Could We Learn Something From David Cameron?

[heironymouspasparagus]

LOL, LOL, LOL!!

Seriously??  Wouldn't it be nice if some here would/could take reality seriously!  Oh, well, everybody's gotta have a dream!

Do woodchucks chuck wood?

Kumbaya, everyone!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3EimMuTbJQ&feature=related

[Red Arrow]

Oh, yeah...there was a short period in the '90s when an effort was made to pay down the debt and spending was held in check.  Yep, you guessed it - it wasn't the Republican administrations of the last 30 years.  Oh, well, too bad it doesn't fit into the Murdoch/Rove script.

Remind me again which party took control of the US House of Representatives and Senate in 1994.

[Red Arrow]

Do woodchucks chuck wood?

Does Heironymouspasparagus save 15% on his car insurance by watching Geico commercials of woodchucks chucking wood on TV?

[nathanm]

Remind me again which party took control of the US House of Representatives and Senate in 1994.

Remind me which administration continued to push deeply unpopular military base closures and which Congress passed the tax increases that closed the gap. (and sadly canned the superconducting supercollider among other "big science" projects as part of that effort) The stage was set to balance the budget before the Republicans took over.

[Red Arrow]

Remind me which administration continued to push deeply unpopular military base closures and which Congress passed the tax increases that closed the gap. (and sadly canned the superconducting supercollider among other "big science" projects as part of that effort) The stage was set to balance the budget before the Republicans took over.

It's interesting how party or ideological lines can attribute success to either the Administration(s) or the Congress.  My take on it is that it only took Clinton 8 years to ruin what took 12 years of Republican Administrations and then a Republican Congress to set in motion.  Parts of the economy were on the way down before the 2000 elections.  I know the part of manufacturing where I was working was on the way down.  As I have stated before (and got scolded), I almost voted for AlGore in 2000 just so he would get credit for the failing economy.  I know your opinion is different and no amount of facts will convince either one of us differently.

[Conan71]

Remind me which administration continued to push deeply unpopular military base closures and which Congress passed the tax increases that closed the gap. (and sadly canned the superconducting supercollider among other "big science" projects as part of that effort) The stage was set to balance the budget before the Republicans took over.

Along the lines of what Red is saying, I find it fascinating how we are quick to discredit the efforts of those we don't agree with.

To a Republican, the fiscal responsibility under President Clinton was the result of a very conservative Congress.  To a Democrat, they only credit President Clinton with the fiscal restraint. 

I'm still not real sure what transpired under Bush 43 and the GOP-dominated Congress other than unprecidented natural disasters, ill-timed tax cuts, and changes in national security after 9/11.  However, looking at the last two years of his administration, spending was way up with a Democrat-controlled Congress, and Bush gets the blame for run-away spending those last two years.

President Reagan is blamed for a burgeoning debt, yet he was working with a Democrat-controlled house.  To a liberal, his fiscal policies were a disaster, yet the country pulled out of the nose-dive we were in during the Carter years and began a great run of prosperity.

To a Democrat, Carter was simply handed a pile and did the best he could.  Nevermind he was the Inspector Clouseau of U.S. Presidents and was working with a Democrat-controlled Congress.  That was all still the fault of the misguided policies of Nixon and Ford.

[we vs us]

I'm still not real sure what transpired under Bush 43 and the GOP-dominated Congress other than unprecidented natural disasters, ill-timed tax cuts, and changes in national security after 9/11. 

Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind, neither of which were paid for when they were voted in.  They were both quintessential unfunded mandates.  The Democrats essentially had to start finding ways to pay for them just about the time they took control of the house. 

And don't turn your nose up at the tax cuts.  Those alone were enough to drive the deficit into hyperdrive.  One trustworthy estimate puts their cost at $2.3T over the first ten years.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I guess no one making observations about Reagan's time were there to experience the thrill.  Reagan had a 'rubber-stamp' Congress that literally did anything and everything he wanted - as so wonderfully exemplified by "Star Wars" (Strategic Defense Initiative.)

And it continued that way until 1994, when the roles were reversed with the Newt-nick "Contract On America).

Great run of prosperity under Reagan - yeah, topped only by the great runs of prosperity under Billy Bob and Lyndon Johnson (remember ole' "guns and butter"??).

As for spending AND debt increases, no one comes even close to Baby Bush.  Even Obama has a ways to go before reaching that mark.

[nathanm]

To a Republican, the fiscal responsibility under President Clinton was the result of a very conservative Congress.  To a Democrat, they only credit President Clinton with the fiscal restraint. 

I'm still not real sure what transpired under Bush 43 and the GOP-dominated Congress other than unprecidented natural disasters, ill-timed tax cuts, and changes in national security after 9/11.  However, looking at the last two years of his administration, spending was way up with a Democrat-controlled Congress, and Bush gets the blame for run-away spending those last two years.

I'm sorry, but the facts get in the way of your analysis. As I pointed out, the hard choices were made before the Republicans took over. The Democratic Congress raised taxes. The Democratic Congress, at the behest of the Democratic President allowed a bunch of military bases to close. The Democratic Congress, in opposition with the Democratic President canceled a bunch of basic science research. (as I mentioned before, the SSC really sticks in my craw, we would have had a particle accelerator 3-4 times more powerful than LHC completed 15 years ago if they hadn't canceled it..the 15 years ago part is nearly as important as the power level, too)

The Republicans went on to spend most of their time attacking the President's personal life rather than making the hard choices. They implemented more and more earmarks, to the point that Clinton was able to convince a bare majority of Congress to give him the line item veto. It's no wonder, then, what happened under Bush II and the Republican-controlled Congress (although as I have mentioned previously, the war on terror made things worse, budget-wise, than they otherwise would have been).

[Red Arrow]

I'm sorry, but the facts get in the way of your analysis. As I pointed out, the hard choices were made before the Republicans took over. The Democratic Congress raised taxes. The Democratic Congress, at the behest of the Democratic President allowed a bunch of military bases to close. The Democratic Congress, in opposition with the Democratic President canceled a bunch of basic science research. (as I mentioned before, the SSC really sticks in my craw, we would have had a particle accelerator 3-4 times more powerful than LHC completed 15 years ago if they hadn't canceled it..the 15 years ago part is nearly as important as the power level, too)

The Republicans went on to spend most of their time attacking the President's personal life rather than making the hard choices. They implemented more and more earmarks, to the point that Clinton was able to convince a bare majority of Congress to give him the line item veto. It's no wonder, then, what happened under Bush II and the Republican-controlled Congress (although as I have mentioned previously, the war on terror made things worse, budget-wise, than they otherwise would have been).

Hard choices?  Democrats raising taxes, cutting the military and scientific research is hard choices?  Seems like business as normal.  I wasn't a JFK fan but at least he understood that cutting taxes had it place and he realized the benefits of the space race to the world in general. 

Line item veto is a good thing.  More lines should be deleted.

[Red Arrow]

I guess no one making observations about Reagan's time were there to experience the thrill.  Reagan had a 'rubber-stamp' Congress that literally did anything and everything he wanted - as so wonderfully exemplified by "Star Wars" (Strategic Defense Initiative.)

And it continued that way until 1994, when the roles were reversed with the Newt-nick "Contract On America).

Great run of prosperity under Reagan - yeah, topped only by the great runs of prosperity under Billy Bob and Lyndon Johnson (remember ole' "guns and butter"??).

As for spending AND debt increases, no one comes even close to Baby Bush.  Even Obama has a ways to go before reaching that mark.

Heirony,

I believe you are old enough to remember Nikita Khrushchev banging his shoe on the table at the UN saying the USSR would bury the USA.  He didn't mean militarily as in smoking hole.  He meant economically.  Remember air raid drills in school?  Duck, cover and kiss your butt goodbye. Remember home fallout shelters?  We didn't have one,  partly because we lived about 2 miles from a Nike base and it wouldn't have done any good if we did survive.  Star Wars ran the Russian economy into the dirt and pretty much ended that threat.  Sure the Congress did a lot of what Reagan wanted but they spent a lot more too. 

I remember the economy being in better shape when Bush I left it to Billy Bob (really Billy Jeff) than Carter left it for Reagan.  There is a lag time so while mentioning the Carter economy I will cut a bit of slack to Obama but add that he should have better indications of a better economy by now if not actually achieving a better economy.  I believe that lag time also led to some of Clinton's good years.  By the end of the Clinton years, the economy was on the way down again.  Would Clinton have signed welfare reform without the pressure of a Republican Congress?  Even Fox news says Clinton was smart enough to drift a bit toward center from the left after the Republicans took over Congress.

I remember LBJ painted Goldwater as a war-monger while campaigning for election.  By then I was a teen and worried about the war in Laos and Viet Nam.  Of course LBJ built up the war after the election.  War economies are generally more robust than peace time ones.

It won't take Obama 8 years to spend as much as Bush II did in 8 years.

We all remember what makes "our" candidates look good compared to the "other guy's" candidates.  Your memory is just as selective as everyone else's.

[Red Arrow]

Medicare Part D and No Child Left Behind, neither of which were paid for when they were voted in.  They were both quintessential unfunded mandates.  The Democrats essentially had to start finding ways to pay for them just about the time they took control of the house. 

And don't turn your nose up at the tax cuts.  Those alone were enough to drive the deficit into hyperdrive.  One trustworthy estimate puts their cost at $2.3T over the first ten years.

I suppose you believe that Republicans have a monopoly on passing unfunded mandates.

[we vs us]

I suppose you believe that Republicans have a monopoly on passing unfunded mandates.

I don't know . . . have anything particular in mind? 

The awesome thing is that the Republican unfunded mandates we were talking about happened along at the same time as two wars, a new state security apparatus, and a couple trillion dollars in tax cuts. 

I'd call that excellent timing, and as someone who's currently in despair over the competency of his own party, I'd have to give the win on this one to the Republicans who seem to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, how little deficits actually matter.

[Red Arrow]

I don't know . . . have anything particular in mind? 

Nothing in particular.  I got so used to Democratic party ideas getting implemented, often by regulation rather than a specific law, that I stopped counting.  Not all were bad ideas, just unfunded.

[nathanm]

Hard choices?  Democrats raising taxes, cutting the military and scientific research is hard choices?  Seems like business as normal.  I wasn't a JFK fan but at least he understood that cutting taxes had it place and he realized the benefits of the space race to the world in general.  

Line item veto is a good thing.  More lines should be deleted.

Yeah, it's a hard choice to make to raise taxes in a recession, and cutting the military budget definitely wasn't "business as usual" in 1992. Afterwards, the Republicans were happy to sit around obstructing government in every way possible in a blatant attempt to derail Clinton's Presidency, just like they're hoping to do if (and it looks likely) they take over the House.

Sort of like they promulgate blatant lies about the timing of the bailouts and try to push the blame onto Obama, who was a part of the stimulus, but the wall street bailouts and all that was set in motion by Bush and the ever-compliant-in-a-crisis Congress went along with it.