re: Why did we drift away from the 1990s paradigm of shrinking budget deficits?

quote:

---

The voters do not care enough to make it a priority.

---

Because they won't have to deal with any debts incurred (that's for future generations) but it would mean voters paid more taxes or got fewer services. It is a structural flaw in the system.

We need a balanced budget amendment.

A lot of the surplus in 99 was equity cash outs on the tech bubble for Y2K. The other contributing factor was congress controlled by Rs wanting to piss in Clinton's cheerios and not pass big spending items.

It was an aberration, not the start of a trend. Now that there is primarily the uniparty and an occasional outsider (Trump) we are past the rubicon.

quote:

---

Trump's deficits occurred when he was handed an amazing economy.

---

yeah obama was so much better than trump economically LOLOLOLOLOL

you want me to give you the list again to make you look even more dumb than you already are??

ur boy obama's spending doubled the deficit dumbass.

we do not mind spending on what needs it. that is the issue with left wing trash like you. you spend on the wrong shite and want to hurt jobs and business jacking up taxes and regs to pay for it like obama.

obamas great successes:

LINK

record doubling debt, record regulations, record lowest labor participation rate since carter, record lowest home ownership since 50s, record number on food stamps(close to 50 million), higher taxes, unaffordable healthcare, aided terrorists,worst recovery since great depression, 1.8% average GDP over 8 years, black and hispanic unemployment far worse

The 90’s saw the rise of a whole new industry. It grew very fast and there was new money everywhere. The feds were able to spend what they wanted and still shrink budget deficits and make themselves look good. Going into forever war in the 2000’s ended all that.

Another thing about the graph in the OP - there is a myth that continues to be sold by the Clintonistas - there WAS NO BUDGET SURPLUS. A budget surplus would mean, necessarily, that the debt went down. The U.S. public debt never went down (actually went up every year, so that means there was a "net" budget deficit every year - not consistent with the notion of a budget "surplus"), so that means, despite the bookkeeping entry of a "surplus", it was phantom.

Makes one doubt the accuracy of a lot of this stuff, but the word "surplus" in this context doesn't mean the same as it would for a business or individual.

quote:

---

Looks like it shrunk pretty good from 2010 to 2016.

---

More like from 2011 through 2015 when the Original Orange Man had the purse strings:

quote:

---

Why did we drift away from the 1990s paradigm of shrinking budget deficits?

---

Republicans got elected.