On it's face, it's pretty damning of Republican administrations. It's only a superficial view of course.
BTTT
D- "Take assignment back and reconfigure in constant $"
Professor Econ
Oh yeah, the current projection for the FY 2004 is about $330 billion, not the $480 billion in the graph, but what's $150 billion when you're trying to make a point? ;-)
Of course Clinton's "surplus" was make believe, created by borrowing heavily from SocSec and Medicare in off the book no interest no legal reason to pay them back loans. Turn those into regular t-bills and Clinton was in deficit just like everybody else.
The Clinton side was BS since they were only PROJECTED figures.
It's why I didn't vote for Bush in 2004. And it's why the "Republicans" with a MAJORITY in Congress are a joke! They have the opportunity to fix this, but instead care more about their "careers". Sickening.
Interesting.
How about a new chart using constant dollars!!
For extra credit, plot the yearly "foreign aid" expenditures for the same period - you might be surprised at what you find . . .
Anyone? Bueller? Anyone?
Why is Clinton's "net gain" +523 million and not +382 million?
Somebody needs to go back to 2nd grade math.
Section. 8.
Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
How does it stack up with control of Congress?
Besides being outdated by about a year and a half, it would be more relevant to see a chart with deficits/surplus in terms of GDP.