BK>>BK>> JB> The debt went up every single year under The Clinton:

BK>>BK>> I said the deficit and the debt load decreased under Clinton. I

BK>> JB> That is doublespeak for cooking to books and moving debt
BK>> JB> further out, not retiring it.

BK>> When the deficit hits zero the debt starts retiring. The latest
BK>> budget figures I got from the Bush administration say it went
BK>> into surplus during Clinton's last few years.

 JB> Yet the debt went up.  You can't explain it.  Also a

 Nope. Some kinda govt accounting. The debt was even expected to
 be paid off within a relatively few years, can't recall how
 many, maybe 15.

 JB> deficit hitting zero or going positive is current account
 JB> balance cashflow and doesn't mean debt is being retired.

 Yeah, it does. See below.

 JB> You can have cash in your pocket and chose not to pay off
 JB> debt.

 The federal budget includes debt service. So, when the deficit
 disappears, the debt service pays off the debt. When the bonds
 mature, and are due they get paid. If the longest term is 15
 years, then after 15 years they would all be paid off.

 OTOH, there is one possible explanation that hadn't occured to
 me before. Social security surpluses are invested in T-Bills, by
 law. So, no matter how low the deficit gets, the Federal govt
 will still have to issue T-Bills, which contribute to the debt.
 Now the income from those T-Bills could be used to pay off other
 T-Bills, which would be a net zero difference. However, during
 the transition I expect the total debt might continue to
 increase even if only because no one has delt with a continuning
 balanced budget before. And it turns out, not now either. So no
 one knew what to do or how to do it.

BK>>BK>> find govt accounting interesting, in that Bush's budget figures
BK>>BK>> show the deficit wiped out under Clinton, yet the debt
BK>>BK>> increasing.

BK>> JB> Those weren't Bush's budget figures but don't let that stop

BK>> It was from Bush's 2007 budget, in the budget history files.

 JB> They were the same under the Clinton.  Nobody played with

 Yes, they were. And they are there under Bush. I use Bush's
 figures because they are the most recent, and because if you
 call them dishonest I don't mind calling Bush dishonest. I feel
 no need to defend Bush, so I win either way.

 JB> the numbers. You are just in denial, ignorant or both.  I
 JB> am going with both.

 Obviously you can't deal with the fact that your beloved leader
 validates Clinton's numbers.

BK>> JB> a good rant. Those figures were their during The CLinton's
BK>> JB> time in office.  You just buried your head in the sand.

BK>> They were there, but burying your head in the sand today won't
BK>> help. Bush has had 6 years to correct them if they are wrong. If
BK>> Bush is still publishing them then they can be accepted as
BK>> correct.

BK>> Or you could say Bush's budget people are incompetent, which I
BK>> could accept also.

 JB> Right, so now Bush changed the debt numbers.

 Uh...Jeff... if Bush changed the debt numbers it would raise the
 question of his cooking the books... which I don't doubt anyway.
 However, it is the fact that Bush did *NOT* change the numbers
 that supports my case. Got it? Did *NOT*.

 JB> You'll say anything, no matter how stupid.  Amazing.

 Yet you are the one who got it turned 180 degrees.

BK>>BK>> JB>
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histd
BK>>BK>> JB> ebt_histo4.h tm

BK>>BK>> JB> 09/30/2006  8,506,973,899,215.23
BK>>BK>> ...
BK>>BK>> JB> 09/30/1991  3,665,303,351,697.03

BK>>BK>> JB> Under The Clinton the debt went up each year
and by a total
BK>>BK>> JB> of

BK>>BK>> JB> Don't let this stop your rant.

BK>>BK>> My statement was correct, and on target. You shifted the
BK>>BK>> discussion. The debt went up under every president as far back

BK>> JB> I changed nothing.  My statements have been consistent on
BK>> JB> this topic. You specifically said above " BK>> The debt
BK>> JB> went up during his early years, until it was turned around.
BK>> JB> That is normal for reversing an economic trend."   That is
BK>> JB> a lie and contradicts what you are now saying.

BK>> No, it's from the Bush administration budget history files. How
BK>> the accounting is done is not my interest or problem. When Bush
BK>> changes the records let me know.

 JB> You are out to lunch.

 While I was out to lunch you got it turned 180 degrees. Now I
 hope you get it straight.


BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... Every morning is the dawn of a new error...
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a