I noticed your friend made the following claim:
"We're on track to have the lowest deficit as a percentage of GDP in decades." This is the same snake oil the GOP has tried to sell before, but let's have some fun with it.
Here is a chart, prepared by the House Budget Committee, that shows deficits as a percentage of GDP:
http://www.house.gov/budget/msrslide4bgt071703.pdfSince your friend's claim goes back decades (plural), let's look at the last 20 years. You will note that Clinton delivered a
surplus of 2.4% of GDP in fiscal year 2000. And so, for his claim to be true, we would have to see a surplus greater than that. Can he tell us who is saying we are "on track" to produce a surplus of 2.5% of GDP or more? Certainly not the White House.
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The White House will release the annual mid-session review budget forecast on Tuesday, a spokesman at the Office of Management and Budget said Friday.
President George W. Bush has recently hinted that the report will show that the government's revenues are sharply exceeding expectations, helping cut the federal government's massive budget deficit.
In its budget request for fiscal year 2007, the White House projected deficits of $423 billion, or 3.2% of gross domestic product, in fiscal 2006 and $354 billion, or 2.7% of GDP, in fiscal 2007. Bush has pledged to cut the deficit in half as a percentage of GDP by fiscal 2009, a goal that could be reached earlier if revenues continue to be healthy.
http://www.easybourse.com/Website/dynamic/News.php?NewsID=17637&lang=fra&NewsRubrique=2Now let's update the chart I furnished earlier. The
actual deficit was 3.5% for FY '03, 3.6% for FY '04, and 2.6% for FY '05. The White House currently predicts deficits of 3.2% and 2.7% for FY '06 and '07, respectively.
Hey, what's with that? I don't see a prediction of any surplus.
I know Junior doesn't want to talk about his actual economic performance, and I don't blame him. But he's not done a very good job of making predictions in the past. For example, remember all those jobs that his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were supposed to create?
http://zfacts.com/p/563.htmlSoon we're going to be told that the actual FY'06 deficit was something less than the 3.2% the White House currently predicts. Small minded people will fall for this spin. It's like a coach saying his football will lose their next game by 50 points, then claiming a victory when they actually lose by only 40 points. They have been hoping that there would someday be some actual good news about the economy, so that they can point to it and say, "See, the tax cuts are working!"
Deficits increase our national debt. Here is a very clear picture of what Reaganomics has done for us in that respect:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.htmlEdit: Spelling