The Clinton-era tax rates fallacy
November 27, 2012 at 4:05 pm in News by Dustin Siggins 48 Comments

Over the last few years, President Obama and his many surrogates have made the case that if America was to return to tax rates on the wealthy that were seen under President Bill Clinton, America would once again become the land of milk and honey.
This argument is, unfortunately, a false one, for a number of critical reasons. Here are several:
First, the simple fact is that President Clinton spent much less than President Obama. While the Fiscal Year 2012 numbers are not out yet, some perspective is available: the federal budget went up by 60% in inflation-adjusted 2010 dollars between 2001 (the last year of a Clinton budget) and 2010.
As Michael Medved noted on November 24, raising taxes only on the wealthy wouldn’t institute the same tax system as seen in the 1990s – the left often fails to point out that most of the much-maligned Bush tax cuts went to those making under $250,000 annually. So if President Obama wants the same tax rates that allegedly helped give us surpluses in the 1990s, he should be willing to raise tax rates on all Americans.
Third, the Clinton-era economy ended with a recession in 2000 and a deficit of over $100 billion, meaning the land of milk and honey ended rather nastily. Of course, proponents of big government never talk about these two facts.
The technology boom fueled the good economy under Bill Clinton (and, of course, a Republican Congress), something Washington never could have envisioned or launched. Much like the housing boom that crashed a few years later, though, that boom ended in a recession. So if Clinton is going to get undeserved credit for the technology boom, he should get undeserved blame for the recession.
Fifth, Clinton vetoed welfare reform twice, before being overridden by his Republican colleagues in Congress. Which means one of the major deficit reduction laws under President Clinton was opposed by Clinton.
Sixth, the major liberal policy pushed by President Clinton – HillaryCare – never became law. After the GOP takeover of the House and Senate, Clinton became a very moderate President. So for Bill Clinton to travel the country talking about his success as President, and how those successes would be relevant in today’s world with the very liberal current resident of the White House, is very intellectually dishonest.
Seventh, many proponents of centralized control of our lives say the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was a major cause of the 2008 financial crash, as it deregulated many aspects of the financial industry. Assuming for the moment that these people are correct, Gramm-Leach-Bliley was signed into law by Bill Clinton (and voted for by Vice President Joe Biden, then a Senator) and backed by Clinton staffer (and future Obama staffer) Lawrence Summers.
It’s easy for political pundits and politicians of all stripes to look back on the past with rose-colored glasses. Republicans do it with Reagan, Democrats do it with Clinton. But as Washington considers tax increases and meager spending reductions, it is incumbent upon grassroots activists to know and apply the real facts of the Clinton Presidency.

What’s with “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
When does “moderation” occur?
Are our ideas being censored?
Some posts don’t have to wait for “moderation”.
I have not been able to determine what the trigger is for “moderation.”
Does anyone here know what causes a post to be prevented from appearing?
Something the article didn’t mention:
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act eliminated the Glass Steagall Act. The Glass Steagall Act was like an imune system. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn’t the disease, it eliminated the immune system. The disease was the Democrats’ idiotic Marxist subprime housing mortgage underwriting program. The disease was accelerated by the Republicans conceding no effective oversight of the disease to the Democrats. Here is a link to the Democrats negotiating with the Republicans:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122290574391296381.html
After the Republicans gave the Democrats what they wanted, the Democrats supported the war in Iraq… for a while.
It was a mistake to negotiate with the Democrats then. The concessions the Republicans gave to the Democrats eventually collapsed our economy.
Americans have been duped more than once in recent history. The system of lies about Vietnam wasn’t exposed for over 30 years. The Democrats and the so-called “mainstream” media duped the American population (again) into believing the economic collapse was caused by the Republicans when the fact was the Democrats’ subprime housing mortgage underwriting program collapsed the economy after two years of Democrat oversight.
We have to take a firm stand. We are on the brink of collapse. With these egomaniac Democrats in power, a collapse is the exact thing they want to justify their using the government to take control of everything.
No more debt. Not for any reason. Let the government shut down until Congress grows up and generates a budget. We haven’t had a budget since Obama took office. We’re drowning in debt, and the Democrats’ plan is to eliminate the budget. You can’t get more insane than that.
With every temporary funding bill, the Republicans negotiate away the Constitution to get some temporary funding for something or another, which can be taken away the very next year. But, the part of the Constitution they negotiated away is gone forever.
We need strong leadership in Congress.
Paul Ryan should be the next Speaker of the House.
If we don’t change leadership in Congress, then we should expect no change from the previous 4, not 2, years.
Please forgive this, but I’m going to test the “moderation” trigger by posting portions of the post I just wrote that has the current status “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Something the article didn’t mention:
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act eliminated the Glass Steagall Act. The Glass Steagall Act was like an imune system. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn’t the disease, it eliminated the immune system. The disease was the Democrats’ idiotic Marxist subprime housing mortgage underwriting program. The disease was accelerated by the Republicans conceding no effective oversight of the disease to the Democrats. Here is a link to the Democrats negotiating with the Republicans:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122290574391296381.html
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Something the article didn’t mention:
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act eliminated the Glass Steagall Act. The Glass Steagall Act was like an imune system. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn’t the disease, it eliminated the immune system. The disease was the Democrats’ idiotic Marxist subprime housing mortgage underwriting program. The disease was accelerated by the Republicans conceding no effective oversight of the disease to the Democrats.
After the Republicans gave the Democrats what they wanted, the Democrats supported the war in Iraq… for a while.
It was a mistake to negotiate with the Democrats then. The concessions the Republicans gave to the Democrats eventually collapsed our economy.
Americans have been duped more than once in recent history. The system of lies about Vietnam wasn’t exposed for over 30 years. The Democrats and the so-called “mainstream” media duped the American population (again) into believing the economic collapse was caused by the Republicans when the fact was the Democrats’ subprime housing mortgage underwriting program collapsed the economy after two years of Democrat oversight.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act eliminated the Glass Steagall Act. The Glass Steagall Act was like an imune system. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn’t the disease, it eliminated the immune system. The disease was the Democrats’ subprime housing mortgage underwriting program.
We have to take a firm stand. We are on the brink of collapse. With these egomaniac Democrats in power, a collapse is the exact thing they want to justify their using the government to take control of everything.
No more debt. Not for any reason. Let the government shut down until Congress grows up and generates a budget. We haven’t had a budget since Obama took office. We’re drowning in debt, and the Democrats’ plan is to eliminate the budget. You can’t get more insane than that.
With every temporary funding bill, the Republicans negotiate away the Constitution to get some temporary funding for something or another, which can be taken away the very next year. But, the part of the Constitution they negotiated away is gone forever.
We need strong leadership in Congress.
Paul Ryan should be the next Speaker of the House.
If we don’t change leadership in Congress, then we should expect no change from the previous 4, not 2, years.
Here is a link to the Democrats negotiating with the Republicans:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122290574391296381.html
Please forgive this, but I tested the “moderation” trigger by posting portions of the post I just wrote that has the current status “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act eliminated the Glass Steagall Act. The Glass Steagall Act was like an imune system. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn’t the disease, it eliminated the immune system.
Glass Steagall act
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
Appearantly, you cannot write G_l_a_s_s S_t_e_a_g_a_l_l_A_c_t in your post, which is what the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act eliminated. The G_l_a_s_s S_t_e_a_g_a_l_l_A_c_t was like an immune system. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn’t the disease, it eliminated the immune system. The disease was the Democrats’ idiotic Marxist subprime housing mortgage underwriting program. The disease was accelerated by the Republicans conceding no effective oversight of the disease to the Democrats.
Please forgive that I used this board to discover what the trigger for censoring a post was. It is interesting that mentioning the G_l_a_s_s S_t_e_a_g_a_l_l_A_c_t causes the post to be censored.
3 ideas: (not fun, but doable) let Bush era cuts lapse & trim budget cuts to flat 10% off everything & end all Federal subsidies (I do mean ALL). The first requires continued deadlock or apathy, the second makes the masses less unhappy (though going from 722 SSDI to 622 will hurt a lot [insert suitable explicatives here]), the last will add to Federal savings (downside is that it would hurt the farmers who aren’t as productive as we would want them to be despite bio-fuel demand and droughts and floods and unfriendly banks, upside is that U.S. businesses could show off their ability to thrive without assistance (it would be hysterical if big oil and big coal and sugar collapsed w/o Federal subsidies)).
It is clear many of our presidents in care of our country made good and bad choices, but the fact is that both Republicans and Democrats are good at over spending taxpayers monies at the Americans (our) expense to say the least.
One thing I recall is that Pres.Clinton left a sizable surplus at end of his term and Pres.Bush did not waste time spending all of it within the first week of his term. Also it should be noted unemployment was at its lowest at end of Clinton’s term and the recession began in 2001 after 9-11 this country was never the same especially because Bush took us into a longterm needless war with Iraq. Although I understand why he was concerned about the welfare of the Iraquis at that time, it was more important to stay focused in finding and arresting OsamaBinLaden rather than Hussein for his genecide against his own people. Unfortunately, we are still dealing with corrupt terrorist countries and supporting them under the current Obama regime.
So the writer of above article should do further research regarding his negative report on Pres.Clinton. All in all, he was re-elected for 2 terms and probably would have won this election had he been eligible to run again for Pres. He had a much better rappore with foreign countries more than any other President (except for Reagan).
The president doesn’t control spending. Congress does. If you recall, Clinton had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the surplus. His veto had to be overridden by Congress for the surplus to happen.
And, if you recall, that so-called “rappore” Clinton had with foreign countries caused us to be bombed by Al Qaeda as if they were on a schedule.
That ended when Bush took office. After 9/11, we didn’t get bombed again until Obama took office.
I believe what you are suffering from, good sir, is called confirmation bias. You only see what you want or what would fill your hate filled agenda. You are a puppet for the plutocrats and it is sad that you are too blind to see how you are being controlled. You clearly are not the 1% yet you fight for them. Sad.
It’s funny how you don’t bring up Iraq and the Republican debacle that had us fight an unnecessary war based on lies which killed tens of thousands of soldiers and disabled hundreds of thousands. This isn’t even counting the Iraqi civilian lives that were needlessly destroyed. An embassy gets attacked, which was a sad event, and immediately Fox has the puppets screaming for Obama to be impeached.
Let’s see….
It’s the day after 9/11/2001. You are the president. What do you do? Do you:
1) Do the Bill Clinton thing and just lob a few cruise missiles in their general direction? or
2) Do the exact same thing in the exact same place against the exact same enemy as the Soviets, and somehow you’re so ignorant you expect a different result than what the Soviets experienced? or
3) You realize it doesn’t matter where you go to fight the war they started in their back yard. Where ever you go, the Arab jihad is coming to fight you. So, you choose the location that is easiest for you to support a full-scale war, giving you the best chance for success. And, if you split the Islamist Terrorist Empire that stretches unbroken from Morocco to Tibet in half, and get rid of Saddam Hussein who rebuilt his infrastructure for war with the money he stole from the US’s oil-for-food scam, so much the better.
You’re probably ignorant enough to concentrate landlocked in Afghanistan and leave Saddam Hussein in your rear with a rebuilt war machine. Yeah… that would be the smart thing to do.
By the way, do you know who the senior CIA officer was that was responsible for intelligence on Iraq’s WMD program?
Valerie Plame.
ROFLMAO
typo correction:
“US’s oil-for-food scam” should be “UN’s oil-for-food scam”
Thank you.
Well let’s see here, I served in Iraqi. My job was to bring the sick dead and wounded home from the battlefield on our medivac planes. As I reflect on the ignorance of your post Mark H. We didn’t lose ten of thousands of men. We didn’t even lose ten thousand men. We’ve lost less men in the ten years we’ve been fighting than the average loss of life for one day of battle in WW2. Check your fact before you begin spewing your vomit.
Psychologists call what you are doing “projection”.
I believe we never stopped getting bombed after 9/11. The only reason you choose to ignore it is because we brought our people over there to be the target of roadside bombs daily.
Well, we actually began defending ourselves. That was the biggest difference between Bush and Clinton.
Mark H – You cannot reason with this guy. What kind of person has a beheaded fellow American as his profile pic? This guy is the Tea Party’s own worst enemy. Whenever I need to convince anyone about the crazies in the Tea Party, I have then check out this website. It’s awesome!
The kind of person who reminds Americans just who is visiting the White House when Obama invites the Muslim Brotherhood for routine visits.
I believe Clinton had a Republian Congress five of his eight years. His budgets had deficits until the Congress turned Republican. Then they became balanced and he moved closer to the center…
I am right with you DBWriter. I belive U are right on the money.
To all of those that say the 2000′s wouldn’t have happened if Bush weren’t President, I like to point out that Clinton’s Treasury Secretary, Robert Rubin, was Chairman of the Board at Citigroup and basically presided of the worst-of-the-worst, most egregious financial Shenanigans resulting from the the repeal of Glass Stegal….maybe you can make that point #9.
Perhaps you can put some actual content into your post. You rant, but you don’t say anything, which is typical of Democrat dupes. I am reminded of Saul Alinsky’s rule number 5, instructing Democrat dupes to use redicule in lieu of actual facts.
The first term you reference in your programmed diatribe is “Marxist”. I’m betting you’re so ignorant you can’t even difine the term. And, your ignorance is compounded by the fact of the history of Obama and the Communist Party USA just wasn’t included in your indoctrination sessions. If you wish, I can educate you on the subject. Or, you can get off your lazy Democrat ass and search these facts yourself.
Or, you can prove me wrong.
Define “Marxism” for us.
I’m betting you’re so ignorant you can’t, yet that doesn’t stop you from running your ignorant mouth about it. You woulnd’t know a Marxist if one was brainwashing you with a bullhorn in your face.
Or, you can prove me wrong. Define “Marxism” for us.
Then, let’s talk about the Marxist ideas the Democrats are pushing on us.
Perhaps you can put some actual content into your post. You rant, but you don’t say anything, which is typical of Democrat dupes. I am reminded of Saul Alinsky’s rule number 5, instructing Democrat dupes to use redicule in lieu of actual facts.
The first term you reference in your programmed diatribe is “Marxist”. I’m betting you’re so ignorant you can’t even difine the term.
And, your ignorance is compounded by the fact of the history of Obama and the Communist Party USA just wasn’t included in your indoctrination sessions. If you wish, I can educate you on the subject. Or, you can get off your lazy Democrat ass and search these facts yourself.
your ignorance is compounded by the fact of the history of Obama and the Communist Party USA just wasn’t included in your indoctrination sessions.
If you wish, I can educate you on the subject. Or, you can get off your lazy Democratass and search these facts yourself.
If you wish, I can educate you on the subject. Or, you can get off your lazy Democrat rear end and search these facts yourself.
Or, you can prove me wrong.
Define “Marxism” for us.
I’m betting you’re so ignorant you can’t, yet that doesn’t stop you from running your ignorant mouth about it. You woulnd’t know a Marxist if one was brainwashing you with a bullhorn in your face.
Or, you can prove me wrong. Define “Marxism” for us.
Then, let’s talk about the Marxist ideas the Democrats are pushing on us.
The first term you reference in your programmed diatribe is “Marxist”. I’m betting you’re so ignorant you can’t even difine the term. And, your ignorance is compounded by the fact of the history of Obama and the Communist Party USA just wasn’t included in your indoctrination sessions. If you wish, I can educate you on the subject. Or, you can get off your lazy Democrat ass and search these facts yourself.
*define
Yes, the President of the United Statees is a Marxist.
And, Marxists control the Democratic Party.
All the other people you mentioned are Marxist communist dupes. They won’t be included in the 10 percent of the population that lives above the masses in every Marxist communist system that has ever existed in history. That’s all a Marxist communist system allows any leisure – 10 percent of the population.
If you haven’t been keeping up with current events, the Democrats’ plan to generate revenue is right out of “Das Kapital”. They’re going to begin seizing privately owned assets.
You can’t get more Marxist than that.
It will require a war with the American people to force them into a Marxist existence.
Obama wants that war. That’s why he procured 750 MILLION rounds of ammunition for the FBI, BATF and DHS.
To put that into perspective, when two nations go to war, for example France and Germany, that war consumes cumulatively about 70 million rounds of ammunition per year.
OBAMA PROCURED 750 MILLION ROUNDS OF AMMUNITION TO USE AGAINST THE AMERICAN POPULATION.
An idiot can guess the plan.
Yes, the President of the United Statees is a Marxist.
And, Marxists control the Democratic Party.
All the other people you mentioned are Marxist communist dupes. They won’t be included in the 10 percent of the population that lives above the masses in every Marxist communist system that has ever existed in history. That’s all a Marxist communist system allows any leisure – 10 percent of the population.
If you haven’t been keeping up with current events, the Democrats’ plan to generate revenue is right out of “Das Kapital”. They’re going to begin seizing privately owned assets.
You can’t get more Marxist than that.
“Your comment is awaiting moderation. ” to my response. So….
In short, the anser to your question is YES, except for the 50 million or so others. They are what is commonly known as dupes. They have no idea how what they are helping will damage their living standard.
And, you still can’t even define “Marxism”.
You want to discuss something you’re too ignorant of to even define.
… like you would know enough to even participate in a discussion about this.
Or, prove me wrong. Define “Marxism” for us.
Then, tell us about the Democrats using direct quotes from Das Kapital to generate revenue for the government they created that is impossible to pay for.
You’re a liar.
Can you read something without introducing the Democrat party line propaganda lie about everyone but the Democrats being filled with hatred?
Actually, I make that determination by comparing what the Democrats are doing with the published text from Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky. It’s that simple. Any quick look at what the Democrats propose causes any educated person (if you can’t define “Marxism” you’re not educated) to conclude the Democrats are promoting Marxism.
As for the bulk of the party membership, they can’t define “Marxism” either, just like you. They are what is called “dupes”.
You are obviously so ignorant, you don’t know the difference between ignorance and stupidity.
You still haven’t given us a definition of “Marxism” for us. I’m betting you can’t even define the term, and you wouldn’t know a Marxist if one was brainwashing you with a bullhorn in your face.
Just define the term, then you might not seem so ignorant. But then that would require you to do some work and research. Can’t have that, must wait on the system to tell you what to think and how to think. Very unrepublic (not the political party, I thought I might have to throw that in there so you don’t get confused)