ZOOM that metaphor went flying over your ole dome didn’t it conservative? Who stimulates the economy more, the working poor (which is including more and more of the shrinking middleclass with this bush recession) or those making over a mill?
So now it is down to who stimulates the economy more, the poor or the rich? Does it really matter? How many jobs do poor people create? Looks to me like both stimulate the economy and why would you hurt any economic class? Seems to me you have a lot of class envy for some reason.
Sure it will .What’s your crystal ball say?
History says you are wrong
I believe ti was during the Clinton years, which had a Republican majority in Congress that did something besides obstruct that did it.
You believe wrong. From the U.S. Treasury Dept.
Fiscal
Year Year
Ending National Debt Deficit
FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion
As can clearly be seen, in no year did the national debt go down, nor did Clinton leave President Bush with a surplus that Bush subsequently turned into a deficit. Yes, the deficit was almost eliminated in FY2000 (ending in September 2000 with a deficit of "only" $17.9 billion), but it never reached zero--let alone a positive surplus number. And Clinton's last budget proposal for FY2001, which ended in September 2001, generated a $133.29 billion deficit. The growing deficits started in the year of the last Clinton budget, not in the first year of the Bush administration.