Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Go Back To Clinton-Era Taxes? What About Clinton-Era Spending?

December 7, 2012 by  

Go Back To Clinton-Era Taxes? What About Clinton-Era Spending?
PHOTOS.COM

In recent days, Howard Dean and other social redistributionists have bloviated that the way to solve the Nation’s fiscal problems is to return to the tax rates under President Bill Clinton. Here’s a better suggestion: Return to Clinton-era spending.

In 2000, Clinton’s last year in office, Federal spending hit $2.325 trillion. Federal revenue that year was $2.632 trillion.

In 2012, Federal spending under President Barack Obama was $3.563 trillion. Cut Federal spending back to Clinton-era levels and with 2012 revenues under the Obama tax cuts coming in at $2.435 trillion, the U.S. is no longer deficit spending.

Under the tax cuts (first implemented by President George W. Bush and continued by Obama), the government took in more revenue during Bush’s eight years ($17.427 trillion) than during Clinton’s ($16,970). In 2007, Federal revenues were $150 billion more under Bush than during Clinton’s highest revenue year, which was 2000.

In fact, despite the depression, Federal revenues have been fairly constant. Under Clinton’s last four years, Federal revenues totaled $9.530 trillion versus $9.238 in Obama’s first four. The problem is not revenues or the lack thereof. The problem is spending: first under Bush and then Obama.

Since 2002, Federal spending per household climbed from $23,010 to $29,691 in 2012, a 29 percent increase (adjusted for inflation).

Now, redistributionists on both sides of the aisle are proposing increased spending and higher taxes as a “solution” to the fiscal cliff. Neither side is talking of cutting spending in any meaningful way.

Forget more spending and taxes. Return to Clinton-era spending and the fiscal crisis is on the road to a solution. Of course, it’ll never happen.

Bob Livingston

is an ultra-conservative American who has been writing a newsletter since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Go Back To Clinton-Era Taxes? What About Clinton-Era Spending?”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

    Bob Livingston – SIR, I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU WRITE ARTICLES WHICH ARE EASY TO UNDERSTAND.

  • http://Salon.com Robin Donald-deVallon

    If Bill Clinton´s idea was and probaby still is teh answer.. then why not give it a whirl… Nothing else so far worked… !! Alright… America is the peopl of the US of America.. It has never been reasonable…. Donah..//

    • Gordon

      Hello. HELLO? is anybody there?

      Go to youtube and punch in David Walker, GAO and watch his videos.

      David Walker was the head of the GAO for 15 years under Clinton.
      Mr. Walker states repeatedly in his videos that the Clinton Balanced Budget was a HOAX.

      He states that if corporations did what Clinton did that they all would be sitting in jail for fraud.

      He emphatically makes the case that the Clinton administration cooked the books and juggled numbers to make the appearance of a balanced economy.

      This leads to the obvious conclusion that “Liars figure and figures lie”.

      So what did you say about trying things the clinton way?

    • Peter Sagi

      Hey Bob Livingston, you schmuck, tell the truth about the income tax already instead of complaining about it! What truth? That it is an excise tax on government granted privilege; that for most people the taxable privilege is that of employment in the legal definition of the word; that employment is not always the same thing as mere hire; that employment by definition legally means use of an SSN; that SSN use is 100% voluntary and not required to live OR WORK in the United States … write the slave enumeration bureau and ask, their website is ssa dot gov and they will confirm that in writing via email or snail mail responding in kind; that form W-4 is 100% voluntary according to the IRS and they admit as much on their website; that anyone being forced into SSN use on the job is forced as a result of policies within korporate Amerika and not any law; that to use an SSN on the job is not only voluntary by law but brings the federal govt. in as a third party to what would have been a two party contract; that use of an SSN on the job incurs liabilty for FICA, payroll tax, Medicare tax, federal income tax, state income tax, local income tax, and Obamacare; that these tax increases as well as Obamacare only apply to taxpayers; that with no SSN use you are a NON taxpayer and simply don’t have to worrry about any of it.

      I am so phuggen sick and tired reading the whinings of so-called “conservatives” regarding tax increases and Obamacare that fail to get down to the fundamentals of the issue … these things only apply to “taxpayers” and that the real issue is how to avoid being a “taxpayer” and now to get by without using the government granted privileges that would make you a “taxpayer” and thereby incurring liability for these taxes. Bottom line … if you have a social security card … if you participate in socialistic insecurity and use a socialist slavestate number … you are a card carrying socialist and shouldn’t complain. Bob Livingston … either you do know better and are not telling the truth or you do not know better in which case read and learn. There is no such thing as restoring our Liberty without gouging socialism out at its root like the ugly wart that it is. Ultimately, at the root of it all is a phoney baloney monetary system courtesy of the Federal Reserve bank, but, holding that in place is the income tax and holding the income tax in place is participation in socialistic insecurity, WHICH IS TOTALLY VOLUNTARY BY LAW even if it is enforced by policy via korporate Amerika, and korporate Amerika gets away with that because most folk believe that use or a socialist slavestate number/participation in socialistic insecurity is required by law WHEN IT IS NOT. That should tell you that the dim mak pressure point strike against the system is education ON THIS KEY ISSUE.

      The only other solution is to pass laws at any level requiring those asking for an SSN be required to provide full disclosure.

      But back to your whining … that is all it is, whining, until such time as you start telling the truth as to the fundamentals, which is participation in socialistic insecurity.

      Pete

  • http://www.facebook.com/tony.newbill1 Tony Newbill

    Compare this Chart,
    Tax Cuts rallied Stock market over the years that they were cut since the high rates after WW2 . You can even see the bump from Kennedy Tax cuts and how the Carter years declined until Reagan cut them again !!!!

    http://investing.money.msn.com/investments/stock-charts/?symbol=%24US%3aDJI&Intraday=1&

    • http://www.facebook.com/benjamin.fox.98892 Benjamin Fox

      More tax is away to destroy the will of the people and to control them and that is the socialist way and with obozo they are winning. The U.S. soon to be commie USA under these idiots who write laws for us and not themselves. Pray and turn back to God or we fail, it’s that simple.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004022485564 Bill Johnson

    This shure the hell makes more sense than playing the obummer game of lies and deception but he won’t do anything that will remotely help the American economy or its people.

    • Sanders

      Right you are, because helping the USA to return to prosperity is not Obamas ultimate objective. His books reveal with certainty what his intentions are and that is to reduce America’s influence to the rest of the world. What better way to do that than to put the final nail into the bankrupt coffin.

    • Gordon

      To whom it may concern: The next terrorist attack will usher in social collapse and marshall law, PDS. Dec 21? or Christmas Day?

  • Gary L.

    No matter how much taxes are increased, these idiots in D.C. will ALWAYS find ways to spend (waste) it. Why do “we the people” allow this stupidity to continue? BECAUSE STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES!

    • Motov

      Absolutely right! Vote for status quo, you get the same feces in a different package.

    • AZ-Ike

      When we stop electing POLITCIANS who want power and start electing citizen representatives who want solutions (limited gov’t/spending), we may see real results.

      • Old Henry

        My U.S. House district had a citizen legislator from the 2010 landslide.

        In November he was replaced with a Communist Party hack by several percentage points. However, the district had been re-drawn per the 2010 cencus and included a lot more areas full of brain-dead union slugs.

      • momo

        Term Limits. We don’t need career politicians, they become jaded and corrupted over time.

      • Vicki

        We have term limits. Just vote them out.

    • Gordon

      DC= narciscistic personality disorder

  • Warrior

    If anyone remembers the 1997-1999 period, we had a little crisis they called Y2K. Ya see, it was predicted the world may end because ANYTHING made that had a computer chip in it was potentially going to fail. Elevators were going to crash into their pits, all databases would be lost, nuclear missiles would take off by themselves, we would have no electricity, heat, etc., etc. Well, this caused grave concerns throughout the country, so, everyone started to spend gobs of money on new computers, legal assistance to protect themselves from liability, flashlights, food hoarding, etc., etc. People, this WAS the event that generated the “CLINTON BOON YEARS” It had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with TAXES and REVENUES in the gubmints scheme of success. It was your gubmint generating another crisis to its advantage. Ergo, in 2000, when we all survived, the crazy spending stopped and we entered what the gubmint likes to call a “recession”.

    If you really want more “revenues”, you need to manufacture a “crisis”. Anyone see another “crisis” in our midst?

    • Warrior

      Oh, and lest I forget, did you also know how the gubmint achieved a so called “balanced budget” in those years? Well, they had SS surpluses of over $200 Bil that they used as ‘general revenue”. Way to go newt! Oh and of course the “debt” still inched it’s way up also. Look it up!

      • Sanders

        Right you are, because helping the USA to return to prosperity is not Obamas ultimate objective. His books reveal with certainty what his intentions are and that is to reduce America’s influence to the rest of the world. What better way to do that than to put the final nail into the bankrupt coffin.

  • Patriot higgins

    Warrior gets it ! I am so tired of hearing that Clinton had A surplus.
    He cooked the books more than others that’s all.
    Which robbed us more than the other Chriminals had.

  • http://n/a Bill

    All accurate economic, medical, political
    and military thinking has to be based on our
    misleaders having unlimited funds while no
    money goes to the D.C. as taxes.

    How can this be? The Fed said their system
    “works (us) only with credit.” Taxes cannot
    be paid with credit. Our misleaders have no
    use for money as long as most of us pretend
    we are paid with strips of paper that have not
    been promises to pay since 1963 and as long
    as revenue agents pretend they are paid.

    A check delivered to the IRS (Imaginary
    Revenue Scum) is nothing more than authoriz-
    ation for a bank to reduce the writer’s credit
    and thus regulate his consumption. Head of
    New York Fed said “Taxation for revenue is
    obsolete.” His name was Beardsley Ruml

    For a debt to exist, there must be intent to
    pay. With no intent, paper shuffling amounts
    to THEFT. Our misleaders pay no one for
    anything! They work us only with credit.

    Go to amazon.com and get a new copy of
    “Money”, The Greatest Hoax On Earth as an
    investment. There are less than 60 copies left.
    To learn what others think of the author 33 years
    after he died, google: “merrill jenkins” money
    just like I wrote that. A year ago, dealers were
    asking 200+ for used copies of that book. Get
    a new copy for $45.90
    Merrill Jenkins, Monetary Realist He invented
    the dollar bill changer and wrote 7 books. I
    knew him well and flew to Sacramento with him.

    I have many newspaper clippings. One says
    Social Security will collapse in 1983. Another:
    “Hilary Clinton lauds those trying to curb population.”

    I ENCOURAGE NO ONE TO FIGHT TAXES

    Dave Wilber

  • cpa

    Very good points. Supports further the fact that we don’t have a revenue problem – we have a spending problem.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      All right the US has a spending problem but which agency will be the first to disband itself down to its most insignificant dust bunny under a desk? I will say none will come forth and in fact more agencies will be created to supposedly solve the problems of spending.

    • Gordon

      30 yrs ago my then wife (soon to be ex) thought that as long as there are checks that she could spend freely. Finally I told the sheriff, “handcuff her tight, and lock her up”. Even that didn’t work. My children tell me that now (on her 5th husband) she is still writing hot checks in the same county.
      Sound familiar?

      • Gordon

        Oh ya, she is a strooooooong Obama pliberal.

        Whoda thunk it?

  • DTConcerned

    A good place to stop spending would be NO incometax returns for companies larger the n 50 employees that exceed what that company has paid in tax over the year. No more handouts to large corporations unless they are creating jobs on US soil that pay taxes into the US economy. Limit all elected officials to 8 years in any elected position with a required 4 year gap before they can hold another elected position to help prevent special interest cornering of political power. This will also force elected officials to feel the impact of what they are doing more when they have to spend four years back in the work force before getting elected again.

    • Motov

      I contend a maximum 12 years is the limit for congress (2 Senate terms or 3 House terms + 1 Senate term or 6 House terms) After that they can no longer hold office. The second part is no special retirement package, they must pay into Social Security like everyone else, and/ or do a 401(k) thing like everyone else. NO EXCEPTIONS

  • DTConcerned

    Oh yeah, abolish Homeland security and let the FBI and CIA do their job. Turn taxing and responsibilty for anything the states can do themselves back over to the states instead of the Federal government, like highways and schools, it costs a lot more to run and manage most programs at a Federal level that could be run and managed at a state or local level.

    • Sanders

      There’s only one problem with abolishing DHS as I see It. Before it’s creation, shortly after 9/11/01, all the intelligence agencies rarely shared information with each other for fear of the other agency solving a crime or better yet preventing it. Bush created DHS primarily to fix this problem so as to strengthen the Fed Govs ability to protect is citizenry and interests abroad. If DHS is abolished will these agencies return to their past practices of not sharing intelligence?

      • alpha-lemming

        I believe these agencies are/were actually prohibited from communications by law. Don’t recall the name, but it was Clinton era and essentially divided the 2 biggies (CIA and FBI) into foreign and domestic responsibilities, and ne’er the two shall meet. In their present form and taking into account Governments size and intrusivness, I definately worry about a “Big Brotheresque” surveillance program on the populace…… but at the same time, one more layer of bureaucracy did little to stream-line things or ultimately make us “safer”.

      • Old Henry

        Shrub did not need the Dept. of Fatherland Security. All that needed to be done was to mandate that the agencies communicate / cooperate.

        The DFS was created to do what it is now doing. Terrorizing ddemonising / humiliating / harassing / spying on the American citizens. And seeing just how far the American citizens will let them go, which is obviously unlimited.

        ALL of which is totally, completely, 100% unconstitutional.

      • Gordon

        All the way from WMDs to Benghazi….. intelligence is ignored.

  • alpha-lemming

    Good article….. it IS a spending problem. I recall SCREAMING at my TV everytime Mitt came on telling us “I’ll create the jobs”. which is 180 degrees out of phase… ergo ala Reagan… “Government is NOT the solution…. it’s the problem”!!! How I longed to hear that phrase this last go ’round. All the regulation upon regulation (over many many years) has forced companies/businesses into into a “doing more (output, profit) with less (manpower, machine time, feedstocks etc.)” model. My responsibilities continually expand with no increase in the work force (hiring is a known “lagging indicator” as to the health of a business/the economy… demand MUST increase before expansion/capital investment is warrented) to the point where the remaining employees are running around faster than a NASCAR pit-crew. A less burdensome Government will do more to revive things and create the DEMAND for workers, than a freight-car of incentives, subsidies, or tax breaks.

    Stated another way…. and to paraphrase an old film…..

    “If you UN-build it….. they will come”……. the jobs that is.

  • RobtELee

    Don’t the numbers slay you? WTH is this USA doing to it’s people! We are being taxed into hell while they enjoy trillions of dollars at their disposal because they are killing the Middle Class making them work harder and harder to keep the freaks in gov’t happy. No more! Go to a NO spending venue and don’t spend for the holidays! Let’s put the Retail Merchants on their butts this year. The economy sucks and the USA is at a total standstill. Thousands of jobs are being lost every month – people cannot pay for anything, anymore! Get the hell out of our wallets Washington and stop fleecing us! Use what you have – there is more than enough. WE want LIBERTY FROM COMMUNIST OPPRESSORS IN WASH LAND.

  • s c

    _____ ‘Clinton’ economics. Solve for x, boys and girls. Go back to JFK economics. That ‘Democrat’ did the right thing and C U T Taxes. Let the current ‘Dems’ TRY to deny it.
    Oh, by the way. Remember Benghazi. Isn’t it bad enough that we have a W H pretender/poser who can ignore a dead ambassador and 2 dead Seals? Maybe Santa will deliver a functioning CONSCIENCE to the White House shortly. HA!

  • cerebus23

    clinton had a brilliant political mind and under the guidance of dick morris and a republican congress, he dd the political smart thing and co opted the republicans on almost every domestic front which led to keeping taxes down and spending in check because that is what that congress ran on.

    Too bad he was a utter fail on security and foreign policy fronts. Because domestically excluding his first 2 years on the job, which were one disaster

    • Gordon

      Thank you for a good laugh for today. LOL

  • jopa

    There is one absolute fact about the Clinton era and that is there were more jobs created then than during the Reagan and both Bush’s combined during their time in office.Bill must have gotten it right.Hillary 2016!!

  • tim

    I aqgree, homeland security should be abolished. It is eating our tax money and when the retirement packages start, we will never be able to pay all of the ridiculous packages the gov’t has offered!!!!! Why should they be qualified after only 20 years!!!!!!! The gov’t is taking us down with thier retirement packages alone. Look at the post office alone. The post office needs to be shurt down and a private company needs to run it. WE can no longer sustain all of these govt retirement packages!!! When will these idiots in washington understand this!! It’s bad enough we have to give congressmen etc retirement even if they only have 2 years in office!!!! We will go down because of govt retirement packages and welfare, which as far as I’m concerned is the same thing!!!!! Govt employees should be paying into social security just like everyone else!!!! Why should they be exempt. Our tax money pays them!!!

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.