As in the song "Lawyers In Love" we have a land, a nation with too many in high places willing to do anything for money neglecting people, honor and principle but a change is coming. No more falling for the lie of living only individualistic and independent lives leaving us divided and conquerable by powerful special interests but a people, a nation collaborating for the greater common good in various groups all across the nation. A land of people working together to help one another with a vision moreover as Jesus would have us be. Love, Mercy, Forgiveness, Kindness....something about another Land. The change is coming

Monday, September 20, 2010

The Deficit Now If Gore Had Been Elected In 2000

So what would have been the difference in the budget if Gore had been elected instead of Bush?
With Gore elected in the year 2000 there would have been no 700 billion tax cut for the very rich(those making over 200,000 annually) in which experts have shown did very little to stimulate the economy.
Because Gore believed in a stronger regulatory government than his predecesor Clinton, the economic disaster of 2008 would have been avoided saving the country another 700 billion from the first TARP bailout but also another 800 billion from the second bailout not counting the billions that would not have been lost because of the overall economic collapse.

Because Gore and his cabinet would have believed in the competent use of government the entire federal government would have been staffed with the best available people working together to make government work as well as possible (a game changing ideological difference from the Bush administration) and with all avenues of communication working together the terrorists that carried out the 9-11 attack would likely have been detected and foiled. Experts have testified that with just a little more cooperation between the FBI and CIA we should have avoided 9-11. And before considering the billions we spent recovering from this disaster here consider another 700 billion we would have not spent in Iraq and the billions we would have not spent in Afghanistan. Would there have been some kind of successful terroist attack?, perhaps but Gore would have garnered and cultivated the goodwill of the world multi-laterally together into any venture in Afghanistan thereby sharing the financial burden.
So you are looking at a clear savings of well over 3 trillion dollars(even without considering the billions in extenuating losses from the economic collapse) and that means a surplus instead of a deficit or more correctly a big surplus instead of a big deficit.
Thats right people, the reason we are where we are is because of the incompetence of the Bush administration, the Republican congress and it's rightwing ideology which has proven unwise to reckless to catastrophic. Their ideology that promotes staffing key government departments from bank regulators to FEMA directors with apathetic anti-government ideologues has yielded it's disastrous results.

Now if that is what you want to do, go back to that kind of government then you need some serious psychological counseling or treatment for amnesia. Bush and the Repubs devastated this nation but we can make this a much better country if we stay the course we are on and fulfill the healing we have began. There will come a time for balance from the right but there is too much to be corrected before we can do that. A collapsed economy with every major bank going down the tubes is not something you heal in just a year or two but surely we have learned something about scurrilous servitude to unbridled market greed and lack of regulation.

Being smarter in 2000 would have us with a healthy surplus right now not to mention the new health care plan and other programs easily paid for upfront. Don't be afraid, be smart.

--- over 3 trillion smarter


Norma said...

I wrote on this very topic some time ago and concluded we still would have gone to war because if you remember the hysteria in the late 90s about WMD, it all came from the Democrats. 9-11 still would have happened only Gore would have been so flumoxed, the country probably would have collapsed; the Bush tax cuts brought more money in--regulations usually help the friends of the Democrats by destroying smaller companies and helping unions and the big firms; and Rubin (Clinton) and friends still would have made all the changes that helped create the melt down. Also, there are two Ts in committed.

Doug said...

Thank you Norma for commenting on my blog. Sorry my response is late but we had a long weekend. My life as of late has been an engaging one so the blogging is secondary. All opposing views are welcome here and any debate is especially encouraged.

Now to your comment. There certainly should have been concern about WMD but there is a world of difference between working in concert with the United Nations avoiding all out war and going to war essentially unilaterally as Bush did. Billions different!
With regard to 9-11 I would say Bush was so flummoxed that he could not even prevent a terrorist attack on American soil that of which Clinton/Gore did prevent and as I stated before it was because they believed in competent efficient government.
Bush attacked Afghanistan but he put his emphasis on Irag. He was so flummoxed that he unilaterally attacked the country that did not attack us on 9-11 wasting billions and thousands of lives. You don't get much more flummoxed than that.

And with regard to regulations you sound like you are simply parroting the rightwing radio pundits. Even the CBO show us that tax cuts did little to stimulate the economy.

You should also notice there are two Ms in flummoxed. From time to time we all make little spelling mistakes don't we and i will surely make my share of them.

Again thanks for your comment and come back anytime.

Norma said...

Yes, but my flumox wasn't under my title (I have 12 blogs). I don't expect comments to be perfect and never insult my readers by pointing out their mistakes. And most importantly, your arguments don't hold up, so we'll agree to disagree.

Doug said...

That would be my description. Very frustrating because I haven't been able to edit that for several years. If I had of course Bush would no longer be in it and I would have made some other changes but it still gets the central point across.
As for the debate all I can say is well, at least I tried.