It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.



page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 09:28 AM

Type it in and post wut ya think

[Edited on 17-9-2002 by Fantastic_Damage]

posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 09:32 AM
when typing in your link I get the following error:
(404 not found error - this happens when the page doesn't exist, FD)
Not Found
The requested URL /debtclock.htm was not found on this server.
Apache/1.3.26 Server at Port 80

posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 09:34 AM

posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 09:37 AM
Thanks for the link. [seriously]

posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 09:39 AM
That's a great link, look what I have found so far:

When Clinton got the news (of a proposed surplus) he ran it by his focus groups and they determined that it was a good thing so he tried to take credit for the surplus. When, if fact, he had nothing whatsoever to do with it. All of the credit goes to the Republican controlled Congress.

posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 09:51 AM
Look you may have got the impression that I think Clinton was a great man or sumpthing cuz I don't. He is a #. Bush however, is a smellier, uglier #.

posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 12:32 PM
is he a poo-poo head also?

posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 07:54 PM
No one is a bigger piece of dog-feces than Klinton. I like Gore better than Klinton, although I think Gore would do more damage, but at least Gore geniunely believes the bullcrap! Klinton is like Daschel in that it is only about power and control.

Bob, let's face facts, the repubs have been just as stupid as the dems in the pork department the last couple of years. What is it with politicians, they get a whiff of our money and they can't wait to spend it!?!

posted on Sep, 17 2002 @ 10:01 PM
Your point being a point we should all agree on TC, the liberals will oppose for the sake of opposing.

posted on Sep, 18 2002 @ 07:32 AM
This thread is about US national debt, not Clinton vs Bush. Save it for all the other forums please. I was just making the point that i don't like either of them, I just like Bush less.


posted on Sep, 18 2002 @ 03:33 PM

Originally posted by Fantastic_Damage
I was just making the point that i don't like either of them, I just like Bush less.

Are you kidding ? You don't like GWB, I know. But you don't like Clinton ????

Be proud of you. Now, I don't know what have to think about you. One day you like him, the next one you don't like him. What's your camp finally ?

And please, don't shout, don't laugh or anything else. Just write a normal post.


posted on Sep, 18 2002 @ 05:51 PM
Wuh, a left-winger trying to make someone conform? I'm appalled!!!

posted on Sep, 19 2002 @ 03:35 AM
Quote one post where I said I like Clinton Phoenix and U2U it to me.

TC you are a moderator, can u please just stick to the thread. There are other threads to stick up for Bush on.

I am trying to ask nicely (seriously).

posted on Sep, 19 2002 @ 06:01 AM
Did you actually read that article that went along with the incredibly fast moving numbers?
Or, is that what I am allowed to say; that the numbers sure do move fast?
You asked what one thinks, yet you don't want one to say anything unless it is cleansed of any political figures that have worsened the effect.
Maybe its us. Yup, we are to blame. We don't run these pork-barrel bums out of Washington. We let them sit up there dreaming of new ways to blow our money before we can even earn it.

posted on Sep, 20 2002 @ 08:18 AM
link be tempted top discussion of economics on ATS; but it's worth pointing out that the USA's fiscal deficit 17 years ago was so appalling that Gramm-Rudman was rushed through. And the deficit has been worse every year since in any real terms.
There is nothing to be said for either party: as a broad generalisation, the Dems tax and the Reps borrow on the market -each has a short term appeal to typical constituents of either [party and both avoid the issue, enefit the same few and store up trouble.
Among the many things that make America not like anywhere else are the relevant economic factors and forces: for at least three reasons the USA's national
debt is very odd:
The Fed
The dollar as a reserve currency
the extent of central responsibility for welfare programmes.

As a simple indication, try to answer this: "America's national Debt - who actually owes it and to whom?"

posted on Sep, 20 2002 @ 08:40 AM
"..and the conspiracy angle is?"; but that seems so long ago, when ATS had conspiracies - however, just what is the "fallacy" in this thread?

posted on Sep, 20 2002 @ 08:49 AM
economic word-salad about the surplus under the Clinton-Gore administration?
there never was a surplus - just the drivel of Liberals who are always happy to spend the money of others.
The phantom, the mirage, of a surplus -only US voters could have been fooled - appeared as a result of the same sort of creative accounting that has recently made corporate America a by-word (again) for sleaze, graft, corruption, peculation and greed.
Clinton adopted the unified budget, which put the social security trust fund in with the operational budget of the government. taxation ensured that the Social Security took in more money than it paid out.
But all the SS money was a debt -it was owed to the payers when they retired -it's like borrowing millions and claiming you're out of debt, with the added charm of not having to pay interest!
In reality, not counting Social Security, which was a separate trust, Clinton-Gore spent $60 billion more than was raised in the first year!
Dear me -if only Estragon could qualify as a US politician -I'd have a million in a year -and I'd be able to take it away and change it into real money, before the US economy implodes -as it soon will if no action is taken.

posted on Oct, 19 2002 @ 12:27 PM
The Republican administrations spend money on the War machinations, hence making their rich defense industry cronies richer, and squash any and all alternative fuel ideas to keep lining the pockets of the fossil fuel conglomerates.

The Dem administrations spend money on social issues which actually benefit the general populace and the people who pay the taxes that they spend.

Quite frankly I'll take the lesser of the two evils, even with all of the dirty back room deals and the BJ's in the oval office!!!

Spending my tax dollars on weapons of mass destruction while US Children go hungry and without medical care is appalling and I can't beleive that even the most heartless of you right-wingers can find fault with helping our own USA peoples.

I like keeping my money in my pocket too but if I know my tax dollars are being used to help others AT HOME as well as for humanitarian efforts abroad then I have no problem with paying my fair share.

I do have issues with my tax dollars paying the Russians and Israel to play nicey-nice!!! I say # EM ALL and lets stay home for the next 20 years and let these crazy bastards destroy one another. We can take what we want after their through wiping each other out!!!


posted on Oct, 20 2002 @ 08:20 AM
What a hack!! Surely you don't believe the democrats spend money on social issues that help the Americans, do you? If so, you are one of the ones referred to as "useful idiots".

Their social policies rarely do an actual good as is, but they sure rob weak people of their dignity and self esteem and none of that matters as it makes the dems feeeel good because they tried to help, even though it doesn't work and they're using other people's money, anyway. As far as their cultural (if you want to call it that) agenda, they are destroying the fabric of this country. That is, however, their intended goal is to do just that; to destroy the traditional values that created this nation and kept it strong, and to replace them with a perverted and warped sense of values that has destroyed many nations before and will do it again.

And what a weak, flimsy stance, to say that the republicans will spend the money on war so their war-machine cronies will make the money. That was so incredibly stupid that I'm afraid that one would fet soiled just trying to stoop low enough to show its flaws.

top topics


log in