[Genuine Realist]

C'mon now . . . Clinton's budget surpluses were almost entirely the result of the Internet bubble (remember that it took states a while to try and tap into that then-new economy) and not his tax increases.  [But I do agree that the surpluses chimeric "surpluses" would lead to tax cuts].

I am pretty sure you can throw in a whole lot of "peace dividend" into the Clinton budget surpluses. Military spending started dowb under Bush and fell like a stone under Clinton. It made sense. The Cold War was over, we didn't need to spend as much. The beauty of it from a political point of view was that you could just spend the money on other things. It was already being collected.

 


Some presidents are extremely lucky (Bill Clinton); others are extremely unlucky (Jimmy Carter).  Some presidents appear teflonesque (Reagan); others don't even get anything thrown at them (Obama).  Many benefits that inure to benefit of a particular occupant have little to do with the occupant.

For sure. One could argue that Hoover is also in the unlucky category.

My own thought is that the budget surpluses of the late 90's are due mostly to the efficiencies created by the information explosion of the 80's boom. I don't believe the dot.com bubble produced that much in the way of revenue at that time. 

We continue to reap benefits to this day, and beyond. Covid-19 would be close to unmanageable without them. It's another benefit of the Reagan years, as much as there are those who would rather die than admit that.

[Genuine Realist]

C'mon now . . . Clinton's budget surpluses were almost entirely the result of the Internet bubble (remember that it took states a while to try and tap into that then-new economy) and not his tax increases.  [But I do agree that the surpluses chimeric "surpluses" would lead to tax cuts].

I am pretty sure you can throw in a whole lot of "peace dividend" into the Clinton budget surpluses. Military spending started dowb under Bush and fell like a stone under Clinton. It made sense. The Cold War was over, we didn't need to spend as much. The beauty of it from a political point of view was that you could just spend the money on other things. It was already being collected.

 


Some presidents are extremely lucky (Bill Clinton); others are extremely unlucky (Jimmy Carter).  Some presidents appear teflonesque (Reagan); others don't even get anything thrown at them (Obama).  Many benefits that inure to benefit of a particular occupant have little to do with the occupant.

For sure. One could argue that Hoover is also in the unlucky category.

My own thought is that the budget surpluses of the late 90's are due mostly to the efficiencies created by the information explosion of the 80's boom. I don't believe the dot.com bubble produced that much in the way of revenue at that time. 

We continue to reap benefits to this day, and beyond. Covid-19 would be close to unmanageable without them. It's another benefit of the Reagan years, as much as there are those who would rather die than admit that.