<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bogus Defense Budget Cuts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/bogus_defense_budget_cuts/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/bogus_defense_budget_cuts/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:56:28 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: McGehee</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/bogus_defense_budget_cuts/comment-page-1/#comment-32826</link>
		<dc:creator>McGehee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2005 19:31:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=8960#comment-32826</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt; Thatâs just off the top of my head though.&lt;/i&gt;

What, no links?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i> Thatâs just off the top of my head though.</i></p>
<p>What, no links?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick DeMent</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/bogus_defense_budget_cuts/comment-page-1/#comment-32822</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick DeMent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2005 19:12:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=8960#comment-32822</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;ken: Your explanation fails to explain why we had budget deficits, under Democratic presidents, when taxes on the upper percentiles were much, much higher.&lt;/i&gt;

Let&#039;s see, under Carter we had the equivalent of $80 a barrel oil and even with the CPI as high as it was average business investment under Carter was more then double that of the Reagan era and 3 times that for the Bush I era. Before that you would have to go back to Johnson.

That&#039;s just off the top of my head though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>ken: Your explanation fails to explain why we had budget deficits, under Democratic presidents, when taxes on the upper percentiles were much, much higher.</i></p>
<p>Let's see, under Carter we had the equivalent of $80 a barrel oil and even with the CPI as high as it was average business investment under Carter was more then double that of the Reagan era and 3 times that for the Bush I era. Before that you would have to go back to Johnson.</p>
<p>That's just off the top of my head though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: McGehee</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/bogus_defense_budget_cuts/comment-page-1/#comment-32813</link>
		<dc:creator>McGehee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:56:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=8960#comment-32813</guid>
		<description>Sometimes I think Ken credits Clinton for all the asteroids that &lt;i&gt;didn&#039;t&lt;/i&gt; hit the earth during the &#039;90s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes I think Ken credits Clinton for all the asteroids that <i>didn't</i> hit the earth during the '90s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/bogus_defense_budget_cuts/comment-page-1/#comment-32810</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:48:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=8960#comment-32810</guid>
		<description>ken:  Your explanation fails to explain why we had budget deficits, under Democratic presidents, when taxes on the upper percentiles were much, much higher.

Further, we had huge budget deficits under Clinton until the bubble--and Gingrich and co. took over the Congress. Divided government makes cutting spending easier.  Even then, though, we simply grew our way out of deficits because of a massive--and largely artificial--growth in the economy owing to the stock/tech booms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ken:  Your explanation fails to explain why we had budget deficits, under Democratic presidents, when taxes on the upper percentiles were much, much higher.</p>
<p>Further, we had huge budget deficits under Clinton until the bubble--and Gingrich and co. took over the Congress. Divided government makes cutting spending easier.  Even then, though, we simply grew our way out of deficits because of a massive--and largely artificial--growth in the economy owing to the stock/tech booms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/bogus_defense_budget_cuts/comment-page-1/#comment-32809</link>
		<dc:creator>ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=8960#comment-32809</guid>
		<description>Budget deficits were eliminated by President Bill Clinton by raising taxes on the top 2% of the taxpayers in the United States. The economy, instead on going into a recession as every conservative pundit and republican politician predicted it would, boomed. 

Budget deficits are not inevitable except when we have conservatives in charge. Conservatives have proven, time and again, to be without the spine to raise the revenue needed to cover our desired level of spending.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Budget deficits were eliminated by President Bill Clinton by raising taxes on the top 2% of the taxpayers in the United States. The economy, instead on going into a recession as every conservative pundit and republican politician predicted it would, boomed. </p>
<p>Budget deficits are not inevitable except when we have conservatives in charge. Conservatives have proven, time and again, to be without the spine to raise the revenue needed to cover our desired level of spending.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
