🚀 go-pugleaf

From: davidba@atl.mindspring.com (David E. Banks)
>The deficit increased because the Democratic Congress continued to
>spend more than it took in.  Just think what the economy would have
>been if this money had stayed in the public sector rather than having
>been borrowed money.

I realize this is the oft-repeated Republican dogma and held sacred,
but unfortunately it doesn't hold up to examination.

Reagan submitted budgets within a very few percent of what Congress
finally passed.

Even if the slightly lower Reagan budgets were all passed as he
proposed it would have made a TOTAL difference in the overall deficit
of about $200B.  The actual deficit for that period rose from $919
billion to over $2 trillion. Without that $200B it would have instead
been, well, about $2 trillion.

In one year (1984) Reagan submitted a budget to the Congress for
approval which was LARGER than what Congress finally passed.

Here are the numbers:
                                 Outlays
        Fiscal Year     Proposed        Actual          % Difference
        1982            695.3           745.8               7.3
        1983            773.3           808.4               4.5
        1984            862.5           851.8              -1.2
        1985            940.3           946.4               0.7
        1986            973.7           990.3               1.7
        1987            994.0           1003.9              1.0
        1988            1024.3          1064.1              3.9
        1989            1094.2          1144.2              4.6
                 ------------------------------------------------------
                Totals  $7,357.6        $7,554.9         Avg 2.8%


-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs@world.std.com          | http://www.std.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202        | Login: 617-739-WRLD