<?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: The Source of the National Debt</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.muttrox.com/index.php/2009/06/the-source-of-the-national-debt/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.muttrox.com/index.php/2009/06/the-source-of-the-national-debt/</link>
	<description>Critical Thinking</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 20:55:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sidney</title>
		<link>http://www.muttrox.com/index.php/2009/06/the-source-of-the-national-debt/comment-page-1/#comment-204454</link>
		<dc:creator>Sidney</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:53:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.muttrox.com/?p=1228#comment-204454</guid>
		<description>So this is an interesting analysis, but I think it&#039;s rather silly to have a &quot;business cycle&quot; category.  Attributing &gt;1/3 of this to the natural variance in the economy over time is just ridiculous.  This portion of the deficit/debt is really the result of policies (both on the spending and revenue side) that lacked sufficient foresight to help better balance revenues with expenditures across a time period that included--SHOCK!!!--leaner years than 1999 and 2000.  This 1/3 shouldn&#039;t just be explained away like this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So this is an interesting analysis, but I think it&#8217;s rather silly to have a &#8220;business cycle&#8221; category.  Attributing &gt;1/3 of this to the natural variance in the economy over time is just ridiculous.  This portion of the deficit/debt is really the result of policies (both on the spending and revenue side) that lacked sufficient foresight to help better balance revenues with expenditures across a time period that included&#8211;SHOCK!!!&#8211;leaner years than 1999 and 2000.  This 1/3 shouldn&#8217;t just be explained away like this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

