Change: Obama’s addition to national debt now surpasses Bush

posted at 10:25 am on March 20, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

National debt?  Eh … who’s counting?  CBS’ Mark Knoller, for one, and by his calculation, Barack Obama has just passed a milestone — at lightning speed:

The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.

The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.

The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush’s last day in office, which coincided with President Obama’s first day.

The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.

It doesn’t get any better, either.  Obama has proposed a new budget for FY2013 that will add another $900 billion to the national debt under the most cheery, best-case scenarios imaginable, and likely will exceed the trillion-dollar mark for the fifth time in his presidency.  In the budget projections released with that proposal, Knoller points out that Obama expects to leave office with a national debt of $20 trillion — which will mean that Obama himself would have nearly doubled the debt during his eight years in office, adding $9.34 trillion for an increase of 87%.

Of course, the proper way to calculate debt responsibility is by control of Congress.  As I pointed out eighteen months ago, that’s actually worse for Democrats:

First, let’s break down the last 10 years of the Bush/Obama era by control of Congress, starting on January 1, 2001.  The starting point for the national debt was $5.662 trillion.  On January 6, 2007, when Democrats took over, Republicans in total control had added $3.011 trillion in debt in six years, just slightly less than Obama has added since taking office less than two years ago.  Since taking control of Congress less than four years ago, Democrats have added $4.992 trillionto the national debt.

Perhaps it would be more fair to look at the entirety of Republican control of the House, which lasted 12 years and bridged the Clinton and Bush administrations.  In that entire span, Republican budgets added $3.873 trillion to the national debt.  That is not only far below what Democrats have added in just one-third of the time, it’s also far below the Obama administration’s own projections of how much they will add to the national debt in just one term.

We can also do the same calculations by fiscal year, from October 1 to September 30 each year, matching the budgets. Using that guide, we find the following scenarios:

  • Republicans in control for 12 years: Added $4.034 trillion (avg $336.17 billion per year)
  • Republicans in control during Bush era: Added $3.201 trillion (avg $533.5 billion per year)
  • Democrats in control of Congress during Bush/Obama era:  Added $4.603 trillion (avg 1.48 trillion per year)

The solution for out-of-control deficit spending will have to come from Congress, since this President consistently refuses to take responsibility for it.  Guy Benson has an in-depth rundown of Rep. Paul Ryan’s new budget, which at least takes a large step in the right direction:

On Spending - The Path to Prosperity spends $3.53 Trillion in FY 2013, a number that grows to $4.88 Trillion by the end of the decade.  It restores full military funding to pre-Budget Control Act sequestration levels, off-setting those dollars elsewhere and preventing a harmful gutting of our national defense.   It reduces spending by $5 Trillion over the next ten years, compared to Obama’s budget.  It restores federal spending to the historical norm of 20 percent of GDP by 2015.

On Deficits - Ryan’s blueprint reduces budget deficits by $3 Trillion over the coming decade, relative to Obama’s budget.  Although it doesn’t happen immediately, and unlike Obama’s plan, this budget balances.  Within the current decade window, it comes closest to primary balance by achieving a $166 Billion annual deficit in 2018 (to put that into perspective, 2010′s deficit under this president was $1.6 Trillion).  The closest Obama’s budget comes to primary balance is a $617 Billion shortfall in 2017, which is still roughly double the size of President Bush’s average deficit.

On Debt - Unlike President Obama’s unflinching debt express, the GOP budget’s lowers spending and enacts crucial reforms to chart a more sustainable debt course, allowing the United States to gradually begin paying down the national debt.  The plan would retire the publicly-held debt by the 2050′s.  Gross debt reached 100 percent of US GDP this year, an alarming tipping point — yet President Obama’s new budget offers ever higher debt in perpetuity[.]

Be sure to read it all.  Ryan’s plan takes the right approach, but doesn’t go far enough.  It’s not sufficient any longer to slow the rate at which we add to the national debt; we have to start subtracting from it.  Now that we have reached the Greece threshold of debt at 100% of our GDP, we can’t afford to keep adding to it.  Unfortunately for Ryan — who certainly understands the problem — he doesn’t have enough people in Washington that will show the necessary leadership to get that kind of approached passed and signed into law.  Until voters get serious and toss Obama and other unserious spenders out of office, Ryan can’t do any better than incremental improvements, which I’ll take over the alternatives offered at the moment.

Update: Don’t miss Steve Eggleston’s analysis in our Green Room, either.  He was ahead of CBS by three days.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

La la la I can’t hear you…..bush!
-cnnlmsdnc

cmsinaz on March 20, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Trips to Mexico for your 13 year old daughter and 2 dozen friends don’t pay for themselves, you know.

Recovery Summer 2050

Bishop on March 20, 2012 at 10:29 AM

“BBBut I had to because of George BBUUSSHH”

bsinc1962 on March 20, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Our grandchildren cannot afford another four more years.

rbj on March 20, 2012 at 10:30 AM

That’s ok – Obummer’s debt is all STIMULUS which got our economy roaring to such an incredibly high level……uhmmm or something…

dentarthurdent on March 20, 2012 at 10:31 AM

…and Obama voted for a large part of Bush’s debt.

burt on March 20, 2012 at 10:33 AM

All according to plan.

Oil Can on March 20, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Oooohhhh – and look at all the highly successful green energy companies thanks to Obummer’s spending….. uhmmm or something..

dentarthurdent on March 20, 2012 at 10:33 AM

If it wasn’t for the European (PIIG) the dollar would be lower than the Mexican Peso.

celtic warrior on March 20, 2012 at 10:33 AM

and this is news?
Sherlock

mickytx on March 20, 2012 at 10:33 AM

I think the part about the “unpaid wars” was the funniest. A war that cost less than $1T throughout it’s entire lifespan is supposedly the reason we have a $4T deficit.

Math is hard, you know?

ButterflyDragon on March 20, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Libtards here blaming unfunded wars, medicare part D, Bush tax cuts…in 5..4..3..2..

I always ask..how Obama has funded the wars since 2009, how he funded the $860 Billion Porkulus Bill he signed in Feb 2009 and the $460B Omnibus Spending Bill he signed in April 2009…yet never get an answer?

HumpBot Salvation on March 20, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Still Bush’s fault. Obama HAD to spend all that money we don’t have to “fix” the problem. Just read some of the O-bot posts on the CBS comments if you don’t believe me.

Yakko77 on March 20, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Bush deficits caused the economic collapse.

Obama deficits are saving the economy!

/Leftists

mankai on March 20, 2012 at 10:36 AM

It’s not sufficient any longer to slow the rate at which we add to the national debt; we have to start subtracting from it.

Excuse me, but do you have a degree in economics?

BobMbx on March 20, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Between this outrageous debt burden imposed by Obama and his squelching the revenues that could be added by allowing us to develop our own natural resources, this administration is responsible for the decline in our credit rating.

Now, check out how his “algae solution” is just another crony effort to expand his election coffers and pay back his friends in low places.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/03/crony_capitalism_and_algae_energy.html

onlineanalyst on March 20, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Not to worry — Geithner will just debase the currency further so Obama can pay our debts in devalued dollars. Not since the Confederate States of America has there been such brilliant public financing!

Scriptor on March 20, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Blah, blah, blah.

Whatever, Obama is awesome.

Good Lt on March 20, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Yes but the donks and Presidebt 0bama are spending us into bankruptcy for much better than the bad old r-words and evil Bush.

jukin3 on March 20, 2012 at 10:38 AM

rbj
heck our great,great grandchildren will still be paying of this idiots mistakes ideas.

angrymike on March 20, 2012 at 10:38 AM

The last fiscal year with a budget produced by the Republican congress was 2007. Deficit that year was $162 Billion. And the trajectory was down.

Then came the Democrats, in charge of congress. $467.63 Billion in 2008, and upward from there.

I see a pattern emerging here………

iurockhead on March 20, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Bush tax cuts: evil

Obama and Dems extending Bush tax cuts: good

-

11-year war debt of $1.31T: evil, cause of economic collapse

1-year Obama deficit of $1.33T: good, cause of all that is good in the world

-

Bush tax cuts: revenue increases

Don’t tell anybody

/Lefty playbook, page 3, after “War on Women” and “War on People of Color”

mankai on March 20, 2012 at 10:39 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Bush made him do it.
/

Mimzey on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

The last fiscal year with a budget produced by the Republican congress was 2007. Deficit that year was $162 Billion. And the trajectory was down.

Then came the Democrats, in charge of congress. $467.63 Billion in 2008, and upward from there.

I see a pattern emerging here………

iurockhead on March 20, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Yes, but let’s not pretend the republicans are innocent. They tend to just rush us toward bankruptcy at a slower pace than the Dems. For every balanced budget in the GOP congress there were 2 or 3 (or more) unbalanced budgets raising the debt. Yes, they are better than the dems, but here better means rushing to disaster more slowly.

Monkeytoe on March 20, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Good thing Clyburn wrote that “Republican Deficit Society” paper in 2005 warning us about the evils of $300B deficits.

/

mankai on March 20, 2012 at 10:43 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

that’s just stupid. But, your name indicates that is what you are, so go figure.

Monkeytoe on March 20, 2012 at 10:44 AM

A fiscally solvent nation populated by free-thinking people can not be brought to it knees. One must first collapse the economy and destroy public education.

His plan is working.

In 2008, I gave the average American voter the benefit of the doubt, recognizing that a lot of people got taken in by his smiley-faced horses*** sales pitch of Hopenchange.

Ignorance as justification for one’s mistakes only goes so far. Anyone still on the Obama bandwagon by the time November rolls around is in on the scam.

Bruce MacMahon on March 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

So… if Bill Clinton had spend a trillion dollars and got us in the hole, it would take G.W. to spend another trillion to get us out? I don’t follow your logic here. You don’t spend more to make LESS!

Turtle317 on March 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM

What makes this even more “impressive” is the fact that Reid et al. have been running interference for him in the Senate, with their steadfast refusal to even try to pass a budget.

frode on March 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Wasn’t the stimulus supposed to be the tow truck? Wa hoppen?

Bishop on March 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM

It’s funny when Lefties criticize Bush for being too Progressive.

visions on March 20, 2012 at 10:46 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Well, duh. And Slurpees are expensive. Or something.

stvnscott on March 20, 2012 at 10:46 AM

The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.

Just wait until his policies are actually implemented.

askwhatif on March 20, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Anyone still on the Obama bandwagon by the time November rolls around is in on the scam.

Bruce MacMahon on March 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM

I concur.

visions on March 20, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Math is hard, you know?

ButterflyDragon on March 20, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Was reading an article yesterday on all the loans the Obamas took out when they were living in Chicago. Even with a decent income and just two kids, they apparently were unable (or unwilling) to live within their means and balance their household budget.

AZCoyote on March 20, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Be sure to read it all. Ryan’s plan takes the right approach, but doesn’t go far enough. It’s not sufficient any longer to slow the rate at which we add to the national debt; we have to start subtracting from it. Now that we have reached the Greece threshold of debt at 100% of our GDP, we can’t afford to keep adding to it. Unfortunately for Ryan — who certainly understands the problem — he doesn’t have enough people in Washington that will show the necessary leadership to get that kind of approached passed and signed into law. Until voters get serious and toss Obama and other unserious spenders out of office, Ryan can’t do any better than incremental improvements, which I’ll take over the alternatives offered at the moment.

I hear you, Ed. The problem is that 100% of the revenues taken in in FY2012 (just under $2.5 trillion) could be diverted to debt repayment, and just wiping out the publicly-held portion would take over 5 years.

At this point, all we can hope for is trajectory, and at least on the publicly-held portion, if this holds, that should be essentially zeroed out in 35 years.

Steve Eggleston on March 20, 2012 at 10:47 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Nah, it will take a couple mormons to get it out. And that is going to really upset your bigoted little heart. Better prepare yourself.

HumpBot Salvation on March 20, 2012 at 10:48 AM

What makes this even more “impressive” is the fact that Reid et al. have been running interference for him in the Senate, with their steadfast refusal to even try to pass a budget.

frode on March 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Precisely! Obstructionism at its best. I don’t recall a Senate that is so full of traitors to the American people as this Senate is. November is going to be unkind to those —holes.

Turtle317 on March 20, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Go Steve!
:)

cmsinaz on March 20, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Excuse me, but do you have a degree in economics?

BobMbx on March 20, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Christina Romer has a degree in economics and she as much as anyone put this administration on this path of rabid spending. It doesn’t take much intelligence that we can no longer afford Obama’s policies or a Congress that refuses to do its job.

Happy Nomad on March 20, 2012 at 10:49 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

There is no chapter in the Obama Truth Team handbook about dealing with the first honest story from your media is there? Has you guys are riled up.

Verifies everything we have been saying for years about you children.

ClassicCon on March 20, 2012 at 10:49 AM

Here’s what really chaps my hide: That stimulus bill found it’s way into the baseline. So all future budgets are based on spending from what I thought was a one year deal. And now, any time someone proposes going back to pre-stimulus budgets, democrats kick up a storm because Republicans want to take food from the poor, or kick the jobless out on the street.

I know I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I never expected the stimulus to be more than a one year proposal. I did not know it would never end. (Until the market ends it for us.)

rogaineguy on March 20, 2012 at 10:51 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

5.5% unemployment and 1/3 of the debt = “In the ditch.”

8.3% unemployment and 3X the debt = “Getting out of the ditch.”

liberal4life is making Orwell look like a prophet.

Good Lt on March 20, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Until voters get serious and toss Obama and other unserious spenders out of office, Ryan can’t do any better than incremental improvements, which I’ll take over the alternatives offered at the moment.

That’s right Ed. We’ll never get there if we don’t take the first step. You have to walk before you can run and all that. I’ll take it too.

magicbeans on March 20, 2012 at 10:51 AM

If you really want to see deficit spending in your household, marry a liberal. I did, and I’m glad the divorce went through. I estimate it will take me another five years just to pay off HER debt she created while married to me.

The debt she’s incurred while divorced is on her head.

Turtle317 on March 20, 2012 at 10:51 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Once Obama gets off the roof with his 9 iron….

*Cue pre-recorded golf clap*

Electrongod on March 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Bishop, just saw on newsbusters, that obama asked the media to scrub their report on malia

What a nice press corps
/

cmsinaz on March 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Wasn’t the stimulus supposed to be the tow truck? Wa hoppen?

Bishop on March 20, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Economic reality is racist.

Betenoire on March 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Good morning slaver. Does it send tingles up your spine to know that you are defending the penury slavery of our progeny for your utopian dreams.

chemman on March 20, 2012 at 10:52 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Seriously dude, if that’s all you’ve got I recommend extended time at the next DNC/Axlerod/Wassername-Schultz re-education camp for you.

D-fusit on March 20, 2012 at 10:53 AM

The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.

It’s called: “Living from hand to mouth” and ’tis indeed a perilous position.
(i’m confident many of us have been there)
When the fit hits the shan, what are ya gonna do?

If the American people never smarten up, the United States is destined to become a Balkanized conglomeration of City States. In my humble opinion, Ynot? Let’s allow the Kennedys, Kerrys, Schumers, Rangels, Clintons, et al, try to impose their will upon the “sovereign state” of Freedomistan. Indians claim that “right” all the time. Why not we the builders, innovators and defenders?
Semper Paratus(“SPQR” my äss)
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on March 20, 2012 at 10:53 AM

If you really want to see deficit spending in your household, marry a liberal. I did, and I’m glad the divorce went through. I estimate it will take me another five years just to pay off HER debt she created while married to me.

The debt she’s incurred while divorced is on her head.

Turtle317 on March 20, 2012 at 10:51 AM

LOL…America’s divorce from OweBama will be finalized in November..but we’ll be paying for decades to come.

HumpBot Salvation on March 20, 2012 at 10:54 AM

LOL…America’s divorce from OweBama will be finalized in November..but we’ll be paying for decades to come.

HumpBot Salvation on March 20, 2012 at 10:54 AM

I feel ALL your pain….

Turtle317 on March 20, 2012 at 10:55 AM

The level of deficit is not sustainable; the politicians will have a window of perhaps 10 months next year, between January and November, to get serious about this. Expect across-the-board tax increases and spending cuts … a “reverse stimulus”, if you will.

TouchdownBuddha on March 20, 2012 at 10:55 AM

While I don’t disagree that Bush did his part to increase the debt – the extensive open ended emergency spending related to 9-11 and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were a major factor.

2nd Ammendment Mother on March 20, 2012 at 10:57 AM

1………….2…………..3……………..

IT’S ALL BUSH’S FAULT!

Better yet, it’s the fault of 52.3% of the voting public.

GarandFan on March 20, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Be sure to get BHO’s new books, How To Spend Your Way TO Economic Freedom and it’s sequel, Crashing The Economy To Bring The Idiot Hoi Polloi To A Brighter One World Government. Both are sure to be NYT bestsellers!

ghostwalker1 on March 20, 2012 at 10:58 AM

But! But! Obama needed spend so much because Bush left us with an economy that was losing a million jobs a month. And he’s gotta continue spending that much because…because…wait one moment, I need to reconsult with the DNC to find out what I believe.

PerceptorII on March 20, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Still Bush’s fault. Obama HAD to spend all that money we don’t have to “fix” the problem.

No, the housing bubble collapse wasn’t Bush’s fault. And neither was the deficit spending that ensued under Obama. The situation is complex enough that it actually warrants reading a book instead of parroting talking points from the right or left.

You can’t experience a once in a lifetime economic crisis and balance the budget when the baseline budget is already affected by a structural $1 tril deficit. You can’t take decisive action to prevent a depression without stimulus spending- as the Germans and Chinese enacted as well.

It’s more instructive to think about how you address the problems facing the US now that continuing with the back-and-forth, endless finger pointing over the past.

bayam on March 20, 2012 at 11:02 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

By “cost more” you must mean digging a far deeper ditch? Ever heard of the “first rule of holes”?

ShainS on March 20, 2012 at 11:04 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Stop it. Your complex economic language is too much for us!

mankai on March 20, 2012 at 11:08 AM

No, the housing bubble collapse wasn’t Bush’s fault. And neither was the deficit spending that ensued under Obama. The situation is complex enough that it actually warrants reading a book instead of parroting talking points from the right or left.

You can’t experience a once in a lifetime economic crisis and balance the budget when the baseline budget is already affected by a structural $1 tril deficit. You can’t take decisive action to prevent a depression without stimulus spending- as the Germans and Chinese enacted as well.

It’s more instructive to think about how you address the problems facing the US now that continuing with the back-and-forth, endless finger pointing over the past.

bayam on March 20, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Nice, Not. How about all of the entitlements spending which is the true cost of the deficits. Want to address them any time?

D-fusit on March 20, 2012 at 11:11 AM

DEBT SCHMEDT……how do I get FREE CONDOMS again????

I HAVE RIGHTS YOU KNOW!

SDarchitect on March 20, 2012 at 11:13 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

and Obama still has it in drive, and is gunning the engine driving it deeper into the mud. If Obama had done nothing, had let the bankruptcy courts work instead of jumping in to save his cronies while screwing the stockholders… the economy would have rebounded by now.. instead of laying here as limp as a liberals reasoning. In Ohio, unemployment among 18 year olds in like 35%.. we’re dying here, we need jobs, which will not happen till Obama is out of office..

He’s been a disaster, coming in promising to save jobs.. and he’s only made it freakin worse by an order of magnitude. The blue collar democrats here will not vote for Obama.. count on it.. he never kept his promises.. he just sent cash to cronies.. like the Chi Town crook he is.

mark81150 on March 20, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Heartache.

KeninCT on March 17, 2012 at 10:58 AM

Baxter Greene on March 20, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Watching Kent Conrad explain twice, with emphasis mind you, that congress has passed a budget that not only covers 2012 but also 2013 AND includes undefined descretionary cuts of $900 billion over the next decade. He claims the GOP is spoiling for a shutdown.

Of course the press is accepting that while hammering Paul Ryan in the same press conference.

As Bob Beckle calls for high fives throughout the Obama campaign because the GOP continues to commit suicide for even discussing a budget.

The meme is now set in concrete for this cycle.

DanMan on March 20, 2012 at 11:20 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

…with the help of every democrat in Congress.

It will cost more to get it out.

..no..it will cost more for Obama to finance and chase his failed economic policies which have made things much…much worse.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

The buck stops at the Presidents desk…..you own it just like you own losing Afghanistan.

Baxter Greene on March 20, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Stop it. Your complex economic language is too much for us!

mankai on March 20, 2012 at 11:08 AM

But but but smart people Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison, Bill gates, Warren Buffet…./libtardforlife

dentarthurdent on March 20, 2012 at 11:24 AM

The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.

The more interesting question- why was there ANY net debt growth under Bush, given the budget inherited from Clinton? Other than the brief recession post 9/11, the economy was expanding and debt-fueled growth wasn’t necessary. It was the first time in modern American history that the federal government undertook a long-term policy of significant spending increases matched by deep tax cuts. Obviously Clinton pursued a different economic policy, but so his predecessors Reagan and Bush Sr, as both enacted significant tax increases to ensure that higher spending was offset by more revenue (esp Reagan’s tax incrases of 1982).

I realize that most conservatives have already pointed this out.

bayam on March 20, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Still Bush’s fault. Obama HAD to spend all that money we don’t have to “fix” the problem.

…you would be hard pressed to find a better example of the total failure of Obama’s Presidency than the fact that 4 years into the “Hope and Change” era….liberals are still whining about Bush.

Baxter Greene on March 20, 2012 at 11:27 AM

The buck stops at the Presidents desk…..you own it just like you own losing Afghanistan.

Baxter Greene on March 20, 2012 at 11:21 AM

As always Mr. Greene well said.

hawkdriver on March 20, 2012 at 11:28 AM

and of course, Obama loves him some outrageously high gas prices and energy bills.. gotta whip them peasants hard to keep them on the path of virtue to green utopia..

A progressive, who claims with a straight face to “care” about the little guy, then want euro priced gas, because they hate our car culture…

Does that dolt Obama not know, the prices of all goods is affected by the costs of fuel?

How many families get driven deeper into poverty, going from working poor, to just friggin poor. The cost of everything from milk to cars is going to explode, and Obama wants it.. That is what Americans instinctively know, and Mr. Harvard Yard, can’t figure the freak out.

Poor families take in in the shorts, again, while a leftwing president plays his fiddle and watches us burn. In Ohio, there are NO alternatives to cars,.. we have no passenger rail, not enough need, no signifigant buss system except in three or four major cities, you don’t have a car..

you don’t work.. and some people commute an hour or more, one way, as my brother does.. to trade the misery of working families, to appease the idiot greens.. Obama better be planning a coup, because he’s no way in Hell going to win this election.

You liberals have had 4 years, and have done NOTHING, but make it worse. Milk is 4 dollars a gallon here now, when gas goes up,.. so does milk, and buddy, kids eat a lot,.. so now, we have to pay a much higher proportion for food, fuel, electric just to survive.. and it’s dooming Obama.

mark81150 on March 20, 2012 at 11:28 AM

See?! SEE! Obama has done more for the economy in three years than Bush did in eight!

Christien on March 20, 2012 at 11:29 AM

The more interesting question- why was there ANY net debt growth under Bush, given the budget inherited from Clinton? Other than the brief recession post 9/11, the economy was expanding and debt-fueled growth wasn’t necessary. It was the first time in modern American history that the federal government undertook a long-term policy of significant spending increases matched by deep tax cuts. Obviously Clinton pursued a different economic policy, but so his predecessors Reagan and Bush Sr, as both enacted significant tax increases to ensure that higher spending was offset by more revenue (esp Reagan’s tax incrases of 1982).

I realize that most conservatives have already pointed this out.

bayam on March 20, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Your downplaying the effects of the 9/11 attacks had on the entire economy. And you totally ignore the natural disasters that also occured during Bush’s first term. Other than that…….

D-fusit on March 20, 2012 at 11:29 AM

you would be hard pressed to find a better example of the total failure of Obama’s Presidency than the fact that 4 years into the “Hope and Change” era….liberals are still whining about Bush.Baxter Greene on March 20, 2012 at 11:27 AM

per hawkdriver, you’re on a roll Mr. Greene

DanMan on March 20, 2012 at 11:33 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

I’ve come to the conclusion that you’re playing a character and just trolling us for laughs.

Absolutely no one could possibly be as obtuse as the character you play.

ButterflyDragon on March 20, 2012 at 11:38 AM

Yes of course, to get out of these large “Bush” deficits we have to create even larger deficits. Makes perfect sense to a libtard.

Wigglesworth on March 20, 2012 at 11:51 AM

And to think, we still can’t double NASA’s tiny budget.

I mean maybe it’s just me but I’d rather send humans to another planet than go to war with libya. But that’s just me.

triple on March 20, 2012 at 11:51 AM

bayam on March 20, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Where do I start? The economy was already getting crushed under the historically-high tax take of 20.6% GDP in 2000. Every time, and I do mean every time, the federal government has taken over 19% of GDP in revenues, the economy has gone into a recession until that dropped back below the historical 18% average (which was the real genius of the 1982 Reagan tax cut).

Item number two was 9/11. That prolonged the 2000-2001 recession through the early part of 2003.

Part 3 is that thanks to interest earned by the “trust funds”, there can be a current-budget surplus while the debt continues to grow as, while the interest is officially offset (indeed, the category in the Monthly Treasury Statement is “Undistributed Offsetting Receipts”), it gets spent as though the money was created. Think of it as, “Give each other $20, okay, and put it on Underhill.”

Steve Eggleston on March 20, 2012 at 11:52 AM

The car had already been driven into the ditch…

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

The shift in the balance of power, when majority control (2+ out of 3) of the House, Senate and Presidency shifted, was NOT January 2009.

It WAS January 2007, when Democrats took majority control of the House and Senate.

The ecnomony was not “in the ditch” when Republicans turned over majority control to the Democrats.

It is the Democrats who drove the economy into the ditch over the course of three years (2007-2009) and left it sitting in the ditch for the last two plus years (2010-Present).

——————————————

What Pelosi, Reid, and Obama “inherited” from Republicans, when the balance of power tipped from Republicans to Democrats in January 2007, was:

1) FY 2007 deficit: $501 Billion.

2) Total National Debt: under $8.7 Trillion.

3) Unemployment: 4.4%

4) “Discouraged Workers” (not counted in the unemployment number): 274,000.

5) Employment-population ratio (for those age 16 years and over): 63.4%

6) The Zillow Average U.S. Home Value Index was over $190,000.

What do we have now, after five+ years of majority Democrat control?

1) A projected FY 2012 deficit of $1,390 Billion ($1.39 Trillion).

2) Total National Debt almost $15.5 Trillion.

3) Unemployment: 8.3%

4) “Discouraged Workers” (not counted in the unemployment number): 1,006,000.

5) Employment-population ratio (for those age 16 years and over): 58.6%

6) The Zillow Average U.S. Home Value Index is under $150,000. (An average loss of over $40,000 in home equity.)

ITguy on March 20, 2012 at 11:52 AM

I think it’s useful to compare two four-year periods, a decade apart, where in each case both houses of Congress were controlled by 1 party.

Republican Congress 1997-2000: about $100 Billion new debt per year.

Democrat Congress 2007-2010: about $1,300 Billion new debt per year.

ITguy on March 20, 2012 at 11:58 AM

Quoting me from yesterday, ITguy brings the cred. Good succinct information.

DanMan on March 20, 2012 at 12:00 PM

FYI: There was NO FY 2009 Bush budget. Bush signed a continuing resolution on 30 September 2008. It expired on 6 March 2009. On 11 March 2009, President Obama signed a FY2009 budget into law.

Resist We Much on March 20, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Resist We Much on March 20, 2012 at 12:05 PM

Minor point of order – Presidents don’t sign budgets; those are joint resolutions. They do, however, sign appropriations based on said budget resolutions.

With respect to the FY2009 budget cycle, the Rats waited until Obama was in the White House to pass appropriations based on their FY2009 budget resolution.

Steve Eggleston on March 20, 2012 at 12:14 PM

What brought down the old Soviet Union? It became bankrupt by trying to keep up with the United States spending in the area of military budget. That may seem a little simplistic but really can not be disputed. What is happening now in the US? We are spending ourselves into a bankrupt economy. Is this by intent or accidental? Don’t really know but it is something that can not be disputed and someday we will all look back and want the real answer. I’ll bet Obama knows exactly what is happening and is not upset by it at all.

Pardonme on March 20, 2012 at 12:16 PM

See:

Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual 2000 – 2010

To get around all of Washington’s budgeting gimmicks, I stick to just the actual debt outstanding on the Fiscal Year end date (September 30th each year).

I take the the total debt from one fiscal year end date and subtract the total debt from the prior fiscal year end date, and I call that additional debt accumulated the TRUE DEFICIT for that fiscal year.

The last calendar year that the republicans held majority control was 2006, and they passed the FY 2007 budget. So let’s look at the TRUE DEFICIT from the last Republican majority budget and compare it to the TRUE DEFICIT from each of the following Democrat majority fiscal years…

————————————————————————————————————–
Republican majority FY 2007: Deficit = $501 Billion ($0.501 Trillion)
————————————————————————————————————–
Democrat majority FY 2008: Deficit = $1,017 Billion ($1.017 Trillion)
Democrat majority FY 2009: Deficit = $1,885 Billion ($1.885 Trillion)
Democrat majority FY 2010: Deficit = $1,652 Billion ($1.652 Trillion)
Democrat majority FY 2011: Deficit = $1,229 Billion ($1.229 Trillion)
Democrat majority FY 2012: Deficit = $1,390 Billion ($1.390 Trillion) {PROJECTED}
————————————————————————————————————–

ITguy on March 20, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Watching Kent Conrad explain twice, with emphasis mind you, that congress has passed a budget that not only covers 2012 but also 2013 AND includes undefined descretionary cuts of $900 billion over the next decade. He claims the GOP is spoiling for a shutdown.

Of course the press is accepting that while hammering Paul Ryan in the same press conference.

As Bob Beckle calls for high fives throughout the Obama campaign because the GOP continues to commit suicide for even discussing a budget.

The meme is now set in concrete for this cycle.

DanMan on March 20, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Conrad kept saying he was going to send in his paperwork today to “deem” the budget passed under the BCA. WTH is with that?

DanMan I am glad you saw this presser. And you know that the LSM is going to run with that along with Paul Ryan tossing another granny off the cliff.

CoffeeLover on March 20, 2012 at 12:20 PM

What brought down the old Soviet Union? It became bankrupt

Pardonme on March 20, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Correct.

And what brought the Russians back?

Oil money. Russia is now the worlds #2 oil exporter, behind Saudi Arabia.
What brought down the old Soviet Union? It became bankrupt by trying to keep up with the United States spending in the area of military budget. That may seem a little simplistic but really can not be disputed. What is happening now in the US? We are spending ourselves into a bankrupt economy. Is this by intent or accidental? Don’t really know but it is something that can not be disputed and someday we will all look back and want the real answer. I’ll bet Obama knows exactly what is happening and is not upset by it at all.

Pardonme on March 20, 2012 at 12:16 PM

The Democrats are enslaving this country by keeping us dependent on Communist and Islamic countries for oil.

ITguy on March 20, 2012 at 12:21 PM

The car had already been driven into the ditch….

It will cost more to get it out.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Follow along…

Bush deficits caused the economic collapse.

Obama deficits are saving the economy!

/Leftists

mankai on March 20, 2012 at 10:36 AM

gwelf on March 20, 2012 at 12:22 PM

“The problem is that the way Bush has done it in the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion from the first 42 presidents. No. 43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome. So we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back. $30,000 for every man, woman, and child. That’s irresponsible, that’s unpatriotic.”

- Democratic Presidential nominee, Barack Obama, 3 July 2008

“The problem is that the way Obama has done it in the last 1,148 days is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $10,628,881,485,510.23 from the first 43 presidents. No. 44 added $4,892,263,827,017.74 by his lonesome. So we now have over $15,519,140,875,930.82 of debt that we are going to have to pay back. $50,061.75 for every man, woman, and child. That’s irresponsible, that’s unpatriotic.”

- RWM, 13 March 2012

If you are interested in more numbers, see the right side of my blog:

http://predicthistunpredictpast.blogspot.com/

Numbers updated monthly.

Resist We Much on March 20, 2012 at 12:26 PM

It’s more instructive to think about how you address the problems facing the US now that continuing with the back-and-forth, endless finger pointing over the past.

bayam on March 20, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Except that the left wants to do more of the same that has failed in the past. Democrats as a party deny that we have a spending problem (unless you bring up the military which is 20% of the budget) but like to pretend we have a revenue problem and that a combination of taxing the rich and borrowing the next generation into abject poverty is going to fix everything.

gwelf on March 20, 2012 at 12:27 PM

The more interesting question- why was there ANY net debt growth under Bush, given the budget inherited from Clinton? Other than the brief recession post 9/11, the economy was expanding and debt-fueled growth wasn’t necessary. It was the first time in modern American history that the federal government undertook a long-term policy of significant spending increases matched by deep tax cuts. Obviously Clinton pursued a different economic policy, but so his predecessors Reagan and Bush Sr, as both enacted significant tax increases to ensure that higher spending was offset by more revenue (esp Reagan’s tax incrases of 1982).

I realize that most conservatives have already pointed this out.

bayam on March 20, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Why do libs always forget that Bush actually inherited a recession from Clinton?

spinach.chin on March 20, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Let’s try that again…

What brought down the old Soviet Union? It became bankrupt

Pardonme on March 20, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Correct.

And what brought the Russians back?

Oil money.
Russia is now the worlds #2 oil exporter, behind Saudi Arabia.

The Democrats are enslaving this country by keeping us dependent on Communist and Islamic countries for oil.

ITguy on March 20, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Thank you President Obama.

crr6 on May 1, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Del Dolemonte on March 20, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Are you better off now than you were two years ago?

Absolutely.

crr6 on May 30, 2011 at 5:35 PM

Del Dolemonte on March 20, 2012 at 12:36 PM

The car had already been driven into the ditch by the Democrat Congress that took over in 2007.

liberal4life on March 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Fixed.

Del Dolemonte on March 20, 2012 at 12:38 PM

bayam on March 20, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Why do libs always forget that Bush actually inherited a recession from Clinton?

spinach.chin on March 20, 2012 at 12:28 PM

They also forget that Bush inherited something else from Clinton.

The 9/11 attacks.

Del Dolemonte on March 20, 2012 at 12:42 PM

Comment pages: 1 2