Bush's handling of national debt not as bad as you would think

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
I still think that government spending needs to be brought under control but what Bush has proposed is not out of line with what has been done the last 30 or so years.

Link

Thursday, Feb. 7, 2003 1 p.m. EST
Bush: A Better Debt Manager?

The debt ceiling! The debt ceiling!

Oh no! We're going to hit the debt ceiling!

So what?

We've hit the debt ceiling for dozens of years, and it doesn't stop us from increasing it.

The interesting thing is that the major media would have you believe that President Bush has caused an unprecedented and outrageous increase in the national debt during his tenure.

This is not so.

According to the statistics, he has actually decreased the national debt since last month, by about $6.5 billion.

Furthermore, Bush 41 increased the national debt by 1.4 trillion dollars in his four years, Bill Clinton increased the national debt by $1.16 trillion in his first term, and Bush 43 is on track to increase the national debt by $1.1 trillion during his first term, a little less than the hero of the major media himself, Bill Clinton.

By contrast, the president who is accused of ratcheting up the nation's debt to "astronomical proportions" according to his detractors, President Reagan, increased the debt by a "whopping" $700 billion in his first term, and an "outrageous" $1 trillion in his second term.

Compared to the current presidents, Reagan was a spendthrift!

Only Bill Clinton, who presided over a period of record government revenues, managed to keep the increase in the national debt to a relative minimum, with regard to recent history.

His contribution to the national debt in his second term was $450 billion - and that was after a record $216 billion payment in the year 2000.

On a percentage basis, we're looking even better under President Bush than the media would have you believe. The federal government has a history of increases in the national debt that are not too disparate, regardless of party, except for Clinton, and the predicted Bush results.

We had a

21% increase in the national debt from 1968 to 1972;
31% increase from 1972 to 1976;
30% increase from 1976 to 1980;
44% increase from 1980 to 1984;
36% increase from 1984 to 1988;
36% increase from 1988 to 1992;
22% increase from 1992 to 1996;
an 8% increase during the Internet bubble of 1996 to 2000;
and we're on track for an 18% increase from 2000 to 2004, if the current numbers hold.

Were there to be a full economic recovery, rather than the anemic one we have going now, Bush's debt numbers may even go down. Now, we're not advocating increases to the national debt, but to single out George W., or even Ronald Reagan, for doing so is apparently, according to the numbers, unjustified.


Charts:


National debt at this minute:
02/07/2003 $6,394,625,504,295.45

Last month
01/31/2003 $6,401,376,662,047.32

Prior fiscal years


Date Amount

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
12/31/1985 $1,945,941,616,459.88
12/31/1984 $1,662,966,000,000.00
12/31/1983 $1,410,702,000,000.00
12/31/1982 $1,197,073,000,000.00
12/31/1981 $1,028,729,000,000.00
12/31/1980 $930,210,000,000.00
12/31/1979 $845,116,000,000.00
12/29/1978 $789,207,000,000.00
12/30/1977 $718,943,000,000.00
12/31/1976 $653,544,000,000.00
12/31/1975 $576,649,000,000.00
12/31/1974 $492,665,000,000.00
12/31/1973 $469,898,039,554.70
12/29/1972 $449,298,066,119.00
12/31/1971 $424,130,961,959.95
12/31/1970 $389,158,403,690.26


Source: Bureau of the Public Debt
 

Dudd

Platinum Member
Aug 3, 2001
2,865
0
0
Are those stats in real dollars or nominal dollars? Because if it's not real, everything they say means nothing.
 

Viper GTS

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
38,107
433
136
Real numbers aren't allowed, you have to use emotion!

WTF were you thinking?

Viper GTS
 

Haircut

Platinum Member
Apr 23, 2000
2,248
0
0
21% increase in the national debt from 1968 to 1972;
31% increase from 1972 to 1976;
30% increase from 1976 to 1980;
44% increase from 1980 to 1984;
36% increase from 1984 to 1988;
36% increase from 1988 to 1992;
22% increase from 1992 to 1996;
an 8% increase during the Internet bubble of 1996 to 2000;
and we're on track for an 18% increase from 2000 to 2004, if the current numbers hold.
What was the percentage increase in GDP during these timeframes?
I'm not an economist, but I thought that the ratio of Debt:GDP was the important figure, not the actual amount of debt itself.
We can't really tell anything just from the debt figures alone.
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: Haircut
21% increase in the national debt from 1968 to 1972;
31% increase from 1972 to 1976;
30% increase from 1976 to 1980;
44% increase from 1980 to 1984;
36% increase from 1984 to 1988;
36% increase from 1988 to 1992;
22% increase from 1992 to 1996;
an 8% increase during the Internet bubble of 1996 to 2000;
and we're on track for an 18% increase from 2000 to 2004, if the current numbers hold.
What was the percentage increase in GDP during these timeframes?
I'm not an economist, but I thought that the ratio of Debt:GDP was the important figure, not the actual amount of debt itself.
We can't really tell anything just from the debt figures alone.

Good question. I remember reading that the current Debt:GDP ratio is currently low. I'd research it today but I only have 30 minutes left at work and doubt I'll be able to get on the PC tonight. :)