Obama smallest Government spender since Eisenhower

[mosco]

Is it? My chart is a bit misleading. OP is a blatent lie.

Who's the hack?

Apologies if I missed it, but besides the article that you provided that was arguing against the exact argument you were making, you haven't countered anything in regard to the original article.

 

[Matt1970]

Apologies if I missed it, but besides the article that you provided that was arguing against the exact argument you were making, you haven't countered anything in regard to the original article.

Well when Bush left office the debt was $10.6 Trillion and he hasn'e signed anything since. It's now $16.6 trillion. Do any kind of math you want to those numbers.

 

[Bowfinger]

Well when Bush left office the debt was $10.6 Trillion and he hasn'e signed anything since. It's now $16.6 trillion. Do any kind of math you want to those numbers.

You are being intentionally dishonest. The debt doesn't jump the second the President's pen hits the paper. It climbs as the expenditures he authorized actually occur. This inconvenient fact has been discussed throughout this thread, yet you continue to feign ignorance.

 

[sunzt]

And you are credible for having blinders on in regards to the OP and deciding to criticize me?LOL, ok.......

LOL, this coming from the guy who references an article that debunks his own argument....

 

[Matt1970]

You are being intentionally dishonest. The debt doesn't jump the second the President's pen hits the paper. It climbs as the expenditures he authorized actually occur. This inconvenient fact has been discussed throughout this thread, yet you continue to feign ignorance.

This applies to you too.

And you are credible for having blinders on in regards to the OP and deciding to criticize me?LOL, ok.......

You have one of the biggest lies told since Obama took office in the OP and you are criticizing me. Hack onward.

 

[Matt1970]

LOL, this coming from the guy who references an article that debunks his own argument....

You have one of the biggest lies told since Obama took office in the OP and you are criticizing me. Hack onward.

 

[sunzt]

Well when Bush left office the debt was $10.6 Trillion and he hasn'e signed anything since. It's now $16.6 trillion. Do any kind of math you want to those numbers.

FROM YOUR OWN LINK:

The actual budgets of the Presidents and their deficits — that’s what this is about, right? — are as follows:

George W. Bush is sworn in on January 20th, but his first budget does not take effect until October 1, 2001:
10/1/2001: Bush starting deficit – $5.8 trillion
9/30/2009: Bush ending deficit – $11.9 trillion
Bush debt contribution: $6.1 trillion

Barack H. Obama is sworn in on January 20th, but his first budget does not take effect until October 1, 2009:
10/1/2009: Obama starting deficit – $11.9 trillion
9/30/2011: Obama ending deficit – $14.8 trillion
Obama debt contribution: $2.9 trillion

Blinders?

I hope you never do any finance related job.... or even your own taxes....

 

[Genx87]

You are being intentionally dishonest. The debt doesn't jump the second the President's pen hits the paper. It climbs as the expenditures he authorized actually occur. This inconvenient fact has been discussed throughout this thread, yet you continue to feign ignorance.

Obama has authorized all spending under his term.

 

[sunzt]

Obama has authorized all spending under his term.

That includes congress and the house GOP.

 

[Genx87]

FROM YOUR OWN LINK:


Blinders?

I hope you never do any finance related job.... or even your own taxes....

The 09 budget is a grey area due to much of it not actually being passed and signed until Obama took office. But we can certainly move past that and realize Obama has done nothing to reduce the ridiculous levels of spending Bush put us in. Obama has authorized all spending under his term. He owns whatever spending he has signed into law.

 

[Genx87]

That includes congress and the house GOP.

Oh? You forgetting Obama's first two years in office? Regardless he signed the spending into law. To act as if he doesnt own it is ridiculous.

 

[sunzt]

Oh? You forgetting Obama's first two years in office? Regardless he signed the spending into law. To act as if he doesnt own it is ridiculous.

That includes all his years, yes. But the House GOP still plays a role in authorizing as well. My position has always been consistent and clear on these deficit talks:

1) cut AND reform entitlements
2) reform tax code to cut loopholes and generate revenue with at least $3 cuts per $1 revenue; preferably lowing the corporate tax rate too

 

[Genx87]

That includes all his years, yes. But the House GOP still plays a role in authorizing as well. My position has always been consistent and clear on these deficit talks:

1) cut AND reform entitlements
2) reform tax code to cut loopholes and generate revenue with at least $3 cuts per $1 revenue; preferably lowing the corporate tax rate too

Bringing up the house GOP for half of Obama's term seems like a weak deflection to me. Especially given the GOP has suddenly decided it wants to reduce spending increases after years of spending like drunks under Bush. I'd argue on the surface these guys only want to grow govt at 5% vs Obamas 7%. It doesnt really help the argument. Nor are they a source of blame for Obama signing spending into law.

I agree with #1 and #2.

 

[BoberFett]

If this is Bush's economy, then we can say that Bush's economy from 2001 to 2008 wasn't Bush's economy, it was Clinton's. Thanks for screwing things up Clinton. And Clinton's good economy wasn't really his, but it was Bush Sr.'s economy. Good job Bush Sr.

Or we can stop playing these ridiculous games and recognize that everyone in Washington is utterly useless.

 

[sunzt]

I'd argue on the surface these guys only want to grow govt at 5% vs Obamas 7%.

That's what i'm saying, they both are culpable for increasing spending and only one makes a fuss and risks US credibility when the other does it.

Nor are they a source of blame for Obama signing spending into law.

They are the source of spending authorizations. Obama only signs what they give him. Two hands to clap sorta thing.

 

[Matt1970]

FROM YOUR OWN LINK:


Blinders?

I hope you never do any finance related job.... or even your own taxes....

You mean like simple math?

George W. Bush is sworn in on January 20th, but his first budget does not take effect until October 1, 2001:
10/1/2001: Bush starting deficit – $5.8 trillion
9/30/2009: Bush ending deficit – $11.9 trillion
Bush debt contribution: $6.1 trillion

Barack H. Obama is sworn in on January 20th, but his first budget does not take effect until October 1, 2009:
10/1/2009: Obama starting deficit – $11.9 trillion
9/30/2011: Obama ending deficit – $14.8 trillion
Obama debt contribution: $2.9 trillion

Those stats would put the $787 Billion Stimulus under Bush's expenditures.

 

[thraashman]

You are being intentionally dishonest. The debt doesn't jump the second the President's pen hits the paper. It climbs as the expenditures he authorized actually occur. This inconvenient fact has been discussed throughout this thread, yet you continue to feign ignorance.

Have you ever seen Matt1970 post? He's not feigning ignorance, he's just that stupid.

 

[Matt1970]

If this is Bush's economy, then we can say that Bush's economy from 2001 to 2008 wasn't Bush's economy, it was Clinton's. Thanks for screwing things up Clinton. And Clinton's good economy wasn't really his, but it was Bush Sr.'s economy. Good job Bush Sr.

Or we can stop playing these ridiculous games and recognize that everyone in Washington is utterly useless.

No no no

Bush is blamed for squandering the borrowed surpluses. Revenue fell due to allowing the dot com bubble to get to big so that puts the Bush influence back to around 1998 or 1999.

 

[Matt1970]

Have you ever seen Matt1970 post? He's not feigning ignorance, he's just that stupid.

Compared to you I am Einstein.

 

[nageov3t]

I'd be curious to see how that chart would look if you judged the budgets that Obama proposed, not just the budgets that the House passed.

 

[Bowfinger]

This applies to you too.



You have one of the biggest lies told since Obama took office in the OP and you are criticizing me. Hack onward.

I didn't post the OP you sputtering buffoon. Sometimes I don't know how you manage to tie your own shoes in the morning. Velcro, perhaps?

 

[Bowfinger]

Compared to you I am Einstein.

Agreed ... Doc Brown's dog, Einstein.

 

[Matt1970]

I didn't post the OP you sputtering buffoon. Sometimes I don't know how you manage to tie your own shoes in the morning. Velcro, perhaps?

No you blithering idiot. You gave a free pass to the biggest lie in 4 years and decided to criticize "misleading" info. But don't worry, maybe nobody picked up on that.

 

[sm625]

Oh my god what a bunch of bullshit. That spending is on him, not Bush. He claimed ownership of it the moment he took office. If he wanted to stop he could veto every damn bill until he had a budget on his desk, and then veto that if it didnt cut the crap. But no, DC and the media bootlickers have all become so addicted to the spending that they pretend that such simple solutions dont exist. This is the last throes of a totally intellectually bankrupt regime. I just wish people would realize that this scum will rob everyone blind before they go down.

 

[Attic]

If you are trying to manipulate information to present Obama as a thrifty spender then you're doing it wrong.

First Obama isn't entirely in control, and second it's the country as a whole that has the spending problem. Obama ought to stick to his guns about spending cuts and rev increases... but he has to be better than being a divisive and playing the blame game. It's pathetic.

Entitlement spending... the writing has been on the wall for years.

The pain from severe national debt will be exponential. Right now we are ok, but once we hit the 20-25T mark we will be at a point where it is gaining speed beyond what can be controlled in a balanced manner and the pain from that point forward will be felt by the poor and middleclass. Wealthy will have their bases covered for how the Fed tricks out of the debt (Raise interest rates big and buy back previous issued debt at low rates cheaply or print money to monetize the debt).

People keep pointing fingers at who is to blame....., lol, it's everyone. It's congress, the president, business leaders, business owners. Very few people in leadership roles act with any leadership qualities,.... this means the ultra wealthy will gain more power and the poor and middle class will be tasked with carrying the buckets of money back and forth for less and less wages.