Author Topic: Spending & national debt (Read 1176 times)

Chairboy · « **on:** January 13, 2008, 02:58:39 PM »

Found an interesting chart today. It doesn't show the size of the national debt itself, it shows the increases to the national debt:

It seems to show a pretty consistent trend over the past 30 years of bigger spending from Republican administrations than Democrats. Both parties seem pretty free with spending my money, but this really suggests that the old "tax & spend democrats" generalization is out of date. I guess stripping us of our constitutional gun rights is cheaper than whatever the Republicans are doing.

SuBWaYCH · « **Reply #1 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:02:55 PM »

Funny... chart stops at 2004......

Fulmar · « **Reply #2 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:04:14 PM »

Was this adjusted for with inflation?

And, guns are expensive

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:04:40 PM »

I would be interested in knowing if it's adjusted for inflation.

Anyway, we might drop the Spend off of the democrats, but we won't drop the tax Democrats.

Nilsen · « **Reply #4 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:15:58 PM »

Off topic but still not..

Im suprised that it wasnt higher during Reagan with the cold war and all. Less "trade" with China perhaps?

john9001 · « **Reply #5 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:23:51 PM »

why would it be adjusted for inflation, the whole point is to show republicans spend more than democrats.

presidents don't make the budget, they can only ask congress for the money, the house of representatives appropriates the money.

And congress has to pad the budget with pork if they want to be reelected. Everyone says congress is corrupt, except for their congressmen, their congressmen bring federal money to their district to build roads, bridges, create jobs, etc.

Gunslinger · « **Reply #6 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:25:45 PM »

Nilson China wasn't a huge player in the cold war. They were still waking up economically.

What the graph doesn't show is the increases in spending in direct corelation with world events. It also doesn't show times of recesion and what not. It just shows debt and who was president when it happened.

Didn't the dems control the congress for a few years during Reagan's terms?

Reagan used that money to outspend and help defeat the soviet empire.

Bush Sr had to fight a war in the gulf.

Clinton cut military spending in half yet increased deployments 300% (I know I SERVED DURING THAT TIME....we were bringing our own pens to work)

W. Bush has the war on terror and the liberation of Iraq. Not to mention that whole 911 thing wich sent our allready weak economy into the crapper.

Nilsen · « **Reply #7 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:36:14 PM »

Thats what im saying... the chinese were not a big trading partner for you back then so they didnt contribute to the defeceit. If you have had that and the cold war at the same time im thinking the defeceit under Reagan would be greater.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:51:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
why would it be adjusted for inflation, the whole point is to show republicans spend more than democrats.

presidents don't make the budget, they can only ask congress for the money, the house of representatives appropriates the money.

And congress has to pad the budget with pork if they want to be reelected. Everyone says congress is corrupt, except for their congressmen, their congressmen bring federal money to their district to build roads, bridges, create jobs, etc.

You adjust for inflation because a dollar today is not worth what it was worth last year.

Fulmar · « **Reply #9 on:** January 13, 2008, 03:56:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
You adjust for inflation because a dollar today is not worth what it was worth last year.

Exactly. If that graph isn't adjusted, I can see the Reagan years outweighing us now.

SaburoS · « **Reply #10 on:** January 13, 2008, 04:18:01 PM »

It would be interesting to see the previous administrations as well.

thrila · « **Reply #11 on:** January 13, 2008, 04:41:04 PM »

even by a glance you can see the debt go up under jimmy car not up. Yet the arrow above it is going down. That's definately not a biased chart if i've ever seen one.

Toad · « **Reply #12 on:** January 13, 2008, 05:16:46 PM »

Somebody once said The President Proposes, Congress Disposes and the Supreme Court rules.

Add these facts about control of the House and Senate to that spending chart:

Years House / Years Senate was held by opposition party:

Gerald Ford 2/2...his entire term, the opposition party controlled both House and Senate

Jimmy Carter 0/0... his party ALWAYS controlled both the House and Senate

Ronald Reagan 8/2.. his party always had the House but the Senate only 2/8

Bush 1 4/4.. his entire term, the opposition party controlled both House and Senate

Clinton 6/6... for 3/4th's of his two terms, the Republicans controlled both House and Senate

Bush 2... 1/3... out of 7 years; he's had mostly Republican control in Congress

Now...

Gerald Ford, slight downward trend, mostly level with Congress under Democratic control.

Jimmy Carter, Ford's slight downward trend continues with Republicans totally controlling Congress but trend reverses to slightly up in last year.

Ronald Reagan, overall snapshot is that spending rises sharply with Republicans holding the House and the Democrats holding the Senate. So the Reagan spending was essentially approved by both parties.

Bush 1, spending skyrockets past the Reagan totals with Democrats controlling both houses of Congress for Bush 1's entire term.

Bill Clinton, overall steady downward trend in spending for both terms considering Bush 1's spending. Democrats control both houses of Congress for the first 2 years of Clinton's first term. Republicans took control of both houses of Congress for the last 6 years of the Clinton presidency. So 75% of those declining years the Congress was totally under Republican control.

Bush 2, spending again skyrockets with both Houses of Congress mostly under Republican control. However, a large part of this can be linked to the Iraq war which intially had the support of both parties. Even now, both parties generally are supporting the funding the war.

Just some things to consider that might not be apparent if one does not delve too deeply into the how and why of that chart.

Blooz · « **Reply #13 on:** January 13, 2008, 06:52:28 PM »

Adjusted for inflation, WW2 and the Vietnam War would dwarf anything you've seen on this chart.

Viking · « **Reply #14 on:** January 13, 2008, 07:35:44 PM »

Nine trillion Dollars. Congratulations America,

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

The Outstanding Public Debt as of 14 Jan 2008 at 01:41:09 AM GMT is:
$ 9 , 2 0 3 , 0 3 6 , 7 6 8 , 2 8 4 . 9 0

The estimated population of the United States is 304,073,868
so each citizen's share of this debt is $30,265.79.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$1.48 billion per day since September 29, 2006!