Obama's and Bush's effect on the deficit

MsMAM wrote: Here is my response:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
.
GW spent money like a drunken sailor.

I wonder what 1.9 trillion would be worth today?

And if you notice from your chart, Clinton spent $1.4 trillion so not much less than Reagan.

The Viking wrote:

MsMAM wrote: Here is my response:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
.
GW spent money like a drunken sailor.

I wonder what 1.9 trillion would be worth today?

So if GW spent money like a drunken sailor then what is Obama since his will be at least double of what Bush spent?

Did you actually see in the chart that the total cost of new policies for Bush is 5.07 trillion and Obama's are 1.44? I swear - you LOVE partisanship even if you are wrong. (I do love you tho)

You want a fun one? Look at this chart. Basically, who is the President is not as relevant, as the budget does not come from the President, but from the Congress. And there is a very high correlation between falling deficits and GOP control of the budgetary process. Letting the Democrats control either (or worse, both) chamber will increase the deficits. And it doesn't even show 2010 when the Dems controlled all three houses. It would be WAY off the chart!

MsMAM wrote: Here is my response:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
.
GW spent money like a drunken sailor.

I wonder what 1.9 trillion would be worth today?

I am sick of this slander. I believe I can speak for drunken sailors across the globe. I have been drunk in many of the piss pots of the world and I can assure you that while you can spend your money, you can spend your watch, you can spend your belt buckle and belt, you can even spend your pants socks and shoes, when you are buck naked, no one will advance you a peso for a beer.

The Viking wrote:
ARE YOU KIDDING?? Raising the debt has nothing to do with spending? That explains a lot. And raising now and then never talking about it or fighting about it is all that happens until the NEXT time they need to raise it which in in Jan of 2013. When the NEXT President is in office. THAT is what this is all about with Obama. He wants to kick the can down the road to the next President. And the Cut, Cap and Balance gave the debt ceiling raise and went to 2013. And Obama said NO!. HE is the one playing games with our Reputation!

OK, I will try one more time before I go to bed....the debt ceiling relates to money that is ALREADY spent.....if we do not raise it, then we default on our debt. simple really. No amount of spending cuts is going to change what we owe right now. If we do not raise the debt ceiling RIGHT NOW.....we default on our obligations, we do not pay people we have promised to pay. You cannot go back and cut the spending that has already been spent......we know what our obligations are through 2012.....those will be the same whatever the Republicans pass in the way of spending cuts...because those cuts WILL NOT apply to money already obligated. Got it?

Look, I know that last post was a simplistic view of the debt ceiling, but really folks, what part of "we owe this money" is so hard for people to understand. The very thought that The United States of American would default on it's debt, would go back on it's financial word, would not pay what it owes is just totally beyond me.

If Tuesday comes around with no agreement, I sure hope that Congress is the first to be notified that they will not be getting any checks till further notice....

MsMAM wrote:

The Viking wrote:

MsMAM wrote: Here is my response:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
.
GW spent money like a drunken sailor.

I wonder what 1.9 trillion would be worth today?

So if GW spent money like a drunken sailor then what is Obama since his will be at least double of what Bush spent?

Did you actually see in the chart that the total cost of new policies for Bush is 5.07 trillion and Obama's are 1.44? I swear - you LOVE partisanship even if you are wrong. (I do love you tho)

Did you look at the federal debt in the middle half way down? Bush took it from $5.628 Trillion when Clinton left (with 9/11 costing about $1 Trillion of that thanks to clinton) to $9.654 Trillion which is $4 trillion added to the National debt. Under Obama it went from the %9.654 Trillion and on there it only says $11.875 but we all have seen the numbers and we are at $14.5 trillion now in just 2 1/2 years. So that is $4.9 trillion in 2 1/2 years compared to Bush's $4 trillion in 8 years with 9/11, and now Obama needs $2.3 trillion more just till the end of his first term. That is $6.3 trillion increase in the Federal debt in 4 years, and the CBO says we will be close to $20 trillion by 2016. SO that $1.44 trillion number is crap and you know it!

Oh really.........right now it doesn't matter how we got there....ONLY that we owe people money, and we damn well better pay them.

archer wrote: Oh really.........right now it doesn't matter how we got there....ONLY that we owe people money, and we damn well better pay them.

But I love how people likeyou HATE the tea Party because htey are sticking to what America voted them in to do. Stop the out of control spending! No one else is doing it!

The Viking wrote:

MsMAM wrote:

The Viking wrote:

MsMAM wrote: Here is my response:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
.
GW spent money like a drunken sailor.

I wonder what 1.9 trillion would be worth today?

So if GW spent money like a drunken sailor then what is Obama since his will be at least double of what Bush spent?

Did you actually see in the chart that the total cost of new policies for Bush is 5.07 trillion and Obama's are 1.44? I swear - you LOVE partisanship even if you are wrong. (I do love you tho)

Did you look at the federal debt in the middle half way down? Bush took it from $5.628 Trillion when Clinton left (with 9/11 costing about $1 Trillion of that thanks to clinton) to $9.654 Trillion which is $4 trillion added to the National debt. Under Obama it went from the %9.654 Trillion and on there it only says $11.875 but we all have seen the numbers and we are at $14.5 trillion now in just 2 1/2 years. So that is $4.9 trillion in 2 1/2 years compared to Bush's $4 trillion in 8 years with 9/11, and now Obama needs $2.3 trillion more just till the end of his first term. That is $6.3 trillion increase in the Federal debt in 4 years, and the CBO says we will be close to $20 trillion by 2016. SO that $1.44 trillion number is crap and you know it!

Did you read the FIRST thing I posted? It is because they are FOLLOWING a president that they STILL have to pay the previous president's crap.