trillion dollar coin

Just goes to show that money is an illusion...

Oh, you mean THIS part of the national debt?

Your graph is comparing apples to oranges. It doesn't matter if spending increased only 7.2% during the Obama recession because under his management with so many people out of work, more than 7% his entire term, there wasn't enough tax receipts coming in. So America was spending three dollars for every two they took in.

Most households would have cut back on spending, not increase it by 7.2%. But then again, thanks to Harry Reid, the Senate hasn't even been able to vote on a budget, we are just going on autopilot.

The Obama Years: no direction, but making good time.

Obama's spendin is a commin! Its already in the law, just hasn't kicked in yet. Stay tuned!

FredHayek wrote: Your graph is comparing apples to oranges. It doesn't matter if spending increased only 7.2% during the Obama recession because under his management with so many people out of work, more than 7% his entire term, there wasn't enough tax receipts coming in. So America was spending three dollars for every two they took in.

The graph doesn't matter to you because it doesn't show you what you want to see. Forget the two unnecessary unpaid-for wars on the credit card; the Trillion dollars in unpaid-for tax-cuts on the credit card; the $750 Billion on the credit card for the unpaid for drug-benefit; the $700 Billion TARP bailout on the credit-card; the auto-bailout and near-destruction of the markets on the credit-card....

But hey, an 88% spending increase on Bush's watch, and a 7.2% increase on Obama's because of the dog-poo the Bush administration left behind... Yeah, I can understand where you would still be living in denial. So, when you have nothing else, just call it "not the same." Since you apparently have a problem reading the title of the chart, it's not about "the budget", or "tax-revenues offsetting expeditures"... (Since you have a problem supplying any sources or believable information that isn't some copy-and-paste from the rightie-echo-chamber, I don't expect you to be able to provide anything like that.) The title of the chart is "US GOVERNMENT SPENDING", (it's not about "household spending"), and it's not "apples and oranges"... It's "apples and apples". Please try to pay attention...Bush increased spending by 88% and Obama increased it by 7.2%. Boy, facts are a bitch, aren't they?

I could sit and watch GOTP Revisionist-History for hours...

Once again, we had the money when "W" was President, we don't right now. A smart guy would have cut spending, Barack let it increase 7.2%

5 Trillion dollars was added with Barack at the helm, and 68 trillion in future liabilities. But don't worry, you won't be here to re-pay it. Spend more, right?

In fact, what is Obama doing with his tax increase from the rich? Paying off debt? Nope, he is increasing spending.
(Watch, the expected tax receipts from Obama's tax hikes won't live up to CBO estimates because increased income taxes do have consequences so once again Obama will be spending the check before it arrives.)

Yes, it was called "THE BUSH RECESSION".... Duh... And the budgets that were already passed before Obama even took office kept it going in that direction for a year afterward...

You, of course, have a SOURCE for that pull-it-out-of-your-arse $68 Trillion number.... :rofllol


Deflect much? Sorry, Fred, you've spent too much time in "Alice in Teabagger-Land"

:Snooze

Once again going with the impotent Obama line? Bush the only three term president this century. Even 5 years later Obama still can't get us out of the ditch. Even when the Dems controlled the house for four years and the Senate for six.

But the dems didn't control the house for Obama first 4 years, and they only had a filibuster proof senate for a few weeks

archer wrote: But the dems didn't control the house for Obama first 4 years, and they only had a filibuster proof senate for a few weeks

Check your history. Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House from 2006 to 2010. Dem majority. Oh wait where is your source that the Dems didn't have the House majority after Obama was elected.