Spending for first 2.5 years of Trump admin HIGHER than same period under Obama

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/spending-first-2-5-years-trump-admin-13-higher-period-obama/

During the first 33 full months of the Trump administration – from February 2017 through October 2019 – the federal government has spent roughly $11.762 trillion, according to tabulations of monthly statements from the Treasury Department. If you flash back to the equivalent 33-month period during the beginning of Obama’s first term – from February 2009 through October 2011 – spending was approximately $10.3 trillion. That was the period of all the bank bailouts and the stimulus. That was the period where we saw the expansion of welfare and unemployment benefits. Yet, today, outlays are 13.2 percent higher than the infamous spending binge.


To be fair, if you factor in inflation, the percentage increase is not nearly as dramatic. Using OMB tables expressing the spending figures in constant 2012 numbers, according to my rough calculation, Obama’s tab for the first 33 months would be $10.385 trillion and Trump’s at $10.722. That would be only a 3.2 percent increase. However, a Republican presidency increasing spending in any way over the catastrophic levels of Obama is indefensible and demonstrates why we will never “conserve” anything under the Republican Party and the political system of the one-way ratchet.

=====================================================================

Trump should be criticized for allowing this to happen. Clearly, Congress also shares the blame. This is outrageous for our country and the future for our children and generations to come. Cuts across the boards, and even more in Defense should happen.

We all need to embrace Spending Cuts....and the first dumbass that brings up more tax revenue should be dragged out, tarred, and feathered. We have RECORD TAX REVENUE. We have a Spending problem, not a tax revenue problem. It's just not sustainable.

The Penny plan is brilliant in it's simplicity, effectiveness, and fairness. I would tack on additional cuts in defense by way of: Foreign Defense Aid, Closure of Foreign Bases, Cessation of Redundant Weapon Programs, Stopping Spending on Weapon Systems that the Pentagon is not asking for. If we follow this plan, we can realistically stop the deficit imbalance in less than 7 years. Within a decade, we can make substantial impact on our National Debt and secure the economic future for generations to come.

I simply don't understand how this is a partisan issue for so many.

 

In dollars, but not in percentages.

I hate how government spends/wastes so much money, but it is partisan hackery to complain only about Trump's spending, or to only drag out the topic of spending in order to cry that "Trump spent more than....."

 

Neo-Cons want military spending
D's want welfare..

They always compromise by both getting their way.

 

13 percent higher.

 

We live in a system where a department recieving the same amount as the previous year is seen as a cut.....

 

This is something that every President back to Reagan can be held accountable for. Reagan increased the budget 170%, yet he was still a fairly popular president. I think every President afterward realized that you can borrow your way to being more popular.

 

Politicians love to talk about fiscal responsibility until they get their hands on the tax payers credit card.

 

Say what you want about Obama but compared to the current left wing lunatics currently running, Obama is practically republican.

 

He was busy winning the Cold War, over Democratic objections. It's like criticizing FDR for WWII spending.

 

you're spot on. It's a friggin shell game with congress-critters. Left or right, they may enter the hall through different doors but they all converge in the same hall and laugh at the constituents

 

How is this a partisan issue?

Because Republicans vote for the same tax less and spend more policies over and over and over again, advertised with memes like "tax cuts pay for themselves".

BTW: Take the 0.5 trillion additional annual deficit (2% GDP) spending by Trump out of the equation, and see where the GDP growth would be. We are already at <2%. That's the problem that the deficit hawks don't seem to understand. When you cut $0.5 trillion from the deficit, it doesn't magically disappear. People who's payroll depended on that money now have no job and can't spend. It's a cycle.....

 

kudos' for ideological consistency.

 

Darth those left wing lunatics have only had one house of congress since January 2019.Most 0f the spending can be laid at the feet of the right wing lunatics.But I do agree neither party is interested in saving taxpayer dollars.

 

That's the problem. Neither should get their way, both should be reduced. Instead, we have a free for all at the expense of our children. It's disgusting.

 

The same people blaming Trump are the same people that pitched a fit when he mentioned a 10% cut..

They dont want solutions they want to sling ****.

 

I totally agree. The OWS / TEA Party groups both were against Crony Capitalism (Gov't favored businesses get the spend). Each group was on a different part of the spectrum, but had that part right. We need to reduce spending and we can with little pain to Defense or Social Programs if we start with the massive waste, redundancy, and foreign aid.

 

You are mostly right here. Those throwing rocks, should also be offering solutions. If they are only throwing rocks, you likely have a partisan drone on your hands.

 

If it was unneeded or wasteful spending, then those paychecks should go away and we should have them working on things that are actually productive. Yes... people will be reassigned, for the better.

 

Reagan was spending the USSR into their demise. We should have greatly pulled on the reigns after the USSR flushed, but we continued with the ridiculous spending.

 

PNAC is a big part of that.

 

It goes back to the Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, see graphs of what the budget did after it, it was a linear rise; the attempt by Raygun for a line item veto would have had the same effect of being able to Impound like Nixon, Clinton wanted line item too.

"Congress passed the ICA in response to President Nixon’s executive overreach – his Administration refused to release Congressionally appropriated funds for certain programs he opposed." https://budget.house.gov/publications/report/impoundment-control-act-1974-what-it-why-does-it-matter

 

Most of that spending was military due to the fact Obama made severe cuts so bad in fact he sent our men into battle with broken rifles, limited or no ammo, planes falling from the sky which of course was extremely demoralizing to troops that were sent in not knowing if the would ever see their families again. If anyone reading this would fault Trump for ensuring the safety of our troops who put their lives on the line for our safety, perhaps they should rethink that mindset.

 

Federal spending will never, ever, go down, and no one expects it to.
:dunno:

 

The federal budget spending rises due to inflation. I know that some posters here have already said that what's spent is going up every year. And, that leaving the budget the way it is is considered a cut. Well, I'm just going to double down on that.

 

You would be right if we were spending at a reasonable rate, but our spending is ridiculously over the top, we could make real cuts and no one would notice, except the really big Crony Capitalists. We could certainly retool our workforce of those that are just a waste and redundant.

Trump has failed us here. It was a big promise that I would like to receive real focus. I think from this thread, we can say that spending is a problem that both sides recognize and want solved. There are some Defense Spending Hawks, and Socialist wannabes that want more, but they are the outliers.