17 trillion dollars

The conservative created the issue, under his watch. (unless you want to pass the buck, and say it wasn't his fault). Conservative, Republican, tea partier, whatever you want to call them...all the same. All under one big roof and the GOP.

 

In my opinion, a conservative should have made more money with massive federal budget surpluses at his disposal, under any form of capitalism, but not truer forms of socialism.

 

The housing bubble? That is a construct of bad lending practices pushed by Fannie Mae with the effort to serve under served communities. This is certainly not created by conservatives. This is a creation of socialists. Even so I will accept only the part that occurred during Bush's term as his and you will have to accept all that occurred within Obama's time frame as Obama's. That is how it works.

 

King Reagan wasn't able to do that, and the recession he inherited was significantly milder than the '08 meltdown.

 

We were in a milder recession under Reagan and he did indeed allow the economy to heal itself.

 

Unemployment stayed in the 7% range until the second year or Reagan's second term, so no, conservatives do not have a magic wand that quick fixes bad economies. Reagan's spending was far worse than Obama's btw, not even in the same stratosphere.

 

Obama's spending totally out paces Reagan's in % of GDP. When Regan took office his spending was about 22% of GDP which he raised in his first year of office to about 23.5% of GDP and at the end of his first term it was down to about 22% In his second term it reduced further and growth of revenue increased. Obama on the other hand raised spending to about 25% of GDP and has remained around 24% of his entire Presidency so far. At the same time revenue has decreased from about 18% of GDP to about 15% where it has stayed unmoving for his entire Presidency.


You are flat out wrong.

 

You've been deceived by RW propaganda again. Spending to GDP has fallen every year after Obama took office and is down to 20.7% of GDP. Which is lower than 6 of 8 Reagan years and lower than 9 of 12 Reagan/Bush1 years.

Year - Spending:GDP
2009 24.4%
2010 23.1%
2011 23.2%
2012 21.8%
2013 20.7%

 

How about a link to your chart?

 

well you would have to tell that to the republicans as well, who spend just as much as the democrats, only on different things.

 

Nobody has spent like Obama.

 

Your statistics are not correct and I would like to know what liberal joke site you got them from.

 

Bush spent just as much as he did. He took us from a surplus, with a debt of only 4 trillion, to a giant deficit and the biggest recession since the Great Depression, and a debt of 11 trillion.

 

No Bush did not spend as much as Obama. Sorry it is just not true. You would like it to be true but its not.

 

How do you go from massive federal budget surpluses to massive federal budget deficits, without spending?

 

They both have added 6 trillion to the debt. Bush from 4 trillion to 11 and Obama from 11 to 17.

 

Your numbers are wrong.

Under Bush in eight years the debt rose by 4.875 trillion

Under Obama in less than 5 years it rose by 5.200 trillion.

If it weren't for the Republican's gaining control of the House I am sure Obama would have spent under a much higher rate but the House has held him to his sequester level that reduced high drunken sailor spending. Remember Obama has 3+ years left to spend like a maniac and he will of course.

 

*bump* for you. Where is the link to these numbers. I want to see what liberal jiberish you have pulled these numbers from.

 

Spending: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44507
Spending 2013: http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/30/u-s-budget-deficit-down-to-680b-lowest-in-5-years/
GDP: http://bea.gov/national/xls/gdplev.xls

Here is the Spending:GDP ration from when Reagan took office:

1980 20.6%
1981 21.1%
1982 22.3%
1983 22.2%
1984 21.1%
1985 21.8%
1986 21.6%
1987 20.6%
1988 20.3%
1989 20.2%
1990 21.0%
1991 21.5%
1992 21.1%
1993 20.5%
1994 20.0%
1995 19.8%
1996 19.3%
1997 18.6%
1998 18.2%
1999 17.6%
2000 17.4%
2001 17.5%
2002 18.3%
2003 18.8%
2004 18.7%
2005 18.9%
2006 19.2%
2007 18.8%
2008 20.3%
2009 24.4%
2010 23.1%
2011 23.2%
2012 21.8%
2013 20.7%


What exactly do you contend is incorrect about my statistics and why?

 

Total debt was $5.7 trillion when Bush took office and $10.6 trillion when he left.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/current

 

nothing like the least wealthy socialists bailing out the wealthiest capitalists, under our republican form of government.

 

Elitist treason:


They've Taken $25 Trillion of New Wealth While Paying Less Taxes



http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/11/04-1




Welfare for the rich - that's what has caused the economic mess. That may not be politically correct to say, but it's the TRUTH.

 

So, Bush doubled our debt, and Obama is bad for running up the debt. Is that correct? But Bush was better? How so?

 

Did you have a question based on something I actually said?

 

How about a link tto these actual figures you are showing? Can you provide that please?