Who's The Smallest Government Spender Since Ike? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama?

[Hobbes]

Here are the no BS numbers.

Well, those may be the real numbers but it's misleading. Here's why.

Those spending numbers include Social Security and Medicare payments which are not discretionary spending.
10,000 seniors per day are retiring and entering the SS and medicare system which is what is driving most of the current increase in the deficit and it's going to get worse.

In 2001 spending on SS and Medicare totaled 692.5B
In 2012 spending on SS and Medicare will total 1304.2B

I used the web site you cited and pulled the SS and Medicare spending out of each years spending here are the total spending per year for discretionary and defense spending.

2012 $2396B
2011 $2342B
2010 $2255B
2009 $2358B
2008 $1932B
2007 $1725B
2006 $1739B
2005 $1615B
2004 $1493B
2003 $1400B
2002 $1283B
2001 $1171B

The big jump in 2008 is because in a recession unemployment and welfare expenditures automatically rise because more people become eligible for benefits.


The only real additional driver of the debt since Obama was inaugurated was his stimulus program and that was only 60% spending
while the other 40% of the stimulus program was Tax Cuts.

 

[inactive]

Nice try, comrade, but read on:

FACT CHECK: Obama off on Thrifty Spending Claim

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wire...g-claim-16434214?singlePage=true#.T8BcRsWwXi4

Not only is 0bama a pathological liar, he is also a malignant narcissist and arrogant Stalinist thug whose sole purpose in life is to destroy this country.

Did you even read what I wrote in my posts, or just title of this thread (which happens to be the title of the linked article)?

Neither will the Dems. He has not gotten but 1 or 2 Democrats in congress to vote for bringing his budgets to the floor, and when the Dems controlled both houses of congress, they would not pass his budgets either.

To clarify, I meant "we" as the country on the whole, not "we" as the Republicans. I sure as hell don't identify myself inclusively with either.

If If's and buts were candy and nuts..........

I may have been kinda facetious there, you know, with the fact there are a whole lot of factors to economic growth that occur outside of (or in spite of) the government budgets and regulation. And collections and deficits are affects as a results.

1997 had a lot less to do with Clinton being sworn back in than it did the dot com boom, for example.

 

[badrinker]

Well, those may be the real numbers but it's misleading. Here's why.

Those spending numbers include Social Security and Medicare payments which are not discretionary spending.
10,000 seniors per day are retiring and entering the SS and medicare system which is what is driving most of the current increase in the deficit and it's going to get worse.

In 2001 spending on SS and Medicare totaled 692.5B
In 2012 spending on SS and Medicare will total 1304.2B

I used the web site you cited and pulled the SS and Medicare spending out of each years spending here are the total spending per year for discretionary and defense spending.

2012 $2396B
2011 $2342B
2010 $2255B
2009 $2358B
2008 $1932B
2007 $1725B
2006 $1739B
2005 $1615B
2004 $1493B
2003 $1400B
2002 $1283B
2001 $1171B

The big jump in 2008 is because in a recession unemployment and welfare expenditures automatically rise because more people become eligible for benefits.


The only real additional driver of the debt since Obama was inaugurated was his stimulus program and that was only 60% spending
while the other 40% of the stimulus program was Tax Cuts.

I'm confused. The numbers you quote (without SS and Medicare) still show a large jump in spending during the last 3-4 years. If the numbers with and without SS and medicare included were graphed, their curves would be virtually identical (albeit with different numbers).

So, are you arguing that the current administration has or has not dramatically increased spending?

 

[vvvvvvv]

Back to the spending debate, I should also mention that real spending has gone up 27% during Obama's term.

Less than half of Reagan's increase...

 

[JB Books]

Nice try, comrade,
Not only is 0bama a pathological liar, he is also a malignant narcissist and arrogant Stalinist thug whose sole purpose in life is to destroy this country.

Over reach much? Ridiculous melodramatic statements like this undermine your position.

 

[vvvvvvv]

Over reach much? Ridiculous melodramatic statements like this undermine your position.

And makes Michael Savage sound intelligent...

 

[SMS]

Less than half of Reagan's increase...

Reagan was busy bankrupting the Soviets and restoring America...Obama is bankrupting us and diminishing America...

 

[vvvvvvv]

Reagan was busy bankrupting the Soviets and restoring America...Obama is bankrupting us and diminishing America...

Like Bush was busy bankrupting the "terrorists"?

 

[SMS]

Yup...what's O's excuse? What's he got to show for it? What has he accomplished? Why are you defending him with equivalent comparisons to those he claims/claimed to be different from?

 

[farmerbyron]

Well, those may be the real numbers but it's misleading. Here's why.

Those spending numbers include Social Security and Medicare payments which are not discretionary spending.
10,000 seniors per day are retiring and entering the SS and medicare system which is what is driving most of the current increase in the deficit and it's going to get worse.

In 2001 spending on SS and Medicare totaled 692.5B
In 2012 spending on SS and Medicare will total 1304.2B

I used the web site you cited and pulled the SS and Medicare spending out of each years spending here are the total spending per year for discretionary and defense spending.

2012 $2396B
2011 $2342B
2010 $2255B
2009 $2358B
2008 $1932B
2007 $1725B
2006 $1739B
2005 $1615B
2004 $1493B
2003 $1400B
2002 $1283B
2001 $1171B

The big jump in 2008 is because in a recession unemployment and welfare expenditures automatically rise because more people become eligible for benefits.

The only real additional driver of the debt since Obama was inaugurated was his stimulus program and that was only 60% spending
while the other 40% of the stimulus program was Tax Cuts.

I understand that SS and Medicare are considered sacred cows but they are insolvent programs. It is disingenuous to talk of spending but exclude the two largest areas of spending.

The most alarming graph is the last one on debt to GDP. WWII spending was temporary and followed by massive reductions in spending. Our current situation is non emergency spending with promises of more massive obligations in the future. This is unsustainable and can only end with the monetization of the debt and massive inflation.

Just because we don't have any politicians with the intestinal fortitude to address the problem of SS and Medicare doesn't mean we can't assign blame to them for spending and not doing anything to fix the problem.