Some Facts About the U.S. Budget

Discussion in 'Politics' started by InTheLight, Feb 16, 2011.

  1. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,189
    Likes Received:
    611
    First budget of $1 Trillion: 1987, Ronald Reagan, 198 years since the U.S. was founded in 1789.

    First budget of $2 Trillion, 2002, George W. Bush. Budget increased by $1 trillion in 15 years. Budget doubled in 15 years. A 100% increase in 15 years.

    First budget of $3 Trillion, 2009, George W. Bush. Budget increased by 1 Trillion, or 50% in 7 years. There were no decreases in the budget during the Bush years.

    2010 Budget = $3.6 Trillion, Barack Obama. Budget increased 19% in one year.

    2011 Budget = $3.8 trillion, Barack Obama. Budget increased 5.5% in one year.

    2012 Budget = $3.7 trillion, Barack Obama. Budget decreased 2.6% in one year.
     
    #1 InTheLight, Feb 16, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 16, 2011
  2. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    If you want to see the impact of taxation, take a historical view of the budget from the first parts of 19th century and draw it out on a chart with the average tax rate mixed in with it.

    The accelerated budget expenditures have exploded since WWII.

    The CBO has all this information available on their website. It is amazing to me that if you spend just a few moments digging for stuff how fast yo can find out when and where things really started to go bad in this country. Once you isolate that it becomes a simple next step to see who is responsible.

    Compare the federal budget as a percentage of total GDP, then you start to really see some interesting facts.

    At this point our only hope is 1) nation wide economic implosion forcing a complete adjustment of spending/budgeting priorities, 2) voting everyone out of Washington every election for the next 10 years. I'm sure there's a third, or fourth, option but the stark reality is that our leaders are getting fat off the complacency of the electorate.
     
  3. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,189
    Likes Received:
    611
    The history of Presidents following the recommendations of Blue Ribbon Commissions is pretty pathetic. However, the height of hypocrisy has got to be Obama's budget recommendations AFTER he got the results from his own Simpson/Bowles budget blue ribbon commission. They recommended cutting the budget by $4 Trillion in the next 10 years (bringing it into balance). Instead Obama floats a flaccid attempt to cut $1 Trillion from the budget in the next 10 years.
     
  4. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    Great post. It points out that both parties are destroying this nation. Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-Dum. I do like the suggestion to throw everyone out for ten yeqrs every election, except I would extend that until the budget was balanced.
     
  5. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    1981 Deficit as percent of GDP = 2.53%
    1993 Deficit as percent of GDP = 3.83%
    2001 Deficit as percent of GDP = -1.24%
    2009 Deficit as percent of GDP = 9.91%
    2010 Deficit as percent of GDP = 8.92%

    See we can make numbers show just about anything we want.
     
  6. SpiritualMadMan

    SpiritualMadMan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,734
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good point... How about dividing that 100% in 15 years out and seeing an average 6.6% per year or 1/3 of obama's first year deficit increase???

    Yes, statistics are very dangerous...

    I've heard it said that in increasing order of evil there are: Lies, Damned Lies then Statistics... :D
     
  7. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    I forgot I meant to say something else.

    The entire premise of this thread is stupid. Can we take a look at your household expenditures over the same period of time, InTheLight? We might just see some similiar patterns.
     
  8. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,189
    Likes Received:
    611
    Well, that's not how annual percentage increases work. A 6.6% annual increase would double the original amount in 11 years, not 15 years.

    In any event, you're missing the point. TOTAL GOVERNMENT SPENDING is increasing at an alarming rate. Government is getting bigger and bigger and taking more and more resources out of the private economy. Reliance on government programs is increasing.

    Let's take your silly math and examine it. How many people do you know that get an average increase of 6.6% in new spending money per year, every year for 15 years? Forget about the 15 years--Do you know anybody that got 6.6% raises for two years in a row?
     
  9. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    Yes, I do.
     
  10. Ruiz

    Ruiz
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    0
    I do too :).

    However, the issue is that we are spending way too much and no budget out there will balance the budget. That should be the goal. Both Bush and Obama fail to understand this most important point.
     
  11. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,896
    Likes Received:
    294
    I don't really care how big the budget is.

    What I do care about is that we're spending $1.6 trillion more than we're taking in.

    That's Obama's doing. No one else has been quite that insanely driven to spend and print. Spend and print. Ad infinitum...

    What I do care about is that democrats forced a healthcare plan down our throats they said would run less than a $1 trillion dollar deficit the first ten years. The real figure is closer to $7.6 trillion.

    Liars. Crooks and liars.
     
    #11 carpro, Feb 16, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 16, 2011
  12. SpiritualMadMan

    SpiritualMadMan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,734
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, I did not miss the "Total" Point.

    But, the manner in which the numbers were presented appeared to make it look like it was all the previous administrations fault and obama was blameless or at the most a drop in the bucket.

    I also noticed that only republicans were presented with extremely high (appearing) figures and clinton didn't even make an appearance...

    We need to be careful that we do not deserve this rebuke:

    Mat 23:24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

    Probably the best presentations are:
    1. total spending vs GDP
    2. debt increase as a percent of GDP
    2. raw debt vs GDP

    Contrasting against what the economy *was* capable of (GDP) is, IMHO, the only real way to judge debt.

    At this point in time we have no reasonable expectation of what the economy *will* be capable of!

    If we can't pay it back, we shouldn't borrow it.

    If we can't pay it back in a few years, we shouldn't borrow it.

    Right now the plan is *only* to reduce it over ten years....

    The plan should be to pay off the debt in ten years!!!!!!!

    If we can't do that we are as good as dead anyway!!!!
     
  13. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,189
    Likes Received:
    611
    Really? This is blameless?

    2010 Budget = $3.6 Trillion, Barack Obama. Budget increased 19% in one year.

    Reagan being mentioned with the first $1T budget was merely coincidence. If not him, it would have happened under Bush Sr. Clinton's budgets went from $1.3T to $1.9T over 8 years, or 46% increase. The difference with Clinton was that he ran a surplus the last two years. But George W. Bush? No excuses there. He had a Republican House and a Republican Senate (with Cheney's tiebreaker vote) for his first two years, and a Republican House for his second two years. He had a Republican House through 2006.

    The point I was trying to make was that it took almost 200 years to reach a $1 trillion budget, then it took only another 15 years to get to $2 trillion, and then only 6 more years to get to $3 trillion.


    No, because the point is that spending is growing at an alarming rate. Government is getting bigger, thus government control is taking over liberties. Or would you be OK with losing liberties so long as GDP was high enough?

    Not talking about debt. The subject matter is the budget, the budget deficit, and total spending.

    So you seem to be saying that as long as our debt is at some acceptable ratio to GDP, the government may continue printing money and creating more and more government programs?


    <sigh> Not talking about debt.

    Again, you are stating that as long as the economy can sustain it, let's SPEND MONEY ON GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS.
     
    #13 InTheLight, Feb 17, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 17, 2011
  14. SpiritualMadMan

    SpiritualMadMan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,734
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am totally against the Growth of Goverment except where Consitutionally Mandated...

    The issue of entitlements and foreign aid are also problems that *must* be dealt with.

    I am a gun owner... NRA member... Tea Party attendee...

    NO I do not believe the loss of Freedom and Liberty guranteed by the Constitution is ACCEPTABLE UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. PERIOD.

    'Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither' - Benjamin Franklin
     

Share This Page

Loading...