A Handy Source of Fiscal Data, or "How Their Naked Ears Were Tortured By The Horseman's Ruthless Cipherin"

Desperately queef something about Scrub not signing the FY2009 budget.


banner2009.jpg


THE PRESIDENT’S FY09 BUDGET
 
The answer was no. Thanks for the link.
It doesn't make a difference if Bush signed it, Bush wrote it

The United States federal budget for fiscal year 2009 began as a spending request submitted by President George W. Bush to the 110th Congress.
 
The answer was no. Thanks for the link.
Decreased tax revenue and high spending resulted in an unusually large budget deficit of about $1.4 trillion, well above the $407 billion projected in the FY 2009 budget. A 2009 CBO report indicated that $245 billion, about half of the excess spending, was a result of the 2008 TARP bailouts.
 
It doesn't make a difference if Bush signed it, Bush wrote it

The United States federal budget for fiscal year 2009 began as a spending request submitted by President George W. Bush to the 110th Congress.

Bush didn't write the spending bills that Obama signed in 2009.
 
Decreased tax revenue and high spending resulted in an unusually large budget deficit of about $1.4 trillion, well above the $407 billion projected in the FY 2009 budget. A 2009 CBO report indicated that $245 billion, about half of the excess spending, was a result of the 2008 TARP bailouts.

I know.

Do you think Bush should be charged for spending $245 billion
when it was repaid, plus profits, in 2009 and later? Should Obama get credit for those repayments?
 
I know.

Do you think Bush should be charged for spending $245 billion
when it was repaid, plus profits, in 2009 and later? Should Obama get credit for those repayments?
Obama should get credit for fixing the "great recession" Bush left for him to clean up.
 
As many of you may have noticed, this here Horseman has zero tolerance for Graduates of the Maria Bartiromo School of Duh!

Accordingly, one of her attentives has been taking a ferocious macing at the side of my steed (why he clings to my stirrup, I cannot fathom).

Specifically, we are examining the conceit that "Democrats spend like drunken sailors" and are therefore not only complicit in, but largely responsible, for our current level of Debt Held by The Public.

To do so, we will compares CAGRs (Compound Annual Growth Rates) of spending and revenue collection for each POTUS going back to 1979.

The numbers are as follows (in billions)



At t=0, Sept 30, 1981

Spending - 678.2 Revenue - 599.3


Reagan (end of term)

Spending - 1143
Revenue - 991

Annual Growth Rates
6.7%/6/4%


Bush

Spending - 1409
Revenue -1154

5.36/3.88

Clinton

Spending - 1862
Revenue - 1991

3.5/7.05


Bush II
Spending - 3517
Revenue - 2105

8.3/0.7

Obama

Spending - 3981
Revenues - 3316

1.56/5.8


Trump

Spending - 4.7*
Revenues - 3.5*

5.7/1.8


* to avoid the bitter tears and recriminations, I have used Grifty's last WH Budget request, and extrapolated the deficit based on trend. Subtracting this from Outlays should be equal to Revenues.

Will this require further elaboration?
The New Right has somehow been gaslighted into bleeving that Republicans are fiscally responsible.

I have no idea how getting the rube herd to fall for this delusion was achieved.

I mean, to bleev such nonsense in the face of the numbers is absolutely incredible.

But bleev they do.
 

Forum List

Back
Top