Congress Approved $2.4 Trillion In Additional Debt During Fiscal Year 2018: Watchdog

[Faun]

Here, check this out.... your figures barely even align with presidencies....

You post: 427,260,940

That was the debt on 6.30.1972. You seem to apply that to Nixon, but he was president from 1.1969 - 8.1974

You post: 3,233,313,451,777

That was the debt on 9.28.1990. You seem to apply that to GWBush, but he was president for 1.2001 - 1.2009

You post: 5,674,178,209,887

That was the debt on 9.30.2000

You apply that to Clinton, which is close, but he was president from 1.1993 - 1.2001

You post: 10,024,724,896,912

That was the debt on 9.30.2008

You seem to apply that to GHBush, but he was president from 1.1989 - 1.1993

You post: 19,573,444,713,936

That was the debt on 9.30.2016

Obama was president from 1.2009 - 1.2017

You post: 907,701,000,000

That was the debt on 9.30.1980. Carter was president from 1.1977 - 1.1981

You post: 2,125,302,616,658

But that was the debt on 9.30.1986. Reagan was president from 1.1981 - 1.1989.

And you somehow skipped over Ford altogether, even though he was the second worst offender since WWII, raising the debt an annualized 14%.

Even you gotta admit, that’s a pretty fucked up chart you posted?

 

[S.J.]

Well, I'm not gonna spend time checking your "statistics" (lol) but it seems to me that you lefties were saying Trump would never be able to increase GDP growth to what it is now. Maybe you should wait until his first term is over before you grade him on his performance. I'd say he's done pretty damn good so far, and when he's done with the trade negotiations the GDP will grow much more and revenues will increase as well. Of course, your communist friends in Washington will try to stop him "by any means necessary" (according to Schumer anyway), but we'll see.

I would be happy to explain the math to you, since it was not included in your talking points I am sure it is beyond you ability to figure out on your own.

Back to this myth of the GDP canceling out the deficit. Even if this were not beyond any sort of logic and reality, even you admit it does not happen and that even in a booming economy it will not come close to happening.

You are such a sucker, but most of your statist are.

Happy to explain the math? But then you don't, you just post a whole lot of nothing (like you've been doing all day). No surprise there. Let us know when you actually have something to say, chump.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Well, I'm not gonna spend time checking your "statistics" (lol) but it seems to me that you lefties were saying Trump would never be able to increase GDP growth to what it is now. Maybe you should wait until his first term is over before you grade him on his performance. I'd say he's done pretty damn good so far, and when he's done with the trade negotiations the GDP will grow much more and revenues will increase as well. Of course, your communist friends in Washington will try to stop him "by any means necessary" (according to Schumer anyway), but we'll see.

I would be happy to explain the math to you, since it was not included in your talking points I am sure it is beyond you ability to figure out on your own.

Back to this myth of the GDP canceling out the deficit. Even if this were not beyond any sort of logic and reality, even you admit it does not happen and that even in a booming economy it will not come close to happening.

You are such a sucker, but most of your statist are.

Happy to explain the math? But then you don't, you just post a whole lot of nothing (like you've been doing all day). No surprise there. Let us know when you actually have something to say, chump.

I told you I would be happy to explain to if you needed it. I have to admit, I really didn't think you were that stupid, but I have to give you credit for manning up and admitting such.

Here you go, the deficit for FY18 was $1.27 trillion, The GDP $19.3 trillion. For the GDP to "cancel" the deficit it would need to end up at $20.57 trillion, just to break even. That is a 6.6% rise in the GDP in one year. Considering that the GDP growth for the first 3 quarters is less than 3% it is doubtful that we will come close to reaching 6.6% for the year.

Does that explain it well enough for my little statist buddy or do you need me to draw some pictures as well?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Here, check this out.... your figures barely even align with presidencies....

You post: 427,260,940

That was the debt on 6.30.1972. You seem to apply that to Nixon, but he was president from 1.1969 - 8.1974

You post: 3,233,313,451,777

That was the debt on 9.28.1990. You seem to apply that to GWBush, but he was president for 1.2001 - 1.2009

You post: 5,674,178,209,887

That was the debt on 9.30.2000

You apply that to Clinton, which is close, but he was president from 1.1993 - 1.2001

You post: 10,024,724,896,912

That was the debt on 9.30.2008

You seem to apply that to GHBush, but he was president from 1.1989 - 1.1993

You post: 19,573,444,713,936

That was the debt on 9.30.2016

Obama was president from 1.2009 - 1.2017

You post: 907,701,000,000

That was the debt on 9.30.1980. Carter was president from 1.1977 - 1.1981

You post: 2,125,302,616,658

But that was the debt on 9.30.1986. Reagan was president from 1.1981 - 1.1989.

And you somehow skipped over Ford altogether, even though he was the second worst offender since WWII, raising the debt an annualized 14%.

Even you gotta admit, that’s a pretty fucked up chart you posted?

No, he does not have to admit such a thing. This is the same guy that when I ribbed him about a typo went back and edited his post and then claimed he had not made the simple mistake. I am sure he will have some such dishonest answer here as well.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Here are the actual figures, based on presidents' fiscal budgets...

PLUS you said they are based on "budgets"... My chart is based on actual expenditures direct from US treasury... where are your guesses from?
View attachment 221654

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

GW Bush's first budget year went into effect on 1 Oct 2001, prior to that it was Clinton's budget.

On that day the debt was $5,806,151,389,190.21

GW Bush' final budget year ended on 30 Sept 2009. On that day the debt was $11,909,829,003,511.75. That is an increase of 105%. Those are the actual numbers with the correct math.

Reagan's numbers are $997,855,000,000.00 to start and $2,857,430,960,187.32 to end. That is an increase of 186%. Those are the actual numbers with the correct math.

Not exactly. Bush never got a budget approved for FY2009. Instead, he signed a continuing budget resolution at the end of FY2008 to keep the government going until mid-March, 2009. Obama signed an appropriations budget on March 12th to keep the government going for the remainder of FY2009.

Thank you for the reminder, I had forgotten about that. That does indeed make a difference, Bush IIs increase would only be 89%.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You claimed the increase on GDP cancelled out the deficits. Classic Keynesian thinking.

And it's a joke.

Why can't you pseudocons bring yourselves to utter a single syllable of criticism about Trump's accelerated spending after eight years of whining about Obama's debt?

You can throw all the red herrings around you wish, but you can't cover up your rampant hypocrisy no matter how hard you try.

And once again, you failed to address the two points I challenged you on. All you seem to be able to do is bitch and moan that I'm not condemning Trump and praising Obama. You quote Ronald Reagan in your sig to mislead people into thinking you're not a leftist yet everything you post here is leftist propaganda. And you call me the hypocrite.

You asked who opposed the balanced budget amendment. What difference does it make when the last proposed by the Republicans was a hoax? It was THEATER and you STILL haven't caught on it was a hoax. You are clinging to your ticket to the show!

The Republican Party's ACTIONS have made it clear they have absolutely ZERO interest in balancing the budget. That's what counts, and that is why you are avoiding discussing that fact at all costs. That is why you are tossing red herrings and tu quoques like a loser.

The simple inescapable fact is that Republicans are bigger spenders than the Democrats.

Deficits were declining the last time they took over, and they accelerated spending. Deficits were declining when they took over this time, and they have accelerated spending.

You can puke your guts out talking about hoax balanced budget amendments, or you can face the very real fact Trump and the Republicans are overspending like maniacs. Trillion dollar deficits are back, baby!

Wake up and smell the reality, retard. You have been hoaxed. How long are you going to act like a clueless dipshit who can't admit he was hoaxed?

Your masters count on you spineless rubes being this submissive. They do not want you asserting yourselves and holding them accountable.

Pathetic.

If Trump tells them that the economy is the greatest now than any other time in U.S. history, their heads bobble up and down and drool slides out of their slack-jawed mouths.
Thank god the members of the U.N. laughed AT HIM when he tried to tell them the same thing.
.
.
.

Just like the democrat sheep who believed Obama when he said his anemic recovery was going well

Haven't you people learned yet that sheep are sheep no matter what political shepherd the follow?

"B-b-b-b-b-b-but Obama!"

TA-DAAAAAAAAA!

Wow that's a real intelligent reply

It seems you can't understand that dems only complain about the debt when republicans run it up and republicans only complain about the debt when dems run it up

You yourself said you didn't care that Reagan ran up the debt and now you whine about it incessantly

You're just another fucking hypocrite sheep or maybe a sheep fucking hypocrite

 

[Skull Pilot]

They don't give a rat's ass about debt and deficits - never have/ never will.
*Unless there's a Dem in the White House

Obama turned our economy around,for less.

Yep - They didn't say a word about GWB's unfunded tax cuts for billionaires, unfunded Medicare D or unfunded wars of choice and aggression.

just like no democrat said boo about the debt Obama ran up

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE DEBT

I gave you the numbers - NOBODY beats Pugs on debt and deficits and Reagan is in a class by himself!

It doesn't matter

BOTH parties increase the debt and that has held true since Coolidge was in office

so any one of you sheep who complain about the debt the other party runs are fucking hypocrites

 

[Faun]

Here are the actual figures, based on presidents' fiscal budgets...

PLUS you said they are based on "budgets"... My chart is based on actual expenditures direct from US treasury... where are your guesses from?
View attachment 221654

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

GW Bush's first budget year went into effect on 1 Oct 2001, prior to that it was Clinton's budget.

On that day the debt was $5,806,151,389,190.21

GW Bush' final budget year ended on 30 Sept 2009. On that day the debt was $11,909,829,003,511.75. That is an increase of 105%. Those are the actual numbers with the correct math.

Reagan's numbers are $997,855,000,000.00 to start and $2,857,430,960,187.32 to end. That is an increase of 186%. Those are the actual numbers with the correct math.

Not exactly. Bush never got a budget approved for FY2009. Instead, he signed a continuing budget resolution at the end of FY2008 to keep the government going until mid-March, 2009. Obama signed an appropriations budget on March 12th to keep the government going for the remainder of FY2009.

Thank you for the reminder, I had forgotten about that. That does indeed make a difference, Bush IIs increase would only be 89%.

Over a 7½ year period, he increased the debt 12% on an annual average.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Here are the actual figures, based on presidents' fiscal budgets...

PLUS you said they are based on "budgets"... My chart is based on actual expenditures direct from US treasury... where are your guesses from?
View attachment 221654

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

GW Bush's first budget year went into effect on 1 Oct 2001, prior to that it was Clinton's budget.

On that day the debt was $5,806,151,389,190.21

GW Bush' final budget year ended on 30 Sept 2009. On that day the debt was $11,909,829,003,511.75. That is an increase of 105%. Those are the actual numbers with the correct math.

Reagan's numbers are $997,855,000,000.00 to start and $2,857,430,960,187.32 to end. That is an increase of 186%. Those are the actual numbers with the correct math.

Not exactly. Bush never got a budget approved for FY2009. Instead, he signed a continuing budget resolution at the end of FY2008 to keep the government going until mid-March, 2009. Obama signed an appropriations budget on March 12th to keep the government going for the remainder of FY2009.

Thank you for the reminder, I had forgotten about that. That does indeed make a difference, Bush IIs increase would only be 89%.

Over a 7½ year period, he increased the debt 12% on an annual average.

But, but it was not his fault! Just look at all those terrible things that happened on his watch...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Erinwltr]

Here, check this out.... your figures barely even align with presidencies....

You post: 427,260,940

That was the debt on 6.30.1972. You seem to apply that to Nixon, but he was president from 1.1969 - 8.1974

You post: 3,233,313,451,777

That was the debt on 9.28.1990. You seem to apply that to GWBush, but he was president for 1.2001 - 1.2009

You post: 5,674,178,209,887

That was the debt on 9.30.2000

You apply that to Clinton, which is close, but he was president from 1.1993 - 1.2001

You post: 10,024,724,896,912

That was the debt on 9.30.2008

You seem to apply that to GHBush, but he was president from 1.1989 - 1.1993

You post: 19,573,444,713,936

That was the debt on 9.30.2016

Obama was president from 1.2009 - 1.2017

You post: 907,701,000,000

That was the debt on 9.30.1980. Carter was president from 1.1977 - 1.1981

You post: 2,125,302,616,658

But that was the debt on 9.30.1986. Reagan was president from 1.1981 - 1.1989.

And you somehow skipped over Ford altogether, even though he was the second worst offender since WWII, raising the debt an annualized 14%.

Even you gotta admit, that’s a pretty fucked up chart you posted?

No, he does not have to admit such a thing. This is the same guy that when I ribbed him about a typo went back and edited his post and then claimed he had not made the simple mistake. I am sure he will have some such dishonest answer here as well.

Damn, I missed that.

 

[Dana7360]

I've read this thread and I find it very interesting how much conservatives/republicans just out and out bold face lie.

It's just incredible.

From insisting that a republican president needs a balanced budget amendment to balance the budget. Guess what guys? They don't. Well I guess they do but democratic presidents don't. Clinton balanced the budget, left a surplus, started paying back the social security funds reagan and the first bush stole, took it back into the black and stopped the theft from the fund. He started paying down the reagan/bush national debt. He left a plan to have that debt paid off by 2010.

Too bad the bush boy returned us to the big spending out of control but not pay for it policies of reagan and bush the first before him. In all of his 8 years he never once wrote a balanced budget even though he was handed one. He restarted the theft from social security with his very first budget even though he promised he wouldn't touch it.

I will give reagan and bush the first credit, they didn't hide trillions of debt by keeping it off the general budget the way the bush boy did with his wars and unfunded prescription drug program.

People claim the debt was over 11 trillion when the bush boy left office. I guess that's something close to truth. But the funny thing, when Obama was inaugurated into office the bush boy's wars were put on the general budget and over night the national debt jumped to 13 trillion dollars. Soon after Obama took office the national debt had to be raised because it was at the 13 trillion limit. Obama had not written a budget and gotten one passed yet. On top of that the bush boy left him the biggest economic collapse since the last republican crash in 1929 then great depression that followed.

Obama averted another republican Great Depression. He also took the bush boy's historic high deficit high of 1.4 trillion and slashed it by nearly a trillion. trump has reversed that to bring it near that historic high in just 2 years. During a good economy. The responsible thing to do is to pay debts when you have a good economy. Not explode debt. All republicans do is explode that debt every time they get into power. They have absolutely no record of fiscal or economic responsible policy. The last republican president who showed anything close to responsible economic policy was Eisenhower.

If you look at the honest numbers, it's not democrats who explode our national debt and deficit. It's republicans who do it yet turn around a lie about it. Over and over and over again.

Yet so many say both parties are the same. No they aren't the same. We don't see democrats torturing human beings. We don't see democrats destroying our economy. We don't see democrats starting wars with lies. We don't see democrats saying the KKK and nazis are good people. We don't see democrats cozying up to despots and dictators. We don't see democrats taking voting rights and rights in general from people. The list goes on and on. The two parties aren't the same. To anyone who is willing to see the cold honest facts, there's a clear difference.

Republican economic and social policy is the most irresponsible and only does damage to our nation and world.

 

[Rustic]

I've read this thread and I find it very interesting how much conservatives/republicans just out and out bold face lie.

It's just incredible.

From insisting that a republican president needs a balanced budget amendment to balance the budget. Guess what guys? They don't. Well I guess they do but democratic presidents don't. Clinton balanced the budget, left a surplus, started paying back the social security funds reagan and the first bush stole, took it back into the black and stopped the theft from the fund. He started paying down the reagan/bush national debt. He left a plan to have that debt paid off by 2010.

Too bad the bush boy returned us to the big spending out of control but not pay for it policies of reagan and bush the first before him. In all of his 8 years he never once wrote a balanced budget even though he was handed one. He restarted the theft from social security with his very first budget even though he promised he wouldn't touch it.

I will give reagan and bush the first credit, they didn't hide trillions of debt by keeping it off the general budget the way the bush boy did with his wars and unfunded prescription drug program.

People claim the debt was over 11 trillion when the bush boy left office. I guess that's something close to truth. But the funny thing, when Obama was inaugurated into office the bush boy's wars were put on the general budget and over night the national debt jumped to 13 trillion dollars. Soon after Obama took office the national debt had to be raised because it was at the 13 trillion limit. Obama had not written a budget and gotten one passed yet. On top of that the bush boy left him the biggest economic collapse since the last republican crash in 1929 then great depression that followed.

Obama averted another republican Great Depression. He also took the bush boy's historic high deficit high of 1.4 trillion and slashed it by nearly a trillion. trump has reversed that to bring it near that historic high in just 2 years. During a good economy. The responsible thing to do is to pay debts when you have a good economy. Not explode debt. All republicans do is explode that debt every time they get into power. They have absolutely no record of fiscal or economic responsible policy. The last republican president who showed anything close to responsible economic policy was Eisenhower.

If you look at the honest numbers, it's not democrats who explode our national debt and deficit. It's republicans who do it yet turn around a lie about it. Over and over and over again.

Yet so many say both parties are the same. No they aren't the same. We don't see democrats torturing human beings. We don't see democrats destroying our economy. We don't see democrats starting wars with lies. We don't see democrats saying the KKK and nazis are good people. We don't see democrats cozying up to despots and dictators. We don't see democrats taking voting rights and rights in general from people. The list goes on and on. The two parties aren't the same. To anyone who is willing to see the cold honest facts, there's a clear difference.

Republican economic and social policy is the most irresponsible and only does damage to our nation and world.

Lol
It doesn’t matter the government has been printing more paper for decades and will continue to do so. The national debt is unpayable because it’s far too large....

Balancing the budget does not pay off the debt, the surplus you speak of means nothing because it did not pay off the debt. So shut the fuck up

 

[JWBooth]

The sound of cackling hens in my chicken yard reminds me so much of this thread. Few truths come through.
Whatever numbers, accurate or made up displayed here are absolutely meaningless.
Trump, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush ,Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson etc. are all at fault. They took what they found and pushed it to the limits available. You, I, everyone is at fault for letting these bastards reign.
Debt cannot be brought under control by simply balancing the budget. Only by shrinking expenditures massively can this beast not be passed on to our grandchildren.
So long as we the people keep believing that government is the answer to all problems this is just an exercise in mental masturbation.

 

[danielpalos]

They don't give a rat's ass about debt and deficits - never have/ never will.
*Unless there's a Dem in the White House

Obama turned our economy around,for less.

Yep - They didn't say a word about GWB's unfunded tax cuts for billionaires, unfunded Medicare D or unfunded wars of choice and aggression.

just like no democrat said boo about the debt Obama ran up

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE DEBT

I gave you the numbers - NOBODY beats Pugs on debt and deficits and Reagan is in a class by himself!

It doesn't matter

BOTH parties increase the debt and that has held true since Coolidge was in office

so any one of you sheep who complain about the debt the other party runs are fucking hypocrites

the charts give a clear picture of what the democrats were doing with the debt. the republican policy is, no goals, just help the rich get richer, "so they can bail out the rest of us".

 

[Mr Natural]

the charts give a clear picture of what the democrats were doing with the debt. the republican policy is, no goals, just help the rich get richer, "so they can bail out the rest of us".

Tax cuts for the wealthy is all they know.

And who do you think is going to be on the hook for this debt? Us seniors who rely on Social Security and Medicare.

Certainly not the Pentagon, Corporate America, or the billionaires.

 

[danielpalos]

the charts give a clear picture of what the democrats were doing with the debt. the republican policy is, no goals, just help the rich get richer, "so they can bail out the rest of us".

Tax cuts for the wealthy is all they know.

And who do you think is going to be on the hook for this debt? Us seniors who rely on Social Security and Medicare.

Certainly not the Pentagon.

we should have an upward pressure on wages on an Institutional basis. it would help seniors, "stay current" regarding cost of living.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Obama turned our economy around,for less.

Yep - They didn't say a word about GWB's unfunded tax cuts for billionaires, unfunded Medicare D or unfunded wars of choice and aggression.

just like no democrat said boo about the debt Obama ran up

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE DEBT

I gave you the numbers - NOBODY beats Pugs on debt and deficits and Reagan is in a class by himself!

It doesn't matter

BOTH parties increase the debt and that has held true since Coolidge was in office

so any one of you sheep who complain about the debt the other party runs are fucking hypocrites

the charts give a clear picture of what the democrats were doing with the debt. the republican policy is, no goals, just help the rich get richer, "so they can bail out the rest of us".

See you don't care about debt either you sheep fucking hypocrite

 

[danielpalos]

we have a general welfare clause

Yep - They didn't say a word about GWB's unfunded tax cuts for billionaires, unfunded Medicare D or unfunded wars of choice and aggression.

just like no democrat said boo about the debt Obama ran up

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE DEBT

I gave you the numbers - NOBODY beats Pugs on debt and deficits and Reagan is in a class by himself!

It doesn't matter

BOTH parties increase the debt and that has held true since Coolidge was in office

so any one of you sheep who complain about the debt the other party runs are fucking hypocrites

the charts give a clear picture of what the democrats were doing with the debt. the republican policy is, no goals, just help the rich get richer, "so they can bail out the rest of us".

See you don't care about debt either you sheep fucking hypocrite

it is right wing policy to help the rich get richer and expect the poor to help pay for our Debt.

the left wing prefers to raise tax revenue by raising the minimum wage. A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would help stabilize markets in our economy, both public and private. And, engender a positive multiplier effect since capital must circulate to ensure liquidity in our private markets and revenue is generated for the public sector.

 

[Skull Pilot]

we have a general welfare clause

just like no democrat said boo about the debt Obama ran up

NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE DEBT

I gave you the numbers - NOBODY beats Pugs on debt and deficits and Reagan is in a class by himself!

It doesn't matter

BOTH parties increase the debt and that has held true since Coolidge was in office

so any one of you sheep who complain about the debt the other party runs are fucking hypocrites

the charts give a clear picture of what the democrats were doing with the debt. the republican policy is, no goals, just help the rich get richer, "so they can bail out the rest of us".

See you don't care about debt either you sheep fucking hypocrite

it is right wing policy to help the rich get richer and expect the poor to help pay for our Debt.

the left wing prefers to raise tax revenue by raising the minimum wage. A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would help stabilize markets in our economy, both public and private. And, engender a positive multiplier effect since capital must circulate to ensure liquidity in our private markets and revenue is generated for the public sector.

YEah yeah keep trying to get paid for not working.

That kind of shit doesn't fly with people who actually work for a living

 

[danielpalos]

we have a general welfare clause

I gave you the numbers - NOBODY beats Pugs on debt and deficits and Reagan is in a class by himself!

It doesn't matter

BOTH parties increase the debt and that has held true since Coolidge was in office

so any one of you sheep who complain about the debt the other party runs are fucking hypocrites

the charts give a clear picture of what the democrats were doing with the debt. the republican policy is, no goals, just help the rich get richer, "so they can bail out the rest of us".

See you don't care about debt either you sheep fucking hypocrite

it is right wing policy to help the rich get richer and expect the poor to help pay for our Debt.

the left wing prefers to raise tax revenue by raising the minimum wage. A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would help stabilize markets in our economy, both public and private. And, engender a positive multiplier effect since capital must circulate to ensure liquidity in our private markets and revenue is generated for the public sector.

YEah yeah keep trying to get paid for not working.

That kind of shit doesn't fly with people who actually work for a living

taxes still need to be paid and you need to not get laid off. someone on unemployment compensation can help out in that fine capital manner under our form of capitalism. why make it any more capitally difficult than that, for the Poor.