Total US Debt Rises Over $18 Trillion; Up 70% Under Barack Obama

[Avorysuds]

But but Reagan!

Yep...

Obama's needs to be updated.

And they they should add the 1 trillion a year in FED stimulus that no other President got... That would be a fun 5 trill or so to add, but hey, like Bush's war Obama will keep the stimulus off budget, and you're good with that because....

Seriously, if you counted the stimulus Obama is the worst person in history when it comes to a economy and debt. Just pretend any other President, Dem or Rep could minus 5ish trillion from their "deficit spending."

Obama gets the tax revenue that never ending stimulus created, but not the debt, Hmmmm, just lucky i guess.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

But but Reagan!

Yep...

Obama's needs to be updated.

FDR added over a 1000 percent to the national debt. Why didn't you include that?

Ask the person who made the chart? List them all if you like, it won't change anything or make Obama look bad, and it wouldn't matter if it did, it is what it is.

O has already spent more than every president. That doesn't help your chart.

What did he spend it on? GOP fuckups?

He spent it on a broken country that doesn't raise taxes enough to pay its bills, or for its wars for that matter.

 

[NYcarbineer]

But but Reagan!

The national debt rose over 200% under Reagan. We still pay interest on the Reagan era debt.

 

[The Rabbi]

But but Reagan!

The national debt rose over 200% under Reagan. We still pay interest on the Reagan era debt.

We still pay interest on FDR's debt too. So what?
Obama's deficits are bigger than Reagan's entire budget.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Since Presidents can't spend money, I'd like to see a year-by-year breakdown, over the last 40 years or so, of spending by Congress and by who was in the White House.

Along with information on which party controlled each house of Congress each year.

I've looked. Does anyone have that?

.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

In progtard lexicon that means the debt is decreasing

 

[NYcarbineer]

But but Reagan!

The national debt rose over 200% under Reagan. We still pay interest on the Reagan era debt.

We still pay interest on FDR's debt too. So what?
Obama's deficits are bigger than Reagan's entire budget.

Obama's spending includes 400 billion a year interest on other presidencies' borrowing. How much did Reagan pay?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

And everyone will go about their continuing to not care.

Total US Debt Rises Over 18 Trillion Up 70 Under Barack Obama Zero Hedge

ZeroHedge, now there is a reliable source for you, NOT!

Let's see The GOP National Debt was $5,807,463,412,200.06 when Bush started and $11,909,829,003,511.75 -$203 billion when he left. An increase of $5.9 trillion. There has been another $1.9 trillion in interest on the $11.7 trillion GOP National Debt for a GOP total National Debt of $13.6 trillion, not counting Bush policy carry-overs like his 2 wars and the continued care of Bush's maimed vets. Obama starts at $13.6 trillion and is at $18,005,549,328,561.45 today including interest on his share of the national debt, an increase of $4.4 trillion or 24% of the total debt.

Are you high?

Just stupid

 

[NYcarbineer]

PAYGO - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

PAYGO was working. GW Bush and the GOP Congress chose to abandon it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

But but Reagan!

The national debt rose over 200% under Reagan. We still pay interest on the Reagan era debt.

Almost 200.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

In progtard lexicon that means the debt is decreasing

No, the debt is increasing. The deficit is decreasing.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

.

Since Presidents can't spend money, I'd like to see a year-by-year breakdown, over the last 40 years or so, of spending by Congress and by who was in the White House.

Along with information on which party controlled each house of Congress each year.

I've looked. Does anyone have that?

.

Go back a page for who controlled Congress. Federal spending is here: US Federal Spending by Year - Charts Tables History

And the President can spend money, he has a budget for White House and other things.

 

[BluesLegend]

But but Reagan!

The national debt rose over 200% under Reagan. We still pay interest on the Reagan era debt.

We still pay interest on FDR's debt too. So what?
Obama's deficits are bigger than Reagan's entire budget.

Have you noticed how out of whack the rate of spending increases are compared to the rate of population growth? Quite telling. I started looking into this when my local school district asked for a 20% spending increase when the number of students actually decreased 10%.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Keep in mind, of course, that we are currently paying $5,500 per family of four, every year, just to pay interest on that debt.

That's $5,500 that you could have spent on better food for your family, rebuilding the porch that's falling apart, repairing your car or even buying a new one ever three years or so, etc. But you couldn't do those things, because you had to send it to the government to pay the interest on that massive debt.

And you'll have to send more next year. And even more the next. Unless the government stops its huge borrowing.

Next time a big-government pusher tries to tell you we don't need to pay off the National Debt, and more borrowing is perfectly fine, Think about what you could have done with that money if he hadn't taken it from you.

And if you didn't pay that much in taxes last year, that's because somebody else paid that much to pay his share in the interest, AND paid your share too. What did he do to deserve being burdened by his share AND yours?

 

[The Rabbi]

But but Reagan!

The national debt rose over 200% under Reagan. We still pay interest on the Reagan era debt.

We still pay interest on FDR's debt too. So what?
Obama's deficits are bigger than Reagan's entire budget.

Have you noticed how out of whack the rate of spending increases are compared to the rate of population growth? Quite telling. I started looking into this when my local school district asked for a 20% spending increase when the number of students actually decreased 10%.

The other shocker is where the increase is going. Which is generally to entitlement programs and income transfers. When Obama promised to transform America, that's what he had in mind. To a Euro style socialist state. Now that he's well on his way no one should be surprised that we see Euro style socialist state growth rates.

 

[80zephyr]

But but Reagan!

Yep...

Obama's needs to be updated.

Using this "logic" the next president will be even better. Even as we go bankrupt.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

And everyone will go about their continuing to not care.

Total US Debt Rises Over 18 Trillion Up 70 Under Barack Obama Zero Hedge

ZeroHedge, now there is a reliable source for you, NOT!

Let's see The GOP National Debt was $5,807,463,412,200.06 when Bush started and $11,909,829,003,511.75 -$203 billion when he left. An increase of $5.9 trillion. There has been another $1.9 trillion in interest on the $11.7 trillion GOP National Debt for a GOP total National Debt of $13.6 trillion, not counting Bush policy carry-overs like his 2 wars and the continued care of Bush's maimed vets. Obama starts at $13.6 trillion and is at $18,005,549,328,561.45 today including interest on his share of the national debt, an increase of $4.4 trillion or 24% of the total debt.

Sorry, not the way it works. If you want to go that route, then paying veterans benefits to WWII, Korean, and Viet Nam vets should all be allocated the the presidents in power at the time of these conflicts.

I also like how you allocated the entire interest on the debt to the GOP.

Mark

 

[PaintMyHouse]

But but Reagan!

Yep...

Obama's needs to be updated.

Using this "logic" the next president will be even better. Even as we go bankrupt.

Mark

Percentages are the Rational, meaning Logical, also in this case meaning Fair way to make Valid comparisons, not something the little Partisans want to do..

 

[80zephyr]

But but Reagan!

The national debt rose over 200% under Reagan. We still pay interest on the Reagan era debt.

So, if the debt was 100 trillion, and a president raised it 50 trillion, you would consider Reagan's spending worse based on a percentage?

Using that "logic" a president 200 hundred years ago could have added 900 bucks to a 100 dollar debt and would look like the worst spender in history.

Using the last presidents base as a current presidents starting point is...stupid.

Mark

 

[PaintMyHouse]

[
Using that "logic" a president 200 hundred years ago could have added 900 bucks to a 100 dollar debt and would look like the worst spender in history.

That would be correct, as a percentage. You know, like in the OP.