23 Polls Say People Support Higher Taxes to Reduce the Deficit

[Truthmatters]

Is it a crime to have money?

 

[BDBoop]

Congress is full of billionaires, the top 6 combine worth is over two trillion dollars. and guess how many of them are democrats?

Meet America's 25 Richest Politicians | ZeroHedge

What's your point, moron?

Can you post a picture of Bwaney Fwank doing that, The true true liberal!
Let Liberal folks get a real feel for their holy man......

Blues

Hey, at least she's eating, and not afraid to be on camera doing so. Attagirl!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What's your point, moron?

Can you post a picture of Bwaney Fwank doing that, The true true liberal!
Let Liberal folks get a real feel for their holy man......

Blues

Hey, at least she's eating, and not afraid to be on camera doing so. Attagirl!

Damn that is so hot, I have this strange urge to cover myself in Kathup and mustard, with a little bit of chille

 

[bigrebnc1775]

These polls are ridiculous. We have billionaires to support and nurture. The only "correct" form of "socialism".

Congress is full of billionaires, the top 6 combine worth is over two trillion dollars. and guess how many of them are democrats?

Meet America's 25 Richest Politicians | ZeroHedge

What's your point, moron?

Why aren't you attacking you're billionaire democrats? Come on moron stop being a hypocrate,

 

[Truthmatters]

Is it a crime to have money?

 

[driveby]

23 Polls Say People Support Higher Taxes to Reduce the Deficit

Go to the link to click each poll.

Then why didn't dems raise taxes when they had their super majority?.....

 

[Oldstyle]

23 Polls Say People Support Higher Taxes to Reduce the Deficit

Go to the link to click each poll.

Then why didn't dems raise taxes when they had their super majority?.....

Christina Romer is on CNN as we speak stating that she not only wouldn't raise taxes right now but would actually cut them. There is a REASON why the Democrats didn't raise taxes when they had their super majorities...they knew only too well that to do so would bring an already weak economy to a grinding halt.

 

[Meister]

Is it a crime to have money?

Is it a crime not to have money? Hmmmm?

 

[radioguy]

And what do you do when this isn't enough to cover what those bleeding heart liberals have not already given away...What do we do then...We get Bernie Sanders and Debbie Wasserman Feingold Harris Silverstein Saperstein Schultz....did i get all her names in there? we get these people to go out and say that the rich need to give up more of what they have earned.....Stop it please will ya?

Well, those damn tax and spend bleeding heart liberals. I should have realized.
While I don't think a discussion on where some of our tax money goes, nor a discussion of how much of our debt is interest on that debt is appropriate here, it is worthwhile to note, however, that whenever the debt goes up, so does the interest that must be paid to carry that debt. If spending beyond a balanced budget doubles, then the debt more than doubles because the interest gets compounded.

All that said I think this is worth taking the time to study. There is a caveat, though. The figures are Government fiscal year figures and the Government's fiscal year is from Sep through Aug. Because of this, there is some slight overlap between administrations, but not enough to alter the overall proportions.

The Conservative element in our country and our Government through the Republican party have railed against excessive Government spending, the national debt, and tax increases for those who can afford it the most and benefit the most from our system.

Here is a little information with no spin, instead, it is from the Department of the Treasury and the Government Accounting Office.

bush (R) himself admitted that during his Presidency the Government grew larger than during any previous Presidential administration. Additionally, the Government has grown substantially in size during every Republican administration starting with Reagan. Just like the Republican myth of "spendthrift Democrats" so goes the myth of the Republican "smaller Government".

Conservatives keep making up stories and their followers keep believing, blindly. Facts are just not needed.

But let's just try some real facts, just for the heck of it. Nixon (R) almost doubled the national debt, Reagan (R) almost tripled it, bush (R) more than doubled it. bush (R) took the debt from $5.8 trillion to $11.91 trillion (more than doubling it, something no Democrat Presidential administration has ever done either by percentage or by dollar amount). (Treasury and GAO figures.)

bush (R) holds the record of all the presidents' administrations for dollar amount increases in the Federal deficit and the National Debt. Reagan (R) holds the record of all Presidents' administrations for percentage increases.

Yes, your grandchildren will be paying for excesses of previous administrations.

For your edification here are the actual figures from the Department of the Treasury, and backed up by the GAO:

Here are the actual figures for changes in the National Debt since Eisenhower (R):

Eisenhower (R):
From $266.1Billion to $289.0B
An increase of $22.9B
An increase of 8.6%

Kennedy/Johnson (D):
$289.0B - $353.7B
+$69.7B
An increase of 22%

Nixon/Ford (R):
$353.7B - $698.8B
+$345.1B
An increase of +98% (practically double)

Carter (D):
$698.8B - $997.9B
+$299.1B
An increase of +43% (If we assume that if Carter had served two terms, his increase would likely be double that of one term, thus it would be 86%, still a smaller percentage increase than the Nixon/Ford administration.

Reagan (R):
$997.9B - $2,857.4B ($2.857 Trillion)
+$1,859.5B ($1.859 Trillion)
An increase of +286% (almost triple!)

G. H. W. Bush (R):
$2.8574Trillion - $4.4115T
+$1.5541T
An increase of +54% (This was in just four years! Eight years might well have doubled these figures to +$3.2T, over double.)

Clinton (D):
$4.4115T - $5.8075T
+$1.3960T
An increase of +32% (by percentage and by dollar amount, in eight years, less than G. H. W. Bush with only four years)

g. w. bush (R):
$5.8075T - $11.91T
+$6.1025T
an increase of +105% (over double...from less than six trillion dollars to almost twelve trillion dollars!!!)

Obama (D):
(figures from 9/30/09 - 8/14/11)
$11.91T - $14.61T
+$2.7T
An increase of +23% (While this seems a lot, much is the interest being paid on the last doubling of the debt.)

These are the actual National debt figures from the U.S. Treasury and the GAO.

It is very clear that the Republicans outspend the Democrats by a wide margin percentage-wise. By dollar amount, the Republicans have also outspent and outborrowed the Democrats: $4.464T for the Dems vs. $9.994T for the Reps since Eisenhower.

Yes the Republicans, the "fiscally responsible" ones, have outspent and outborrowed the Democrats by over a 2:1 margin since President Eisenhower. Even if you remove Eisenhower from the equation, it is still over 2:1.

Worse, the Republicans have deliberately decreased the Government's income by their tax cuts, while they continued to spend more. So much for the "tax and spend" Democrats. That is a myth perpetrated by Republicans who seem to have a need to misdirect you. And, no wonder.

By percentage increase and by dollar amount, the Republicans outdo the Democrats by a significant margin, a two to one margin. No Democrat had a larger percentage increase over any Republican except over Eisenhower. (Ike, by the way, was a true fiscal conservative.)

-g

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Is it a crime to have money?

Who are you asking? I say no but do you think it's wrong to have a lot of money?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And what do you do when this isn't enough to cover what those bleeding heart liberals have not already given away...What do we do then...We get Bernie Sanders and Debbie Wasserman Feingold Harris Silverstein Saperstein Schultz....did i get all her names in there? we get these people to go out and say that the rich need to give up more of what they have earned.....Stop it please will ya?

Well, those damn tax and spend bleeding heart liberals. I should have realized.
While I don't think a discussion on where some of our tax money goes, nor a discussion of how much of our debt is interest on that debt is appropriate here, it is worthwhile to note, however, that whenever the debt goes up, so does the interest that must be paid to carry that debt. If spending beyond a balanced budget doubles, then the debt more than doubles because the interest gets compounded.

All that said I think this is worth taking the time to study. There is a caveat, though. The figures are Government fiscal year figures and the Government's fiscal year is from Sep through Aug. Because of this, there is some slight overlap between administrations, but not enough to alter the overall proportions.

The Conservative element in our country and our Government through the Republican party have railed against excessive Government spending, the national debt, and tax increases for those who can afford it the most and benefit the most from our system.

Here is a little information with no spin, instead, it is from the Department of the Treasury and the Government Accounting Office.

bush (R) himself admitted that during his Presidency the Government grew larger than during any previous Presidential administration. Additionally, the Government has grown substantially in size during every Republican administration starting with Reagan. Just like the Republican myth of "spendthrift Democrats" so goes the myth of the Republican "smaller Government".

Conservatives keep making up stories and their followers keep believing, blindly. Facts are just not needed.

But let's just try some real facts, just for the heck of it. Nixon (R) almost doubled the national debt, Reagan (R) almost tripled it, bush (R) more than doubled it. bush (R) took the debt from $5.8 trillion to $11.91 trillion (more than doubling it, something no Democrat Presidential administration has ever done either by percentage or by dollar amount). (Treasury and GAO figures.)

bush (R) holds the record of all the presidents' administrations for dollar amount increases in the Federal deficit and the National Debt. Reagan (R) holds the record of all Presidents' administrations for percentage increases.

Yes, your grandchildren will be paying for excesses of previous administrations.

For your edification here are the actual figures from the Department of the Treasury, and backed up by the GAO:

Here are the actual figures for changes in the National Debt since Eisenhower (R):

Eisenhower (R):
From $266.1Billion to $289.0B
An increase of $22.9B
An increase of 8.6%

Kennedy/Johnson (D):
$289.0B - $353.7B
+$69.7B
An increase of 22%

Nixon/Ford (R):
$353.7B - $698.8B
+$345.1B
An increase of +98% (practically double)

Carter (D):
$698.8B - $997.9B
+$299.1B
An increase of +43% (If we assume that if Carter had served two terms, his increase would likely be double that of one term, thus it would be 86%, still a smaller percentage increase than the Nixon/Ford administration.

Reagan (R):
$997.9B - $2,857.4B ($2.857 Trillion)
+$1,859.5B ($1.859 Trillion)
An increase of +286% (almost triple!)

G. H. W. Bush (R):
$2.8574Trillion - $4.4115T
+$1.5541T
An increase of +54% (This was in just four years! Eight years might well have doubled these figures to +$3.2T, over double.)

Clinton (D):
$4.4115T - $5.8075T
+$1.3960T
An increase of +32% (by percentage and by dollar amount, in eight years, less than G. H. W. Bush with only four years)

g. w. bush (R):
$5.8075T - $11.91T
+$6.1025T
an increase of +105% (over double...from less than six trillion dollars to almost twelve trillion dollars!!!)

Obama (D):
(figures from 9/30/09 - 8/14/11)
$11.91T - $14.61T
+$2.7T
An increase of +23% (While this seems a lot, much is the interest being paid on the last doubling of the debt.)

These are the actual National debt figures from the U.S. Treasury and the GAO.

It is very clear that the Republicans outspend the Democrats by a wide margin percentage-wise. By dollar amount, the Republicans have also outspent and outborrowed the Democrats: $4.464T for the Dems vs. $9.994T for the Reps since Eisenhower.

Yes the Republicans, the "fiscally responsible" ones, have outspent and outborrowed the Democrats by over a 2:1 margin since President Eisenhower. Even if you remove Eisenhower from the equation, it is still over 2:1.

Worse, the Republicans have deliberately decreased the Government's income by their tax cuts, while they continued to spend more. So much for the "tax and spend" Democrats. That is a myth perpetrated by Republicans who seem to have a need to misdirect you. And, no wonder.

By percentage increase and by dollar amount, the Republicans outdo the Democrats by a significant margin, a two to one margin. No Democrat had a larger percentage increase over any Republican except over Eisenhower. (Ike, by the way, was a true fiscal conservative.)

-g

OH how very nice more stats. Do you have the styats of who held congress during those presiential terms? Was it a Republican controlled congress or democrat? After all it is Congress who control's spending. So take your stats and bring back something else to argue with.

 

[Oldstyle]

And what do you do when this isn't enough to cover what those bleeding heart liberals have not already given away...What do we do then...We get Bernie Sanders and Debbie Wasserman Feingold Harris Silverstein Saperstein Schultz....did i get all her names in there? we get these people to go out and say that the rich need to give up more of what they have earned.....Stop it please will ya?

Well, those damn tax and spend bleeding heart liberals. I should have realized.
While I don't think a discussion on where some of our tax money goes, nor a discussion of how much of our debt is interest on that debt is appropriate here, it is worthwhile to note, however, that whenever the debt goes up, so does the interest that must be paid to carry that debt. If spending beyond a balanced budget doubles, then the debt more than doubles because the interest gets compounded.

All that said I think this is worth taking the time to study. There is a caveat, though. The figures are Government fiscal year figures and the Government's fiscal year is from Sep through Aug. Because of this, there is some slight overlap between administrations, but not enough to alter the overall proportions.

The Conservative element in our country and our Government through the Republican party have railed against excessive Government spending, the national debt, and tax increases for those who can afford it the most and benefit the most from our system.

Here is a little information with no spin, instead, it is from the Department of the Treasury and the Government Accounting Office.

bush (R) himself admitted that during his Presidency the Government grew larger than during any previous Presidential administration. Additionally, the Government has grown substantially in size during every Republican administration starting with Reagan. Just like the Republican myth of "spendthrift Democrats" so goes the myth of the Republican "smaller Government".

Conservatives keep making up stories and their followers keep believing, blindly. Facts are just not needed.

But let's just try some real facts, just for the heck of it. Nixon (R) almost doubled the national debt, Reagan (R) almost tripled it, bush (R) more than doubled it. bush (R) took the debt from $5.8 trillion to $11.91 trillion (more than doubling it, something no Democrat Presidential administration has ever done either by percentage or by dollar amount). (Treasury and GAO figures.)

bush (R) holds the record of all the presidents' administrations for dollar amount increases in the Federal deficit and the National Debt. Reagan (R) holds the record of all Presidents' administrations for percentage increases.

Yes, your grandchildren will be paying for excesses of previous administrations.

For your edification here are the actual figures from the Department of the Treasury, and backed up by the GAO:

Here are the actual figures for changes in the National Debt since Eisenhower (R):

Eisenhower (R):
From $266.1Billion to $289.0B
An increase of $22.9B
An increase of 8.6%

Kennedy/Johnson (D):
$289.0B - $353.7B
+$69.7B
An increase of 22%

Nixon/Ford (R):
$353.7B - $698.8B
+$345.1B
An increase of +98% (practically double)

Carter (D):
$698.8B - $997.9B
+$299.1B
An increase of +43% (If we assume that if Carter had served two terms, his increase would likely be double that of one term, thus it would be 86%, still a smaller percentage increase than the Nixon/Ford administration.

Reagan (R):
$997.9B - $2,857.4B ($2.857 Trillion)
+$1,859.5B ($1.859 Trillion)
An increase of +286% (almost triple!)

G. H. W. Bush (R):
$2.8574Trillion - $4.4115T
+$1.5541T
An increase of +54% (This was in just four years! Eight years might well have doubled these figures to +$3.2T, over double.)

Clinton (D):
$4.4115T - $5.8075T
+$1.3960T
An increase of +32% (by percentage and by dollar amount, in eight years, less than G. H. W. Bush with only four years)

g. w. bush (R):
$5.8075T - $11.91T
+$6.1025T
an increase of +105% (over double...from less than six trillion dollars to almost twelve trillion dollars!!!)

Obama (D):
(figures from 9/30/09 - 8/14/11)
$11.91T - $14.61T
+$2.7T
An increase of +23% (While this seems a lot, much is the interest being paid on the last doubling of the debt.)

These are the actual National debt figures from the U.S. Treasury and the GAO.

It is very clear that the Republicans outspend the Democrats by a wide margin percentage-wise. By dollar amount, the Republicans have also outspent and outborrowed the Democrats: $4.464T for the Dems vs. $9.994T for the Reps since Eisenhower.

Yes the Republicans, the "fiscally responsible" ones, have outspent and outborrowed the Democrats by over a 2:1 margin since President Eisenhower. Even if you remove Eisenhower from the equation, it is still over 2:1.

Worse, the Republicans have deliberately decreased the Government's income by their tax cuts, while they continued to spend more. So much for the "tax and spend" Democrats. That is a myth perpetrated by Republicans who seem to have a need to misdirect you. And, no wonder.

By percentage increase and by dollar amount, the Republicans outdo the Democrats by a significant margin, a two to one margin. No Democrat had a larger percentage increase over any Republican except over Eisenhower. (Ike, by the way, was a true fiscal conservative.)

-g

Wow, great use of stats to really muddy an issue. Let's take a closer look, shall we? I believe we're looking at a total of 8 Republican terms compared to 4 1/2 Democratic terms. I also believe we're looking at two Democratic Presidents who had the decided advantage of being in the Oval Office when the US was not at war giving them something referred to as a "peace dividend". I'm also curious why your figures on Obama are from September 30th of 2009 until August of this year? Did Obama not spend anything from when he took office in January of '09 until September of '09? Talk about playing fast and loose with numbers!

Historically the three biggest spikes in the National debt occurred under Wilson (WW1), Roosevelt (WW2) and Obama.

National debt by U.S. presidential terms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think if you look at the make up of our government during those three spikes you'll see that both the Congress and the Oval Office were controlled by Democrats. Aren't statistics fun!!!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And what do you do when this isn't enough to cover what those bleeding heart liberals have not already given away...What do we do then...We get Bernie Sanders and Debbie Wasserman Feingold Harris Silverstein Saperstein Schultz....did i get all her names in there? we get these people to go out and say that the rich need to give up more of what they have earned.....Stop it please will ya?

Well, those damn tax and spend bleeding heart liberals. I should have realized.
While I don't think a discussion on where some of our tax money goes, nor a discussion of how much of our debt is interest on that debt is appropriate here, it is worthwhile to note, however, that whenever the debt goes up, so does the interest that must be paid to carry that debt. If spending beyond a balanced budget doubles, then the debt more than doubles because the interest gets compounded.

All that said I think this is worth taking the time to study. There is a caveat, though. The figures are Government fiscal year figures and the Government's fiscal year is from Sep through Aug. Because of this, there is some slight overlap between administrations, but not enough to alter the overall proportions.

The Conservative element in our country and our Government through the Republican party have railed against excessive Government spending, the national debt, and tax increases for those who can afford it the most and benefit the most from our system.

Here is a little information with no spin, instead, it is from the Department of the Treasury and the Government Accounting Office.

bush (R) himself admitted that during his Presidency the Government grew larger than during any previous Presidential administration. Additionally, the Government has grown substantially in size during every Republican administration starting with Reagan. Just like the Republican myth of "spendthrift Democrats" so goes the myth of the Republican "smaller Government".

Conservatives keep making up stories and their followers keep believing, blindly. Facts are just not needed.

But let's just try some real facts, just for the heck of it. Nixon (R) almost doubled the national debt, Reagan (R) almost tripled it, bush (R) more than doubled it. bush (R) took the debt from $5.8 trillion to $11.91 trillion (more than doubling it, something no Democrat Presidential administration has ever done either by percentage or by dollar amount). (Treasury and GAO figures.)

bush (R) holds the record of all the presidents' administrations for dollar amount increases in the Federal deficit and the National Debt. Reagan (R) holds the record of all Presidents' administrations for percentage increases.

Yes, your grandchildren will be paying for excesses of previous administrations.

For your edification here are the actual figures from the Department of the Treasury, and backed up by the GAO:

Here are the actual figures for changes in the National Debt since Eisenhower (R):

Eisenhower (R):
From $266.1Billion to $289.0B
An increase of $22.9B
An increase of 8.6%

Kennedy/Johnson (D):
$289.0B - $353.7B
+$69.7B
An increase of 22%

Nixon/Ford (R):
$353.7B - $698.8B
+$345.1B
An increase of +98% (practically double)

Carter (D):
$698.8B - $997.9B
+$299.1B
An increase of +43% (If we assume that if Carter had served two terms, his increase would likely be double that of one term, thus it would be 86%, still a smaller percentage increase than the Nixon/Ford administration.

Reagan (R):
$997.9B - $2,857.4B ($2.857 Trillion)
+$1,859.5B ($1.859 Trillion)
An increase of +286% (almost triple!)

G. H. W. Bush (R):
$2.8574Trillion - $4.4115T
+$1.5541T
An increase of +54% (This was in just four years! Eight years might well have doubled these figures to +$3.2T, over double.)

Clinton (D):
$4.4115T - $5.8075T
+$1.3960T
An increase of +32% (by percentage and by dollar amount, in eight years, less than G. H. W. Bush with only four years)

g. w. bush (R):
$5.8075T - $11.91T
+$6.1025T
an increase of +105% (over double...from less than six trillion dollars to almost twelve trillion dollars!!!)

Obama (D):
(figures from 9/30/09 - 8/14/11)
$11.91T - $14.61T
+$2.7T
An increase of +23% (While this seems a lot, much is the interest being paid on the last doubling of the debt.)

These are the actual National debt figures from the U.S. Treasury and the GAO.

It is very clear that the Republicans outspend the Democrats by a wide margin percentage-wise. By dollar amount, the Republicans have also outspent and outborrowed the Democrats: $4.464T for the Dems vs. $9.994T for the Reps since Eisenhower.

Yes the Republicans, the "fiscally responsible" ones, have outspent and outborrowed the Democrats by over a 2:1 margin since President Eisenhower. Even if you remove Eisenhower from the equation, it is still over 2:1.

Worse, the Republicans have deliberately decreased the Government's income by their tax cuts, while they continued to spend more. So much for the "tax and spend" Democrats. That is a myth perpetrated by Republicans who seem to have a need to misdirect you. And, no wonder.

By percentage increase and by dollar amount, the Republicans outdo the Democrats by a significant margin, a two to one margin. No Democrat had a larger percentage increase over any Republican except over Eisenhower. (Ike, by the way, was a true fiscal conservative.)

-g

Wow, great use of stats to really muddy an issue. Let's take a closer look, shall we? I believe we're looking at a total of 8 Republican terms compared to 4 1/2 Democratic terms. I also believe we're looking at two Democratic Presidents who had the decided advantage of being in the Oval Office when the US was not at war giving them something referred to as a "peace dividend". I'm also curious why your figures on Obama are from September 30th of 2009 until August of this year? Did Obama not spend anything from when he took office in January of '09 until September of '09? Talk about playing fast and loose with numbers!

Historically the three biggest spikes in the National debt occurred under Wilson (WW1), Roosevelt (WW2) and Obama.

National debt by U.S. presidential terms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think if you look at the make up of our government during those three spikes you'll see that both the Congress and the Oval Office were controlled by Democrats. Aren't statistics fun!!!

Why are you arguing about spending and the presidents Congress controlls spending, if you want to argue who the biggest spenders are, (Republican or Democrats) look to who controlled congress.

 

[Oldstyle]

Well, those damn tax and spend bleeding heart liberals. I should have realized.
While I don't think a discussion on where some of our tax money goes, nor a discussion of how much of our debt is interest on that debt is appropriate here, it is worthwhile to note, however, that whenever the debt goes up, so does the interest that must be paid to carry that debt. If spending beyond a balanced budget doubles, then the debt more than doubles because the interest gets compounded.

All that said I think this is worth taking the time to study. There is a caveat, though. The figures are Government fiscal year figures and the Government's fiscal year is from Sep through Aug. Because of this, there is some slight overlap between administrations, but not enough to alter the overall proportions.

The Conservative element in our country and our Government through the Republican party have railed against excessive Government spending, the national debt, and tax increases for those who can afford it the most and benefit the most from our system.

Here is a little information with no spin, instead, it is from the Department of the Treasury and the Government Accounting Office.

bush (R) himself admitted that during his Presidency the Government grew larger than during any previous Presidential administration. Additionally, the Government has grown substantially in size during every Republican administration starting with Reagan. Just like the Republican myth of "spendthrift Democrats" so goes the myth of the Republican "smaller Government".

Conservatives keep making up stories and their followers keep believing, blindly. Facts are just not needed.

But let's just try some real facts, just for the heck of it. Nixon (R) almost doubled the national debt, Reagan (R) almost tripled it, bush (R) more than doubled it. bush (R) took the debt from $5.8 trillion to $11.91 trillion (more than doubling it, something no Democrat Presidential administration has ever done either by percentage or by dollar amount). (Treasury and GAO figures.)

bush (R) holds the record of all the presidents' administrations for dollar amount increases in the Federal deficit and the National Debt. Reagan (R) holds the record of all Presidents' administrations for percentage increases.

Yes, your grandchildren will be paying for excesses of previous administrations.

For your edification here are the actual figures from the Department of the Treasury, and backed up by the GAO:

Here are the actual figures for changes in the National Debt since Eisenhower (R):

Eisenhower (R):
From $266.1Billion to $289.0B
An increase of $22.9B
An increase of 8.6%

Kennedy/Johnson (D):
$289.0B - $353.7B
+$69.7B
An increase of 22%

Nixon/Ford (R):
$353.7B - $698.8B
+$345.1B
An increase of +98% (practically double)

Carter (D):
$698.8B - $997.9B
+$299.1B
An increase of +43% (If we assume that if Carter had served two terms, his increase would likely be double that of one term, thus it would be 86%, still a smaller percentage increase than the Nixon/Ford administration.

Reagan (R):
$997.9B - $2,857.4B ($2.857 Trillion)
+$1,859.5B ($1.859 Trillion)
An increase of +286% (almost triple!)

G. H. W. Bush (R):
$2.8574Trillion - $4.4115T
+$1.5541T
An increase of +54% (This was in just four years! Eight years might well have doubled these figures to +$3.2T, over double.)

Clinton (D):
$4.4115T - $5.8075T
+$1.3960T
An increase of +32% (by percentage and by dollar amount, in eight years, less than G. H. W. Bush with only four years)

g. w. bush (R):
$5.8075T - $11.91T
+$6.1025T
an increase of +105% (over double...from less than six trillion dollars to almost twelve trillion dollars!!!)

Obama (D):
(figures from 9/30/09 - 8/14/11)
$11.91T - $14.61T
+$2.7T
An increase of +23% (While this seems a lot, much is the interest being paid on the last doubling of the debt.)

These are the actual National debt figures from the U.S. Treasury and the GAO.

It is very clear that the Republicans outspend the Democrats by a wide margin percentage-wise. By dollar amount, the Republicans have also outspent and outborrowed the Democrats: $4.464T for the Dems vs. $9.994T for the Reps since Eisenhower.

Yes the Republicans, the "fiscally responsible" ones, have outspent and outborrowed the Democrats by over a 2:1 margin since President Eisenhower. Even if you remove Eisenhower from the equation, it is still over 2:1.

Worse, the Republicans have deliberately decreased the Government's income by their tax cuts, while they continued to spend more. So much for the "tax and spend" Democrats. That is a myth perpetrated by Republicans who seem to have a need to misdirect you. And, no wonder.

By percentage increase and by dollar amount, the Republicans outdo the Democrats by a significant margin, a two to one margin. No Democrat had a larger percentage increase over any Republican except over Eisenhower. (Ike, by the way, was a true fiscal conservative.)

-g

Wow, great use of stats to really muddy an issue. Let's take a closer look, shall we? I believe we're looking at a total of 8 Republican terms compared to 4 1/2 Democratic terms. I also believe we're looking at two Democratic Presidents who had the decided advantage of being in the Oval Office when the US was not at war giving them something referred to as a "peace dividend". I'm also curious why your figures on Obama are from September 30th of 2009 until August of this year? Did Obama not spend anything from when he took office in January of '09 until September of '09? Talk about playing fast and loose with numbers!

Historically the three biggest spikes in the National debt occurred under Wilson (WW1), Roosevelt (WW2) and Obama.

National debt by U.S. presidential terms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think if you look at the make up of our government during those three spikes you'll see that both the Congress and the Oval Office were controlled by Democrats. Aren't statistics fun!!!

Why are you arguing about spending and the presidents Congress controlls spending, if you want to argue who the biggest spenders are, (Republican or Democrats) look to who controlled congress.

I'm pretty sure I pointed out that both Congress AND the White House were controlled by Democrats during the three largest spikes. There really isn't much of an "argument" to make here. The figures that the earlier poster used were laughable. Obama's own people have estimated our national debt will be 16.5 trillion by 2012...up 5.9 trillion from when Obama took office. To contrast that with Bush...the deficit only went up 4.2 trillion over Bush's TWO terms. The increase if Obama wins a second term and Obama Care stands is going to be MAMMOTH!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Wow, great use of stats to really muddy an issue. Let's take a closer look, shall we? I believe we're looking at a total of 8 Republican terms compared to 4 1/2 Democratic terms. I also believe we're looking at two Democratic Presidents who had the decided advantage of being in the Oval Office when the US was not at war giving them something referred to as a "peace dividend". I'm also curious why your figures on Obama are from September 30th of 2009 until August of this year? Did Obama not spend anything from when he took office in January of '09 until September of '09? Talk about playing fast and loose with numbers!

Historically the three biggest spikes in the National debt occurred under Wilson (WW1), Roosevelt (WW2) and Obama.

National debt by U.S. presidential terms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think if you look at the make up of our government during those three spikes you'll see that both the Congress and the Oval Office were controlled by Democrats. Aren't statistics fun!!!

Why are you arguing about spending and the presidents Congress controlls spending, if you want to argue who the biggest spenders are, (Republican or Democrats) look to who controlled congress.

I'm pretty sure I pointed out that both Congress AND the White House were controlled by Democrats during the three largest spikes. There really isn't much of an "argument" to make here. The figures that the earlier poster used were laughable. Obama's own people have estimated our national debt will be 16.5 trillion by 2012...up 5.9 trillion from when Obama took office. To contrast that with Bush...the deficit only went up 4.2 trillion over Bush's TWO terms. The increase if Obama wins a second term and Obama Care stands is going to be MAMMOTH!

No argument on my part just wanted to make sure to point was clear Presidnets don't spend Congress does.

 

[Oldstyle]

Oh, trust me I understand that quite clearly. If you're W. in the last two years of your second term you need to get things passed by Nancy Pelosi's Congress. The only way to get spending approved for the wars you want to fight is to trade off on domestic spending. It's why the deficit EXPLODED the last two years of Bush's presidency.

 

[Synthaholic]

Congress is full of billionaires, the top 6 combine worth is over two trillion dollars. and guess how many of them are democrats?

Meet America's 25 Richest Politicians | ZeroHedge

What's your point, moron?

Why aren't you attacking you're billionaire democrats? Come on moron stop being a hypocrate,

Attack them for WHAT???

C'mon, Rebecca: FOCUS!

 

[Synthaholic]

23 Polls Say People Support Higher Taxes to Reduce the Deficit

Go to the link to click each poll.

Then why didn't dems raise taxes when they had their super majority?.....

Filibuster.


Try keeping up.

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh, trust me I understand that quite clearly. If you're W. in the last two years of your second term you need to get things passed by Nancy Pelosi's Congress. The only way to get spending approved for the wars you want to fight is to trade off on domestic spending. It's why the deficit EXPLODED the last two years of Bush's presidency.

Then show what those tradeoffs were.

 

[California Girl]

I support a tax increase to reduce the deficit.

The problem is that no one trusts the Government to use the tax increase to reduce the deficit. They have proved, time and again, (both sides) that they cannot be trusted with other people's money.