Obama's fuzzy math about his spending

Discussion in 'Politics' started by TheGreatGatsby, May 25, 2012.

  1. TheGreatGatsby
    Offline

    TheGreatGatsby Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2012
    Messages:
    20,434
    Thanks Received:
    2,365
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    California
    Ratings:
    +6,570
    Apparently, Obama and is spouting how he has decreased spending at a lower rate than any president in decades.

    How did he come to this conclusion?

    He used 2009 as the baseline (year ends at end of June). That was the year that both Bush and Obama passed major stimulus bills. Then in subsequent years, he basically only slightly increased 'stimulus' level spending.

    Now here's the real problem. How much has spending actually increased under Obama? Well; Bush's last submitted budget (which was already bloated with Dem crap and two wars) was $3.1 trillion. Obama's 2013 budget submission (with one war and military cuts) is $3.8 trillion. That's an 18 percent increase. That's a little bit different than the 1.4 percent he is claiming.

    And Clinton's last submitted budget was $1.9 trillion (2001). So Obama has actually submitted a budget that is double what it was only twelve years ago.

    Also, how many times lately, have we heard Obama say that he's going to control debt relative to the percentage of GDP lately? That's his talking point. It's how he's been trying to justify not making any actual cuts.

    But here's the problem. He artificially rose the deficit as a level of GDP at a time when the interest on our debt was becoming an even bigger boon.

    Deficit as a percentage of GDP:

    2012 - 8.5
    2011 - 8.7
    2010 - 8.9
    2009 - 9.9
    2008 - 3.2
    2007 - 1.2
    2006 - 1.9
    2005 - 2.6
    2004 - 3.5
    2003 - 3.4
    2002 - 1.5
    2001 - 1.3
    2000 - 2.4
    1995 - 2.2
    1990 - 3.9
    1985 - 5.1
    1980 - 2.7
    1975 - 3.4
    1970 - 0.3
    1965 - 0.2
    1960 - 0.1
    1955 - 0.8
    1950 - 0.1
    1945 - 21.5
    1940 - 3.0
    1935 - 4.0
    1930 - 0.8

    You see the difference between Bush, who Dems called a reckless spender and Obama? Aside from the stimulus year even with two wars he was never above 3.5. Obama has routinely exceeded him by about 250 percent.

    And you'll notice that in 2003; the first budget year after 9/11 it still only went to 3.4. At that time, the politicians weren't giving us any phony bologna about a stimulus either. The increase was only war related.

    Sources:

    United States federal budget - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Historical Federal Budget Reference. Compare reviews & ratings.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2012
  2. Gremlin-USA
    Offline

    Gremlin-USA <<< Me in 1970

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,306
    Thanks Received:
    184
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Gremlinville, USA
    Ratings:
    +186
    "WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Barack Obama pledged Monday to cut the nation's $1.3 trillion deficit in half by the end of his first term."

    Obama pledges to cut nation's deficit in half - Feb. 23, 2009

    "President Obama used his weekly YouTube address to reiterate his promise to go "line by line" and reduce waste"

    Promise: Cut Waste In Federal Budget - The Promise Audit - National Journal Online

    "Obama is making final decisions on his budget for next year and is still promising to outline a path to substantially lower federal deficits. But on nearly every front, that goal has gotten harder since his first budget a year ago."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/us/politics/06budget.html

    "Obama's fuzzy math about his spending" ??

    Fuzzy Math or Fibs? .....

    .
     
  3. TheGreatGatsby
    Offline

    TheGreatGatsby Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2012
    Messages:
    20,434
    Thanks Received:
    2,365
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    California
    Ratings:
    +6,570
    ^^^

    Nice finds. Crazy how Obama makes all these huge promises and then the media never calls him out. And they should be calling him out for his low spending claims. But what do we get? <Crickets>
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. RightWingFerret
    Offline

    RightWingFerret BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,720
    Thanks Received:
    110
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Sarasota & Naples, Florida
    Ratings:
    +110
    The average hamster can solve any mathemetic caculation far better than Obama.
     
  5. Gremlin-USA
    Offline

    Gremlin-USA <<< Me in 1970

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,306
    Thanks Received:
    184
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Gremlinville, USA
    Ratings:
    +186

    Let's see Fuzzy Math, Hamsters.... is that why Libs get that tingling feeling up their leg when Obama is a round?
     
  6. RightWingFerret
    Offline

    RightWingFerret BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,720
    Thanks Received:
    110
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Sarasota & Naples, Florida
    Ratings:
    +110
    and to think a 3 year old monkey can do a budget 10 times more efficiant than Obama......lets just put an ape in office,,,yah,,thats the ticket! (and demote Obama to white house janitor)
     
  7. DontBeStupid
    Offline

    DontBeStupid Look it up!

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,463
    Thanks Received:
    422
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Ratings:
    +422
    I thought it was obvious, but I'll say it anyway. Deficits during good economic times is bad and during bad economic times is good.

    Beyond that, anyone crying over Obama and the deficit, Romney's "plan" makes the deficits worse. So, there's that.
     
  8. rdean
    Offline

    rdean rddean

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Messages:
    60,148
    Thanks Received:
    6,896
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    chicago
    Ratings:
    +14,994
    Actually, if you take away the Bush/Republican commitments, Obama has spent less than any president since 1929.

    Course, the numbers aren't all that accurate. There has been more than 40,000 young Americans maimed in the Iraq fiasco. The majority of those will need medical help for decades. The billions Republicans lost in Iraq and the billions thrown away on overpaid no bid contracts could come in handy. But Republicans NEVER, EVER take a shred of responsibility for any of their catastrophes. In fact, how about a $10,000.00 BET that Republicans will try to figure out a way to deny those maimed Americans health care the way they did the first responders?

    Senate GOP blocks 9/11 first responders health plan bill

    Senate Republicans on Thursday morning filibustered legislation to monitor and treat first responders and emergency workers who suffered illnesses related to 9/11.

    A vote to quash the filibuster failed by a vote of 57 to 42, three votes short of the necessary threshold. As a result, the proposal is unlikely to pass this year.

    The bill would provide funding for a health program to treat first responders, construction and cleanup workers and residents who inhaled toxic particles after the collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

    ---------------------------------------------

    These terrible actions by this odious party can hardly be denied. Everything is documented by the Senate itself. This is the dirtiest and sickest political party in a hundred years.
     
  9. RightWingFerret
    Offline

    RightWingFerret BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,720
    Thanks Received:
    110
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Sarasota & Naples, Florida
    Ratings:
    +110
    my sister is an accountant, if she was president the unemployment would go back to 5%.
     
  10. TheGreatGatsby
    Offline

    TheGreatGatsby Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2012
    Messages:
    20,434
    Thanks Received:
    2,365
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    California
    Ratings:
    +6,570
    ^^^ 2 ^^^

    Actually, the deficit as a percent of GDP is higher under Obama than any other president since FDR. That's your spending reality dean; not whatever lies you're telling yourself that I didn't bother to read.
     

Share This Page