Spending to GDP Less than Under Bush I, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ, JFK & Ike

[Steve Hanson]

Expect it to get a lot worse:

Graph is from where?

Maybe the CBO like it says right on the graph

 

[Toro]

This reminds me of how the Warmers point to some weather event on the planet and say "See that! Global Warming!!" Whats the point of the chart? See that! We can have Mo' n Bigga Deficits! So we need a deficit bigger than $1.6 Trillion? What $2 Trillion? $3 Trillion?

Really? Really? That's what you get from this chart?

Gee, maybe I shouldn't scoff at rdean's 6% thing.

What's you point, that we can sustain more spending and bigger deficits because we're a few tick below some meaningless statistic?

No.

But way to extrapolate. Do you do the same thing in the warmer threads too?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Really? Really? That's what you get from this chart?

Gee, maybe I shouldn't scoff at rdean's 6% thing.

What's you point, that we can sustain more spending and bigger deficits because we're a few tick below some meaningless statistic?

No.

But way to extrapolate. Do you do the same thing in the warmer threads too?

You must have had something in mind when you posted it and that was the only thing I could think of.

To me the number that matters is a deficit so huge it has to be measured in scientific notation (1.6*10^12) and then there's the all but certain loss of out AAA Credit rating.

 

[Toro]

You must have had something in mind when you posted it and that was the only thing I could think of.

I posted it because it interested and surprised me.

 

[Jroc]

Humm..we have a 1.5 TRILLION dollar budget DEFICIT any way you slice it it is by FAR the largest in history so what's your point? we're broke thats the point the rest is bull

 

[Cuyo]

fyi

Well gosh, that tells me receipts must be too low. And there it was right in front of our eyes all along!...

 

[Toro]

Humm..we have a 1.5 TRILLION dollar budget DEFICIT any way you slice it it is by FAR the largest in history so what's your point? we're broke thats the point the rest is bull

My point, or more accurately the point of the graph, is that federal government spending is now lower than it was for the first 45 years after WWII.

 

[Toro]

Well gosh, that tells me receipts must be too low. And there it was right in front of our eyes all along!...

Federal receipts to GDP are at their lowest level since ~1950.

I'd find a graph for that too, but I'm too lazy.

 

[Cuyo]

Well gosh, that tells me receipts must be too low. And there it was right in front of our eyes all along!...

Federal receipts to GDP are at their lowest level since ~1950.

I'd find a graph for that too, but I'm too lazy.

Naturally. Lowest rates in post-war history; Particularly on top earners. Meanwhile, top earners are making the most disproportionately high earnings compared to their lower wage counterparts EVER... and yet, we have a deficit? How?

 

[KissMy]

I find it interesting that is mostly dipped during Clinton, mostly went up during Bush and is starting to dip again under Obama...Stats don't lie.

No - It went up under Democrat congress & Obama. Since the Republicans took the House the spending to GDP ratio has turned down....Stats don't lie.

 

[Cuyo]

I find it interesting that is mostly dipped during Clinton, mostly went up during Bush and is starting to dip again under Obama...Stats don't lie.

No - It went up under Democrat congress & Obama. Since the Republicans took the House the spending to GDP ratio has turned down....Stats don't lie.

Don't be retarded. The new Republic congress isn't even on the books yet.

 

[Wiseacre]

These are the real numbers, not what Toro put up. I don't know what gce is in his chart but it ain't total gov't spending like this is. It's from usgovernmentspending and is federal only. Notice the big jump in 2009, thanks for the debt Mr Obama.


YR Total %GDP
Spend
1980 2788.1 21.20 a
1981 3126.8 21.69 a
1982 3253.2 22.92 a
1983 3534.6 22.87 a
1984 3930.9 21.67 a
1985 4217.5 22.44 a
1986 4460.1 22.21 a
1987 4736.4 21.20 a
1988 5100.4 20.87 a
1989 5482.1 20.86 a
1990 5800.5 21.60 a
1991 5992.1 22.10 a
1992 6342.3 21.78 a
1993 6667.4 21.14 a
1994 7085.2 20.63 a
1995 7414.7 20.44 a
1996 7838.5 19.91 a
1997 8332.4 19.22 a
1998 8793.5 18.79 a
1999 9353.5 18.20 a
2000 9951.5 17.98 a
2001 10286.2 18.11 a
2002 10642.3 18.90 a
2003 11142.1 19.39 a
2004 11867.8 19.32 a
2005 12638.4 19.56 a
2006 13398.9 19.82 a
2007 14077.6 19.38 a
2008 14369.1 20.76 a
2009 14119 24.91 a
2010 14660.4 23.58 a
2011 15079.6 25.32 b
2012 15812.5 23.58 b

 

[Avorysuds]

Taxes under Eisenhower were above 90% for the richest Americans. Thanks for pointing that out.

This economy is what happens when you throw money at rich people.

I just moved this idiot to ignore for not only being racist but for also being one of the most out of touch people on these boards... At some point you just have to weigh how little someone adds to a debate over how comical it is to read their posts. In cases involving Rtard, it's quicker to do a *half scroll* over a "this person is on your ignore list" rather than having to do that *full scroll* past a post you already know is full of shit.

Grats Rtard, you’re on par with Shaman but only 1 step behind TM because reading her desperate Obama fanboyism is still funny… Your posts however have just gone stale with the same old repetitiveness we have come to expect from you. It's not even entertaining watching you get your shit stomped anymore as no one seems to even somewhat take your posts seriously.

 

[Avorysuds]

So Toro what is the point of your chart? Does this mean things are getting better or things are doing swell?

 

[Mr_Rockhead]

.
.
View attachment $spending_gdp.bmp

I like this graph because it shows ALL GOVERNMENT SPENDING and how it ramped up after the democrats took over in 2006. (That was the year the democrats swept virtually all the races including the ones down the ticket). And the fact that we are now being bled so much worse at the local and state level only means we have that much less for the feds to take.

Also, if I recall correctly, the spending for ObamaCare is timed to get Obama and the democrats through the 2012 election before it finally kicks-in (2014?).

So what happens to these charts when THAT finally happens?

 

[xsited1]

Expect it to get a lot worse:

Graph is from where?

Maybe the CBO like it says right on the graph

 

[expat_panama]

...its telling us spending to gdp in % is lower than the historical average...

No it isn't, that's a plot of the GCE not spending. The BEA Economic Analysis Glossary says the GCE is

The value of services produced by government, measured as the purchases made by government on inputs of labor, intermediate goods and services, and investment expenditures. It is the sum of government consumption expenditures and government gross investment.

Total outlays budgeted by the federal government also includes everything like debt interest, transfer payments, and it looks like this:

Federal spending is the hightest it's been in over 60 years, up to where it was during WWII. It was at 30 year lows under the previous administration.

 

[Toro]

...its telling us spending to gdp in % is lower than the historical average...

No it isn't, that's a plot of the GCE not spending. The BEA Economic Analysis Glossary says the GCE is

The value of services produced by government, measured as the purchases made by government on inputs of labor, intermediate goods and services, and investment expenditures. It is the sum of government consumption expenditures and government gross investment.

Total outlays budgeted by the federal government also includes everything like debt interest, transfer payments, and it looks like this:

Federal spending is the hightest it's been in over 60 years, up to where it was during WWII. It was at 30 year lows under the previous administration.

That would account for the discrepancies. Thanks.

 

[Trajan]

Well gosh, that tells me receipts must be too low. And there it was right in front of our eyes all along!...

Federal receipts to GDP are at their lowest level since ~1950.

I'd find a graph for that too, but I'm too lazy.

Naturally. Lowest rates in post-war history; Particularly on top earners. Meanwhile, top earners are making the most disproportionately high earnings compared to their lower wage counterparts EVER... and yet, we have a deficit? How?

look, we have gone over this, if you just jack taxes you'll get 17-18% the of pie, extent, you'll grab another 70 Billion great, then what? but if you flatten the base and take from more sources, you get a even bigger pie...for god sakes.

 

[Trajan]

...its telling us spending to gdp in % is lower than the historical average...

No it isn't, that's a plot of the GCE not spending. The BEA Economic Analysis Glossary says the GCE is

The value of services produced by government, measured as the purchases made by government on inputs of labor, intermediate goods and services, and investment expenditures. It is the sum of government consumption expenditures and government gross investment.

Total outlays budgeted by the federal government also includes everything like debt interest, transfer payments, and it looks like this:

Federal spending is the hightest it's been in over 60 years, up to where it was during WWII. It was at 30 year lows under the previous administration.

thats sadly more like it.

Bill Gross seems to have made his bet..... that chart better take severe downturn...soon.