What if Obama spent like Reagan?

Lakhota

Diamond Member
Jul 14, 2011
159,783
76,310
2,330
Native America
Regardless of budget deficits and national debt, there is a time to save and a time to spend. Republican austerity has made this recovery extraordinarily slow. Republicans wouldn't allow Obama the same fiscal courtesy as shown to Reagan and Bush to spend out of recession.

government-spending-investment-first-terms.jpg


average-government-spending.jpg


If it were up to Obama, the federal government would have spent much more since 2010. Moreover, these numbers are, in large part, functions of the economies the three men inherited. Each saw a recession in their first term, but Obama's was by far the worst, and so it led to much more severe cutbacks in state and local spending.

Rather, these graphs simply establish a basic fact about Obama's term: While deficits have indeed been high, government spending and investment has been falling since 2010. This is, in recent presidential administrations, a simply unprecedented response to a recession.

Basic economic theory would hold that you want a larger contribution from government spending during a big recession in which private demand is weak than you do during a mild recession or a healthy economy. But that's been the case in Obama's economy, and all signs are that the pace of government spending cuts will accelerate sharply over the next year.

Phil Klein argues that it's important to note spending skyrocketed in 2008, and so Obama was starting from an abnormally high baseline, and so the comparison between change in government spending under Obama and change in government spending under other presidents is flawed. That's absolutely true. But it's applicable to much more than just government spending. The jump in spending in 2008 was the direct and sole consequence of the financial recession.

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan? - The Washington Post
 
Last edited:
You wankers on the left are really crazy. America is financially FUBAR'D.

We're not only set to balance the budget in 2015 up here, but to run a small surplus as a buffer zone in case the world economy goes tits up again.
 
Regardless of budget deficits and national debt, there is a time to save and a time to spend. Republican austerity has made this recovery extraordinarily slow. Republicans wouldn't allow Obama the same fiscal courtesy as shown to Reagan and Bush to spend out of recession.

government-spending-investment-first-terms.jpg


average-government-spending.jpg


Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan? - The Washington Post
Doubt your homemade graphs are truthful. Obama has outspent every potus.


By mega quizzillions. But the left wing whack jobs keep wanting more and more money that just isn't there.
 
I see the DNC handlers have sent out the evening emails on the topics they want pushed in message boards by their operatives.
 
LIberals are dumb asses. They double the size of a government give away program and claim that is a good buy and great policy to borrow money from the Chinks on. Reagan borrowed money and invested in the military and the Soviet Bloc folded like a cheap tent. The Three Little Pigs is recommended reading for the liberal.
 
Righties cannot factually dispute this thread. They blow smoke - but no hard facts. What righties tend to ignore most of all is CONTEXT.

CONTEXT.
 
Righties cannot factually dispute this thread. They blow smoke - but no hard facts. What righties tend to ignore most of all is CONTEXT.

CONTEXT.

Here's a thought. Just accept that this thread is chock full of epic fail and walk away with your head hung down in shame.
 
Regardless of budget deficits and national debt, there is a time to save and a time to spend. Republican austerity has made this recovery extraordinarily slow. Republicans wouldn't allow Obama the same fiscal courtesy as shown to Reagan and Bush to spend out of recession.

government-spending-investment-first-terms.jpg


average-government-spending.jpg


If it were up to Obama, the federal government would have spent much more since 2010. Moreover, these numbers are, in large part, functions of the economies the three men inherited. Each saw a recession in their first term, but Obama's was by far the worst, and so it led to much more severe cutbacks in state and local spending.

Rather, these graphs simply establish a basic fact about Obama's term: While deficits have indeed been high, government spending and investment has been falling since 2010. This is, in recent presidential administrations, a simply unprecedented response to a recession.

Basic economic theory would hold that you want a larger contribution from government spending during a big recession in which private demand is weak than you do during a mild recession or a healthy economy. But that's been the case in Obama's economy, and all signs are that the pace of government spending cuts will accelerate sharply over the next year.

Phil Klein argues that it's important to note spending skyrocketed in 2008, and so Obama was starting from an abnormally high baseline, and so the comparison between change in government spending under Obama and change in government spending under other presidents is flawed. That's absolutely true. But it's applicable to much more than just government spending. The jump in spending in 2008 was the direct and sole consequence of the financial recession.

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan? - The Washington Post

The problem with Obama's spending is that he has spent way too much on defense. He increased defense spending by 800 billion a year. I do side with the rightwing in saying that he has spent way too much but what's interesting is that it is the kind of spending republicans love. This coupled with Bush's toxic tax cuts is what mostly accounts for the 7 trillion.
 
For all you wingnuts who try to falsely blame Obama for the national debt, deficits and poor economy, I invite you to please give us an accounting of the debt that Obama has added - that wasn't a direct or indirect result of Bush actions. The Bush debt clock didn't just stop on the day Obama was sworn in. Let me give you some starting tips: TWO wars that Bush kept OFF budget that Obama keeps ON budget and the Bush tax cuts. Obama was about $1.3 trillion in the hole on the day he was sworn in. In short, Bush-era policies are still driving the numbers.

4524250851_8a16aebb74.jpg


10 Republican Lies About the Bush Tax Cuts | Crooks and Liars

I'm still waiting for you wingnut geniuses to give us a factual accounting of the debt that Obama has added - that wasn't a direct or indirect result of Bush actions. Waiting...
 
Regardless of budget deficits and national debt, there is a time to save and a time to spend. Republican austerity has made this recovery extraordinarily slow. Republicans wouldn't allow Obama the same fiscal courtesy as shown to Reagan and Bush to spend out of recession.

government-spending-investment-first-terms.jpg


average-government-spending.jpg


If it were up to Obama, the federal government would have spent much more since 2010. Moreover, these numbers are, in large part, functions of the economies the three men inherited. Each saw a recession in their first term, but Obama's was by far the worst, and so it led to much more severe cutbacks in state and local spending.

Rather, these graphs simply establish a basic fact about Obama's term: While deficits have indeed been high, government spending and investment has been falling since 2010. This is, in recent presidential administrations, a simply unprecedented response to a recession.

Basic economic theory would hold that you want a larger contribution from government spending during a big recession in which private demand is weak than you do during a mild recession or a healthy economy. But that's been the case in Obama's economy, and all signs are that the pace of government spending cuts will accelerate sharply over the next year.

Phil Klein argues that it's important to note spending skyrocketed in 2008, and so Obama was starting from an abnormally high baseline, and so the comparison between change in government spending under Obama and change in government spending under other presidents is flawed. That's absolutely true. But it's applicable to much more than just government spending. The jump in spending in 2008 was the direct and sole consequence of the financial recession.

Charts: What if Obama spent like Reagan? - The Washington Post

You don't even know what those charts mean, do you?
 
What a hilarious thread, talk about just making up your facts as you go.
Blame all the debt on the guy previous.

Anyone on the left ever actually taken over a job for anyone? I guarantee that if you go over budget for 5+ years and are still blaming the guy who you replaced, they will be replacing YOU. No , that's not true, no company is going to give you 5 years.

How ludicrous, at this point Obama owns the budget PERIOD.
 

Forum List

Back
Top