Who’s the biggest spender? The biggest deficit spender?

Ronald_Reagan_tax_reform_1986_ap_img

And so here’s the truth: this election is about the future, and the Democratic Party, and the political left has no ideas about the future. All their ideas are the same, tired ideas of the past. More government, more spending. For every issue for America, their answer is a new tax on someone, and a new government program. This nation is going to turn the page, and that’s what this election should be about.”

— Sen. Marco Rubio, during the latest GOP presidential debate

Let’s take a closer look at the assumptions buried in that statement, shall we? Posted below are two charts, documenting the growth in spending and growth in national debt under the two previous two-term Republican administrations and under President Obama.

The time frames run from the year that each president took office to the year that he leaves office. In Obama’s case, the 2017 numbers are necessarily projections from the Office of Management and Budget, but absent some magical, major budget deal coming out of Washington, they should prove pretty accurate.

comps

— You could argue that spending growth under Obama has been curtailed by a largely Republican Congress, and you’d be correct to an extent. On the other hand, Bush also dealt with a largely Republican Congress, with no such visible impact.

— You could argue that the spending numbers under Bush are skewed by the necessity of responding to the economic collapse of 2008, which forced the fiscal 2009 budget to rise. But even if you arbitrarily end the Bush years in fiscal 2008, before the collapse really took hold, he and his fellow Republicans oversaw a spending increase of 68 percent.

— You could argue that Bush had to deal with two major wars, but the larger of those wars was a war of his choice, not a war of necessity. Furthermore, he attempted to “finance” that war with a second major tax cut, something that had never happened during wartime in our nation’s history. That contributed significantly to the more than doubling of the federal debt on his watch.

— You could argue that spending under Reagan grew because he had to deal with a largely Democratic Congress, but that would be a fallacy. In every year from 1981-1989, the total amount of spending approved by Congress was very close to the amount that Reagan himself had requested. He and Congress did bang heads over how the money was to be spent — how much for this program vs. that program — but the total spending levels were set by Reagan, and Congress honored them.

In short, you can argue a whole lot of mitigating circumstances, but in the end, the numbers are the numbers. Even if you gave Reagan and Bush credit for all of those allegedly mitigating circumstances in their favor, and gave Obama credit for none of those in his favor, you would still fall well, well short of justifying the mythology that Rubio and his colleagues try to peddle.

Facts is facts.

Reader Comments 0

910 comments
ByteMe
ByteMe

@DownInAlbany Pretty sure they didn't have a problem with an Obama presidency in 2008 too.

FIGMO2
FIGMO2

Since Glass-Steagall has made an appearance, it's important to note that Hillary does not support its reinstatement. She's gonna decide wherein risk lies. Why hasn't Dodd-Frank done more? Because special interest groups have stepped in. I'm wonderin'...

Are those the same special interests contributing to her campaign?

Scrap Dodd-Frank and go with Glass-Steagall. No need to over analyze the obvious.  

DownInAlbany
DownInAlbany

@Visual_Cortex @FIGMO2 Why would they be concerned.  They have her in their collective pockets already.  She's not going to hurt WS. Plus, that's from 2007.  Surely she's evolved on that issue like the dozens of others, huh?

FIGMO2
FIGMO2

@Visual_Cortex @FIGMO2

Admittedly some wishful thinking on my part here.

Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

That speech was in 2007?

And somewhere around 2013, I'm seeing another speech she made, a couple, actually.

Hillary Clinton’s Lucrative Goldman Sachs Speaking Gigs

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/362637/hillary-clintons-lucrative-goldman-sachs-speaking-gigs-alec-torres

Clinton’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

Why not?

I'm outta here.



DownInAlbany
DownInAlbany

I'm wondering if the country is ready to hold their noses and vote for someone that 70% believe is unethical.  Lawd, has it come to THIS?

td1234
td1234

Glad to see some government officials actually have the guts to stand up and speak the truth. 


"Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke (D) argued affirmative action is “The only discrimination that people should be railing against on these colleges and universities” on Thursday’s “Hannity” on the Fox News Channel.

Clarke said, “These aren’t protests. This is an insurrection. This is a rebellion. It’s pretty obvious to me that not much learning activity goes on in many of these colleges and universities across the United States. You know who gets left out of this Sean? Is the taxpayer. These are tax supported schools. That president that resigned, and these professors, they don’t work for the students, they work for taxpayers of Missouri, and the taxpayers ought to stand up and demand that their money spot being spent to fund these laboratories of liberal indoctrination. No wonder we end up near bottom now in international scholastic competitions. No — like I said, learning activity is secondary now on these college campuses. The only discrimination that people should be railing against on these colleges and universities, are these programs that discriminate against white and Asian students in favor of less-qualified black students for entry into the university. That’s something that has served its usefulness, and that sort of discrimination is what should end.”

He added, “These students are a product of these professors and of the university. They fill their heads with this nonsense, like I said. This cultural isolation is retrogressive. This doesn’t help anybody. We’ve gone from this multicultural idea, which I think is problematic anyway, and now all of a sudden we want to isolate people again, create spaces for black people to go and heal. I mean, this stuff is nonsense. Let’s get back to the topic of academic rigor, study, intellectual conversations going on, and forget all these rebellions and these insurrections, that’s all this is.”

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@td1234 

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke

some "Blue Lives Matter" wad-o'-jerk, no doubt. 

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

from time to time, whenever Social Security discussions arise, I feel I need to post a link like this.

https://www.census.gov/people/wealth/files/Wealth distribution 2000 to 2011.pdf

Check page 7, where the enticingly-titled "Table A1. Median Household Net Worth, by Net Worth Quintiles and Age of the Householder: 2000 and 2011" appears.

Check the first, second, and third quintiles. AKA 60% of your fellow Americans. 

Check their net wealth at age 65.

Heck, check the fourth quintile, the "upper 20-40%", if you will. Those folks, at age 65, might be semi-ok if SS doesn't get hacked. Maybe. Perhaps. Not a big nest egg, but something that will provide a very modest supplement to SS.

Mostly? Just do not talk to me about "reforming" this stuff for The Olds unless you have familiarized yourself with these stats, mmkay?

(and because it seems to always come up--yes, they are counting everything here. Including any home equity.)

td1234
td1234

@Visual_Cortex And who is talking about do anything to the people that are already receiving SS or those that are about to receive? 


All the potential reforms I have heard will have to do with future recipients.  

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@td1234 @Visual_Cortex 

td, you know how you get when you hear about federal gun regs? like, any gun regs?

Multiply that by about fifty and you'll grasp my degree of skepticism whenever I hear the "only future recipients!" dodge.

This retirement income is due every future generation. It is not something to be negotiated away. Certainly not to "balance the budget" for more tax cuts for billionaires, Freedom Bombs, and our domestic spying network.

Nick_Danger
Nick_Danger

@Visual_Cortex @td1234 And when I've been saving to meet my goals, and the rules are changed, even ten years into the future, my savings plans are shot.

td1234
td1234

@Nick_Danger I have been hearing since my 20's that SS would not be available for me so therefore my planning for retirement has not even considered that money. If I get it then all it will mean is that me and my wife will be able to enjoy a couple more trips out of the country every year or a couple more cruises. 

Nick_Danger
Nick_Danger

@Visual_Cortex @td1234 @Nick_Danger ""So, this week, should I have the kids skip meals, or skip buying my heart medicine prescription, so I can save for retirement?" 

But td feels that the poor deserve what they get, because it's their own fault.

td1234
td1234

@Visual_Cortex I do not say anything over the phone or write anything that is unpatriotic.  

td1234
td1234

@Nick_Danger Should that person had bought a $300,000 home when they only make $30,000 per year? Could that person give up one six pack a week and put it into a savings account? 


I consider myself upper middle class but I still live in a what people call a starter home so that I could save more money. Heck, I have rental properties that have more square feet than my home. I did not buy my first brand new car until I was over the age of 45. 


The decisions you make in life are important. 

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@td1234 @Visual_Cortex 

 I do not say anything over the phone or write anything that is unpatriotic.  

And when the Next Guy in the White House decides that what you said is, in fact, unpatriotic?

Guess you're just SOL, because Freedom.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@td1234 @Nick_Danger 

Imaginary anecdotes are no substitute for acting on real-life data.

I've given you the real-life data about household wealth in the US. One can't wish that away. It is what it is.

Corey
Corey

Chicago offers perhaps the starkest example of trafficking. There are no retail gun dealers within city limits, because Chicago has some of the tightest municipal gun regulations. Yet bringing a gun into Chicago can be as simple as driving less than an hour to a gun show in Indiana, where private sales are not recorded and do not require a background check.

“If you’re in the city of Chicago on the South Side, you may be closer to Indiana than you are to the Magnificent Mile,” said Roseanna Ander, executive director of the University of Chicago Crime Lab, referring to a well-known part of Chicago’s downtown.

Corey
Corey

A handgun used in the killing of two Brooklyn officers last year was traced to a pawnshop just south of Atlanta. A revolver used in a fatal shooting of an officer in Queens in May was traced to aroadside pawnshop, also in Georgia, about 100 miles from Atlanta. And a handgun used to kill an officer in East Harlem last month was traced to South Carolina.

“We’re trying to deal with it, but we have a spigot that’s wide open down there and we don’t have a national or local ability to shut that spigot down at the moment,” said the New York City police commissioner, William J. Bratton, as he announced an indictment against gun traffickers last week.

td1234
td1234

@Nick_Danger They are a progressive institution run by progressives so ask them.

Nick_Danger
Nick_Danger

@FIGMO2 It's interesting that they have so few black faculty and staff.  I wonder why that is?

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@Nick_Danger @td1234 

haven't you heard? 

Philo said so earlier--90+% of all colleges are "liberal cesspools."

This is reality, in Rightie Bubble World. White males are being whipped as we speak by transgender black hippies on college campuses across the fruited plain.

Watsuie007
Watsuie007

@Visual_Cortex @Nick_Danger @td1234 "Liberal cesspools".  Just what are you talking about?  College is a place to learn about different subjects, meet all kinds of new people, listen to differences in opinion and to do study and research.  There is nothing "liberal" about that.  That is how education works at the college level.  Our country became great due to its colleges, innovation and research and US colleges are sought after in most countries on this planet.  Liberal?!  You must be joking or maybe you just spent way too much time watching Faux New.

Cupofjoe
Cupofjoe

Interesting to see more metrics being placed on the Jaybee blog such as counting comments and people listening. Cox will now start monitoring more conversions.


Jaybee has 12 months and will be moving on.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

Cuppa, just FYI, this monitoring/metrics has been going on all along. Sometimes it's been visible to viewers, sometimes not.

(that "people listening" counter was available to mobile app users, I think, all along.)

Jaybee has 12 months and will be moving on

Would that make you happy? anyhow, our 53%er has been saying that for about a decade now.

Cupofjoe
Cupofjoe

Reagan deregulated banks, then we come up with the too big to fail which flies in the face of deregulation. 

Kool beans there Peaches


You may want to google “Clinton glass steagall

For efficiency sake Jay should give 80% of the folks the blog name “simple minded ideologue”

Peachs
Peachs

@Cupofjoe Clinton had in mind helping the local bank that had no economic activity, it was a way to survive, Wall Street was not envisioned in this equation but they were the wind fall winners and became the gunslingers.  Bush needed to rein it in but instead encouraged it.  Lots of pictures of him and Enron people before that thing went under. The right is so close to the corruption they are almost the same people. 

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@Peachs @Cupofjoe 

Clinton had in mind helping the local bank that had no economic activity, it was a way to survive

I like Lincoln Chafee's excuse a lot more.

Nick_Danger
Nick_Danger

Is that Coach Bud standing behind Reagan there?

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

And I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that Jay is probably A-OK with this, because at his heart, there ain't that much daylight between his notions of "fiscal responsibility", and those of thieving swine like Pete Peterson.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

mornin'.

I'm a little surprised bit of SS "tweaking" to "save" $10 billion isn't bigger news. (and I might be reading this wrong/need more coffee.) A little embarrassed to admit I hadn't heard about it until now.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/houses-proposed-budget-bill-will-devastating-effects-millions-social-security-benefits/


[B]enefits now being received by spouses, divorced spouses or children on the work record of a spouse, ex-spouse or parent who has suspended his or her benefits will be eliminated until the worker restarts his/her retirement benefit. I’ve never heard of a change in Social Security law that eliminates benefits for people already collecting, but this is what’s in this bill. This will cost millions of households tens of thousands of dollars. Worse, it will induce those who have suspended their benefits in order to collect higher benefits at 70 to restart their benefits at permanently lower levels in order to maintain their family’s immediate living standards.

[...]

They made their draconian changes in a back room, with no public hearings, knowing that the changes would be rushed to a vote before Congress. They made these changes knowing that these changes would take benefits away from millions of low- and middle-income people.

And Obama signed this piece of garbage? Jesus Christ. 

I officially apologize to LeninTime for anything less-than-nice I might have said about him regarding the President. He was right--Obama has been ready all along to cut SS, and he just did. Apparently. (I'm getting some more coffee.)


LordHelpUs
LordHelpUs

@Visual_Cortex Well, that is what approximately 70 tomahawk missiles cost.

As I said to td last night.  REEEEALLLL effed up priorities!  Disgusting...

Oops, I meant 'freedum' missiles.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@LordHelpUs @Visual_Cortex 

Well, that is what approximately 70 tomahawk missiles cost

Much more importantly, it's what it takes to help keep the Beltway's donor base living in a manner to which they have become accustomed.

Also too, it's only because I've sworn off using swear words in here, that there is no gerund that rhymes with "trucking" in between the words "Jesus" and "Christ", above.

ByteMe
ByteMe

@Visual_Cortex How did they get that this change would affect "millions"?  Seems like a few thousand at best.  Sounds like you'd have to be getting relatives' benefits AND the principle has to suspend their own benefits to cut the other person off.  How many could that really be right now?

ByteMe
ByteMe

@Visual_Cortex But if you know that going in, then it's not a sudden surprise.  The only people this will surprise are people who are CURRENTLY doing something that's no longer being permitted; everyone else has been warned, so it's not a shock to them.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@CherokeeCounty @Visual_Cortex @LordHelpUs 

I think you apologists are missing the point here. Look, I don't even know if I'd have ever benefited from the previous policy. the fact remains, a rules change was made that cuts benefits.

No Democrat should ever, and I mean ever, cut Social Security benefits. I should never, ever, have to waste one second slapping a Democrat around to get them into line on this.

Period.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@ByteMe @Visual_Cortex 

not a shock to them

speaking of "shocks"?

I'm so old I remember when SS was the "third rail."

Well, Obama, Warren, Franken, and Sanders, just took a real good ol' long leak on that third rail, and felt nary a twinge of current back their way. 

Isn't that sweet? Aren't we voters a considerate lot?

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@CherokeeCounty @Visual_Cortex @LordHelpUs 

...aaand, having read that Fidelity piece, it does appear that the very worst parts of it did get sanded down a bit. So ok, I can see why a Franken/Sanders/Warren might hold their nose and vote for it.

Still, I think it deserves a lot more attention, and I think progressives need to be a lot more assertive than they've been. I get the political strategy--you don't want it to look like you "lost" in the deal, you want to declare victory and all that. And if you're an elected official I gues that's part of the game.

But we're not elected officials. And we don't have to cheerlead and wave pom poms if we think this is the start of more fcrewage.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@FIGMO2 @Visual_Cortex @CherokeeCounty @LordHelpUs 

 adjustments had to be made

The only adjustments that have to be made are on the revenue side, not the spending side.

Period.

And you, Pete Peterson, his current mouthpiece Chris Christie, and all the rest of the "shared sacrifice" swine know where they can shove their assertions to the contrary.

ByteMe
ByteMe

@Visual_Cortex I think we need to change the index being used to drive increases to something that actually reflects costs for the elderly instead of the current wider CPI calculation.

CherokeeCounty
CherokeeCounty

@Visual_Cortex @CherokeeCounty @LordHelpUs

Apologist?

Come on.

I was just giving you the facts.

I agree that social security benefits should be increased.

But that doesn't mean that we never ever make changes that will negatively affect a few future recipients.

I know you know this, but the real enemies here are the Cruz's and Rubio's of the world - not Bernie or Obama, or Liz Warren.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@ByteMe @Visual_Cortex 

change the index being used to drive increases

Show me how benefit increases as currently calculated are somehow spiraling out of control if we don't change the indexing.

And while you're at it? This bit is kind of important. show me how Americans today, after thirty years of our little defined-benefit-pensions-to-401(k) social engineering experiment, are accumulating just too much gosh-darn wealth, much more than is healthy...

and maybe I'll take such a proposal with a whole lotta seriousness.

FIGMO2
FIGMO2

@Visual_Cortex @FIGMO2 @CherokeeCounty @LordHelpUs

No doubt there are seniors living below the poverty line. That just goes to show poverty has been with us for a looooong time. Most, however, are struggling to hold onto their savings. Low interest rates are cutting into those savings. Those that saved fully expected SS to take a hit.

A failure to plan is a plan to fail.

As to the revenue side? You cannot get blood out of a turnip, and those that rely on government are just that...

turnips.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@FIGMO2 @Visual_Cortex @CherokeeCounty @LordHelpUs 

A failure to plan is a plan to fail.

Stop preaching. I've been putting as much as I possibly can into retirement plans my entire working life. So have millions of your fellow americans.

Looked at what net wealth is among Americans as a result of these policies, at retirement age? You should, sometime.

As to the revenue side? You cannot get blood out of a turnip

No, but you can get plenty of revenue out of a relatively tiny group of plutocrats, and it's high time we did.

ByteMe
ByteMe

@Visual_Cortex I didn't say they were "spiraling out of control."  I'm implying that the indexing being used can be constructed to better match the expenses being incurred by seniors.

Visual_Cortex
Visual_Cortex

@ByteMe @Visual_Cortex 


I would be ok with a group that had truly no ax to grind working out what would form the basis of such an index, and seeing the results. I'll give you that much.