Obama Has DOUBLED the National Debt!

From the beginning of George Washington's first term to the last day GW Bush was in office, the US had accumulated a debt of approximately $6.3 Trillion. CBO projects the debt at the end of Obama's first (and hopefully, only) term will be almost $12.8 Trillion. Which means that in 4 years, he has more than doubled the debt. This is going to spell disaster for the economy of the US and the world.

http://www.rightchange.com/blog/comm...responsibility

From the beginning of George Washington's first term to the last day GW Bush was in office, the US had accumulated a debt of approximately $6.3 Trillion. CBO projects the debt at the end of Obama's first (and hopefully, only) term will be almost $12.8 Trillion. Which means that in 4 years, he has more than doubled the debt. This is going to spell disaster for the economy of the US and the world.

http://www.rightchange.com/blog/comm...responsibility

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

If you're looking for other presidents who nearly doubled the national debt, perhaps Mr. Bush is also a culprit. According to the Treasury, the publicly held debt was $3.3 trillion when he took office in 2001, and more than $6.3 trillion when he left office in 2009.

That's an increase of nearly 91 percent.

I'm not looking for other Presidents who doubled the debt, I'm looking for someone who will STOP it!

This is absolutely amazing, but so typical.

A blind partisan tries to justify the staggeringly irresponsible fiscal practices of the current president by saying, in essence, "Well, his predecessor did it,too!" Indeed, he did. Under G. W. Bush, federal spending in nominal dollars increased from an annual rate of about $1.8 trillion to nearly $2.9 trillion.

But now federal spending is humming along at a run rate of about $3.6 trillion annually. That's about a 25% jump from the already bloated pre-Obama levels. Don't you think Barack Obama was hired to actually fix problems, not just stack failure atop failure?

The U.S. economy is obviously in serious trouble. We're merely trying to camouflage deep structural problems by running huge deficits, while having the Federal Reserve give us virtually endless ZIRP in concert with attempts to pancake the yield curve by applying multiple iterations of QE and "Operation Twist." This isn't likely to turn out well.

What the hell do you think we're getting for all that money? For those of you in Paul Krugman's "hallelujah chorus", who think we needed massive "stimulus" spending to avoid a replay of the Great Depression, I suggest that you learn something about economic history.

Here's a good place to start:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...sEQ_story.html

I'm not looking for other Presidents who doubled the debt, I'm looking for someone who will STOP it! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

good luck. it has gone up with almost every president. No one had been able to stop it.

http://www.skymachines.com/US-Nation...ental-Term.htm


Facts are devistating to morons.

good luck. it has gone up with almost every president. No one had been able to stop it. Originally Posted by BigLouie

Someone has to, or it will come to a crashing halt on its own. It won't be pretty. I don't know what the critical mass of debt will be, but I think we are close to a complete economic collapse. The only way to avoid that is to reverse our spending policies.

I realize it probably won't happen. There will be a radical change in this country and the world when the collapse hits, and it won't be toward freedom.

Facts are devistating [sic] to morons. Originally Posted by CJ7

One might also note that morons are often very poor spellers.

That's particularly true of a couple of the blind partisans who frequent this forum.

interesting indeed... Under the xx administration, the increase in the national debt, from the total at the time of the change in administration, has been....

from Ford to Carter - increased 42% over Ford, over 4 yrs
from Carter to Reagan - increased 189% over Carter, over 8 yrs
from Reagan to Bush - increased 56% over Reagan, over 4 yrs
from Bush to Clinton - increased 36% over Bush, over 8 yrs
from Clinton to Bush jr - increased 89% over Clinton, over 8 yrs
from Bush jr to OBama / now- increased 41% over Bush jr, over 3 yrs

So, neither party and the entire house/senate have any ability/balls to man-up and take on the entitlement mentality - everyone wants to cut spending, except those things that they like/enjoy....

so, lets stop policing the world and imposing our values/goals on others and take care of our own / get our own house in order... not gonna happen - as it is a sad fact that most Americans live today on the promise of what they will pay tomorrow

...So, neither party and the entire house/senate have any ability/balls to man-up and take on the entitlement mentality... Originally Posted by Roothead

True that!

Both Democrats and Republicans have become "free lunch" parties.

Let's shower favored constituencies with more and more largesse. No one needs to actually pay for any of this; we can cover it with borrowed and printed money.

In fact, while we're at it, why don't we order up another round of tasty tax cuts for about 90% of American households?

What could possibly go wrong with a plan like that? If we pay off the citizenry in such a fashion, no one will notice that we're not really fixing anything.

Right?

The system is irreversibly broken, unless we can stop electing Democrats and Republicans.

The system is irreversibly broken, unless we can stop electing Democrats and Republicans. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's nice to envision some sort of "reform party" riding to the rescue, but I don't see it happening -- at least, not any time soon.

It seems to me that at least one of the two major parties better begin morphing itself into a responsible "reform" party very soon, or we're all in a heap of trouble.

As should now be obvious to anyone who hasn't been living in a cave for the last couple of decades, handing all the levers of power to either of our dysfunctional political parties is like handing a 500 HP muscle car to an overtestosteroned 17-year-old.

This may be the ideal election for a third party to have a significant effect. A third party won't win, but we could begin a trend away from these other clowns, or at least put them on notice that we are fed up with the choices we have. I mean, Obama v. Romney or Gingrich? No one wins with that choice.

This may be the ideal election for a third party to have a significant effect. A third party won't win, but we could begin a trend away from these other clowns, or at least put them on notice that we are fed up with the choices we have. I mean, Obama v. Romney or Gingrich? No one wins with that choice. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Every third-party movement since the Civil War has been co-opted by either the Democrats or the Republicans.

Well, we have to try. There is no other choice.