Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Barack Obama. Thats who

[saloman]

Get your fire suits on folks. Its going to get hot in this thread...

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama?

It�s enough to make even the most ardent Obama cynic scratch his head in confusion.

Amidst all the cries of Barack Obama being the most prolific big government spender the nation has ever suffered, Marketwatch is reporting that our president has actually been tighter with a buck than any United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Who knew?

Check out the chart �



So, how have the Republicans managed to persuade Americans to buy into the whole �Obama as big spender� narrative?

It might have something to do with the first year of the Obama presidency where the federal budget increased a whopping 17.9% �going from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. I�ll bet you think that this is the result of the Obama sponsored stimulus plan that is so frequently vilified by the conservatives�but you would be wrong.

The first year of any incoming president term is saddled�for better or for worse�with the budget set by the president whom immediately precedes the new occupant of the White House. Indeed, not only was the 2009 budget the property of George W. Bush�and passed by the 2008 Congress�it was in effect four months before Barack Obama took the oath of office.

Accordingly, the first budget that can be blamed on our current president began in 2010 with the budgets running through and including including fiscal year 2013 standing as charges on the Obama account, even if a President Willard M. Romney takes over the office on January 20, 2013.

So, how do the actual Obama annual budgets look?

Courtesy of Marketwatch-

• In fiscal 2010 (the first Obama budget) spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.
• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.
• In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office�s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.
• Finally in fiscal 2013 � the final budget of Obama�s term � spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO�s latest budget outlook.

No doubt, many will wish to give the credit to the efforts of the GOP controlled House of Representatives. That�s fine if that�s what works for you.

However, you don�t get to have it both ways. Credit whom you will, but if you are truly interested in a fair analysis of the Obama years to date�at least when it comes to spending�you�re going to have to acknowledge that under the Obama watch, even President Reagan would have to give our current president a thumbs up when it comes to his record for stretching a dollar.

Of course, the Heritage Foundation is having none of it, attempting to counter the actual numbers by pretending that the spending initiated by the Bush Administration is the fault of Obama. As I understand the argument Heritage is putting forth �and I have provided the link to the Heritage rebuttal so you can decide for yourself�Marketwatch, in using the baseline that Obama inherited, is making it too easy on the President.

But then, with the Heritage Foundation being the creator of the individual mandate concept in healthcare only to rebut the same when it was no longer politically convenient, I�m not quite sure why anyone believes much of anything they have to say any longer. With their history of reversing course for convenience, I can�t help but wonder, should they find themselves reviewing the spending record of a President Romney four years from today, whether they might be tempted to use the Obama numbers as the baseline for such a new Administration.

contact Rick at thepolicypage@gmail.com

Twitter @rickungar

[leafs43]

This garbage again?


brb, spending trillions of dollars a year is spending less than 300 billion dollars a year.




President A: One year spend 300 billion dollars, the next 400 billion. 33% increase in spending.

President B: One year spend 1 trillion dollars, the next 1.2 trillion dollars. 16% increase.

OP's logic: President B spends less!

[anonymousceleb]

In terms of increase, sure. It's hard to outspend Dubya.

[dr_D]

It's the troof. Federal spending under Obama has grown the slowest

factcheck.org

[r0gue6]

Which is why right wing retards focus on the deficit instead of actual spending.

[Rune]

This garbage again?


brb, spending trillions of dollars a year is spending less than 300 billion dollars a year.




President A: One year spend 300 billion dollars, the next 400 billion. 33% increase in spending.

President B: One year spend 1 trillion dollars, the next 1.2 trillion dollars. 16% increase.

OP's logic: President B spends less!

inflation how does it work?

[ToPHeR35]

This means nothing LOL. More spin

[saloman]

OP's logic: President B spends less!

I know you have a hard time reading and comprehending stuff but do you really think I wrote the OP?

[dr_D]

This means nothing LOL. More spin

damage control

[MrRIP]

Lol I made a thread on this a month or so ago.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-has-lowest-s/

[ToPHeR35]

damage control

damage control?

LOL all this is saying is Bush spent alot and Obama came along and spent slightly a little more than Bush...LOL WTF? Like that's suppose to make him look good

Let's all hail Obama because he spent a few hundred billion more than his predecessor instead of a few trillion more. Tell me how that makes it ok???

If anything this thread just proves that liberals have no common sense related to spending that they would even argue that somehow Obama is a great president because his RATE of spending is much slower...lol WTF?


LOL it's like McCarthy spinning the homicide numbers in Chicago by saying we have a "decrease in the increase of shootings" LOL WTF?

[saloman]

damage control

I am thinking we have paid GOP'er internet marketers in here sometimes.

[leafs43]

inflation how does it work?

Has nothing to do with inflation.

Obama came into office with TARP pushing the baseline up. Obama kept that baseline and spends his ass off on garbage like the stimulus.


It's false statistics that only tell half the story.

It's actually funny coming from the OP, because it's expected.

[000350]

But but...socialism!..Communism!!

[MrRIP]

Has nothing to do with inflation.

Obama came into office with TARP pushing the baseline up. Obama kept that baseline and spends his ass off on garbage like the stimulus.


It's false statistics that only tell half the story.

It's actually funny coming from the OP, because it's expected.

Oh really. How much did he spend on the stimulus?

[leafs43]

Oh really. How much did he spend on the stimulus?

The stimulus was almost a trillion dollars on its own.



That shows how faulty these statistics are. The largest stimulus project in history upticked the % in spending only a little bit because of the already high baseline from the previous year.

[ToPHeR35]

ITT liberals hail Obama because of his decrease in the increase of federal spending

[MrRIP]

The stimulus was almost a trillion dollars on its own.



That shows how faulty these statistics are. The largest stimulus project in history upticked the % in spending only a little bit because of the already high baseline from the previous year.

But a third of the stimulus was pure tax cuts. No spending. You don't even know what's in the stimulus bro.

[saloman]

But a third of the stimulus was pure tax cuts. No spending. You don't even know what's in the stimulus bro.

That leafs43 has no idea what he is talking about is no surprise to anyone.

[dr_D]

The stimulus was almost a trillion dollars on its own.

That shows how faulty these statistics are. The largest stimulus project in history upticked the % in spending only a little bit because of the already high baseline from the previous year.

Not true. First, the stimulus was $780 billion spread over a two year period so it is really $390 billion per year. Second 27% of the $780 billion were tax cuts so actual spending was $570 billion. Spread over two years we get the peanut amount of $285 billion of spending per year.

Of course these are very rough estimates, but it gets the point across.

[MrRIP]

Not true. First, the stimulus was $780 billion spread over a two year period so it is really $390 billion per year. Second 27% of the $780 billion were tax cuts so actual spending was $570 billion. Spread over two years we get the peanut amount of $285 billion of spending per year.

Can u say sonned?

[leafs43]

Yep, Obama is spending less than Bush....shown by the decrease we see post 2009....


Oh wait....




You guys just throw out some statistics and don't even know how they are formulated.

[r0gue6]

Here's the best part...let's say Obama cut tons of budget and closed the deficit cause we all know the right wingers care so much about the deficit.

That would obviously cause massive layoffs, causing unemployment to go up.

So then, in their infinite wisdom, the right wingers would attack him on unemployment numbers.

Dumb fuks gonna dumb fuk.

[Stizzel]

Came into saloman thread. Saw its bush's fault. No one was surprised that day.

[Stizzel]

Here's the best part...let's say Obama cut tons of budget and closed the deficit cause we all know the right wingers care so much about the deficit.

That would obviously cause massive layoffs, causing unemployment to go up.

So then, in their infinite wisdom, the right wingers would attack him on unemployment numbers.

Dumb fuks gonna dumb fuk.

Government layoffs maybe. I say lay the military off first. The ones with marketable skills will get scooped up by the private sector.

[leafs43]

To state the OP's logic:

If Obama spends 200 trillion dollars every year but never goes above 200 trillion dollars, he is spending less than a somebody who spends 1 million dollars one year and 2 million dollars the next year.

[Flakker]

This garbage again?


brb, spending trillions of dollars a year is spending less than 300 billion dollars a year.




President A: One year spend 300 billion dollars, the next 400 billion. 33% increase in spending.

President B: One year spend 1 trillion dollars, the next 1.2 trillion dollars. 16% increase.

OP's logic: President B spends less!

In terms of increase, sure. It's hard to outspend Dubya.

This and this.

Plus the OP ignores Obamacare. 1.8T over 10 years and rising.

[EctoCanuck]

That chart looks so much better in color................



Notice how spending always increase under Republicans and than dips under Democrats?Isn't that the opposite of everything conservatives believe?

[HaterSalad]

So Bush spent a ton and Obama is spending slightly more than a ton....nice graph(s)

[MrRIP]

Government layoffs maybe. I say lay the military off first. The ones with marketable skills will get scooped up by the private sector.

Public sector jobs are shrinking as well. Although I would argue in order to help the people they should be rising.