This board has been migrated to our new platform! Check out the new home page at discussion.fool.com or click below to go directly to the new Board on the new site.
Then you'll also have to note that he started with a massively extended baseline because of TARP. Without recognizing that, the rate of increase is totally meaningless, and *you know that, but prefer to be grossly misleading*.ACTUALLY, even if you completely ignore any increases in real federal expenditures for 2008, and look solely at real federal expenditures at the end of 2007 and use THAT number as a baseline (which I would say is a LARGER adjustment than what you're stating), then real Federal spending over Obama's 6 years in office has increased at 2.83%, which is STILL the third lowest since WWII behind Ike and Clinton. EVERY other president since WWII has had annualized growth in real federal expenditures greater than 3% during their tenure.Now then, you were saying something about "grossly misleading"?It is more descriptive, and FAR more honest, to recognize that Obama has increased the national debt by roughly a trillion a year. That is *not misleading*; that is *completely true*. Ah yes, it's "a big number". However, if you (again) look at the RATE of increase, then during Obama's tenure the national debt has increased at a rate of 9.2% annually. I could only easily get data since 1966, but I'll note that this rate of increase is BELOW that of Ford (14.55%), Carter (9.23%), Reagan (14.17%), and Bush I (11.69%). Since you wanted absolute, non-inflation adjusted totals, there you go.Now, if we inflation adjust the totals, Obama's at 7.67%, which is still BEHIND both Reagan (9.81%) and Bush I (8.26%). That was 12 solid years of national debt increases well above anything Obama's done. You wanna go off on Obama, then you'll have to do so on St. Ronnie as well.-synchronicity
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
My Fool |