Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Hey big spender - Hot Air: "Correcting the media on Obama's spending record...again."

And James Pethokoukis adds some numbers to the fight: "As I point out in my original post, if Obama wins another term, spending—according to his own budget—would never drop below 22.3% of GDP. If that forecast is right, spending during Obama’s eight years in office would average 23.6% of GDP. That average is higher than any single previous non-war year in American history."


# said...

More numbers.

In Obama's first year (fiscal 2010), spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.
Obama's second year (2011): spending rose 4.3% to $3.6 trillion.
Obama's third year: spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the CBO.
Obama's fourth year: spending is set to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion.

Annualized growth of federal spending per term:
G.W. Bush 2006-2009: +8.1%
G.W. Bush 2002-2005: +7.3%
Clinton 1998-2001: +3.9%
Clinton 1994-1997: +3.2%
G.H. Bush 1990-1993: +5.4%
Reagan 1986-1989: +4.9%
Reagan 1982-1985: +8.7%

Total Obama average: +1.4%, which includes the cost of the 2009 stimulus bill. Adjusted for inflation, federal spending under Obama is going down for the first time since the early 1970s. Unadjusted, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since the end of the Korean War.

dfwmtx said...

War is peace
Ignorance is strength
Freedom is slavery
Increased spending is cutting it back.

Anonymous said...

Facts are fiction
Fiction is fact

"We have always been at war with deficits." said...

Congratulations to George Orwell for getting a job writing for that well-known socialist rag, the Wall Street Journal:

Obama spending binge never happened
Government outlays rising at slowest pace since 1950s

Eric said...

We're still on this? Everybody outside the Obama war room is laughing at this like a Julia infographic.

Also: whatshisname didn't write this for the WSJ. They might have noted that he called the 2009 budget put out by Obama and passed in a Democrat-controlled Congress as "Bush" spending.

Anonymous said...

Eric said...

Remember when adding $4 trillion to the national debt (in 8 years) was "unpatriotic?" Good times.

Anonymous said...

Remember when an optional war and a freebie to the rich were the same thing as averting a depression? Good times? Get smart.

Eric said...

I agree: why did the Vice President and Secretary of State vote for it? And then the current President extended the tax cuts to the rich!


Anonymous said...

Genius gotcha, because economics and politics never, ever intersect. Well spotted!

Eric said...

Did we avert a depression? All I remember is going another $5 trillion in debt. The rest is a blur.

That blur and the Red Sox collapse last season - Bush's fault.

Grow a pair, Dems! said...

Haw! That overused comeback, so beloved by online conservatives, isn't embarrassing at all! Because George W. Bush led a "buck stops here" political party that never blamed earlier politicians for anything.* (*Except the economic downturn, the 9/11 attacks and the flooding of New Orleans.)

And liberals: stop making up facts about the rate of spending, which has EXPLODED! Why can't Obama just cut our taxes every year, the way Ronald Reagan did?