Barack Obama has repeatedly insisted that he inherited the current economic problems and budget deficit from the George Bush deficit. Is that true or is the Obama budget insane? Here is a chart to help clarify where the truth lies. Read about it below and see a video.
obama budget deficit chart

Bush Deficit vs Obama Deficit

Last night at his prime time press conference, Barack Obama looked straight into his big screen teleprompter and told the American people that he had inherited the Bush budge deficit and was doing all he could to reduced it. As has been his pattern since his inauguration, he has asked the American people for patience while he sorts out the numerous messes left to him by the previous administration.

Of course, the stock market reached never before seen heights, unemployment was at all time lows and we were rocking along just fine under the Bush administration. That is up until 2006 when the democrats took control of Congress. But why let the facts get in the way of a good repetitive dose of propaganda for the masses?

In much the same way that Obama stands in front of the cameras and tells the American people that the buck stops with him and then turns around immediately and spends his time assigning blame to everyone but himself, he declares that he is doing everything he can to fix the economy while at the very same time, increasing the federal budget to levels few of us could have imagined. He has actually succeeded in having American people talk in terms of trillions of dollars as though those are reasonable sums of money.

The budget Obama proposes for this year increases federal spending by a fiscally insane 34% over the budget adopted for last year, with a total of $4 trillion in federal spending, the highest EVER.

But hey, why worry about spending money and incurring trillions of dollars in debt? He can always get more out of working Americans and when hes bled us all dry, he can just print more money. Its like free money. Doesnt the government have a big ol money printing press deep in the bowels of Fort Knox somewhere? Isnt it great to have that kind of power!

The democrats were in an uproar over the national deficit when Ronald Reagan was President. The Obama deficit, in the first year of his presidency, will be 4 times higher than the highest deficit ever reached while Reagan was President. But theres nary a peep from the howling democrats over this. In fact, on the contrary, they are applauding it. At least the far left democrats are.

As is apparent from the Bush deficit vs Obama deficit graph above, in the first two months of Obamas administration, the stimulus package has already contributed to quadruple the deficit. Of course, when Obama claims hes going to half it by 2013, it could be the sort of sale we find at some of our finer department stores. You know, raise the price, then half it and come off like a hero. Maybe thats his ultimate plan. Unfortunately, there are people who would actually fall for that. After all, there ARE people who answer the Nigerian email scams.

There is no question that President George W. Bush did increase the federal deficit to a historic $700 billion through 2008. However, Obama is adding another $1 Trillion to that already historic level. Whatever increases Bush did during his administration, Obama is matching and raising to almost unimaginable levels.

And we would be remiss not to mention that Bushs administration had to deal with the budget busting terrorists attacks of 9/11/2001 and the subsequent costly Global War on Terrorism.

Obamas budget insanity will increase the public debt by $4.9 Trillion. Staggering. Incomprehensible numbers.

Regardless of the clearly identifiable facts, Obama persist in insisting that he inherited the deficit and pleads with the public to be patient while he fixes all these problems that have been laid at his feet. Meanwhile, we are being robbed blind.

Its all about smoke and mirrors and a bit of slight of hand.

One just wonders how far it will go before the people stand up and demand that it stop and if, by then, it will be too late.

Could you please post links and original sources?

Thank you.

Jim...

Yes, Obama inherited old business from the Bush Admin.

That's pretty normal.

It will take about 10 - 15 years for the scholars to sort out what is Obama's now and what is Bush's.

 

*****
We'll be friends until we're old and senile. Then we'll be new friends.
-Anon.

Here's the link

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=3572

Thanks, but no thanks, poetse.

As you will no doubt agree, "opinion" is really not the same as fact.

Original sources please.

Jim..

Thanks, but no thanks, poetse.

As you will no doubt agree with, "opinion" is really not the same as fact.

Original sources please.

Jim..

True, opinions are not the same as fact, but opinions are based on facts. And those facts are clearly expressed in the opinions. For example, it is easy to find all of the documentation for Obama's proposed budget. And it is easy enough to compute what the outcome will be.

Even those who manage only household budgets can see the flaw in Obam's budget. You cannot borrow your way into prosperity. Therefore, we can see a general principle whith which everyone would agree. That is, You must live within your means.

And one does not need to wonder where the money is coming from to pay the bills. It is coming from the tax payersw.

So what facts did the writer say that means you need the original source for something?

True, opinions are not the same as fact, but opinions are based on facts. And those facts are clearly expressed in the opinions.

********************

The same could be said for Paul Krugman.  He is operating from the same facts that you are.

Jim..

The same could be said for Paul Krugman. He is operating from the same facts that you are.

Jim..


True, and there are economist on both saides. What does that prove?

Well, fror one thing, we need to find any example of an individual, business, or government entity that thas borrowed itself into prosperity. Can you find any that have doen that?

If it were really possible, those people with credit card debt, home foreclosures, and oth heavily endebted people would all be wealthy now.

Of course, there are some who borrow to the hilt, file bankruptcy, and live in expensive homes. So by hook or crook, it could be done if you really wanted to chet a lot of people.

True, and there are economist on both saides. What does that prove?

**************************

It doesn't prove anything.  And your blathering on about it doesn't strengthen your argument.

Jim..

Well, if it were such a good idea, China would continue to buy our dollars. So may I suggest that China feels that the huge debt is not going to be repaid?

You do realize that people have credit ratings, ands nations are going to seel their debt to other countries and individuals. If they are not buying iot is due to their opinion that the dollar is becoming worthless.

So the blather of China is right there with mine. Can you show us how the dollar is becoming stronger?

Well, if it were such a good idea, China would continue to buy our dollars. So may I suggest that China feels that the huge debt is not going to be repaid?

******************************

So, you are going to suggest that, China, a Communist nation, is going to drive what you think is good economic policy?

So, as you suggest, if China, a communist country, no longer buys our debt, than that, somehow is a negative commentary on the Obama administration?

How so?

Jim...

China ha been buying US debt for a long time. They are now buying gold instead of buying our dollars. Geithner could not convince the Chinese that the dollar was safe.

And there are several countries wanting to to establish a different currency from the dollar.

You could know these things if you paid attention to people other than Krugman.

Of course he did.

Was the slate magicly wiped clean. No national debt, no wars in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The 2010 budget and spending proposals as is the stimulus package are Obama's babies.

China ha been buying US debt for a long time. They are now buying gold instead of buying our dollars. Geithner could not convince the Chinese that the dollar was safe.

And there are several countries wanting to to establish a different currency from the dollar.

You could know these things if you paid attention to people other than Krugman.

************************

I have been paying attention to others besides Krugman..  You assume facts not in evidence.

Jim...

Then you are aware that China is giving up opn the dollars. So who will buy them? someone needs to pay for our debt, and of course, we will eventually.

Then you are aware that China is giving up opn the dollars. So who will buy them? someone needs to pay for our debt, and of course, we will eventually.

*************************

So, you are saying that communist china is what is driving our economy?  Be clear on this.  You extoll capitalism, but yet, the fact that a communist country is not buying our debt anymore, is somehow a commentary on "capitalism"?  How so?

Jim..

[this should be good]

So, you are saying that communist china is what is driving our economy? Be clear on this. You extoll capitalism, but yet, the fact that a communist country is not buying our debt anymore, is somehow a commentary on "capitalism"? How so?

Jim..

[this should be good]

No, I am saying we are driving our own economy. We are borrowing money from China in order to finance the debt that opur government is making.

A business enterprise borrows money from the bank. so does than mean the bank is driving the business? No, the people who are running the business and working in the business are driving the business to make profits.

o China is the bank and we must build our own economy. That means the private sector must run 70 percent of the economy iof they return to what was happening before the Obama aqdministration.

True, opinions are not the same as fact, but opinions are based on facts

Maybe some but certainly not all of them.

LOL! I suppose if you posted the sky is blue there would be the usual
"Could you please post links and original sources?" forget the obvious...if it doesn't mix with the leftist kool-aid then there must be a lie in there somewhere! Maybe everything in it is "A LIE! A LIE! A LIE!" LOL! "I must have proof and it must be from a "PROOF PLACE" that I approve of their view of the proof that I demand proved!...or else!...or else!...or else! it's "A LIE! A LIE! A LIE!...A LIE! DAMN IT! IT'S A LIE! IT'S A DAMN LIE!"

The language of priorities is the religion of Socialism.....Aneurin Bevan

Skippy is just a tad high-strung lately.

Skippy is just a tad high-strung lately.
****************

LOL

The understatement of the year!!

***********************************

I've learned that the people you care most about in life are taken from you too soon and
all the less important ones just never go away.
And the real pains in the ass are permanent.

Here's the link

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=3572

Ahhh...a neoCON blog OPINION and nothing more.

True, opinions are not the same as fact, but opinions are based on facts.

Not always, and not often when they are neoCON opinions.

China ha [sic] been buying US debt for a long time. They are now buying gold instead of buying our dollars.

WRONG again, poetse.....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/25/china-still-buying-record_n_207337.html (and even though the link is HuffPo, the article...clearly marked...is from REUTERS)

http://www.free-press-release.com/news/200906/1245161106.html

http://www.behindbluelines.com/2009/05/19/funny-thing-chinas-still-buying-our-debt/

 

Skippy is just a tad high-strung lately.

"Lately" ???    He's always been that way.

We all know that you can't nbelieve Huffington. Right, Janie. How's that four using your best technique., ROTFLMAO


http://www.thetrumpet.com/?q=5995.4357.0.0

Now back to the real issue. You complained for eight yr=ears about the Bush Deficits, but you don't blink at the Obama deficits.

That poroves that you are Democrats and anything a Dem does is alright with you. Where did you leave your thinking caps?

....for PROVING you can't read well, poetse.  Not only was the article on HuffPo from REUTERS (as I posted), but I also left TWO (2) other links.

How's that four [sic] using your best technique

I see you STILL can't edit worth a damn either.

Well theoretically we are still operating under Bush's 2009 budget so most of the 2009 deficit is still Bush's.

Let's try a different approach about deficits.

Of these Presidents - Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, and Bush Jr. which was the most restrained fiscally.

And after answering that correctly have the nerve to get upset about Obama's spending after keeping your trap clamped shut during those other 20 years.

...for PROVING you can't read well, poetse. Not only was the article on HuffPo from REUTERS (as I posted), but I also left TWO (2) other links.

How's that four [sic] using your best technique

I see you STILL can't edit worth a damn either.

Chuckle, Chuckle. I use your technique and you talki about my editing. Chuckle, chuckle.

Let's try a different approach about deficits.

Of these Presidents - Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, and Bush Jr. which was the most restrained fiscally.

And after answering that correctly have the nerve to get upset about Obama's spending after keeping your trap clamped shut during those other 20 years.

And there you go trying to prove that Republicans run the larget deficits. Party has nothing to do with those deficits, Check the Conf=gress, and the economic conditions.

Recessions will always cause deficits because taxes are not being collected as they are during boom periods. Therefore, different presidents of different parties do what is right economically for the country. For exzmple, JFK, Ronald REagajn, and George W. Bush used tax cuts to stimulate the economy. They were fighting resessions and unemployment. They had to get money into the hands of those who would spend it so that the economy would rebound.

Only you wnt to blame Bush and the Republicans without looking at the other variables.

So why are you only getting upset about the deficits Obama is proposing to create? Could it be because he isn't a Republican?

....proof that you don't read well, poetse!  

So why are you only getting upset about the deficits Obama is proposing to create? Could it be because he isn't a Republican?


Because the other deficits are already addeded to the national debt. Do we need to add trillions more? Obama could have cut sopending, but he increased it.

You and other liberals blames Bush for those huge deficits and now you wnat to blame him for the Obama deficits saying that Obama inherited the Bush deficits. that is not true because the Bush defictis will be added to the national debt as Bush deficits. Obama is creating his own deficits and it doesn't appear to upset you at all. Instead you consistently blame Bush.

Recessions will always cause deficits because taxes are not being collected as they are during boom periods. Therefore, different presidents of different parties do what is right economically for the country. For exzmple, JFK, Ronald REagajn, and George W. Bush used tax cuts to stimulate the economy. They were fighting resessions and unemployment. They had to get money into the hands of those who would spend it so that the economy would rebound.

Yet you are blaming Obama for trying to do the same thing?

You say recessions will always cause deficits yet you blame Obama for the deficits during a recession.

You can argue about how he stimulates the economy but the truth is tax cuts or government spending bot stimulate the economy and both create deficits.

You argue he is trying to do too much and spending too much.

But to criticize him for a deficit that you admit isn't his fault really is remarkable.

Poetse would find a reason to complain no matter what Obama does. Why don't you get off your high horse poetse.

Poetse would find a reason to complain no matter what Obama does. Why don't you get off your high horse poetse.


Go ahead, fiscon, be that hypocrite. You complained about the Bush deficits and now you think Obama is doing the right thing in his 3.53 trillion budget with 1.2 trillion deficit.

And you would tell me that I would find a reason to complain no matter what Obama does. You, fiscopn, have fallen on your face and worshiped the ONE who makes no errors. Why did you not do that for Bush. Errors are errors and deficits are deficits. But you have no reasoning ability and you are a political hack.