Chart of increases in the national debt

[BrianH]

A democrat sent me this chart which I thought was very interesting for Ron Paul Republicans to know and try to show the GOP why they are losing popular support.

http://files.meetup.com/523165/Natl_Debt_Chart.jpg

[1836]

Carter did more economic damage due to horrid inflationary policies, and Clinton's budgetary responsibility was due to Newt Gingrich.

But, it's a neat chart.

[ARealConservative]

The legislative branch legislates.

A chart showing which party was in control of that branch would be more meaningful.

[BrianH]

The legislative branch legislates.

A chart showing which party was in control of that branch would be more meaningful.

That's a good idea. Any ideas where to find that info?

[itsnobody]

This is misleading

It has a lot to do with congress, remember Republicans controlled congress while Bill Clinton was in office, the Democrats controlled congress when Ronald Reagan was president, Reagan wanted to eliminate the Dept. of Education and cut spending, but the Democrats wouldn't allow him to

But Bush has been horrible, not a true fiscal conservative

Also the chart doesn't go back very far only back until 1980, I'm pretty sure Einsenhower was a low spender

[BrianH]

This is misleading

It has a lot to do with congress, remember Republicans controlled congress while Bill Clinton was in office

Where can I find the record of who controlled Congress and the Senate?

[itsnobody]

Where can I find the record of who controlled Congress and the Senate?

Not sure, I'm sure you can find it if you search around

But remember there's more factors than simply who was president, this isn't a dictatorship

[RollOn2day]

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Chart of National Debt as accrued by President from Roosevelt till today. Click on each chart to zoom in.

Scroll down to about 3/4 of the way down to see who controlled the House and the Senate during each presidents term.

Bush Jr has enjoyed a Republican House and Senate for 6 years in office.....but Democrats still existed so the rise in debt during this time will still be attributed to the Democrats :eek: because, well, who wants to take responsibility for the largest debt increase in US history?

Certainly not any one of my Republican friends. Any takers?

[RonRules]

Here's the thing EVERYBODY forgets about US debt. STATE DEBT !!!

Here's California:
http://www.lao.ca.gov/2004/cal_facts/2004_calfacts_budget.htm

Now add up all 50 states to the US federal debt, then corporate debt and personal debt.

Our grandchildren will never pay that.

[itsnobody]

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Chart of National Debt as accrued by President from Roosevelt till today. Click on each chart to zoom in.

Scroll down to about 3/4 of the way down to see who controlled the House and the Senate during each presidents term.

Bush Jr has enjoyed a Republican House and Senate for 6 years in office.....but Democrats still existed so the rise in debt during this time will still be attributed to the Democrats :eek: because, well, who wants to take responsibility for the largest debt increase in US history?

Certainly not any one of my Republican friends. Any takers?

Bush and Ne-cons aren't really fiscal conservative, having the largest budget and largest deficit in US history isn't fiscally conservative...

However if you look at the actual numbers the debt seemed to sky rocket ever since we got off a gold standard (1971):
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/history.gif

Seems like the debt continuously increased, you can't print gold out of thin air, but you can print money out of thin air. It's no wonder that so many Economists endorse Ron Paul...

[BrianH]

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

Chart of National Debt as accrued by President from Roosevelt till today. Click on each chart to zoom in.

Scroll down to about 3/4 of the way down to see who controlled the House and the Senate during each presidents term.

Bush Jr has enjoyed a Republican House and Senate for 6 years in office.....but Democrats still existed so the rise in debt during this time will still be attributed to the Democrats :eek: because, well, who wants to take responsibility for the largest debt increase in US history?

Certainly not any one of my Republican friends. Any takers?

Thanks!

[bergstrom]

Wikipedia:

110th congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_congress): D
109th congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/109th_Congress): R
108th congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/108th_Congress): R
107th congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/107th_Congress): R
106th congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/106th_Congress): R
105th congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/105th_Congress): R
104th congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/104th_Congress): R
103rd congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/103rd_United_States_Congress): D
... etc....

[BrianH]

From: http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

http://files.meetup.com/523165/party_controlVdebt.jpg
"The chart confirms that the Neo-Cons got control of both Houses of Congress in 1995, and singular control of our government from 2000 to 2006, and yet, as the debt charts prove in Figures 1 & 2 above, even with all that power in 12 years they never controlled spending.

When Mr. Reagan was in office he had a Democratic House and a Republican Senate to deal with. But the “Great Communicator” used the bully pulpit to force both Houses of Congress to go along with his tax cuts on the promise that spending cuts would follow. However, the spending was never reduced. The mixed-party Congress, with no presidential leadership, failed to follow through on reducing spending.

How did Mr. Clinton lead the nation into fiscal responsibility? When there was a Democratic run Congress he worked with them to put a policy in place that the Republicans dumped the minute Mr. Bush entered office. That reasonable and responsible policy was; if you cut taxes you must make a corresponding cut in spending. They called it “pay as you go.” We need that kind of responsible leadership again. Under President Clinton the Republican Congress lived within the ‘pay as you go’ rule and spending was extremely well controlled.
The Republicans rapidly abandoned this rule when Mr. Bush entered office in 2000 and deficit spending started skyrocketing immediately. Republicans have proven they do not have the guts or the political will to do what it takes to get spending under control. For the country’s sake let’s hope a new Democratic Congress will change the direction of this otherwise certain economic train wreck.

One thing the chart above makes clear, in stark contrast to their rhetoric, is that in the last 60 years when Republicans held all the power, they never used it to reduce the debt; in fact they always increased it. If you want deficit reduction you need Democrats in control, because the “borrow and spend” Republicans have never done it on their own."

[thoughtbombing]

Carter did more economic damage due to horrid inflationary policies, and Clinton's budgetary responsibility was due to Newt Gingrich.

But, it's a neat chart.

Newt was but one man.. frankly, he is a piece of shit, too.

[Shink]

Yeah, those charts do seem to assume that the President does all the spending. I guess most people want one branch of government to think about/bitch about.

[trapfive]

I thought we'd moved past this argument and established neither party has served this country's interest.

We need to break down this two party stranglehold.

[MrZach]

Yeah, but Clinton was able to avoid increasing the National Debt by looting the Social Security fund to make up the difference... He just raided our government's savings, so is that *really* better?

[lastnymleft]

However if you look at the actual numbers the debt seemed to sky rocket ever since we got off a gold standard (1971):
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/history.gif
Agreed. Arguing about which side of the bird is controlling direction, when it is BOTH, is pointless. The core issue is as stated above: since we went off the gold standard, debt has exploded. As has inflation:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ef/USACPI1800.png

[Cleaner44]

Bush and Ne-cons aren't really fiscal conservative, having the largest budget and largest deficit in US history isn't fiscally conservative...

Neocons most definetly are not fiscally conservative. I look at Neocons as big government socialists.

Irving Kristol, the "god-father" and one of the founders of neoconservatism, stated five basic policies of neoconservatism that distinguish it from other "movements" or "persuasions". These policies, he claimed, "result in popular Republican presidencies":

1. Taxes and Federal Budget: "Cutting tax rates in order to stimulate steady economic growth. This policy was not invented by neocons, and it was not the particularities of tax cuts that interested them, but rather the steady focus on economic growth." In Kristol's view, neocons are and should be less concerned about balancing fiscal budgets than traditional conservatives: "One sometimes must shoulder budgetary deficits as the cost (temporary, one hopes) of pursuing economic growth."
2. Size of Government: Kristol distinguishes between Neoconservatives and the call of traditional conservatives for smaller government. "Neocons do not feel ... alarm or anxiety about the growth of the state in the past century, seeing it as natural, indeed inevitable."
sorce: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism