Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Obama Has Now Increased Debt More than All Presidents from George Washington Through

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Obama Has Now Increased Debt More than All Presidents from George Washington Through

    Obama Has Now Increased Debt More than All Presidents from George Washington Through George H.W. Bush Combined

    By Terence P. Jeffrey

    The Obama administration passed another fiscal milestone this week, according to new data released by the Treasury Department. As of the close of business on Oct. 3, the total national debt was $14,837,099,271,196.71—up about $44.8 billion from Sept. 30.

    That means that in the less-than-three-years Obama has been in office, the federal debt has increased by $4.212 trillion--more than the total national debt of about $4.1672 trillion accumulated by all 41 U.S. presidents from George Washington through George H.W. Bush combined.

    This $4.212-trillion increase in the national debt means that during Obama’s term the federal government has already borrowed about an additional $35,835 for every American household--or $44,980 for every full-time private-sector worker. (According to the Census Bureau there were about 117,538,000 households in the country in 2010, and, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were about 93,641,000 full-time private-sector workers.)

    When Obama was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2009, according to the Treasury Department, the total national debt stood at $10,626,877,048,913.08.

    At the end of January 1993, the month that President George H. W. Bush left office, the total national debt was $4.1672 trillion, according to the Treasury. Thus, the total national debt accumulated by the first 41 presidents combined was about $44.8 billion less than the approximately $4.212 trillion in new debt added during Obama’s term.

    As of Monday, Obama had been in office 986 days—or about 32 and a half months. During that time, the debt increased at an average pace of $4.27 billion per day. Were that rate to continue until Obama’s term ends on Jan. 20, 2013, the debt would then stand at about $16.86534 trillion—an increase of more than $6.2 trillion for Obama’s four years.

    That would equal nearly $53,000 for each American household or more than $66,00 for each full-time private-sector worker.

    That total national debt did not exceed $6.2 trillion until 2002, when George W. Bush was president.

  • #2
    Will someone please explain how this is Bush's fault for me?

    Thanks in advance

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by kbsooner21 View Post
      Will someone please explain how this is Bush's fault for me?

      Thanks in advance

      It's all Bush's fault ...

      Comment


      • #4
        I love when ppl blame Obama for everything cracks me up. Meanwhile Bush gets cheered for doing what exactly.
        How many more titles will the Yankees try to buy it never ends.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by DIRK View Post
          I love when ppl blame Obama for everything cracks me up. Meanwhile Bush gets cheered for doing what exactly.
          I love when ppl blame Bush for everything cracks me up. Meanwhile Obama gets cheered for doing what exactly?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by DIRK View Post
            I love when ppl blame Obama for everything cracks me up. Meanwhile Bush gets cheered for doing what exactly.
            Who here is cheering Bush? Please point that out for me. I'll be waiting patiently...

            Comment


            • #7
              Lets talk about something MUCH more important,,,,Dale Jr's losing streak is now @ 129, WTF!

              Comment


              • #8
                Bush didn't keep throwing money around like we have it. Like bailout after bailout and just throws his hands in the air??? Sometimes doing less, is more.
                Hoops

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Hoopster007 View Post
                  Bush didn't keep throwing money around like we have it. Like bailout after bailout and just throws his hands in the air??? Sometimes doing less, is more.
                  Going to War cost a few bucks.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by BigWeiner View Post
                    Going to War cost a few bucks.
                    But it was something that had to be done.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by kbsooner21 View Post
                      But it was something that had to be done.
                      Not really. What really had to be done, was "throwing" money into the economy, otherwise things would've been a lot worse. Tons of money was wasted and put in the wrong places, that's another topic all together, but that still had to be done. The War didn't didn't do shit, but waste a ton of money that we needed for other things. You must think we have invaded Iran too, right?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by BigWeiner View Post
                        Not really. What really had to be done, was "throwing" money into the economy, otherwise things would've been a lot worse. Tons of money was wasted and put in the wrong places, that's another topic all together, but that still had to be done. The War didn't didn't do shit, but waste a ton of money that we needed for other things. You must think we have invaded Iran too, right?
                        What had to be done was "throwing money into the economy"??? By the government??? ahhmmmm, did you realize that you are a Marxist? Centrally planned and controlled economy and government control over the means of production? Maybe you never realized it, but that is the core tenant of Marxism. No, the govt shouldn't be "throwing money into the economy". Fact is, the government shouldn't even have the money to "throw into the economy". That is what free market capitalism is all about. Make a better product, sell a better product, increase your wealth, build a new product, build it better, make more money...and so on. The govt should have ONLY enough money to provide for its Constitutionally mandated responsibilities, with the most significant of which being defense (as in wars, when they are necessary). BTW, I am not expressing an opinion on the necessity of any particular war. My point was only to kind of explore why the government should have "thrown more money into the economy". The money the govt does (or did) have is money confiscated from the People and, frankly, I think they would make better use of it than any bureucratic circle jerk.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by umreb78 View Post
                          What had to be done was "throwing money into the economy"??? By the government??? ahhmmmm, did you realize that you are a Marxist? Centrally planned and controlled economy and government control over the means of production? Maybe you never realized it, but that is the core tenant of Marxism. No, the govt shouldn't be "throwing money into the economy". Fact is, the government shouldn't even have the money to "throw into the economy". That is what free market capitalism is all about. Make a better product, sell a better product, increase your wealth, build a new product, build it better, make more money...and so on. The govt should have ONLY enough money to provide for its Constitutionally mandated responsibilities, with the most significant of which being defense (as in wars, when they are necessary). BTW, I am not expressing an opinion on the necessity of any particular war. My point was only to kind of explore why the government should have "thrown more money into the economy". The money the govt does (or did) have is money confiscated from the People and, frankly, I think they would make better use of it than any bureucratic circle jerk.
                          I agree with this, but we have big govt

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I could careless about who's to blame for what, but wouldn't everybody agree that any debt for the Wars is Bush's responsibility regardless of who came into office after him?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by BigWeiner View Post
                              Going to War cost a few bucks.
                              are we really going to go down this road yet again BW. how many times do i have to tell you CONGRESS declares war not a president. The congress at the time was controlled by the DEMS which ran the senate!!!! how is Iraq Bush's fault?


                              and beyond that Bush isnt my hero or my favorite president. Far from it. Why cant you just admit Dear Leader Obama is the worst president in the history of our great country. Admit it and move on already. Geezz
                              Last edited by 10DimeBry; 12-02-2011, 10:36 PM.
                              2013 NCAA POD Record

                              8-3ATS +3.80 units

                              2013 NFL POD Record

                              1-2 ATS -4.50 units

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X