Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CATO - Bush biggest spender in recent U.S. History

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

  • CATO - Bush biggest spender in recent U.S. History

    The evil, liberal CATO institute is after W again.



    Executive Summary

    President Bush has presided over the largest overall increase in inflation-adjusted federal spending since Lyndon B. Johnson. Even after excluding spending on defense and homeland security, Bush is still the biggest-spending president in 30 years. His 2006 budget doesn’t cut enough spending to change his place in history, either.

    Total government spending grew by 33 percent during Bush’s first term. The federal budget as a share of the economy grew from 18.5 percent of GDP on Clinton’s last day in office to 20.3 percent by the end of Bush’s first term.

    The Republican Congress has enthusiastically assisted the budget bloat. Inflation-adjusted spending on the combined budgets of the 101 largest programs they vowed to eliminate in 1995 has grown by 27 percent.

    The GOP was once effective at controlling nondefense spending. The final nondefense budgets under Clinton were a combined $57 billion smaller than what he proposed from 1996 to 2001. Under Bush, Congress passed budgets that spent a total of $91 billion more than the president requested for domestic programs. Bush signed every one of those bills during his first term. Even if Congress passes Bush’s new budget exactly as proposed, not a single cabinet-level agency will be smaller than when Bush assumed office.

    Republicans could reform the budget rules that stack the deck in favor of more spending. Unfortunately, senior House Republicans are fighting the changes. The GOP establishment in Washington today has become a defender of big government.
    You can check out the full .pdf file from the site.

    So what happened to the party of smaller government?
    Tutto nel mondo è burla

  • #2
    Nobody votes for someone who will say "we need to raise your taxes and cut your benefits".

    Comment


    • #3
      Biggest spending president in 30 years? Hardly. For most of Clinton's term, he was spending more as a percentage of the economy than is Bush.

      In reality, we're now spending on the low end of the range since 1974 in relation to our economy.
      I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

      Comment


      • #4
        Here's a chart I put together on this a couple of weeks ago. Follow the orange line.
        Attached Files
        I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

        Comment


        • #5
          actually, the party of small government still exists- that would be the liberarian party.

          and look at the difference between the orange and blue lines. thats the federal deficit for one fiscal year. the area between the two after 2001 is the total deficit spending by bush between 2001 and 2003. (we are in 2005 now)

          and your little statement that clinton spent more as a percent of GDP is wrong according to your graph.
          "Everything for the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State" - Benito Mussolini

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by DanS
            Biggest spending president in 30 years? Hardly. For most of Clinton's term, he was spending more as a percentage of the economy than is Bush.

            In reality, we're now spending on the low end of the range since 1974 in relation to our economy.
            So, which direction was our national debt going in the Clinton years, and which direction is it going now?

            Spending has increased even adjusted for inflation on programs the GOP promised to cut. No two ways around that.
            Tutto nel mondo è burla

            Comment


            • #7
              let me go even further and say that the GOP is unpatriotic and unamerican. they are taking the peoples hard earned money and giving it to special interests and are hurting the average american. the traitors who support them should leave the country.
              "Everything for the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State" - Benito Mussolini

              Comment


              • #8
                So, which direction was our national debt going in the Clinton years, and which direction is it going now?
                It was going up during Clinton too, except his last couple of years.
                I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DanS
                  Here's a chart I put together on this a couple of weeks ago. Follow the orange line.
                  I would like to point out that that chart only shows current expenditure - i.e. spending on consumption and transfer payments - it excludes government investment which i'm sure has to be paid for as well.
                  19th Century Liberal, 21st Century European

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It was going up during Clinton too, except his last couple of years.

                    because he inherited it from Bush I and Reagan. if you look at yearly deficit each year under clinton, it went down as a percent of GDP. that means he was doing something to keep it going down.
                    "Everything for the State, nothing against the State, nothing outside the State" - Benito Mussolini

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by DanS
                      It was going up during Clinton too, except his last couple of years.
                      Hang on, using your preferred measure of a ratio relative to GDP the US's net government debt peaked in 1993 at 58% of GDP - it then fell to 38% by 2001 and has since risen to 46%
                      19th Century Liberal, 21st Century European

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Estonians could teach you amis a thing or two about fiscal discipline.
                        Originally posted by Serb:Please, remind me, how exactly and when exactly, Russia bullied its neighbors?
                        Originally posted by Ted Striker:Go Serb !
                        Originally posted by Pekka:If it was possible to capture the essentials of Sepultura in a dildo, I'd attach it to a bicycle and ride it up your azzes.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Saras
                          Estonians could teach you amis a thing or two about fiscal discipline.
                          Hell almost every other western nation could (the exception being my own )
                          19th Century Liberal, 21st Century European

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Let me just show you something I made during the last five minutes or so...

                            Originally posted by DanS
                            It was going up during Clinton too, except his last couple of years.
                            While factually correct, I think this statement is a bit misleading. Let me demonstrate, using your own graph:
                            Attached Files

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Now then DanS, when you look at the "Clinton" part of that chart, do you see any trend regarding the size of the federal deficit?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X