Cost of the G.W. Bush Administration: $11.5 trillion (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 04:56:53 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Cost of the G.W. Bush Administration: $11.5 trillion (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Cost of the G.W. Bush Administration: $11.5 trillion  (Read 2761 times)
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,750


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« on: January 24, 2009, 12:46:51 AM »

In January 2001, the Congressional Budget Office projected a cumulative surplus of $5.6 trillion over the next 10 years. Bush used that as justification for his tax cuts (we can have our cake and eat it too).

On January 19, 2001, the national debt was $5,727,776,738,304.64
On January 20, 2009, the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08

It's expected to be at least $12 trillion 2 years from now, instead of a $128 billion national debt. Great job, Bush!
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,750


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2009, 01:47:50 AM »

Please, Republicans, don't ever lecture us about 'fiscal discipline' again.

I feel like this is all I ever post anymore;

Bush ≠ the Republican Party

Naw, they basically are. Republicans are holding up Holder's nomination because he didn't promise to not investigate the Bush administration.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,750


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2009, 02:56:36 AM »

Also, of course these programs are perfectly solvent

LOL.

I feel like this is all I ever post anymore;

Bush ≠ the Republican Party

True, but he was the leader of our Party and we are being held accountable.

As everyone knows I am generally a supporter of the 43rd President and I am lampooned for it.  That's fine, it's life.  I believe he deserves a defense, as he accomplished some positive things, and certainly isn't the only culprit for many of the challenges we face today.

I am deeply concerned and embarrassed by the lack of fiscal discipline practiced while my own Party was in control of the White House and Congress.  The Republican Party forgot what the word "deficit" meant, and some leaders even tried to make us believe that large deficits were healthy.  As I have stated before, we believed we could have our cake, eat it too, and then reach into the future and eat our grandchildren's cake.  We deserve the wrath of history for these actions.

HOWEVER, one must note that the biggest long-term fiscal problem we face concerns entitlement programs.  Would we have expected a Republican Congress in 2002 to raise retirement ages or lower benefits.. and still be re-elected?  Bush had to promise to create a brand new benefit for Prescription Drugs in order to get elected in 2000... and, unfortunately, he kept that promise.

That would have been a lot cheaper if it hadn't favored Big Pharma over the taxpayers. The ironic part about Republicans talking about how much trouble Social Security will be in is that Bush screwed up every other part of the federal budget so bad that Social Security is by far the most fiscally strong part of the entire federal budget.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 10 queries.