[quote=mike92104][quote=CA renter]Mike, much of that extra spending is on defense; and the vast majority of libs I know detest it. Not only that, but taxes were lowered at the very same time that they (Republicans) were increasing spending.
Again, you can TAX and spend, or you can not tax and not spend; but you cannot spend without taxing. There is no surer way to complete economic disaster than spending without taxing.
The “rich” have been getting a free ride for far too long. They are the ones who benefit most from doing business in and with a country that has property (including IP) protections, rule of law, infrastructure, social safety nets (so they don’t have to live in fortresses and drive around in armored cars), etc. They should be paying a proportionate share.[/quote]
I think you just made my point by immediately turning to the “fair share” BS. I also don’t think the lion’s share of the extra spending is on defense, unless Mr Obama really likes defense contractors. Now don’t get me wrong, the Reps did their share of the damage once they let the “Pay-Go” rule expire, but the unprecedented increase I was mentioning began with TARP, and that level of spending has continued year after year since.[/quote]
As SK mentioned above, the TARP program began under Bush.
As for the recent increases in federal spending (some good charts and other info found here, too, BTW):
“2009-2011 Budget Outcomes Skewed by the Recession
Due to one of the worst economic downturns since the Great Depression – and the policies enacted to combat it – 2009-2011 tax and spending levels diverged from recent patterns. Federal revenues plunged to 15 percent of GDP in 2009 and remained at 15 percent through 2011, the lowest levels in decades. The efforts to prevent collapse of the financial system and to deal with the failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the automatic expansion of programs like unemployment insurance and food stamps (which always grow during economic downturns to meet rising need), and spending from the February 2009 stimulus package together pushed federal outlays to 25 percent of GDP in 2009 and 24 percent of GDP in 2010 and 2011. As a result, deficits reached record levels.
It will take the economy several years to fully recover, and during that time federal revenues and expenditures will continue to differ from historical experience. However, the composition of the budget in 2011 largely resembles recent federal spending patterns.”
“The first chart shows the federal debt in trillions of
dollars and as a percent of gross domestic product (GDP)
from 1950 through 2010. From 1950 to 2007, the debt
increased from about $0.25 trillion to nearly $9 trillion.
The debt initially declined relative to the nation’s output,
from about 94 percent of GDP in 1950 to a trough of about
32 percent of GDP in 1981. In the early 1980s, however,
both actual debt and debt relative to GDP began to rise
sharply, reaching 64 percent of GDP in 2007 (vertical line).
There was a very large increase
in the debt as a result of the financial
crisis and subsequent recession.
In just three years (2008-10),
the nation’s debt increased by
about $4.5 trillion, a 50 percent
increase over its 2007 level. The
debt relative to GDP rose to 93.2
percent.2″
They go on to say this:
“Hence, the rise in the national debt from the 1970s
through 2007 is entirely a consequence of the federal government’s
increase of expenditures without an offsetting
increase in revenues to pay for that additional spending.”
It’s interestig to point out that the debt-to-GDP ratio was declining until that champion of all Republicans came into office…Ronald Reagan. That’s when our debt burden really began to take off. Then, when Clinton was in office, the debt levels came down again until Bush II came into office. The reason Obama (and gang) had to increase spending during his time in office was because our economy got so f’d up during Bush’s term. His tax cuts, wars, and deregulation (which admittedly began under Clinton), led us down the road toward “financial Armageddon.”
FWIW, I think Obama is a Republican in Dems clothing. He’s failed us horribly with his refusal to keep his promise to rein in the financial industry and help restore the balance between labor and capital that is so essential to a successful economy and society.
