CHART OF THE DAY: Reminder, The Deficit You're Freaking Out About Is Bush's Fault

CHART OF THE DAY: Reminder, The Deficit You’re Freaking Out About Is Bush’s Fault

Economy • July 2010 • Views: 1,034

President Obama’s administration has been blamed for reckless spending that has put America into its debt hole. But in reality, much of that spending emanates from policies of President Bush, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

They argue that Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Bush tax cuts (along with the economic downturn) are what is driving the U.S. deficit, not stimulus spending.

The chart presents the ugly truth.

Available here. This shouldn’t be news to anyone who wasn’t in a coma for the last decade, but here you go. It’s a frighteningly vital and vibrant wingnut talking point, so I reckon all possible pushback must be done always.

Recent Pages by iceweasel:
Witches, Satanism, and an Exorcism: A Tour Through the Rightwing Psyche Gateway Pundit Doesn't Understand What Words Mean Monday Morning Lockdown Literature Schadenfreude: One Trump Moment--Watch Ted Cruz Issues Statement, Blames the Bitches

Jump to bottom

9 comments

Stanghazi Sun, Jul 4, 2010 10:25:51am

Image: chart-of-the-day-bush-policies-deficits-june-2010.gif

Bob Levin Sun, Jul 4, 2010 12:20:09pm

Does this mean that the solution to the economic problems is just finding the right person to blame?

Stanghazi Sun, Jul 4, 2010 4:43:02pm

re: #2 Bob Levin

Does this mean that the solution to the economic problems is just finding the right person to blame?

Uh, no. It's all about paying for your desires. If we want war, we can raise taxes.

Bob Levin Sun, Jul 4, 2010 5:18:51pm

re: #3 Stanley Sea

So you think that all this talk about the housing bubble, the European bonds being graded as junk, the stalling credit markets, the stalling housing market, lower than expected private enterprise payrolls, the falling stock market, the collapse of Lehman...all of this is attributable to the Iraq War?

It's not. And I'm not looking for anyone to blame, but I am looking for someone to effectively deal with this very complex problem.

BARACK THE VOTE Sun, Jul 4, 2010 9:37:31pm

re: #4 Bob Levin

So you think that all this talk about the housing bubble, the European bonds being graded as junk, the stalling credit markets, the stalling housing market, lower than expected private enterprise payrolls, the falling stock market, the collapse of Lehman...all of this is attributable to the Iraq War?

It's not. And I'm not looking for anyone to blame, but I am looking for someone to effectively deal with this very complex problem.

And you'd really like to ignore the facts that Bush took office with a surplus and left us with a deficit. Main reason? Wars. (Plus that brilliant tax refund. Hooray!)

You aren't 'looking for someone to effectively deal with this very complex problem'. You're pissed that anyone should point out it didn't all happen on Obama's watch, period. That's why you downdinged the post-- which merely links to a chart. You haven't yet disputed that chart, btw, so I can conclude you're yet another of the Bush Butthurt-- you'll reflexively downding anything that doesn't blame Obama and Obama exclusively for the mess we're in.

Gus Sun, Jul 4, 2010 9:47:12pm

re: #3 Stanley Sea

Uh, no. It's all about paying for your desires. If we want war, we can raise taxes.

Total so far $1,013,317,390,461... for both wars. It's a bit hire than that.

I think that's just direct operational costs and doesn't include VA, nation building, etc. For example:

Long-term health care costs

A recent study indicated that the long term health care costs for wounded Iraq war veterans could range from $350 billion to $700 billion.

One study estimated the Iraq war to have been as high as 12 billion per month.

Bob Levin Sun, Jul 4, 2010 10:06:48pm

re: #5 iceweasel

Thank you for attempting to read my mind--should I also call you a liar, for no reason other than I want to?

I am looking for someone to effectively deal with the situation--that is the job description of President, isn't it? To shoulder the problems of the nation, make the appropriate intervention and to alleviate them to some extent? Since you know me so well, tell me where I learned about economics or sociology or psychology. So you downdinged the post, even though you don't know me, haven't spoken to me, don't know where I'm from or anything about me, but you still feel qualified to read my mind to tell me what I really think. How open minded of you--well, I guess it is open minded, but in another way.

I don't care one way or another about Bush. He's not President anymore. Our actual President did say that Bush messed things up but he's going to fix it, right? That was the campaign. And I didn't even mention the rate of unemployment? Am I one of those statistics, or not? And would it matter to you?

I'm not looking to blame anyone. I want someone to begin to turn this around. Ah, but you said in your open minded way that I couldn't possibly want that. Heaven forbid I should care about people who've lost their pensions, retirements, houses, jobs, who now wonder if they can ever retire--why should I care about those folks when it's so much easier to look for someone to blame?

Curt Mon, Jul 5, 2010 1:47:37pm

re: #6 Gus 802

Gus802;

There are plenty of line items in the Federal Budget to look at. Why just pick on money spent on wars?

Consider this: The clearly stated job of the Federal Government is to provide for the common defense. On that premise, there are plenty of things we spend on that are not even mentioned in The Constitution. Anyone with a bone to pick on excess spending has plenty of opportunity to gore any of the millions of head of oxes, to the dismay of who is support said ox(es).

As Bob mentions, we need a problem solver. It's no secret in history that every President (including George Washington) inherited conditions put in place by those before him, but the a leader puts that aside. If the President wants to go down in history as a complainer who couldn't manage to stabilize the economy, he's on his way, and his supporters that buy into that approach to leading the nation are enabling that long term legacy. Better to propose workable solutions, and volunteer to fix what is, not find evidence to say "it could have been different!" Good also if the leader understands suggestions are worth listening to.

I submit any energy spent on pointing fingers, while a crisis is before us, is detracting from getting the job done. Blame comes when the circumstances are under control.

Gus Mon, Jul 5, 2010 2:04:40pm

re: #8 Curt

Gus802;

There are plenty of line items in the Federal Budget to look at. Why just pick on money spent on wars?

Consider this: The clearly stated job of the Federal Government is to provide for the common defense. On that premise, there are plenty of things we spend on that are not even mentioned in The Constitution. Anyone with a bone to pick on excess spending has plenty of opportunity to gore any of the millions of head of oxes, to the dismay of who is support said ox(es).

As Bob mentions, we need a problem solver. It's no secret in history that every President (including George Washington) inherited conditions put in place by those before him, but the a leader puts that aside. If the President wants to go down in history as a complainer who couldn't manage to stabilize the economy, he's on his way, and his supporters that buy into that approach to leading the nation are enabling that long term legacy. Better to propose workable solutions, and volunteer to fix what is, not find evidence to say "it could have been different!" Good also if the leader understands suggestions are worth listening to.

I submit any energy spent on pointing fingers, while a crisis is before us, is detracting from getting the job done. Blame comes when the circumstances are under control.

I was just showing some figure and not necessarily "picking" on the war spending. It is just a part of the overall wild spending we have been seeing from Washington since early 2002. All spending was approved by the Republican majority prior to 2006 and the Democratic majority afterwards. The primary big ticket items for all Federal spending is, as always, entitlements and defense spending.

The trajectory towards the record deficits we are seeing today were there for several years now. I believe the responsibility lies with both Bush and Obama and the Republican and Democratic House and Senate. In the end I see it as Obama and the Democrats (as current leadership) simply inheriting the baton or status quo of previous administrations and political parties. The gluttony will remain in place regardless of who wins the next election.

As far as the blame game I've been around long enough to have seen this repeated by both parties and many administrations. Blame is not unique to the current administration. For example, it was common to blame, in part, the WTC attack on certain Clinton failures well into 2007. While the Bush White House didn't directly engage in direct blame that administration used particular media outlets to act as surrogates under the direction of Karl Rove.

That being said the blame game is an American sport in and out of politics.

Auto

This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!