The Political Party

[Visconti]

First Term: Obama Increased Debt $50,521 Per Household; More Than First 42 Presidents in 53 Terms Combined

During Barack Obama’s first term as president of the United States, the debt of the federal government increased by $5.8 trillion, which exceeds the combined debt accumulated under all presidents from George Washington through Bill Clinton. The new federal debt accumulated in Obama's first term equaled approximately $50,521 for each of household in the country.

On Jan. 20, 2009, when Obama was first inaugurated, the total debt of the federal government was $10,626,877,048,913.08, according to the U.S. Treasury. As of the close of business on Jan. 17, the last day reported by the Treasury before Obama’s second inauguration, the total debt of the federal government was $16,432,631,489,854.70.

Thus, from Obama’s first inauguration to his second, the federal government’s debt grew by $5,805,754,440,941.62. Given that the Census Bureau currently estimates that there are 114,916,000 households in the United States, the $5,805,754,440,941.62 debt increase under Obama equals about $50,521 per household.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/first-term-obama-increased-debt-50521-household-more-first-42-presid...

"We don't have a spending problem."

Barry Hussein

[willhaven]

Yet government spending is down.

[tequila_titan]

Waiting for Bush's fault.................................

[RogueGnome]

visconti, your pap smear results are back from the lab

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

willhaven wrote:

Yet government spending is down.

---

You're probably buying the spin that the INCREASE in govt spending is lower under Obama than some other presidents.  But it's still increasing.

You can think of it like a fuse - it's burning a little slower now than during the Iraq war.  But it's still burning, and at some point the shit hits the fan. 

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

RogueGnome wrote:

visconti, your pap smear results are back from the lab

---

What's with the misogyny, you and willhaven?

[trainset]

Not on my household

[RogueGnome]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

RogueGnome wrote:

visconti, your pap smear results are back from the lab

---

What's with the misogyny, you and willhaven?

---

Probably not a good idea to use big four-syllable words unless you understand their meaning, Used2BMarkoh.

[hobbenator]

---

trainset wrote:
Not on my household

---

pap smear attempt with this pos lapdog

[Tom Hicks]

not only has obama presided over a reduction in the rate of growth of federal spending, he has reduced the actual number of non-military federal employees.

By the end of 2010, the United States STILL has less employees on the books than we did back in 1980 even though the population has grown from 226,545,805 to approximately 330,000,000 in 2010.

TOTAL NONMILITARY EMPLOYEES IN 1980 — 2,875,000
TOTAL NONMILITARY EMPLOYEES IN 2010 — 2,840,000

We have 35,000 less nonmilitary employees under President Obama than we had 30 years ago.

[Minning Around]

Obama didn't incease the debt. Deregulation of Wall Street, two unfunded wars, unnecessary tax cuts, and plan B increased the debt. It's a conservative problem.

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

Minning Around wrote:

Obama didn't incease the debt.

---

Of course not.  Obama isn't responsible for anything.

You know what this is?  Obama holds the same office as the Queen in the UK.  He's just a figurehead to be adored by his people.  He's not supposed to actually fix anything, you silly wightwing wascals!

[Shaun_Micallef]

How is it affecting your household Wyn? Will you experience a drop of $50k?

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

Shaun_Micallef wrote:

How is it affecting your household Wyn? Will you experience a drop of $50k?

---

You didn't ask me, but yes, actually we all will.  And it's $150K or so per household at this point, if I recall correctly.  We won't necessarily realize our loss because it's wealth we'll never have, but could have had.  It takes the form of higher taxes we wouldn't otherwise be facing, less roads and bridges, higher interest rates, inflation, higher product costs (foreign products especially) or forms we don't even realize yet.  But the point is, we are committed to paying $150K to the Chinese some how, some way, and that debt limits our future options just as much as if it were a mortgage.

Why no politician has been able to convey this to the American people is beyond me.

[Shaun_Micallef]

It's wealth you don't have but could have?

Now that's what I call optimistic projection, but you're right, it wasn't directed at you, it was directed at Wyn.

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

Shaun_Micallef wrote:

It's wealth you don't have but could have?

Now that's what I call optimistic projection, but you're right, it wasn't directed at you, it was directed at Wyn.

---

It's not speculative, if that's what you mean by 'optimistic projection'.  It's known as "opportunity cost" in formal economics.  If you take out a mortgage to buy a house, you are committed to, let's say, $2000/month.  That's $2K that doesn't go to movies, clothes, car, whatever.  The opportunity cost of buying a house is all the things you could otherwise have gotten if you didn't have a mortgage. 

[mdwagner73]

The US fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.  By starting from the day Obama was inaugurated, you are including spending that was approved before Obama was elected.  This has been pointed out multiple times on this board so I can only assume that the people who continue to do this are liars. 

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

mdwagner73 wrote:

The US fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.  By starting from the day Obama was inaugurated, you are including spending that was approved before Obama was elected.  This has been pointed out multiple times on this board so I can only assume that the people who continue to do this are liars. 

---

No, come on, will you guys get your heads out of his butt, please!  The problem is that he has made no effort to deal with the problem.  He seems, in fact, to deliberately sabotage every effort to take a crack at our problem.  It's been reported that he even said to Boehner "We don't have a spending problem".

He talks a good game, sometimes, depending on the stage, but has shown negative leadership in working towards a solution.

[mdwagner73]

---

Used2BMarkoh wrote:

---

mdwagner73 wrote:

The US fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.  By starting from the day Obama was inaugurated, you are including spending that was approved before Obama was elected.  This has been pointed out multiple times on this board so I can only assume that the people who continue to do this are liars. 

---

No, come on, will you guys get your heads out of his butt, please!  The problem is that he has made no effort to deal with the problem.  He seems, in fact, to deliberately sabotage every effort to take a crack at our problem.  It's been reported that he even said to Boehner "We don't have a spending problem".

He talks a good game, sometimes, depending on the stage, but has shown negative leadership in working towards a solution.

---

Yes, Markoh.  We already know that facts and honesty are not your forte. 

[Used2BMarkoh]

---

mdwagner73 wrote:

---

---

Yes, Markoh.  We already know that facts and honesty are not your forte. 

---

Feel free to disagree with me, if you want to bring up anything that refutes what I've said.  The ad hominem seems ridiculous to me, but if you think I'm factually wrong or interpreting things wrong, say on.