Politics & Current Events
mominatrix
member
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
who's the most fiscally conservative POTUS of the last 30 years?
Obama: Most Fiscally Conservative President in Modern History?
By Derek Thompson
Mar 16 2012, 11:22 PM ET
193
Maybe not. It looks like Clinton's got him beat.
Economist Justin Wolfers tweets a graph from Mark Thoma
that's very much worth talking about. It measures per capita growth in
government spending for the last seven presidents' first term in office.
This is what he finds:
The graph tells a simple story that I've recounted before.
For all the talk you hear about Obama's historic spree, government
spending actually hasn't increased so dramatically under this president.
The stimulus was big, but it's over. It's been replaced by, if not
austerity (which has struck our states and cities) then a hard
correction to the center.
Here's another way to tell the story ... It's a quiz! I present to you the first three years in spending for three recent presidents: Barack Obama, George Bush, and Ronald Reagan. To make it a game, I've removed their names and indexed the spending increases to their first month of office. And I've replaced the dates with integers from 1-10 so you can't guess by looking at the years.
Can you guess which president is which?
Let me anticipate some of your objections before you make them. (1) Reagan was fighting a war, he jacked up defense spending instead of discretionary spending, and he inherited a recession with inflation that might, well, inflate his numbers. This is all true, but expanding defense was Reagan's choice, and a dollar spent, on no matter what, is a dollar taxed or borrowed. (2) Bush was fighting a war and battling a recession, too. Yes, but he has neither inflation nor a Great Recession. (3) Don't play relativity games with me, Derek, too much government spending is too much government spending, even if Obama's predecessors were worse! There is a time for government cuts, but it's not when you have 9 percent unemployment and your interest rates are below 2%. (4) The language of Obamacare and financial reform are better indicators of big government than federal spending. It's fair to measure government size by its total involvement in people's lives, but that deserves a longer post. (5) We should be more concerned about the taxes and spending to come than the spending that has past. But they haven't happened yet, so they're not part of the president's record.
Maybe I missed some objections -- I'm sure you'll let me know -- and I'll answer in the comment section.
But the bottom line is that it is really, truly time for the myth about Big Spender Obama to die. If anything, it is remarkable that, after a recession and a private sector implosion, the public sector expanded less under this administration than it did under Bush or Reagan, especially when you consider the government cuts made at the state and local levels.
Source: Reuters
Here's another way to tell the story ... It's a quiz! I present to you the first three years in spending for three recent presidents: Barack Obama, George Bush, and Ronald Reagan. To make it a game, I've removed their names and indexed the spending increases to their first month of office. And I've replaced the dates with integers from 1-10 so you can't guess by looking at the years.
Can you guess which president is which?
President #1
President #2
President #3
The
hint that solves the puzzle: They're in chronological order. It goes
Reagan, Bush, Obama. Going by federal expenditures (and note these are
nominal figures), it would seem that if Obama's a socialist, Ronald
Reagan is Karl Marx with an ICBM.
President #2President #3The
hint that solves the puzzle: They're in chronological order. It goes
Reagan, Bush, Obama. Going by federal expenditures (and note these are
nominal figures), it would seem that if Obama's a socialist, Ronald
Reagan is Karl Marx with an ICBM.Let me anticipate some of your objections before you make them. (1) Reagan was fighting a war, he jacked up defense spending instead of discretionary spending, and he inherited a recession with inflation that might, well, inflate his numbers. This is all true, but expanding defense was Reagan's choice, and a dollar spent, on no matter what, is a dollar taxed or borrowed. (2) Bush was fighting a war and battling a recession, too. Yes, but he has neither inflation nor a Great Recession. (3) Don't play relativity games with me, Derek, too much government spending is too much government spending, even if Obama's predecessors were worse! There is a time for government cuts, but it's not when you have 9 percent unemployment and your interest rates are below 2%. (4) The language of Obamacare and financial reform are better indicators of big government than federal spending. It's fair to measure government size by its total involvement in people's lives, but that deserves a longer post. (5) We should be more concerned about the taxes and spending to come than the spending that has past. But they haven't happened yet, so they're not part of the president's record.
Maybe I missed some objections -- I'm sure you'll let me know -- and I'll answer in the comment section.
But the bottom line is that it is really, truly time for the myth about Big Spender Obama to die. If anything, it is remarkable that, after a recession and a private sector implosion, the public sector expanded less under this administration than it did under Bush or Reagan, especially when you consider the government cuts made at the state and local levels.
Source: Reuters
The Girl is 5. The Boy is 2. The Dog is 1.
I am the 99%.
I am the 99%.
Re: who's the most fiscally conservative POTUS of the last 30 years?
Expanding the cost of government from 20% of GDP to 22% (to be 23-24% by the end of the year) is unprecidented. That is HUGE increase. All while driving up debt, and devaluing the dollar.
States have to cut their spending as they cannot print money and are mandated to have a balanced budget.
Obama's first budget was laughed at with 99-0 votes Harry Reid has stated that the current budget will not be voted on.
this is at least the 2nd time you've quoted this number without a cite. Could we have a source please?
Above Us Only Sky
I mean, for real Sisu, we get it. You hate Obama. But posting random accusations with no follow up or sourcing does not help to convince others that your hate for him is not irrational and crazytoons.
So, moving forward, how about you try showing us instead of telling us and expecting us to just take your word for it that whatever you post is the gospel (according to Sisugal).
Thanks and bye.
From OMB - Table 1.2 here - http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals
Find me here instead!
Thanks Y4M. But still Sisu, don't count on her to do your work for you all the time.
Ugh no--I'd rather do work.
I only came in here because no one is talking about Mad Men or football anymore.
Find me here instead!
Would the jump from 2008 to 2009 include the funds for the bailout passed by Bush?
Just curious, since that would make much more sense with the other data above. Esp since it actually goes down in 2010.
I'm not sure how TARP gets scored, since it was more of a loan program. Remember spending/GDP has two parts--spending is one, GDP is the other. When the economy goes down, GDP follows, which would raise the percentage of GDP even if spending remained constant. That 4.4 pt jump is going to be part spending increase, part GDP decrease.
Find me here instead!
Ah OK, that makes more sense then.
One thought from the OP's charts. They are renormalizing at the start of each administration. So take Reagan's chart, tack on Bush I's (curiously not included here), then Clinton, then Bush II, and then Obama--it's a huge upward trajectory over our lifetimes.
I'm also not sure the small dip in Obama's 10th quarter is particularly interesting. These all look pretty much the same to me.
Find me here instead!
That made me LOL. Mostly because as much as I'd love your take, when I read Heather's request I thought it seemed a bit like asking for a book report
I am a runner, knitter, scientist, DE-IVF veteran, and stage III colon cancer survivor.
Y4M did the work and came up with the numbers for you. Only problem is, if you go back further on that chart, 23-24% is not unprecedented at all. Nor is an increase of 2%, if that's what you meant
That would be Reagan, the patron saint of fiscal conservatives, and a Republican Senate