US National Debt by Year
This data table is a list of US National Debt by year by President. The second column is the amount added or subtracted to the debt for that year, the third column is the total debt for that year, after additions/subtractions. The number used per year is the accumulated national debt as of September 30 of any given year, as that is the end of the federal governments fiscal year.
End of Term % of Total Debt is based off of the FY2020 debt of $26,945,391,194,615.15, except for Obama, Trump & Biden (who are based on the total debt, so far, in FY2024). (Last Updated: 5/15/2024)
* US National Debt data, spanning from 1975 to 1985 is rounded up to the nearest $1 million. Reasons as to why are currently unknown.
Source: US Department of the Treasury
| Year | President | Added/Subtracted Debt | Cumulative Debt | Yearly % Increase | Total Term % Increase | End of Term % of Total Debt |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1789 | George Washington | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| 1790 | George Washington | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| 1791 | George Washington | $75,463,476.52 | $75,463,476.52 | n/a | 100% | .0003% |
| 1792 | George Washington | $1,764,448.14 | $77,227,924.66 | 2.3% | 100% | .0003% |
| 1793 | George Washington | $3,130,709.38 | $80,358,634.04 | 4.0% | 100% | .0003% |
| 1794 | George Washington | -$1,931,229.27 | $78,427,404.77 | -2.4% | 100% | .0003% |
| 1795 | George Washington | $2,320,182.62 | $80,747,587.39 | 3.0% | 100% | .0003% |
| 1796 | George Washington | $3,014,584.68 | $83,762,172.07 | 3.7% | 100% | .0003% |
| 1797 | John Adams | -$1,697,692.74 | $82,064,479.33 | -2.0% | -0.9% | -0.000003% |
| 1798 | John Adams | -$2,835,950.21 | $79,228,529.12 | -3.5% | -0.9% | -0.000003% |
| 1799 | John Adams | -$819,859.35 | $78,408,669.77 | -1.03% | -0.9% | -0.000003% |
| 1800 | John Adams | $4,567,624.58 | $82,976,294.35 | 5.8% | -0.9% | -0.000003% |
| 1801 | Thomas Jefferson | $61,756.45 | $83,038,050.80 | 7.4% | -21.4% | -0.00007% |
| 1802 | Thomas Jefferson | -$2,325,418.55 | $80,712,632.25 | -2.8% | -21.4% | -0.00007% |
| 1803 | Thomas Jefferson | -$3,657,945.85 | $77,054,686.40 | -4.5% | -21.4% | -0.00007% |
| 1804 | Thomas Jefferson | $9,372,434.48 | $86,427,120.88 | 12.2% | -21.4% | -0.00007% |
| 1805 | Thomas Jefferson | -$4,114,970.38 | $82,312,150.50 | -4.8% | -21.4% | -0.00007% |
| 1806 | Thomas Jefferson | -$6,588,879.84 | $75,723,270.66 | -8.0% | -21.4% | -0.00007% |
| 1807 | Thomas Jefferson | -$6,504,872.02 | $69,218,398.64 | -8.6% | -21.4% | -0.00007% |
| 1808 | Thomas Jefferson | -$4,022,080.67 | $65,196,317.97 | -5.8% | -21.4% | -0.00007% |
| 1809 | James Madison | -$8,173,125.88 | $57,023,192.09 | -12.5% | 95.3% | 0.0002% |
| 1810 | James Madison | -$3,849,974.57 | $53,173,217.52 | -6.8% | 95.3% | 0.0002% |
| 1811 | James Madison | -$5,167,629.76 | $48,005,587.76 | -9.7% | 95.3% | 0.0002% |
| 1812 | James Madison | -$2,795,849.86 | $45,209,737.90 | -5.8% | 95.3% | 0.0002% |
| 1813 | James Madison | $10,753,089.67 | $55,962,827.57 | 23.8% | 95.3% | 0.0002% |
| 1814 | James Madison | $25,525,018.67 | $81,487,846.24 | 45.6% | 95.3% | 0.0002% |
| 1815 | James Madison | $18,345,813.91 | $99,833,660.15 | 22.5% | 95.3% | 0.0002% |
| 1816 | James Madison | $27,501,273.59 | $127,334,933.74 | 27.5% | 95.3% | 0.0002% |
| 1817 | James Monroe | -$3,842,968.58 | $123,491,965.16 | -3.0% | -29.1% | -0.0001% |
| 1818 | James Monroe | -$20,025,331.33 | $103,466,633.83 | -16.2% | -29.1% | -0.0001% |
| 1819 | James Monroe | -$7,936,985.55 | $95,529,648.28 | -7.7% | -29.1% | -0.0001% |
| 1820 | James Monroe | -$4,514,082.13 | $91,015,566.15 | -4.7% | -29.1% | -0.0001% |
| 1821 | James Monroe | -$1,028,138.49 | $89,987,427.66 | -1.1% | -29.1% | -0.0001% |
| 1822 | James Monroe | $3,559,249.32 | $93,546,676.98 | 4.0% | -29.1% | -0.0001% |
| 1823 | James Monroe | -$2,670,799.70 | $90,875,877.28 | -2.9% | -29.1% | -0.0001% |
| 1824 | James Monroe | -$606,099.51 | $90,269,777.77 | -0.6% | -29.1% | -0.0001% |
| 1825 | John Quincy Adams | -$6,481,345.06 | $83,788,432.71 | -7.2% | -25.3% | -0.00008% |
| 1826 | John Quincy Adams | -$2,734,372.72 | $81,054,059.99 | -3.3% | -25.3% | -0.00008% |
| 1827 | John Quincy Adams | -$7,066,702.79 | $73,987,357.20 | -8.7% | -25.3% | -0.00008% |
| 1828 | John Quincy Adams | -$6,512,313.33 | $67,475,043.87 | -8.8% | -25.3% | -0.00008% |
| 1829 | Andrew Jackson | -$9,053,630.20 | $58,421,413.67 | -13.4% | -99.9% | -0.0003% |
| 1830 | Andrew Jackson | -$9,856,007.17 | $48,565,406.50 | -16.9% | -99.9% | -0.0003% |
| 1831 | Andrew Jackson | -$9,442,214.82 | $39,123,191.68 | -19.4% | -99.9% | -0.0003% |
| 1832 | Andrew Jackson | -$14,800,956.50 | $24,322,235.18 | -37.8% | -99.9% | -0.0003% |
| 1833 | Andrew Jackson | -$17,320,536.35 | $7,001,698.83 | -71.2% | -99.9% | -0.0003% |
| 1834 | Andrew Jackson | -$2,241,616.75 | $4,760,082.08 | -32.0% | -99.9% | -0.0003% |
| 1835 | Andrew Jackson | -$4,726,349.03 | $33,733.05 | -99.3% | -99.9% | -0.0003% |
| 1836 | Andrew Jackson | $3,780.00 | $37,513.05 | 11.2% | -99.9% | -0.0003% |
| 1837 | Martin Van Buren | $299,444.78 | $336,957.83 | 798.2% | 9,425.6% | 0.00001% |
| 1838 | Martin Van Buren | $2,971,166.24 | $3,308,124.07 | 881.8% | 9,425.6% | 0.00001% |
| 1839 | Martin Van Buren | $7,126,097.07 | $10,434,221.14 | 215.4% | 9,425.6% | 0.00001% |
| 1840 | Martin Van Buren | -$6,860,877.32 | $3,573,343.82 | -65.8% | 9,425.6% | 0.00001% |
| 1841 | William Henry Harrison / John Tyler | $1,677,531.72 | $5,250,875.54 | 46.9% | 556.6% | 0.00007% |
| 1842 | John Tyler | $8,343,605.19 | $13,594,480.73 | 158.9% | 556.6% | 0.00007% |
| 1843 | John Tyler | $19,148,441.27 | $32,742,922.00 | 140.9% | 556.6% | 0.00007% |
| 1844 | John Tyler | -$9,281,269.50 | $23,461,652.50 | -28.3% | 556.6% | 0.00007% |
| 1845 | James Knox Polk | -$7,536,349.49 | $15,925,303.01 | -32.1% | 100.5% | 0.00009% |
| 1846 | James Knox Polk | -$375,100.04 | $15,550,202.97 | -2.4% | 100.5% | 0.00009% |
| 1847 | James Knox Polk | $23,276,331.8 | $38,826,534.77 | 149.7% | 100.5% | 0.00009% |
| 1848 | James Knox Polk | $8,218,327.46 | $47,044,862.23 | 21.2% | 100.5% | 0.00009% |
| 1849 | Zachary Taylor | $16,016,996.46 | $63,061,858.69 | 34% | 34% | 0.00006% |
| 1850 | Millard Fillmore | $390,914.86 | $63,452,773.55 | 0.6% | 5.0% | 0.00001% |
| 1851 | Millard Fillmore | $4,852,022.47 | $68,304,796.02 | 7.6% | 5.0% | 0.00001% |
| 1852 | Millard Fillmore | -$2,105,454.31 | $66,199,341.71 | -3.1% | 5.0% | 0.00001% |
| 1853 | Franklin Pierce | -$6,396,224.01 | $59,803,117.70 | -9.7% | -51.7% | -0.0001% |
| 1854 | Franklin Pierce | -$17,560,895.28 | $42,242,222.42 | -29.4% | -51.7% | -0.0001% |
| 1855 | Franklin Pierce | -$6,655,265.86 | $35,586,956.56 | -15.8% | -51.7% | -0.0001% |
| 1856 | Franklin Pierce | -$3,614,418.66 | $31,972,537.90 | -10.2% | -51.7% | -0.0001% |
| 1857 | James Buchanan | -$3,272,706.05 | $28,699,831.85 | -10.2% | 102.8% | 0.0001% |
| 1858 | James Buchanan | $16,212,049.18 | $44,911,881.03 | 56.5% | 102.8% | 0.0001% |
| 1859 | James Buchanan | $13,584,956.85 | $58,496,837.88 | 30.2% | 102.8% | 0.0001% |
| 1860 | James Buchanan | $6,345,450.00 | $64,842,287.88 | 10.8% | 102.8% | 0.0001% |
| 1861 | Abraham Lincoln | $25,738,585.84 | $90,580,873.72 | 39.7% | 2,700.3% | 0.006% |
| 1862 | Abraham Lincoln | $433,595,538.41 | $524,176,412.13 | 478.7% | 2,700.3% | 0.006% |
| 1863 | Abraham Lincoln | $595,595,726.50 | $1,119,772,138.63 | 113.6% | 2,700.3% | 0.006% |
| 1864 | Abraham Lincoln | $696,012,231.94 | $1,815,784,370.57 | 62.2% | 2,700.3% | 0.006% |
| 1865 | Andrew Johnson | $864,863,499.17 | $2,680,647,869.74 | 47.6% | 43.8% | 0.003% |
| 1866 | Andrew Johnson | $92,588,303.95 | $2,773,236,173.69 | 3.5% | 43.8% | 0.003% |
| 1867 | Andrew Johnson | -$95,110,069.82 | $2,678,126,103.87 | -3.4% | 43.8% | 0.003% |
| 1868 | Andrew Johnson | -$66,438,252.68 | $2,611,687,851.19 | -2.5% | 43.8% | 0.003% |
| 1869 | Ulysses Simpson Grant | -$23,235,637.25 | $2,588,452,213.94 | -0.9% | -16.5% | -0.002% |
| 1870 | Ulysses Simpson Grant | -$107,779,786.13 | $2,480,672,427.81 | -4.2% | -16.5% | -0.002% |
| 1871 | Ulysses Simpson Grant | -$127,461,095.49 | $2,353,211,332.32 | -5.1% | -16.5% | -0.002% |
| 1872 | Ulysses Simpson Grant | -$99,960,003.54 | $2,253,251,328.78 | -4.2% | -16.5% | -0.002% |
| 1873 | Ulysses Simpson Grant | -$18,768,335.58 | $2,234,482,993.20 | -0.8% | -16.5% | -0.002% |
| 1874 | Ulysses Simpson Grant | $17,207,475.23 | $2,251,690,468.43 | 0.8% | -16.5% | -0.002% |
| 1875 | Ulysses Simpson Grant | -$19,405,936.48 | $2,232,284,531.95 | -0.9% | -16.5% | -0.002% |
| 1876 | Ulysses Simpson Grant | -$51,889,464.80 | $2,180,395,067.15 | -2.3% | -16.5% | -0.002% |
| 1877 | Rutherford Birchard Hayes | $24,906,324.95 | $2,205,301,392.10 | 1.1% | -2.8% | -0.0002% |
| 1878 | Rutherford Birchard Hayes | $50,904,500.43 | $2,256,205,892.53 | 2.3% | -2.8% | -0.0002% |
| 1879 | Rutherford Birchard Hayes | $93,361,589.51 | $2,349,567,482.04 | 4.1% | -2.8% | -0.0002% |
| 1880 | Rutherford Birchard Hayes | -$229,152,111.41 | $2,120,415,370.63 | -9.8% | -2.8% | -0.0002% |
| 1881 | James Abram Garfield / Chester Alan Arthur | -$51,401,801.05 | $2,069,013,569.58 | -2.4% | -13.7% | -0.001% |
| 1882 | Chester Alan Arthur | -$150,700,575.55 | $1,918,312,994.03 | -7.3% | -13.7% | -0.001% |
| 1883 | Chester Alan Arthur | -$34,141,265.96 | $1,884,171,728.07 | -1.8% | -13.7% | -0.001% |
| 1884 | Chester Alan Arthur | -$53,642,804.50 | $1,830,528,923.57 | -2.8% | -13.7% | -0.001% |
| 1885 | Grover Cleveland | $33,435,949.57 | $1,863,964,873.14 | 1.8% | -7.5% | -0.0005% |
| 1886 | Grover Cleveland | -$88,901,859.36 | $1,775,063,013.78 | -4.8% | -7.5% | -0.0005% |
| 1887 | Grover Cleveland | -$117,460,421.15 | $1,657,602,592.63 | -6.6% | -7.5% | -0.0005% |
| 1888 | Grover Cleveland | $35,256,391.95 | $1,692,858,984.58 | 2.1% | -7.5% | -0.0005% |
| 1889 | Benjamin Harrison | -$73,806,062.35 | $1,619,052,922.23 | -4.4% | -6.2% | -0.0007% |
| 1890 | Benjamin Harrison | -$66,912,717.50 | $1,552,140,204.73 | -4.1% | -6.2% | -0.0007% |
| 1891 | Benjamin Harrison | -$6,143,613.12 | $1,545,996,591.61 | -0.4% | -6.2% | -0.0007% |
| 1892 | Benjamin Harrison | $42,467,553.02 | $1,588,464,144.63 | 2.7% | -6.2% | -0.0007% |
| 1893 | Grover Cleveland | -$42,478,458.50 | $1,545,985,686.13 | -2.7% | 11.4% | 0.001% |
| 1894 | Grover Cleveland | $86,267,950.55 | $1,632,253,636.68 | 5.6% | 11.4% | 0.001% |
| 1895 | Grover Cleveland | $43,867,346.57 | $1,676,120,983.25 | 2.7% | 11.4% | 0.001% |
| 1896 | Grover Cleveland | $93,719,340.15 | $1,769,840,323.40 | 5.6% | 11.4% | 0.001% |
| 1897 | William McKinley | $47,832,342.50 | $1,817,672,665.90 | 2.7% | 20.7% | 0.001% |
| 1898 | William McKinley | -$21,140,670.00 | $1,796,531,995.90 | -1.2% | 20.7% | 0.001% |
| 1899 | William McKinley | $195,395,311.02 | $1,991,927,306.92 | 10.9% | 20.7% | 0.001% |
| 1900 | William McKinley | $145,033,784.75 | $2,136,961,091.67 | 7.3% | 20.7% | 0.001% |
| 1901 | Theodore Roosevelt | $6,365,842.22 | $2,143,326,933.89 | 0.3% | 22.9% | 0.002% |
| 1902 | Theodore Roosevelt | $15,283,512.00 | $2,158,610,445.89 | 0.7% | 22.9% | 0.002% |
| 1903 | Theodore Roosevelt | $43,854,336.00 | $2,202,464,781.89 | 2.0% | 22.9% | 0.002% |
| 1904 | Theodore Roosevelt | $61,538,803.25 | $2,264,003,585.14 | 2.8% | 22.9% | 0.002% |
| 1905 | Theodore Roosevelt | $10,611,478.70 | $2,274,615,063.84 | 0.5% | 22.9% | 0.002% |
| 1906 | Theodore Roosevelt | $62,546,775.20 | $2,337,161,839.04 | 2.7% | 22.9% | 0.002% |
| 1907 | Theodore Roosevelt | $120,026,222.50 | $2,457,188,061.54 | 5.1% | 22.9% | 0.002% |
| 1908 | Theodore Roosevelt | $169,618,210.00 | $2,626,806,271.54 | 6.9% | 22.9% | 0.002% |
| 1909 | William Howard Taft | $12,739,969.50 | $2,639,546,241.04 | 0.5% | 9.2% | 0.0009% |
| 1910 | William Howard Taft | $13,119,597.00 | $2,652,665,838.04 | 0.5% | 9.2% | 0.0009% |
| 1911 | William Howard Taft | $112,934,768.65 | $2,765,600,606.69 | 4.3% | 9.2% | 0.0009% |
| 1912 | William Howard Taft | $102,773,267.47 | $2,868,373,874.16 | 3.7% | 9.2% | 0.0009% |
| 1913 | Woodrow Wilson | $47,831,039.50 | $2,916,204,913.66 | 1.7% | 804.8% | 0.09% |
| 1914 | Woodrow Wilson | -$3,705,644.50 | $2,912,499,269.16 | -0.1% | 804.8% | 0.09% |
| 1915 | Woodrow Wilson | $145,637,604.00 | $3,058,136,873.16 | 5.0% | 804.8% | 0.09% |
| 1916 | Woodrow Wilson | $551,107,389.00 | $3,609,244,262.16 | 18.0% | 804.8% | 0.09% |
| 1917 | Woodrow Wilson | $2,108,526,017.36 | $5,717,770,279.52 | 58.4% | 804.8% | 0.09% |
| 1918 | Woodrow Wilson | $8,874,391,134.48 | $14,592,161,414.00 | 155.2% | 804.8% | 0.09% |
| 1919 | Woodrow Wilson | $12,798,808,699.12 | $27,390,970,113.12 | 87.7% | 804.8% | 0.09% |
| 1920 | Woodrow Wilson | -$1,438,513,706.96 | $25,952,456,406.16 | -5.3% | 804.8% | 0.09% |
| 1921 | Warren Gamaliel Harding | -$1,975,005,853.62 | $23,977,450,552.54 | -7.6% | -11.5% | -0.01% |
| 1922 | Warren Gamaliel Harding | -$1,014,068,844.23 | $22,963,381,708.31 | -4.2% | -11.5% | -0.01% |
| 1923 | Calvin Coolidge | -$613,674,342.95 | $22,349,707,365.36 | -2.7% | -23.3% | -0.02% |
| 1924 | Calvin Coolidge | -$1,098,894,375.87 | $21,250,812,989.49 | -4.9% | -23.3% | -0.02% |
| 1925 | Calvin Coolidge | -$734,619,101.59 | $20,516,193,887.90 | -3.5% | -23.3% | -0.02% |
| 1926 | Calvin Coolidge | -$872,977,572.71 | $19,643,216,315.19 | -4.3% | -23.3% | -0.02% |
| 1927 | Calvin Coolidge | -$1,131,309,383.34 | $18,511,906,931.85 | -5.8% | -23.3% | -0.02% |
| 1928 | Calvin Coolidge | -$907,613,730.42 | $17,604,293,201.43 | -4.9% | -23.3% | -0.02% |
| 1929 | Herbert Clark Hoover | -$673,204,717.33 | $16,931,088,484.10 | -3.8% | 10.7% | 0.007% |
| 1930 | Herbert Clark Hoover | -$745,778,652.67 | $16,185,309,831.43 | -4.4% | 10.7% | 0.007% |
| 1931 | Herbert Clark Hoover | $615,971,660.28 | $16,801,281,491.71 | 3.8% | 10.7% | 0.007% |
| 1932 | Herbert Clark Hoover | $2,685,720,952.42 | $19,487,002,444.13 | 16.0% | 10.7% | 0.007% |
| 1933 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $3,051,670,116.02 | $22,538,672,560.15 | 15.7% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1934 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $4,514,468,854.33 | $27,053,141,414.48 | 20.0% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1935 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $1,647,751,210.05 | $28,700,892,624.53 | 6.1% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1936 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $5,077,650,869.20 | $33,778,543,493.73 | 17.7% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1937 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $2,646,070,238.56 | $36,424,613,732.29 | 7.8% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1938 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $740,126,583.16 | $37,164,740,315.45 | 2.0% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1939 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $3,274,792,095.66 | $40,439,532,411.11 | 8.8% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1940 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $2,527,998,626.57 | $42,967,531,037.68 | 6.3% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1941 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $5,993,912,498.03 | $48,961,443,535.71 | 13.9% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1942 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $23,461,001,580.51 | $72,422,445,116.22 | 47.9% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1943 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $64,273,645,213.68 | $136,696,090,329.90 | 88.7% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1944 | Franklin Delano Roosevelt | $64,307,296,891.23 | $201,003,387,221.13 | 47.0% | 931.5% | 0.67% |
| 1945 | Harry S Truman | $57,678,800,188.80 | $258,682,187,409.93 | 28.7% | 28.9% | 0.22% |
| 1946 | Harry S Truman | $10,739,911,763.33 | $269,422,099,173.26 | 4.2% | 28.9% | 0.22% |
| 1947 | Harry S Truman | -$11,135,716,064.59 | $258,286,383,108.67 | -4.1% | 28.9% | 0.22% |
| 1948 | Harry S Truman | -$5,994,136,595.68 | $252,292,246,512.99 | -2.3% | 28.9% | 0.22% |
| 1949 | Harry S Truman | $478,113,347.34 | $252,770,359,860.33 | 0.2% | 28.9% | 0.22% |
| 1950 | Harry S Truman | $4,586,992,490.71 | $257,357,352,351.04 | 1.8% | 28.9% | 0.22% |
| 1951 | Harry S Truman | -$2,135,375,536.11 | $255,221,976,814.93 | -0.8% | 28.9% | 0.22% |
| 1952 | Harry S Truman | $3,883,201,970.50 | $259,105,178,785.43 | 1.5% | 28.9% | 0.22% |
| 1953 | Dwight David Eisenhower | $6,965,882,853.14 | $266,071,061,638.57 | 2.7% | 10.5% | 0.1% |
| 1954 | Dwight David Eisenhower | $5,188,537,469.89 | $271,259,599,108.46 | 2.0% | 10.5% | 0.1% |
| 1955 | Dwight David Eisenhower | $3,114,623,694.16 | $274,374,222,802.62 | 1.1% | 10.5% | 0.1% |
| 1956 | Dwight David Eisenhower | -$1,623,409,153.30 | $272,750,813,649.32 | -0.6% | 10.5% | 0.1% |
| 1957 | Dwight David Eisenhower | -$2,223,641,752.89 | $270,527,171,896.43 | -0.8% | 10.5% | 0.1% |
| 1958 | Dwight David Eisenhower | $5,816,045,849.38 | $276,343,217,745.81 | 2.1% | 10.5% | 0.1% |
| 1959 | Dwight David Eisenhower | $8,362,689,332.41 | $284,705,907,078.22 | 3.0% | 10.5% | 0.1% |
| 1960 | Dwight David Eisenhower | $1,624,853,770.15 | $286,330,760,848.37 | 0.6% | 10.5% | 0.1% |
| 1961 | John Fitzgerald Kennedy | $2,640,177,761.68 | $288,970,938,610.05 | 0.9% | 6.8% | 0.07% |
| 1962 | John Fitzgerald Kennedy | $9,229,884,110.82 | $298,200,822,720.87 | 3.2% | 6.8% | 0.07% |
| 1963 | John Fitzgerald Kennedy / Lyndon Baines Johnson | $7,658,810,275.54 | $305,859,632,996.41 | 2.6% | 6.8% | 0.07% |
| 1964 | Lyndon Baines Johnson | $5,853,266,260.89 | $311,712,899,257.30 | 1.9% | 13.6% | 0.15% |
| 1965 | Lyndon Baines Johnson | $5,560,999,726.34 | $317,273,898,983.64 | 1.8% | 13.6% | 0.15% |
| 1966 | Lyndon Baines Johnson | $2,633,188,811.84 | $319,907,087,795.48 | 0.8% | 13.6% | 0.15% |
| 1967 | Lyndon Baines Johnson | $6,313,849,999.06 | $326,220,937,794.54 | 2.0% | 13.6% | 0.15% |
| 1968 | Lyndon Baines Johnson | $21,357,468,631.34 | $347,578,406,425.88 | 6.5% | 13.6% | 0.15% |
| 1969 | Richard Milhous Nixon | $6,141,847,415.53 | $353,720,253,841.41 | 1.8% | 31.8% | 0.4% |
| 1970 | Richard Milhous Nixon | $17,198,453,108.52 | $370,918,706,949.93 | 4.9% | 31.8% | 0.4% |
| 1971 | Richard Milhous Nixon | $27,211,037,505.61 | $398,129,744,455.54 | 7.3% | 31.8% | 0.4% |
| 1972 | Richard Milhous Nixon | $29,130,716,484.96 | $427,260,460,940.50 | 7.3% | 31.8% | 0.4% |
| 1973 | Richard Milhous Nixon | $30,881,144,371.59 | $458,141,605,312.09 | 7.2% | 31.8% | 0.4% |
| 1974 | Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr | $16,918,210,419.46 | $475,059,815,731.55 | 3.7% | 35.4% | 0.6% |
| 1975 | Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr | $58,129,184,268.45 | *$533,189,000,000.00 | 12.2% | 35.4% | 0.6% |
| 1976 | Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr | $87,244,000,000.00 | *$620,433,000,000.00 | 16.4% | 35.4% | 0.6% |
| 1977 | James Earl Carter | $78,407,000,000.00 | *$698,840,000,000.00 | 12.6% | 46.3% | 1.07% |
| 1978 | James Earl Carter | $72,704,000,000.00 | *$771,544,000,000.00 | 10.4% | 46.3% | 1.07% |
| 1979 | James Earl Carter | $54,975,000,000.00 | *$826,519,000,000.00 | 7.1% | 46.3% | 1.07% |
| 1980 | James Earl Carter | $81,182,000,000.00 | *$907,701,000,000.00 | 9.8% | 46.3% | 1.07% |
| 1981 | Ronald Wilson Reagan | $90,154,000,000.00 | *$997,855,000,000.00 | 9.9% | 186.7% | 6.29% |
| 1982 | Ronald Wilson Reagan | $144,179,000,000.00 | *$1,142,034,000,000.00 | 14.4% | 186.7% | 6.29% |
| 1983 | Ronald Wilson Reagan | $235,176,000,000.00 | *$1,377,210,000,000.00 | 20.6% | 186.7% | 6.29% |
| 1984 | Ronald Wilson Reagan | $195,056,000,000.00 | *$1,572,266,000,000.00 | 14.2% | 186.7% | 6.29% |
| 1985 | Ronald Wilson Reagan | $250,837,000,000.00 | *$1,823,103,000,000.00 | 16.0% | 186.7% | 6.29% |
| 1986 | Ronald Wilson Reagan | $302,199,616,658.42 | $2,125,302,616,658.42 | 16.6% | 186.7% | 6.29% |
| 1987 | Ronald Wilson Reagan | $224,974,274,294.58 | $2,350,276,890,953.00 | 10.6% | 186.7% | 6.29% |
| 1988 | Ronald Wilson Reagan | $252,060,821,088.16 | $2,602,337,712,041.16 | 10.7% | 186.7% | 6.29% |
| 1989 | George Herbert Walker Bush | $255,093,248,146.16 | $2,857,430,960,187.32 | 9.8% | 56.2% | 5.43% |
| 1990 | George Herbert Walker Bush | $375,882,491,589.93 | $3,233,313,451,777.25 | 13.2% | 56.2% | 5.43% |
| 1991 | George Herbert Walker Bush | $431,989,899,919.78 | $3,665,303,351,697.03 | 13.4% | 56.2% | 5.43% |
| 1992 | George Herbert Walker Bush | $399,317,303,824.63 | $4,064,620,655,521.66 | 10.9% | 56.2% | 5.43% |
| 1993 | William Jefferson Clinton | $346,868,227,617.72 | $4,411,488,883,139.38 | 8.5% | 39.6% | 5.97% |
| 1994 | William Jefferson Clinton | $281,261,026,873.94 | $4,692,749,910,013.32 | 6.4% | 39.6% | 5.97% |
| 1995 | William Jefferson Clinton | $281,232,990,696.07 | $4,973,982,900,709.39 | 6.0% | 39.6% | 5.97% |
| 1996 | William Jefferson Clinton | $250,828,038,426.34 | $5,224,810,939,135.73 | 5.0% | 39.6% | 5.97% |
| 1997 | William Jefferson Clinton | $188,335,072,261.61 | $5,413,146,011,397.34 | 3.6% | 39.6% | 5.97% |
| 1998 | William Jefferson Clinton | $113,046,997,500.28 | $5,526,193,008,897.62 | 2.1% | 39.6% | 5.97% |
| 1999 | William Jefferson Clinton | $130,077,892,717.81 | $5,656,270,901,615.43 | 2.4% | 39.6% | 5.97% |
| 2000 | William Jefferson Clinton | $17,907,308,271.43 | $5,674,178,209,886.86 | 0.3% | 39.6% | 5.97% |
| 2001 | George Walker Bush | $133,285,202,313.20 | $5,807,463,412,200.06 | 2.3% | 76.7% | 16.15% |
| 2002 | George Walker Bush | $420,772,553,397.10 | $6,228,235,965,597.16 | 7.2% | 76.7% | 16.15% |
| 2003 | George Walker Bush | $554,995,097,146.46 | $6,783,231,062,743.62 | 8.9% | 76.7% | 16.15% |
| 2004 | George Walker Bush | $595,821,633,586.70 | $7,379,052,696,330.32 | 8.8% | 76.7% | 16.15% |
| 2005 | George Walker Bush | $553,656,965,393.18 | $7,932,709,661,723.50 | 7.5% | 76.7% | 16.15% |
| 2006 | George Walker Bush | $574,264,237,491.73 | $8,506,973,899,215.23 | 7.2% | 76.7% | 16.15% |
| 2007 | George Walker Bush | $500,679,473,047.25 | $9,007,653,372,262.48 | 5.9% | 76.7% | 16.15% |
| 2008 | George Walker Bush | $1,017,071,524,650.01 | $10,024,724,896,912.49 | 11.3% | 76.7% | 16.15% |
| 2009 | Barack Hussein Obama | $1,885,104,106,599.26 | $11,909,829,003,511.75 | 18.8% | 95.3% | 27.64% |
| 2010 | Barack Hussein Obama | $1,651,794,027,380.04 | $13,561,623,030,891.79 | 13.9% | 95.3% | 27.64% |
| 2011 | Barack Hussein Obama | $1,228,717,297,665.36 | $14,790,340,328,557.15 | 9.1% | 95.3% | 27.64% |
| 2012 | Barack Hussein Obama | $1,275,901,078,828.74 | $16,066,241,407,385.89 | 8.6% | 95.3% | 27.64% |
| 2013 | Barack Hussein Obama | $671,942,119,311.43 | $16,738,183,526,697.32 | 4.2% | 95.3% | 27.64% |
| 2014 | Barack Hussein Obama | $1,085,887,854,036.50 | $17,824,071,380,733.82 | 6.5% | 95.3% | 27.64% |
| 2015 | Barack Hussein Obama | $326,546,285,750.51 | $18,150,617,666,484.33 | 1.8% | 95.3% | 27.64% |
| 2016 | Barack Hussein Obama | $1,241,086,361,182.79 | $19,573,444,713,936.79 | 7.8% | 95.3% | 27.64% |
| 2017 | Donald John Trump | $671,455,302,116.72 | $20,244,900,016,053.51 | 3.4% | 37.7% | 21.34% |
| 2018 | Donald John Trump | $1,362,048,367,492.77 | $21,606,948,383,546.28 | 6.3% | 37.7% | 21.34% |
| 2019 | Donald John Trump | $420,475,731,272.32 | $22,027,424,114,818.60 | 1.9% | 37.7% | 21.34% |
| 2020 | Donald John Trump | $4,917,967,079,796.55 | $26,945,391,194,615.15 | 18.25% | 37.7% | 21.34% |
| 2021 | Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. | $1,483,527,375,433.53 | $28,428,918,570,048.60 | 5.5% | 28.23% | 22.02% |
| 2022 | Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. | $2,499,993,043,258.10 | $30,928,911,613,306.70 | 8.79% | 28.23% | 22.02% |
| 2023 | Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. | $2,238,422,431,416.50 | $33,167,334,044,723.20 | 7.24% | 28.23% | 22.02% |
| 2024 (so far) | Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. | $1,384,828,074,124.70 | $34,552,162,118,847.90 | 4.18% | 28.23% | 22.02% |
Pingback: What’s Wrong With The GOP? – Random Musings
I just read an article by Hans Sennholz written in 1972 where he made projections as to what the national debt would be in 1973, 1983 and 1993 and he was pretty well bang on. Why didn’t anybody listen to him?
Why? The only thing we learn from history is that no one learns anything from history.
Yes, but you have to be smart to be able to comprehend History… . the same way most of us follow sports, this Presidential election cycle is just about winning or loosing!
Only the politicians, media and state employees are concerned about their careers.
Taxes, Health care, national debt going out of control it is just part of the game, The sad part is that soon very soon in Nov a bunch of us will be on the street the screaming “we won” without knowing WHAT!
Have now idea what we people have won or lost. All I can do is Pray that the Almighty God Lead our leaders and that they have some desire to follow Him (God not Trump)
Think you meant Trump not God, stop spreading your fairytales
interesting how there’s so many Trump haters on here however anyone that has basic math skills or an idea of what accounting is can look at the numbers and see that Obama put us in over 7.4 trillion dollars of additional debt. the news wants to bash Trump for the debt going over 22 trillion however if you look at the numbers Obama came in at just under 12 trillion and left at just under 20 trillion. Do the math folks this website put all the numbers out there for you and math is the only thing that doesn’t have an opinion attached to it. Numbers are numbers and facts are facts. it would appear as though people on here need to educate themselves before spreading their opinions. I don’t care who you do when you don’t like but again numbers don’t lie
Smart man! Couldn’t have said it better myself.
I think we need a way to communicate the importance of trend lines. That is the part of this data that is Meaningful. Math and economics education is important. The trends here follow 2 clear patterns. Republicans increasing deficit spending and Wars increasing deficit spending. In every Democratic Administration deficit spending has moved in the right direction. In times of peace deficit spending has moved in the right direction.
The question is how do we make this into common knowledge?
I think it is very easy to read this data and come to the wrong conclusions.
The Great War and World War II appeared to have driven us into the billions column, but the trillions have come from the neocon wars, beginning with Vietnam. After this point there is a detectable pattern that is different from what came before. I would like to see the columns in this table better aligned, so as to make it easier to separate millions, billions and trillions. I would also like to see a visualization such as a line graph to show these trend lines in a way that humans can easily consume. I am sure there are other trends that I am not smart enough to have detected without such visual representations.
I would like to thank the owner of this website for taking the time to post this very valuable data.
Democrats were responsible for escalating the Vietnam war..wasn’t Lyndon Johnson a Democrat? What political party was FDR in? Weren’t the Depression years of the 1930’s in a time of Peace for the nation? The debt only grew in those years with the birth of some serious social spending–some of those programs are still with us…
Our debt exploded much in the way Capitalism did in the 80’s. The debt went from 990B when RR took office. After 12 years between him and GHB. The debt was now 3B. It has come close to doubled with every President. The problem as I see it is no one has the stomach to tax people the way they should be taxed. We built a Middle Class from 1933-1981 and top bracket was at least 70%. No one seems to get the danger about this other than those commenting here. How do we wake people up?
If America is to elect Hillary Clinton as president she will go the same path as her predecessors which will set the country’s economy back to what it was like in the Great Depression but it will be 100 times worse but Donald trump could turn the country around.He may have filed for bankruptcy but he can pull the country out of debt he did it with his company for times but don’t take my word for it I’m not even American I’m a 15 year old kid from Canada
You’re Canadian? Can we send you Trump?
Yesss
Nah, we want Trump. But feel free to move. =]
I’m totally ok with you going to canada.
Another win for Trump!!
Well 2017 has ended and Trump has been in office a year now (nearly) and time to look at our nation’s debt and what has been added in the last year.
$671,455,302,116.72 was added to our nation’s debt. Although it looks bad at first glance it can be debated just how much is due to Obama and how much is due to Trump. Also the debt hasn’t went up such a small amount sense 2007, and considering Obama added an average of $1,033,372,391,344.33 per year and added $1,241,086,361,182.79 his last year in office I would call this a win.
Good job kid. You sound like you are very intelligent. Keep up with the good work. In other words, “YOU GO BOY!”
You are awesome
A smart 15 year old Canadian! Ever think of going into finance? Teaching others what this means?
Keep your opinions in Canada, nerd.
Last time I checked it shouldn’t matter where you’re from if you’re speaking the truth. I’m a born and raised American citizen and I stand on this Canadian side. Oh and just so you know it’s always better to be a nerd than an ignorant opinionated name caller.
Obviously you were too young to remember what our country was like at the end of the last Republican administration. Look it up.
The housing bubble was caused by Bill Clinton’s sub-prime mortgage law after he repealed a law outlawing them. Which means that liberal policies caused the crash of 2008. Nice try though.
Unfortunately Erin that myth has been Debunked. We now know that failure to regulate the banking system was the culpret. look up the repeal of the Glass Steagal act . The whole mess was driven by the private sector with major investment banks at the core of the problam because they were no lnger subjet to banking regulations. simply put greed caused it. Conservatives have falsely put the blame on US 9 specifically Bill Clinton as you have above. So I ask you this … if it was the result of Clintons sub prime mortgage law WHY then did Europe also experience a housing bubble ?
Sorry, Trump paid pennies on the dollar when he walked out of court after bankruptcy
Maybe that could be a way he could save America from the Obama debt. Though that’s probably just wishful thinking.
And I don’t see any confirmation of that “pennies on the dollar”, like a internet web page link.
What a load of excrement!
I just want to say a couple things. First you said that trump pulled his company out of debt FOR times. You said for not four, which weakens your argument. Also the United States’ government is not a business, and you can’t run it as such. For one the U.S. government makes some of its own money by, making it from raw materials. The U.S. also gets its money from people, but not in the way that Trump would get from his hotels. You have to use taxes; which are a lot more complicated than hotel fees. Money is not everything though, you have to also make laws; which is also way different than hotel rules. You also have to chose whether or not to get involved in a conflict or not. Therefore he might be one of the worst presidents to come to office. Or he could be a savior for America; you can never truly predict the future.
yes you can run it as a business. It is one big business for the American people to prosper, which the democratic party does not want. Why? The democratic party wants to oppress and control the people, that is why so many people fell from middle class status to poverty status under the abomination of Barrack! At least under trump and running it like a business we are getting so many of the people that went into the poverty level under Obama, are getting they’re middle class status back and more! This doesn’t fit well with the rich elitist of the democratic party! And the Housing crash of 2008 was a direct result of the failed policy passed by Bill Clinton before he left office! Facts are facts! But lately facts have become lies to the democratic people, and their lies have become facts! Just do not understand the stupidity of the democratic party!
Just remember by nature ALL Corporations are Dictatorship’s…and Trump is (was)a CEO in a Corporation…so what does that say as to where our nation is heading towards.
👏👏👏
Ok. So we shouldn’t learn history because people don’t learn history? Yeah. That really makes sense.
If you continue reading these comments you will find many parrots who just repeat what they hear from Hannity and Rush.
If you continue to spout off ignorant comments such as this, you will show your level of grade school education.
i guess the ruth hurts you
Cause it’s easy to spend other people’s money trying to make yourself look great.
For almost 20 years people have been saying PUERTO RICO was going bankrupt… Now they’re bankrupt.
lol, love this comment.
Trump is a moron, it is well documented.
Care to provide said documentation, troll? =]
Move your ass to Venezuela, commie.
National debt in 1865 in today’s dollar would be over 38 trillion.
As virtually all my still-living friends know, I made a rather infamous (college professors and others said I was insane then) speech in 1974, in which I said that the turn of the 21st Century would see the first of the fiscal collapses, a more than half a trillion dollar version of the Federal Reserve Act swindle, and that federal liberalism and feminism spending debt would reach thirty trillion dollars. I first in 1967 said the LBJ socialism was the cancer cell planted and that it would eventually kill the U.S. (I predicted in an essay written then in college the shattering of the nation by secession, also). I’m currently writing a history of the US during my lifetime (1936-present), and I will again cite the reasons and mathematics I used all these decades ago.
Here’s the interesting thing. If Trump, as a better than average businessman, is elected and he could figure out a way to knock $1Billion per day off of the national debt…..that’s 365B per year. It would take him over 25.5 years to get rid of the debt that Barack Obama is responsible for. Yes Sir, he promised change and we got it……..he has mortgaged our children’s future for at least the next 3 generations.
You got your wires crossed, fella. Just look at the numbers above and you will see why. Under Reagan and Daddy Bush the national debt QUADRUPLED. Under Baby Bush’s tax bill which lasted twelve years before President Oabama could get it changed, the national debt TRIPLED again. Whether Trump is a better than average businessman is quite debatable, since he probably holds the world’s record for bankruptcies. The results of his proposed tax bill is not debatable. His tax cut for the rich would ADD an additional trillion dollars per year to the debt.
Yawn you better stop blaming others and just look at the figures maybe obozo should not have borrowed money. Facts are facts. Obozo stated 10 in debt and HE singlehand almost double it. For all general purposes you could say he did double it it was only a couple of billion from that point. I see you get your nickname from obozo math
Mmhm, and bush also brought it from 5trillion to 10 trillion, Reagan brought us from less than 1trillion to over 2trillion, yet so many conservatives praise the him. In fact, Obama has lowered the national deficit (not debt) by almost 50%. Raegan on the other hand doubled it.
This fiscal year ends in 9 days. The deficit is projected at $1.4 Trillion. What is this 50% lower than? Every year of Obama’s presidency has been a record deficit year, every one.
Let’s not forget bush doubled his during very affluent times. Obama has a world economic disaster left by previous poor American toxic loans to deal with
Bush, Obama, Clinton
Same cloth!
Dude do u hear yourself talk dick…. he raised it 10 trillion u fucking moron…….
@Lui56, Yes President Reagan did theoretically double the debt HOWEVER, you must take in to consideration that after the LBJ, Nixon, Ford & Carter administrations our defense had been depleted to a worse state than it is today. I know that for a fact I served under the Nixon, Ford, Carter & Reagan administrations on active duty. We never could fire our weapons (NO AMMO) couldn’t train and more than half of out combat vehicles (land, sea & air) were NOT FUNCTIONAL. Couple that with pay raises for military personnel in .05-1,5% per year devastated moral. But during the same time federal, state and local gov. free loaders (some call them workers) got extravagant raises in pay, benefits and all other manor of goodies.
Reagan’s increases in debt WERE JUSTIFIED, Carter, LBJ, Clinton, Maobama WERE NOT!!!
You do know that a country in recession needs a greater investment from the government. Therefore regardless of who is President, the deficits and the national debt will increase.
That’s the belief of Keynesian economists, who think that actually works, but that has never been proven to actually work. Usually, greater investment from government (ie – more government spending) makes things much worse. It causes inflation and it provides for the mirage that things are better, but in reality, the economy is stagnant with only government spending propping it up.
This is exactly what’s happening in the US, right now. Government has “invested” trillions of dollars into the market, which has inflated the DOW. That’s good for stock holders/investors, but it’s not necessarily good for anyone else. We still have a record number of people on food stamps, a record number of people not in the job market, a $19 trillion dollar debt, and once the Fed increases interest rates to normal levels, you’re going to see record inflation.
If we followed Smithian/Hayekian/Austrian economics (something that has been proven to work), we would see economic ups and downs, but they would be natural. The economy will always recover in a free market. Once the government gets involved, everything just gets worse.
Geez, comments like this last truly stink.
Now, the govt NEEDS to borrow trillions to help people?
We do not need this kind of help.
This “help” only hurts everyone.
Go to some (any) govt office and preach your nonsense to them.
So we have been in a recession for the past 40 years? That doesnt sound right.
We have been in a recession for the past 8? That doesnt sound right either. I get what you are saying, but based on all economic data, we are nit and have not been in an 8-year recession that explains the debt increase.
Paying for illegal personal wars hasn’t helped us at all… Still no AUMF! Congress turned down Obama last 2 years, Hillary didn’t ask as SOS… She just did it, then “Lost $6B!?!”
How does one go about losing $6B???
#Crazy #GottaStop
Actually the debt was at 8.5 when the democrats took over in 2006
the main point is this – it took until 1980, essentially 200 years to grow the national debt to 1 trillion; now in 2016, its apparently 16+ trillion. Thus in 40 years, we have grown the national debt over 16 times what it took the first 200 years to grow it. In that 40 years, we have had 20 years of solid Arther Laffer style economics. But yet we keep flirting with it. Isn’t time to admit the truth? Isn’t time to go back to when a Republican actually believed in a balanced budget? When would that have been ? By the way, I welcome SERIOUS discussions only. thornton dot richard at gmail dot com.
I suggest you study up on who balanced the budget in the second Clinton term. FYI, Newt and the republicans created the budget, Clinton just signed the budget bill. So to answer your question, the last balanced budget was a Republican budget.
FYI the national debt in 1865, in today’s dollar would be 38 trillion.
Who ties your shoes in the morning?
The problem with your argument is that you’re talking about doubled or tripled, when you should be looking at real dollars. Reagan added about $1.5 billion to the national debt. Obama has added almost $10 billion. Inflation doesn’t account for that kind of increase.
I believed you meant trillion not billion. Regarding the difference between Reagan and Obama, the first did not inherited two wars. However, Obama did, and wars are costly.
Have you never heard of the Cold War? USA vs USSR? That was a very costly war that the USA won.
Why did the cold war cost Reagan so much more than it cost Carter?
It seems that too many people in America, overlook what the Reagan Adm started, and what the Obama Adm, inherited! What Reagan began w/Military spending, trickled all the way into the future, through various Admins, to where it became Obama’s inherited situation. And many are trying to put it on one persons shoulders. This atmosphere was in place long before “The Man of Color” became “The Man of Color in the White House” But that to many U S Citizens, is pretty much impossible to accept, or comprehend! You guys, have a nice day! 🙂 🙂 🙂
Are you REALLY a math teacher? I only ask because it seems like you are having trouble comparing apples to oranges… and you should… real dollars only count when the time frame is closer… percentages yield more relevant info over longer courses of time (c’mon you know that)… otherwise George Washingtons $2500/yr salary looks paltry compared to George Bushs salary of $400k per year, yet has about $1M buying power for the era…
Finally somebody who went to math class. You’re spot on!
I knew it! The enormous debt amassed under Obama is GWB’s fault. Just like everything else that’s happened during Obama’s administration. I expect the same government by excuses from Hillary.
Obama has nearly doubled our debt since 2009.
I’m certainly no fan of Obama by any stretch of the imagination, but they all pass the debt along to the next guy like a hot potato and hope the economy doesn’t crash on their watch. If Trump tried to pay down the debt at all, he would be the first president I even knew to try and take any positive steps in it’s reduction.
Andrew Jackson, who had a limited education, paid off the entire national debt.
This Presidential election cycle is just about winning or loosing!
Only the politicians, media and state employees are concerned about their careers.
Taxes, Health care, national debt going out of control it is just part of the game, The sad part is that soon very soon in Nov a bunch of us will be on the street the screaming “we won” without knowing WHAT!
Smarmy elite libs talking down to folks — what a surprise. You might help solve more problems if you stopped being so condescending when inarguably the debt problem is your creation and Hillary will do nothing to solve it.
Think you need to re-read the list, it clearly show it was under Obama the the debt grew much greater than under bush!
Yes, because the damage was done just before obama took over the debt went up then like a ripple effect from the market crash and the mortgage collapses under the bush administration You see towards the end of Obamas term the economy is picking up and unmployment rate going down. A president is working a few years from the previous president. Trump will look good for a couple years
Thanks for you remarks. I’m currently writing a history of the US during my lifetime, and must note that you overlook forty years of socialist Democrat control of congress after the fifties. You also omit characteristically the rest of the considerations a historian and/or economist makes. For reasons you are perhaps unable to meaningfully understand (and inasmuch as every proposition must in order to be explained be reduced to the listener’s level of understanding), you are failing to hear what the Democrat Party post John Kennedy has been proclaiming to the wide world – that those with money are fair game for pandering politicians and for government controlled by pandering politicians. A foundering father, Benjamin Franklin, said that when that happened it would “herald the end of the republic.” Virtually all of the founding fathers feared that one thing more than all else. My first two voted for president, incidentally, were for Kennedy and Johnson, and I was reared by and among staunch supporters of the Democrat Party. Thanks, however, for your remarks here: they are most useful to me as an example of what H.L. Mencken called “the zoo run from the monkey cage.” It’s the reason democracy never lasts long, in other words.
Any tax cut is for the rich, the bottom half of wage earners pay less than 3% of the Federal Income Taxes collected by the IRS. The top 1% of wage earners pay more than 30% of all Income Taxes Collected. The rest of the top 10% of wage earners pay more than 31% of all Income Taxes Collected. The rest of the top 25% of wage earners pay about 16% of all Income Taxes Collected. The rest of the top 50% of wage earners pay about 10.5% of all Income Taxes Collected.
Yes, but Trump isn’t promising any reduction in the debt. In the contrary, his proposed tax cuts, pension increases, defense additions and other promises of government “help” will cost the country trillions more than Hillary’s tax plan. I don’t like either, but it’s very clear Trump would spend more and take in less that Hilary.
Simon, tax cuts have proven time and time again to increase the amount of revenue the government takes in, in taxes. The reason is that businesses are free to grow, entrepreneurs are more emboldened to start businesses, and more people are put to work. The economy grows and the government benefits.
He’s promised to eliminate wasteful spending, he has said that he’d like to eliminate the federal reach of the DOE, which would bring it back home to the states and local municipalities. He’d stop funding terrorist organizations (through our support of terror nations, like Iran & the Saudis) and nation building in other countries, he’d re-negotiate trade agreements (China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Mexico, NAFTA) and hopefully eliminate the idea of TPP.
Trump is an anti-Globalist, so hopefully he’d do a lot to eliminate our wasteful spending elsewhere and concentrate on us.
As for his defense strategy: He’s playing the Reagan card – “Peace through Strength.” With a rebuilt military, we would likely not have to go to war with many of our enemies, because the idea with going to war with the largest, strongest military in the world is a bad one. Many of our enemies have become emboldened under an Obama presidency, due to his laissez-faire attitude toward our military and enemies.
Thank you. Well said
Thank you Maxine. =]
It is shocking that our US national Debt has almost doubled now to $20 Trillion Dollars since our current president has done shocking events for almost 8 years now. The FBI doesn’t always do what they are supposed to do, and there are many illegal events, including illegal immigrants who are allowed to stay here for some odd reason. Upon the Clinton election, there were unfortunately several woman who were raped and the FBI did not arrest the person who did that. And now that Hillary has been noted for thousands of improper e-mail events, that still has not yet actually been affected by the FBI. Why not? The other potential event that might now happen is that certainly by surprisingly supported by both of the Obama’s, it might very much be the case that many of our current problems are going to be kept and maybe increased by Hillary. She has in fact said that she will allow a huge amount of refugees to come to America, which of course will again hugely increase our costs here, instead of doing something helpful for all of the legal citizens here. The supposedly affordable care act, certainly is not affordable. I was paying about $325 per day with Kaiser, and as soon as the new care act was put in place my cost was increased to almost $500. The other surprise was that because the Democrats were in charge of approving it by vote, it was reported that they never did actually read the document to actually know what they were going to approve, but they still did!
Kevin, you are selling the trickled down economy principle that has been prove wrong many times. The economy grows when consumers have money to spend. No entrepreneur will build or expand a business just because he has money available. Is there no profits to be made they won’t do it.
I’m selling Smithian/Hayekian/Austrian economics, which has been proven to work, time and time again. How do you think America became the most prosperous and generous country this world has ever seen in less than 200yrs? It wasn’t Keynesian economics or government spending, that’s for sure. It was the free market and the spirit of the entrepreneur.
When you alleviate the tax burden on the citizens of the country, you’re freeing them of soft tyranny (to borrow a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville). Entrepreneurship is rarely seen in heavily taxed countries, which we are now among. There’s literally no chance to invest in yourself, when you’re beholden to an oppressive regime.
When you alleviate the tax burden on businesses, those businesses begin to grow, and the costs of their products begin to lower. Most people who don’t believe in “trickle down economics” (a term coined by liberals), also fail to see that taxes are built into the product that businesses produce/sell, making them less affordable for the individual.
It’s human nature to want to succeed. Success is determined by many things, but in business, it’s growth. What happens when businesses grow? They begin to hire more employees. What happens when more employees are hired? Less people are looking for work/unemployed/on food stamps/etc. What also happens? People who didn’t have much money before, now have money to spend. The economy moves forward.
After Reagan’s tenure and his passage of policies effecting the economy, we saw a decade of economic growth. Just look at what happened. We had the PC boom, the internet boom, we had some of the biggest, most prosperous companies grow out of that decade. In effect, we had hundreds/thousands of tech companies pop up to supply the demand for these new services/tech.
The free market works.
I’d like to ask you how Trump plans to do all those things you say he will, but I know you don’t have an answer. How do I know that, you ask? Because it’s blatantly clear that not even Trump knows how he’d do them. Everything he’s ever proposed is just what he wants to happen, not how he’s going to get it to happen. On the occasion that he DOES explain his plan, you can flip a coin on whether it’s to “solve” a problem that doesn’t exist, or if it doesn’t have a chance in hell of actually succeeding. For example, I’ll give you half of all my possessions if you can tell me what expenses he considers wasteful, I’ll blow you if you find out how he claims he’ll eliminate the DOE’s reach, I’ll burn down my own house if you can tell me how defunding governments that have terrorist organizations actively trying to take them over would help at all, and I’ll cut out my tongue if you explain how Trump is going to get those nations to trade with us while not being willing to spend money outside the United States. While I’m at it, I’ll get my name legally changed to “Stupid McIdiothead” if you can give a logical explanation as to how the United States will strengthen under a man who considers our military, arguably the strongest and most advanced in the world ALREADY, rubbish.
And PS, “trickle down” was something that Reagan himself said.
Well, you’re wrong about who coined the term “trickle down economics,” but hey, that’s ok…
From Investopedia:
“Origins. The first reference to trickle-down economics came from American comedian and commentator Will Rogers, who used it to derisively describe President Herbert Hoover’s stimulus efforts during the Great Depression. More recently, opponents of President Ronald Reagan used the term to attack his income tax cuts.”
You do understand that many of the programs Trump would like to cut fall under the Executive Branch, correct? He has the authority to pass executive orders to affect many national policies, including wasteful spending in these programs under multiple executive Departments. He also has the power to “undo” all of Obama’s executive orders, which have been harmful to the economy. He can also nominate conscientious and competent leaders to become executive department/agency heads. This can help to eliminate waste, fraud, and improve upon “business as usual.” He can also be sure to enforce the laws that are already on the books, but largely ignored by Democrats and especially the current POTUS. This will also help the economy, because illegal immigration would finally be taken seriously.
Congressional approval is not needed in everything that Trump has proposed. Eliminating Obamacare is one thing he’ll need approval to do.
I don’t think we’ve ever heard from any nominee running for President, how, exactly they would enact change in government. Ideas are what gets them elected, not line-by-line directions. That said, I don’t think you’ve ever listened to a Trump speech. If you had, you’d have heard him discuss, at length, his ideas concerning the DOE and eliminating waste. Bringing school choice back through school voucher programs, eliminating the common core system, eliminating “no child left behind” and “Every Student Succeeds” as they’ve done nothing to escalate youth, and killing federal oversight over local education.
Those are just some examples of what he’s mentioned about the DOE. If you had been watching, you’d hear much more about every policy he’s presented over the last year, but let’s face it… you haven’t been watching. You might want to take a look at his website, as well… He’s had his positions on some of his more important issues listed for over a year. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions
While we’re on the subject, can you tell me why you voted to elect President Obama? Or why you’re voting for Hillary? What were and are their plans? I never heard any “hows” from them. What you’re doing is called hypocrisy.
I never said that Reagan was the one who originally called it “trickle down economics”. What I said was that he used the phrase “trickle down” while referring to his plan.
Moving on, cutting programs doesn’t just solve problems. You need to do more than that. If you stop smoking because it’s caused you to develop lung cancer, that doesn’t change that you have lung cancer. It’s also unfair to say that all of Obama’s executive orders have harmed the economy, as that’s simply inaccurate. You could make an argument for some, or even most, of them being harmful, but you can’t say that they all were. Just like how you can say that the current executive department/agency heads are incompetent and need to be replaced, but you can’t say that there’s a guarantee the replacement would do any better. I actually don’t know which laws you’re referring to that are being “ignored by Democrats”, so I’d love if you would be so kind as to point them out. If you’re referring to illegal immigration, as can be inferred from your next sentence, I suppose that brings us to the wall. Might I tell you that the wall is one of my favorite things to discuss? Not because I think building a twenty foot wall on the Mexican border will help stop actually dangerous illegal immigrants, because I don’t, but because of how ridiculous it is. The only wall that comes to mind of similar scale and purpose would be the Great Wall of China, and that was built to defend against the Mongols. Do you really believe that illegal immigrants pose a similar amount of threat? While on the topic of illegal immigration, what’s the point of being dicks to the immigrants? If you’re really worried about them stealing away money from American citizens to send back to their families in Mexico, then why not bring their families to America? If people want to live in the United States, why not let them? If you weren’t aware, more people means more workers, more tax dollars pulled in, and more potential for groundbreaking new scientists, athletes, politicians, anything! If it’s easier to come into the country legally, more people will chose to do that rather than cross the border illegally. The thing about making it easier for people to become American citizens is you won’t need to worry about people stealing jobs from American citizens. You can’t even argue that our culture would be broken by an influx of immigrants, because nearly all of our culture originally came from immigrants.
But that’s probably enough said about immigration. As it happens, I do have something to say about Obamacare, and that the only reason people hate it so much is because it was proposed by President Barack Hussein Obama. You can say that it’s weak and doesn’t work, but I’ll just ask you to remember how much of it was rejected by Congress.
Sure, you can argue that. And absolutely have I never listened to a full speech by Donald Trump. That being said, I would like to know Trump’s plans because he is a megalomaniacal and narcissistic pathological liar. That’s the only excuse for eighty percent of the things he says, because the only other possibility is ignorance, and he’s shown to have at least some knowledge of what’s happening.
I’d listen to his speeches or go to his website but honestly, I feel like I’d probably catch a disease.
I didn’t vote for Obama. I’m not voting for Hillary. I don’t vote. The way I see it, whatever happens doesn’t really change much for me. I’m a straight white guy, I stay at home whenever I can, and I don’t bother to stay informed. I don’t have to worry about much. If Trump gets elected, the worst case scenario is that the secret police show up at my house for talking shit about him, I show them that I’m white, and they leave. If Hillary gets elected, worst case scenario is the secret police show up at my house because I’m a white guy, I tell them I’m dating someone who doesn’t even identify as a gender, and they leave. Why even bother?
Oh, and I’d reply to your post directly, but I can’t. Real shame.
I concur
Catty one, your spelling and grammar are terrible. Why would anyone listen to someone without even the language skills expected of a 8th grader? You must be one of the under-educated that Trump loves so much.
Kevin, you just put the biggest and best reasons to vote for Trump and I just don’t understand why more people don’t see or understand this. All the other character flaws and issues are so subordinant to all of this but the mass media sees itself fit to manipulate
people and the campaign.
Which enemies are emboldened? Russia?
Ok, well you are the only one that has posted truthful factual data that is taking into account the actual time frames and true bearings of the impacts upon our nation and the economy at differing times. You also seem to have a strong grasp (at least of all the comments made thus far of how taxation and HOW government spending works when done correctly and incorrectly as much as is possible within a democratic capitalist society) I appreciate your truthful, accurate, correct, and FACTUAL economic analysis without showing in my opinion much if any bias. I am an independent voter that is tired of the same ole drowning deficit actions taken over the past few years and therefore yes I believe it is possible for Trump to make a difference (no not solve all our economic woes that have been created over the past decades by both parties), but I’m willing to take the chance to have some type of hope; which with the continuance of our past government would not happen.
My previous comment was in answer to Simon!
Correction, so as not to confuse..I agree with what Kevin Bush has to say; so basically my comment is in support of the factual unbiased and well substantiated mathematically and otherwise statements by Kevin.
Your comment is incorrect, there has not been a time in our history where income tax cuts increased revenue. Look it up.
With all due respect, I must disagree. Tax revenue to the government almost consistently increases when tax rates are decreased. We have the historical data to back it up. Likewise, economic growth is stimulated by an increase in activity of the free market.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/10/15/do-tax-cuts-increase-government-revenue/#3051fb7b48a3
Do you want to cite your instances for us? Yeah, I didn’t think so. Trickle down economics has been a failed experiment and the victims are the 98% at the bottom.
Sorry friend, 98% of the population isn’t in dire straits. Maybe you haven’t taken a look at some other countries in the world, but you’ll find that most poor people in other countries don’t have TVs, cell phones, plenty of food on their table, let alone refrigerators. That’s a US and to a lesser degree, Western World, phenomenon, and it has everything to do with capitalism – not Keynesian economics, where the government props up an economy.
Can you explain to me, with your liberal mind, how you think taxing more people is good for citizens as a whole? It’s literally reverse-Robinhoodism. Socialists (read: liberals) think the world would be a better place, if we taxed everyone more so that everyone would be on a “level playing field.” Take from the haves, give to the government, and trust that government knows what’s best for the population and have-nots. Basically, allow an Oligarchy to decide who gets to be wealthy and who doesn’t. Usually it ends up with the Oligarchy being rich, while the rest of the citizenry suffers. Your way has been tried time and time again, and what happens? Economies collapse, more people become poor, more people become dependent on Government, rather than themselves, more people become unemployed and are pushed out of the work force, etc.
We just tried it your way, with Obama Economics, and it didn’t work. He is the Food Stamp President, presiding over a record number of people pushed out of the labor force, having added $10 Trillion to the National Debt, while making us less safe, less confident, less dependable, less everything.
Reagan and the liberally termed “trickle down economics” (otherwise known as less government, more economic freedom) pushed us into the tech enlightenment period, which saw broad growth of entrepreneurialism, which is the true cause of innovation.
We’re going to find out!
Hillary spent a ton on non-declared, non AUMF (illegal) wars in the Middle East, S. America & in Africa (and perhaps Pakistan & other places too) as Oba just let her do whatever, sell whatever she wanted for profiteering, power, $ for her Foundation, her buddies, etc.
She also took in a ton from foreigners, quite illegally.
Trump knows his stuff. If he can’t turn this mess around, I seriously doubt anyone can!
It’s going to take US all working together to do this… No excuses, no BS, & far less government, shutting off any new immigrants from anywhere, unless they have something to add to our economy that citizens can’t do, which is law in most countries.
The hemoraging has to stop, we need to go back to making what we need, prices on imports are going to go IP, no doubt.
OPEC just squeezed their oil production (after 8 years), so gas WILL go up, until & unless we create our own here!
We need AMERICAN companies doing this here in America! NOT outsiders!
Allowing ANY non-citizen to do business here without them going through red tape is suicide! We shouldn’t have EVER allowed ANY industry into our country at all!
We need to get back to Made in the USA, BY USA!
But he’s a terrible businessman with many failed and bankrupt ventures, he’s never worked for anything in his life, and he’s an ignorant asshole? He has done nothing but prove how there are masses of ignorant, paranoid, racists, who are afraid of progress.
Amen, the only thing about Obama’s executive orders is that he’s black, and that hurts racists feelings.
In 1999, Donald Trump proposed for the United States a one off 14.25% wealth tax on the net worth of individuals and trusts worth $10 million or more. Trump claimed that this would generate $5.7 trillion in new taxes, which could be used to eliminate the national debt.
Trump will bankrupt the country, he has experience!
The country is already bankrupt. We can’t sustain $20 trillion in debt, and businessmen aren’t the ones who got us there. Politicians and lawyers are. Cute, though. ;]
Since 1791 the debt has never being paid in full and it never will. US owes most of the debt to itself. End if story.
Actually if you check your facts..the country has never really truly been debt free since 1835, but I understand what you are trying to say. 🙂
Lol, first of all it would cost more than the gov wastes now to oversee the overseers of overseers in all aspects of the Fed Gov; Trump (himself) is going down the line of every ledger in every journal Of every section of the U.S. Government? Get outa here!!
Still less debt growth than Reagan….
Running a Billion dollars business is not child play, Starting projects and completing then on time under budget is the art that politicians will never understand, Our national Debt is out of control, Obama care was a good Idea but is not working… 22 trillion waste!!!, Open borders will also cost trillions, Factories like mine leaving or closing because of bad open trade policies will not help America. #trump16 is the answer, give him a try, if after 4 years we will not see positive changes, then we will have to “fire him”> we can’t afford Obama/ Clinton 4 more years..
Skeeter, you didn’t look at the debt chart very closely. Abe, FDR, your own Ronal Reagan, and Bush caused the debt problem. Only Reagan was the culprit when not in war. Obama was a typical President as far as increase and he has been in war – which was created by another.
Just saying
You knucklehead… FDR had to pull the country out of the great depression and he did. That took government spending, how else would anyone fix it? He got millions back to work, everyone that got a handout went to work, and they weren’t working because the market crashed, banks closed, there weren’t jobs. Republicans argue that tax cuts trickle down, well FDR invested in the country and people and it paid off. The problem with republican tax cuts are they help the already rich, corporations, and burden the ones who aren’t. As someone else stated giving corporations more money doesn’t mean it will result in growth or wages. anyone with business sense knows you need to run a market analysis of the proposed business which takes into account the demographic of customers, local population, and the median income. In other words if no one has money or jobs businesses don’t make as much money. I live in a tourist town and we can tell when economy is bad, jobs are down, pay is down, business is down, people can’t afford to get married or travel, I catered weddings there’s a very serious correlation with how much people spend vs the economy. FDR also had to deal with a guy named Hitler and the Japanese. Looking back should we have not gone to war with Hitler? Unless you’re a neo Nazi trumper why? If not for the US intervention the world would be very different, we might be speaking German, we came close to losing as it was. And pearl harbor? I guess we should of done nothing about that either huh? Did bush turn the cheek after 9/11? no! He lied so he could start a second war! I talked to my grandparents about the depression and ww2. People during the depression didn’t act like greedy selfish assholes when people needed help, or call people lazy welfare takers. People were living in shanty shacks, and people helped each other, fed each other, looked after each other, and pulled themselves up and out of a mess that wasn’t any of their doing. And during WW2 everyone did everything they could to bring this country together, from scrapping, to rationing everything, people didn’t even have elastics in their underwear and gave all of that up happily for the war effort. People today would never sacrifice like that. And FDR brought people together and comforted them during the most difficult and scary times, he was a man who truly loved his people and wanted Americans to have a higher standard of life. After WW2 this country thrived and were the best economic times this century. When you get old and can no longer work you have FDR to thank for your social security check. Everyone who rails on FDR forget to take into account the situation the US was in and what he did to change that, but republicans will praise tax cuts that benefit the rich who don’t need it.
And since this comment was so old I’ll send my current knowledge back to you in 2016. Enjoy low gas prices because they’re going up, borrowing interest rates are too, and the cost of cars and homes will too because trump started a foolish trade war resulting on lumber, steel tarrifs, also farm and dairy tariffs. He’s been driving businesses out of the country and some soon bankrupt. Farmers who voted for trump are now running in debt, having to take out loans to operate, and have been committing suicide in higher rates. Yep we’re really winning alright. Once trumpies tax giveaway to the rich kicks in and expires for the rest of us I’m sure it will get better… Not. What little tax bonus most of us did get has been consumed by inflation and rising prices. Yup more winning
Your comments are extremely funny considering that the richest people in the United States or and support Democrats. Why is that that every rich person wants to jump on the Democrat bandwagon? It’s sure not because the Republicans like the rich. It’s because the rich are in cahoots with the Democrats. ever wondered how besos and all these other billionaires can support the Democratic party however they keep more than 50% of their income every year. I thought Democrats were for helping everyone in taxing the rich. sorry folks but common sense and previous history has shown us that the rich side with the people who treat them best and give them what they want. anyone who believes that the Richer on the Republican side is obviously either blind or ignorant to the obvious facts. look at all the actors actresses millionaires billionaires that will all be quite outspoken about the Democratic party being there besties. they say they’re for helping everyone however they sit in their Mansions collecting tens of thousands of dollars if not more a day while people that they say that they are for helping are hungry and living in poverty. I don’t see any of these rich billionaire Democratic supporters going down to South Central LA and donating a billion dollars to food banks and shelters. The government and media are controlling weak people’s minds by telling them what they want them to know in here. As an American still plans on using their right to vote you have an obligation to educate yourself on facts not opinions given to you by one side of the political spectrum. it took the United States the first 215 years of its existence to accumulate 7.5 trillion in debt. this is the same amount that Obama and his Democratic cronies added to our debt during his eight years of office. He left the US with more debt however he left with more money in his personal bank account. most politicians especially the higher on salons of the democratic party are millionaires including good old Bernie Sanders.anyone who would like to argue that fact needs to look at his income on his to book deals. People need to quit spell spreading ignorance and do some investigative research before commenting their opinions. this is why our politics are so messed up now because people want to believe someone’s opinion instead of facts Educate Yourself!
Did you even look at the spreadsheet? Obama brought the annual deficit inherited by Bush Jr. from 1.88 Trillion down to 3.5 billion. That is a 70% reduction in yearly deficit.
If you look at all the governments over the last 40 years the national debt grows exponentially faster during Republican regimes than the Democrats. Bill Clinton drove the deficit down to 18 billion his last year in office and G.W. Bush drove it up to 130 billion in a single year.
I challenge you to actually read the document before you start making ridiculous partisan statements. Particularly in light of the fact that the data is very clearly laid out in front of you.
He mortgaged our children’s future their children, all the way up to our great,great grandchildren’s great grandchildren.
Junior Bush’s tax cuts got the debt spiraling up. Reagan and poppa Bush did the same thing. Now Trump and the Republican congress want to give us another tax cut. Now what do you really think is going to happen to the national debt?
By the way historically (look it up if you don’t believe me) unemployment has been higher when Republicans have been in the White House. So what do you think is going to happen to jobs?
Hold on. So all the debt is on one person now? There is a fucking chart that shows clearly that it wasn’t all him so stfu assclown
lol, if you’re not going to look at how policies, new legislation and new extensions of government can affect government spending and debt, then this is a waste of our time. My list already shows you how much the debt increased under Reagan (a great deal). Your exercise, however, proves nothing. It just shows an average percentile increase. So what? Notice how the percentages, during his tenure, decrease after skyrocketing. Why do you suppose that is? Oh, that’s right… you don’t know, because you’re not looking at policies/legislation over the years, you’re just looking at raw data.
You’re right, numbers don’t lie, but numbers can be manipulated, and certain facts (like the GDP and Debt as a % of GDP) can be purposefully neglected to tell a story from a particular point of view.
“Nice manipulation” refers to your manipulation of my words.
Pingback: Timothy J. Barnett: Starving The Beast: Trump, Taxes And The Politics Of Unanticipated Consequences - News24Media
There should be a simple law that should state … No goverment should have the right to spend more money than what they collect from the citizens…. debt resolved! … otherwise hang on for a ride and polititians with their hands on big money regardless of party…your debt will only grow as it has been for so many years!! Why are we debating anything else?!!
lol, Why don’t we call them polio-ticians: they handicap the country, man!
Fighting wars when they have the nuclear-weapons.
Allowing illegal-immigrants and removing jobs from Americans: where are these illegal-immigrants dwelling, shopping: American? ! The proposal is insane. The jobs are not paid at cost and these billionaires spend American dollars in France, Italy, London: you name their enjoyments leaving the American-families in the cold or heat!; sometimes literally. We are a country now, independence was only a few years ago and we have to think for ourselves as well: you may want to assist Mexicans based on their deplorable living conditions: you call it; America will soon look like most, if not all, of the baseball and football-teams! Americans sent men to the moon: being American is about respect.
Trump didn’t refute not paying those workers, let’s hope they were Mexicans!, and he’s “proud of his proposed tax-cut” for the rich; Hillary is “sorry” about the deleted-emails: upstanding-citizens don’t have these issues: it is my humble-opinion that Americans are being had, it’s like considering the lesser of two ‘evil’. We want Americans happy and politicians, as currently called!, must make sure that they aren’t violating the Constitutional rights of Americans. In remembrance of my American-child
The reason people are against using nuclear weapons is because they aren’t accurate. Not in the sense that you won’t hit your target, you’ll definitely destroy what you’re aiming at, but in the sense that it’ll also destroy everything for miles around your target. There’s going to be civilian casualties, and a whole lot of them. Not to mention the backlash from the international community if we were to willingly use nuclear weapons, which would without a doubt include nukes of their own. There’s reasons that nukes have only been used once. Anyway, people of color aren’t any less American than whites. Quit being racist.
I have always been told if you don’t vote then you don’t have the right to b***h. Your opinion no longer matters if you choose not to vote. The vote gives you a voice, it may not always go your way but it’s still your voice nonetheless. The vote is your opportunity to assist in change, to disagree or agree. Your chance to have a voice, an opinion of who is best qualified to make decisions for you. You choose not to vote, not to participate in change or to help so go back to your fantasy football game and be quiet. When you cast your vote then you can be included in adult conversations. Until then what you have to say doesn’t matter, obviously not to you either since you don’t even take your right to vote seriously enough to do so. Those who choose not to vote do have a serious effect on the nations problems as a whole. You may think, “oh I’m just one person what’s my vote going to change”, but there’s too many who think the same and that adds up to the changes being made and persons being elected are not actually elected by the majority rule as the system is designed but only by the minority rule of those who choose to vote. AMERICAN PEOPLE, EXERCISE YOUR RIGHT TO VOTE. ITS YOUR VOICE AND IT DOES MATTER!!!
My comment was for Guy the guy, who commented earlier that he didn’t vote and there wasn’t much that could be done to him. I would have placed my comment directly under his previous one I am referring to but that was not an option.
There is a law JT. Article 1 section 10 of our constitution. This section like several others is ignored, we just don’t count that anymore, no amendment to repeal it, gov just doesn’t count it cause they can. Article 1 section 10 “No state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a payment of debts.”
The power to coin and regulate the value of money rests with congress, congress has illegally delegated that power to a private bank, the federal reserve bank. Gov does as it pleases.
I am in your side.. Politicians should learn from a real business man for 4 years, then they can take over..
There is a simple solution to our debt: war. We could reduce or perhaps remove all of our debt if we annihilated and annexed all countries we owe debt to. Although many citizens would oppose this act, the government does not have to listen to them, the government is more powerful than the people. We are a nation with thousands of nuclear weapons, who would oppose us? We are unstoppable and could be the unrivaled superpower of Earth. Imagine what we could accomplish as a nation, as a world, with endless resources and a single government controlling it all.
This is just my opinion on the matter. I would like to see others’ ideas too!
Okay, I don’t think you get how Democracy works. The thought that the government doesn’t have to listen to the people is against everything the United States stands for. Maybe you don’t know this, but the USA was formed because an Empire spanning the globe wouldn’t listen to its people.
Who is lending us trillions of dollars?? That’s odd, none of you experts have mentioned that. The federal reserve banks are a gigantic CREDIT CARD that increases and decreases its rates as they please. I wonder why rates were 0.25% – 0.5% during Obamas terms and up to 6% – 8% during GWB. WTF is up with that? The FED likes for us to borrow and keep making minimum payments. Your income taxes are paid directly to the federal reserve. The electricity bill at the White House (and any government spending) is paid directly by the federal reserve and charged interest. Just like charging a credit card. The USA has no control over money. Now this clown comes in and wants to challenge and audit the FED? Well Lincoln tried to dissolve the central banking system, Garfield was against it as well, Kennedy started printing our own American money in defiance of the FED (interest free) … and it didn’t go well for them. Good luck crooked Donald, you can stiff small businesses and employees but you can’t stiff the FED.
You get a million dollars, but… every time you buy something, a monkey falls from the rafters (or ceiling) and trashes the entire store. Would you do it? #TrumpTrain 🙂 #imwithher
Fact, the National Debt increased by 260% under Ronald Reagan, BY FAR the worst!!!!!!
The % increase of the National Debt under a Democrat are ALL lower then it was by the proceeding Republican.
Saddest thing is it has NOT decreased once since 1957, OUCH………..
Your facts look wrong, according to the grid. The debt was increased by 186.7% under Reagan. The “worst” would have to be Martin Van Buren, a Democrat, who increased it by 9,425.6% ($3.5 Million or $83.475 Million in inflation dollars). That is, if we’re going by percentage.
Second place belongs to a Republican: Lincoln, with 2,700.3% ($2 Billion or $51.5 Billion in inflation dollars).
Third place belongs to a Democrat: FDR, with 931.5% ($182 Billion or $3.343 Trillion in inflation dollars).
Fourth place belongs to another Democrat: Woodrow Wilson, with 804.8% ($23.1 Billion or $557.172 Billion in inflation dollars).
Fifth place belongs to a Whig: John Tyler, with 556.6% ($22 Million or $617.980 Million in inflation dollars).
Finally, Sixth place belongs to Reagan (a Republican), with 186.7% ($174 Billion or $504.6 Billion in inflation dollars). When comparing inflation dollars, Reagan comes in third place, behind FDR (#1) and Woodrow Wilson (#2), from this sample of six Presidents. This dollar amount, of course, pales in comparison to modern day spending/debt.
The debt rose 76.7% under GWB ($4.4 Trillion or $5.94 Trillion in inflation dollars).
Even worse, the debt rose 93.4% under Obama ($9.3 Trillion or $10.323 Trillion in inflation dollars).
The Democrats have done much more damage to this nation than any other party or person, in the history of these United States. That’s pretty evident.
A comparison in inflation dollars:
1. Obama = $10.323 Trillion added to Debt
2. GWB = $5.94 Trillion added to Debt
3. FDR = $3.343 Trillion added to Debt
4. Wilson = $557.172 Billion added to Debt
5. Reagan = $504.6 Billion added to Debt
Have you noticed those who have the highest debt increase were in office during a major war.
How can you say the Democrats have done so much more damage without knowing why the numbers are high.
Wilson was in office during WWI
FDR was in office during WWII
Obama in office during the Iraq war (Bush also)
Lincoln in office during Civil War.
We could say Reagan was in office during Cold War.
No idea (but will look it up) what was going on with Van Buren. He probably had to spend a ton of money getting rid of the cheese smell Jackson left behind.
Plus Obama inherited the Bank Bailout, Automotive Bailout, and Housing market crash of 2006 or prior. Plus the War that BUSH started. And not to mention the Replubican party said their goal once Obama took office was to make sure he did not get a 2nd term. Which meant they were not going to reach across the table and work with the Democrats. Come on…are we in Grade School. This is our nation of prosperity and we need to make sure that we make things better so our children and their children can have good jobs, health care and retirement. I am embarrassed of how you act. Everyone of you should have to live off of Social Security not your fabulous pensions. Trump won because America is sick and tired of the crap that politicians hand us and the American people thought, what the Hell, let’s see if he can shake things up in Congress and the Senate.
Hey, if you don’t show up for work and have more than three absentees, “YOU’RE FIRED”. Donald knows how to do that much
Why do you say Bush started the war? Where were you when those planes that were hijacked by terrorists flew into the World Trade Center buildings in New York? Or are you one of the conspiracy theorist who believes that was all orchestrated by Bush? Yes the war went in the wrong direction at first, but it was in fact necessary to show others that the American people would not stand by and allow an attack on our country without serious repercussions. I’m no fan of war as I would hope no person would be, but I also would not roll over and do nothing when attacked. I would fight back. Wouldn’t you? That was not the time for “turning the other cheek” that was the time to show the world we would not stand for being disrespected and attacked by anyone, we would stand and fight and defend our country. Yes, there was selfish reasons of the administration involved and yes it took far too long and too much money to finally get justice but the end result was the end of Bin Laden, the mastermind. Unfortunately, there’s still more of his followers still out there planning who knows what, but… I believe we sent a clear message that we would not back down and would fight and defend our country and now those who would do us harm should think twice before attacking us again. I respect your opinion and even agree with part of it but there are so many gaps and at the same time war is sometimes a necessary evil.
Actually what happened to Van Buren is that he had to pick up the pieces of what Jackson did. Jackson shut down the National Bank, and shut down all virtual credit, he demanded that people buy land through hard cash, such as the gold dollar, it was because of this, there wasn’t any debt. It was also because of this the US went into it worst financial crisis sense the nation was formed. It also happened 3 months after Van Buren became president, so you can’t really blame Van Buren for what happened, like Trump can’t take credit for anything, until October, and Obama can’t take credit for what happened in the beginning of 2008. So when it comes to a financil crisis or a financil “golden age” you cant blame the current president until about October of his first term.
I’ve always heard that the Republicans have increased the national debt the most; that Reagan alone had tripled the debt; and usually the Democrats will decrease spending, and balance the national budget. Either way, however you look at it, usually the incoming President has to clean up the outgoing Presidents mess. I am biased & too lazy to do the research, but usually the Republicans spend the money without having the revenue to do it, & the Democrats usually have to clean up the mess the Republicans in office have made. I know my thinking is not fair, part of it is true, part of it is not true. Election years are so ugly & bring out the worst in people. However, I think Trump would be a mistake for our country & global relations. He would cause more damage than any good he would possibly do.
The debt by itself doesn’t mean much. The key is debt relative to growth.
Suppose you runs business that brings in $1000/yr. You determine that you increase this to $1500 by expanding production. But, expanding production will cost $250 that you don’t have. Since you have the necessary credit and collateral, you borrow $250. You now have a debt of $250, but your total revenue increased by $500 and net revenue is $1250. This is debt worth incurring.
On the other hand, suppose that you miscalculated and revenues increase by only $100. Here, your net drops to $850 even though your total rose to $1100. This debt was not worth incurring.
The corollary to public debt is the GDP to debt ratio. You can find charts that track it from Washington’s presidency on.
Saddest thing is you believe what you’re shoveling
I vote for Kevin Bush for president. He has the knowledge needed.
His statements are very true.
Trump 2016
Prison for Hilly and Billy 2016
The national debt for the last 100+ years is doubling on average every 8 years. Yes there are some ups and downs, but that is what it averages out to. Expect a 40 trillion debt in 2024 and it doesn’t matter who gets elected. 2032 will bring 80 trillion of fed gov debt. The big question is, what is the limit or when will creditors say no more?
“The big question is, what is the limit or when will creditors say no more?”
What creditors?
There is not a person or nation on the face of the Earth, or any combination of them to finance such debt.
We are borrowing the money by printing it and hiding the inflation from it through Quantitative Easing, which is causing a bubble to exist in the financial markets, and currently it is about four times bigger than the housing bubble which brought us to our knees
As Mr Trump has said both the Rep and Dem have not done a good job the last 40 years . The chart proves its.
Here are some FACTS concerning the historical picture of national debt ($billions) and growth during terms of various presidents:
……………………………………………………………….National Debt……………Increase……………….% Increase
……………………………………………………………….(Year Ending)
1976-80 Pres. Carter………………………………….$909………………………….$210………………………..46%
1981-88 Pres. Reagan………………………………$2,602……………………….$1,603…………………….186%
1989-92 Pres. Bush Sr……………………………….$4,065……………………….$1,463………………………56%
1993-20 Pres. Clinton………………………………..$5,674……………………….$1,609………………………39%
2001-08 Pres. Bush………………………………….$10,025……………………..$4,351………………………77% or 110% including:
CBO Study: Tax Revenue Loss by Tax Cuts……$1,900
2009-16 Pres. Obama……………………………….$19,392…………………..$9,367(a)……………………..93% or 84% including
CBO Study: Tax Revenue Loss by Tax Cuts………$900…………………..(a) +$4.8 trillion caused by recession, stimulus packages, saving financial institutions
Bush Jr.’s application of the “trickle down” theory in the form of a major tax reduction stimulus was a complete failure as was Reagan’s use of this approach. It’s an economic policy an older generation once called the horse-and-sparrow theory: “If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.” In other words, if you feed the wealthy increasing amounts, they brush more crumbs off the table, feeding those below them.
During the Carter years, the federal deficit had averaged $54.5 billion annually and national debt expanded 46%. But Reagan sharply reduced taxes and the federal deficit skyrocketed to $211 billion annually with the national debt increasing 186% during his term. Reagan to his credit saw that”tax decreases don’t pay for themselves.” He ended up raising taxes 11 times after seeing debt and deficits rise steeply in his first term. Tragically, Bush Jr. didn’t respect the junk economics of “trickle down,” and during his 2001-07 term the economy was hit with modest growth, large deficits and anemic job growth.
Propagandists like to say that redistributing wealth by progressive taxation does not increase wealth. Only low taxes spur economic growth and tax revenue growth. As noted, Reagan found such claims to be completely false; as did Bush Jr., but would never admit it; false to the Germans, the Dutch, the Swedes, the Norwegians, etc. of this world; false also according to CBO study showing that tax cuts replace 22% of lost tax revenue the first 5 years, rising to replace 32% of lost tax revenue the second five years. In layman’s terms, a $1 million tax cut would generate a $780,000 deficit in each of the first 5 years and a $680,000 deficit in each of the second 5 years. In short, supply-side economics as theory illustrated by “trickle down” con game benefits the wealthy but not middle-class or poor. It has virtually no support from professional economists.
Editors:
Please REMOVE my comment. I’ll resubmit it in a correctly printed format.
Thank you for presenting my comment in proper format.
Some of you guys are real funny and have interesting ways to “cook the books” to blame the President for the debt. But if that is what you want, OK, but which President. I also went to the U S Treasury, but I also went to the Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Research Service, the Senate .gov, the White House.gov. IRS.gov and a few more. According to all of these sites our country has always been in debt since day one. And most of the debt prior to Nixon was spent on war. But since 1930 83% of the national debt was created during Republican Presidencies, 80% of that during only 2 Presidencies, R Reagan and G W Bush. The highest deficit spending increases in the last 75 years was also during the same Presidencies, 54% and 61% respectively. Reagan almost doubled all debt before him combined, during peacetime, Bush also Created more debt than all debt before him combined. And the U S Department of Defense said only a small percentage of it went to the war. The lowest increase of deficit spending was during Clinton and Obama, 3.5% and 1.4% respectively. Although he hasn’t done much to really lower the debt, he has done absolutely nothing to raise it. In fact all the debt created over the last 8 years is equal to the interest on the debt prior to the Obama Administration. What has he done? All of his executive orders are less that 1.5% of 1% of the National Budget and Obama Care last year only cost about 300 billion yet tax revenues during the last 8 years has gone up almost 700 billion dollars. These are the facts no matter what Fox New, Rush Limbaugh or Donald Trump says. So stick that in you pipe and smoke it. If you can afford it.
My fellow Americans, The 2016 Presidential Election will boil down to just two types of voters:
1. The Globalists(Clinton) and 2. The Nationalists(Trump) THAT’S IT! So which category do you belong to???
Now if you say, “I’m NOT voting this time around,” or “I’m going 3rd party,” Well for one you’ve just thrown your vote away or else your candidate will just serve to harm the other two major political candidates chances of winning the white house. It is your right though to vote for whomever you wish.
The National Debt–What so few Americans realize was that the seeds of FDR’s New Deal were just beginning to take root in the economy. The ND had grown from $22 Billion in 1932 to just under $400 B by 1970. By ’79, the debt had doubled to 800 B. The problem with a debt that doubles in 10 yrs. is that the % compounds to such a degree that it simply can’t be paid out of current tax payer dollars. Once the % itself is financed, hence the compounding % accelerates with blinding speed. IF the National Debt had been dealt with diligently and very aggressively back in the 1970’s, the ND could’ve been controlled and greatly minimized. Unfortunately, to our detriment, neither the Fed or the American people were concerned enough to grapple with this ultra mega financial problem. Runaway inflation was eroding our dollar at an astonishing rate during the 1970’s. By the late 60’s/early 70’s, the US economy was set-up for a debt run economy whereby the deficits of earlier years gone by would pale in comparison to the enormous deficits of the future. Deficits in the millions would soon turn into billions. Today we see our ND increasing at nearly $1 trillion a year and will continue to accelerate until our US economy reaches the breaking point. We are currently at 19 Trillion. I fear this astronomical amount of $ will never be paid off in full nor reduced to controllable levels. Eventually, the American economy will crumble and America will be sold to our creditors.
Please think about your children and grandchildren’s future when you go to the polls or vote by mail this 2016 Election. You will either vote for the Globalist or the Nationalist agenda. Which will you chose?
Pingback: Importing Kratos for a bong rip and a gangbang. | Exmorted
It is also rather insightful to read these comments, one argues for the free market another argues it was all the tax cuts, but all fail to notice since Social Security has been enacted it has paid out $97 trillion while only $63 trillion has been paid in, this is a $34 trillion difference or one and a half times more than the national debt.
So if we were not mortgaging the children’s future for $20 trillion and stealing another $14 trillion from their parents to pay grandpa and grandma what they never paid, we would still have factories in this country and would not have had the old people, who got this $34 trillion extra money, investing it in foreign countries trying to get the best return on their investment because they had impoverished the business at home by taking their money in the first place.
Until people face up to one simple truth this problem will kill us all
Socialism is the belief that some people have a right to live at the expense of others, and is nothing more than theft
Pingback: rump, SCOTUS, Orthodox Presbyterian Book of Church Order | ThM
Does anyone know what Andrew Jackson did to get rid of the national debt during his time in office?
The best way to grow our economy is rebuilding our infrastructure with Americans. Naturally, this in turn, would generate more spending in the economy as you are targeting disposable income relative to discretionary income; that tax cuts to the wealthy accomplishes. However, spending in the economy must be accompanied by actual productivity less we end up with too much dollars chasing fewer goods causing inflation.
Pingback: Some of the Most Likely Disaster Scenarios - Survivalist Prepper
Pingback: Some of the Most Likely Disaster Scenarios | Marlon Karda
Pingback: America, You Been Played! Trump’s Election and The Takeaway Method | cliffordasbury
We are definitely not all Keynesians now.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics
Pingback: Treasury Debt Down Hard on American PublicWe Hold These Truths
Kevin Bush – At what point does the cost of servicing our national debt exceed the total tax revenue coming in? Or is the government expecting tax revenue to continue growing simply by population growth alone (i.e.: future tax payers that are not born yet or immigrants that are moving into our country)?
I have one major problem with this tally. I’ll begin with recent Administrations, since I’m not interested in slogging through 44 Administrations worth of data to figure out how/when this tally got off-track.
I’ll start with Carter. The fiscal year data shows that on Oct 1st 1977, when President Carter’s first budget took effect, the debt stood at $699 billion, so the chart is correct, however, by Oct 1st 1981, when President Reagan’s first budget took effect that debt was up to $998, while the chart incorrectly stops calculating Carter’s increases at $907 billion, almost a 10% discrepancy.
This continued miscalculation is most obvious when it comes to President Obama. As I write this we are currently only in the 3rd month of President Obama’s eighth budget, yet the chart shows his tally as being complete, giving him credit for eight full budgets, by incorrectly assigning George W Bush’s $3.1 trillion (estimated: $3.5 trillion, actual expenditures) final budget to him.
Thus, the chart’s numbers are dramatically skewed relative to reality, since Bush’s actual budget periods increased the debt from $5.816 trillion to $11.853 trillion, rather than *just* the $10.024 billion shown on the chart…which incorrectly subtracts more than $1.8 trillion from President George W Bush’s actual increases to the debt.
Thus if we use a projected $21 trillion for Oct 1st of 2017, when President Obama’s eighth fiscal budget period ends, and President Trump’s first budget takes effect, and go by the actual $11.853 billion starting point, we find that the actual increase to the National debt during President Obama’s Administration will likely be around 76%, while the actual increase during President Bush’s eight years in Office was 103%.
I will assume that this mistake was made unintentionally, but it clearly incorrectly sways the data to a massive degree regarding the past 16 years, in President Bush’s favor.
If we go by the official fiscal year data, correctly assigned, this would be the tally of annual fiscal year increase to the National debt by Administration, in descending order of actual increase, from Carter to Obama:
Reagan – average annual increase 23.75%
George H. W. Bush – average annual increase 13.5%
George W Bush – average annual increase 12.88%
Carter – average annual increase 10%
Obama – average annual increase 9.5%
Clinton – average annual increase 4%
I’m hopeful that some kind of correction will eventually be applied, to better illustrate the non-partisan reality of the hard data.
National debt source: https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/mspd.htm
You’re not reading this chart correctly. This is a list of Presidents from start of their term to finish. It’s not a list by Fiscal Budgets. The Fiscal Year does not begin or end with a Presidential inauguration. The Fiscal Year ends on September 30 of every year, since 1976. Prior to that, the Fiscal Year ended on June 30. It would be a much more complicated list, if I were to sort this by Fiscal Year, rather than by Presidential Term. Whether the Budget was passed under a current or preceding President, is negligible. The current President is responsible for how those funds are utilized, along with Congress. Things change in Government, almost daily these days.
You can budget $80 Billion for Defense Spending, if you want, but it doesn’t mean you’re only going to spend $80 Billion on Defense that year… nor does it mean you can’t prevent spending $80 Billion.
Pingback: Obama’s Shocking Historically Weak Economic Performance | The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College Center for Vision and Values - A conservative think tank promoting truth and liberty through a vision of faith and freedom.
Idiots
YALL NEED JESUS! GO FIND A CHURCH CUZ YALL NEED SOME HOLY WATER. OH AND TO PRAY
Pingback: Obama's Shocking Historically Weak Economic Performance - Self-Educated American
The National Debt has increased more in the last 10 years more than it has THE REST OF THE US HISTORY! Wake up people. Bush was part of the problem, but as you can see Obama has increased the debt more so and we are expected to reach $20 trillion in debt by May. All Trump can do at this point is try to manage the damage. From one US citizen to all the others I hope our president can help our nation the best that he can and I trust that he will.
I really think you need to look in the 1860’s and the civil war period and compare it with today’s dollar. You’ll find that your reduction is not true.
Deduction, I love auto correct. NOT
This comment is in regards to Kevin Bush’s post on Sep. 21 2016 specifically. Your sweeping generalizations with any supporting proof are disturbing to me. Lets take the claim “When you alleviate the tax burden on business, those business begin to grow, and the costs of their products begin to lower.” Let’s take one of the fastest growing countries in the world, China. China’s cumulative tax rate on profits is about 68%, and China’s business have been growing for 26 years (which is as far as the number I found in a 30 second google search covered). Also from the same 30 second search I found the personal rate in China is 45%, and I have no idea if they follow Smithian/Hayekian/Austrian economics.
Thankfully we got a new president from a different group. Based upon the almost complete double of our prior national debt in the last 8 years, I have heard of a few variations. Although it is spelled very similar and sounds a little similar, the Democrat group is now known as being Dumb As Craps, and our last president also got a variation. Based upon almost 10 trillion more debt, now he is noted as being You Bummer!
I would like to use this article for a school project but i need the publication date. Anyone have it?
Apologize for the delay. Life got in the way of my approving comments/responding to arguments and even updating the site with the most recent data (I’ll be doing this soon). To answer your question, I published this page back on 10/27/2010 and have been updating it as often as I can.
Pingback: ECONOMICS 101, 202, 303 AND THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF ECONOMIC LEARNING ; GENESIS 19:9: and they came near to break the door. | BOOKMARK AND TRANSLATE THIS WEBSITE. It won't be there for long
All this talk about debt. Yes it is very high and it IS the fault of of our politicians because they know they can do what ever they want to with our money and they use the rule of constitutional law which basically allows them to do what ever they wish with our money and there is not a goddamned thing the public can do other than change the law or wait to vote them out. Hasn’t anybody noticed the elephant in the room? Hasn’t anybody noticed what is happening to OUR protections under the Constitution? Hasn’t anybody noticed that Washington no longer has the will or courage to enforce the will of the people or the rule of law. Hasn’t anybody noticed the states distancing themselves from Washington. Hasn’t anybody noticed all of the propaganda and lies being spread to every home in this country. Hasn’t anybody asked themselves the question Why am I so angry at Republicans or Democrats? A lot of anger and name calling. I don’t know you and you do not know me but here it is we are now fighting among ourselves and worse. I found that our means of communication being highly controlled and directed toward using the media TV, Radio, Internet and of course the use of cellphones. The cellphones will be a tracking device so THEY can find you. They have passed laws allowing the government to spy on you and you can can be arrested for nothing and detained indefinitely for months or even years and doesn’t matter weather your black or white or brown or yellow or blue. Some of you already that something bad happened on Sep 11 our government was essentially overthrown to insert a Capitalist Regime and capitalism doesn’t mix with our form of government. Capitalism is for the bottom line only and nothing else. In America our government is preparing for civil unrest with the police being retrained to be nothing more than thugs and also DHS that is another illegal armed force within the borders of CONUS. That is strictly against the law as. And if you look at our elections at least for the last 17 years they have no credibility they are not valid. The Supreme Court has broken the Civil Rights Act which no longer can insure that all citizens can vote without prejudice or being prevented from voting in any way. When the court made that descision they also removed those rights for ALL citizens that includes white people. The courts also ruled that giving individual rights to businesses and buildings including doctors and all professionals so that now we can’t sue them if they do something wrong or kill someone. You can’t sue a doctor for malpractice and win. You can’t sue these large chemical companies if they poison your land or your family these corporations have immunity from prosecution. All these things and unproven accusations involving political figures are used to distracted and anger us and keep everyone worried and confused while the politicians and corporations are reaping the benefits in the form of TRILLIONS of dollars. Our elected officials both parties have not been performing their sworn duties as a matter fact they DO NOT listen or even care most of them are in the pockets of huge corporations. But if you can not see the handwriting on the wall, they are going to bring down this country and they DON’T CARE about you or your stupid little family. They will take everything because they already have the infrastructure to do it. When airplanes fly into buildings the very next day our president presented something called The Patriot Act. which basically removes all of our constitutional protections and allows the government to assemble policing forces to hunt down arrest or kill terrorists and that means that we us the citizens have now become terrorists in their eyes. Now the FED. The Fed is not and has never been a part of the government and it is a private bank except that they have no money. When the gov needs more money they get a loan at the local Fed who in turn places an order to the government printing office to print more money. When the printing office delivers the new money to the fed the fed the loans that money to the government with interest the government the in turn loans the to the banks with interest and the the bank loans it to you and me. What this does is incur interest charges three times on the loan not including the loan amount. Not a good deal when you print one dollar and have to payback Four to every one dollar. What a ripoff. Who is the FED? Well they seem to be the ones who Own the United States because they control the money and the interest rates for all loans. I don’t know who owns the Fed but I think it is probably run by a foriegn set of banks. The Fed may actually own this country. If we have to get loans thru the Fed only then they must know exactly how much debt there is and they would also know how much the U. S. is actually worth. All that said there is one place to find our worth is Wall Street. What this doesn’t show is the real worth of the U.S.. The real worth is not just the stock value it is the value of everything from border to border and what is on above and below the ground all the way down to earths core and all the way to outer space, so that is a lot. The question is is the U.S. only worth 20 trillion or much much more. I suspect that this country is worth much more the $20 Trillion dollars. The debt is very important but are we worrying to much? It’s possible that when Washington puts a cap on debt where spending can not exceed 20 Trillion dollars but if we do exceed 20 Trillion does that mean the U.S. will have to file bankruptcy? I think our leaders have thrown us under the bus. This two party system is not true Democracy. There must be more than two parties and that means real choice not the lies and political dark money(dirty money) Koch Bros. are radical conservatives bent on deciding the outcome of elections by throwing money to convince republicans in central and southern United States making false statements about people and politicians and the strategy works well. But it is false and just serves to anger people already worried about what the government js going to do to us next. Extreme Democrats is like Totalitarianism or a better description would be like the novel 1984 introduces Big Brother. Extreme Republicans are referred to as Authoritarianism or Nazi’s so we must be vigilant and determined to never allow this to happen. (But we are very close to this becoming true.) We currently are living in a police state and soon there will be cameras everywhere and your freedoms and rights once gone will never return. Trump is not good for the country. He can’t be trusted and he lies for a living. He is in no way qualified to be president neither is Pence. The GOP spent billions try to get Hillary Clinton discredited as it turned out she was not guilty of those accusations but she lost the election due to manipulating the election process and ending the election before all the votes were counted and that is blatant cheating on the part of the GOP. However this was not a good time for Hillary to run. I dont think the country was ready and she was the ONLY democratic choice and the republicans had something like 17 candidates and all of them sucked. And then here comes some selfish fat bastard who would sell everyone of us out because capitalists are sellouts and have no loyalty or patriotism for their country. They love money and power and they want to take from us. I love my country. I served my country for over 20 years. I was ready to lay down my life for my country. I do not have to like or blindly follow the president because he is only a man with opinions. I don’t have to like some dude who became president on bet and to vote this loose cannon in to run this country. But I would still give my life for this country and everybody in it. but I wouldn’t give up a dime for this president. He can not demand my loyalty I must give it willingly. It is my right and duty to question the government and the politicians to challenge them. The government and their “friends” have been running fear campaigns to keep people on edge. I believe we have overreacted regarding terrorism. We should be doing what we did in the past and that is Never negotiate with terrorists and they won’t be allowed to create fear and we will continue our lives without fear from a screwed government or religious radicals where the Americans would not leave their country. I am a democrat and I don’t believe in gun control. If the government takes away our right to defend ourselves our families and our land from aggressors both tyrannical or foreign To be able to keep and maintain our rights and freedoms we must continue to vote and challenge those who will take our freedoms under the guise of greater security. We can not succumb to a false promise of better security. We just don’t it.
Pingback: On 9/11, America’s Economic Preparedness Worse than Ever
National debt in 1865 in today’s dollar would be over 38 trillion.
While we as a nation should strive to reduce our national debt, if the information that I have is correct we were much further in debt in 1865 at the end of the civil war. In today’s dollar the GDP was
sorry hit the wrong button. The GDP In 1865 was about 10 billion dollars, in today’s dollar that would be a little over 140 billion and their national debt in today’s dollar was over 38 trillion making the debt around 270 times the GDP.
Today’s national debt is about 20.5 trillion and our GDP is 19.25 trillion making our debt just a little more than double our GDP.
Yeah, it’s still too high but we made it through the 1860’s, we can do it again.
Removed the comments you requested. =]
Another win for Trump!!
Well 2017 has ended and Trump has been in office a year now (nearly) and time to look at our nation’s debt and what has been added in the last year.
$671,455,302,116.72 was added to our nation’s debt. Although it looks bad at first glance it can be debated just how much is due to Obama and how much is due to Trump. Also the debt hasn’t went up such a small amount sense 2007, and considering Obama added an average of $1,033,372,391,344.33 per year and added $1,241,086,361,182.79 his last year in office Trump almost cut the growth in half! I would call this a win.
The debt went up a similar amount in 2013. The debt is actually never the result of who is president because the president doesn’t determine spending by himself. When the president’s party has a majority of both houses you can blame him, otherwise it is a shared blame.
I believe Trump will do good for our Country if people would just give him a chance ,Instead of fighting him on every single thing, Its alot to clean up after Obummers
\
Pingback: The Fall of the American Empire - LA Progressive
Pingback: The Fall of the American Empire – Antiwar.com Blog
It’s trսly very difficult in this active life to listen news on TV, therefore I just uѕe internet for that reason,
and take the most ᥙp-to-date infoгmation.
After three-quarters of a century on Earth in a study of this spectacle, here are a few of my (politically independent) opinions:
BOTH the quantity and quality of fed expenditures matter. Not enough attention is paid to the quality.
BOTH parties executive and legislative branches have placed votes ahead of fiscal responsibility.
The Donkeys waste billions on social programs. The Elephants waste billions on corporate welfare. Both waste billions on deadly foreign wars (Johnson in Viet Nam, W in the mid-east.) We have little to show for all our wrong-headed (“War on poverty” and “War on Everybody”) ventures.
Unless and until we change our system of government (that is not likely), we are destined for further cutbacks (notice your medical co-pays) and eventually a financial meltdown worse than 2008. The U.S. will survive, but (like a divorce) we will feel like an amputee afterward.
We are much like the citizens of Rome. While we are entertained by the Donkey and Elephant battle in the Coliseum orchestrated by the Emperor and Senators to distract us….. the Huns are getting closer to the gate.
But not to worry my friends. It doesn’t really matter. Take comfort in the fact that we are all dead in the long run.
Pingback: What Would Happen If USA Stopped Paying Its Debt? – The Infographics Show
Look at the history of France. Same-o, same-o?????????????????
I would just like to add for all the Obama haters , that as soon as he took office, John (crying) Bohnier said the Republicans would NEVER vote or pass on anything Obama wanted. the Republicans were really thinking of the American people, weren’t they? sorry about Bohner spelling
Pingback: Larry Kudlow Needs to Reread Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Emperor’s New Clothes” - Light from the Right