Much of political rhetoric is vague, smokey, well, smoke. And mirrors. However, every now and then the topic turns to something tangible, like numbers.
Some, indeed many, economic statistics are as clear as Snoop Dog's eye's at 11:00 AM. But a few statistical categories reflect the precise clarity of Sarah drawing a bead on big ol' shaggy Alces alces (or an endangered Democrat Congressional incumbent).
Actual spending, actual income, the difference between them and the percentage of difference are the later category. Everyone with a checking account knows the same to be true. Just add up your deposits, add up your debits and come up with the difference. Public school grads, don't use long math-we've stopped teaching that painful topic. Use your online calculator.
Well, the United States government works the same way. It (we) takes in money (receipts). It (we) spends money (outlays). There is a difference, either plus or minus. That difference is a percentage of the total.
So here are the numbers, expressed in constant 2005 dollars (so our liberal friends cannot claim we are comparing old apples to inflated oranges). Using actual dollars makes the spending far worse, because there's more of it and the inflated dollar pays for less but let's be charitable and give 'em the benefit of an identical statistical baseline.
|2006||$ 2324.1 Trillion||$ 2563.8 Trillion||$ -239.6 Billion||-1.9|
|2008||$ 2288.1 Trillion||$ 2703.8 Trillion||$ -415.7 Billion||-3.2|
|2009||$ 1899 Trillion||$ 3173.4 Trillion||$ -1274.4 Billion||-10.1|
|2010||$ 1927.9 Trillion||$ 3081 Trillion||$-1153.0 Billion||-9.0|
|2011||$ 1998.7 Trillion||$ 3126.3 Trillion||$ -1127.6 Billion||-8.7|
A simple review of the number shows some interesting mileposts. The federal operating deficit has increased approximatley 500% since control of the Federal government was last vested in unified Republican control (2006).
When W could still exercise some restraint on the spending human-monster soft core spending porn, Barack, Nancy, Harry were only able to increase total outlays by 5.4%. Now that is not a great, but that makes
The election of BHO as POTUS put Caligula in charge of the spending party. In the first year of the Obama Presidency, with complete Democrat control-absent even the threat of a Republican filibuster-of spending outlays increased by 17.3%-at a time when federal revenues were collapsing following the THREE CONSECUTIVE YEARS OF RECORD REVENUE (2006-2008) Dubya's Administration produced. That's 17.3% in one year. That's also the last year the still Democrat Senate even produced a budget, so the next two years of spending reflect a deficit chef on autopilot.
While we cannot always go into the nerd tree of numbers in every public interview on the deficit spending, here's a fact based sound bite that works every time a libs say W caused the deficit-"liar!"