Bush digs U.S. deep into debt
I am concerned about those who continue to support President George W. Bush.
President Bush has increased the national debt to $9.5 trillion. This debt is serious, and even if surpluses are found, it will take years to reduce the debt. The debt will probably reach $11 trillion before we can begin to pay it down.
This debt requires us to borrow money from other governments such as China. The value of the dollar is falling because of the debt.
Each time taxes were reduced the debt has increased. First we must reduce the debt to reasonable levels, then cut taxes.
We have record oil and food prices, a housing crisis, an auto industry in trouble and a loss of jobs. There has been extreme mismanagement of the economy by President George W. Bush.
Richard Huff
Overland Park

Sammy,
14 years of growth at 5% will get you to about 100%, so it's not really surprising that fed outlays almost doubled. With the expensive war we're hosting I'm surprised it's not more.
You would have had a stronger argument if you had referenced constant dollars.
Posted by: preservation hall | Aug 7, 2008 8:03:29 AM
Sure glad those frugal, "where's the money going to come from" Republicans have controlled the Whitehouse and/or Congress so much of the last twenty years. Can you imagine how bad it would be if those "fiscally conservative" Republicans hadn't been here to hold things in check?
Yeah right.
Since 1980 the United States has proven beyond any doubt that a group of idiots with an unlimited credit card can have a really good time. Too bad even with no spending limit the bill will come due.
Posted by: jack | Aug 6, 2008 10:28:31 PM
Eng: Once again your arguement appears to be, "I know my guys suck. But the other guys would be worse."
Wow, what a political slogan:
"Vote for us, we suck less!"
Posted by: jack | Aug 6, 2008 10:23:27 PM
The president forced loads of spending onto congress and they did not have the guts to fight back. Look how the Democratic controlled congress keeps giving him more money for Iraq when they could have forced and end to the immoral war within months after they took office. Look how the prior Republican congress passed Medicare D when they knew that Medicare was already broke.
The spending coupled with a Federal Reserve which tries to suppress the market response of higher interest rates prints new money with abandon. That is why all prices go up-not speculators, no excuses. When you print new money, all the existing money buys less. There is more money chasing the same goods.
It is functionally no different than a bunch of counterfeiters who do good printing work. The only difference is who gets the benefit of the first spend. After that it is just money in circulation.
Posted by: Michael Kerner | Aug 6, 2008 7:45:24 PM
Janda
How will a Democrat Administration remedy this situation? Since 2006 when they took control of the House, and the purse strings, they have spent more, not less.
Posted by: Engineer | Aug 6, 2008 4:37:09 PM
As of July 26 the public debt was $9,540,689,536,562, up from $5,727,776,738,304 when Bush took office; an increase of 60%. The total average interest on the debt is 4.461%. The U.S. population is 304,719,602 people.
Bush’s debt increase of $3,812,912,798,258 equals $12,513 for every person in the U.S raising the per capita debt from $18,796 when he entered office to $31,309 per person. This is the “birth tax” today.
The interest on the increase in the national debt under Bush is $170,094,039,930 per year or $466,011,068 per day.
That $466 million per day is just the increase in the interest on Bush’s debt.
The “don’t worry be happy” stance pretty well sums up the Republican attitude.
Remember Dick Cheney, “You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due.”
Posted by: Janda | Aug 6, 2008 2:07:36 PM
Sammy,
Those charts Ross Perot held up on TV years ago were right too. Things that make sense are not popular with our elected officials.
Posted by: solomon | Aug 6, 2008 10:26:07 AM
"Each time taxes were reduced the debt has increased."
At least do your homework Richard. The government has never had as much revenue as it has now, after the cuts. The problem is spending, not taxes.
Ron Paul got one thing right (and it shocked me when I did my homework). If we put government spending back to 1994 levels, we wouldn't need to collect ANY individual income tax.
1994 Total Fed Outlay: $1.5 Trillion
2007 Total Fed Outlay: $2.8 Trillion
2007 Fed Receipts from individual income tax: $1.2 Trillion
(Source: 2008 Statistical Abstract of the United States)
Posted by: Sammy | Aug 6, 2008 9:35:38 AM
"We have record oil and food prices, a housing crisis, an auto industry in trouble and a loss of jobs. There has been extreme mismanagement of the economy by President George W. Bush."
It seems that to Mr. Huff, like many others, Bush is responsible for absolutely everything bad.
Record Oil and Food Prices: I'll give Richard half credit here. The record oil prices were due to the falling value of the dollar (which, could be argued, were due to the administration's level of spending, although our bad import / export ratio can also be blamed) and speculators on the WORLD market (which can no more be blamed on Bush that on you or I).
Housing Crises: This one is a no-go. Vastly over-inflated values and inappropriate lending / borrowing caused the bubble to burst. The values were in due in part to the "hype" of the early decade, and the deregulation that spurred the packaging of sub-prime loans (which encouraged marginal lending) were initiated under Clinton's watch.
Auto Industry: It's now somehow Bush's fault that the Big 3 failed to recognize a shifting market and increase innovation and introduce better products in an attempt to survive? Combined with the burden of HUGE benefit costs that foreign manufacturers aren't dealing with, this is what has put the American manufacturers in the position their in, not Bush.
Seriously guys. There are a LOT of bad things that you can place squarely on Bush's shoulders. Why the need to try and place things that don't belong there?
Posted by: Marctnts | Aug 6, 2008 9:12:23 AM
Uh, Richard, the President can't spend one penny of your money.....see under the separation of powers that duty falls to the Congress.....or as it has been said, the President proposes, and Congress disposes....
Posted by: Rogue | Aug 6, 2008 7:58:39 AM
Run Richard run!
Posted by: solomon | Aug 6, 2008 7:15:08 AM