SamuelRSmith said:
richardhutnik said:
BenVTrigger said:
I mean fact in its simplest terms Bong Lover. Any way you look at it Obama has already spent more than any president in US history bar none. The federal govt expenditure under his administration has averaged 3.5 trillion a year in comparison to "big bad evil bushs" 2.5 trillion.
And by no means am i a Bush lover but people who attack Bush and defend Obama are flat out hilarious |
It isn't the raw size of the amount of money spent that is the issue. The federal budget can grow much larger in raw dollars, but be a smaller percentage of the economy. The big issue has to do with the size of the deficit, and the interest payments as a percentage of the economy.
As the economy grows, the federal government would expect to have more money. Economies naturally grow, if things go right, and tax revenues go up, and it is best they get spent on something to make the country raising the taxes better.
|
A problem with this is that we have no idea what any of the figures actually are. GDP, inflation, spending numbers are all so bastardized and fuzzy through accounting tricks, the actual picture out there could be miles worse than what we're being led to believe.
|
http://www.shadowstats.com/
As you were saying...
What should be detectable though, is an increase in tax revenues, with everything else left alone. Economies, by their nature are geared toward growing though. Economies do want to grow, order things for commerce, and continue to add value. People with money seek this out. Of course, there is always the risk of a piling on of negative externalities that end up causing a net decline if they get large enough. Also, there is the risks of a disaster happening also.
