Thread: Which recent president was the biggest spender? Which was the smallest?

So wait, Bush signs a massive bailout, which many from the right disagreed with (present company included), and Barry is still outspending him, but just barely, so we should be happy with that? Yeah, ok. Funny how with unemployment and under-employment still at astronomical heights the government is increasing spending at all. You would think since income is down taxes would be as well, so the budget would be smaller, but I guess I failed economics...

Read up on your journalist and his choice of title v article content... that is not so shocking.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Funny how with unemployment and under-employment still at astronomical heights the government is increasing spending at all.

Its called counter-cyclical government spending. The government should increase spending and create jobs during an economic downturn to fill the gaps left by a receding private sector.

Now how this has been attempted during this recent recession has not been optimal, but its way better than the government not doing anything at all, or worse, also shrinking itself.

Originally Posted by Madmax (Grape)

Its called counter-cyclical government spending. The government should increase spending and create jobs during an economic downturn to fill the gaps left by a receding private sector.

Now how this has been attempted during this recent recession has not been optimal, but its way better than the government not doing anything at all, or worse, also shrinking itself.

This is exactly it. Also, because the economy was already in a downward spiral when Obama came in to office, he has had to spend money to bring it back. It has taken him 4 years to do sure, but it's not like the entire United States would just suddenly want to spend money again (which is what the economy needs.) I don't think a president's term should be judged by how much money they spent while in office, it should be judged off of the subsequent effects of their spending, and as much as some people want to ignore it, the economy IS getting better. Businesses are starting, more jobs are opening up, and money is starting to move again.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

So wait, Bush signs a massive bailout, which many from the right disagreed with (present company included), and Barry is still outspending him, but just barely, so we should be happy with that? Yeah, ok. Funny how with unemployment and under-employment still at astronomical heights the government is increasing spending at all. You would think since income is down taxes would be as well, so the budget would be smaller, but I guess I failed economics...

What Economics classes did you take? Not digging, just really curious as a lot of people spew stuff on here and have NO idea what they are talking about.

People can assume they know how the economy works based on what they see on television and by what Rush Lindbaugh or Bill Maher tell them. I am not saying one is right or wrong either way, but a lot of people are educated by the media, and that just ISN'T the way to learn things correctly, with an open mind, rather than with a hard lean one way or the other.

Originally Posted by Madmax (Grape)

Its called counter-cyclical government spending. The government should increase spending and create jobs during an economic downturn to fill the gaps left by a receding private sector.

Wrong, wrong, wrong! Well, maybe I put too many "wrongs". Spending isn't always the answer. Increasing spending is not guaranteed to create jobs, and that money has to come from somewhere, right? So if you want more spending, it will require more taxes. The government can tax us all day long, but do you trust what they are doing with the money we currently give them?

So what is next? There isn't any magical thing we can do to simply create jobs. We are getting our asses kicked by the import business and outsourcing. So do we tax companies that choose to outsource/offshore labor? That might work, until the American workers realize how shitty they are going to get paid. I guess getting paid a shitty wage is better than not having a job at all, right?

Smart spending is the answer. If there isn't anything good to invest in at the moment, why should we spend a dime? So I guess I am not totally disagreeing with you, but spending is risky if it is on stupid stuff.

Originally Posted by HeavyG

Smart spending is the answer. If there isn't anything good to invest in at the moment, why should we spend a dime? So I guess I am not totally disagreeing with you, but spending is risky if it is on stupid stuff.

You are right, but the system is set up to prevent smart spending. I work for the federal government. This is how it works:

Department A has a budget of $1M dollars for fiscal year 2011. Chugging along and fulfilling their goals and being careful stewards of the people's money, they actually spend only $500K.
Department B has a budget of $1M for fiscal year 2011. Just doing their thing and not being good stewards of the people's money, they barely meet their goals while running out of funding in July.

When the budget gets done for fiscal year 2012 (ha! like that ever happens) the better performing department A will get underfunded and the wasteful Department B will get additional funding. Thus rewarding people who are not doing their jobs correctly.

So in the real world, what happens is that all departments, towards the end of the fiscal year, will start buying stupid things that they do not really need so as to not to receive less funds in the next budget. This is what needs to be fixed. No I do not have the answers. But I have a very close view of the problem. And it is very scary. My organization, for example, has never met a third party IT tool they did not like and buy. They wont let the fact that the OEM's tool is better and comes with the product at no additional charge stop them from buying the tools. Nor will they listen to us techy types that keep telling them that we do not need this crapware. This is caused by the scenario I mentioned above. I am sure that other government agencies have similar issues.