This graph says it all!

[jerry611]

Sometimes people have trouble visualizing raw numbers. So here is a link to a graph that shows the mis-management of this administration.

http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

[mike_c]

1. K&R-- note that the slope of that line ALWAYS increases under...

...republican administrations-- the same administrations that routinely pass themselves off as "fiscally responsible." Always. Lincoln was evidently wrong-- you really can fool all of the people all of the time!

[central scrutinizer]

4. Both the first and second derivatives are positive

Take that Mr. "marginal tax rate" bullshitter. At least the second derivative was negative under Clinton meaning things were getting under control.

[Roland99]

2. Table 7.1 from this link shows all the detail

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/pdf/hist.pdf

[BlueEyedSon]

3. this quote is a goodie:

"Over the last 59 years Republican Presidents have out borrowed Democratic Presidents by almost a three to one ratio. That is, for every dollar a Democratic President has raised the national debt in the past 59 years Republican Presidents have raised the debt by $2.87."

[progressoid]

5. That looks like a keeper.

[thereismore]

6. Nice. thanks. nt

[FULL_METAL_HAT]

7. Graph I made myself awhile back showing Debt, Deficit, and GDP relations

A while back I posted this http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2536864&mesg_id=2537334

DEBT/DEFICIT confusion is one of the things that allows them to scam us!

Here's a graph I made. Save and share!




A couple of points to note:

The purple line with square points is the debt as a % of GDP (with the percentage scale on the right side of the graph). You might consider as the amount of money you earn per year vs. how much debt you carry. (Frankly when I looked at this I thought its actually kinda reasonable. If someone made $40K/year, carrying $13,200 (33%) or even $27,200 (68%) in a car loan or a mortgage doesn't seem out of bounds. But I'm not a 'conimist so I can't say if this holds true of an entire nation!)

As we can see it's fluctuated between 50% down to 33% up to 68% down to 58% and then from there I can only presume its trending upward.

The two lines near the bottom, the blue shows the deficit as a % of the GDP, which has never broke 7% it seems but has been below 0% meaning no deficit. The orange line shows the deficit as a % of the debt which is quite fascinating when you look at the presidents and politics of the times when it was highest. Of course Clinton had a budget SURPLUS so this line dropped below 0% into the "negative deficit".

Please feel free to comment on the politics of the times we can see in this graph.

{B^> FMH

p.s. If you want to SEE where the budget money goes, there is an EXCELLENT visual layout here:

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/9410862 /

I suggest you start with the circle with the flag. It starts there by showing of the 2004 budget of $782 BILLION, Military spending was $399 BILLION while NON-Military spending was $383 BILLION! 51% to 48% (familiar numbers???) And that doesn't include the 26 BILLION for DHS (non-military lol!) ... that brings it up to a "mandate" of 54% ... I daresay our 'conomy is being solely supported by our spending our future (by running up the deficits and debts) on weapons against an enemy that killed 500 TIMES less people in 5 years than "Adverse Drug Reactions" from pharmaceuticals has (est. 305,000 PER YEAR! "Death by medicine" Word document of study)

[BlooInBloo]

8. I must be missing something....

... To my eye, it looks like gw increased the debt by about 70-80%. And yet the page says that the republican average debt increase was only 9-ish%. Given that there are only 6 republicans on the graph, that means that the other 5 republicans' debt increases must have been vanishingly small to get from 70% increase data point down to a 9% average.

Am I missing something?


EDIT: Thanks for the link tho! Very informative.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

9. I love that it says "1st Oil War" and "2nd Oil War"

Someone needs to post this on a big billboard right out in front of the White House.

[Jim Warren]

10. This is bush's legacy...............defined and illustrated!

If this administration is groping to define it's legacy this should be easy for even them to understand. The end of big government, indeed.