Mover Mike

My B. Bradford postings reminded me of this information:

NATIONAL DEBT

Here is how the National Debt has grown over the Last 3 Decades:

Carter - 4 Years
Started - 01/21/1977 - $653,544,000,000.00
Ended - 01/19/1981 - $930,209,523,658.00

Total Debt under Carter - $276,665,523,658.00 (276 Billion)

Reagan - 8 Years
Started - 01/20/1981 - $930,210,000,000.00
Ended - 01/19/1989 - $2,602,337,712,041.16

Total Debt under Reagan - $1,672,127,712,041.00 (1.6 Trillion)

Bush, Sr. - 4 Years
Started - 01/20/1989 - $2,602,857,255,961.25
Ended - 01/19/1993 - $4,187,806,610,369.16

Total Debt under Bush, Sr. - $1,584,949,354,408.00 (1.5 Trillion)

Clinton - 8 Years
Started - 01/20/1993 - $4,188,092,107,183.60
Ended - 01/19/2001 - $5,727,776,738,304.64

Total Debt under Clinton - $1,539,684,631,121.00 (1.5 Trillion)

Bush. Jr. - 5 Years
Started - 01/20/2001 - $5,728,195,796,181.57
Ended - 01/24/2006 - $8,185,315,076,347.87

Total Debt under Bush, Jr. - $2,457,119,280,166.00 (2.4 Trillion) & Growing

I am afraid this will all end badly!

Hat Tip to Scribe

Budget Surplus national debt Mover Mike

B. Bradford has replied to my post:

Thank you for your response.

At the very least, use inflation adjusted dollars or you are comparing 2000 dollars to 1999 dollars to 1998 dollars, which is completely invalid. Using a constant measure is critical in producing a valid chart.

You can see charts of the surplus here

I find your explanation, that the Republicans want to "mislead" us into thinking that there was a surplus under the Democrats, highly unlikely.

B. Bradford, I am not going to adjust the deficit for inflation. I don't want you to feel good about the deficit. Quoting from an earlier Mover Mike:

"The gimmicked accounting standards, as established during the Johnson era, and as used today for official, unified budget reporting, show a 2003 deficit of $374.3 billion. Using GAAP reporting (without Social Security reporting), the official GAAP deficit for 2003 expands to $665.0 billion. Including accounting for Social Security and related areas, the 2003 deficit balloons to $3,702 billion, or $3.7 trillion. The accounting reflects no adjustment for the new, more expensive Medicare program." (in all cases I've added emphasis)

2004 Results

Results for the official 2004 deficit will be published in the next several months, and the numbers are projected by the Bush administration to be significantly worse than in 2003, $445 billion versus $374 billion, with the actual deficit likely to near $4.3 trillion (my estimate). The 2004 GAAP financial statements on the government will not be published until March/April

-----------------------------GAAP-Based--------GAAP-Based

Fiscal--------"Official"----Deficit Without---Deficit With

-Year-----------Deficit------Soc. Sec., Etc.--Soc. Sec., Etc.

------------------------------------------------------------

2004 est.---$445 Billion-----$800 Billion-----$4.3 Trillion

2003--------$374 Billion-----$665 Billion-----$3.7 Trillion

2002--------$158 Billion-----$365 Billion-----$1.5 Trillion

The politicians would like you to adjust the deficit for inflation, that would make it look smaller. But they are already playing games with the deficit to make it look smaller. Above are numbers just for 2002, 2003 and 2004, showing what the real deficit is.

We have a neat scam going. We go into debt and debase the dollar through inflation and make the value of the dollars we pay back worth less. Since 1971 when the US went off the Gold Standard the value of the dollar has been debased to the tune of 95%.

Why do the Republicans go along with the fiction of a surplus in the Clinton years? Because they want to use the same tricks Clinton and Bush I, and Carter and Reagan and Nixon used. They want to continmue spending money, giving the voters essentially bread and circuses for their vote, without raising taxes.

IT'S A TRAVESTY!

B Bradford Budget Surplus Clinton Administration national debt Mover Mike