I think that President Obama raised the national debt by $9.3 trillion. How can anyone say he did a good job as president?
There are several things one has to remember when discussing the increased debt from FY “09 to FY ’17.On September 30, 2008 (last day of FY 08) the national debt was at 9.2 trillion dollars. Let’s remember this was 112 days prior to Obama taking office. During those 112 days America was in the middle of the 2nd largest economic collapse in US history. On January 21st 2009 the US national debt was at $10.6 trillion dollars. That’s an addition of $1.4 trillion that many on the right are charging to President Obama that was incurred before he even took office.Between Jan. 21, 2009 and the end of FY 10 (21 months) there was $3.9 trillion added to the debt which were expenses for expenses incurred before Obama took office. Including the actual cost of the two theater war which began in the fall of 2001 that Bush II had kept “off book” that Obama placed ON the books. Plus the costs of bank and corporate bailouts due to the economic collapse incurred during the previous administration.Federal dollars given to states to help alleviate unemployment benefits and well as the federal SNAP program, due to the millions of jobs lost during the economic collapse.Medicare cost mainly attributed to an aging population have attributed to $1.1 trillion in the national debt since FY ’09.Following FY ’11 the national debt began growing at a slower rate. This was due to 3 items. 1) Loan paybacks from GM and Chrysler, as well as an Energy department project investing in renewable energy manufacturing. (yes this was the program which began in 2005 under the GWB admin and remains today. This is the same program which received guff for the Solyandra bankruptcy. However, what many have not heard is that beginning in 2012 this program for the first time ever made a profit from repayment of loans given out during FY 2009/10.Beginning in 2013 the debt began growing at an even slower rate when the Unemployment rate dropped at a faster rate and more tax dollars came in.In FY 2016 the national debt grew $546 billion dollars. The lowest growth in the debt since FY 2005. In FY 2017 the debt grew $644 billion, an increase in the growth rate of nearly $100 billion. FY 2017 was the first year the debt growth rate grew from the previous year for the first time since FY 2012.The largest contributor of the national debt since FY ’05 has been decreased tax revenue following the tax cuts enacted in 2003.
Obama increased the US GDP by $4 trillions but increased the US’ debt by $9 trillions. Didn’t Obama worsen America’s economy?
Yes. Do you really need to ask?
How much did Obama add to the national debt?
On October 1st, 2001, the first day of Bush’s 1st Budget, our debt was $5.8 Trillion Dollars. On September 30th, 2009 the last day of Bush’s Last Budget, our debt was $11.65 Trillion, meaning that Bush added $5.85 Trillion or slightly more than DOUBLING our Debt.On October 1st, 2009, the first day of Obama’s 1st Budget, our debt was $11.65 Trillion Dollars. And on September 30th, 2017 the last day of Obama’s Last Budget, our debt was $20 Trillion, meaning that Obama added $8.35 Trillion or in other words, he increased our debt by 71.67%Recent other Presidents had the following results: Reagan TRIPLED our Debt between his Tax Cuts to the Wealthy and Spending like a Drunken Sailor, even more than before the tax cuts, which is why our Debt TRIPLED. GHW Bush in just 4 years, increased our debt by 68%, almost as much as Obama did in 8 years. Clinton, the first president since LB Johnson, to have a budget surplus, and he ended his presidency with 4 consecutive budget surpluses, to only increase our debt by 37%.I think I’m seeing a PATTERN here, Republicans cut taxes AND increase spending, so our debt goes way up under Republicans while Democrats Raise taxes (ON THE WEALTHY) & CUT spending. So when Republicans occupy the White House, our debt goes WAY UP, and when the Democrats are in the White House, our debt doesn’t go up so fast.Trump was predicted to increase the debt by $10 Trillion, BEFORE THE Republican TAX CUT, NOW he is on schedule to increase by $11.5 Trillion in 8 years, compared to Obama’s $8.35 Trillion. And that assumes that there aren’t other increases in spending.
Why did Obama increase the debt by 5 trillion?
Because the US Congress voted upon and approved spending which exceeded revenues by 5 trillion over the same time period. While Obama can make requests regarding spending and taxation, it's up to the legislature to actually make those decisions.Given the list of "Related Questions", I am inclined to think that this is being asked because of the recent (as of November, 2015) discussions concerning the "Debt Ceiling", a fundamentally flawed law which exists solely so that the Congress can periodically make it a political issue.The debt ceiling is basically Congress telling the Treasury "We are going to require you, by law, to spend more than you take in, but if you try to borrow money needed to actually comply with that law, we are going to yell at you for being irresponsible."
How did the US national debt go from 7.6 trillion in 2004 to nearly 19 trillion now?
Since 1998, the US has issued $719 Trillion in govt securities, what we call "debt". Mike Norman points out that only about 2.5% of that remains outstanding as interest bearing Treasury securities accounts, which are in high demand, "over-subscribed".So that $19 Trillion is literally private savings. Is private savings wrong? Bad? In a capitalist economy, I thought savings is good? Is it bad that American banks and foreigners park their savings in USA accounts? None of the wealthy depositors seem to be complaining.So $700 Trillion has been successfully "paid back" since 1998, with a little bonus of interest, thank you for doing business with America. Functionally, all that happens is the balance is moved from one account inside the Fed (savings, aka Treasuries) to another account (demand deposits, aka reserves). That's how the so-called debt ) liabilities) is "paid back", per contract. It reverts to Fed's liabilities. That is no longer Treasury liabilities, so no longer officially "govt liabilities" aka "debt". That's all.It's just like when your CD reverts back to your checking account. You can leave it there, or re-up for a new CD, if you don't plan to spend it soon. If you spend it, the balance just moves to someone else's account.That's a service that Congress provides to the financial sector, to bond traders, to savers. They can't demand gold. All they get are account credits, which the USA govt produces, exclusively. Nobody else creates US dollars but Uncle Sam.As Greenspan told Paul Ryan, YouTube, specifically on Social Security, but anything, the US can always pay any obligations it has.Apparently, banks and foreign investors, and Americans, have accumulated that much more net financial wealth. That's why the number is bigger. Of course some of us are much richer while others are the same or have much less wealth now, but that's a separate topic.
During Barack Obama's presidency the US national debt has increased from $10 trillion to over $17 trillion. Who is to blame and does it matter?
It is neither a critical issue at the moment nor is it the responsibility of the President that was elected immediately after a major recession or Depression. A funny thing happens after an economic collapse, government revenue drops considerably at the exact time that government is needed the most, spiking deficits to triple or quadruple, especially if you do the right thing and increase rather than decrease spending. Decreasing spending would definitely have deepened and prolonged the time it takes to recover.This particular collapse was somewhat unique in the history of economics, and we are very lucky that it was not worse and that it is turning around despite deceptively weak balance sheets for all three legs of financial institutions. Therefore, it was much more important that spending not be cut. On the other hand, the Bush tax cuts could be said to be exasperating the situation more than necessary, for there is no reason to believe that the trickle down effects are preventing things from getting worse and good reason to believe that they are at least fueling false fears about a worse structural problem than is a apparent. In which case, if we are talking about the increase of $7 trillion vs what would have been potentially an increase of $5 trillion, then the blame would have to be placed on the Republican House that refused to even consider violating the silly Norquist pledge. However, the truth is we were destined to have this level of debt regardless because, IF the House did agree to tax increases, it would probably have included a State revenue sharing proposal of an equal amount to stimulate selected regions.The good news is that, IF we can grow at normal fast recovery rate for the next five years, and reasonable tax policies are in effect, and minimum wage increased sufficiently to decrease preprogrammed food stamp, earned income credit, and housing subsidy programs, the short term deficit can be reduced in half and the long term fears diminished greatly.
The total national debt when Obama leaves office is expected to approach $20 trillion. What effect does a debt that exceeds GDP mean for the US?
The reason you would want to have debt not greater than the GDP is the cost of servicing the debt shrinks the GDP when the debt is more that the GDP. The cost of servicing the debt is the interest you pay on the debt and as debt increases the interest on the debt increases which effectively means that some of the services that government provides will shrink due to spending cut or the revenue has to grow.There is also the rate of interest, which is a measure of the cost of capital in an economy, right now it is at an all time low because of the Federal Reserves’ Zero Interest Rate Policy. This cannot be sustained as eventually the Interest rate will have to go up which causes the cost of servicing the debt even higher. This effectively robs the future generations of the services that government provides.For example if the defense spending shrinks the US might have to prioritize it defense capabilities and readiness, which might lead to more security threats/conflicts.The healthcare spending could be limited and new research and development efforts might be impacted.Infrastructure maintenance and investment could be impacted.Higher taxation on the populace.All this could lead to crisis of confidence in the institutions of governance and lead to political instability.