Who’s to blame for the National Debt?

[Joanne98]

As a Graphic Designer by trade, an artist in general, and a scatterbrain in particular, I like to see data in graphs and charts. To me, it’s just much more useful to see information graphically represented (see my previous post for a good example) than to examine tables of raw data. So when I see charts like the one on the right, it makes a big impression on me.

This chart (or others like it) isn’t exactly new. It’s been floating around the net for a few years, and it clearly shows that the National Debt increases at a significantly greater rate when we have a Republican president. I’ve seen this chart pop up on Digg and in message board comments all over the place. There are apparently a lot of people who have it bookmarked and are ready to post a link to it at the first sign of praise of Republican fiscal policy or criticism of Democrat fiscal policy.

However, one of the first criticisms this chart gets is always something along the lines of “the President doesn’t really have much control over the economy” or that it’s really a problem caused in the Senate, since they’re the ones who come up with the bills. The inevitable response to that is “yes, but the President can veto those bills”. Who’s really to blame?

http://dubiositysite.blogspot.com/2009/02/whos-to-blame-for-national-debt.html

Charts at link...

[Warpy]

1. The Republican Party

and their silly tax cutting dogma. Every time they cut taxes on the ultra rich, the government gets starved for funds, stops doing its important work on infrastructure, and the economy goes into the toilet.

[sandnsea]

2. Warmongers are to blame

In the White House, in the HOUSE where the budgets are written, in the Senate - and mostly in the country at large.

[Lasher]

3. There is a newer version of the first chart

Here it is:



http://www.lafn.org/politics/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

Another good graphic here

More images &imgrefurl=http://thereadersbrigade.blogspot.com/2007/10/those-tax-and-spend-republicans.html&h=518&w=845&sz=16&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=Gj55vGrnS7RD0M:&tbnh=89&tbnw=145&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhistorical%2Bdeficit%2Bdemocratic%2Brepublican%2Bpresident%2Bcongress%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN">here

You don't have to be an economist to be able to grasp the obvious. Thanks for sharing this good scoop.

Lasher

[Joanne98]

6. Oh WOW thanks Lasher. I'm making it my new screensaver!

:)

[Lasher]

7. Notice the TARP spending is not reflected in the 2008 deficit.

That's because the federal government fiscal year ends on September 30. FY 2009 will be a real eye popper. :-(

[FiveGoodMen]

4. A populace that continually approves of spending more on defense than the entire rest of the world

certainly has to be factored in.

[Lasher]

5. That's only part of it.

Democrats spend a little too much. Republicans cut taxes for their rich owners, decreasing revenue despite the fairy tales we have heard, and then they spend way more.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20059-2005Apr1.html

[FiveGoodMen]

8. That's why I said 'factored in'

But we are talking about a LOT of money just for the Pentagon (who 'lost' a couple trillion, if I remember correctly).

[Lasher]

9. I couldn't agree more.

Half as much as we are currently spending on 'defense' would be way too much.