The New York Times posted a chart on Sunday comparing new expenditures by President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama under their respective terms. The chart uses information from the Congressional Budget Office and estimates Obama’s new costs through 2017 (to equal Bush’s two terms). The results speak volumes.
Based on the figures from the chart, Bush spent $5.07 trillion on new expenditures from fiscal years 2002-2009. Obama will have spent only $1.44 trillion through 2017, including saving $126 billion through spending cuts.
According to the chart of costs based on new policies:
You can view The New York Times’ chart here or below.
The New York Times
Sources: Congressional Budget Office; Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
where is Obama"s spending on the four wars we are in now?
You have got to be kidding me. This is propaganda at it’s best. WOW who would believe this.
tea parties = “terrorists” - whatever, what a bunch of pansies you liberals are.
Pasha, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are Bush policies. Obama didn’t get in in there so he’s not responsible for the cost. This chart was done in 2010.
Ray, this isn’t propaganda, this comes from the Non partisan Congressional budget office. You know, the agency that keeps track of the deficit and our tab. They don’t choose sides. The numbers don’t lie.
This is pure numbers magic. Bush took out National Debt from about 5.5 trillion to about 9.5 trillion in either years. Obama has taken our National Debt from about 9.5 trillion to about 15.5 trillion in just three short years. The above numbers magic charts are ludicrous.
David, you miss the point. You just say anything the govt spends is Obama’s fault. He can be blamed for the war costs that we are currently paying. You are just looking at total outlays, not new spending. You would blame Obama for Bush spending, that goes on and on? We have a smaller amount of govt money leading to deficiets and the reason is the Bush tax cuts. The spending on the Bush wars and his medicare prescription plan (unfunded) goes on and on, we are still paying for them. you would blame Obama for the stuff Bush did?
I think the bigger point is missed. Obama and the media bashed Bush for spending too much, then Obama came in and did the exact same thing. He accelerated the car headed toward the cliff rather than putting on the brakes. Hypocritical? We need someone who can find the brake pedal!
that is just new spending and why cant we blame obama for wars he continued to support and he has entered several new countries, plus this is only regarding new policies it doesnt talk about icreases he has made on already existing ones
Could the Tea Party plans be considered economic terrorism?