US National Debt by Year

This data table is a list of US National Debt by year by President. The second column is the amount added or subtracted to the debt for that year, the third column is the total debt for that year, after additions/subtractions. The number used per year is the accumulated national debt as of September 30 of any given year, as that is the end of the federal governments fiscal year.

Expert custom sissertation writing service. Can someone write my dissertation for me? We are expert in dissertation writing.

End of Term % of Total Debt is based off of the FY2015 debt of $18,150,617,666,484.33. 2016 is updated to the current debt. The remaining percentages will be updated as time permits. (Last Updated: 1/2/2016)

* US National Debt data, spanning from 1975 to 1985 is rounded up to the nearest $1 million. Reasons as to why are currently unknown.

Source: US Department of the Treasury

Year President Added/Subtracted Debt Cumulative Debt Yearly % Increase Total Term % Increase End of Term % of Total Debt
1789 George Washington n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
1790 George Washington n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
1791 George Washington $75,463,476.52 $75,463,476.52 n/a 100% .0005%
1792 George Washington $1,764,448.14 $77,227,924.66 2.3% 100% .0005%
1793 George Washington $3,130,709.38 $80,358,634.04 4.0% 100% .0005%
1794 George Washington -$1,931,229.27 $78,427,404.77 -2.4% 100% .0005%
1795 George Washington $2,320,182.62 $80,747,587.39 3.0% 100% .0005%
1796 George Washington $3,014,584.68 $83,762,172.07 3.7% 100% .0005%
1797 John Adams -$1,697,692.74 $82,064,479.33 -2.0% -0.9% -0.000004%
1798 John Adams -$2,835,950.21 $79,228,529.12 -3.5% -0.9% -0.000004%
1799 John Adams -$819,859.35 $78,408,669.77 -1.03% -0.9% -0.000004%
1800 John Adams $4,567,624.58 $82,976,294.35 5.8% -0.9% -0.000004%
1801 Thomas Jefferson $61,756.45 $83,038,050.80 7.4% -21.4% -0.0001%
1802 Thomas Jefferson -$2,325,418.55 $80,712,632.25 -2.8% -21.4% -0.0001%
1803 Thomas Jefferson -$3,657,945.85 $77,054,686.40 -4.5% -21.4% -0.0001%
1804 Thomas Jefferson $9,372,434.48 $86,427,120.88 12.2% -21.4% -0.0001%
1805 Thomas Jefferson -$4,114,970.38 $82,312,150.50 -4.8% -21.4% -0.0001%
1806 Thomas Jefferson -$6,588,879.84 $75,723,270.66 -8.0% -21.4% -0.0001%
1807 Thomas Jefferson -$6,504,872.02 $69,218,398.64 -8.6% -21.4% -0.0001%
1808 Thomas Jefferson -$4,022,080.67 $65,196,317.97 -5.8% -21.4% -0.0001%
1809 James Madison -$8,173,125.88 $57,023,192.09 -12.5% 95.3% 0.0004%
1810 James Madison -$3,849,974.57 $53,173,217.52 -6.8% 95.3% 0.0004%
1811 James Madison -$5,167,629.76 $48,005,587.76 -9.7% 95.3% 0.0004%
1812 James Madison -$2,795,849.86 $45,209,737.90 -5.8% 95.3% 0.0004%
1813 James Madison $10,753,089.67 $55,962,827.57 23.8% 95.3% 0.0004%
1814 James Madison $25,525,018.67 $81,487,846.24 45.6% 95.3% 0.0004%
1815 James Madison $18,345,813.91 $99,833,660.15 22.5% 95.3% 0.0004%
1816 James Madison $27,501,273.59 $127,334,933.74 27.5% 95.3% 0.0004%
1817 James Monroe -$3,842,968.58 $123,491,965.16 -3.0% -29.1% -0.0002%
1818 James Monroe -$20,025,331.33 $103,466,633.83 -16.2% -29.1% -0.0002%
1819 James Monroe -$7,936,985.55 $95,529,648.28 -7.7% -29.1% -0.0002%
1820 James Monroe -$4,514,082.13 $91,015,566.15 -4.7% -29.1% -0.0002%
1821 James Monroe -$1,028,138.49 $89,987,427.66 -1.1% -29.1% -0.0002%
1822 James Monroe $3,559,249.32 $93,546,676.98 4.0% -29.1% -0.0002%
1823 James Monroe -$2,670,799.70 $90,875,877.28 -2.9% -29.1% -0.0002%
1824 James Monroe -$606,099.51 $90,269,777.77 -0.6% -29.1% -0.0002%
1825 John Quincy Adams -$6,481,345.06 $83,788,432.71 -7.2% -25.3% -0.0001%
1826 John Quincy Adams -$2,734,372.72 $81,054,059.99 -3.3% -25.3% -0.0001%
1827 John Quincy Adams -$7,066,702.79 $73,987,357.20 -8.7% -25.3% -0.0001%
1828 John Quincy Adams -$6,512,313.33 $67,475,043.87 -8.8% -25.3% -0.0001%
1829 Andrew Jackson -$9,053,630.20 $58,421,413.67 -13.4% -99.9% -0.0004%
1830 Andrew Jackson -$9,856,007.17 $48,565,406.50 -16.9% -99.9% -0.0004%
1831 Andrew Jackson -$9,442,214.82 $39,123,191.68 -19.4% -99.9% -0.0004%
1832 Andrew Jackson -$14,800,956.50 $24,322,235.18 -37.8% -99.9% -0.0004%
1833 Andrew Jackson -$17,320,536.35 $7,001,698.83 -71.2% -99.9% -0.0004%
1834 Andrew Jackson -$2,241,616.75 $4,760,082.08 -32.0% -99.9% -0.0004%
1835 Andrew Jackson -$4,726,349.03 $33,733.05 -99.3% -99.9% -0.0004%
1836 Andrew Jackson $3,780.00 $37,513.05 11.2% -99.9% -0.0004%
1837 Martin Van Buren $299,444.78 $336,957.83 798.2% 9,425.6% 0.00002%
1838 Martin Van Buren $2,971,166.24 $3,308,124.07 881.8% 9,425.6% 0.00002%
1839 Martin Van Buren $7,126,097.07 $10,434,221.14 215.4% 9,425.6% 0.00002%
1840 Martin Van Buren -$6,860,877.32 $3,573,343.82 -65.8% 9,425.6% 0.00002%
1841 William Henry Harrison / John Tyler $1,677,531.72 $5,250,875.54 46.9% 556.6% 0.00002%
1842 John Tyler $8,343,605.19 $13,594,480.73 158.9% 556.6% 0.00002%
1843 John Tyler $19,148,441.27 $32,742,922.00 140.9% 556.6% 0.00002%
1844 John Tyler -$9,281,269.50 $23,461,652.50 -28.3% 556.6% 0.00002%
1845 James Knox Polk -$7,536,349.49 $15,925,303.01 -32.1% 100.5% 0.0001%
1846 James Knox Polk -$375,100.04 $15,550,202.97 -2.4% 100.5% 0.0001%
1847 James Knox Polk $23,276,331.8 $38,826,534.77 149.7% 100.5% 0.0001%
1848 James Knox Polk $8,218,327.46 $47,044,862.23 21.2% 100.5% 0.0001%
1849 Zachary Taylor $16,016,996.46 $63,061,858.69 34% 34% 0.00009%
1850 Millard Fillmore $390,914.86 $63,452,773.55 0.6% 5.0% 0.00002%
1851 Millard Fillmore $4,852,022.47 $68,304,796.02 7.6% 5.0% 0.00002%
1852 Millard Fillmore -$2,105,454.31 $66,199,341.71 -3.1% 5.0% 0.00002%
1853 Franklin Pierce -$6,396,224.01 $59,803,117.70 -9.7% -51.7% -0.0002%
1854 Franklin Pierce -$17,560,895.28 $42,242,222.42 -29.4% -51.7% -0.0002%
1855 Franklin Pierce -$6,655,265.86 $35,586,956.56 -15.8% -51.7% -0.0002%
1856 Franklin Pierce -$3,614,418.66 $31,972,537.90 -10.2% -51.7% -0.0002%
1857 James Buchanan -$3,272,706.05 $28,699,831.85 -10.2% 102.8% 0.0002%
1858 James Buchanan $16,212,049.18 $44,911,881.03 56.5% 102.8% 0.0002%
1859 James Buchanan $13,584,956.85 $58,496,837.88 30.2% 102.8% 0.0002%
1860 James Buchanan $6,345,450.00 $64,842,287.88 10.8% 102.8% 0.0002%
1861 Abraham Lincoln $25,738,585.84 $90,580,873.72 39.7% 2,700.3% 0.01%
1862 Abraham Lincoln $433,595,538.41 $524,176,412.13 478.7% 2,700.3% 0.01%
1863 Abraham Lincoln $595,595,726.50 $1,119,772,138.63 113.6% 2,700.3% 0.01%
1864 Abraham Lincoln $696,012,231.94 $1,815,784,370.57 62.2% 2,700.3% 0.01%
1865 Andrew Johnson $864,863,499.17 $2,680,647,869.74 47.6% 43.8% 0.005%
1866 Andrew Johnson $92,588,303.95 $2,773,236,173.69 3.5% 43.8% 0.005%
1867 Andrew Johnson -$95,110,069.82 $2,678,126,103.87 -3.4% 43.8% 0.005%
1868 Andrew Johnson -$66,438,252.68 $2,611,687,851.19 -2.5% 43.8% 0.005%
1869 Ulysses Simpson Grant -$23,235,637.25 $2,588,452,213.94 -0.9% -16.5% -0.003%
1870 Ulysses Simpson Grant -$107,779,786.13 $2,480,672,427.81 -4.2% -16.5% -0.003%
1871 Ulysses Simpson Grant -$127,461,095.49 $2,353,211,332.32 -5.1% -16.5% -0.003%
1872 Ulysses Simpson Grant -$99,960,003.54 $2,253,251,328.78 -4.2% -16.5% -0.003%
1873 Ulysses Simpson Grant -$18,768,335.58 $2,234,482,993.20 -0.8% -16.5% -0.003%
1874 Ulysses Simpson Grant $17,207,475.23 $2,251,690,468.43 0.8% -16.5% -0.003%
1875 Ulysses Simpson Grant -$19,405,936.48 $2,232,284,531.95 -0.9% -16.5% -0.003%
1876 Ulysses Simpson Grant -$51,889,464.80 $2,180,395,067.15 -2.3% -16.5% -0.003%
1877 Rutherford Birchard Hayes $24,906,324.95 $2,205,301,392.10 1.1% -2.8% -0.0004%
1878 Rutherford Birchard Hayes $50,904,500.43 $2,256,205,892.53 2.3% -2.8% -0.0004%
1879 Rutherford Birchard Hayes $93,361,589.51 $2,349,567,482.04 4.1% -2.8% -0.0004%
1880 Rutherford Birchard Hayes -$229,152,111.41 $2,120,415,370.63 -9.8% -2.8% -0.0004%
1881 James Abram Garfield / Chester Alan Arthur -$51,401,801.05 $2,069,013,569.58 -2.4% -13.7% -0.002%
1882 Chester Alan Arthur -$150,700,575.55 $1,918,312,994.03 -7.3% -13.7% -0.002%
1883 Chester Alan Arthur -$34,141,265.96 $1,884,171,728.07 -1.8% -13.7% -0.002%
1884 Chester Alan Arthur -$53,642,804.50 $1,830,528,923.57 -2.8% -13.7% -0.002%
1885 Grover Cleveland $33,435,949.57 $1,863,964,873.14 1.8% -7.5% -0.0008%
1886 Grover Cleveland -$88,901,859.36 $1,775,063,013.78 -4.8% -7.5% -0.0008%
1887 Grover Cleveland -$117,460,421.15 $1,657,602,592.63 -6.6% -7.5% -0.0008%
1888 Grover Cleveland $35,256,391.95 $1,692,858,984.58 2.1% -7.5% -0.0008%
1889 Benjamin Harrison -$73,806,062.35 $1,619,052,922.23 -4.4% -6.2% -0.0006%
1890 Benjamin Harrison -$66,912,717.50 $1,552,140,204.73 -4.1% -6.2% -0.0006%
1891 Benjamin Harrison -$6,143,613.12 $1,545,996,591.61 -0.4% -6.2% -0.0006%
1892 Benjamin Harrison $42,467,553.02 $1,588,464,144.63 2.7% -6.2% -0.0006%
1893 Grover Cleveland -$42,478,458.50 $1,545,985,686.13 -2.7% 11.4% 0.001%
1894 Grover Cleveland $86,267,950.55 $1,632,253,636.68 5.6% 11.4% 0.001%
1895 Grover Cleveland $43,867,346.57 $1,676,120,983.25 2.7% 11.4% 0.001%
1896 Grover Cleveland $93,719,340.15 $1,769,840,323.40 5.6% 11.4% 0.001%
1897 William McKinley $47,832,342.50 $1,817,672,665.90 2.7% 20.7% 0.002%
1898 William McKinley -$21,140,670.00 $1,796,531,995.90 -1.2% 20.7% 0.002%
1899 William McKinley $195,395,311.02 $1,991,927,306.92 10.9% 20.7% 0.002%
1900 William McKinley $145,033,784.75 $2,136,961,091.67 7.3% 20.7% 0.002%
1901 Theodore Roosevelt $6,365,842.22 $2,143,326,933.89 0.3% 22.9% 0.003%
1902 Theodore Roosevelt $15,283,512.00 $2,158,610,445.89 0.7% 22.9% 0.003%
1903 Theodore Roosevelt $43,854,336.00 $2,202,464,781.89 2.0% 22.9% 0.003%
1904 Theodore Roosevelt $61,538,803.25 $2,264,003,585.14 2.8% 22.9% 0.003%
1905 Theodore Roosevelt $10,611,478.70 $2,274,615,063.84 0.5% 22.9% 0.003%
1906 Theodore Roosevelt $62,546,775.20 $2,337,161,839.04 2.7% 22.9% 0.003%
1907 Theodore Roosevelt $120,026,222.50 $2,457,188,061.54 5.1% 22.9% 0.003%
1908 Theodore Roosevelt $169,618,210.00 $2,626,806,271.54 6.9% 22.9% 0.003%
1909 William Howard Taft $12,739,969.50 $2,639,546,241.04 0.5% 9.2% 0.001%
1910 William Howard Taft $13,119,597.00 $2,652,665,838.04 0.5% 9.2% 0.001%
1911 William Howard Taft $112,934,768.65 $2,765,600,606.69 4.3% 9.2% 0.001%
1912 William Howard Taft $102,773,267.47 $2,868,373,874.16 3.7% 9.2% 0.001%
1913 Woodrow Wilson $47,831,039.50 $2,916,204,913.66 1.7% 804.8% 0.1%
1914 Woodrow Wilson -$3,705,644.50 $2,912,499,269.16 -0.1% 804.8% 0.1%
1915 Woodrow Wilson $145,637,604.00 $3,058,136,873.16 5.0% 804.8% 0.1%
1916 Woodrow Wilson $551,107,389.00 $3,609,244,262.16 18.0% 804.8% 0.1%
1917 Woodrow Wilson $2,108,526,017.36 $5,717,770,279.52 58.4% 804.8% 0.1%
1918 Woodrow Wilson $8,874,391,134.48 $14,592,161,414.00 155.2% 804.8% 0.1%
1919 Woodrow Wilson $12,798,808,699.12 $27,390,970,113.12 87.7% 804.8% 0.1%
1920 Woodrow Wilson -$1,438,513,706.96 $25,952,456,406.16 -5.3% 804.8% 0.1%
1921 Warren Gamaliel Harding -$1,975,005,853.62 $23,977,450,552.54 -7.6% -11.5% -0.02%
1922 Warren Gamaliel Harding -$1,014,068,844.23 $22,963,381,708.31 -4.2% -11.5% -0.02%
1923 Calvin Coolidge -$613,674,342.95 $22,349,707,365.36 -2.7% -23.3% -0.03%
1924 Calvin Coolidge -$1,098,894,375.87 $21,250,812,989.49 -4.9% -23.3% -0.03%
1925 Calvin Coolidge -$734,619,101.59 $20,516,193,887.90 -3.5% -23.3% -0.03%
1926 Calvin Coolidge -$872,977,572.71 $19,643,216,315.19 -4.3% -23.3% -0.03%
1927 Calvin Coolidge -$1,131,309,383.34 $18,511,906,931.85 -5.8% -23.3% -0.03%
1928 Calvin Coolidge -$907,613,730.42 $17,604,293,201.43 -4.9% -23.3% -0.03%
1929 Herbert Clark Hoover -$673,204,717.33 $16,931,088,484.10 -3.8% 10.7% 0.01%
1930 Herbert Clark Hoover -$745,778,652.67 $16,185,309,831.43 -4.4% 10.7% 0.01%
1931 Herbert Clark Hoover $615,971,660.28 $16,801,281,491.71 3.8% 10.7% 0.01%
1932 Herbert Clark Hoover $2,685,720,952.42 $19,487,002,444.13 16.0% 10.7% 0.01%
1933 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $3,051,670,116.02 $22,538,672,560.15 15.7% 931.5% 1.0%
1934 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $4,514,468,854.33 $27,053,141,414.48 20.0% 931.5% 1.0%
1935 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $1,647,751,210.05 $28,700,892,624.53 6.1% 931.5% 1.0%
1936 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $5,077,650,869.20 $33,778,543,493.73 17.7% 931.5% 1.0%
1937 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $2,646,070,238.56 $36,424,613,732.29 7.8% 931.5% 1.0%
1938 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $740,126,583.16 $37,164,740,315.45 2.0% 931.5% 1.0%
1939 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $3,274,792,095.66 $40,439,532,411.11 8.8% 931.5% 1.0%
1940 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $2,527,998,626.57 $42,967,531,037.68 6.3% 931.5% 1.0%
1941 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $5,993,912,498.03 $48,961,443,535.71 13.9% 931.5% 1.0%
1942 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $23,461,001,580.51 $72,422,445,116.22 47.9% 931.5% 1.0%
1943 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $64,273,645,213.68 $136,696,090,329.90 88.7% 931.5% 1.0%
1944 Franklin Delano Roosevelt $64,307,296,891.23 $201,003,387,221.13 47.0% 931.5% 1.0%
1945 Harry S Truman $57,678,800,188.80 $258,682,187,409.93 28.7% 28.9% 0.3%
1946 Harry S Truman $10,739,911,763.33 $269,422,099,173.26 4.2% 28.9% 0.3%
1947 Harry S Truman -$11,135,716,064.59 $258,286,383,108.67 -4.1% 28.9% 0.3%
1948 Harry S Truman -$5,994,136,595.68 $252,292,246,512.99 -2.3% 28.9% 0.3%
1949 Harry S Truman $478,113,347.34 $252,770,359,860.33 0.2% 28.9% 0.3%
1950 Harry S Truman $4,586,992,490.71 $257,357,352,351.04 1.8% 28.9% 0.3%
1951 Harry S Truman -$2,135,375,536.11 $255,221,976,814.93 -0.8% 28.9% 0.3%
1952 Harry S Truman $3,883,201,970.50 $259,105,178,785.43 1.5% 28.9% 0.3%
1953 Dwight David Eisenhower $6,965,882,853.14 $266,071,061,638.57 2.7% 10.5% 0.1%
1954 Dwight David Eisenhower $5,188,537,469.89 $271,259,599,108.46 2.0% 10.5% 0.1%
1955 Dwight David Eisenhower $3,114,623,694.16 $274,374,222,802.62 1.1% 10.5% 0.1%
1956 Dwight David Eisenhower -$1,623,409,153.30 $272,750,813,649.32 -0.6% 10.5% 0.1%
1957 Dwight David Eisenhower -$2,223,641,752.89 $270,527,171,896.43 -0.8% 10.5% 0.1%
1958 Dwight David Eisenhower $5,816,045,849.38 $276,343,217,745.81 2.1% 10.5% 0.1%
1959 Dwight David Eisenhower $8,362,689,332.41 $284,705,907,078.22 3.0% 10.5% 0.1%
1960 Dwight David Eisenhower $1,624,853,770.15 $286,330,760,848.37 0.6% 10.5% 0.1%
1961 John Fitzgerald Kennedy $2,640,177,761.68 $288,970,938,610.05 0.9% 6.8% 0.1%
1962 John Fitzgerald Kennedy $9,229,884,110.82 $298,200,822,720.87 3.2% 6.8% 0.1%
1963 John Fitzgerald Kennedy / Lyndon Baines Johnson $7,658,810,275.54 $305,859,632,996.41 2.6% 6.8% 0.1%
1964 Lyndon Baines Johnson $5,853,266,260.89 $311,712,899,257.30 1.9% 13.6% 0.2%
1965 Lyndon Baines Johnson $5,560,999,726.34 $317,273,898,983.64 1.8% 13.6% 0.2%
1966 Lyndon Baines Johnson $2,633,188,811.84 $319,907,087,795.48 0.8% 13.6% 0.2%
1967 Lyndon Baines Johnson $6,313,849,999.06 $326,220,937,794.54 2.0% 13.6% 0.2%
1968 Lyndon Baines Johnson $21,357,468,631.34 $347,578,406,425.88 6.5% 13.6% 0.2%
1969 Richard Milhous Nixon $6,141,847,415.53 $353,720,253,841.41 1.8% 31.8% 0.6%
1970 Richard Milhous Nixon $17,198,453,108.52 $370,918,706,949.93 4.9% 31.8% 0.6%
1971 Richard Milhous Nixon $27,211,037,505.61 $398,129,744,455.54 7.3% 31.8% 0.6%
1972 Richard Milhous Nixon $29,130,716,484.96 $427,260,460,940.50 7.3% 31.8% 0.6%
1973 Richard Milhous Nixon $30,881,144,371.59 $458,141,605,312.09 7.2% 31.8% 0.6%
1974 Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr $16,918,210,419.46 $475,059,815,731.55 3.7% 35.4% 0.9%
1975 Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr $58,129,184,268.45 *$533,189,000,000.00 12.2% 35.4% 0.9%
1976 Gerald Rudolph Ford Jr $87,244,000,000.00 *$620,433,000,000.00 16.4% 35.4% 0.9%
1977 James Earl Carter $78,407,000,000.00 *$698,840,000,000.00 12.6% 46.3% 1.6%
1978 James Earl Carter $72,704,000,000.00 *$771,544,000,000.00 10.4% 46.3% 1.6%
1979 James Earl Carter $54,975,000,000.00 *$826,519,000,000.00 7.1% 46.3% 1.6%
1980 James Earl Carter $81,182,000,000.00 *$907,701,000,000.00 9.8% 46.3% 1.6%
1981 Ronald Wilson Reagan $90,154,000,000.00 *$997,855,000,000.00 9.9% 186.7% 9.3%
1982 Ronald Wilson Reagan $144,179,000,000.00 *$1,142,034,000,000.00 14.4% 186.7% 9.3%
1983 Ronald Wilson Reagan $235,176,000,000.00 *$1,377,210,000,000.00 20.6% 186.7% 9.3%
1984 Ronald Wilson Reagan $195,056,000,000.00 *$1,572,266,000,000.00 14.2% 186.7% 9.3%
1985 Ronald Wilson Reagan $250,837,000,000.00 *$1,823,103,000,000.00 16.0% 186.7% 9.3%
1986 Ronald Wilson Reagan $302,199,616,658.42 $2,125,302,616,658.42 16.6% 186.7% 9.3%
1987 Ronald Wilson Reagan $224,974,274,294.58 $2,350,276,890,953.00 10.6% 186.7% 9.3%
1988 Ronald Wilson Reagan $252,060,821,088.16 $2,602,337,712,041.16 10.7% 186.7% 9.3%
1989 George Herbert Walker Bush $255,093,248,146.16 $2,857,430,960,187.32 9.8% 56.2% 8.1%
1990 George Herbert Walker Bush $375,882,491,589.93 $3,233,313,451,777.25 13.2% 56.2% 8.1%
1991 George Herbert Walker Bush $431,989,899,919.78 $3,665,303,351,697.03 13.4% 56.2% 8.1%
1992 George Herbert Walker Bush $399,317,303,824.63 $4,064,620,655,521.66 10.9% 56.2% 8.1%
1993 William Jefferson Clinton $346,868,227,617.72 $4,411,488,883,139.38 8.5% 39.6% 8.9%
1994 William Jefferson Clinton $281,261,026,873.94 $4,692,749,910,013.32 6.4% 39.6% 8.9%
1995 William Jefferson Clinton $281,232,990,696.07 $4,973,982,900,709.39 6.0% 39.6% 8.9%
1996 William Jefferson Clinton $250,828,038,426.34 $5,224,810,939,135.73 5.0% 39.6% 8.9%
1997 William Jefferson Clinton $188,335,072,261.61 $5,413,146,011,397.34 3.6% 39.6% 8.9%
1998 William Jefferson Clinton $113,046,997,500.28 $5,526,193,008,897.62 2.1% 39.6% 8.9%
1999 William Jefferson Clinton $130,077,892,717.81 $5,656,270,901,615.43 2.4% 39.6% 8.9%
2000 William Jefferson Clinton $17,907,308,271.43 $5,674,178,209,886.86 0.3% 39.6% 8.9%
2001 George Walker Bush $133,285,202,313.20 $5,807,463,412,200.06 2.3% 76.7% 24.0%
2002 George Walker Bush $420,772,553,397.10 $6,228,235,965,597.16 7.2% 76.7% 24.0%
2003 George Walker Bush $554,995,097,146.46 $6,783,231,062,743.62 8.9% 76.7% 24.0%
2004 George Walker Bush $595,821,633,586.70 $7,379,052,696,330.32 8.8% 76.7% 24.0%
2005 George Walker Bush $553,656,965,393.18 $7,932,709,661,723.50 7.5% 76.7% 24.0%
2006 George Walker Bush $574,264,237,491.73 $8,506,973,899,215.23 7.2% 76.7% 24.0%
2007 George Walker Bush $500,679,473,047.25 $9,007,653,372,262.48 5.9% 76.7% 24.0%
2008 George Walker Bush $1,017,071,524,650.01 $10,024,724,896,912.49 11.3% 76.7% 24.0%
2009 Barack Hussein Obama $1,885,104,106,599.26 $11,909,829,003,511.75 18.8% 93.4% 48.3%
2010 Barack Hussein Obama $1,651,794,027,380.04 $13,561,623,030,891.79 13.9% 93.4% 48.3%
2011 Barack Hussein Obama $1,228,717,297,665.36 $14,790,340,328,557.15 9.1% 93.4% 48.3%
2012 Barack Hussein Obama $1,275,901,078,828.74 $16,066,241,407,385.89 8.6% 93.4% 48.3%
2013 Barack Hussein Obama $671,942,119,311.43 $16,738,183,526,697.32 4.2% 93.4% 48.3%
2014 Barack Hussein Obama $1,085,887,854,036.50 $17,824,071,380,733.82 6.5% 93.4% 48.3%
2015 Barack Hussein Obama $326,546,285,750.51 $18,150,617,666,484.33 1.8% 93.4% 48.3%
2016 Barack Hussein Obama $1,241,086,361,182.79 $19,391,704,027,667.12 6.8% 93.4% 48.3%
Be Sociable, Share!


  • Pingback: What’s Wrong With The GOP? – Random Musings

  • I just read an article by Hans Sennholz written in 1972 where he made projections as to what the national debt would be in 1973, 1983 and 1993 and he was pretty well bang on. Why didn’t anybody listen to him?

  • Here’s the interesting thing. If Trump, as a better than average businessman, is elected and he could figure out a way to knock $1Billion per day off of the national debt…..that’s 365B per year. It would take him over 25.5 years to get rid of the debt that Barack Obama is responsible for. Yes Sir, he promised change and we got it……..he has mortgaged our children’s future for at least the next 3 generations.

    • You got your wires crossed, fella. Just look at the numbers above and you will see why. Under Reagan and Daddy Bush the national debt QUADRUPLED. Under Baby Bush’s tax bill which lasted twelve years before President Oabama could get it changed, the national debt TRIPLED again. Whether Trump is a better than average businessman is quite debatable, since he probably holds the world’s record for bankruptcies. The results of his proposed tax bill is not debatable. His tax cut for the rich would ADD an additional trillion dollars per year to the debt.

      • Yawn you better stop blaming others and just look at the figures maybe obozo should not have borrowed money. Facts are facts. Obozo stated 10 in debt and HE singlehand almost double it. For all general purposes you could say he did double it it was only a couple of billion from that point. I see you get your nickname from obozo math

        • Mmhm, and bush also brought it from 5trillion to 10 trillion, Reagan brought us from less than 1trillion to over 2trillion, yet so many conservatives praise the him. In fact, Obama has lowered the national deficit (not debt) by almost 50%. Raegan on the other hand doubled it.

          • Dobrin Tzvetkovsky

            This fiscal year ends in 9 days. The deficit is projected at $1.4 Trillion. What is this 50% lower than? Every year of Obama’s presidency has been a record deficit year, every one.

          • Let’s not forget bush doubled his during very affluent times. Obama has a world economic disaster left by previous poor American toxic loans to deal with

          • Bush, Obama, Clinton
            Same cloth!

          • Dude do u hear yourself talk dick…. he raised it 10 trillion u fucking moron…….

        • You do know that a country in recession needs a greater investment from the government. Therefore regardless of who is President, the deficits and the national debt will increase.

          • That’s the belief of Keynesian economists, who think that actually works, but that has never been proven to actually work. Usually, greater investment from government (ie – more government spending) makes things much worse. It causes inflation and it provides for the mirage that things are better, but in reality, the economy is stagnant with only government spending propping it up.

            This is exactly what’s happening in the US, right now. Government has “invested” trillions of dollars into the market, which has inflated the DOW. That’s good for stock holders/investors, but it’s not necessarily good for anyone else. We still have a record number of people on food stamps, a record number of people not in the job market, a $19 trillion dollar debt, and once the Fed increases interest rates to normal levels, you’re going to see record inflation.

            If we followed Smithian/Hayekian/Austrian economics (something that has been proven to work), we would see economic ups and downs, but they would be natural. The economy will always recover in a free market. Once the government gets involved, everything just gets worse.

          • Geez, comments like this last truly stink.
            Now, the govt NEEDS to borrow trillions to help people?
            We do not need this kind of help.
            This “help” only hurts everyone.
            Go to some (any) govt office and preach your nonsense to them.

          • So we have been in a recession for the past 40 years? That doesnt sound right.
            We have been in a recession for the past 8? That doesnt sound right either. I get what you are saying, but based on all economic data, we are nit and have not been in an 8-year recession that explains the debt increase.

          • Paying for illegal personal wars hasn’t helped us at all… Still no AUMF! Congress turned down Obama last 2 years, Hillary didn’t ask as SOS… She just did it, then “Lost $6B!?!”
            How does one go about losing $6B???
            #Crazy #GottaStop

        • Actually the debt was at 8.5 when the democrats took over in 2006

        • the main point is this – it took until 1980, essentially 200 years to grow the national debt to 1 trillion; now in 2016, its apparently 16+ trillion. Thus in 40 years, we have grown the national debt over 16 times what it took the first 200 years to grow it. In that 40 years, we have had 20 years of solid Arther Laffer style economics. But yet we keep flirting with it. Isn’t time to admit the truth? Isn’t time to go back to when a Republican actually believed in a balanced budget? When would that have been ? By the way, I welcome SERIOUS discussions only. thornton dot richard at gmail dot com.

          • I suggest you study up on who balanced the budget in the second Clinton term. FYI, Newt and the republicans created the budget, Clinton just signed the budget bill. So to answer your question, the last balanced budget was a Republican budget.

      • Math teacher / voter

        The problem with your argument is that you’re talking about doubled or tripled, when you should be looking at real dollars. Reagan added about $1.5 billion to the national debt. Obama has added almost $10 billion. Inflation doesn’t account for that kind of increase.

        • I believed you meant trillion not billion. Regarding the difference between Reagan and Obama, the first did not inherited two wars. However, Obama did, and wars are costly.

        • Are you REALLY a math teacher? I only ask because it seems like you are having trouble comparing apples to oranges… and you should… real dollars only count when the time frame is closer… percentages yield more relevant info over longer courses of time (c’mon you know that)… otherwise George Washingtons $2500/yr salary looks paltry compared to George Bushs salary of $400k per year, yet has about $1M buying power for the era…

        • Finally somebody who went to math class. You’re spot on!

      • I knew it! The enormous debt amassed under Obama is GWB’s fault. Just like everything else that’s happened during Obama’s administration. I expect the same government by excuses from Hillary.

      • This Presidential election cycle is just about winning or loosing!
        Only the politicians, media and state employees are concerned about their careers.
        Taxes, Health care, national debt going out of control it is just part of the game, The sad part is that soon very soon in Nov a bunch of us will be on the street the screaming “we won” without knowing WHAT!

      • Smarmy elite libs talking down to folks — what a surprise. You might help solve more problems if you stopped being so condescending when inarguably the debt problem is your creation and Hillary will do nothing to solve it.

    • Yes, but Trump isn’t promising any reduction in the debt. In the contrary, his proposed tax cuts, pension increases, defense additions and other promises of government “help” will cost the country trillions more than Hillary’s tax plan. I don’t like either, but it’s very clear Trump would spend more and take in less that Hilary.

      • Simon, tax cuts have proven time and time again to increase the amount of revenue the government takes in, in taxes. The reason is that businesses are free to grow, entrepreneurs are more emboldened to start businesses, and more people are put to work. The economy grows and the government benefits.

        He’s promised to eliminate wasteful spending, he has said that he’d like to eliminate the federal reach of the DOE, which would bring it back home to the states and local municipalities. He’d stop funding terrorist organizations (through our support of terror nations, like Iran & the Saudis) and nation building in other countries, he’d re-negotiate trade agreements (China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Mexico, NAFTA) and hopefully eliminate the idea of TPP.

        Trump is an anti-Globalist, so hopefully he’d do a lot to eliminate our wasteful spending elsewhere and concentrate on us.

        As for his defense strategy: He’s playing the Reagan card – “Peace through Strength.” With a rebuilt military, we would likely not have to go to war with many of our enemies, because the idea with going to war with the largest, strongest military in the world is a bad one. Many of our enemies have become emboldened under an Obama presidency, due to his laissez-faire attitude toward our military and enemies.

        • Thank you. Well said

          • It is shocking that our US national Debt has almost doubled now to $20 Trillion Dollars since our current president has done shocking events for almost 8 years now. The FBI doesn’t always do what they are supposed to do, and there are many illegal events, including illegal immigrants who are allowed to stay here for some odd reason. Upon the Clinton election, there were unfortunately several woman who were raped and the FBI did not arrest the person who did that. And now that Hillary has been noted for thousands of improper e-mail events, that still has not yet actually been affected by the FBI. Why not? The other potential event that might now happen is that certainly by surprisingly supported by both of the Obama’s, it might very much be the case that many of our current problems are going to be kept and maybe increased by Hillary. She has in fact said that she will allow a huge amount of refugees to come to America, which of course will again hugely increase our costs here, instead of doing something helpful for all of the legal citizens here. The supposedly affordable care act, certainly is not affordable. I was paying about $325 per day with Kaiser, and as soon as the new care act was put in place my cost was increased to almost $500. The other surprise was that because the Democrats were in charge of approving it by vote, it was reported that they never did actually read the document to actually know what they were going to approve, but they still did!

        • Kevin, you are selling the trickled down economy principle that has been prove wrong many times. The economy grows when consumers have money to spend. No entrepreneur will build or expand a business just because he has money available. Is there no profits to be made they won’t do it.

          • I’m selling Smithian/Hayekian/Austrian economics, which has been proven to work, time and time again. How do you think America became the most prosperous and generous country this world has ever seen in less than 200yrs? It wasn’t Keynesian economics or government spending, that’s for sure. It was the free market and the spirit of the entrepreneur.

            When you alleviate the tax burden on the citizens of the country, you’re freeing them of soft tyranny (to borrow a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville). Entrepreneurship is rarely seen in heavily taxed countries, which we are now among. There’s literally no chance to invest in yourself, when you’re beholden to an oppressive regime.

            When you alleviate the tax burden on businesses, those businesses begin to grow, and the costs of their products begin to lower. Most people who don’t believe in “trickle down economics” (a term coined by liberals), also fail to see that taxes are built into the product that businesses produce/sell, making them less affordable for the individual.

            It’s human nature to want to succeed. Success is determined by many things, but in business, it’s growth. What happens when businesses grow? They begin to hire more employees. What happens when more employees are hired? Less people are looking for work/unemployed/on food stamps/etc. What also happens? People who didn’t have much money before, now have money to spend. The economy moves forward.

            After Reagan’s tenure and his passage of policies effecting the economy, we saw a decade of economic growth. Just look at what happened. We had the PC boom, the internet boom, we had some of the biggest, most prosperous companies grow out of that decade. In effect, we had hundreds/thousands of tech companies pop up to supply the demand for these new services/tech.

            The free market works.

        • I’d like to ask you how Trump plans to do all those things you say he will, but I know you don’t have an answer. How do I know that, you ask? Because it’s blatantly clear that not even Trump knows how he’d do them. Everything he’s ever proposed is just what he wants to happen, not how he’s going to get it to happen. On the occasion that he DOES explain his plan, you can flip a coin on whether it’s to “solve” a problem that doesn’t exist, or if it doesn’t have a chance in hell of actually succeeding. For example, I’ll give you half of all my possessions if you can tell me what expenses he considers wasteful, I’ll blow you if you find out how he claims he’ll eliminate the DOE’s reach, I’ll burn down my own house if you can tell me how defunding governments that have terrorist organizations actively trying to take them over would help at all, and I’ll cut out my tongue if you explain how Trump is going to get those nations to trade with us while not being willing to spend money outside the United States. While I’m at it, I’ll get my name legally changed to “Stupid McIdiothead” if you can give a logical explanation as to how the United States will strengthen under a man who considers our military, arguably the strongest and most advanced in the world ALREADY, rubbish.

          And PS, “trickle down” was something that Reagan himself said.

          • Well, you’re wrong about who coined the term “trickle down economics,” but hey, that’s ok…

            From Investopedia:
            “Origins. The first reference to trickle-down economics came from American comedian and commentator Will Rogers, who used it to derisively describe President Herbert Hoover’s stimulus efforts during the Great Depression. More recently, opponents of President Ronald Reagan used the term to attack his income tax cuts.”

            You do understand that many of the programs Trump would like to cut fall under the Executive Branch, correct? He has the authority to pass executive orders to affect many national policies, including wasteful spending in these programs under multiple executive Departments. He also has the power to “undo” all of Obama’s executive orders, which have been harmful to the economy. He can also nominate conscientious and competent leaders to become executive department/agency heads. This can help to eliminate waste, fraud, and improve upon “business as usual.” He can also be sure to enforce the laws that are already on the books, but largely ignored by Democrats and especially the current POTUS. This will also help the economy, because illegal immigration would finally be taken seriously.

            Congressional approval is not needed in everything that Trump has proposed. Eliminating Obamacare is one thing he’ll need approval to do.

            I don’t think we’ve ever heard from any nominee running for President, how, exactly they would enact change in government. Ideas are what gets them elected, not line-by-line directions. That said, I don’t think you’ve ever listened to a Trump speech. If you had, you’d have heard him discuss, at length, his ideas concerning the DOE and eliminating waste. Bringing school choice back through school voucher programs, eliminating the common core system, eliminating “no child left behind” and “Every Student Succeeds” as they’ve done nothing to escalate youth, and killing federal oversight over local education.

            Those are just some examples of what he’s mentioned about the DOE. If you had been watching, you’d hear much more about every policy he’s presented over the last year, but let’s face it… you haven’t been watching. You might want to take a look at his website, as well… He’s had his positions on some of his more important issues listed for over a year.

            While we’re on the subject, can you tell me why you voted to elect President Obama? Or why you’re voting for Hillary? What were and are their plans? I never heard any “hows” from them. What you’re doing is called hypocrisy.

          • I never said that Reagan was the one who originally called it “trickle down economics”. What I said was that he used the phrase “trickle down” while referring to his plan.
            Moving on, cutting programs doesn’t just solve problems. You need to do more than that. If you stop smoking because it’s caused you to develop lung cancer, that doesn’t change that you have lung cancer. It’s also unfair to say that all of Obama’s executive orders have harmed the economy, as that’s simply inaccurate. You could make an argument for some, or even most, of them being harmful, but you can’t say that they all were. Just like how you can say that the current executive department/agency heads are incompetent and need to be replaced, but you can’t say that there’s a guarantee the replacement would do any better. I actually don’t know which laws you’re referring to that are being “ignored by Democrats”, so I’d love if you would be so kind as to point them out. If you’re referring to illegal immigration, as can be inferred from your next sentence, I suppose that brings us to the wall. Might I tell you that the wall is one of my favorite things to discuss? Not because I think building a twenty foot wall on the Mexican border will help stop actually dangerous illegal immigrants, because I don’t, but because of how ridiculous it is. The only wall that comes to mind of similar scale and purpose would be the Great Wall of China, and that was built to defend against the Mongols. Do you really believe that illegal immigrants pose a similar amount of threat? While on the topic of illegal immigration, what’s the point of being dicks to the immigrants? If you’re really worried about them stealing away money from American citizens to send back to their families in Mexico, then why not bring their families to America? If people want to live in the United States, why not let them? If you weren’t aware, more people means more workers, more tax dollars pulled in, and more potential for groundbreaking new scientists, athletes, politicians, anything! If it’s easier to come into the country legally, more people will chose to do that rather than cross the border illegally. The thing about making it easier for people to become American citizens is you won’t need to worry about people stealing jobs from American citizens. You can’t even argue that our culture would be broken by an influx of immigrants, because nearly all of our culture originally came from immigrants.
            But that’s probably enough said about immigration. As it happens, I do have something to say about Obamacare, and that the only reason people hate it so much is because it was proposed by President Barack Hussein Obama. You can say that it’s weak and doesn’t work, but I’ll just ask you to remember how much of it was rejected by Congress.
            Sure, you can argue that. And absolutely have I never listened to a full speech by Donald Trump. That being said, I would like to know Trump’s plans because he is a megalomaniacal and narcissistic pathological liar. That’s the only excuse for eighty percent of the things he says, because the only other possibility is ignorance, and he’s shown to have at least some knowledge of what’s happening.
            I’d listen to his speeches or go to his website but honestly, I feel like I’d probably catch a disease.
            I didn’t vote for Obama. I’m not voting for Hillary. I don’t vote. The way I see it, whatever happens doesn’t really change much for me. I’m a straight white guy, I stay at home whenever I can, and I don’t bother to stay informed. I don’t have to worry about much. If Trump gets elected, the worst case scenario is that the secret police show up at my house for talking shit about him, I show them that I’m white, and they leave. If Hillary gets elected, worst case scenario is the secret police show up at my house because I’m a white guy, I tell them I’m dating someone who doesn’t even identify as a gender, and they leave. Why even bother?

            Oh, and I’d reply to your post directly, but I can’t. Real shame.

        • I concur

        • Catty one, your spelling and grammar are terrible. Why would anyone listen to someone without even the language skills expected of a 8th grader? You must be one of the under-educated that Trump loves so much.

        • Kevin, you just put the biggest and best reasons to vote for Trump and I just don’t understand why more people don’t see or understand this. All the other character flaws and issues are so subordinant to all of this but the mass media sees itself fit to manipulate
          people and the campaign.

        • Which enemies are emboldened? Russia?

        • Ok, well you are the only one that has posted truthful factual data that is taking into account the actual time frames and true bearings of the impacts upon our nation and the economy at differing times. You also seem to have a strong grasp (at least of all the comments made thus far of how taxation and HOW government spending works when done correctly and incorrectly as much as is possible within a democratic capitalist society) I appreciate your truthful, accurate, correct, and FACTUAL economic analysis without showing in my opinion much if any bias. I am an independent voter that is tired of the same ole drowning deficit actions taken over the past few years and therefore yes I believe it is possible for Trump to make a difference (no not solve all our economic woes that have been created over the past decades by both parties), but I’m willing to take the chance to have some type of hope; which with the continuance of our past government would not happen.

          • My previous comment was in answer to Simon!

          • Correction, so as not to confuse..I agree with what Kevin Bush has to say; so basically my comment is in support of the factual unbiased and well substantiated mathematically and otherwise statements by Kevin.

        • Your comment is incorrect, there has not been a time in our history where income tax cuts increased revenue. Look it up.

      • We’re going to find out!
        Hillary spent a ton on non-declared, non AUMF (illegal) wars in the Middle East, S. America & in Africa (and perhaps Pakistan & other places too) as Oba just let her do whatever, sell whatever she wanted for profiteering, power, $ for her Foundation, her buddies, etc.
        She also took in a ton from foreigners, quite illegally.
        Trump knows his stuff. If he can’t turn this mess around, I seriously doubt anyone can!
        It’s going to take US all working together to do this… No excuses, no BS, & far less government, shutting off any new immigrants from anywhere, unless they have something to add to our economy that citizens can’t do, which is law in most countries.
        The hemoraging has to stop, we need to go back to making what we need, prices on imports are going to go IP, no doubt.
        OPEC just squeezed their oil production (after 8 years), so gas WILL go up, until & unless we create our own here!
        We need AMERICAN companies doing this here in America! NOT outsiders!
        Allowing ANY non-citizen to do business here without them going through red tape is suicide! We shouldn’t have EVER allowed ANY industry into our country at all!
        We need to get back to Made in the USA, BY USA!

    • But he’s a terrible businessman with many failed and bankrupt ventures, he’s never worked for anything in his life, and he’s an ignorant asshole? He has done nothing but prove how there are masses of ignorant, paranoid, racists, who are afraid of progress.

    • In 1999, Donald Trump proposed for the United States a one off 14.25% wealth tax on the net worth of individuals and trusts worth $10 million or more. Trump claimed that this would generate $5.7 trillion in new taxes, which could be used to eliminate the national debt.

    • Trump will bankrupt the country, he has experience!

      • The country is already bankrupt. We can’t sustain $20 trillion in debt, and businessmen aren’t the ones who got us there. Politicians and lawyers are. Cute, though. ;]

        • Since 1791 the debt has never being paid in full and it never will. US owes most of the debt to itself. End if story.

          • Actually if you check your facts..the country has never really truly been debt free since 1835, but I understand what you are trying to say. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • Lol, first of all it would cost more than the gov wastes now to oversee the overseers of overseers in all aspects of the Fed Gov; Trump (himself) is going down the line of every ledger in every journal Of every section of the U.S. Government? Get outa here!!

    • Still less debt growth than Reagan….

    • Running a Billion dollars business is not child play, Starting projects and completing then on time under budget is the art that politicians will never understand, Our national Debt is out of control, Obama care was a good Idea but is not working… 22 trillion waste!!!, Open borders will also cost trillions, Factories like mine leaving or closing because of bad open trade policies will not help America. #trump16 is the answer, give him a try, if after 4 years we will not see positive changes, then we will have to “fire him”> we can’t afford Obama/ Clinton 4 more years..

    • Skeeter, you didn’t look at the debt chart very closely. Abe, FDR, your own Ronal Reagan, and Bush caused the debt problem. Only Reagan was the culprit when not in war. Obama was a typical President as far as increase and he has been in war – which was created by another.
      Just saying

    • Did you even look at the spreadsheet? Obama brought the annual deficit inherited by Bush Jr. from 1.88 Trillion down to 3.5 billion. That is a 70% reduction in yearly deficit.

      If you look at all the governments over the last 40 years the national debt grows exponentially faster during Republican regimes than the Democrats. Bill Clinton drove the deficit down to 18 billion his last year in office and G.W. Bush drove it up to 130 billion in a single year.

      I challenge you to actually read the document before you start making ridiculous partisan statements. Particularly in light of the fact that the data is very clearly laid out in front of you.

    • He mortgaged our children’s future their children, all the way up to our great,great grandchildren’s great grandchildren.

    • Junior Bush’s tax cuts got the debt spiraling up. Reagan and poppa Bush did the same thing. Now Trump and the Republican congress want to give us another tax cut. Now what do you really think is going to happen to the national debt?

      By the way historically (look it up if you don’t believe me) unemployment has been higher when Republicans have been in the White House. So what do you think is going to happen to jobs?

    • Hold on. So all the debt is on one person now? There is a fucking chart that shows clearly that it wasn’t all him so stfu assclown

  • lol, if you’re not going to look at how policies, new legislation and new extensions of government can affect government spending and debt, then this is a waste of our time. My list already shows you how much the debt increased under Reagan (a great deal). Your exercise, however, proves nothing. It just shows an average percentile increase. So what? Notice how the percentages, during his tenure, decrease after skyrocketing. Why do you suppose that is? Oh, that’s right… you don’t know, because you’re not looking at policies/legislation over the years, you’re just looking at raw data.

    You’re right, numbers don’t lie, but numbers can be manipulated, and certain facts (like the GDP and Debt as a % of GDP) can be purposefully neglected to tell a story from a particular point of view.

    “Nice manipulation” refers to your manipulation of my words.

  • Pingback: Timothy J. Barnett: Starving The Beast: Trump, Taxes And The Politics Of Unanticipated Consequences - News24Media

  • There should be a simple law that should state … No goverment should have the right to spend more money than what they collect from the citizens…. debt resolved! … otherwise hang on for a ride and polititians with their hands on big money regardless of party…your debt will only grow as it has been for so many years!! Why are we debating anything else?!!

    • lol, Why don’t we call them polio-ticians: they handicap the country, man!
      Fighting wars when they have the nuclear-weapons.
      Allowing illegal-immigrants and removing jobs from Americans: where are these illegal-immigrants dwelling, shopping: American? ! The proposal is insane. The jobs are not paid at cost and these billionaires spend American dollars in France, Italy, London: you name their enjoyments leaving the American-families in the cold or heat!; sometimes literally. We are a country now, independence was only a few years ago and we have to think for ourselves as well: you may want to assist Mexicans based on their deplorable living conditions: you call it; America will soon look like most, if not all, of the baseball and football-teams! Americans sent men to the moon: being American is about respect.
      Trump didn’t refute not paying those workers, let’s hope they were Mexicans!, and he’s “proud of his proposed tax-cut” for the rich; Hillary is “sorry” about the deleted-emails: upstanding-citizens don’t have these issues: it is my humble-opinion that Americans are being had, it’s like considering the lesser of two ‘evil’. We want Americans happy and politicians, as currently called!, must make sure that they aren’t violating the Constitutional rights of Americans. In remembrance of my American-child

      • The reason people are against using nuclear weapons is because they aren’t accurate. Not in the sense that you won’t hit your target, you’ll definitely destroy what you’re aiming at, but in the sense that it’ll also destroy everything for miles around your target. There’s going to be civilian casualties, and a whole lot of them. Not to mention the backlash from the international community if we were to willingly use nuclear weapons, which would without a doubt include nukes of their own. There’s reasons that nukes have only been used once. Anyway, people of color aren’t any less American than whites. Quit being racist.

    • There is a law JT. Article 1 section 10 of our constitution. This section like several others is ignored, we just don’t count that anymore, no amendment to repeal it, gov just doesn’t count it cause they can. Article 1 section 10 “No state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a payment of debts.”
      The power to coin and regulate the value of money rests with congress, congress has illegally delegated that power to a private bank, the federal reserve bank. Gov does as it pleases.

    • I am in your side.. Politicians should learn from a real business man for 4 years, then they can take over..

  • There is a simple solution to our debt: war. We could reduce or perhaps remove all of our debt if we annihilated and annexed all countries we owe debt to. Although many citizens would oppose this act, the government does not have to listen to them, the government is more powerful than the people. We are a nation with thousands of nuclear weapons, who would oppose us? We are unstoppable and could be the unrivaled superpower of Earth. Imagine what we could accomplish as a nation, as a world, with endless resources and a single government controlling it all.

    This is just my opinion on the matter. I would like to see others’ ideas too!

    • Okay, I don’t think you get how Democracy works. The thought that the government doesn’t have to listen to the people is against everything the United States stands for. Maybe you don’t know this, but the USA was formed because an Empire spanning the globe wouldn’t listen to its people.

    • Who is lending us trillions of dollars?? That’s odd, none of you experts have mentioned that. The federal reserve banks are a gigantic CREDIT CARD that increases and decreases its rates as they please. I wonder why rates were 0.25% – 0.5% during Obamas terms and up to 6% – 8% during GWB. WTF is up with that? The FED likes for us to borrow and keep making minimum payments. Your income taxes are paid directly to the federal reserve. The electricity bill at the White House (and any government spending) is paid directly by the federal reserve and charged interest. Just like charging a credit card. The USA has no control over money. Now this clown comes in and wants to challenge and audit the FED? Well Lincoln tried to dissolve the central banking system, Garfield was against it as well, Kennedy started printing our own American money in defiance of the FED (interest free) … and it didn’t go well for them. Good luck crooked Donald, you can stiff small businesses and employees but you can’t stiff the FED.

  • Fact, the National Debt increased by 260% under Ronald Reagan, BY FAR the worst!!!!!!
    The % increase of the National Debt under a Democrat are ALL lower then it was by the proceeding Republican.
    Saddest thing is it has NOT decreased once since 1957, OUCH………..

    • Your facts look wrong, according to the grid. The debt was increased by 186.7% under Reagan. The “worst” would have to be Martin Van Buren, a Democrat, who increased it by 9,425.6% ($3.5 Million or $83.475 Million in inflation dollars). That is, if we’re going by percentage.

      Second place belongs to a Republican: Lincoln, with 2,700.3% ($2 Billion or $51.5 Billion in inflation dollars).

      Third place belongs to a Democrat: FDR, with 931.5% ($182 Billion or $3.343 Trillion in inflation dollars).

      Fourth place belongs to another Democrat: Woodrow Wilson, with 804.8% ($23.1 Billion or $557.172 Billion in inflation dollars).

      Fifth place belongs to a Whig: John Tyler, with 556.6% ($22 Million or $617.980 Million in inflation dollars).

      Finally, Sixth place belongs to Reagan (a Republican), with 186.7% ($174 Billion or $504.6 Billion in inflation dollars). When comparing inflation dollars, Reagan comes in third place, behind FDR (#1) and Woodrow Wilson (#2), from this sample of six Presidents. This dollar amount, of course, pales in comparison to modern day spending/debt.

      The debt rose 76.7% under GWB ($4.4 Trillion or $5.94 Trillion in inflation dollars).

      Even worse, the debt rose 93.4% under Obama ($9.3 Trillion or $10.323 Trillion in inflation dollars).

      The Democrats have done much more damage to this nation than any other party or person, in the history of these United States. That’s pretty evident.

      A comparison in inflation dollars:
      1. Obama = $10.323 Trillion added to Debt
      2. GWB = $5.94 Trillion added to Debt
      3. FDR = $3.343 Trillion added to Debt
      4. Wilson = $557.172 Billion added to Debt
      5. Reagan = $504.6 Billion added to Debt

      • Have you noticed those who have the highest debt increase were in office during a major war.

      • How can you say the Democrats have done so much more damage without knowing why the numbers are high.

        Wilson was in office during WWI
        FDR was in office during WWII
        Obama in office during the Iraq war (Bush also)

        Lincoln in office during Civil War.
        We could say Reagan was in office during Cold War.
        No idea (but will look it up) what was going on with Van Buren. He probably had to spend a ton of money getting rid of the cheese smell Jackson left behind.

        • Plus Obama inherited the Bank Bailout, Automotive Bailout, and Housing market crash of 2006 or prior. Plus the War that BUSH started. And not to mention the Replubican party said their goal once Obama took office was to make sure he did not get a 2nd term. Which meant they were not going to reach across the table and work with the Democrats. Come on…are we in Grade School. This is our nation of prosperity and we need to make sure that we make things better so our children and their children can have good jobs, health care and retirement. I am embarrassed of how you act. Everyone of you should have to live off of Social Security not your fabulous pensions. Trump won because America is sick and tired of the crap that politicians hand us and the American people thought, what the Hell, let’s see if he can shake things up in Congress and the Senate.

          Hey, if you don’t show up for work and have more than three absentees, “YOU’RE FIRED”. Donald knows how to do that much

      • I’ve always heard that the Republicans have increased the national debt the most; that Reagan alone had tripled the debt; and usually the Democrats will decrease spending, and balance the national budget. Either way, however you look at it, usually the incoming President has to clean up the outgoing Presidents mess. I am biased & too lazy to do the research, but usually the Republicans spend the money without having the revenue to do it, & the Democrats usually have to clean up the mess the Republicans in office have made. I know my thinking is not fair, part of it is true, part of it is not true. Election years are so ugly & bring out the worst in people. However, I think Trump would be a mistake for our country & global relations. He would cause more damage than any good he would possibly do.

        • The debt by itself doesn’t mean much. The key is debt relative to growth.

          Suppose you runs business that brings in $1000/yr. You determine that you increase this to $1500 by expanding production. But, expanding production will cost $250 that you don’t have. Since you have the necessary credit and collateral, you borrow $250. You now have a debt of $250, but your total revenue increased by $500 and net revenue is $1250. This is debt worth incurring.

          On the other hand, suppose that you miscalculated and revenues increase by only $100. Here, your net drops to $850 even though your total rose to $1100. This debt was not worth incurring.

          The corollary to public debt is the GDP to debt ratio. You can find charts that track it from Washington’s presidency on.

    • Saddest thing is you believe what you’re shoveling

  • I vote for Kevin Bush for president. He has the knowledge needed.
    His statements are very true.
    Trump 2016
    Prison for Hilly and Billy 2016

  • The national debt for the last 100+ years is doubling on average every 8 years. Yes there are some ups and downs, but that is what it averages out to. Expect a 40 trillion debt in 2024 and it doesn’t matter who gets elected. 2032 will bring 80 trillion of fed gov debt. The big question is, what is the limit or when will creditors say no more?

    • “The big question is, what is the limit or when will creditors say no more?”

      What creditors?

      There is not a person or nation on the face of the Earth, or any combination of them to finance such debt.

      We are borrowing the money by printing it and hiding the inflation from it through Quantitative Easing, which is causing a bubble to exist in the financial markets, and currently it is about four times bigger than the housing bubble which brought us to our knees

  • As Mr Trump has said both the Rep and Dem have not done a good job the last 40 years . The chart proves its.

  • Here are some FACTS concerning the historical picture of national debt ($billions) and growth during terms of various presidents:

    ……………………………………………………………….National Debt……………Increase……………….% Increase
    ……………………………………………………………….(Year Ending)

    1976-80 Pres. Carter………………………………….$909………………………….$210………………………..46%

    1981-88 Pres. Reagan………………………………$2,602……………………….$1,603…………………….186%

    1989-92 Pres. Bush Sr……………………………….$4,065……………………….$1,463………………………56%

    1993-20 Pres. Clinton………………………………..$5,674……………………….$1,609………………………39%

    2001-08 Pres. Bush………………………………….$10,025……………………..$4,351………………………77% or 110% including:

    CBO Study: Tax Revenue Loss by Tax Cuts……$1,900

    2009-16 Pres. Obama……………………………….$19,392…………………..$9,367(a)……………………..93% or 84% including

    CBO Study: Tax Revenue Loss by Tax Cuts………$900…………………..(a) +$4.8 trillion caused by recession, stimulus packages, saving financial institutions

    Bush Jr.’s application of the “trickle down” theory in the form of a major tax reduction stimulus was a complete failure as was Reagan’s use of this approach. It’s an economic policy an older generation once called the horse-and-sparrow theory: “If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.” In other words, if you feed the wealthy increasing amounts, they brush more crumbs off the table, feeding those below them.

    During the Carter years, the federal deficit had averaged $54.5 billion annually and national debt expanded 46%. But Reagan sharply reduced taxes and the federal deficit skyrocketed to $211 billion annually with the national debt increasing 186% during his term. Reagan to his credit saw that”tax decreases don’t pay for themselves.” He ended up raising taxes 11 times after seeing debt and deficits rise steeply in his first term. Tragically, Bush Jr. didn’t respect the junk economics of “trickle down,” and during his 2001-07 term the economy was hit with modest growth, large deficits and anemic job growth.

    Propagandists like to say that redistributing wealth by progressive taxation does not increase wealth. Only low taxes spur economic growth and tax revenue growth. As noted, Reagan found such claims to be completely false; as did Bush Jr., but would never admit it; false to the Germans, the Dutch, the Swedes, the Norwegians, etc. of this world; false also according to CBO study showing that tax cuts replace 22% of lost tax revenue the first 5 years, rising to replace 32% of lost tax revenue the second five years. In layman’s terms, a $1 million tax cut would generate a $780,000 deficit in each of the first 5 years and a $680,000 deficit in each of the second 5 years. In short, supply-side economics as theory illustrated by “trickle down” con game benefits the wealthy but not middle-class or poor. It has virtually no support from professional economists.

  • Editors:

    Please REMOVE my comment. I’ll resubmit it in a correctly printed format.

  • Thank you for presenting my comment in proper format.

  • Some of you guys are real funny and have interesting ways to “cook the books” to blame the President for the debt. But if that is what you want, OK, but which President. I also went to the U S Treasury, but I also went to the Congressional Budget Office, Congressional Research Service, the Senate .gov, the White and a few more. According to all of these sites our country has always been in debt since day one. And most of the debt prior to Nixon was spent on war. But since 1930 83% of the national debt was created during Republican Presidencies, 80% of that during only 2 Presidencies, R Reagan and G W Bush. The highest deficit spending increases in the last 75 years was also during the same Presidencies, 54% and 61% respectively. Reagan almost doubled all debt before him combined, during peacetime, Bush also Created more debt than all debt before him combined. And the U S Department of Defense said only a small percentage of it went to the war. The lowest increase of deficit spending was during Clinton and Obama, 3.5% and 1.4% respectively. Although he hasn’t done much to really lower the debt, he has done absolutely nothing to raise it. In fact all the debt created over the last 8 years is equal to the interest on the debt prior to the Obama Administration. What has he done? All of his executive orders are less that 1.5% of 1% of the National Budget and Obama Care last year only cost about 300 billion yet tax revenues during the last 8 years has gone up almost 700 billion dollars. These are the facts no matter what Fox New, Rush Limbaugh or Donald Trump says. So stick that in you pipe and smoke it. If you can afford it.

  • Concerned American Citizen

    My fellow Americans, The 2016 Presidential Election will boil down to just two types of voters:
    1. The Globalists(Clinton) and 2. The Nationalists(Trump) THAT’S IT! So which category do you belong to???
    Now if you say, “I’m NOT voting this time around,” or “I’m going 3rd party,” Well for one you’ve just thrown your vote away or else your candidate will just serve to harm the other two major political candidates chances of winning the white house. It is your right though to vote for whomever you wish.
    The National Debt–What so few Americans realize was that the seeds of FDR’s New Deal were just beginning to take root in the economy. The ND had grown from $22 Billion in 1932 to just under $400 B by 1970. By ’79, the debt had doubled to 800 B. The problem with a debt that doubles in 10 yrs. is that the % compounds to such a degree that it simply can’t be paid out of current tax payer dollars. Once the % itself is financed, hence the compounding % accelerates with blinding speed. IF the National Debt had been dealt with diligently and very aggressively back in the 1970’s, the ND could’ve been controlled and greatly minimized. Unfortunately, to our detriment, neither the Fed or the American people were concerned enough to grapple with this ultra mega financial problem. Runaway inflation was eroding our dollar at an astonishing rate during the 1970’s. By the late 60’s/early 70’s, the US economy was set-up for a debt run economy whereby the deficits of earlier years gone by would pale in comparison to the enormous deficits of the future. Deficits in the millions would soon turn into billions. Today we see our ND increasing at nearly $1 trillion a year and will continue to accelerate until our US economy reaches the breaking point. We are currently at 19 Trillion. I fear this astronomical amount of $ will never be paid off in full nor reduced to controllable levels. Eventually, the American economy will crumble and America will be sold to our creditors.
    Please think about your children and grandchildren’s future when you go to the polls or vote by mail this 2016 Election. You will either vote for the Globalist or the Nationalist agenda. Which will you chose?

  • Pingback: Importing Kratos for a bong rip and a gangbang. | Exmorted

  • It is also rather insightful to read these comments, one argues for the free market another argues it was all the tax cuts, but all fail to notice since Social Security has been enacted it has paid out $97 trillion while only $63 trillion has been paid in, this is a $34 trillion difference or one and a half times more than the national debt.

    So if we were not mortgaging the children’s future for $20 trillion and stealing another $14 trillion from their parents to pay grandpa and grandma what they never paid, we would still have factories in this country and would not have had the old people, who got this $34 trillion extra money, investing it in foreign countries trying to get the best return on their investment because they had impoverished the business at home by taking their money in the first place.

    Until people face up to one simple truth this problem will kill us all

    Socialism is the belief that some people have a right to live at the expense of others, and is nothing more than theft

  • Pingback: rump, SCOTUS, Orthodox Presbyterian Book of Church Order | ThM

  • Does anyone know what Andrew Jackson did to get rid of the national debt during his time in office?

  • The best way to grow our economy is rebuilding our infrastructure with Americans. Naturally, this in turn, would generate more spending in the economy as you are targeting disposable income relative to discretionary income; that tax cuts to the wealthy accomplishes. However, spending in the economy must be accompanied by actual productivity less we end up with too much dollars chasing fewer goods causing inflation.

  • Pingback: Some of the Most Likely Disaster Scenarios - Survivalist Prepper

  • Pingback: Some of the Most Likely Disaster Scenarios | Marlon Karda

  • Pingback: America, You Been Played! Trumpโ€™s Election and The Takeaway Method | cliffordasbury

  • We are definitely not all Keynesians now.

  • Pingback: Treasury Debt Down Hard on American PublicWe Hold These Truths

  • Kevin Bush – At what point does the cost of servicing our national debt exceed the total tax revenue coming in? Or is the government expecting tax revenue to continue growing simply by population growth alone (i.e.: future tax payers that are not born yet or immigrants that are moving into our country)?

  • frustrated conservative

    I have one major problem with this tally. I’ll begin with recent Administrations, since I’m not interested in slogging through 44 Administrations worth of data to figure out how/when this tally got off-track.

    I’ll start with Carter. The fiscal year data shows that on Oct 1st 1977, when President Carter’s first budget took effect, the debt stood at $699 billion, so the chart is correct, however, by Oct 1st 1981, when President Reagan’s first budget took effect that debt was up to $998, while the chart incorrectly stops calculating Carter’s increases at $907 billion, almost a 10% discrepancy.

    This continued miscalculation is most obvious when it comes to President Obama. As I write this we are currently only in the 3rd month of President Obama’s eighth budget, yet the chart shows his tally as being complete, giving him credit for eight full budgets, by incorrectly assigning George W Bush’s $3.1 trillion (estimated: $3.5 trillion, actual expenditures) final budget to him.

    Thus, the chart’s numbers are dramatically skewed relative to reality, since Bush’s actual budget periods increased the debt from $5.816 trillion to $11.853 trillion, rather than *just* the $10.024 billion shown on the chart…which incorrectly subtracts more than $1.8 trillion from President George W Bush’s actual increases to the debt.

    Thus if we use a projected $21 trillion for Oct 1st of 2017, when President Obama’s eighth fiscal budget period ends, and President Trump’s first budget takes effect, and go by the actual $11.853 billion starting point, we find that the actual increase to the National debt during President Obama’s Administration will likely be around 76%, while the actual increase during President Bush’s eight years in Office was 103%.

    I will assume that this mistake was made unintentionally, but it clearly incorrectly sways the data to a massive degree regarding the past 16 years, in President Bush’s favor.

    If we go by the official fiscal year data, correctly assigned, this would be the tally of annual fiscal year increase to the National debt by Administration, in descending order of actual increase, from Carter to Obama:

    Reagan – average annual increase 23.75%

    George H. W. Bush – average annual increase 13.5%

    George W Bush – average annual increase 12.88%

    Carter – average annual increase 10%

    Obama – average annual increase 9.5%

    Clinton – average annual increase 4%

    I’m hopeful that some kind of correction will eventually be applied, to better illustrate the non-partisan reality of the hard data.

    National debt source:

    • You’re not reading this chart correctly. This is a list of Presidents from start of their term to finish. It’s not a list by Fiscal Budgets. The Fiscal Year does not begin or end with a Presidential inauguration. The Fiscal Year ends on September 30 of every year, since 1976. Prior to that, the Fiscal Year ended on June 30. It would be a much more complicated list, if I were to sort this by Fiscal Year, rather than by Presidential Term. Whether the Budget was passed under a current or preceding President, is negligible. The current President is responsible for how those funds are utilized, along with Congress. Things change in Government, almost daily these days.

      You can budget $80 Billion for Defense Spending, if you want, but it doesn’t mean you’re only going to spend $80 Billion on Defense that year… nor does it mean you can’t prevent spending $80 Billion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *