George W. Bush Has Left Our Economy in Shambles

Reckless spending by the G.O.P. is the cause of our fiscal woes

Make no mistake George W. Bush is no conservative. Sure, under the tutelage of Karl Rove, Bush managed to fool a significant number of voters into believing he shared their conservative values. But you can't argue with his record: he's a free-spending liberal who could make Ted Kennedy blush.

On the conservative social front, Bush's actions have been more conservative than his fiscal record, but even here, other than appointing conservative judges to the courts, Bush has done little which hardcore conservatives appreciate.

Fiscally, George W. Bush will likely go down as the most recklessly spending president in our nation's history (with the help of a G.O.P. controlled Congress for most of his term). This week the White House announced the United States government will have a record $482-billion budget deficit next year. And these numbers will more than likely increase if the economy and the housing market continue to slump -- something most economic experts say is likely.

Bad Economics 101

In understanding the nation's terrible fiscal policy, it is important to realize the difference between the national deficit and the national debt. Our national deficit is the amount of money we have to borrow each year to run the government (pay entitlements like Social Security, fund the war in Iraq, and build all the bridges to nowhere so our members of Congress can get re-elected). Our national debt is the cumulative sum of all the money our nation has borrowed from year to year. Think of the debt as all the annual deficits added up. The amount we still haven't paid back is currently $9,546,982,673,051.42 (that's $9.5-trillion). Since 2007, the amount has increased $1.77-billion per day. Each American's share of the national deficit is currently $31,358.69.

Why Care?

Okay, so why care? Because at some point, all of the people who own our Treasury notes expect to be paid back. While that is a novel concept to our president and Congress, most Americans understand that if you don't pay back what you borrow, the lender eventually comes after you to claim the money, or whatever it is (such as your house) you bought with it. Even most high-school drop-outs understand this principle as does anyone who has ever watched the Sopranos. Unfortunately, our politicians in Washington do not.

We should care because our children and grandchildren and their children and their grandchildren are on course to be saddled with this debt. And in addition to leaving them with all of this debt, we will also be leaving them with a Social Security system that is insolvent, and a Medicare program that is similarly bust. So in effect, many of the programs that have been promised to Americans that are the cause of our budgetary and fiscal problems will no longer be around for those who will end up paying for the largesse of previous generations.

And to whom do we owe this money? To a whole lot of people, countries, and companies who buy our bonds and Treasury notes. Think of countries like China. They buy a lot of our notes while inflating their currency so the products they make that we buy at Wal-Mart remain cheap. Oh yeah, they also buy a lot of oil -- which increases demand, and thus our costs for oil -- so they can keep their polluting manufacturing plants humming so we can buy tainted dog food and toys made with lead paint. For the record, 5 percent of all products imported into the U.S. from China are sold at... you guessed it, Wal-Mart.

Oh, and remember that "economic stimulus" package President Bush and Congress passed last year? It cost the Treasury (that's really you and me and future generations), $150-billion. I imagine a lot of that $150-billion was spent at our favorite discount store on cheap crap made in China.

The Solution:

So what do we do? On a micro level, the answer is simple: throw out all the rascals in Congress who spend our money and the money of future generations like a bunch of drunken sailors. And elect a president (like John McCain) who has a record of cutting pork-barrel spending. On a macro level, the solution is not so simple because the American voting public is not that sophisticated when it comes to identifying long-term problems and electing representatives who will address them.

President Bush and Congress' legacy will be one of appalling fiscal stewardship but the American voter is to blame because we don't demand better from our elected officials.

Where is Tony Soprano when you need him?

Chris Ingram is the president and founder of 411 Communications a corporate and political communications firm, and publisher of www.IrreverentView.com. Ingram is a frequent pundit on Fox News and CNN, and has written opinion columns for the Washington Times, UPI, Frontpage Florida, and National Review online. E-mail him at: [e-mail].

Comments

[GiggidyGeshmoygen]

in addition to the economy, bush has also caused

education
transportation
healthcare
infrastructure
the dollar
the environment
the middle class
democracy
and The Constitution

to be in a shambles ...................

[izAriver]

"President Bush and Congress' legacy will be one of appalling fiscal stewardship but the American voter is to blame because we don't demand better from our elected officials."

Who did you vote for in the last two presidential elections?

[ThePeacemakers]

Pork Barrel spending - yeah, like the no-bid contracts to defense manufactures with fraudulent auditing.
And Pork Barrel spending - like the military black budget.

I'm sure we can find money for the US infrastructure (such as rebuilding bridges, education) somewhere in all that.
Now, if only we don't drink the cool-aid and give those fraudulent no-bid contracts for rebuilding to the Bush-Cheney buddy companies.

[Irtnog]

Don't forget that the (estimated) $1.5 Trillion spent on the military misadventure in Iraq is OFF BUDGET. It doesn't show up on the balance sheet of the US and therefore the national debt is actually higher than this pundit shows. This is enron style accounting folks. Furthermore to call Bu$h and his co-conspirators (incl McCain) conservatives is an affront to true conservatives.

True conservatives DO NOT: engage in milatary adventurism, entangle themselves in the internal affairs of other soverign countries, abrogate the constitution, suspend habeus corpus, spend money they don't have, abrogate the possee comitatus act, engage in ex-judicial detention, enact signing statements, support unfettered executive power, tip the balance of power, increase the size of government by 1/3, ignore the will of the people......and the list goes on and on.

Unfortunately today, what are called conservatives are conservative in name only.

It used to be that cowards were social pariahs, now we send them to Washington to govern us.

We'll be sorry.

[myrddin]

Only one problem with electing John McCain. He promises a continuation of the Bush tax cuts which cause us to borrow more money. Cutting pork is only a very small part of the deficit. The interest on the national debt has grown so large since Bush took office that it in itself is adding to the national debt. At only 4% interest it consumes 400 billion a year. Imagine what we could do with that money if we weren't paying interest on money we already over spent. another thing that isn't brought out in this article is that the deficit also includes a surplus from the social security trust fund. When Bush cut taxes he cut the money that should have gone into the trust fund even though it was supposedly in a lock-box from the Clinton years. He gave the trust fund money to the richest Americans at the expense of the elderly.

[NickHP]

Sorry, Senator McCain, now shed crocodile tears for the economy which he helped spend into deficit.

It is not just cut cut cut that balances budgets, it is also collecting taxes. For 8 years the Republican control of the presidency and both houses of Congress has thrown out the ability to collect revenue. When you forgive someone's tax obligation you shift that weight onto someone else. Going into deficit just means we have to pay interest on that debt in upcoming years.

No, McCain is part of the problem on the budget side. And he is a warmonger to boot for root toot tooting for this Iraq war. He's 71 years old and loosing what little mental faculty he once had, and he's never been the brightest bulb in Congress, either. There are many reasons 'my friends' why this decrepit specimen of a human being should not be the next president.

[bmora]

"And elect a president (like John McCain) who has a record of cutting pork-barrel spending."

Is this a joke? Since when? Correct me if I am wrong, but has not McCain been in the Senate while we were racking up all this debt? How much pork has McCain cut exactly? Since when can one Senator control the spending habits of Congress? By your standard, is he not part of the problem. McCain has pushed plenty of pork during his tenure; enough so, that he puts one of our, Texas, state’s barbecue restaurant chain to shame.

So called “pork” whether on the decline or incline has little to do with the overall rate of spending. In fact, if pork was all that we had to worry about, I posit that we would be running surpluses almost every year. Our debt debacle has consistently been pegged with the expansion (the Reagan and Bush eras) and contraction of the US's military budget. It would seem that a 100 year war and military buildup would worsen exponentially our current fiscal crisis. As a matter of empirical observation, one would conclude that war invariably leads to increased debt. Why would you not vote for the dude that plans to end the war (or at least one of them anyway)?

[bmora]

Continued:

Does McCain have magic fairy powder that enables one to spend more than one takes in to fight an unending war and simultaneously reduce the National Debt and Deficit all in one fell swoop? Wow, that must be some illegal sh*t.

Oh, and since you provided not empirical data, I will not either, but I know my numbers directly refute what you are saying. Care to suggest or prove otherwise? Did not think so. Go back to school and just say no to drugs.

[hopeless277]

As long as paychecks for congress clear, nobody cares.

[HeevenSteven]

'scuse me, but have YOU been drinking with the sailors?

John McCain didn't use any of his gravitas to try to clamp down on the drunken sailor spending. He also helped rubber stamp all the misery Bush wrought. He also supported the Iraq invasion, the worst drunken sailor spending in Decades. He hasn't got a clue about energy policy other than drill.

The Republican party flunked it's leadership test with flying colors, they do not deserve to be rewarded for it. It's time for some real intelligence in that office, and McCain doesn't measure up.

[BADEN]

Uh......if I remember my history correctly.......

YOUR PARTY MEMBERS ENABLED HIM AND SUPPORTED HIM.

Uh......

You broke it.
You own it.

Don't blame Bush.
You allowed him free reign.
Don't blame Bush.
You allowed him 'the decider'
Don't blame Bush.
Blame yourselves.

And SHAME on all of you for selling out.
Shame.

[blaqntelligence]

They have none, remember?

[CitizenE]

The idea that conservatives have ever in fact been anything other than enablers for the military industrial petrochemical pharmaceutical corporatocracy and high rollers is laughable. Reagan foisted the biggest defense spending boondoggle on the US in American history--Star Wars--all the while cutting taxes for his wealthy cronies and running up deficits that surpassed all previous American administrations end to end. Their whole pitch is a bait and switch in which they offer a 20 dollar handout while the financially elite get to rob the bank. Mc Cain and his chief economic advisor Phil Graham have been especially scurrilous on deregulation to enable first S&Ls and most recently banks to (legally) embezzle. They want something for nothing, don't have any idea that when one p***es up stream, those downstream pay an enormous price, believe that we can go as far into debt for military adventurism as they so desire, have in Reagan's day sold the nation off to the Saudis and now to the Chinese, and are perennially unwilling to invest in the heath of our nation, or a sensible, renewable, long term energy program. Conservatives are never responsible when it comes to economic governance, and their latest ploy, now that the chickens have come home to roost, is to call George Bush an exception when he has been the apotheosis of the rule.

[blaqntelligence]

"And elect a president (like John McCain) who has a record of cutting pork-barrel spending."

You can't be serious........

Cutting pork barrel spending will NOT save our economy if our so-called leaders consider it an American right to bomb, invade, and occupy a nation at our questionable discretion......