The problem is that some of these charts are from the right, the Wall Street Journal specifically. When WSJ charts show Obama has spent less than GOP presidents, you can assume that it's safe information. Kinda blows up the argument that it's left wing media propaganda no?

@Svart Debt went up because of tax cuts.

These charts are for laymen, not economists. They show spending has not gone wild under Obama and job growth has been good in Private Sector but down in Public Sector due to Republican blocking. If they weren't blocking the recovery would be strong and revenue increased to help cut deficit.

Also Corporations are Booming in profits under Obama but sitting on Trillions. The Right wing says he hurts Business but that's another lie.

1st of all most of Obama's actions have been in effort to FIX the crap that was done before he took office and since he took over he hasn't really significantly added to the deficit, which is different from the long term Debt.

Federal Spending under Obama has been the slowest in Decades. Slower than Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. It's not even close. Spending is always worse under Republicans, they just do better propaganda to say it's worse under Democrats.

Gross Domestic Product is up. Wall Street is up. Private Sector Job Growth is up. Only the Public Sector has been starved by the Republicans so that overall the recovery can be slowed. Under Reagan and Bush they increased Public sector Spending to get out of recession, which they lie about later.

Even the cause of the Deficit in the Future isn't really due to the Obama Recovery Efforts alone, but much of it is Bush era actions.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

Sorry, but saying that my numbers are wrong or lack foundation isn't enough, on its own, to persuade me of that fact. But maybe it's time to move on.

@Vitaliy_Kiselev

I don't follow you. You'll need to more specific, if you want me to pursue the argument. But maybe it's better just to drop it....

@svart

Bush II doubled the national debt in his 8 years, from about $5 trillion to about $10 trillion, despite the fact that he inherited a budget surplus from Clinton. In other words, in 8 years, Bush doubled a deficit which had taken more than the prior 200 years to accumulate.

The first "Obama deficit" in 2009 (the first red line) is actually Bush's budget, and Bush's deficit. While Bush inherited a surplus from Clinton, Obama inherited Bush's $1.2 trillion deficit, based on Bush's budget for 2009. Obama had nothing to do with it -- a president coming into office in 2009 doesn't set the 2009 budget. The previous president does.

While it's true deficits have been very large under Obama, GROWTH of government spending under Obama has been much lower than other recent presidents. He is indeed running high deficits, but this the baseline economy he inherited from Bush: he inherited Bush's wars, Bush's tax cuts, and Bush's Depression. There's no way to clear that stuff from the balance sheet.

You can hardly expect Obama to be running a $250 billion deficit, when he inherited an economy running on a $1+ trillion deficit, courtesy of George Bush, and in the middle of a Depression, no less. But, given that figure, his spending increases per capita are far, far lower than those of Reagan and Bush.

Again. Simple solutions do not work. Problem is not in less or more spending. As for difference between parties, in core things they are the same, with same sponsors. So, who cares?

This isn't true. I hear this every year of an election. That both sides are the same. Let's see the hands of people who think Al Gore would've invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. And where would our economy be without this? http://www.costofwar.com

@Vitaliy Of course that means nothing about the veracity of the belief. 37% of Americans can't find America on a map...of America! http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-shehori/poll-37-of-americans-unab_b_150933.html

@brianluce, you're right. They also keep saying Obama raised taxes, which is a lie, cuz he has cut taxes! Spending has flatlined during Obama's presidency and the private sector has created more jobs under him than during the entire Bush 8 years.

The only problem I see is that we couldn't get a big enough stimulus. The amount they went for was based on early estimates of the depth of the recession, but they were wrong and it was much deeper than they anticipated. No matter, things have actually turned around. Manufacturing is up. Private sector job growth is up. The only thing that didn't happen was enough money to help keep the public sector going. If not for Republican obstruction, Obama would've had this country all the way back!!!

The Republicans are funny, cuz they made sure to block any Public Sector assistance, but during Republican presidencies they spent their way out of recessions with PUBLIC sector spending at very hgh levels, but whenever a Democrat is in the Oval Office they block any Public Sector spending. Go look up what Reagan and Bush spent on Discretionary Spending verses Obama. Spending is actually DOWN under Obama. The lies just continue. The US is actually going to experience growth once Obama is re-elected and they can't block his US investment in infrastructure, education and research and development.

I really get tired of people blaming it on Obama I got no love of republicans or democrats they both suck at the ambrosia filled tits of the rich. Until the US government can no longer be unduly motivated by those with money the little guy is screwed. Americans for years worked hard for a balance between work and living to create a quality of life the envy of most of the world and it's all being thrown away by greedy international corporations and the politicians they bought the race to the bottom.

@jrd maybe so. That's over my head.

I see farmers unable to break even, more and more small business owners with less and less work, people with under water houses and more foreclosures than I've ever seen. I'm lucky. I own my farm and another home, all my vehicles and equipment are paid for. My total debt is under ten thousand....but the rest of the country seems to be on the verge of bankruptcy.

So the country may not go bankrupt, but it sure looks like everyone in it may. Just my ground level observation.

@JRD There's enough fault to go around. As much as I hate Obama this is not his mess alone. It's been snowballing for a long time.

I agree that the question should be when as opposed to if. The next big question is "What to do then?". I talked to a young photographer last year and told him to take pictures and keep notes because this is history on a rampage,