HEADLINES

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

So, who’s responsible for the current debt level?

And more importantly, who's responsible for the current trajectory of the federal debt?

Yesterday, Joe Biden blamed GOP for "quadrupling" National Debt.

Quadrupling?  SRSLY, Joe?

Mark Knoller, White House correspondent for CBS Radio, did a quick check of the numbers to show that the increase was actually 86% on the GOP's watch from 2001 through the 2009 inauguration of Barack Obama.  That's nowhere near "quadrupling," which would represent a 400% increase, but  this calculation doesn't tell the whole truth, either.

When George W. Bush took office in January 2001, the total US National Debt was $5.727 trillion.  Between that date and January 2007 when Democrats took control of the Congress, the total US National Debt was $8.675 trillion.  This represents a 51% increase, or about an 8.6% increase on an average annual basis.  That's a big jump, but wait…

From January 2007 until January 2009, Under the Democrat-controlled Congress, the National Debt increased to $10.627 trillion.  This represents a 22.5% increase, or about 11.25% on an average annual basis.  That's an even bigger jump.  It took Congressional Democrats two years to do half more again the damage what the GOP did in six years.

From January 2009 through August 2010, under a Democrat-controlled Congress and a Democrat White House, the National Debt increased to $13.320 trillion, or about a 16.0% average annual basis. Whoa… The rate of growth in the National Debt has increased nearly two-fold since the Democrats obtained full legislative and executive power. In about 20 months, too.

In truth, since the Democrats took control of Congress in January 2007, they have steadily increased the rate of growth in the National Debt.  For the two year period between 2007 and Obama's inauguration in January 2009, the annual rate of increase in the debt level grew by a whopping 265 basis points.  Between January 2009 and the current date, the annual rate of increase in the debt level has grown by an even more eye-popping 475 basis points.

There is no sugar-coating the Republicans' responsibility for the increase between 2001 and 2007.  They spent in ways that would make Tip O'Neill blush.  But to suggest that the Republicans are responsible for the 54% increase since 2007 and the 16% average annual rate of growth since 2009 is just wrong. 

Here's a chart, showing the plot using these rates of growth and projecting them into 2012.  The parabolic launch didn't start until Democrats had all the levers of power.

Book1

Anyone who claims that the Republicans are responsible for the recent run-up in the National Debt, from $8.675 trillion in 2007 to the current level of $13.2o trillion is either very bad at math, or very good at partisan political spinning.

NB:  This is not a knock on Mark Knoller, who has done a very professional job of covering the White House for CBS Radio.  This is a knock on partisan Democrats (and their sycophants in the old school media) who want to spin numbers such that they don't have to bear responsibility for nearly doubling the National Debt since seizing power in the 2006 mid-term election.







Sent from my iPhone

So, who’s responsible for the current debt level?

And more importantly, who's responsible for the current trajectory of the federal debt?

Yesterday, Joe Biden blamed GOP for "quadrupling" National Debt.

Quadrupling?  SRSLY, Joe?

Mark Knoller, White House correspondent for CBS Radio, did a quick check of the numbers to show that the increase was actually 86% on the GOP's watch from 2001 through the 2009 inauguration of Barack Obama.  That's nowhere near "quadrupling," which would represent a 400% increase, but  this calculation doesn't tell the whole truth, either.

When George W. Bush took office in January 2001, the total US National Debt was $5.727 trillion.  Between that date and January 2007 when Democrats took control of the Congress, the total US National Debt was $8.675 trillion.  This represents a 51% increase, or about an 8.6% increase on an average annual basis.  That's a big jump, but wait…

From January 2007 until January 2009, Under the Democrat-controlled Congress, the National Debt increased to $10.627 trillion.  This represents a 22.5% increase, or about 11.25% on an average annual basis.  That's an even bigger jump.  It took Congressional Democrats two years to do half more again the damage what the GOP did in six years.

From January 2009 through August 2010, under a Democrat-controlled Congress and a Democrat White House, the National Debt increased to $13.320 trillion, or about a 16.0% average annual basis. Whoa… The rate of growth in the National Debt has increased nearly two-fold since the Democrats obtained full legislative and executive power. In about 20 months, too.

In truth, since the Democrats took control of Congress in January 2007, they have steadily increased the rate of growth in the National Debt.  For the two year period between 2007 and Obama's inauguration in January 2009, the annual rate of increase in the debt level grew by a whopping 265 basis points.  Between January 2009 and the current date, the annual rate of increase in the debt level has grown by an even more eye-popping 475 basis points.

There is no sugar-coating the Republicans' responsibility for the increase between 2001 and 2007.  They spent in ways that would make Tip O'Neill blush.  But to suggest that the Republicans are responsible for the 54% increase since 2007 and the 16% average annual rate of growth since 2009 is just wrong. 

Here's a chart, showing the plot using these rates of growth and projecting them into 2012.  The parabolic launch didn't start until Democrats had all the levers of power.

Book1

Anyone who claims that the Republicans are responsible for the recent run-up in the National Debt, from $8.675 trillion in 2007 to the current level of $13.2o trillion is either very bad at math, or very good at partisan political spinning.

NB:  This is not a knock on Mark Knoller, who has done a very professional job of covering the White House for CBS Radio.  This is a knock on partisan Democrats (and their sycophants in the old school media) who want to spin numbers such that they don't have to bear responsibility for nearly doubling the National Debt since seizing power in the 2006 mid-term election.







Sent from my iPhone

Link Shared from 'Drudge Report Easy'

This news link was sent from a friend.

Download News Hour for iPhone from itunes



theblogprof: Reason TV: Never Enough for America's Limitless Welfare State

http://theblogprof.blogspot.com/2010/08/reason-tv-never-enough-for-americas.html

Link Shared from 'Drudge Report Easy'

This news link was sent from a friend.

Download News Hour for iPhone from itunes



Link Shared from 'Drudge Report Easy'

This news link was sent from a friend.

Download News Hour for iPhone from itunes



Link Shared from 'Drudge Report Easy'

This news link was sent from a friend.

Download News Hour for iPhone from itunes



Fwd: Birmingham Personal Finance Examiner: On the cusp of a major stock market decline?



examiner logo
As noted previously, stock charts are nothing more than a depiction of hope and fear. Markets rise on hope, and decline on fear. Hope is not a clear emotion in many cases. It tends to be diffuse and nebulous. As a result, stock market rises tend to... Read more »


Birmingham Personal Finance Examiner, Greg Howard


Greg Howard is a personal financial advisor and licensed agent in Alabama, Georgia and Florida. His specialty is those who are in the pre-retirement window and already in retirement. He was educated at The Citadel, and has been in insurance and finance since 1985. He appears regularly on internet TV and radio talk shows, explaining the current economic situation and how it affects individuals. You may contact Greg at greg@gregwhoward.com.


 
You are receiving this email at Jayman2124@gmail.com because you subscribed to Birmingham Personal Finance Examiner on examiner.com
If you wish to change or remove your email address, simply ask us to unsubscribe you
Unsubscribe | Terms of Use

 

Sunday, August 22, 2010

At $578 million, Los Angeles unveils the costliest school in the country

image The Los Angeles Unified School District is unveiling the costliest school in the United States. It's the Robert F. Kennedy Community School system.

The price tag is consistent with the lifestyle of the rich and famous who populate the area:  A cool $578 million.  Yes, Five hundred, seventy eight million dollars.  For a school. 

In California, the next Greece.

This is the Los Angeles United School District, that routinely produces a 50% dropout rate and test scores with proficiency ratings approaching one-third of students.  That means for every three students taking standardized tests, only one shows proficiency in the subject matter. 

Apparently, the leaders of the LAUSD are bad at math.


LOS ANGELES (AP) — Next month's opening of the Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools will be auspicious for a reason other than its both storied and infamous history as the former Ambassador Hotel, where the Democratic presidential contender was assassinated in 1968.

With an eye-popping price tag of $578 million, it will mark the inauguration of the nation's most expensive public school ever.

The K-12 complex to house 4,200 students has raised eyebrows across the country as the creme de la creme of "Taj Mahal" schools, $100 million-plus campuses boasting both architectural panache and deluxe amenities.

"There's no more of the old, windowless cinderblock schools of the '70s where kids felt, 'Oh, back to jail,'" said Joe Agron, editor-in-chief of American School & University, a school construction journal. "Districts want a showpiece for the community, a really impressive environment for learning."

Not everyone is similarly enthusiastic.


What's scary about this is that the Los Angeles Unified School District is proud of this.

I'm all for students going to school in nice, clean, well-constructed facilities that foster an atmosphere of comfort and learning.  But at $578 million, the cost-per-student is $137,619.05.  And that's just for construction.

But this is not the first of the LAUSD's Taj Mahal projects.  This is just the crown jewel:


Partly by circumstance and partly by design, the Los Angeles Unified School District has emerged as the mogul of Taj Mahals.

The RFK complex follows on the heels of two other L.A. schools among the nation's costliest — the $377 million Edward R. Roybal Learning Center, which opened in 2008, and the $232 million Visual and Performing Arts High School that debuted in 2009.


For those of us who learned math in the brick and mortar schools of yesteryear, that means the LAUSD has spent no less than $1.187 billion on shiny new schools that would make Al Gore blush at their opulence and splendor. 

Do you think that the people of California are getting their money's worth?  Do you think that student test scores and dropout rates warrant spending this kind of money on the setting, rather than the readin, ritin' and rithmetic?

Gimme some feedback in the comments.







Sent from my iPhone

Heritage Foundation

DrudgeFeed.com - Drudge Report RSS feed

RedState

Right Wing News

RenewAmerica

Hot Air » Top Picks

Conservative Outpost

Conservative Examiner

Michelle Malkin

Big Government

Big Journalism

Big Hollywood

Pajamas Media