4 ms·

It looks like it was under control for a while following World War II, but then from the early 1980s, it's hard for me not correlate the first derivative of the

It looks like it was under control for a while following World War II, but then from the early 1980s, it's hard for me not correlate the first derivative of the slope of that graph with presidential party.

secabeen 1y ago
What do you specifically see? I see two big increases in debt, both due to shocks (the 08 financial crisis, and the pandemic; one under Obama, and one under Trump.). Pre 2008, it does look like moderate increases under Reagan/Bush1 and Bush 2, and flat to decrease under Clinton, is that what you mean?
- emchammer 1y ago
  Yes, that's roughly what I see. The bottom of the Y axis on this graph is 30% which can be a little deceptive. It looks to me like Clinton and Obama had a terrible challenge in bringing this under control following the early 1980s and the 2008 financial crises and they did what they could, and then there is also Reaganomics. It just looks so hopeless because this figure is as high as it was following the war. Now Biff Tannen's in the White House, and he'll be knocking down walls. I don't think the system was meant to handle human greed on this scale.
  - rbanffy 1y ago
    > I don't think the system was meant to handle human greed on this scale. It was held together by decorum. There is none left.
- etchalon 1y ago
  The 2008 crisis happened under Bush, not Obama. Obama was inaugurated on January 20th, 2009.
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    Not only was Obama not inaugurated until 2009, but the Great Recession began in 2007, so tying it to Obama because it is popularly associated with 2008 and Obama was elected towards the end of that year is...doubly wrong.
    - Terr_ 1y ago
      I'm also certain some folks believe Biden was President during the start of COVID-19 in the US too. (Jan 2020.) It seems to be a pattern, where a disturbingly-large minority of people remember nothing but the year-number of an election (e.g. "2008") and never account for how voting was at the end of that year and the voting-result only takes effect the next (odd-numbered) year. Oh, there's also a general "I want it to be true so I remember it that way" aspect, but I think that's contributory rather than the main cause.
- xnx 1y ago
  > What do you specifically see? 1942-1945: Big increase to pay for fighting/winning a World War 1946-2007: More or less fiscally responsible 2008-present: War-like level of debt increase to counteract a down business cycle?
- Terr_ 1y ago
  > I see two big increases in debt I recommend the surplus/deficit by GDP graph, which is easier than manually eyeballing slopes: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSGDA188S https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSGDA188S
georgemcbay 1y ago
> It looks like it was under control for a while following World War II, but then from the early 1980 Democrats had a near solid lock on Congress from World War II until the early 1980s (only 2 two year sessions where they didn't control both chambers) and Congress hadn't abdicated its power of the purse. Republicans spend a lot of time branding themselves as the "party of fiscal responsibility", but ask yourself in what situations a group needs heavy branding by way of incessant self messaging. By every major objective measure, Republican control of government has been worse for the economy. And to be clear, none of this reply is meant as a defense of the current Democratic party which is currently (at the national level) leaderless and in shambles and is far too captured by its donor class of special interests to protect the interests of the American working and middle classes and who will be unable to regain real power until they address that.
Terr_ 1y ago
> it's hard for me not correlate the first derivative of the slope of that graph Many years ago I recall seeing a chart that annotated-out the party had the Presidency or majorities in either house of Congress along the "time" axis, but I'm not having any luck finding one. Sort of like this [0] except including a line for deficit/surplus by GDP. [1] There are a lot of charts out there where the Presidency is shown, but IMO that plays in to a false narrative about who really has power over budgeting and how-much. [0] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/02/03/single-party-control-in-washington-is-common-at-the-beginning-of-a-new-presidency-but-tends-not-to-last-long/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/02/03/single-pa... [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSGDA188S https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSGDA188S

secabeen 1y ago

What do you specifically see? I see two big increases in debt, both due to shocks (the 08 financial crisis, and the pandemic; one under Obama, and one under Trump.). Pre 2008, it does look like moderate increases under Reagan/Bush1 and Bush 2, and flat to decrease under Clinton, is that what you mean?

emchammer 1y ago
Yes, that's roughly what I see. The bottom of the Y axis on this graph is 30% which can be a little deceptive. It looks to me like Clinton and Obama had a terrible challenge in bringing this under control following the early 1980s and the 2008 financial crises and they did what they could, and then there is also Reaganomics. It just looks so hopeless because this figure is as high as it was following the war. Now Biff Tannen's in the White House, and he'll be knocking down walls. I don't think the system was meant to handle human greed on this scale.
- rbanffy 1y ago
  > I don't think the system was meant to handle human greed on this scale. It was held together by decorum. There is none left.
etchalon 1y ago
The 2008 crisis happened under Bush, not Obama. Obama was inaugurated on January 20th, 2009.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  Not only was Obama not inaugurated until 2009, but the Great Recession began in 2007, so tying it to Obama because it is popularly associated with 2008 and Obama was elected towards the end of that year is...doubly wrong.
  - Terr_ 1y ago
    I'm also certain some folks believe Biden was President during the start of COVID-19 in the US too. (Jan 2020.) It seems to be a pattern, where a disturbingly-large minority of people remember nothing but the year-number of an election (e.g. "2008") and never account for how voting was at the end of that year and the voting-result only takes effect the next (odd-numbered) year. Oh, there's also a general "I want it to be true so I remember it that way" aspect, but I think that's contributory rather than the main cause.
xnx 1y ago
> What do you specifically see? 1942-1945: Big increase to pay for fighting/winning a World War 1946-2007: More or less fiscally responsible 2008-present: War-like level of debt increase to counteract a down business cycle?
Terr_ 1y ago
> I see two big increases in debt I recommend the surplus/deficit by GDP graph, which is easier than manually eyeballing slopes: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSGDA188S https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSGDA188S

georgemcbay 1y ago

> It looks like it was under control for a while following World War II, but then from the early 1980 Democrats had a near solid lock on Congress from World War II until the early 1980s (only 2 two year sessions where they didn't control both chambers) and Congress hadn't abdicated its power of the purse. Republicans spend a lot of time branding themselves as the "party of fiscal responsibility", but ask yourself in what situations a group needs heavy branding by way of incessant self messaging. By every major objective measure, Republican control of government has been worse for the economy. And to be clear, none of this reply is meant as a defense of the current Democratic party which is currently (at the national level) leaderless and in shambles and is far too captured by its donor class of special interests to protect the interests of the American working and middle classes and who will be unable to regain real power until they address that.

Terr_ 1y ago

> it's hard for me not correlate the first derivative of the slope of that graph Many years ago I recall seeing a chart that annotated-out the party had the Presidency or majorities in either house of Congress along the "time" axis, but I'm not having any luck finding one. Sort of like this [0] except including a line for deficit/surplus by GDP. [1] There are a lot of charts out there where the Presidency is shown, but IMO that plays in to a false narrative about who really has power over budgeting and how-much. [0] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/02/03/single-party-control-in-washington-is-common-at-the-beginning-of-a-new-presidency-but-tends-not-to-last-long/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/02/03/single-pa... [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSGDA188S https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSGDA188S