You seem to not understand revenue. Until you do this is pointless because you have no idea what is happening in this conversation. That money is given to the States. It didn't have to be. It could have been spent elsewhere or not spent at all. You are COMPLETELY ignoring that fact by pretending...
That revenue is generated at the Federal level. It's then given (spent) to the States in aide. It's spent at the Federal level which is why it's included. You can't generate money at the Federal level. Include it in yearly revenue and then just pretend it was never there. Which is exactly what...
Is this money spent at the Federal level? Yes. Are you excluding it to try and validate an incorrect and misleading statement? Yes.
That money is generated and SPENT at the Federal level. Which is why it is included in the Total Federal Spending.
It's Federal spending. It's revenue generated and spent at the Federal level. This is very simple and you can't seem to comprehend it at it's simplest level. You are choosing to exclude and include whatever you want to validate your incorrect point. You have to include ALL money spent and...
His point was that Federal spending is lowest under Obama than any other president since WWII. Which is factually incorrect no matter what numbers you use.
If you use total Federal spending it gets even worse. If you include the Federal debt then it gets even worse.
He and the article are...
You are aware that states and local governments get money from the Federal Government? I'm guessing you aren't aware of this. This is Federal money spent. This doesn't include revenue generated at the state and local level. It does include Federal money spent at the state and local level.
You either aren't comprehending this site, the numbers on it, or you are just making shit up.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/piechart_2010_US_total
Total spending for 2010 5.9 trillion.
Looks at dollars spend. It's a 2 trillion dollar increase in actual spending. When leveled for inflation it's the biggest increase of all presidents combined. When taken at face value it's still the biggest single increase in presidential history. Excluding WWII.
My point was that the major increase in spending during Bush's term was during a Democrat controlled house. Which I provided evidence to back up those statements. You are now basically trying to change the subject. My point has been made.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.