A comment and a question.

Comment: tax cuts are not costs.

Question. Does the tab for Iraq and Afghanistan accrued since Obama’s inauguration go under Obama or Bush in this accounting?

Tax cuts are costs, when they represent a transfer of wealth. Bush transferred wealth from the middle class to the upper class. He did it by raising taxes on the middle class and giving that money to the upper class by a tax cut. If you don’t understand that, then you have never seen a slush fund hidden by a deficit. In which case, you could never be an auditor, because you are too gullible.

Look.. I voted for Obama, but this chart says absolutely nothing except the propaganda it is. If you are afraid to intelligently criticize Obama and make up ridiculous comparisons, then you deserve the Republicans, because you have fallen to their level of deceit.

First, Obama kept the same policies as Bush when it came to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Therefore t has become his policy.
Secondly, he initiated the second TARP bailout of the banks. Therefore he shares the blame here, too.
Third, he kept Bernanke, Bair, Geitner (all members of George W Bush’s cabinet.) What does that say to you???

You fail to include the ultimate tax that Obama’s policy of Quantitative Easing put on the middle class and poor, while giving the wealthy the chance to double and triple their money in the stock market. Bernanke’s policies of QE I & QE II is the ultimate tax because it caused inflation and devaluing of the US Dollar making basic products, particularly food, much more expensive for Americans. Worse, it has caused the rise of food and other resources in poorer regions of the world, such as Africa and South America and Asia. This has caused distress upon billions of people. QE is a policy change created by the Obama administration you haven’t included in your biased charts.

To compare policy changes is ridiculous, because much of what Obama is doing is sanctioning Bush’s policies. I wish your chart really told a true story, but unfortunately it is one obfuscating piece of propaganda.

Tax cuts are not a cost. Only spending can increase debt.

I would love to hear a rational explanation of how letting taxpayers keep more of their money actually costs them money.

Think of it this way: they are taking money out of my pocket and giving it to the companies through tax breaks. Make sense?

Tax cuts are not costs. Really? I could have sold Arbusto at $100. Today it trades for $20. That is not a cost.

This is why we are in trouble.