Prior to the arrival of Ronald Reagan there had never
been a U.S. President who left behind a U.S. national
debt of over $1 Trillion dollars. Reagan ushered in
what I am calling here the era of the Four President
Horsemen of the U.S. Apocalypse. The Apocalypse I have
in mind is the U.S. National debt:
Reagan-9/30/88 = $2.6 Trillion national debt
Bush 41-9/30/92 = $4.0 Trillion national debt
Clinton-9/30/2000 = $5.6 Trillion national debt
Bush 43-9/30/2008 = $10.1 Trillion national debt
It will be observed from the above figures that in the
12 years from the first horseman until the third
horseman the U.S. national debt approximately doubled.
It will also be observed that in the eight years from
the third horseman to the fourth horseman the
U.S. national debt approximately doubled again. That
means that currently every 10 years on average the
U.S. national debt doubles. That further means that
if this current trend continues, then expect this:
President?-9/30/2018 = $20 Trillion national debt
President?-9/30/2028 = $40 Trillion national debt
President?-9/30/2038 = $80 Trillion national debt
President?-9/30/2048 = $160 Trillion national debt
You say, perhaps, that it can't really get as bad as
what I showed for 9/30/2048. If so, I reply why not?
America for over 20 years has been in the cycle of
doubling the U.S. national debt on average every 10
years. No Republican or Democratic President has
seriously attempted to stop the cycle in those years so
which Republican or Democratic President is going to
seriously attempt to stop the cycle in the next 40
years? In my view, under the current state of most
American attitudes if one President even seriously
tried to stop the cycle the political fallout for him
and his political party would be extremely serious.
And what President or political party in America wants
extremely serious fallout?
Some will say, perhaps, that Bill Clinton already
showed the way to recovery with his balanced budgets.
To such I say consider this:
Clinton's "balanced budgets" are an illusion
spread by the Main Stream Media.
No U.S. President has really had a balanced
budget since 1957 and Dwight Eisenhower.
Balanced budgets are a good starting point for
beginning to stop the apocalypse of the U.S. national
debt but since there hasn't been a balanced budget
since 1957 and Eisenhower, then when do you think
some U.S. President is going to start them again?
By the way, Eisenhower had two balanced budgets
back to back, 1956 and 1957.
Update-Nov 24: The $7.7 Trillion Bailout?
U.S. Pledges Top $7.7 Trillion to Ease Frozen Credit:
'...Bloomberg News tabulated data from the Fed,
Treasury and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and
interviewed regulatory officials, economists and
academic researchers to gauge the full extent of the
government’s rescue effort...'
'...The worst financial crisis in two generations
has erased $23 trillion, or 38 percent, of the value
of the world’s companies and brought down three of
the biggest Wall Street firms...'
Update #2-Nov 26: $1 Trillion budget deficit for 2009?
Federal deficit could hit $1 Trillion this year:
'...Obama said at a news conference Tuesday, "Budget
reform is not an option. It's a necessity..."'
'...Budget hawks were stunned when the federal deficit
hit a record $455 billion in fiscal 2008, which ended
Sept. 30, more than double the previous year's deficit.
But now, even the fiscally conservative say another
doubling, to $1 trillion or more, may be inevitable...'
Update #3-Nov 26: The $8.5 Trillion Bailout?
Government bailout hits $8.5 trillion:
'The federal government committed an additional $800
billion to two new loan programs on Tuesday, bringing
its cumulative commitment to financial rescue
initiatives to a staggering $8.5 trillion...'
'...Given the unprecedented size and complexity of
these programs and the fact that many have never been
tried before, it's impossible to predict how much they
will cost taxpayers. The final cost won't be known for
'...Most of the money, about $5.5 trillion, comes from
the Federal Reserve, which as an independent entity
does not need congressional approval to lend money to
banks or, in "unusual and exigent circumstances," to
other financial institutions...'