Replies

You lack facts.

The 1940 FY Budget, submitted before we entered WW II, had Human Resource (HR) spending at $4.139 billion. By 1945, FDR DECREASED HR spending to $1.859 billion, a DECREASE of 55.1%.

In 1940, 43.7 cents of every dollar went toward HR--$4.139 billion out of total spending of $9.468 billion. By 1945, FDR had CUT social spending to less than 0.002% (practically nonexistent)!

Contrast that to George Bush. Bush first budget, FY 2002, had HR spending (welfare) at $1.317 trillion. By 2006 FY, Bush has INCREASED social welfare spending to $1.675 trillion, an increase of 27.2%! During wartime!

In 2002, 65.51 cents of every dollars went to social welfare (compared to FDR's 1940 rate of 43.7 cents of every dollar). Also, we can compare this figure to Clinton's first budget of 59.47 cents of every dollar.

FDR CUT welfare spending during wartime. Bush has INCREASED welfare spending during wartime.

There are a number of programs that Bush has increased at rates of 100%, 150% and 200%, when normally we see increases near the inflation rate. Bush has initiated social welfare programs that FDR never dreamed of. In addition, global welfare spending is Bush's favorite hobby. FDR? Why don't you do something constructive and compare FDR's global welfare to Bush's. Your embarrassment would overwhelm you.

LBJ warped FDR's programs into the cesspool they are today. Bush has now taken LBJ's spending to unchartered waters.

FACT--the percent of the total budget devoted to social welfare spending DROPPED in the 1950s and DROPPED again in the 1960s. If FDR was such a "socialist", it certainly was not cast in concrete in our national agenda.

George Bush is such a liberal fiscally that he makes FDR look like Mr. Tightwad. Those are the FACTS.

SOURCE: Office of Management and Budget, FY 2006 Historical Tables, Table 3.1, Outlays by Superfunction, 1940-2010.