He was? I wasn't aware that he signed the 2007-2009 budgets into law.
Then the Republicans won the house, we got the economy killing government shutdown, sequester, etc.
It's weird how the economy didn't get better when the spending was increased and now is getting better when it didn't. It's almost as if the Keynesian religion is wrong.
For the record, here are the Federal spending numbers:
2007 2,728,686
2008 2,982,544
2009 3,517,677
2010 3,457,079
2011 3,603,059
2012 3,537,127
2013 3,454,605
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/
How is Keynesianism almost wrong since we've been at elevated spending levels since 2009?
We've had elevated spending levels and tax cuts since the Great Recession which sounds exactly like a Keynesian prescription.
Tax cuts? What tax cuts?
You don't remember getting a stimulus check?
But anyway just to be clear your position is the reason the economy is doing so great now is that we had a big increase in spending in 2009?
We didn't have "a" big increase in just 2009. The initial increase happened in 2009 and that level has been pretty much maintained through to today. So we've had about 5 years of increased government spending.
And that current spending levels are "elevated"?
Since the economy is so great now, should we be cutting the spending back to non-elevated levels?
One quarter of good growth while good news doesn't mean we're back on track from the Great Recession. I'd say that once the economy shows signs that it is in full recovery and we're out of the liquidity trap then it would be time to start talking about reducing government spending. Once private sector spending is strong again then we can talk about removing some government spending from the economy.