| | During this same time period, spending mandated by Congress has also increased by more than 29% in inflation-adjusted dollars, representing an 11.4% increase in federal spending as a percentage of [[Gross domestic product|GDP]]. This spending has doubled the federal debt, increasing it from 58% to 66% of GDP. Defense spending increased 61%, and non-defense by 23% during the eight years since 2000. The largest non-defense spending increase has been for federally-funded medical expenses, at 54 percent.<ref>[http://www.aier.org/research/commentaries/750-big-government-under-the-bush-administration Big Government Under The Bush Administration], AIER, 16 November 2008</ref> In total, Bush has increased government expenditures by the largest percentage of any president since Lyndon Johnson.<ref>[http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/article944806.ece Some think Bush was too liberal], Wes Allison, Tampa Bay Times December 21, 2008 quoting Gleaves Whitney, director of the Hauenstein Center for Presidential Studies at Grand Valley State University and author of a new paper, "Anatomy of a Divorce: Conservatives versus George W. Bush."</ref> | | During this same time period, spending mandated by Congress has also increased by more than 29% in inflation-adjusted dollars, representing an 11.4% increase in federal spending as a percentage of [[Gross domestic product|GDP]]. This spending has doubled the federal debt, increasing it from 58% to 66% of GDP. Defense spending increased 61%, and non-defense by 23% during the eight years since 2000. The largest non-defense spending increase has been for federally-funded medical expenses, at 54 percent.<ref>[http://www.aier.org/research/commentaries/750-big-government-under-the-bush-administration Big Government Under The Bush Administration], AIER, 16 November 2008</ref> In total, Bush has increased government expenditures by the largest percentage of any president since Lyndon Johnson.<ref>[http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/article944806.ece Some think Bush was too liberal], Wes Allison, Tampa Bay Times December 21, 2008 quoting Gleaves Whitney, director of the Hauenstein Center for Presidential Studies at Grand Valley State University and author of a new paper, "Anatomy of a Divorce: Conservatives versus George W. Bush."</ref> |
| − | Bush presided over a period of unreal economic growth that reflected a bubble that burst in 2008. The housing bubble allowed people to cash in the rising value of houses; low interest rates that led to massive borrowing. Money flowed into the U.S. from around the world. The stock market that hit a record high in 2007, then plunged relentlessly downward, losing $8 trillion in value in 2008. Unemployment hit an all time low in March 2007, but started rapidly increasing after January 2008. Bush signed into law a minimum wage increase, one of the platforms for the Democrats in the 2006 Congressional elections, after the House and Senate included Bush's request of provisions for small-business tax breaks.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/20/AR2006122001784.html</ref><ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011001666.html</ref> Tax policies have been favorable to reducing the [[Capital Gains Tax]], with a subsequent surge in investment. | + | Bush presided over a period of unreal economic growth that reflected a bubble that burst in 2008. The [[housing bubble]] allowed people to cash in the rising value of houses; low interest rates that led to massive borrowing. Money flowed into the U.S. from around the world. The stock market that hit a record high in 2007, then plunged relentlessly downward, losing $8 trillion in value in 2008. Unemployment hit an all time low in March 2007, but started rapidly increasing after January 2008. Bush signed into law a minimum wage increase, one of the platforms for the Democrats in the 2006 Congressional elections, after the House and Senate included Bush's request of provisions for small-business tax breaks.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/20/AR2006122001784.html</ref><ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011001666.html</ref> Tax policies have been favorable to reducing the [[Capital Gains Tax]], with a subsequent surge in investment. |