Grim Milestone: US National Debt Hits $16 Trillion Representing A More Than 50% Increase Under Obama


According to the US Treasury, and just in time for the Democrat National Convention, as of August 31st the US national debt is $16,015,769,788,215.80.

When Obama took office on January 20th, 2009 the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08. Which means that, during Obama’s term in office, the national debt has grown $5,388,892,739,303.

That’s a more than 50% increase.

Every single president in history, from George Washington through George W. Bush, managed to accumulate $10.626 trillion in national debt. And Obama has increased that by more than 50% in less than four years.

To be fair, Bush saw a roughly 85% increase in the national debt under his administration (from $5.727 trillion to $10.626 trillion) over his eight years in office. Which means that Bush was really, really bad on spending (as were the Republicans and Democrats in Congress during his term), but Obama and our current Congress is even worse.

Rob Port is the editor of In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters.

Related posts

  • Jamer Morrow

    Does anybody actually think we can pay this back? Expect things to cost a lot more in the future. Ultimately we are going to have an inflationary depression.

  • mikemc1970

    On the first day of the DNC. How poignant.

  • John Wayne- American

    on a good note, no one can accuse Obummer for running our debt up to 15 trillion any more..

    15 trillion seconds ago, was 31,688 years ago, man still lived in caves in Africa and the Glaciers that created Lake Agassiz and covered Grand Forks / Fargo under 1000 feet of Ice wouldn’t happen for another 20,000 years!

  • kevindf

    Obama doesn’t care. He has enough money to live the rest of his life like a king.

    • Onslaught1066

      Louie XVI?

  • Albert Lickenspittle

    The Tax cuts for the rich cost us 700 Billion, but they bring us everything. Ya, sure ya betcha, right Rob

    • Onslaught1066

      ‘F’ off, you whiny little bitch.

      build your own sidewalks

    • Patrick R. Pfeiffer

      Hey Einstein-lowering the RATES of taxation, INCREASES the tax revenue; happens every time including under Secretary Mellon in the 20’s'; JFK; Reagan and Bush. If liberal politicans spend more than is taken in, that isn’t the fault of the tax policy.

      You’ll also enjoy knowing that each time upper RATES have been lowered, the EVIL RICH wound up paying a greater percentage of the total than they did before.

      It’s all statistical history. But of course, you’re a walking talking point and an economic illiterate.

    • Gern Blasnton

      The top 52% pay all federal income taxes, so your little theory doesn’t hold an ounce of water.

    • Bat One

      Please explain how you conclude that the US Treasury would have taken in $700 billion more had there been no Bush tax rate cuts.

    • donwalk

      Three historical quotes concerning tax cuts:
      1. “Lower rates of taxation will stimulate economic activity and so raise the levels of personal and corporate income as to yield within a few years an increased – not a reduced – flow of revenues to the federal government.”
      2. “It is no contradiction – the most important single thing we can do to stimulate investment in today’s economy is to raise consumption by major reduction of individual income tax rates.”
      3. “A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

    • Dmgdriver

      Amen, Donwalk even if the “rich” don’t hire a single employee, they buy product. Products that need to be manufactured, transported, wearhoused, sold to retailers, stocked on shelves and sold to the consumer. All jobs in the market.

  • Patrick R. Pfeiffer

    Give the guy some credit. It took 42 other Presidents 232 years to pile up that much debt and BHO did it in only 4!

  • kevindf

    Everyone who pays incomes taxes got a cut.

  • DoctorMu

    The “biggest tax increase in the history of the country” in 1993 preceded an economic boom that surpassed the 80s and reduced the deficit until it became a surplus. I’d advocate going back to the tax rates of the 90s.

    $1.5T was spend in Iraq and no one ever paid for it. Entitlements account and until now the DOD account for the vast majority of increases in gold plate spending.

    We have as much a revenue problem as a spending problem. When the real estate bubble burst due to unregulated securities including credit default swaps, capital nearly froze. TARP1 and 2 were largely forged under W’s administration.

    We should be investing in infrastructure and R&D rather than a hatchet job of sequestration. I would advocate reducing small business and base corporate tax rates while closing loophioles.