PDA

View Full Version : getting around the debt ceiling fight.


peacepipe
01-04-2013, 08:28 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/01/trillion-dollar-coins-the-ultimate-debt-ceiling-end-around/

With President Obama having kicked off debt ceiling negotiations by vowing not to negotiate over the debt ceiling, a new option for paying off the nation’s considerable tab is gaining momentum with cheeky fiscal and monetary wonks.

It goes like this: Should Congress fail to extend the U.S. debt limit —reached again on Dec. 31 — the president could ask the Treasury to begin printing trillion dollar coins (in a process explained mostly seriously by Jim Pethokoukis on his American Enterprise Institute blog), a number of which could then be put toward fulfilling debt obligations in the event new legislation stalls in Congress.

While there are laws in place to regulate how much paper, gold, silver or copper currency can be circulated by the government, there is nothing so clearly stated when it comes to platinum. That door open, the Treasury could have the U.S. Mint melt and mold a few trillion dollars of it, then ship the goods over to the Federal Reserve for safekeeping until the time comes to pay the bills.

The more difficult part comes sometime after the decision is made to coin the platinum and before the Mint gets to work in sculpting the pieces.

At that point, the American people must decide whose face will adorn the trillion dollar trinket. The process to determine the “specs” of the coin, U.S. Mint Public Affairs Specialist Genevieve Billia warns, must be “determined by legislation,” creating the potential for another congressional impasse.

Also to note: The likeness sculpted into its side must belong to a dead person, ruling out early favorite Ikea Monkey, but boosting the candidacies of Ronald Reagan and John Maynard Keynes.

peacepipe
01-04-2013, 08:31 AM
Personally, I'd rather him use the constitutional option,but with rethugs willing to tank the economy for their own political ideologies it a good option.

cutthemdown
01-04-2013, 02:21 PM
Why not just make some cuts to spending that we obviously need and the whole county agrees needs to happen.

cutthemdown
01-04-2013, 03:05 PM
Personally, I'd rather him use the constitutional option,but with rethugs willing to tank the economy for their own political ideologies it a good option.

Why not just make some cuts, raise the limit and keep compromising like they did on the taxes? Or were you pissed they raised the threshold to 450 grand? best thing is for Obama to scoff at the repub cuts, then meet somewhere in the middle by maybe asking for something else he wants, then raise the debt limit. If Repubs were willing to crash economy why did they deal on the fiscal cliff? Also your savoir Obama just signed almost a 700 billion dollar defense bill. Are you sure he isn't really far off on what you want to see cut from defense? Not sure its the repubs you should be mad at right now.

peacepipe
01-04-2013, 04:13 PM
No,nip this in the bud now. You allow the rethugs to hold this thing hostage,they'll always hold it hostage. Like they say, don't negotiate with terrorist. I have no problems with cuts as long as they are not to SS or Medicare. BTW a majority of the country don't want Medicare or SS to change.

cutthemdown
01-04-2013, 04:25 PM
No,nip this in the bud now. You allow the rethugs to hold this thing hostage,they'll always hold it hostage. Like they say, don't negotiate with terrorist. I have no problems with cuts as long as they are not to SS or Medicare. BTW a majority of the country don't want Medicare or SS to change.

But those are the two biggest problems moving forward. Isn't taking them off the board sort of taking your ball and going home? You accuse Repubs of not compromising but then take an uncompromising position.

cutthemdown
01-04-2013, 04:30 PM
Also peace remember any precedent set will also be used against you someday. Just like Repubs will eventually have to deal with Dems using the 60 threshold to stop legilsation from coming to a vote. So if you give the President the power to raise debt limit one day it will be a repub not having to listen to the democrats. Thats why its always better to use a compromise rather then a hammer. I was really surprised the repubs getting the tax threshold raised wasn't considered more of a victory for repubs then media made it out.

Then repubs got a provision in defense bill making it tough for Bama to move prisoners from Guantanamo. Not like conservatives didnt get some wins IMO.

So whats your plan? To have Obama mint trillion dollar coins to avoid debt limit and spending cuts? Wow I don't think that would go over to well.

peacepipe
01-04-2013, 04:35 PM
But those are the two biggest problems moving forward. Isn't taking them off the board sort of taking your ball and going home? You accuse Repubs of not compromising but then take an uncompromising position.

We both pointed to what a majority the country wants. They want spending cuts but not to SS & Medicare. So that leaves defense spending which is outrageously high. That leaves oil subsidies,how many bases do we actually need in foreign countries. A majority of the country doesn't mind taxes,when justified. Tarriffs are far too low. Hell in Medicare you can cut out over payments. There are other options out there. Rethugs are just using the situation to do away with programs they don't like.

peacepipe
01-04-2013, 04:38 PM
Also peace remember any precedent set will also be used against you someday. Just like Repubs will eventually have to deal with Dems using the 60 threshold to stop legilsation from coming to a vote. So if you give the President the power to raise debt limit one day it will be a repub not having to listen to the democrats. Thats why its always better to use a compromise rather then a hammer. I was really surprised the repubs getting the tax threshold raised wasn't considered more of a victory for repubs then media made it out.

Then repubs got a provision in defense bill making it tough for Bama to move prisoners from Guantanamo. Not like conservatives didnt get some wins IMO.

So whats your plan? To have Obama mint trillion dollar coins to avoid debt limit and spending cuts? Wow I don't think that would go over to well.
The debt limit is unconstitutional,so therefore whether there's a rep or a dem in office,there shouldn't be a debt limit.

elsid13
01-04-2013, 04:41 PM
Why not just make some cuts to spending that we obviously need and the whole county agrees needs to happen.

Everyone acts like federal funds are just thrown away. They actually do things that are meaningful and critical for America.

Do we cut funds that pay for the FAA and Air Traffic Control?
How about reducing the number of food inspectors?
Or better yet let cut back on Border Security.
Maybe we should just stop fix interstates.
Better yet lets not fund basic research or the CDC.
Maybe we should transfer Mount Rushmore to Disney.

It easy to talk about numbers but let talk about what we want as country and real things vs generalities.

peacepipe
01-04-2013, 05:20 PM
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/schumer-negotiate-debt-ceiling.php?ref=fpb

Echoing President Obama’s refusal to negotiate on the debt limit, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) warned Republicans on Friday that Democrats have no intention of giving in to any of their demands in exchange for lifting the nation’s borrowing limit to pay its bills.

“I think that risking government shutdown, risking not raising the debt ceiling, is playing with fire,” Schumer told reporters in the Capitol, in response to a question from TPM. “Anyone who wants to come and negotiate, and say ‘we will raise the debt ceiling only if you do A, B, C’ will not have a negotiating partner. And if then they don’t want to raise the debt ceiling, it’ll be on their shoulders. I would bet that they would not go forward with that.”

The No. 3 Democrat declared that Obama and congressional Democrats have learned their lesson from the 2011 fiasco that nearly led to a default. He predicted that Republicans will give in and cleanly raise the country’s borrowing authority — which expires around March — if Democrats stonewall and give them no other option.

cutthemdown
01-04-2013, 05:45 PM
So Peace you want defense slashed but the guy you voted for just approved over 600 billion for them. Are you pissed off? So I guess maybe next yr they cut defense? Fact is its not a big enough piece of the pie to solve our problems.

No one wants to admit its federal pensions and entitlements. If we only spent 300 billion a yr on defense it still wouldn't make up the difference.

peacepipe
01-04-2013, 07:37 PM
So Peace you want defense slashed but the guy you voted for just approved over 600 billion for them. Are you pissed off? So I guess maybe next yr they cut defense? Fact is its not a big enough piece of the pie to solve our problems.

No one wants to admit its federal pensions and entitlements. If we only spent 300 billion a yr on defense it still wouldn't make up the difference.

SS & Medicare are not entitlements,you pay into those programs your entire working life. They are investments,not entitlements. Do I like the idea that there was some compromise,yes I do cause that's how government works.

Rethugs will have to bend our way for the debt ceiling.

cutthemdown
01-04-2013, 09:51 PM
SS & Medicare are not entitlements,you pay into those programs your entire working life. They are investments,not entitlements. Do I like the idea that there was some compromise,yes I do cause that's how government works.

Rethugs will have to bend our way for the debt ceiling.

i think maybe some small cuts in exchange for raising the limit is reasonable. Obama used to decry raising it so I think he should at least be able to do something to get it raised.

I agree the people getting screwed over but I don't see any other way to make the budget balance. I don't think asking Americans to work maybe a couple yrs more is a huge deal for people. The old age was back when people didn't live as long and healthcare wasn't as good. I think we could work an extra 2-3 yrs in exchange for the govt really cutting other spending. I agree it cant all be on the backs on soc sec and medicare.

I know something just went into action where people now have to pay tax on healthcare bennies they get? So Govt is going to be coming for revenue. We simply must make them cut and using the debt limit to get some IMO is perfectly legitimate.

cutthemdown
01-04-2013, 09:55 PM
Still peace the president just signed a defense spending package with no more cuts. Some were agreed to before this but still a huge defense budget. Are you sure the Democrats really want to cut defense. Or do they just play at that because liberals like you enjoy hearing it? But when push comes to shove the dems know you will be voting for them even if they never cut defense right? Thats why I dont think it ever gets cut much.

Both sides don't want to find jobs for 150 thousand troops etc. Also closing foreign bases will never be popular with the military. Domestic bases never with the Congressman and Senators from those states/cities.

The a lot of defense contracting now takes place in liberal states like CA and Feinstien and Boxer fight like crazy for big defense contractors.

Like I said you preach over and over about defense and it never gets touched.

peacepipe
01-05-2013, 08:08 AM
We can debate what needs to be cut anytime you want but this isn't about what cuts need to be made, it's about a political party,Republicans,using the tactics of extortion/black mail to get what they want. You don't negotiate with terrorist. You don't give a child who throws a temper tantrum what he wants. Why? Because they'll do it again & again. The fact that rethugs are using extortion/blackmail to get leverage,means they have no leverage.

cutthemdown
01-05-2013, 04:13 PM
We can debate what needs to be cut anytime you want but this isn't about what cuts need to be made, it's about a political party,Republicans,using the tactics of extortion/black mail to get what they want. You don't negotiate with terrorist. You don't give a child who throws a temper tantrum what he wants. Why? Because they'll do it again & again. The fact that rethugs are using extortion/blackmail to get leverage,means they have no leverage.

Answer the question. The man you voted for just signed a defense bill are you unhappy with him? Also how come its not extortion when dems say our way or we go over the cliff? But if repubs say give in some to us or we go over the cliff it is extortion? Is there one set of rules for the politicians you agree with and another for conservatives?

lonestar
01-05-2013, 04:58 PM
Why not just make some cuts to spending that we obviously need and the whole county agrees needs to happen.

An amazing concept way over the heads of the progressives

peacepipe
01-05-2013, 09:26 PM
Answer the question. The man you voted for just signed a defense bill are you unhappy with him? Also how come its not extortion when dems say our way or we go over the cliff? But if repubs say give in some to us or we go over the cliff it is extortion? Is there one set of rules for the politicians you agree with and another for conservatives?
Because it was no cliff,defaulting on our debt has real consequences here & worldwide. Defaulting is also unconstitutional.
Second Obama was offering compromise the whole time.

cutthemdown
01-06-2013, 12:58 AM
Because it was no cliff,defaulting on our debt has real consequences here & worldwide. Defaulting is also unconstitutional.
Second Obama was offering compromise the whole time.

You still won't admit that had lets say Romney won, then signed a 700 billion dollar defense bill you would be railing on how stupid he is and how wrong it is. Admit it you Obama just as much of a hawk for defense spending as qany Repub. Sure he may not want to send troops in as much but nonetheless he didn't really want to cut it.

Rohirrim
01-06-2013, 03:11 AM
Why not just make some cuts to spending that we obviously need and the whole county agrees needs to happen.

Because every program has its own lobby buying its own congressmen. Read this: http://www.businessinsider.com/congress-forcing-the-army-to-make-tanks-2012-10

Until the corrupting influence of money is removed from government, you'll never do anything about it, regardless of which ideological path you wish to follow. The first day a congressmen enters office, he gets right to work raising money to run again in two years. And for the next two years, he will spend the majority of his time raising money. What kind of system is that?

That One Guy
01-06-2013, 07:30 AM
Because it was no cliff,defaulting on our debt has real consequences here & worldwide. Defaulting is also unconstitutional.
Second Obama was offering compromise the whole time.

Defaulting may have been decided to be unconstitutional but that doesn't necessarily make the debt limit unconstitutional. It just means you can't borrow any more to pay the bills. The last time this came around, they were making preparations for the military to go without pay. A week of such things happening and suddenly people would be ready to take real action. I say that and the chief income of my family is from military pay.

The problem is the big 3 untouchables all need to be touched. Of course the people don't want them touched but, again, it always comes back to that quote about democracy and people voting themselves all the money in the treasury. We can't let the peoples' love of handouts bankrupt the country.

Recall, when on an airplane, they always tell you to fix your oxygen mask before helping others. Similarly, the government can be much more help to everyone in the long run if they'd stabilize themselves first. However, until the government can responsibly handle its own duties, it needs to take a step back and reorganize.

For me, personally, I'd pay things in the order of:

-Debt - only because we have to
-Those with day to day responsibilities (This would include deployed military)
-Those basically on retainers (This would be non-deployed military, all those jobs where people just wait around incase they're needed)
-Those who have paid-in accounts (SS and the sort)
-Congressmen
-Those who just have their hand out

Get as far down the line as you can with payments and when the money runs out, too bad. It's not ideal but would be a method for paying debt without increasing the debt limit.

peacepipe
01-06-2013, 08:36 AM
Defaulting may have been decided to be unconstitutional but that doesn't necessarily make the debt limit unconstitutional. It just means you can't borrow any more to pay the bills. The last time this came around, they were making preparations for the military to go without pay. A week of such things happening and suddenly people would be ready to take real action. I say that and the chief income of my family is from military pay.

The problem is the big 3 untouchables all need to be touched. Of course the people don't want them touched but, again, it always comes back to that quote about democracy and people voting themselves all the money in the treasury. We can't let the peoples' love of handouts bankrupt the country.

Recall, when on an airplane, they always tell you to fix your oxygen mask before helping others. Similarly, the government can be much more help to everyone in the long run if they'd stabilize themselves first. However, until the government can responsibly handle its own duties, it needs to take a step back and reorganize.

For me, personally, I'd pay things in the order of:

-Debt - only because we have to
-Those with day to day responsibilities (This would include deployed military)
-Those basically on retainers (This would be non-deployed military, all those jobs where people just wait around incase they're needed)
-Those who have paid-in accounts (SS and the sort)
-Congressmen
-Those who just have their hand out

Get as far down the line as you can with payments and when the money runs out, too bad. It's not ideal but would be a method for paying debt without increasing the debt limit.
Since you seem to know everything explain what happens with interest rates nation wide for mortgages,small business loans skyrocket, how it will put us into a dbl dip recession, if not worse a depression.
You act as if the worse thing that happens is a few things don't get paid out.

cutthemdown
01-06-2013, 09:12 AM
What it means is the govt needs to stop spending so much more then they bring in. Obviously we will run deficits. In some ways they aren't as bad as we make them out to be. It's just its getting bigger at almost 2 times the rate under Obama. Even when you take out the war spending it will still be getting bigger.

DenverBrit
01-06-2013, 09:22 AM
There is no question we must cut back spending, there is no choice. But we must also find revenue as cuts alone won't be enough, the deficit is too large.

Any members of the house who hold the economy hostage to the debt ceiling, should be recalled for incompetence and fiscal sabotage. When will the country say 'enough' and mean it?

Arkie
01-06-2013, 10:19 AM
Why don't they just mint a $20 trillion coin to deposit at the Fed Reserve? Then we would be running a surplus. It's obvious the government will keep spending more anyway. I'd rather have debt free inflation than inflation created by more debt. This would save us trillions of dollars in interest payments over the next 10 years. The Federal Reserve will fight this.

That One Guy
01-06-2013, 10:28 AM
Since you seem to know everything explain what happens with interest rates nation wide for mortgages,small business loans skyrocket, how it will put us into a dbl dip recession, if not worse a depression.
You act as if the worse thing that happens is a few things don't get paid out.

Bad things happen when you make bad investments. We have significantly more people than jobs yet we continue to just import everything from China. We need a mentality change as much as anything. Some tough times need to lay ahead to divert us from the status quo.

That One Guy
01-06-2013, 10:31 AM
There is no question we must cut back spending, there is no choice. But we must also find revenue as cuts alone won't be enough, the deficit is too large.

Any members of the house who hold the economy hostage to the debt ceiling, should be recalled for incompetence and fiscal sabotage. When will the country say 'enough' and mean it?

Fiscal sabotage? Maybe in the short term. Long term, responsibility is very likely the safest option but it'll result in significantly more unrest in the short term. It's just a philosophical difference but why pass on an opportunity for hyperbole, right?

That One Guy
01-06-2013, 10:33 AM
What it means is the govt needs to stop spending so much more then they bring in. Obviously we will run deficits. In some ways they aren't as bad as we make them out to be. It's just its getting bigger at almost 2 times the rate under Obama. Even when you take out the war spending it will still be getting bigger.

I'd prefer the government just do the necessary tasks and avoid speculation and gambling on economic manipulation. Fund everything before implementation, pay down the debt, and build on a safe foundation.

peacepipe
01-06-2013, 11:00 AM
Fiscal sabotage? Maybe in the short term. Long term, responsibility is very likely the safest option but it'll result in significantly more unrest in the short term. It's just a philosophical difference but why pass on an opportunity for hyperbole, right?

Nothing responsible about taking an action such as default.

DenverBrit
01-06-2013, 12:41 PM
Fiscal sabotage? Maybe in the short term. Long term, responsibility is very likely the safest option but it'll result in significantly more unrest in the short term. It's just a philosophical difference but why pass on an opportunity for hyperbole, right?

Paying our bills is a philosophical difference?? Since when?

cutthemdown
01-07-2013, 03:15 AM
Because every program has its own lobby buying its own congressmen. Read this: http://www.businessinsider.com/congress-forcing-the-army-to-make-tanks-2012-10

Until the corrupting influence of money is removed from government, you'll never do anything about it, regardless of which ideological path you wish to follow. The first day a congressmen enters office, he gets right to work raising money to run again in two years. And for the next two years, he will spend the majority of his time raising money. What kind of system is that?

We need term limits and a law saying you can't be a lobbyist until you have been out of govt for say...... 5 yrs? Then maybe make the terms the serve for a bit longer. For instance you serve one yr term as senator and you are done, then you have to work private sector for 3-5 yrs before you can lobby the govt etc etc.

Then maybe increase their salaries a little to attract higher quality people. But in exchange we need to make punishment for graft and corruption at the public service level more harsh.

Arkie
01-07-2013, 10:55 AM
Don't increase their salaries. Give them incentives based on their performance. Their pay goes up if our deficit comes down, for example.

peacepipe
01-07-2013, 05:11 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/07/platinum-coin-greg-walden_n_2425940.html
Greg Walden R-ore is trying to introduce legislation banning the minting of trillion dollar.
Time - Politics

Walden's legislation also implicitly acknowledges that "the platinum option" is, in fact, legal.

If Obama ever invoke "the platinum option" -- and he has so far offered no indication that he would seriously consider it -- the existence of Walden's bill could be used to support a court case in defense of the move.

Fedaykin
01-07-2013, 06:30 PM
It's hilarious to see all the people simultaneously arguing about the high cost of interest payments and arguing that we shouldn't increase the debt limit.

Just what do you guys think is going to happen when we default on those loan payments?

Meanwhile, we and our allies spend 10x more on military than any remotely potential aggressor does, yet a large contingent of ****ing pussies argues that making significant cuts to military spending isn't something we should do because "zomg the Chinese!".

cutthemdown
01-07-2013, 08:03 PM
We have to increase the debt limit but i don't feel sorry for Obama considering the crap he talked when he was a Senator regarding the debt limit.

Obama can make a few cuts to something in exchange for having it raised whats the big deal?

cutthemdown
01-07-2013, 08:06 PM
Don't increase their salaries. Give them incentives based on their performance. Their pay goes up if our deficit comes down, for example.

Until we change the code for the tax zones we are screwed. Out govt has to make a program that allows compaines to make money overseas, return it to America and invest it without paying tax. Right now because tax is high they just leave it overseas.

peacepipe
01-07-2013, 08:40 PM
Until we change the code for the tax zones we are screwed. Out govt has to make a program that allows compaines to make money overseas, return it to America and invest it without paying tax. Right now because tax is high they just leave it overseas.

That's stupid, here we are needing more revenue & you want to create a situation where there is even less revenue.

peacepipe
01-07-2013, 08:45 PM
We have to increase the debt limit but i don't feel sorry for Obama considering the crap he talked when he was a Senator regarding the debt limit.

Obama can make a few cuts to something in exchange for having it raised whats the big deal?

The big deal is you have a political party willing to crash the U.S. economy in order to get what they want. As I've stated before,you don't negotiate with anyone under these circumstances, if rethugs want to break their oath & violate our constitution,then so be it.

Rohirrim
01-07-2013, 08:55 PM
The U.S. spends nearly a trillion dollars a year on defense. China spends about $136 billion. Oh, and we still have the Pacific Ocean on one side of us, and the Atlantic on the other.

cutthemdown
01-07-2013, 11:36 PM
That's stupid, here we are needing more revenue & you want to create a situation where there is even less revenue.

You kidding this idea was floated by Bill Clinton it would create tons of revenue. Right now the govt gets nothing from that revenue. It stays in the countries it was made in, or goes to other offshore banks.

Right now they just leave it all out of the USA and the govt makes no revenue. So how could my idea result in a revenue decrease? We need a different tax zone for our corp that do biz overseas. This isn't a big super conservative point. If it was me I would drop it from the 35% we try and get, to something more like 10%. But in exchange we close the loophole and tell companies they have to bring back at least 50% of the profit the generate overseas.

Trust me you do that and it would mean billions for our economy. Clinton even threw out the possibility of a one time amnesty with no tax paid but only for a short time. Then you go with the reduced rate like 10%. You tell companies you have 6 mos to return money and invest in in the USA and pay no tax on it. He explained it would be like a private sector stimulus.

Meck77
01-08-2013, 03:42 AM
The U.S. spends nearly a trillion dollars a year on defense. China spends about $136 billion. Oh, and we still have the Pacific Ocean on one side of us, and the Atlantic on the other.

Trillions spent and we don't even protect our own borders. Somehow I doubt that millions of people just walk into China with guns and drugs on their backs then march into their schools and hospitals and get free services.

houghtam
01-08-2013, 08:35 AM
Trillions spent and we don't even protect our own borders. Somehow I doubt that millions of people just walk into China with guns and drugs on their backs then march into their schools and hospitals and get free services.

Something tells me the Chinese don't also have a statue that says "Give me your tired, your poor..."

But yeah, immigrants are our problem.

That One Guy
01-21-2013, 07:50 PM
Paying our bills is a philosophical difference?? Since when?

I haven't been back in the WRP in a few weeks so didn't see you responded here but I agree that the constitution forces us to pay our bills. I just think forcing those bills at the expense of other things can be a good thing. Show us we don't need xyz. If we have a blank check, we never have to really analyze anything.

DenverBrit
01-22-2013, 09:50 AM
I haven't been back in the WRP in a few weeks so didn't see you responded here but I agree that the constitution forces us to pay our bills. I just think forcing those bills at the expense of other things can be a good thing. Show us we don't need xyz. If we have a blank check, we never have to really analyze anything.

Holding the debt ceiling hostage to leverage one party's agenda is wrong.

We have collectively run up the bill, there shouldn't be one word of debate about paying it.

The only effect would be another downgrade and the destabilizing of the market and the economy. Enough.

Arkie
01-22-2013, 11:55 AM
Here's the Budget crisis in 3D.

Budget Talks & Fiscal Cliff - Explained - Cheat Sheet (http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa/fiscal_cliff/fiscal_cliff.html)

It's impossible to raise taxes enough to meet current spending. The 2013 deficit will increase instead of decrease.

Cito Pelon
01-24-2013, 05:33 PM
Hoo-rah. I hear the Senate has formulated a deal to limit filibusters. This is a big deal.

That One Guy
01-24-2013, 06:41 PM
Holding the debt ceiling hostage to leverage one party's agenda is wrong.

We have collectively run up the bill, there shouldn't be one word of debate about paying it.

The only effect would be another downgrade and the destabilizing of the market and the economy. Enough.

Did you read what I said? I said pay the bills. Don't leave any question that America will pay it's debt obligations. Just don't pay congress, the military (except those deployed - but also offer to void those contracts for soldiers which you can't pay), social obligations, etc.

ZONA
01-24-2013, 09:10 PM
I think you have to go back to the last time we had a surplus and go from there. What has happened since then.

* Healthcare costs are through the roof - causing medicare costs to go through the roof.
* Bush tax cuts for nearly 12 years.
* Wallstreet deregulation, causing Wallstreet greed, causing financial recession.
* War, War War
* Companies sending manufacturing jobs overseas.

Simple - we have to get these healthcare costs down. Medicare is a good program, but $50K for a visit to the ER to have an MRI is inexcusable. Stop fighting wars we can't afford. Stop deregulating Wallstreet so they can F us over only to slap them on the hand and give them a big kiss afterwards. Stop giving insane tax cuts to wealthy business and don't allow them a tax break when they ship jobs over seas. I think we all clearly saw that not taxing the wealthy companies doesn't = job creation. What happened during our recession? They were still getting their tax breaks but they didn't create any jobs, instead they cut jobs. The rich always make sure they themselves are paid first, paid handsomely and then what's left over trickles down. American benefits and wages for normal working folks are some of the worst in any civilized country. The wealth gap in this country is growing and growing and growing.

DenverBrit
01-25-2013, 10:52 AM
Did you read what I said? I said pay the bills. Don't leave any question that America will pay it's debt obligations. Just don't pay congress, the military (except those deployed - but also offer to void those contracts for soldiers which you can't pay), social obligations, etc.

I did read it, but honestly, didn't understand what you were trying to say, so I repeated my point. ;D

That One Guy
01-26-2013, 05:36 AM
I think you have to go back to the last time we had a surplus and go from there. What has happened since then.

* Healthcare costs are through the roof - causing medicare costs to go through the roof.
* Bush tax cuts for nearly 12 years.
* Wallstreet deregulation, causing Wallstreet greed, causing financial recession.
* War, War War
* Companies sending manufacturing jobs overseas.

Simple - we have to get these healthcare costs down. Medicare is a good program, but $50K for a visit to the ER to have an MRI is inexcusable. Stop fighting wars we can't afford. Stop deregulating Wallstreet so they can F us over only to slap them on the hand and give them a big kiss afterwards. Stop giving insane tax cuts to wealthy business and don't allow them a tax break when they ship jobs over seas. I think we all clearly saw that not taxing the wealthy companies doesn't = job creation. What happened during our recession? They were still getting their tax breaks but they didn't create any jobs, instead they cut jobs. The rich always make sure they themselves are paid first, paid handsomely and then what's left over trickles down. American benefits and wages for normal working folks are some of the worst in any civilized country. The wealth gap in this country is growing and growing and growing.

There's two problems as I see it: There's no limit to the amount of medical attention one person can use. People LOVE going to the doctor and believing they have diseases, injuries, etc. We've got a malingering, hypochondriac filled society. Then add that some diseases are in the millions to treat and there's not a good answer to this. Ever since people started patenting drugs regularly, this has been an issue.

The other issue is that in today's society, there's just not much use for poor people. We need a few people to work our McDonalds and such but in terms of respectable jobs involving labor, most of them are outsourced and/or replaced by a robot. For this, again, there's no good solution. You can't just point at the rich folk that are shipping jobs overseas and scream foul. I also don't believe giving tax incentives are the answer because then you're taking two steps forward but still one step back. There's a HUGE consumer base in the United States and that, at this point, might be our biggest asset. The government needs to take advantage of that.

That One Guy
01-26-2013, 05:37 AM
I did read it, but honestly, didn't understand what you were trying to say, so I repeated my point. ;D

LOL

Fair enough. I mostly just return to the WRP on very sleepless nights when it's the last place on the internet left unexplored. The rambling babbles I can produce at that point are very likely unintelligible.

Meck77
10-02-2013, 06:57 AM
Here we go again............

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew reiterated Tuesday that the goverment's extraordinary measures to stay below the $16.7 trillion debt limit will expire on Oct. 17. In a letter to bipartisan leaders in Congress, Lew said that the government shutdown will not extend the deadline that he first estimated late last month "unless it continues for an extended period of time." Lew said his agency is now using its final extraordinary measures to ward off the debt ceiling. Lew repeated that Treasury would have $30 billion in cash on hand on Oct. 17, and would be at risk of not being able to pay its bills. "If we have insufficient cash on hand, it would be impossible for the United States of America to meet all of its obligations for the first time in our history," he said.

pricejj
10-02-2013, 08:48 PM
The McClintock-Toomey Act, which would insure that the U.S. would NEVER default on it's debt, has been shot down by Obama and Reid several times.

This bill would insure that debt payments go out first before anything else, in the event the debt ceiling is not raised. The Democrat Socialists want no part of it.

Taco John
10-02-2013, 08:52 PM
Personally, I'd rather him use the constitutional option,but with rethugs willing to tank the economy for their own political ideologies it a good option.

FYI - the president's lawyers disagree that it would be constitutional, and they know that there would be a court challenge, thus making all the bonds in the market at that time on shaky ground, thus requiring higher interest rates. From everything I've heard the President is not going to assert himself in that way.

peacepipe
10-02-2013, 09:19 PM
FYI - the president's lawyers disagree that it would be constitutional, and they know that there would be a court challenge, thus making all the bonds in the market at that time on shaky ground, thus requiring higher interest rates. From everything I've heard the President is not going to assert himself in that way.

14th amendment baby, obamacare was challenged in court as well.defauting far worse , if the market knows taht they don't haveto worry about deflautinf anymorw it'll stabilize.

Meck77
10-03-2013, 07:28 AM
Here comes the fear tactics. Buffet came and today and said "Meh it's ok if we go over the debt limit as long as it doesn't take a year"....lol

See what Obama's buddy had to say this morning.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/default-could-be-worse-than-08-crisis-treasury-2013-10-03-1091157


Put your seat belts on your stock investments or drop them off at the next bus stop for someone else to give them a ride!

I think people make the mistake too often taking pride in what they know. Or think they know. I think the more important question is "What don't you know".

I'm a big fan of a strong defense against what I don't know.

barryr
10-05-2013, 07:31 AM
Obama as a senator did not support raising the debt ceiling, but now his tune has changed. Thank goodness it wasn't about some usual petty political move.

Jetmeck
10-05-2013, 09:28 PM
The McClintock-Toomey Act, which would insure that the U.S. would NEVER default on it's debt, has been shot down by Obama and Reid several times.

This bill would insure that debt payments go out first before anything else, in the event the debt ceiling is not raised. The Democrat Socialists want no part of it.


Why don't you jump of a bridge you ass.............

What about whats left as usual **** the poor people.


Retards like you electing Ran Pauls and such are why we are in this mess.

Jetmeck
10-05-2013, 09:31 PM
Obama as a senator did not support raising the debt ceiling, but now his tune has changed. Thank goodness it wasn't about some usual petty political move.


Things were much worse than he thought especially after the 08 debacle...........be real

Seriously we can't just starve everyone who is not rich while giving the rich another tax cut to make all you fools happy.

Slowly reduce the deficit through smart spending cuts and increased revenue is a fair balanced approach.

You don't understand fair or compromise, not many of your party do.

Jetmeck
10-05-2013, 09:33 PM
Here comes the fear tactics. Buffet came and today and said "Meh it's ok if we go over the debt limit as long as it doesn't take a year"....lol

See what Obama's buddy had to say this morning.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/default-could-be-worse-than-08-crisis-treasury-2013-10-03-1091157


Put your seat belts on your stock investments or drop them off at the next bus stop for someone else to give them a ride!

I think people make the mistake too often taking pride in what they know. Or think they know. I think the more important question is "What don't you know".

I'm a big fan of a strong defense against what I don't know.


Don't know or watch the market much do you ?

They can and will swing wildly over less.............

You better hold your ass if we default.........

pricejj
10-06-2013, 08:21 AM
Why don't you jump of a bridge you ass.............

What about whats left as usual **** the poor people.


Retards like you electing Ran Pauls and such are why we are in this mess.

LOL Do you need a sedative?

Many more "Ron Pauls" is exactly what this country needs, in order to veer away from bankruptcy.

barryr
10-09-2013, 09:25 AM
The hilarity in this is democrats, including Obama himself, back in 2006 were saying how terrible it would be to raise the debt ceiling and according to Obama, "shows a lack of leadership" to do so, but he we go with the typical liberal democrat 180 when it is convenient for them. And there is most of the media pretending it never happened and not asking why it's great now when it wasn't back then. Hersh is quite right.