The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-09-2013, 01:10 PM   #26
Rigs11
Ring of Famer
 
Rigs11's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 8,590
Default

Hold the Vote Boner!

Votes are there to break shutdown, but not the will
Posted by
CNN's Dan Merica
Updated 10/9/2013 at 8:00 a.m.

Washington (CNN) – There appeared to be enough votes in the House on Wednesday to approve legislation to reopen the federal government, according to an ongoing CNN survey of House members.

CNN's vote count

All 200 Democrats and 19 Republicans support passing a continuing resolution with no additional legislative strings attached that would reopen the federal government, which has been partially closed for a week over a bitter policy dispute between Republicans and Democrats on health care. With three vacancies in 435 member House, 217 votes are currently the minimum needed for the measure to win approval in the House.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...ill/?hpt=hp_t2
Rigs11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 01:49 PM   #27
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,431

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

DenverBrit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 03:10 PM   #28
W*GS
Ring of Famer
 
W*GS's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 20,851
Default

Sounds like the GOP to me...

Quote:
18 USC § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
W*GS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 03:48 PM   #29
elsid13
Lost In Space
 
elsid13's Avatar
 
Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 19,752
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
Moody's credit rating agency raining on Obama's scare parade:

Moody's offers different view on debt limit

One of the nation’s top credit-rating agencies says that the U.S. Treasury Department is likely to continue paying interest on the government’s debt even if Congress fails to lift the limit on borrowing next week, preserving the nation’s sterling AAA credit rating.

In a memo being circulated on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Moody’s Investors Service offers “answers to frequently asked questions” about the government shutdown, now in its second week, and the federal debt limit. President Obama has said that, unless Congress acts to raise the $16.7 trillion limit by next Thursday, the nation will be at risk of default.

Not so, Moody’s says in the memo dated Oct. 7.

” We believe the government would continue to pay interest and principal on its debt even in the event that the debt limit is not raised, leaving its creditworthiness intact,” the memo says. “The debt limit restricts government expenditures to the amount of its incoming revenues; it does not prohibit the government from servicing its debt. There is no direct connection between the debt limit (actually the exhaustion of the Treasury’s extraordinary measures to raise funds) and a default.

The memo offers a starkly different view of the consequences of congressional inaction on the debt limit than is held by the White House, many policymakers and other financial analysts. During a press conference at the White House Tuesday, Obama said missing the Oct. 17 deadline would invite “economic chaos.”

The Moody’s memo goes on to argue that the situation is actually much less serious than in 2011, when the nation last faced a pitched battle over the debt limit.

“The budget deficit was considerably larger in 2011 than it is currently, so the magnitude of the necessary spending cuts needed after 17 October is lower now than it was then,” the memo says.

Treasury Department officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...b-327c5c814d82
I would like to point out it is analyst opinion and thus is not set in stone. The underlying assumptions are key to this type of "reports"
elsid13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 03:51 PM   #30
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,449

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
Bingo!

Ever wonder why the Tea Party would worry about going after the EPA? You won't wonder after you find out that the Koch Bros. are in the Top Ten Worst Polluters List of America every single year.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 03:58 PM   #31
DenverBrit
Just hanging out.
 
DenverBrit's Avatar
 
Got a breath mint??

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 12,431

Adopt-a-Bronco:
The Team
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Bingo!

Ever wonder why the Tea Party would worry about going after the EPA? You won't wonder after you find out that the Koch Bros. are in the Top Ten Worst Polluters List of America every single year.
It's one of those Kodak moments when incredibly stupid people join hands with the mega wealthy for a common cause.
DenverBrit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 04:49 PM   #32
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,945

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
Moody's credit rating agency raining on Obama's scare parade:

Moody's offers different view on debt limit

One of the nation’s top credit-rating agencies says that the U.S. Treasury Department is likely to continue paying interest on the government’s debt even if Congress fails to lift the limit on borrowing next week, preserving the nation’s sterling AAA credit rating.

In a memo being circulated on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Moody’s Investors Service offers “answers to frequently asked questions” about the government shutdown, now in its second week, and the federal debt limit. President Obama has said that, unless Congress acts to raise the $16.7 trillion limit by next Thursday, the nation will be at risk of default.

Not so, Moody’s says in the memo dated Oct. 7.

” We believe the government would continue to pay interest and principal on its debt even in the event that the debt limit is not raised, leaving its creditworthiness intact,” the memo says. “The debt limit restricts government expenditures to the amount of its incoming revenues; it does not prohibit the government from servicing its debt. There is no direct connection between the debt limit (actually the exhaustion of the Treasury’s extraordinary measures to raise funds) and a default.

The memo offers a starkly different view of the consequences of congressional inaction on the debt limit than is held by the White House, many policymakers and other financial analysts. During a press conference at the White House Tuesday, Obama said missing the Oct. 17 deadline would invite “economic chaos.”

The Moody’s memo goes on to argue that the situation is actually much less serious than in 2011, when the nation last faced a pitched battle over the debt limit.

“The budget deficit was considerably larger in 2011 than it is currently, so the magnitude of the necessary spending cuts needed after 17 October is lower now than it was then,” the memo says.

Treasury Department officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...b-327c5c814d82
Math people, basic math:

The current deficit is what, 900 billion? Where do you suggest we instantly cut 900 billion dollars in spending?

The total discretionary spending currently is 1.5T

~1T of that is defense spending (DoD, VA, DoE, DHS, NASA, etc.)

Interest is 246 billion of that 1.5T

That leaves ~250bn in other discretionary spending (DOI, DoEd, DoJ, etc.) from which you can cut.

So what are you going to cut? All non defense, non-interest spending is only going to get you 1/4 of the deficit. To make up that other 3/4 you are going to have to do some combination of the following

a.) gut defense related spending (DoD+ VA,DHS,etc.)
b.) stop servicing current debt (i.e. DEFAULT)

That assumes you've already completely scrapped the rest of the government dumping perhaps 10s of millions of public and private (contractor) workers into the unemployment lines (with a corresponding ballooning of social spending there) along the way.

Saying we can just instantly balance the budget is pure lunacy.

If you want to do it with non-discretionary spending (the biggies being SS medicare, and military pensions/va), then you are both going to have to pass legislation that will stop those programs and in the process effectively steal (again!) all the money that has been collected to fund those programs. Oh, and if you DO pass the legislation to stop those programs, you also reduce the total revenues by about 1T, meaning you still have to cut discretionary spending just like I noted above!

Last edited by Fedaykin; 10-09-2013 at 05:13 PM..
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 04:53 PM   #33
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,449

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverBrit View Post
It's one of those Kodak moments when incredibly stupid people join hands with the mega wealthy for a common cause.
And the common cause is to funnel more money and power to the mega wealthy at the expense of the stupid people. Carnivals have been operating on this principle for centuries.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 06:52 PM   #34
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 53,768
Default

L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 07:04 PM   #35
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,022

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Who was plotting with Bernie when he voted against paying our debts in 2006?
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 07:05 PM   #36
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 53,768
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Who was plotting with Bernie when he voted against paying our debts in 2006?
Is that how the Fox Ministry of Truth spun it?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 07:06 PM   #37
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 53,768
Default

House Republicans who love to wrap themselves in the Constitution should keep something in mind:

Their obligations to pay the nation's bills aren't optional. Neither is their oath of office.

http://on.msnbc.com/GNgh6s
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 08:50 PM   #38
Missouribronc
Ring of Famer
 
Missouribronc's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,646

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Anyone who thinks the federal government can't operate within its means like a business or an individual is an absolute fool.
Missouribronc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 08:52 PM   #39
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,449

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Missouribronc View Post
Anyone who thinks the federal government can't operate within its means like a business or an individual is an absolute fool.
Yeah. Just like hospitals.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 08:54 PM   #40
Missouribronc
Ring of Famer
 
Missouribronc's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,646

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
Yeah. Just like hospitals.
I'm sorry. You must not know a lot about hospitals.
Missouribronc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 08:57 PM   #41
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,449

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Missouribronc View Post
I'm sorry. You must not know a lot about hospitals.
I've worked in one for years. Without government subsidies they wouldn't exist. Tell me, what marketable item does the U.S. produce? What is our market? What is our market share? Who are our investors? Who are our customers? How is production doing? We're spending a massive ****load of money on military. How much profit does that bring in? etc.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 09:03 PM   #42
Missouribronc
Ring of Famer
 
Missouribronc's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,646

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

I assume you're referring to tax exemptions.

And taxes are only passed on to consumers, so it ultimately is the consumer that suffers any sort of increase in taxes.
Missouribronc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 09:07 PM   #43
Rohirrim
Partisan
 
Rohirrim's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 54,449

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Malik Jackson
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Missouribronc View Post
I assume you're referring to tax exemptions.

And taxes are only passed on to consumers, so it ultimately is the consumer that suffers any sort of increase in taxes.
That and all the Medicaid and Medicare money coming in. If that wasn't there, those people would be uninsured, but they'd still be coming in.
Rohirrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 09:15 PM   #44
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,999

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Missouribronc View Post
I assume you're referring to tax exemptions.

And taxes are only passed on to consumers, so it ultimately is the consumer that suffers any sort of increase in taxes.
you are right assuming a business owner doesn't want to stay in business. consumers will only pay so much for a product, regardless of what the business pays in taxes.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2013, 09:37 PM   #45
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 3,022

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rohirrim View Post
I've worked in one for years. Without government subsidies they wouldn't exist. Tell me, what marketable item does the U.S. produce? What is our market? What is our market share? Who are our investors? Who are our customers? How is production doing? We're spending a massive ****load of money on military. How much profit does that bring in? etc.
This reminds me of the guy who claimed that farmers wouldn't have enough water if it weren't for the Bureau of Reclamations among other federal agencies.

What he failed to realize is that people built plenty of dams before the federal government got involved. Without federal involvement, there would likely be many more dams than there are today.

Many of these same kinds of examples exist in healthcare. But the fantasy that hospitals would just cease to exist without subsidies just because they receive subsidies is laughable. Besides, I'm not sure what hospital you work for, but ask your CFO some time how far ahead your hospital comes out on Medicaid subsidies when you factor in Medicare/Medicaid undercompensation.

When you sum it all up, often public-payer business costs hospitals money. Most are lucky if they break even.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2013, 08:14 PM   #46
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 53,768
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Missouribronc View Post
I'm sorry. You must not know a lot about hospitals.
L0L!

L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 04:49 AM   #47
HILife
Ring of Famer
 
HILife's Avatar
 
Mrs. Alicia Hilife

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: DC - NOVA - DMV - VA - Take your pick
Posts: 4,432
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
you are obviously to much of a simpleton to understand the debt limit. its about paying the bills we have already built.
That's exactly correct. These bills have already hit. All they are doing is paying it. Defaulting is a none option, ask Warren Buffet and all the other billionaires. They can't all be wrong.
HILife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 07:20 AM   #48
frerottenextelway
█████
 
frerottenextelway's Avatar
 
█████

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: █████
Posts: 8,429

Adopt-a-Bronco:
██
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
Moody's credit rating agency raining on Obama's scare parade:

Moody's offers different view on debt limit

One of the nation’s top credit-rating agencies says that the U.S. Treasury Department is likely to continue paying interest on the government’s debt even if Congress fails to lift the limit on borrowing next week, preserving the nation’s sterling AAA credit rating.

In a memo being circulated on Capitol Hill Wednesday, Moody’s Investors Service offers “answers to frequently asked questions” about the government shutdown, now in its second week, and the federal debt limit. President Obama has said that, unless Congress acts to raise the $16.7 trillion limit by next Thursday, the nation will be at risk of default.

Not so, Moody’s says in the memo dated Oct. 7.

” We believe the government would continue to pay interest and principal on its debt even in the event that the debt limit is not raised, leaving its creditworthiness intact,” the memo says. “The debt limit restricts government expenditures to the amount of its incoming revenues; it does not prohibit the government from servicing its debt. There is no direct connection between the debt limit (actually the exhaustion of the Treasury’s extraordinary measures to raise funds) and a default.

The memo offers a starkly different view of the consequences of congressional inaction on the debt limit than is held by the White House, many policymakers and other financial analysts. During a press conference at the White House Tuesday, Obama said missing the Oct. 17 deadline would invite “economic chaos.”

The Moody’s memo goes on to argue that the situation is actually much less serious than in 2011, when the nation last faced a pitched battle over the debt limit.

“The budget deficit was considerably larger in 2011 than it is currently, so the magnitude of the necessary spending cuts needed after 17 October is lower now than it was then,” the memo says.

Treasury Department officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...b-327c5c814d82
Default Truthers! Our credit is based upon investors believing the US Dollar is the safest investment. That's what keeps our economy, and the worlds economy from completely crashing into complete chaos. We already had people like Fidelity completely sell off ALL their US treasury bonds. What do you think would happen if we pass that deadline? Honestly? Come into reality world for a minute.
frerottenextelway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 08:11 AM   #49
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 53,768
Default

Once again, Parry has the repigs' number...

Making the Economy Scream

by Robert Parry

Link

Americans who have studied CIA destabilization campaigns around the world may see some striking parallels to the strategy of Tea Party Republicans who have provoked a government shutdown and now are threatening a credit default. The idea is to make the country appear ungovernable and to make the economy “scream.”

This approach is similar to what CIA operatives do to get rid of disfavored political leaders in other countries, such as when Nixon ordered the spy agency to sabotage Chile’s economy and upset its political stability in the early 1970s.

The CIA’s thinking is that most people just want a chance to make a living. So, if an economic crisis can be ginned up – while propaganda outlets put the blame on the government leaders who are ostensibly in charge – then the people will ultimately turn against those leaders in an effort to restore normality.

In effect, the CIA takes the political process hostage by inflicting economic pain on the average citizen, sponsoring “populist” disorders, spreading confusion through propaganda outlets and then waiting for a weary population to give in. This technique has worked in many countries over the years – and surely the idea long predated the formation of the CIA in the late 1940s.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2013, 08:13 AM   #50
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla!
 
L.A. BRONCOS FAN's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location
Posts: 53,768
Default

L.A. BRONCOS FAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:35 PM.


Denver Broncos