Take the Debt Ceiling Off the Table [W:70]

[washunut]

Putting aside the noise from both sides, it would seem that we should put aside the risk of not raising the debt ceiling. Everyone understands not raising the debt ceiling for more than a couple of days would lead to a huge economic mess. There has been no budget proposal I have seen that would balance the budget for the next year.

We can talk about the fact that the then senator Obama voted against raising the budget in 2007, but so what. He was irresponsible then, that does not mean others should take that stance now. People can look back and say there have been other times when there were strings attached to raising the debt ceiling, but again who cares, we are in the mess we are now based on who we put in office now.

I would not couple the government "shutdown" with the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is like dropping a nuclear bomb on ourselves, the shutdown is a skirmish.

Keep the government shutdown until a real budget is agreed upon rather than these inane CRs. Lift the uncertainty over the debt limit which is an option that can not be used effectively.

Thoughts?

 

[head of joaquin]

Taking the debt ceiling off the table won't happen. The GOP and its tea party masters want the US government to default. They are that deep into Obamaphobia. There is no way to stop them but removal from office. Two weeks from now, they will force a default. It's what they want. It isn't a byproduct of failed negotiations. It's their goal.

 

[clownboy]

At some point we have to stop taking on increased debt, we've known that and all previous efforts to draw a line in the sand failed because there were no consequences for acquiring more debt beyond the line. That's why we created debt ceiling legislation. We reached the line and now the critters want to cross it again with no end in sight. Shall we instead wait for default or where we are in the position of absolute economic failure?

 

[head of joaquin]

At some point we have to stop taking on increased debt, we've known that and all previous efforts to draw a line in the sand failed because there were no consequences for acquiring more debt beyond the line. That's why we created debt ceiling legislation. We reached the line and now the critters want to cross it again with no end in sight. Shall we instead wait for default or where we are in the position of absolute economic failure?

Since raising the debt ceiling doesn't increase any debt, but just pays for already existing debt, this answer is incoherent

But it makes my point: the GOP wants a default and there is no stopping them without removing them and their incoherent worldview from office.

washnut -- you have your answer.

 

[clownboy]

Once again HOJ chimes in to tell us that borrowing money to pay for existing overbudget liabilities doesn't increase our nation debt. Sounds like someone thinks paying off one credit card with another is the magical answer. :mrgreen:

 

[washunut]

At some point we have to stop taking on increased debt, we've known that and all previous efforts to draw a line in the sand failed because there were no consequences for acquiring more debt beyond the line. That's why we created debt ceiling legislation. We reached the line and now the critters want to cross it again with no end in sight. Shall we instead wait for default or where we are in the position of absolute economic failure?

I know of no budget proposal, including the Ryan budget that gets to balance this fiscal year. So we can debate what a new limit should be, but we need an increase. If either side wants no increase they should show us their path to balance this fiscal year. Otherwise we are wasting a bunch of time and credibility on something that can't happen.

 

[washunut]

Once again HOJ chimes in to tell us that borrowing money to pay for existing overbudget liabilities doesn't increase our nation debt. Sounds like someone thinks paying off one credit card with another is the magical answer. :mrgreen:

Put him on ignore as it is a waste of time.

 

[head of joaquin]

Once again HOJ chimes in to tell us that borrowing money to pay for existing overbudget liabilities doesn't increase our nation debt. Sounds like someone thinks paying off one credit card with another is the magical answer. :mregreen:

Once again, clown pretends that debts already incurred magically go away if we don't pay for them.

No wonder tea partiers can't run businesses and have to live on the dole.

 

[clownboy]

Once again, clown pretends that debts already incurred magically go away if we don't pay for them.

No wonder tea partiers can't run businesses and have to live on the dole.

Lie, where did I say or even imply that? Quote it. Debts do not go away if you don't pay them nor do they stay the same when you borrow from Peter to pay Paul which is what you advocate.

 

[ARealConservative]

progressives are going to have to adjust their formula.

It doesn't take a majority to stop them.

an ever increasing portion of the population would prefer a credit default over allowing them to continue to push for more and more nannyism.

you want to pretend this is a game of chicken, feel free.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

progressives are going to have to adjust their formula.

It doesn't take a majority to stop them.

an ever increasing portion of the population would prefer a credit default over allowing them to continue to push for more and more nannyism.

you want to pretend this is a game of chicken, feel free.

so the only way to save the house is to burn it down?

 

[clownboy]

so the only way to save the house is to burn it down?

No, that way to save the house is to stop taking on new debt and stop nannying the People.

 

[ARealConservative]

so the only way to save the house is to burn it down?

You tell me.

Will you stop pushing for all these federal solutions and increase the sheer number of people angry with their government, or will you be willing to pursue a method that seeks to reduce the number of disenfranchised citizens by allowing states, counties, cities, etc. to have more control over things?

 

[Unitedwestand13]

You tell me.

Will you stop pushing for all these federal solutions and increase the sheer number of people angry with their government, or will you be willing to pursue a method that seeks to reduce the number of disenfranchised citizens by allowing states, counties, cities, etc. to have more control over things?

so you want federal government to yield authority to state and local governments? I don't see that as much of a differance.

Government is government, it makes no differance whether it is state or federal.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Putting aside the noise from both sides, it would seem that we should put aside the risk of not raising the debt ceiling. Everyone understands not raising the debt ceiling for more than a couple of days would lead to a huge economic mess. There has been no budget proposal I have seen that would balance the budget for the next year.

We can talk about the fact that the then senator Obama voted against raising the budget in 2007, but so what. He was irresponsible then, that does not mean others should take that stance now. People can look back and say there have been other times when there were strings attached to raising the debt ceiling, but again who cares, we are in the mess we are now based on who we put in office now.

I would not couple the government "shutdown" with the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is like dropping a nuclear bomb on ourselves, the shutdown is a skirmish.

Keep the government shutdown until a real budget is agreed upon rather than these inane CRs. Lift the uncertainty over the debt limit which is an option that can not be used effectively.

Thoughts?

As long as the federal government continues under the shutdown, the US treasury receives sufficient revenue from taxes and other sources each month to delay any need to increase the debt ceiling well past the October 17 deadline the Treasury Department floated last month. It should be fairly easy for the smart guys and gals at treasury to tell the American people today how far back each day of the shutdown pushes back the need for the debt ceiling increase. Why do you suppose they're not doing that?

 

[ARealConservative]

so you want federal government to yield authority to state and local governments?

Pretty please

I don't see that as much of a differance.

I do. The larger the size of government, the more difficult it is to remove yourself from it.

If a state has a bad law, and I really hate that law, I can move to another state.

If the entire country does it, I have to renounce my citizenship.

Also, I have a larger voice in how my state rules.

Government is government, it makes no differance whether it is state or federal.

False. Not only does it impact us as I mentioned above, it also has a major impact on how we fund things.

The federal government is unique in that it can hide costs of programs by monetary expansion and debt debasement. States can’t do that. So states have to be much more open and honest about what a program costs

 

[washunut]

As long as the federal government continues under the shutdown, the US treasury receives sufficient revenue from taxes and other sources each month to delay any need to increase the debt ceiling well past the October 17 deadline the Treasury Department floated last month. It should be fairly easy for the smart guys and gals at treasury to tell the American people today how far back each day of the shutdown pushes back the need for the debt ceiling increase. Why do you suppose they're not doing that?

Let's remember that the government spending has not stopped, just slowed a little. Entitlements still get paid, the military gets paid. So yes it will make a difference, perhaps increasing when the debt ceiling gets hit by about a day for every week of the shutdown.

 

[greengirl77]

At some point we have to stop taking on increased debt, we've known that and all previous efforts to draw a line in the sand failed because there were no consequences for acquiring more debt beyond the line. That's why we created debt ceiling legislation. We reached the line and now the critters want to cross it again with no end in sight. Shall we instead wait for default or where we are in the position of absolute economic failure?

So it okay not to pay bills that are already approved now.

 

[greengirl77]

I know of no budget proposal, including the Ryan budget that gets to balance this fiscal year. So we can debate what a new limit should be, but we need an increase. If either side wants no increase they should show us their path to balance this fiscal year. Otherwise we are wasting a bunch of time and credibility on something that can't happen.

Well until the Republicans come to realization that half this country pays no taxes and big corps. pay none and park their money offshore, and pay no taxes the budget will never be balanced. They will never do that so we will always have a deficit and a debt problem. Considering the fact that a majority of the debt is due to their leaders wild spending when Republicans have had the majority control the last 30 years anytime they piss and moan about the debt I laugh.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Let's remember that the government spending has not stopped, just slowed a little. Entitlements still get paid, the military gets paid. So yes it will make a difference, perhaps increasing when the debt ceiling gets hit by about a day for every week of the shutdown.

That sounds about right, if you presume that the President and the administration have no control over discretionary spending going forward. There is no way, in my view, that the US federal government could not operate well into the future, past the debt ceiling deadline, while still paying all "commitments" with the $250 million in revenue it takes in each month. Will it be easy - no - can it be done - yes - but you won't hear that from the President or anyone in the administration because they have a vested interest in making it as catastrophic as they can for political, not national reasons.

 

[washunut]

That sounds about right, if you presume that the President and the administration have no control over discretionary spending going forward. There is no way, in my view, that the US federal government could not operate well into the future, past the debt ceiling deadline, while still paying all "commitments" with the $250 million in revenue it takes in each month. Will it be easy - no - can it be done - yes - but you won't hear that from the President or anyone in the administration because they have a vested interest in making it as catastrophic as they can for political, not national reasons.

I agree that the mess will be man made but I will happen nonetheless.

I think the President would take a default and loss of credit rating for a win in house elections in t 2014 in a nanosecond.

 

[CanadaJohn]

I agree that the mess will be man made but I will happen nonetheless.

I think the President would take a default and loss of credit rating for a win in house elections in t 2014 in a nanosecond.

He would be foolish to do so since Democrats taking over the House in 2014 is a virtual impossibility and a Republican take over of the Senate isn't out of the question. Obama's incompetence is finally becoming apparent to more and more Americans, unfortunately, for many it's far too late.

 

[Vern]

Putting aside the noise from both sides, it would seem that we should put aside the risk of not raising the debt ceiling. Everyone understands not raising the debt ceiling for more than a couple of days would lead to a huge economic mess. There has been no budget proposal I have seen that would balance the budget for the next year.

Wash, that’s just it, everyone doesn’t understand. and they’re all on your side. Hence the ‘noise’ is coming from your side about wanting to default. This will be now the second time your side is threatening to destroy the economy by not raising the debt ceiling. And you can talk all you want about Senator Obama but he was never threatening to destroy the economy. So don’t put the typical grandstanding about the debt ceiling in the same category as the republicans threatening to not raise it. You have a large and ignorant contingent of your party that thinks defaulting on the debt is a good thing.

I think the President would take a default and loss of credit rating for a win in house elections in t 2014 in a nanosecond.

Now why would you think that? Other than he was born in Kenyan, his BC was fake, he tried to kill old people, he then encouraged old people to commit suicide, he never compromises with republican demands and on and on and on. So read this slowly, he’s not the one threatening to destroy the economy by not raising the debt ceiling so please don’t create a narrative that allows you to deflect blame from the responsible party.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Taking the debt ceiling off the table won't happen. The GOP and its tea party masters want the US government to default. They are that deep into Obamaphobia. There is no way to stop them but removal from office. Two weeks from now, they will force a default. It's what they want. It isn't a byproduct of failed negotiations. It's their goal.

Their goal? Why do you insist on lies and character assassination?

 

[Helix]

Putting aside the noise from both sides, it would seem that we should put aside the risk of not raising the debt ceiling. Everyone understands not raising the debt ceiling for more than a couple of days would lead to a huge economic mess. There has been no budget proposal I have seen that would balance the budget for the next year.

We can talk about the fact that the then senator Obama voted against raising the budget in 2007, but so what. He was irresponsible then, that does not mean others should take that stance now. People can look back and say there have been other times when there were strings attached to raising the debt ceiling, but again who cares, we are in the mess we are now based on who we put in office now.

I would not couple the government "shutdown" with the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling is like dropping a nuclear bomb on ourselves, the shutdown is a skirmish.

Keep the government shutdown until a real budget is agreed upon rather than these inane CRs. Lift the uncertainty over the debt limit which is an option that can not be used effectively.

Thoughts?

Even if we don't default, we could lose our credit rating even if it looks like we might default. We're the global reserve currency; we absolutely cannot do this.