Who loses if debt-limit talks fail? Possibly Republicans more than Obama.

[toddwv]

We the people win if the debt limit talks fail. Our politicians would be forced to tighten thier belts and operate within thier means as well as make cuts and limit the size and scope of government. Think about it, if you maxed out all your credit cards and had massive amounts of debt that you could not afford to pay would it really be helping to raise your credit limit? Wouldn't you be postponing the inevitable?

You do realize that if we default on debt that it will put us even DEEPER in debt, right?

Your response is exactly why the Republicans will bear the brunt of any backlash. The right seems almost giddy about the possibility of default. It is the culmination of nearly 3 decades of their "starve the beast" agenda.

 

[toddwv]

:shrug: if they do, the effects on the economy will be negative; and we will see whether they overpower the "reduction in uncertainty" or not.

In my darker moments, I think Republicans ought to give Democrats higher taxes on job-creators and energy. Let 'em wreck what little, anemic recovery may be occurring.

but that's a sorched earth policy that puts Americans down for political gain in 2012. not worth the trade-off. tempting, but not worth it.

You say "job-creators" and "energy". Where exactly are these "job-creators"? The Republicans seem more interested in creating more jobs overseas at this point than any meaningful job creation here at home.

 

[greatar4]

According to a lot people the way to deal with the debt crisis is by making some deep cuts in spending and roll back the George Bush tax cuts. But, the problem is this scenario is very unlikely because the Republicans have vowed to defeat any tax hikes legislation. The problem for Barack Obama is that he won't be able to convince people that a tax hikes on the wealthiest american is the best way to go after he himself has signed to extend the George Bush tax cut for 2 years.

I think if the deal fails the Republican should be blamed because they are far more interested in getting their ideas accepted by the other side, but they are not willing to give anything as far as tax is concerned.

 

[Thunder]

it now appears that they will agree to $4 trillion in cuts to the debt, along with removing some tax-loopholes for the wealthy and Big Oil.

this is a very good compromise, though I wish we could agree on higher cuts.

anyways, compromise is good...and I commend the GOP for coming around for the good of the people.

 

[Thunder]

........do you also support the return of spending levels to Bush or pre-Bush levels? There is no way to tax our way out of this.....

never said there was.

 

[BDBoop]

well yeah. that's the current thinking in the White House. Let it go past Aug 2. Let some kind of major disruption occur. Send all the scary letters to Social Security and Medicare recipients. Use it as part of your "Republicans Want To Take Away Your Medicare" narrative for 2012.

That's not what they want? So with that now on the table, the Republicans will say "Oh! Oh, no. No, thank you. We'll cut somewhere else, somewhere more near and dear to our hearts."

 

[Иосиф Сталин]

I don't care how they do it or if it plunges the country back into a recession, as long as they start being fiscally responsible, something that hasn't been practised in a long time in Washington, D.C. A recession is preferable now as opposed to later in time when maybe the US economy will be too vulnerable to even risk anything. In fact, I don't even know why they've waited so long (I'm already counting on the Gov. not defaulting as you can see), these cuts and tax increases should have been implemented long time ago.

I'm neither a Democrat, nor a Republican, but both parties (especially the GOP) had better start doing something about this goddamn mess that's putting this nation in peril.

I'm confused here, weren't Republicans all about downsizing the Government? Well, here is their chance! Or is it the wealthy-getting-taxed part what bothers them so much? Please somebody explain.

Please think about the future of this nation when voting, and not about your personal financers or any special interest group.

 

[Jeezy]

I don't care how they do it or if it plunges the country back into a recession, as long as they start being fiscally responsible, something that hasn't been practised in a long time in Washington, D.C. A recession is preferable now as opposed to later in time when maybe the US economy will be too vulnerable to even risk anything. In fact, I don't even know why they've waited so long (I'm already counting on the Gov. not defaulting as you can see), these cuts and tax increases should have been implemented long time ago.

I'm neither a Democrat, nor a Republican, but both parties (especially the GOP) had better start doing something about this goddamn mess that's putting this nation in peril.

I'm confused here, weren't Republicans all about downsizing the Government? Well, here is their chance! Or is it the wealthy-getting-taxed part what bothers them so much? Please somebody explain.

Please think about the future of this nation when voting, and not about your personal financers or any special interest group.

Joseph Stalin wants YOU...to think about the future of this nation!

 

[Иосиф Сталин]

Joseph Stalin wants YOU...to think about the future of this nation!

Yeah, by you I mean our political representatives.

 

[Cold Highway]

If the debt limit gets raised, the people lose because it's our money.

 

[cpwill]

removing tax-loopholes is not a tax-increase.

in fact it is, since what are paid are not nominal rates, but effective rates.

 

[cpwill]

That's not what they want? So with that now on the table, the Republicans will say "Oh! Oh, no. No, thank you. We'll cut somewhere else, somewhere more near and dear to our hearts."

no, that is what some in the White House want. some kind of disruption that they can blame on "irresponsible Republicans". they began prepping for this narrative a couple of weeks ago with the "Republicans want to hurt the economy to help themselves in 2012" bit. a post-Aug 2 disruption which could be accompanied by those Scary Letters and a helpful mainstream media (eager to draw easy parallels to the government shutdown of the 90's) to blame it all on Republicans would give Obama an economic narrative where currently he doesn't have one.

 

[Temporal]

Something will be pulled out of the word work at the last minute. No one wants to be blamed for the economy collapsing. However, what I want to see a real, co-operative solutions that address long-term problems, and not messy patchwork that is only there to compensate for months of partisan bitch fests.

Our congress is so woefully broken it is painful to watch. Good policy and behavior is the exception and not the rule. If they manage to come to a bipartisan solution that at least shows earnestness to control the debt situation, I will be grateful but surprised.

 

[BDBoop]

no, that is what some in the White House want. some kind of disruption that they can blame on "irresponsible Republicans". they began prepping for this narrative a couple of weeks ago with the "Republicans want to hurt the economy to help themselves in 2012" bit. a post-Aug 2 disruption which could be accompanied by those Scary Letters and a helpful mainstream media (eager to draw easy parallels to the government shutdown of the 90's) to blame it all on Republicans would give Obama an economic narrative where currently he doesn't have one.

Well, they couldn't blame it if the Republicans weren't doing it. Are you trying to play a victim card for them?

 

[cpwill]

Well, they couldn't blame it if the Republicans weren't doing it. Are you trying to play a victim card for them?

what do you mean "if Republicans weren't doing it". Republicans laid everything on the table except one item. Democrats were free to pick an item (Medicare, Social Security, Unemployment benefits, whatever) as well, but instead Democrats are insisting on that one item. Not content on working within the realm of available compromise and borders, they are insisting on it all. All Republicans have said is "we are actually going to cut spending." not raise taxes and blithely pretend that's a "spending cut" - Republicans are (for once) saying we shouldn't engage in the kind of double-dealing talking-out-of-both-sides-of-our-mouths that got us here. If Obama were to come out with a cuts package tomorrow, and could cut nearly whatever he wanted, and split the Republican Party for the win; as well as give Republicans a harder time running in 2012 while burnishing his "moderate" credentials. This is his deal to make whenever he wants to.


government spending for the past half-century averaged about 20% of GDP. Obama shot it up to about 25% of GDP. now he is insisting that taxes make up part of the difference in his spending increases? no. bring it back down to 18% of GDP so we can start paying off debt. He's basically arguing that the American people rather than Congress should have to make up for spending excesses.

not that it will work. it will just depress job creation and growth.

because you're not going to get 21, 22, or 23% of GDP in taxes with any hike in tax rates.

that being said, Republicans probably will fold on some taxes - Obama has put the airline and oil industry out there, so he will probably need them as trophies to show off to his base and save face. This will have a harmful net effect.... but hopefully the damage will be mitigated.

 

[BDBoop]

what do you mean "if Republicans weren't doing it". Republicans laid everything on the table except one item. Democrats were free to pick an item (Medicare, Social Security, Unemployment benefits, whatever) as well, but instead Democrats are insisting on that one item. Not content on working within the realm of available compromise and borders, they are insisting on it all. All Republicans have said is "we are actually going to cut spending." not raise taxes and blithely pretend that's a "spending cut" - Republicans are (for once) saying we shouldn't engage in the kind of double-dealing talking-out-of-both-sides-of-our-mouths that got us here. If Obama were to come out with a cuts package tomorrow, and could cut nearly whatever he wanted, and split the Republican Party for the win; as well as give Republicans a harder time running in 2012 while burnishing his "moderate" credentials. This is his deal to make whenever he wants to.


government spending for the past half-century averaged about 20% of GDP. Obama shot it up to about 25% of GDP. now he is insisting that taxes make up part of the difference in his spending increases? no. bring it back down to 18% of GDP so we can start paying off debt. He's basically arguing that the American people rather than Congress should have to make up for spending excesses.

not that it will work. it will just depress job creation and growth.

because you're not going to get 21, 22, or 23% of GDP in taxes with any hike in tax rates.

that being said, Republicans probably will fold on some taxes - Obama has put the airline and oil industry out there, so he will probably need them as trophies to show off to his base and save face. This will have a harmful net effect.... but hopefully the damage will be mitigated.

I have seen Republicans laying nothing on the table. I've been reading every piece of information out there, and I have never seen Rebublicans bring one damn thing to the table. I'll need your sources.

 

[cpwill]

I have seen Republicans laying nothing on the table. I've been reading every piece of information out there, and I have never seen Rebublicans bring one damn thing to the table. I'll need your sources.

Republicans have publicly stated that everything is on the table except they won't hike taxes on the recovery. Defense Spending, favorite projects, pork spending, entitlements, you name it. as a secondary condition, they have said they want to cut a dollar in future spending for every dollar they raise the debt ceiling by.



now, back in May when this all started the American people (who sent a rather clear message on November of 2010 as regards government spending) polled 47 to 19% that they wanted their congresscritter to vote against raising the debt ceiling at all. more lately (as the fear mongerers on our televisions hammer home the message of looming armaggeddon) that number dropped to 23% who opposed raising it at all and 51% who supported raising it tied to large spending cuts, the position the Republicans are holding.


there is a Reason Americans are polling that they trust Congressional Republicans more on debt and deficit issues right now.

 

[Badmutha]

I have seen Republicans laying nothing on the table. I've been reading every piece of information out there, and I have never seen Rebublicans bring one damn thing to the table. I'll need your sources.

....use your open eye......
.
.
.
.

 

[randel]

....use your open eye......
.
.
.
.

how about you provide sources to back up what you post?

 

[randel]

Republicans have publicly stated that everything is on the table except they won't hike taxes on the recovery. Defense Spending, favorite projects, pork spending, entitlements, you name it. as a secondary condition, they have said they want to cut a dollar in future spending for every dollar they raise the debt ceiling by.



now, back in May when this all started the American people (who sent a rather clear message on November of 2010 as regards government spending) polled 47 to 19% that they wanted their congresscritter to vote against raising the debt ceiling at all. more lately (as the fear mongerers on our televisions hammer home the message of looming armaggeddon) that number dropped to 23% who opposed raising it at all and 51% who supported raising it tied to large spending cuts, the position the Republicans are holding.


there is a Reason Americans are polling that they trust Congressional Republicans more on debt and deficit issues right now.

either taxes are on the table, or the republicans are not negotiating in good faith....some targeted increases/closing of loopholes will not harm the economy one bit.

 

[W00ster]

there is a Reason Americans are polling that they trust Congressional Republicans more on debt and deficit issues right now.

Actually, all polling done the past months show the support for increased taxes on the rich to be in the range of 80%. GOP has no support in the people for their Reverse Robin Hood politics, e.g. stealing from the poor in order to give to the rich!

 

[cpwill]

either taxes are on the table, or the republicans are not negotiating in good faith....some targeted increases/closing of loopholes will not harm the economy one bit.

it depends on structure - but effective tax increases (which is what you are discussing) will indeed harm the economy; though not incredibly severely.


an excellent parallel could be drawn with the "luxury car and boat" tax of the early 90's; which resulted only in thousands of blue-collar workers who made those items getting thrown out of work, LESS revenue being collected, and was quickly repealed. The wealthy won't be hurt by the increases he is discussing as much as those they employ will be. If you want to close the loopholes while lowering overall rates to maintain revenue neutrality; that is an excellent way to lower the overall complexity, distortion, and compliancy cost of the system, and it's an absolutely bone-headed obvious idea to spark growth by freeing up funds in the economy without costing government a single red cent in expenditures or lost revenue.... which is probably why the President's Debt Commission proposed it.


And the Rumors Say That Might Be On The Table:

...a source familiar with discussions with the White House says that they have included a number of options for moving forward. One option discussed was a tax reform and simplification that would lower individual and corporate rates in exchange for closing loopholes, deductions, and other “spending in the tax code.”...​

 

[BDBoop]

“You’re playing with fire when you don’t need to play with fire,” Buffett said.

He said Congress raised the debt ceiling seven times during President George W. Bush’s administration, so it would be silly not to do so now. He said the roughly $4 billion the government spends each day would be missed.

“We don’t need to tell the rest of the world that anytime people in Congress start throwing a tantrum that we’re not going to pay our bills,” Buffett said. AP

Love the bolded.

Warren Buffet: Not raising debt ceiling is

 

[cpwill]

:shrug: anyone who thinks that we will not continue to pay our debt obligations either isn't paying attention or (worse) listening to what the Talking Heads of Doom are telling them. If anything, an extension past Aug 2 where we were to pay our debt first and cut other spending would be reassuring to the Bond Markets that - no matter what - the full faith and credit is solid.

 

[randel]

it depends on structure - but effective tax increases (which is what you are discussing) will indeed harm the economy; though not incredibly severely.


an excellent parallel could be drawn with the "luxury car and boat" tax of the early 90's; which resulted only in thousands of blue-collar workers who made those items getting thrown out of work, LESS revenue being collected, and was quickly repealed. The wealthy won't be hurt by the increases he is discussing as much as those they employ will be. If you want to close the loopholes while lowering overall rates to maintain revenue neutrality; that is an excellent way to lower the overall complexity, distortion, and compliancy cost of the system, and it's an absolutely bone-headed obvious idea to spark growth by freeing up funds in the economy without costing government a single red cent in expenditures or lost revenue.... which is probably why the President's Debt Commission proposed it.


And the Rumors Say That Might Be On The Table:

...a source familiar with discussions with the White House says that they have included a number of options for moving forward. One option discussed was a tax reform and simplification that would lower individual and corporate rates in exchange for closing loopholes, deductions, and other “spending in the tax code.”...​

not sure we are the same page my friend..i'm looking for increased revenue, and, if done right, i don't believe will harm the economy...i am pleased to see that the republicans may be coming around a bit on the issue of taxes, it is my belief that we need an increase in revenue, and a decrease in spending...3-4 trillion in cuts, while significant, will not be enough imo.... we need 300-500 billion in increased revenue , we need close to 50/50 increase in revenue/spending cuts, and we need our congress critters and President to man up , and put a freeze on spending for 3-5 years, and then recalibrate from there.