Liberal free for all coming to an end

[TracyCoxx]

A poll conducted for CNN by ORC International showed support for a Balanced Budget Amendment at 74% among U.S. adults. Support for a proposal like the Republican “Cut, Cap, and Balance” plan was 66%.

Gallup Poll: Obama's Weekly Job Approval Ties Term Low of 43%

43% happens to also be the percentage of people who strongly disapprove of BO's performance according to Rasmussen.

And you know the expression: It's the Economy stupid!
Gallup says 73% of Americans say the economy is getting worse.

[GRH]

Are you smoking crack Tracy? Obama has shown a HIGH propensity for compromise which included $3 trillion in spending cuts-- including cuts to Social Security and Medicare (sacred cows for Democrats). It's the damn Republicans that refuse to budge on revenues, or as I like to call it, tax spending.

And part of the reason that the Boehner proposal for a temporary extension (that would last six months) is completely unacceptable is because it creates economic uncertainty for the entire economy. Further, this kick the can approach is almost certain to cause the US having their credit rating lowered. Ratings agencies have said there is a 50% chance of a credit downgrade in the next few months unless a credible plan to address the deficit is forwarded. A six month debt ceiling extension is HARDLY credible and would lead to a lower credit rating. This in turn would lead to a higher cost to service the debt as well as increased borrowing costs for Americans.

[GRH]

And regarding polls, I've seen earlier polls that indicated that a majority of Americans did not want the debt ceiling raised. In the same polls, a majority of Americans admitted to not having a basic understanding of interest rates too, or even what the debt ceiling was. Moral of the story...The voting public is stupid. You won't find many credible economists who would suggest that the most powerful nation on earth shouldn't be able to issue debt. Corporations issue debt to leverage their earnings potential. Families take on debt to invest in their future (mortgages, cars, etc.) Debt is not an evil thing. And the absurdity of "capping" spending at a percentage of GDP completely ignores demographic trends. We have a boom of retirees flooding the system; this marks a major demographic shift from our past history and in the coming decades will necessitate a higher amount of spending as a percentage of GDP to pay the benefits to these retirees. This demographic shift has spending implications. Those that support capping spending ignore the demographics-- what they are essentially saying is that we are going to renege on the promises we've made to seniors.

[tslust]

Originally Posted by GRH

The voting public is stupid

The 2008 election is proof of that.

Originally Posted by GRH

Families take on debt to invest in their future (mortgages, cars, etc.) Debt is not an evil thing.

http://youtu.be/_mfMG66LtVU

Most of these families try to live within their means. That includes paying their bills, paying off their loans and mortgages, trying to stay within a budget. The problem with our national debt is that our government shows no intention of paying off its loans and they will not live within their means (unless forced to by -ohh IDK, maybee a- Constitutional Ammendment, and maybee not even then).

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by GRH

You won't find many credible economists who would suggest that the most powerful nation on earth shouldn't be able to issue debt. Corporations issue debt to leverage their earnings potential. Families take on debt to invest in their future (mortgages, cars, etc.) Debt is not an evil thing.

I couldn't respond to you about debt any better than this:
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America?s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can?t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government?s reckless fiscal policies. ? Increasing America?s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ?the buck stops here.? Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." Barack Obama - 2006

[smc]

July 28, 2011

China Puts US on eBay

"Government Sold Separately," Sales Listing Says

BEIJING (The Borowitz Report) ? Showing its impatience with the debt ceiling stalemate in Washington, China today took the extraordinary step of putting the United States of America on eBay.

Officials at the online auction site said they believed it was the first time a major Western nation had been listed for sale there ?if you don?t count Greece.?

In Beijing, the Chinese Finance Ministry said that it had considered waiting until August 2 to see if the US would ever pay back its multitrillion-dollar obligations, but ultimately decided to cut its losses.

?We think we?ll attract a buyer on eBay,? the Ministry said. ?Say what you will about the US, it?s still one of the top fifty countries in the world.?

The sales listing for the US contains some interesting information, such as China?s description of the former superpower as being in ?fair to average condition.?

The listing also includes the stipulation ?government sold separately,? which the Finance Ministry took great pains to explain.

?We thought that including the government in the sale might turn off potential buyers,? the Ministry said. ?Plus, the US government isn?t ours to sell anyway ? it?s owned by the Koch brothers.?

With no bidders in the first 24 hours on eBay, China admitted that it would be challenging to unload the US, but it still held out hope that a buyer would step forward: ?We?ve got our fingers crossed for Zuckerberg.?

At the White House, press secretary Jay Carney said that he understood China?s decision to sell the US, but warned that a buyer would have to turn up on eBay before August 2: ?After that, the Internet gets shut off.?

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

I couldn't respond to you about debt any better than this:
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America?s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can?t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government?s reckless fiscal policies. ? Increasing America?s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ?the buck stops here.? Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." Barack Obama - 2006

Well--- That's was before he inherited the Bush meltdown. I got no answer from you on what would have happened if Obama had not poured cash into the economy as the country melted down, where would we be today?

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Well--- That's was before he inherited the Bush meltdown. I got no answer from you on what would have happened if Obama had not poured cash into the economy as the country melted down, where would we be today?

I did answer here:

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

I think at most it only bought us time, and in the meanwhile, it left us with a larger debt. The ramifications of that are not over. I think as Ron Paul says, we were left worse off in the long run than if we bit the bullet and took the hit.

And here's what Ron Paul said in September of 2008. I still agree with him...

Monday, September 29, 2008

As a vote nears on the $700 billion dollar plus bailout bill, Congressman Ron Paul took to the House floor this morning to warn that the passage of the legislation will destroy the dollar and the world economy.

Stating that the passage of the bailout bill would only make the problem worse, the Congressman from Texas said, ?This has nothing to do with free market capitalism, this has to do with a managed economy, an inflationary system, corporatism, a special interest system, and this has nothing to do with the failure of our free markets and capitalism.?

Paul blamed the current crisis on a Federal Reserve power monopoly over the money and credit system, the ceaseless borrowing and printing of money, and dismissed the bill as nothing but more of the same.

?Long term this is disastrous,? continued the Congressman, ?we?ve already pumped in $700 billion dollars, here?s another $700 billion dollars ? this is going to destroy the dollar ? that?s what you should be concerned about ? if you destroy the dollar you?re going to destroy a worldwide economy and that?s what we?re on the verge of doing.?

Paul said that the long term implications of the bailout would be a lot more serious than the problems currently being experienced by Wall Street.


The Congressman called for more oversight and warned, ?What we?re doing today is going to make things much worse.?

Paul expressed his frustration that free market economists who predicted the crisis were being ignored while the people who created the problem were being given the responsibility to offer a solution.

[smc]

July 30, 2011

Fox News Reports: Obama Starting to Wonder Why He Moved to U.S.
President Nostalgic for Land of Birth, Fox Says

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report) ? According to the Fox News Channel, President Barack Obama is so weary of the debt ceiling stalemate in Congress that he is beginning to wonder why he moved to the United States in the first place.

Fox News anchor Shepard Smith broke the story today, reporting that ?sources close to the President say he?s increasingly nostalgic for the land of his birth.?

?To someone like President Obama, this wrangling in Congress must seem very foreign,? said Mr. Smith. ?In Kenya, debt ceilings are raised automatically by the village elders, who then celebrate with a ceremonial feast of cabbage, mangoes and goat.?

While Mr. Smith stopped short of saying that Mr. Obama planed to leave Washington and return to his native Kenya, ?his birth certificate does allow him to return at any time he sees fit.?

?As he sees Congress push the United States ever closer to default, who can blame Mr. Obama for longing for simpler times, roaming free on the savanna?? Mr. Smith reported.

In other debt ceiling news, by unanimous vote the House of Representatives passed a bill raising Speaker of the House John Boehner?s medication.

As for the debt ceiling negotiations, they are ?right on schedule,? according to the ancient Mayans.

[ila]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

I couldn't respond to you about debt any better than this:
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America?s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can?t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government?s reckless fiscal policies. ? Increasing America?s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ?the buck stops here.? Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." Barack Obama - 2006

I just read a newspaper article today that says that every US president from Eisenhower on has raised the debt ceiling.

I do agree that the US has a debt problem that no one is willing to fix. I also agree that there is a leadership failure. As I see it, it is due to a weak president. That's not to say that a strong president would come up with better solutions. It just means that there is no leadership and hence no direction. The US ship of state is afloat and rudderless with an impending hurricane.

The US is going to have to get its act together. If it doesn't it will put the whole world economy into chaos and cause problems for generations to come. The reason it will cause problems to the world economy is because most money traders are based in the US and they have no idea that there is any other country beyond its borders. They are blinkered and shortsighted. There only concern is maximum profit for minimum effort regardless of the long term consequences.

[smc]

Originally Posted by ila

I just read a newspaper article today that says that every US president from Eisenhower on has raised the debt ceiling.

I do agree that the US has a debt problem that no one is willing to fix. I also agree that there is a leadership failure. As I see it, it is due to a weak president. That's not to say that a strong president would come up with better solutions. It just means that there is no leadership and hence no direction. The US ship of state is afloat and rudderless with an impending hurricane.

The US is going to have to get its act together. If it doesn't it will put the whole world economy into chaos and cause problems for generations to come. The reason it will cause problems to the world economy is because most money traders are based in the US and they have no idea that there is any other country beyond its borders. They are blinkered and shortsighted. There only concern is maximum profit for minimum effort regardless of the long term consequences.

There are some very important elements to this entire debt ceiling "crisis" that are getting buried in the hyperbolic bullshit that substitutes for honest discourse (not what ila wrote above, but generally). I put all of this in the following context: I am not a supporter of Barack Obama, and am not a Democrat.

First, this "crisis" has been completely manufactured for political ends. Every single president since Franklin Roosevelt, including every Republican president, has raised the debt ceiling. The radical reactionaries elected under the Tea Party banner manufactured this crisis in an effort to starve the U.S. government of the money it needs to function, because they do not believe in the system under which the United States operates. They are willing to dismantle the social compact that has served the U.S. people (albeit, poorly) since the Great Depression not because it incurs debt, but because they are against its principles and the social solidarity implied by it. It is NOT ABOUT MONEY.

Second, the debt ceiling is a very simple thing that has typically been addressed in legislation no longer than a single piece of paper. It simply gives the Treasury Department the authority to borrow money Congress has already approved for spending. That authority involves going to the bond market and selling U.S. Treasury Bonds, long the most trusted investment in the entire world.

Third, the U.S. Constitution says not a word about the debt ceiling. There is only one other country in the world that has a provision like our debt ceiling, and that's Denmark. The U.S. debt ceiling was an invention of 1917, when federal budget controls were not nearly as stringent and sophisticated as they are today. The debt ceiling votes in Congress have always been more or less routine: some people (Obama when he was a senator, for instance) will symbolically vote against raising them with the full understanding that it will pass, because it must. It has nothing to do with spending in the future.

Fourth, it is a complete fabrication of the Tea Party (and aped by Tracy Coxx in multiple posts) that Barack Obama is some kind of crazed taxer who overspends and threatens to put the United States into bankruptcy. (Yes, Tracy Coxx will pretend that because Tracy Coxx never used those precise words Tracy Coxx is not responsible for such specific, hyperbolic, idiotic views.) The facts are otherwise, though. U.S. indebtedness runs around $14 trillion. Over the past 10 years, $5.07 trillion was run up during the Bush administration. Obama is responsible for $1.44 trillion. The Tea Partiers are liars (in addition to being ignorant).

Fifth, as the Tea Party seeks to delegitimize Obama, it is clear that should they succeed in obstructing all the way to "default," Obama can then order the secretary of the treasury to issue bonds as needed. There is ample legal opinion, highly respected, that the debt ceiling is an unconstitutional infringement on the executive branch, and opinions by very conservative justices now on the Supreme Court (and appointed by Bush) that provide precedents.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by GRH

Are you smoking crack Tracy?

No, but I did have some blue bell ice cream last night.

Originally Posted by GRH

Obama has shown a HIGH propensity for compromise which included $3 trillion in spending cuts-- including cuts to Social Security and Medicare (sacred cows for Democrats). It's the damn Republicans that refuse to budge on revenues, or as I like to call it, tax spending.

The entire time BO has been president I have been griping about his overspending and saying that it was going to put us deep in debt, risk our credit rating and that the programs he wanted weren't going to help anything. 3 years later that is exactly where we are. It's time to recognize that the trillions BO added to the debt were for nothing other than to pay off his supporters. The liberal free for all is at an end.

He has added over $4 trillion in debt in his term. His $3 trillion in cuts that he wants is over 10 years. That's $300 billion/year. That's pocket change. So basically he wants us to live with this debt he added, oh and by the way let's get more tax too for his mismanagement of our economy. That's really going to help in a big-ass recession.

Originally Posted by GRH

And part of the reason that the Boehner proposal for a temporary extension (that would last six months) is completely unacceptable is because it creates economic uncertainty for the entire economy.

The debt situation BO has put us in creates uncertainty for the economy. As far back as 1940 Congress had to pass 37 short-term debt extensions. They have all provided funding for less than six months. He is focused on his campaign, pure and simple. Like what Rahm Emanuel says "You never want a serious crisis go to waste".

Originally Posted by GRH

Debt is not an evil thing.

That's a blanket statement. Certainly you must realize that at some point the interest payments become too big of a burden on our economy.

Originally Posted by GRH

And the absurdity of "capping" spending at a percentage of GDP completely ignores demographic trends. We have a boom of retirees flooding the system; this marks a major demographic shift from our past history and in the coming decades will necessitate a higher amount of spending as a percentage of GDP to pay the benefits to these retirees. This demographic shift has spending implications. Those that support capping spending ignore the demographics-- what they are essentially saying is that we are going to renege on the promises we've made to seniors.

Wouldn't it be nice if the $157 billion we're paying for interest on our debt could go to the boom of retirees flooding the system instead? We have to live within our means. If there's a boom of retirees flooding the system, then we'll have to cut something else. You want to add more money to the budget? Create more tax payers.

[smc]

I am no supporter of Barack Obama. I am, though, a supporter of truth.

No matter how many times Tracy Coxx writes it, it is clear to everyone who is honest about it that what he calls the "debt situation BO has put us in" is really a debt situation that George W. Bush and his enablers in Congress put us in. Every reputable economist in the world agrees that government spending (i.e., the stimulus) is a key way to get out of a recession. That Obama's didn't go far enough is the main point to make about it. Every reputable economist in the world also agrees that the Bush tax cuts, two unfunded wars fought on credit, and a boondoggle prescription drug benefit for seniors that enriched the pharmaceutical companies is the primary reason the United States went from surplus to deficit.

So, readers, take the continuing drumbeat by Tracy Coxx with a gigantic block of salt.

[GRH]

And notice how the part about the Boehner proposal leading to a credit downgrade-- that didn't warrant a response.

[GRH]

S&P even spelled out what it thought would be necessary to maintain the AAA. ?If Congress and the Administration reach an agreement of about $4 trillion, and if we conclude that such an agreement would be enacted and maintained throughout the decade, we could, other things unchanged, affirm the ?AAA? long-term rating on the U.S.?

One of the major reasons to not kick the can down the road with a 6 month extension.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by GRH

One of the major reasons to not kick the can down the road with a 6 month extension.

Ok, well this isn't what I was talking about before. I was talking about just raising the debt ceiling enough to pay the interest payments for the next 6 months. What S&P is saying here is that they want more than that. They want to see us actually bring down the debt at least $4 trillion in 10 years. I would like to see that as well. I've always been a big proponent of seriously cutting spending and bringing down the debt. Basically they want the debt rolled back to where it was before Obama took office LOL. That's certainly something they can do, I only hope congress and BO are listening.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by GRH

One of the major reasons to not kick the can down the road with a 6 month extension.

So back to this GRH... The senate is working on a bill that cuts $2 trillion over 10 years. Why? If S&P says we need to cut $4 trillion over 10 years why is the senate trying to cut $2 trillion over 10 years? And why has the senate tossed the only bill so far that does cut at least $4 trillion over 10 years?

[smc]

Originally Posted by GRH

And notice how the part about the Boehner proposal leading to a credit downgrade-- that didn't warrant a response.

As Thomas Gray wrote in Ode on a Distant Prospect of Eton College:

... where ignorance is bliss,
'Tis folly to be wise.

Of course, deliberately ignoring something of import is downright irresponsible, not to mention dangerous.

[randolph]

Kick the can???

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

A poll conducted for CNN by ORC International showed support for a Balanced Budget Amendment at 74% among U.S. adults. Support for a proposal like the Republican ?Cut, Cap, and Balance? plan was 66%.

Gallup Poll: Obama's Weekly Job Approval Ties Term Low of 43%

43% happens to also be the percentage of people who strongly disapprove of BO's performance according to Rasmussen.

And you know the expression: It's the Economy stupid!
Gallup says 73% of Americans say the economy is getting worse.

So they have pulled the "balanced budget amendment" out of the closet. Dear old Ronny yammered about this years ago. When he got elected, he appointed a committee of people OPPOSED to it to "study" it. It died a quiet death.