What? No government shutdown threads?

[kia75]

So again, if there has to be a government shutdown and a debt default, so be it. Giving in to their demands or even giving them the idea that these are levers they can use to negotiate is something that responsible people can't do. You give them absolutely nothing.

So what is the endgame?

Who blinks and who can blink in a government shutdown?

The Democrats can't blink because there is nothing that they can do to placate the party. In the recent bill that went on Friday, if Democrats completely and utterly caved in each and every way then the government would only be funded until December where we would do this dance again. There is nothing that the Democrats can do to get us out of this mess.

The Tea Party wants a government shut-down. They don't want to negotiate. If the Democrats completely caved in everything it would only delay the shutdown until Christmas. Once the shut down happens what is the Tea Party's end game? Do they think the wreckage of the United States without a government will magically turn the USA into a paradise? And the thing that makes me most concerned is that the Tea Party likes to bury their head in the sand. Once the Government shut-down happens I can see them burying themselves even more, even if their constituent call them and complain about all the damage a shut-down is doing to their own district, I don't see the Tea Party giving in. Barring an apocalypse that destroys everything, I can't see the Tea party ever giving in.

The Republicans are held hostage by the tea party. Boehner and the saner Republicans know that a shutdown would devastate the party. They know that a budget must be passed and a that a government is required for America to work. But they also know if they work with the Democrats they'll be primaried out. They know that ending a shut down will cost them their careers.

Are we relying on Republicans falling on their sword to end a government shut-down? On sacrificing their careers for the good of the nation?


How is the shut down ended?

 

[fskimospy]

And "the rich" have been successful in obtaining exemptions from the taxation part of Obamacare, leaving a heavier burden on the working middle class. What's the difference?

You should go read the two plans. The differences should be pretty obvious.

 

[fskimospy]

So what is the endgame?

Who blinks and who can blink in a government shutdown?

The Democrats can't blink because there is nothing that they can do to placate the party. In the recent bill that went on Friday, if Democrats completely and utterly caved in each and every way then the government would only be funded until December where we would do this dance again. There is nothing that the Democrats can do to get us out of this mess.

The Tea Party wants a government shut-down. They don't want to negotiate. If the Democrats completely caved in everything it would only delay the shutdown until Christmas. Once the shut down happens what is the Tea Party's end game? Do they think the wreckage of the United States without a government will magically turn the USA into a paradise? And the thing that makes me most concerned is that the Tea Party likes to bury their head in the sand. Once the Government shut-down happens I can see them burying themselves even more, even if their constituent call them and complain about all the damage a shut-down is doing to their own district, I don't see the Tea Party giving in. Barring an apocalypse that destroys everything, I can't see the Tea party ever giving in.

The Republicans are held hostage by the tea party. Boehner and the saner Republicans know that a shutdown would devastate the party. They know that a budget must be passed and a that a government is required for America to work. But they also know if they work with the Democrats they'll be primaried out. They know that ending a shut down will cost them their careers.

Are we relying on Republicans falling on their sword to end a government shut-down? On sacrificing their careers for the good of the nation?


How is the shut down ended?

The only way I see this ending is Republican leadership caving and passing these bills with Democratic votes and the votes of the sane Republicans. The Democrats gain nothing from compromising on this outside of guaranteeing themselves another hostage crisis next year.

There's a reason you don't negotiate with terrorists. When you give in to hostage taking you simply encourage more of it. It was irresponsible to have compromised with the Republicans the first time they pulled this stunt. It would be downright negligent to continue to do so.

 

[Texashiker]

The only way I see this ending is Republican leadership caving and passing these bills with Democratic votes and the votes of the sane Republicans. The Democrats gain nothing from compromising on this outside of guaranteeing themselves another hostage crisis next year.

There's a reason you don't negotiate with terrorists. When you give in to hostage taking you simply encourage more of it. It was irresponsible to have compromised with the Republicans the first time they pulled this stunt. It would be downright negligent to continue to do so.

I respectfully disagree with everything you said.

The only terrorist here are the ones who are driving this nation into debt.

Continuing to raise the debt limit is insanity.

 

[cubby1223]

You should go read the two plans. The differences should be pretty obvious.

I know the general overview of the plans, and I believe both plans ultimately will favor "the rich" over "the poor".

The primary goal of Obamacare is to insure every person in this country. But I feel that the way they are doing this, the government's ability to control and lower prices will be greatly diminished. I feel that the setup of Obamacare is going to create opportunities for more individuals to take more money from the system without providing increased value back into the system.

To me, reducing costs is far more important than universal coverage. If they don't figure a way to lower costs & increase quality and efficiency, then what good are any of the other benefits of the legislation? Lower costs gives us greater coverage. Greater coverage without lower costs gives us rationing.

 

[Jhhnn]

I respectfully disagree with everything you said.

The only terrorist here are the ones who are driving this nation into debt.

Continuing to raise the debt limit is insanity.

Oh, please. The very Teahadists now threatening to not pay Govt obligations are some of the same people who legislated them into existence.

The time to fight for what they want is during the appropriations process, not after they've helped create the appropriations in the first place.

As has been pointed out, repeatedly, this is just another Repub hostage taking situation, run under the ruse of actually wanting to reduce spending. They want to defund the ACA, not to save money at all. Their record on spending proves the point entirely.

Fuck 'em. Now that the bets are on the table, it's time for Dems to call, let Repubs show themselves to be four flushers.

It's also time to end the debt ceiling charade once and for all. If Congress authorizes expenditures, the Treasury should be automatically empowered to pay them, by law. Period.

 

[Jhhnn]

I know the general overview of the plans, and I believe both plans ultimately will favor "the rich" over "the poor".

The primary goal of Obamacare is to insure every person in this country. But I feel that the way they are doing this, the government's ability to control and lower prices will be greatly diminished. I feel that the setup of Obamacare is going to create opportunities for more individuals to take more money from the system without providing increased benefit to the system.

To me, reducing costs is more important than universal coverage. Reducing costs makes care more affordable, increasing coverage naturally. Obamacare's plan for reducing costs right now is largely to shift the burden of payment away from one group and onto another.

Sounds peachy, except that income inequality has placed entirely too many people out of the market entirely, unless they receive subsidies.

 

[ivwshane]

I respectfully disagree with everything you said.

The only terrorist here are the ones who are driving this nation into debt.

Continuing to raise the debt limit is insanity.

Insanity is repeating the same bullshit line even though you have zero clue what you are talking about. Not raising the debt ceiling doesn't mean we are spending less or that the budget has been cut.

 

[Texashiker]

Insanity is repeating the same bullshit line even though you have zero clue what you are talking about. Not raising the debt ceiling doesn't mean we are spending less or that the budget has been cut.

Insanity is enslaving future generations to financial servitude.

It's also time to end the debt ceiling charade once and for all. If Congress authorizes expenditures, the Treasury should be automatically empowered to pay them, by law. Period.

In other words give the government a blank check.

 

[Jhhnn]

In other words give the government a blank check.

That's a really dismal attempt at thinking. Congress has already authorized the expenditures, now they have to authorize borrowing to cover them. Well, or tax increases, take your pick. The Horror!

If they really wanted less spending, they'd authorize less spending, but they don't, so there you have it- extortion as grandstanding to their base.

 

[Balt]

That's a really dismal attempt at thinking. Congress has already authorized the expenditures, now they have to authorize borrowing to cover them. Well, or tax increases, take your pick. The Horror!

If they really wanted less spending, they'd authorize less spending, but they don't, so there you have it- extortion as grandstanding to their base.

Well stated. I honestly don't understand how this simple logic still escapes people.

 

[Texashiker]

That's a really dismal attempt at thinking. Congress has already authorized the expenditures, now they have to authorize borrowing to cover them.

Who is going to pay that borrowing back?

Every tax dollar you,
Every tax dollar your children,
Every tax dollar your grandchildren,
will pay into the system has already been spent.

But like Greenspan once said, we can always print more money.

 

[IronWing]

Who is going to pay that borrowing back?

Every tax dollar you,
Every tax dollar your children,
Every tax dollar your grandchildren,
will pay into the system has already been spent.

But like Greenspan once said, we can always print more money.

Don't let facts get in the way of your whining. Congress, with the full participation of the Republicans orchestrating the current tantrum, already spent the money. Time for the Republicans to put on their big-boy pants and raise the debt ceiling to cover the spending they've already done.

 

[fskimospy]

I respectfully disagree with everything you said.

The only terrorist here are the ones who are driving this nation into debt.

Continuing to raise the debt limit is insanity.

This is just a denial of reality. If you want the government to spend less, there is an easy way to do that: the appropriations bills. You are advocating for the US to breach its contractual and statutory obligations that it has already agreed to. This is the height of irresponsibility.

As others have said, we should abolish the debt ceiling. Almost no other nation has such a thing. Failing that, we have to be sure to offer zero concessions to anyone trying to take hostages with it.

 

[Matt1970]

Wrong again. One of the things that makes trying to have a discussion with people like you so pointless is that you're incapable of processing new information. It's called cognitive dissonance. You start with your faith-based positions, and stubbornly shut out anything that challenges them. You posted multiple times in that very thread, yet a month later you're back to your original beliefs, your faith unfazed by reality.

The Congressional Budget Office has forecast that the annual deficit will be $670 billion when the budget year ends Sept. 30

The federal government ran a budget deficit of roughly $750 billion for the first 11 months of fiscal year 2013, CBO

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44552

Maybe we can pull out an $80 Billion surplus this month. Anything is possible.

 

[Matt1970]

I don't think you understand his point. He is saying that the ACA is not perfect, but it is vastly preferable to A.) the status quo and B.) what conservatives have put forth.

.

Something that was supposed to drive down the cost of insurance, but so far has only shown to actually drive up the cost is not preferable to anything. If possible maybe it should have been fixed before it was rammed down the throats of the public. Remember, we have to pass it to see what is in it.

 

[Texashiker]

As others have said, we should abolish the debt ceiling. Almost no other nation has such a thing.

Who is supposed to pay this borrowed money back?

How much debt are we supposed to procure before we say enough is enough?

 

[Jhhnn]

Who is going to pay that borrowing back?

Your misunderstanding of money & its creation is utterly profound. In a fiat floating currency world, the whole idea that the govt needs to borrow money is anachronism held over from the gold standard, a way for the financial elite to collect economic rent from ownership of money.

The debt will never be repaid, nor should it be. It was never intended to be repaid. Its value will simply be eroded away via inflation over time.

If money creation, borrowing, ceased, our economy would rapidly collapse from lack of liquidity due to the balance of payments deficit, the dollar's place as the world reserve currency & the predatory nature of the financial elite.

That's particularly true considering that the deregulated financial system created more debt than money as income existent to service it over the course of the Ownership Society scam, the greatest looting spree in the history of finance.

If that reality is over your head, it's not reality's fault.

 

[Jhhnn]

Who is supposed to pay this borrowed money back?

How much debt are we supposed to procure before we say enough is enough?

Exceptionally dense and obstinate ATM, I see. Congress authorized the spending with appropriations bills, but now Teahadists refuse to honor those obligations.

They helped pass the appropriation bills, didn't they? Or do you & they deny that simple fact?

 

[Texashiker]

The debt will never be repaid, nor should it be. It was never intended to be repaid. Its value will simply be eroded away via inflation over time.

Someone will have to pay back all of those US savings bonds the Chinese and Japanese have been stockpiling.

Economics 101, before you take a loan have a plan to pay the money back.

The government is spending but has no plan or ability to pay the money back.

 

[kia75]

The Debt Ceiling isn't about borrowing money, it's about being responsible and paying our bills. Think of it like going to dinner at a restaurant. You order your food, then at the end you get a check and pay it. Paying for the bill at the end of meal is the debt ceiling.

If you want to save money then you do it during the ordering time. You don't get to order a steak, eat it, then go "Oh my Gosh, Steak is so expensive, I think I'm going to leave the restaurant without paying!" That's just irresponsible. Congress authorized a budget is now deciding they don't want to pay for it. And much like there are consequences of walking out of a check on a restaurant, there are consequences for not raising the debt ceiling. The whole world suffers.

 

[Texashiker]

Think of it like going to dinner at a restaurant. You order your food, then at the end you get a check and pay it. Paying for the bill at the end of meal is the debt ceiling.

Example #1 - Think of it like this, your department at work spends its entire yearly budget in one month.

You go to your boss, tell him/her you spent the yearly budget in one month, so now you need more money to make it through the next 11 months.

Chances are you will be fired.

Example #2 - Your credit card is maxed out, but you go out to eat anyway. When the waiter drops the bill off at the table you call the credit card company and ask them to raise your spending limit.

Maybe you should not have gone out to eat if you had reached your spending limit.

That is what congress is doing to us, and we argue to increase the budget?

The federal reserve is not the governments blank check. We do not get to print money out of thin air without something to back it up.

 

[michal1980]

Exceptionally dense and obstinate ATM, I see. Congress authorized the spending with appropriations bills, but now Teahadists refuse to honor those obligations.

They helped pass the appropriation bills, didn't they? Or do you & they deny that simple fact?

So what?

Can't they cut the spending instead of raising the debt ceiling?

 

[Texashiker]

So what?

Can't they cut the spending instead of raising the debt ceiling?

According to the libtards in this forum the government should be able to spend as much money as it wants.

Screw a balanced budget like the rest of us have to live by.

Screw the people who bought our debt.

Just print, print, and more print until the world runs out of ink. Maybe we should build a keystone pipeline to the federal reserve just for ink. Better yet, lets just build an ink factory next door.

 

[kia75]

Think of it like this, your department at work spends its entire yearly budget in one month.

You go to your boss, tell him/her you spent the yearly budget in one month, so now you need more money to make it through the next 11 months.

Chances are you will be fired.

That is what congress is doing to us, and we argue to increase the budget?

Except that your metaphor is completely and utterly wrong. It'd be more accurate if you said that you are given a budget, expect a certain amount of money, make plans for using that money and then suddenly your boss tells you he's decided not to pay the rest of the budget.

That's the thing, the budget is set at the beginning, the money is already spent, it the paying of the thing that's being put into jeopardy.