PDA

View Full Version : Economics The Debt Ceiling: State your case.....


talastan
04-21-2011, 10:15 AM
I'm trying to get a more educated understanding as to why we really should consider raising the debt ceiling. My opinion is we will be enabling the DC shopaholics to continue their :BS:


Poll forthcoming as well.....

talastan
04-21-2011, 10:19 AM
This article got me asking the question I stated in the OP.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/federal-borrowing-pace-hit-debt-limit-le

Federal Borrowing on Pace to Hit Debt Limit in Less Than Week
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
By Terence P. Jeffrey
(CNSNews.com) - Federal borrowing is on pace to hit the legal limit on the national debt in less than a week.

As set in a law passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama on Feb. 12, 2010, the legal limit on the national debt is $14.2940 trillion. As of the close of business Tuesday, according to the Daily Treasury Statement released at 4:00 pm today, the portion of the national debt subject to this legal limit was $14.268365 trillion. (The total national debt, including the portion exempted from the legal limit, was $14.3205 trillion.)

This left the U.S. Treasury with the authority to borrow only an additional $25.635 billion before it hits the statutory debt limit.

On April 4, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) in order to warn Congress that the Treasury was approaching the legal debt limit. In an appendix to this letter, Geithner pointed to the rapid pace at which new debt was accumulating.

“On average,” Geithner wrote, “the public debt of the United States increases by approximately $125 billion per month (although there are significant variations from month to month).”

In a 31-day month, $125 billion in new debt works out to an average of $4.03 billion in new debt per day. At that pace, the $25.635 billion in legal borrowing authority the Treasury had left at the close of business on Tuesday would be exhausted in less than seven days.

Geithner’s letter did not spell out the time period he used to determine that the debt increases at approximately $125 billion per month. In fact, according to the official debt figures published by the Treasury itself, the debt has been increasing at a somewhat faster pace than $125 billion per month during the Obama presidency.

On Jan. 20, 2009, the day Obama was inaugurated, the portion of the nation debt subject to the legal limit (a small portion of the debt is exempted from the limit) was $10.568142 trillion. By April 19, 2011, the portion of the national debt subject to the limit had increased to 14.268365 trillion. That means that during the first 821 days of Obama’s presidency the debt increased by $3.700223 trillion—or $4.5 billion per day.

The actual average monthly increase in the debt during Obama’s presidency has been $139.5 billion.

In fact, in the past six days, the debt has increased at a far faster pace than either the $4.03 billion per day average suggested by Secretary Geithner or the $4.5 billion per day that the Treasury has increased the debt since Obama became president. At the close of business last Wednesday, the debt subject to the limit was $ 14.211984 trillion--or $56.381 less than the debt recorded at the close of business Tuesday.

In other words, in the six days of Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, the national debt increased $56.381 billion---or almost $9.4 billion per day.

At that pace, the Treasury would exhaust its $25.635 in remaining borrowing authority in less than 3 days.

In his April 4 letter to Sen. Reid, Geithner said the Treasury was then projecting that it would hit the debt limit by May 16.

“The Treasury Department now projects that the debt limit will be reached no later than May 16, 2011,” Geithner wrote. “This is a projection based on the expected level of tax receipts, the timing of our commitments and obligations over the next several weeks, and our judgment concerning the level of cash balances we need to operate.”

Geithner also warned that this projection might change—but not to the advantage of Congress.

“Although these projections could change,” Geithner wrote, “we do not believe that they are likely to change in a way that would give Congress more time in which to act.”

When Treasury is about to reach the debt limit, the Treasury secretary can take certain extraordinary steps to stretch the Treasury’s borrow-and-spending authority. According to Geithner, however, these extraordinary measures would only give the government another $165 billion in borrowing-and-spending room.

That extra room is about what the government would typically borrow in 40 days—using Geithner’s conservative estimate that it borrows an average of $125 billion per month.

FD
04-21-2011, 10:43 AM
Of course they should, and they will. They already voted for the debt, the rest is just political grandstanding.

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 10:54 AM
No don't raise it. Cut spending 20% across the board and on top of that completely de-fund Obamacare.

Then work out how to bring troops home from Afghanistan, Libya and eventually Iraq ( No, not in a hundred years or like we stayed in Germany or Japan), close all bases down in the ME and central Asia. Stop war mongering. Reduce burdensome and unecessary regulations on businesses. STOP printing money and bailing any more businesses out, including foreign banks.

If those demands cannot be me SHUT DOWN the govt. It is a criminal gang.

Stewie
04-21-2011, 11:00 AM
Our reps in the Federal Gov't are spineless wimps. Of course they'll raise the debt limit and quantitative easing will continue beyond June. All the talk of reducing spending and ending QE is a bunch of BS. Won't happen, can't happen.

LOCOChief
04-21-2011, 11:01 AM
• If we refuse to raise our debt ceiling by May 16, the full faith and credit of the United Stands will be very much at risk. A first effect would be that trillions of treasury securities would be dumped (sending interest rates soaring) as there are trillions of these bonds held by pension funds and insurance companies which legally cannot own the debt of an issuer in default. When this was explained, 46% of Americans still said we still shouldn’t raise our debt ceiling.

When the WSJ/NBC New pollsters then explained that it would get worse, when the pollsters follow up by telling the interviewees the consequence of bills, benefits, government salaries, and interest not getting paid, the public’s opposition in raising the debt ceiling actually increased, to 62%. Do we really want the government to default on its debt?

-The Garrett, Watts Report

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 11:01 AM
Our reps in the Federal Gov't are spineless wimps. Of course they'll raise the debt limit and quantitative easing will continue beyond June. All the talk of reducing spending and ending QE is a bunch of BS. Won't happen, can't happen.

+1

I think with enough voters with entitlement mentality it also makes it difficult for them to do so too.

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 11:02 AM
• If we refuse to raise our debt ceiling by May 16, the full faith and credit of the United Stands will be very much at risk.

Heh! Heh! As far as I'm concerned it already is at risk. They're a criminal gang.

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 11:05 AM
No don't raise it. Cut spending 20% across the board and on top of that completely de-fund Obamacare.

Then work out how to bring troops home from Afghanistan, Libya and eventually Iraq ( No, not in a hundred years or like we stayed in Germany or Japan), close all bases down in the ME and central Asia. Stop war mongering. Reduce burdensome and unecessary regulations on businesses. STOP printing money and bailing any more businesses out, including foreign banks.

If those demands cannot be me SHUT DOWN the govt. It is a criminal gang.

You truly are no longer playing with a full deck.

Have you already been committed, or is that in the works? It's official. :shake:

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 11:06 AM
You truly are no longer playing with a full deck. Have you already been committed, or is that in the works? It's official. :shake:

:LOL:LMAO You got nuthin' I see. Cutting 20% plus Obamacare is not that uncommon a position for even a Republican.

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 11:08 AM
:LOL:LMAO You got nuthin' I see.

No time to waste with the resident kook. Enjoy your stay at the assylum.

LOCOChief
04-21-2011, 11:09 AM
Speaking of default on debt from the same report I pulled this amazingly suprise nugget of info:
• What’s wrong with the BofA, and why won’t the Fed let them declare a dividend? The Wall Street Journal gives one possible reason, and it’s a shocker: More than 85% of 1.3 million mortgages from Countrywide are now at least 90 days late on their payments. It might be believable at 10%, or even 15%, but 85% delinquencies???

Wow 85%

Hydrae
04-21-2011, 11:09 AM
When I borrow money I am expected to actually, I don't know, pay it back. These guys seem to think they can keep the shell game going and pay old loans with new loan money. Eventually the pyramid will fall over.

Amnorix
04-21-2011, 11:10 AM
I don't even understand the debt limit.

You set a rule for yourself that your debt won't go beyond X, then you implement a bunch of policies to limit your income to Y, guarantee spending at Z, making it a foregone conclusion that your debt will exceed X.

Then you think to yourself, "hrm...should we raise my debt limit, or default"?

The stupidity isn't in the debt ceiling, it's in the underlying policies that put you in the position of blowing through the debt cap to begin with. You've ALREADY decided to exceed that debt cap, it was just a question of time as to when, precisely, that would occur.

vailpass
04-21-2011, 11:19 AM
I don't even understand the debt limit.

You set a rule for yourself that your debt won't go beyond X, then you implement a bunch of policies to limit your income to Y, guarantee spending at Z, making it a foregone conclusion that your debt will exceed X.

Then you think to yourself, "hrm...should we raise my debt limit, or default"?

The stupidity isn't in the debt ceiling, it's in the underlying policies that put you in the position of blowing through the debt cap to begin with. You've ALREADY decided to exceed that debt cap, it was just a question of time as to when, precisely, that would occur.

Yep. I don't know whether to LMAO or :deevee:

FD
04-21-2011, 11:25 AM
I don't even understand the debt limit.

You set a rule for yourself that your debt won't go beyond X, then you implement a bunch of policies to limit your income to Y, guarantee spending at Z, making it a foregone conclusion that your debt will exceed X.

Then you think to yourself, "hrm...should we raise my debt limit, or default"?

The stupidity isn't in the debt ceiling, it's in the underlying policies that put you in the position of blowing through the debt cap to begin with. You've ALREADY decided to exceed that debt cap, it was just a question of time as to when, precisely, that would occur.

Exactly, they already voted for the debt. What they are doing now is just political grandstanding. Voting for the debt but then not voting to allow the government to borrow that debt is just idiotic.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 11:25 AM
Quote:

“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.”

- Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), March 20, 2006

Jaric
04-21-2011, 11:29 AM
Quote:

“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.”

- Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), March 20, 2006

Well that's like totally different.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 11:30 AM
Well that's like totally different.

It is on his watch!:shrug:

Jaric
04-21-2011, 11:31 AM
You truly are no longer playing with a full deck.

Have you already been committed, or is that in the works? It's official. :shake:

What's a better definition of insanity?

Finding out a plan to fix a problem even if the plan might not be perfect?

Or...

Doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result?

Jaric
04-21-2011, 11:31 AM
It is on his watch!:shrug:

Well yes. But Bush is evil.

Stewie
04-21-2011, 11:47 AM
The dollar is below 74 at this time. Below 75 is a wake up call. Our gov't will increase the debt ceiling and they'll continue QE so it will fall further. They have to and it will. The head of China's central bank said today that they need to move away from US dollar assets. China is already using their dollar assets to buy resources that are useful to their growth. That buying is from the BRICS nations, not the US.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 11:47 AM
You truly are no longer playing with a full deck.

Have you already been committed, or is that in the works? It's official. :shake:

I know you want Obama to succeed , but seriously, what did she say that wasn't part of our problem with the debt?

Next time you when you say committed, try looking into the mirror.

Obama is doing nothing but trying to spend his way to prosperity!

Say it with me, It Can't Be Done.

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 11:49 AM
What's a better definition of insanity?

Finding out a plan to fix a problem even if the plan might not be perfect?

Or...

Doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result?

No one is arguing to keep doing the same thing, but BEP's "solution" is a complete joke.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 11:49 AM
The dollar is below 74 at this time. Below 75 is a wake up call. Our gov't will increase the debt ceiling and they'll continue QE so it will fall further. They have to and it will. The head of China's central bank said today that they need to move away from US dollar assets. China is already using their dollar assets to buy resources that are useful to their growth. That buying is from the BRICS nations, not the US.


Raise it.
Spend more .
Borrow more to cover cost.
More debt.


Got it.:huh:

chiefsnorth
04-21-2011, 11:50 AM
Nothing substantive will happen until Obama is gone or Congress either goes 2/3 republican or back to democrat. Unfortunately the republicans aren't smart enough to avoid being hustled and don't have the spine to make Obama change the course he's put us on.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 11:50 AM
No one is arguing to keep doing the same thing, but BEP's "solution" is a complete joke.

Seriously, it had a lot of valid points.

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 11:51 AM
I know you want Obama to succeed , but seriously, what did she say that wasn't part of our problem with the debt?

Next time you when you say committed, try looking into the mirror.

Obama is doing nothing but trying to spend his way to prosperity!

Say it with me, It Can't Be Done.

Roy....you aren't quite in BEP's neighborhood on this. Reasonable people can disagree, but the issue will never be solved by only addressing it through cuts to spending. If it's to be solved, it will come as a result of concessions from both sides of the ledger.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 11:54 AM
Roy....you aren't quite in BEP's neighborhood on this. Reasonable people can disagree, but the issue will never be solved by only addressing it through cuts to spending. If it's to be solved, it will come as a result of concessions from both sides of the ledger.

I've been on record about cutting spending and taxing where we can.

It's the only real solution. But to BEP's assessment, I can not fault any of her spending cuts.

But as I said, Obama wants to spend our way to prosperity, I have never seen it happen outside of a World War.

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 11:56 AM
Doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result?

That and not knowing the difference between right and wrong.

Stewie
04-21-2011, 11:57 AM
Roy....you aren't quite in BEP's neighborhood on this. Reasonable people can disagree, but the issue will never be solved by only addressing it through cuts to spending. If it's to be solved, it will come as a result of concessions from both sides of the ledger.

Concessions? The mess we're in can only be solved by broad cuts in spending. The problem is that the majority of Americans are suckling at the teet of real taxpayers.

Sure, we can cut nothing and watch the dollar go right down the shitter. The reason the dollar is losing value is because we're trying the "concession" option. It's not an option and the rest of the world knows it.

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 11:57 AM
Seriously, it had a lot of valid points.

Thank you. Like a true Soviet, Kotter chooses attacking one's sanity for an argument. If he were in charge he'd send a bunch of us off to Siberia for treatment. LMAO;)

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 11:58 AM
Concessions? The mess we're in can only be solved by broad cuts in spending. The problem is that the majority of Americans are suckling at the teet of real taxpayers.

Sure, we can cut nothing and watch the dollar go right down the shitter. The reason the dollar is losing value is because we're trying the "concession" option. It's not an option and the rest of the world knows it.

And the dollar losing value makes imports more expensive—like OIL!

mlyonsd
04-21-2011, 11:59 AM
Exactly, they already voted for the debt. What they are doing now is just political grandstanding. Voting for the debt but then not voting to allow the government to borrow that debt is just idiotic.

Not everyone voted for increased spending. Those that didn't have a fundamental right to vote against raising the debt limit. It's not idiotic in the least.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 12:00 PM
Currently, we have this!

Elspeth Reeve Elspeth Reeve – Thu Apr 21, 9:18 am ET

Republicans are promising to block the raising of the federal debt limit--which could cause the U.S. to default on its debt--if Democrats don't offer major concessions on spending cuts and long term measures to change the way the federal budget is crafted. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Republicans "will not grant their request for a debt limit increase" without big concessions from Democrats, "a clear escalation in the long-running Washington spending war,"

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 12:00 PM
I've been on record about cutting spending and taxing where we can.

It's the only real solution. But to BEP's assessment, I can not fault any of her spending cuts.

Responsible cuts based on serious re-examination of priorities, coupled with serious reforms, are essential; draconian cuts to gut national security and the social safety net don't qualify. A combination of responsible cuts, and raising revenue in a responsible way is the only way we will ever fix it.

It's also the only way we will ever get past the divisive, bitter, and insane rhetoric that is being tossed around by the lunatic fringe on both sides of the political spectrum.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 12:02 PM
OK, we do not raise it, we lose our credit rating, the dollar stumbles, cost of living goes through the roof.

We raise it, we go deeper in debt, longer to climb out, if at all?

Pick your poison folks.

Jaric
04-21-2011, 12:08 PM
Roy....you aren't quite in BEP's neighborhood on this. Reasonable people can disagree, but the issue will never be solved by only addressing it through cuts to spending. If it's to be solved, it will come as a result of concessions from both sides of the ledger.

Why? The issue is that we spend too much. If the problem can be solved without raising taxes why wouldn't we go about it that way?

wazu
04-21-2011, 12:17 PM
When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

Jaric
04-21-2011, 12:19 PM
Responsible cuts based on serious re-examination of priorities, coupled with serious reforms, are essential; draconian cuts to gut national security and the social safety net don't qualify. A combination of responsible cuts, and raising revenue in a responsible way is the only way we will ever fix it.

It's also the only way we will ever get past the divisive, bitter, and insane rhetoric that is being tossed around by the lunatic fringe on both sides of the political spectrum.

You do realize the things you've placed off limits account for the vast majority of the budget right? Which in other words means you aren't serious about cutting spending.

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 12:26 PM
When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

What?

You mean we don't get to see the back side of the hole they are digging ?

HonestChieffan
04-21-2011, 12:28 PM
In theory Id say no to raising the ceiling. But as I understand it and I may be wrong, the money has been spent so this is really an after the fact issue. That said I would force the administration over a barrel on this one. They are the ones who have positioned not raising it as the end of the world so hold them to it and make them come forward with dramatic needed cuts in spending and as the opportunity arises, lower the debt ceiling as the cuts are made.

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 12:38 PM
OK, we do not raise it, we lose our credit rating, the dollar stumbles, cost of living goes through the roof.

We raise it, we go deeper in debt, longer to climb out, if at all?

Pick your poison folks.

False dichotomy. It's not an either/or situation. Cuts (even across the board, just not radical,) coupled with targeted reasonable tax increases--perhaps across the board too. And, yes, I'm on board for those who don't pay anything, at least kicking in a symbolic amount at a minimum.


You do realize the things you've placed off limits account for the vast majority of the budget right? Which in other words means you aren't serious about cutting spending.

It's a difference of degree: cuts, yes, draconian cuts, no.

donkhater
04-21-2011, 12:39 PM
First the whole concept of a debt ceiling is entirely bogus if it is imperitive that it is raised each and everytime we approach the limit.

One of two things should happen:

1. Abolish the debt ceiling. Be honest about it. Why not raise it to $100 trillion if no one wishes to abide by it? If the US will default on its debt if we don't raise it, then raise it to where we theoretically can't touch it.

What kind of signal would that be to our creditors, eh? Which lead us to option #2.....

2. Abide by the spending limit that congress agreed to abide bywhen they raised it the prior time they voted on it. Reneging on that agreement does as much harm (albeit slower and less obvious) than not raising the ceiling.

Geithner has full discretion on how to allocate government funds so as to satisfy creditors. His biggest problem this time is that interest rates are about to skyrocket, which means a larger chunk of the budget will go to paying off debt. All the more reason to swallow the pill now, when austerity measures won't hurt as much as they will when the dollar totally collapses.

Jaric
04-21-2011, 12:45 PM
False dichotomy. It's not an either/or situation. Cuts (even across the board, just not radical,) coupled with targeted reasonable tax increases--perhaps across the board too. And, yes, I'm on board for those who don't pay anything, at least kicking in a symbolic amount at a minimum.




It's a difference of degree: cuts, yes, draconian cuts, no.

You consider a 20% cut draconian?

Stewie
04-21-2011, 12:49 PM
First the whole concept of a debt ceiling is entirely bogus if it is imperitive that it is raised each and everytime we approach the limit.

One of two things should happen:

1. Abolish the debt ceiling. Be honest about it. Why not raise it to $100 trillion if no one wishes to abide by it? If the US will default on its debt if we don't raise it, then raise it to where we theoretically can't touch it.

What kind of signal would that be to our creditors, eh? Which lead us to option #2.....

2. Abide by the spending limit that congress agreed to abide bywhen they raised it the prior time they voted on it. Reneging on that agreement does as much harm (albeit slower and less obvious) than not raising the ceiling.

Geithner has full discretion on how to allocate government funds so as to satisfy creditors. His biggest problem this time is that interest rates are about to skyrocket, which means a larger chunk of the budget will go to paying off debt. All the more reason to swallow the pill now, when austerity measures won't hurt as much as they will when the dollar totally collapses.

+1

"I'm a heroin addict and I promise after my next fix I'll stop."

donkhater
04-21-2011, 12:50 PM
For all the people out there that believe that the U.S. will automatically default on their debt if the ceiling isn't raised, ask yourself this....

Why does the party in the White House always advocate raising the ceiling and the minority party in Congress usually huff and puff against raising it?

Answer: All politicians love to spend money without constraint. The party in power has the credit card and wants to use it, while the party out of power wants to restrain that in some way. That and it makes them seem like they are fiscally responsible without risking that the debt limit actually isn't raised.

Congress and the Fed are doing just fine destroying the wealth in this country. It is time a check was put on their power.

Stewie
04-21-2011, 12:50 PM
False dichotomy. It's not an either/or situation. Cuts (even across the board, just not radical,) coupled with targeted reasonable tax increases--perhaps across the board too.


You realize our debt can never be repaid, right? That means EVER!

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 12:53 PM
You consider a 20% cut draconian?

For some budget items, yes; for others, not really.

You realize our debt can never be repaid, right? That means EVER!

Elaborate, please....

Jaric
04-21-2011, 01:03 PM
For some budget items, yes; for others, not really.
Considering that a 20% cut across the board won't even come close to balencing this year's budget, I think you're going to have to reevaluate what you consider draconian.

Our current budget is about 3.5 trillion dollars. Of that, Medicare, medicaid, social security, and defense spending accounts for about 2.2 trillion of that.

If you aren't willing to make serious cuts to of those programs, you aren't serious about cutting spending. And even the 20% that BEP proposed which you think is insane wouldn't be near enough to balence the budget. At this is all before the obamination of a health care bill goes into effect.

EDIT: That's just to balance the budget. We haven't even started to figure out how we are going to pay back the 14+ trillion dollars we are already in the hole.

chiefsnorth
04-21-2011, 01:04 PM
I know the far left playbook here is to say "we want reform, but we don't want draconian cuts" and then proceed to call any cut other than on defense spending "draconian", "immoral" and every other name in the book. But:

We know that Obama said FDR had the right idea on the great depression except he didn't spend enough and he didn't spend fast enough. Does anyone believe he is serious about cutting anything? Is there anyone drawing breath in the world who believes what he is saying? So why even play ball when you know he has no intention of keeping his word?

HonestChieffan
04-21-2011, 01:18 PM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-pzMy-2tePi0/Ta6mXEUzk2I/AAAAAAABA8M/yoG93DR6cE0/s1600/ATT00001.jpeg

ROYC75
04-21-2011, 01:23 PM
We have already seen Obama , the Dem's with an open credit card at work.

Need we see more ?

KC Dan
04-21-2011, 01:39 PM
Considering that a 20% cut across the board won't even come close to balencing this year's budget, I think you're going to have to reevaluate what you consider draconian.

Our current budget is about 3.5 trillion dollars. Of that, Medicare, medicaid, social security, and defense spending accounts for about 2.2 trillion of that.

If you aren't willing to make serious cuts to of those programs, you aren't serious about cutting spending. And even the 20% that BEP proposed which you think is insane wouldn't be near enough to balence the budget. At this is all before the obamination of a health care bill goes into effect.

EDIT: That's just to balance the budget. We haven't even started to figure out how we are going to pay back the 14+ trillion dollars we are already in the hole.btw, a 20% cut wouldn't even get us to 2008 budget spending levels. So going back to 2008 budget spending levels is draconian? Yeah, right Mr. Kotter

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 01:52 PM
Considering that a 20% cut across the board won't even come close to balencing this year's budget, I think you're going to have to reevaluate what you consider draconian.

Our current budget is about 3.5 trillion dollars. Of that, Medicare, medicaid, social security, and defense spending accounts for about 2.2 trillion of that.

If you aren't willing to make serious cuts to of those programs, you aren't serious about cutting spending. And even the 20% that BEP proposed which you think is insane wouldn't be near enough to balence the budget. At this is all before the obamination of a health care bill goes into effect.

EDIT: That's just to balance the budget. We haven't even started to figure out how we are going to pay back the 14+ trillion dollars we are already in the hole.

My view is over the long term; it certainly isn't going to be fixed in 1 or 2 years, that's true. I've never contended otherwise.

btw, a 20% cut wouldn't even get us to 2008 budget spending levels. So going back to 2008 budget spending levels is draconian? Yeah, right Mr. Kotter

Given the economy, and the hit on government's ability to raise revenue....times are tough. As the economy rebounds, that....and raising revenue to close the gap will, eventually, pull us out of these tough times. Unless, of course, the right is able to sell the tired old economics of trickle-down to the public, again.

HonestChieffan
04-21-2011, 01:55 PM
My view is over the long term; it certainly isn't going to be fixed in 1 or 2 years, that's true. I've never contended otherwise.


Took 3 years from 2008 to 2011. Id be cool with hitting 2008 levels over the next three years with a mandated spending cap/debt ceiling reduction

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 01:59 PM
Took 3 years from 2008 to 2011. Id be cool with hitting 2008 levels over the next three years with a mandated spending cap/debt ceiling reduction

Digging out of the recession, with the current restraints on the ablility to increase revenues, makes that a very ambitious approach.

KC Dan
04-21-2011, 02:03 PM
Given the economy, and the hit on government's ability to raise revenue....times are tough. As the economy rebounds, that....and raising revenue to close the gap will, eventually, pull us out of these tough times. Unless, of course, the right is able to sell the tired old economics of trickle-down to the public, again.So, your ok with keeping spending at these unsustainable and ridiculously high levels vs. 2008 levels because "Given the economy, and the hit on government's ability to raise revenue....times are tough." Just jack taxes, hang out and wait for the economy to recover? Really? How fast do you think the economy will recover when job creators have their taxes jacked?

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 02:19 PM
YES WE CAN!



LMAO

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 02:22 PM
So, your ok with keeping spending at these unsustainable and ridiculously high levels vs. 2008 levels because "Given the economy, and the hit on government's ability to raise revenue....times are tough." Just jack taxes, hang out and wait for the economy to recover? Really? How fast do you think the economy will recover when job creators have their taxes jacked?

Deficit spending in recessionary times, historically, has worked to stabilize the economy. The biggest problem we have is: during boom times, we continue to spend like drunken sailors (rather than paying off debt)....and we continue to insist on ever lower taxes. Modest targeted tax hikes--for everyone, as far as I'm concerned, have to be a part of the solution.

Are job creators above sharing in the pain?

Spend in tough times to keep the ship afloat; but then you have to pay the piper in good times...isn't rocket science. However, neither party every seems willing to ever pay the piper.

KC Dan
04-21-2011, 02:28 PM
Deficit spending in recessionary times, historically, has worked to stabilize the economy. The biggest problem we have is during boom times, we continue to spend like drunken sailors (rather than paying off debt)....and we continue to insist on ever lower taxes.

Spend in tough times to keep the ship afloat; but then you have to pay the piper in good times...isn't rocket science. However, neither party every seems willing to ever pay the piper.I am going to put this in nice large type for all:

We are NOT in recession, no need to increase gov't spending. It ended Q3-2009 and has expanded every quarter since.

Q3 2009 GDP: 1.6% (Was 2.2%)


Advance Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/10/29/recession-is-over-thanks-to-stimulus.htm) - The economy grew 3.5%, which meant that technically the recession (http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossdomesticproduct/f/Recession.htm) was over.
Second Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/11/24/economy-only-grew-2-8.htm) - Growth was revised down to 2.8%.
Third Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/12/22/economy-not-growing-enough-to-create-jobs.htm) - Growth was revised down to 2.2%.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/economicindicators/a/GDP-statistics.htm

Stewie
04-21-2011, 02:38 PM
I am going to put this in nice large type for all:

We are NOT in recession, no need to increase gov't spending. It ended Q3-2009 and has expanded every quarter since.

Q3 2009 GDP: 1.6% (Was 2.2%)


Advance Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/10/29/recession-is-over-thanks-to-stimulus.htm) - The economy grew 3.5%, which meant that technically the recession (http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossdomesticproduct/f/Recession.htm) was over.
Second Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/11/24/economy-only-grew-2-8.htm) - Growth was revised down to 2.8%.
Third Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/12/22/economy-not-growing-enough-to-create-jobs.htm) - Growth was revised down to 2.2%.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/economicindicators/a/GDP-statistics.htm

The joker!

KC Dan
04-21-2011, 02:53 PM
The joker!People call me the space cowboy, yeah...

cdcox
04-21-2011, 03:06 PM
We shouldn't pay our interest on our debt? I thought everyone here was in favor of accountability?

"Conservatives: Fuck accountability"

Cave Johnson
04-21-2011, 03:11 PM
As expected, the majority on here are absolute f'ing morons with a fatalist streak and/or tenuous grasp on reality.

Jaric
04-21-2011, 03:13 PM
As expected, the majority on here are absolute f'ing morons with a fatalist streak and/or tenuous grasp on reality.

If you have a suggestion on how to make up a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit, by all means enlighten us.

Cave Johnson
04-21-2011, 03:13 PM
OK, we do not raise it, we lose our credit rating, the dollar stumbles, cost of living goes through the roof.

We raise it, we go deeper in debt, longer to climb out, if at all?

Pick your poison folks.

If by stumbles you mean implodes, then yes.

Stewie
04-21-2011, 03:15 PM
Obama has put together a team to understand why gas is $4/gallon. The guy is a complete dumbass!

Cave Johnson
04-21-2011, 03:26 PM
If you have a suggestion on how to make up a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit, by all means enlighten us.

I'm not going to throw out a 500 point plan, but the gist is spending cuts and tax increases, in that order. We can't continue to afford to lock up 1 out every 100 Americans, so the drug war should be significantly scaled back. Tax everything except the most societally destructive drugs. Take an axe to the military-industrial complex.

Increase the payroll tax cutoff, means test retirement benefits and Medicare. Speaking of which, Medicare spends way, way too much on end-of-life care. I'd endorse this plan, but the radical right would just say we're promoting death panels.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/a-modest-proposal-on-healthcare-costs.html

Etc.

Radar Chief
04-21-2011, 03:27 PM
People call me the space cowboy, yeah...

Some call me Maurice.

Jaric
04-21-2011, 03:31 PM
I'm not going to throw out a 500 point plan, but the gist is spending cuts and tax increases, in that order. We can't continue to afford to lock up 1 out every 100 Americans, so the drug war should be significantly scaled back. Tax everything except the most societally destructive drugs. Take an axe to the military-industrial complex.

Increase the payroll tax cutoff, means test retirement benefits and Medicare. Speaking of which, Medicare spends way, way too much on end-of-life care. I'd endorse this plan, but the radical right would just say we're promoting death panels.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/a-modest-proposal-on-healthcare-costs.html

Etc.
Sounds good.

Do you have any hope that happens unless Uncle Sam is forced to do it?

Cave Johnson
04-21-2011, 03:36 PM
Sounds good.

Do you have any hope that happens unless Uncle Sam is forced to do it?

None at all. We're being governed by the baby boomers (i.e., children).*

*Which is probably a reflection of the magical thinking of the public. No one is willing to accept either tax increases or significant spending cuts. Seriously, that generation can suck it.

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 03:42 PM
None at all. We're being governed by the baby boomers (i.e., children).*

*Which is probably a reflection of the magical thinking of the public. No one is willing to accept either tax increases or significant spending cuts. Seriously, that generation can suck it.

It's multiple generations.

Cave Johnson
04-21-2011, 03:44 PM
It's multiple generations.

Sure, but on average, they're boomers.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-01-05-new-congress_N.htm

Stewie
04-21-2011, 03:45 PM
None at all. We're being governed by the baby boomers (i.e., children).*

*Which is probably a reflection of the magical thinking of the public. No one is willing to accept either tax increases or significant spending cuts. Seriously, that generation can suck it.

Baby boomers have taken a huge hit. I work with them and they try and try to make things work. When you think all is well and everything is pulled out from under you it sucks. Life is easy when looking from the outside. Those baby-boomers are now having to work to 70 to make things work for their families.

HonestChieffan
04-21-2011, 03:47 PM
Baby boomers have taken a huge hit. I work with them and they try and try to make things work. When you think all is well and everything is pulled out from under you it sucks. Life is easy when looking from the outside. Those baby-boomers are now having to work to 70 to make things work for their families.


And they are the rich. So they pay all the taxes.

Cave Johnson
04-21-2011, 03:52 PM
Baby boomers have taken a huge hit. I work with them and they try and try to make things work. When you think all is well and everything is pulled out from under you it sucks. Life is easy when looking from the outside. Those baby-boomers are now having to work to 70 to make things work for their families.

It's under their watch that the costs of health care and education spiraled out of control. It's especially under their watch that the national debt tripled over the last decade. Seriously, f**k those guys with a rusty knife.

That's what happens when half of the political spectrum believes in the absolute bullshit principle that tax cuts automatically increase revenue, the other half think there should be no limits on the strength of the social net, and all of them feel deficits don't matter.

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 05:24 PM
I am going to put this in nice large type for all:

We are NOT in recession, no need to increase gov't spending. It ended Q3-2009 and has expanded every quarter since.

Q3 2009 GDP: 1.6% (Was 2.2%)


Advance Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/10/29/recession-is-over-thanks-to-stimulus.htm) - The economy grew 3.5%, which meant that technically the recession (http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossdomesticproduct/f/Recession.htm) was over.
Second Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/11/24/economy-only-grew-2-8.htm) - Growth was revised down to 2.8%.
Third Report (http://useconomy.about.com/b/2009/12/22/economy-not-growing-enough-to-create-jobs.htm) - Growth was revised down to 2.2%.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/economicindicators/a/GDP-statistics.htm

Seriously? This economy is still very shaky; at-risk for a double-dip.

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 05:26 PM
We shouldn't pay our interest on our debt? I thought everyone here was in favor of accountability?

"Conservatives: **** accountability"

Pretty much.... :shake:

KC Dan
04-21-2011, 05:27 PM
Seriously? This economy is still very shaky; at-risk for a double-dip.What part of my post was inaccurate?

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 05:28 PM
I'm not going to throw out a 500 point plan, but the gist is spending cuts and tax increases, in that order. We can't continue to afford to lock up 1 out every 100 Americans, so the drug war should be significantly scaled back. Tax everything except the most societally destructive drugs. Take an axe to the military-industrial complex.

Increase the payroll tax cutoff, means test retirement benefits and Medicare. Speaking of which, Medicare spends way, way too much on end-of-life care. I'd endorse this plan, but the radical right would just say we're promoting death panels.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/a-modest-proposal-on-healthcare-costs.html

Etc.

THIS

Holy crap....am I really doing this????


:huh:

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 05:30 PM
What part of my post was inaccurate?

You forgot the part about....corporations, banks and real estate types, and business, telling us they are hoarding record profits, and suppressing wages and "re-investment" because they believe the economy is still suspect---even as they book their third cruise for the year.

That's how they seem to be justifying their own ascent back to prosperity, while leaving the rest of us in their wake. That's precisely how it looks from "behind." Just sayin'....

:shrug:

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 05:34 PM
None at all. We're being governed by the baby boomers (i.e., children).*

*Which is probably a reflection of the magical thinking of the public. No one is willing to accept either tax increases or significant spending cuts. Seriously, that generation can suck it.

THIS

Wow...holy crap....I'm in an episode of Twilight Zone. Surely the universe is about to explode....

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 05:37 PM
It's multiple generations.

Mostly the Boomers; there are just so damn many of us. And we really do suck.

Self-absorbed navel gazers. 80% of us anyway. And we've passed it on to our kids. :shake:

KC Dan
04-21-2011, 05:41 PM
You forgot the part about....corporations, banks and real estate types, and business, telling us they are hoarding record profits, and suppressing wages and "re-investment" because they believe the economy is still suspect---even as they book their third cruise for the year.

That's how they seem to be justifying their own ascent back to prosperity, while leaving the rest of us in their wake. That's precisely how it looks from "behind." Just sayin'....

:shrug:Hey, most here would probably say that I am one of them and that is fine with me. I make a good dollar and am I hoarding? You damn right I am. I have little to zero faith that our gov't is going to get us out of this debt mess or set the proper conditions to make us a world economic leader again.

I have doubled my staff in the past year and to tell you the truth, it was very hard to do so. We are getting taxed to the bejezus because we can't right off things like R&D and other things that big companies can because we don't have those items. Our company health care costs have exploded since "The Affordable Health Care....." crap passed. I have three temps right now that I would like to turn permanent but am not because it costs too damn much and I have no confidence that our costs (taxes, health, ect..) are not going to explode again in 2012.

So, I guess that looks from "behind" as horrid and mean-spirited. So what. A cruise is a lot cheaper than betting on a very real losing economy at the moment. In addition, working 60-80 hour weeks deserves a good cruise instead of sitting at home collecting unemployment. (ok, that was a little over the top)

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-21-2011, 05:45 PM
1/3 of Medicare costs are spent in the last six months of life. We really do need to realize the importance of palliative care over a hopeless attempt at curative therapy.

I have no problem with raising taxes across the board. I don't recall many wealthy individuals stopping investment whenever the top marginal rate was 39% during the tech boom. Taxes should be bumped up for every strata, but those who have had theirs cut the most, and who have had the economy hurt them the least, and whose wealth outpaces everyone else should kick in the biggest portion of the tax increase.

The SS cutoff should be cut to 5% and the cap should be pushed up to $2million. That cuts payroll taxes for the vast majority of Americans and increases solvency of the system.

Defense spending should be cut by a third. There is no department with more redundant and unnecessary procurements than DoD.

mlyonsd
04-21-2011, 06:02 PM
Mostly the Boomers; there are just so damn many of us. And we really do suck.

Self-absorbed navel gazers. 80% of us anyway. And we've passed it on to our kids. :shake:Good God. You don't have a clue.

Jaric
04-21-2011, 06:16 PM
None at all. We're being governed by the baby boomers (i.e., children).*

*Which is probably a reflection of the magical thinking of the public. No one is willing to accept either tax increases or significant spending cuts. Seriously, that generation can suck it.

Ah. So I see we're on pretty much the same page here.

mlyonsd
04-21-2011, 06:17 PM
It's under their watch that the costs of health care and education spiraled out of control. It's especially under their watch that the budget deficits tripled over the last decade. Seriously, f**k those guys with a rusty knife.

That's what happens when half of the political spectrum believes in the absolute bullshit principle that tax cuts automatically increase revenue, the other half think there should be no limits on the strength of the social net, and all of them feel deficits don't matter.

This is a pretty solid post. The only exception is I'd rather go with cyanide than a rusty knife.

The one piece of evidence I'd like to present to the court is I've never, ever, bought into the global economy.

This republic has faced several crises but the two that stick out most IMO when it comes to our current fiscal problems are the progressive tax and both parties selling out to a global economy.

Jaric
04-21-2011, 06:19 PM
Mostly the Boomers; there are just so damn many of us. And we really do suck.

Self-absorbed navel gazers. 80% of us anyway. And we've passed it on to our kids. :shake:

Yeah...thanks...

:shake:

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 06:26 PM
Good God. You don't have a clue.

I know it sucks, realizing our own generation is mostly the blame for draggin' down the U.S...but's it's true. That's why you are reduced to these sorts of very lame, and non-substantive posts. Yeah, it's been going on for a few months now, and until now...I haven't called you on it. The pattern, though, is clear; you don't want to admit what you know is true.

Baby-boomers, so self-absorbed as we are, refuse to admit it, but we've reaped what we have sown; sex-drugs-rock 'n roll/"if it feels good do it" pop-psychology....has come back to bite us.

We were afraid we couldn't live up to the Greatest Generation--so we stopped trying. Me-me-me. That's what it's really all about; it's really that simple. So the pot-head, burn-out, no-brain response of "you don't have a clue" is efficient.

That's okay; I honestly believe that Generation X/The Millennials will do better than our sorry ass-ed generation of self-absorbed navel-gazers have done, so hopefully we'll recover. However, I'm embarrassed to be a part of the Boomers. Dead serious, man.

But, hey, it's all good. Woodstock was way cool, right? "Get your motor runnin'..." :toast:

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 06:31 PM
Hey, most here would probably say that I am one of them and that is fine with me. I make a good dollar and am I hoarding? You damn right I am. I have little to zero faith that our gov't is going to get us out of this debt mess or set the proper conditions to make us a world economic leader again.

I have doubled my staff in the past year and to tell you the truth, it was very hard to do so. We are getting taxed to the bejezus because we can't right off things like R&D and other things that big companies can because we don't have those items. Our company health care costs have exploded since "The Affordable Health Care....." crap passed. I have three temps right now that I would like to turn permanent but am not because it costs too damn much and I have no confidence that our costs (taxes, health, ect..) are not going to explode again in 2012.

So, I guess that looks from "behind" as horrid and mean-spirited. So what. A cruise is a lot cheaper than betting on a very real losing economy at the moment. In addition, working 60-80 hour weeks deserves a good cruise instead of sitting at home collecting unemployment. (ok, that was a little over the top)

I appreciate your honesty, Dan. Very seriously. You're a good man; and when good men are reduced to this....it tells us something about the current state of our culture and society.

Thanks for exhibit "A" to support my position...

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 06:34 PM
Yeah...thanks...

:shake:

It's shameful and embarrassing to be a part of a generation that has done this to America. :shake:

Honestly, I take some solace in the fact that some consider '63 "too late" to be part of the boomers....

mlyonsd
04-21-2011, 06:36 PM
I know it sucks, realizing our own generation is mostly the blame for draggin' down the U.S...but's it's true. That's why you are reduced to these sorts of very lame, and non-substantive posts. Yeah, it's been going on for a few months now, and until now...I haven't called you on it. The pattern, though, is clear; you don't want to admit what you know is true.

Baby-boomers, so self-absorbed as we are, refuse to admit it, but we've reaped what we have sown; sex-drugs-rock 'n roll/"if it feels good do it" pop-psychology....has come back to bite us.

We were afraid we couldn't live up to the Greatest Generation--so we stopped trying. Me-me-me. That's what it's really all about; it's really that simple. So the pot-head, burn-out, no-brain response of "you don't have a clue" is efficient.

That's okay; I honestly believe that Generation X/The Millennials will do better than our sorry ass-ed generation of self-absorbed navel-gazers have done, so hopefully we'll recover. However, I'm embarrassed to be a part of the Boomers. Dead serious, man.

But, hey, it's all good. Woodstock was way cool, right? "Get your motor runnin'..." :toast:
And let it be known I was the last to climb on the Kotter is an idiot bandwagon. :toast:

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 06:37 PM
And let it be known I was the last to climb on the Kotter is an idiot bandwagon. :toast:

Dittos, Rush!!! :toast:

mlyonsd
04-21-2011, 06:42 PM
Dittos, Rush!!! :toast:I fail to see the Rush inuendo. I'm just talking as a normal guy from South Dakota.

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 06:49 PM
I fail to see the Rush inuendo. I'm just talking as a normal guy from South Dakota.

Rush/Hannity/Beck's prime audience. Congrats! :toast:

Give my regards to Governor Douchegard the next time you attend a "coffee."

1/3 of Medicare costs are spent in the last six months of life. We really do need to realize the importance of palliative care over a hopeless attempt at curative therapy.

I have no problem with raising taxes across the board. I don't recall many wealthy individuals stopping investment whenever the top marginal rate was 39% during the tech boom. Taxes should be bumped up for every strata, but those who have had theirs cut the most, and who have had the economy hurt them the least, and whose wealth outpaces everyone else should kick in the biggest portion of the tax increase.

The SS cutoff should be cut to 5% and the cap should be pushed up to $2million. That cuts payroll taxes for the vast majority of Americans and increases solvency of the system.

Defense spending should be cut by a third. There is no department with more redundant and unnecessary procurements than DoD.

THIS

WoodDraw
04-21-2011, 06:55 PM
eh, nevermind...too slow

mlyonsd
04-21-2011, 07:13 PM
THIS

Finally, a DA liberal acknowledging death panels should exist.

dirk digler
04-21-2011, 07:26 PM
If you have a suggestion on how to make up a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit, by all means enlighten us.

I would follow Obama's or someone else's reasonable plan to cut spending, get rid of the Bush tax cuts (they have cost us $1.8 trillion), bump up the top rate to 40% and increase everyone else's rate by 2% for temporary period (2-3 years max).

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 08:07 PM
Finally, a DA liberal acknowledging death panels should exist.

Finally, a dittohead acknowledging they prefer extending the lives of the dying by 6 months with taxpayer dollars...to enrich health care industry barons portfolios.

Because Boomers have earned it. Damn it. :toast:

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 08:36 PM
1/3 of Medicare costs are spent in the last six months of life. We really do need to realize the importance of palliative care over a hopeless attempt at curative therapy...


Too bad your words that are lost on self-absorbed navel-gazers....and most Boomers, it seems, Hamas. Hospice care is so misunderstood and under-valued in our society.

In the words of my dying father, last year...."Why the hell would I do that---hang on for 4 or 5 months, so they can open me up....remove the cancer, to then live in ICU on a ventilator, on an IV...so drugged that I sleep 15-20 hours a day. No thanks. Let me go. I love you all, but it's my time." The nurses and social workers, every one, expressed utter disbelief that a man of my father's origins....was endowed with such wisdom. I'm ashamed to admit, it was something I would not have even expected.

For such a simple man, he captured the essence of our current dilemma in a way I never would have expected. God bless you, dad; you are missed.

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 10:18 PM
The one problem I have with the Greatest Generation is that they believed and did everything the govt told them. Including that they needed FDR to save them during the Great Depression. LOL! That's just like being a ditto-head too.

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 10:21 PM
1/3 of Medicare costs are spent in the last six months of life. We really do need to realize the importance of palliative care over a hopeless attempt at curative therapy.
Well, I can't say I disagree with this.


I do have a problem with raising taxes across the board though because more and more taxes means less liberty and that hinders an economy.

BucEyedPea
04-21-2011, 10:23 PM
It's under their watch that the costs of health care and education spiraled out of control. It's especially under their watch that the national debt tripled over the last decade. Seriously, f**k those guys with a rusty knife.

That's what happens when half of the political spectrum believes in the absolute bullshit principle that tax cuts automatically increase revenue, the other half think there should be no limits on the strength of the social net, and all of them feel deficits don't matter.

Oh bullshit! The left wing politicians wanted these programs! Their ignorance of economics is merely showing. They consistently promised lower numbers in their ignorance. It also corrupts the people. Yet, you want more of the same things while bitching about boomers. Do you really expect a different result by wanting the same in greater amounts for more people?

Mr. Kotter
04-21-2011, 10:31 PM
The one problem I have with the Greatest Generation is that they believed and did everything the govt told them. Including that they needed FDR to save them during the Great Depression. LOL! That's just like being a ditto-head too.

You are a caricature of yourself and Ayn Rand...and TJ. FDR and the New Deal were not the savior some claim, yet they righted the ship....as evidenced by his land-slide victories in 1936-40-44. Americans living at the time, not revisionist whack-job historians, seemed to think he did the right thing. I'll accept their judgement over your ideologically-tinged extremism..... any day.

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-22-2011, 12:27 AM
Too bad your words that are lost on self-absorbed navel-gazers....and most Boomers, it seems, Hamas. Hospice care is so misunderstood and under-valued in our society.

In the words of my dying father, last year...."Why the hell would I do that---hang on for 4 or 5 months, so they can open me up....remove the cancer, to then live in ICU on a ventilator, on an IV...so drugged that I sleep 15-20 hours a day. No thanks. Let me go. I love you all, but it's my time." The nurses and social workers, every one, expressed utter disbelief that a man of my father's origins....was endowed with such wisdom. I'm ashamed to admit, it was something I would not have even expected.

For such a simple man, he captured the essence of our current dilemma in a way I never would have expected. God bless you, dad; you are missed.

Had an almost identical experience with my grandmother, who had kidney cancer that metastasized to her lungs. What's the point in having someone shrivel away in an ICU at the cost of thousands of dollars per day? The quality of care you are getting is not better at that point. MRIs, CTs, or PET scans aren't going to make a difference. Once her oral chemo stopped working ($14k per month for the uninsured, FWIW), the outcome was not in doubt, so she stayed at home, and the nurses, caregivers, and my family made her as comfortable as possible in her last days.

Amnorix
04-22-2011, 05:58 AM
Currently, we have this!

Elspeth Reeve Elspeth Reeve – Thu Apr 21, 9:18 am ET

Republicans are promising to block the raising of the federal debt limit--which could cause the U.S. to default on its debt--if Democrats don't offer major concessions on spending cuts and long term measures to change the way the federal budget is crafted. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Republicans "will not grant their request for a debt limit increase" without big concessions from Democrats, "a clear escalation in the long-running Washington spending war,"


That's the MAD option, and I don't believe it for a tenth of a second. It's an empty threat.

Jaric
04-22-2011, 06:42 AM
I would follow Obama's or someone else's reasonable plan to cut spending

Is this the same Obama whose "plans" will cause spending to skyrocket (even by our standards) in the next few years?

And I'm ok with getting rid of the Bush tax cuts, as long as you seperate those from small businesses. Taxing them more isn't going to help anything.

Mr. Kotter
04-22-2011, 09:43 AM
Had an almost identical experience with my grandmother, who had kidney cancer that metastasized to her lungs. What's the point in having someone shrivel away in an ICU at the cost of thousands of dollars per day? The quality of care you are getting is not better at that point. MRIs, CTs, or PET scans aren't going to make a difference. Once her oral chemo stopped working ($14k per month for the uninsured, FWIW), the outcome was not in doubt, so she stayed at home, and the nurses, caregivers, and my family made her as comfortable as possible in her last days.

It's also the way I'll choose to go, if I'm confronted with the same choice.

Notice the crickets our anecdotal evidence gets from self-absorbed navel-gazing Boomers, though?

:hmmm:

go bowe
04-22-2011, 12:55 PM
It's also the way I'll choose to go, if I'm confronted with the same choice.

Notice the crickets our anecdotal evidence gets from self-absorbed navel-gazing Boomers, though?

:hmmm:hey, i can't even see my navel...

Mr. Kotter
04-22-2011, 09:39 PM
hey, i can't even see my navel...

You may be a hippie, but you ain't a self-absorbed navel-gazer....you have a mind of your own, a conscience, and even a heart.

That separates you from "them." Just sayin'. Heh.

:toast:

go bowe
04-22-2011, 10:34 PM
You may be a hippie, but you ain't a self-absorbed navel-gazer....you have a mind of your own, a conscience, and even a heart.

That separates you from "them." Just sayin'. Heh.

:toast:
jeeze, you're making me blush here...

btw, technically speaking, i'm a hippie refugee... :Peace: :Peace: :Peace:

The Mad Crapper
05-15-2011, 01:50 PM
"The fact that we're here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. Leadership means '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. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit."

~Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill 2006


President Barack Obama warned Congress that failing to raise the U.S. debt limit could lead to a worse financial crisis and economic recession than 2008-09 if investors began doubting U.S. credit-worthiness.

"If investors around the world thought that the full faith and credit of the United States was not being backed up, if they thought that we might renege on our IOUs, it could unravel the entire financial system," Obama told a CBS News town-hall meeting.

B.O. 2011

http://badattitudes.com/MT/pantload.jpg

Chocolate Hog
05-15-2011, 03:00 PM
Don't raise it. It's been denied before and we were fine. I don't believe that it will cause the economy to collapse.

Chocolate Hog
05-15-2011, 03:02 PM
"The fact that we're here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. Leadership means '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. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit."

~Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill 2006


President Barack Obama warned Congress that failing to raise the U.S. debt limit could lead to a worse financial crisis and economic recession than 2008-09 if investors began doubting U.S. credit-worthiness.

"If investors around the world thought that the full faith and credit of the United States was not being backed up, if they thought that we might renege on our IOUs, it could unravel the entire financial system," Obama told a CBS News town-hall meeting.

B.O. 2011

http://badattitudes.com/MT/pantload.jpg


The president also said he'd cut the debt in half his first term and that unemployment would not go above 8%

Dave Lane
05-15-2011, 03:45 PM
The president also said he'd cut the debt in half his first term and that unemployment would not go above 8%

And then the end of the world came.

Chocolate Hog
05-15-2011, 05:15 PM
And then the end of the world came.

And then a stagnant economy came with devaluation of the dollar leading to inflation. Good thing we spent hundreds of billions fixing nothing right?

LiveSteam
05-15-2011, 06:34 PM
And then the end of the world came.

Id like to go back to work before the world ends.

gonefishin53
05-16-2011, 04:26 PM
Our national security officials say our debt level is a threat to our national security. Since raising the debt would naturally increase the threat, it would seem treasonous to raise the debt and increase the threat to our national security.

I would not be opposed to tax increases if the revenue did not go to the general fund and could only be used to reduce current debt. Make it a felony to introduce legislation making these revenues available for any other purpose than reducing current debt. Any tax increases should improve our national security by reducing debt levels.

Limiting the power and spending authority of the Washington aristocracy should be the appropriate way for eliminating annual deficits. Decriminalizing drug use, reducing our national defense responsibilities to protecting and facilitating commerce as well as securing our borders, reducing the tax code from 55,000 pages to 5,000 words, and eliminating a lot of federal bureaucracies by moving spending authority for general welfare programs and transportation to local and state governments would go a long way towards balancing the federal budget.

cdcox
05-16-2011, 06:45 PM
Limiting the power and spending authority of the Washington aristocracy should be the appropriate way for eliminating annual deficits. Decriminalizing drug use, reducing our national defense responsibilities to protecting and facilitating commerce as well as securing our borders, reducing the tax code from 55,000 pages to 5,000 words, and eliminating a lot of federal bureaucracies by moving spending authority for general welfare programs and transportation to local and state governments would go a long way towards balancing the federal budget.

Not really. Entitlements and interest on debt consumes 100% of tax revenues by 2025. Your proposals only nibble at at the excess spending. To get back on track is going to take more than that, and it is going to hurt.

gonefishin53
05-16-2011, 07:52 PM
Not really. Entitlements and interest on debt consumes 100% of tax revenues by 2025. Your proposals only nibble at at the excess spending. To get back on track is going to take more than that, and it is going to hurt.

All government programs authorized by the words "provide for... the general welfare" in article 1 section 8 of our Constitution covers everything from the medicare program to the farm subsidies program.

I've been studying the problem of unsustainable government policies since 1980. We need more democracy (broader representation) at the state and local level and less bureaucracy at the national level. I think broad based local governments would be far more capable of determining what's best for the general welfare of local communities than a building full of federal bureaucrats in D.C. Think Los Angelos County, CA. with a 435 seat house and 100 seat senate. The federal government provides county (or similar local governments with well established boundaries) with a simple, easily administered funding source to satisfy the Constitutional requirement of federal funding. Then we have about 2,000 laboratories to learn how we can "provide for... the general welfare" in an efficient, equitable, cost effective manner instead of thousands of clueless bureaucrats in D.C. sucking up tax dollars.