NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
The Paul Ryan budget requires a raising of the debt ceiling.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So, then...
You agree that labelling the GOP congressional minority as "obstructionist" and "the party of no" was just a bunch of partisan hooey.
Right?
I said the obstructionists were Republicans and Democrats who act like Republicans.
Happy now?
So representing your constituents' interests is now considered "obstructionist"? Interesting.
I said the obstructionists were Republicans and Democrats who act like Republicans.
Happy now?
So representing your constituents' interests is now considered "obstructionist"? Interesting.
If you have an obstructionist constituency, sure.
So representing your constituents' interests is now considered "obstructionist"? Interesting.
If you have an obstructionist constituency, sure.
So some Americans are more equal than other Americans, comrade?
If you have an obstructionist constituency, sure.
So some Americans are more equal than other Americans, comrade?
That makes no sense in the context of this conversation.
So some Americans are more equal than other Americans, comrade?
That makes no sense in the context of this conversation.
That's because you're dense.
Reps get elected to represent their constituents. That often means opposition to others. You call it "obstructionism". But those people represented have every right to representation as anyone else.
Now you're backtracking.That makes no sense in the context of this conversation.
That's because you're dense.
Reps get elected to represent their constituents. That often means opposition to others. You call it "obstructionism". But those people represented have every right to representation as anyone else.
I said absolutely nothing about their rights.
I call it 'obstructionism' because it fits the definition of 'obstructionism'. that's all.
No it doesn't. It just means that, instead of borrowing money to pay for everything in sight, the government has to survive with the money it actually has on hand. Geithner has statuary authority to decide which bills to pay and which ones to defer. If it was going to happen the way you describe the deadline for raising the ceiling would be May 20, not the middle of June.
But hopefully not before the GOP has wrung maximum concessions from Obama, like rolling back Obamacare. This has already started, with Obama actually signing legislation to revoke some parts of it.
Now you're backtracking.That's because you're dense.
Reps get elected to represent their constituents. That often means opposition to others. You call it "obstructionism". But those people represented have every right to representation as anyone else.
I said absolutely nothing about their rights.
I call it 'obstructionism' because it fits the definition of 'obstructionism'. that's all.
You obviously think that the GOP should have rolled over for Obama and the Democrats' agenda and just voted alongside with them. The fact that they didnt is what you label obstructionist.
But I point out that the GOP had good reasons for opposing the Dems' agenda. And now you want to pretend that your comment was innocent.
The among the first to be effected by the failure to raise the debt ceiling would be money market funds which millions of individuals and corporations use as a checking account since they are widely regarded as cash. A stock market crash and a credit crisis would be inevitable.Critics of the government contend it is inefficient, inept, and wasteful. Yet faced with a debt ceiling, those same people believe government could pull the rabbit out of the hat and not default on contracts, interest payments, and bond redemptions. Interest rates on treasury bills would easily double. There would be no savings and the government would be permanently saddled with high interest rates.The FLAW in your arguement is that you CITE GE...a private entity...that doesn't PAY taxes as of late...
But as to others or any household?
Imaging them running their budgets like gubmint?
Thing is? The Gubmint's bluff has been called. S&P called them...
Something HAS TO BE DONE...this has been going on too long. That can they kick down the road can't be kicked any longer.
The Debt ceiling should remain where it is. The world will NOT come to an end. it would signal the rest of the world that WE are serious of this debt.
People are inherently wasteful as long as they are allowed to be. But when budget crunch reality sets in you would be amazed how much more efficient the whole thing can be.
You would also be amazed at the dexterity of Treasury. I recall the last shut down they managed a few tricks. This wont be any different. It certainly wont be the Armageddon the administraiton predicts.
The among the first to be effected by the failure to raise the debt ceiling would be money market funds which millions of individuals and corporations use as a checking account since they are widely regarded as cash. A stock market crash and a credit crisis would be inevitable.Critics of the government contend it is inefficient, inept, and wasteful. Yet faced with a debt ceiling, those same people believe government could pull the rabbit out of the hat and not default on contracts, interest payments, and bond redemptions. Interest rates on treasury bills would easily double. There would be no savings and the government would be permanently saddled with high interest rates.
People are inherently wasteful as long as they are allowed to be. But when budget crunch reality sets in you would be amazed how much more efficient the whole thing can be.
You would also be amazed at the dexterity of Treasury. I recall the last shut down they managed a few tricks. This wont be any different. It certainly wont be the Armageddon the administraiton predicts.
No it doesn't. It just means that, instead of borrowing money to pay for everything in sight, the government has to survive with the money it actually has on hand. Geithner has statuary authority to decide which bills to pay and which ones to defer. If it was going to happen the way you describe the deadline for raising the ceiling would be May 20, not the middle of June.
The US budget for 2011, approximate
Social security $800 billion.
Medicare and medicaid $800 billion
Defense $800 billion
Interest $200 billion
Everything else $1.2 trillion
Total spending $3.8 trillion
Total revenues $2.2 trillion
Deficit $1.6 trillion.
So, to not borrow money, either spending must be cut or taxes raised dramatically. If we aren't going to raise taxes, then we are going to have start cutting social security, medicare and defense because those three account for $2.4 trillion in spending and we only have $2.2 trillion in revenues. Assuming that we don't default on our debt - a tenuous assumption - revenues are $2 trillion. That means we have to cut at least $400 billion from those three, and that is assuming that we don't spend a dime on everything else. "Living within our means" means slashing these items, no way, no how.
The debt ceiling gets hit in the first week in May. Treasury has enough gimmicks to get us through to the beginning of July. And cash flows and expenditures for the government are seasonal, so the exact date when those big items are cut are variable. But they will be cut if the debt ceiling is not raised. It is not debatable.
All Society Security payroll taxes are invested in treasury bonds when received, so to make benefit payments each month Society Security must redeem treasury bonds. To avoid default on bonds and contracts, the government could suspend payment of S.S. benefits and Medicaid funds. Clinton threatened to do this in the government shutdown in the 90’s. Medicaid is jointly funded by the states so it could continue functioning by suspending some services. Just as in a government shutdown, nonessential government employees could be furloughed. This should guarantee that all government debt and contractual obligations would be met. Pressure from the voters, would force Congress to resolve the issue in a matter of days. Once Congress raises the debt limit, all suspended payments and back salaries could be paid.No it doesn't. It just means that, instead of borrowing money to pay for everything in sight, the government has to survive with the money it actually has on hand. Geithner has statuary authority to decide which bills to pay and which ones to defer. If it was going to happen the way you describe the deadline for raising the ceiling would be May 20, not the middle of June.
The US budget for 2011, approximate
Social security $800 billion.
Medicare and medicaid $800 billion
Defense $800 billion
Interest $200 billion
Everything else $1.2 trillion
Total spending $3.8 trillion
Total revenues $2.2 trillion
Deficit $1.6 trillion.
So, to not borrow money, either spending must be cut or taxes raised dramatically. If we aren't going to raise taxes, then we are going to have start cutting social security, medicare and defense because those three account for $2.4 trillion in spending and we only have $2.2 trillion in revenues. Assuming that we don't default on our debt - a tenuous assumption - revenues are $2 trillion. That means we have to cut at least $400 billion from those three, and that is assuming that we don't spend a dime on everything else. "Living within our means" means slashing these items, no way, no how.
The debt ceiling gets hit in the first week in May. Treasury has enough gimmicks to get us through to the beginning of July. And cash flows and expenditures for the government are seasonal, so the exact date when those big items are cut are variable. But they will be cut if the debt ceiling is not raised. It is not debatable.
What do you think those numbers prove?
Social Security takes in money every year. Despite the fact that it will actually take in less than it pays out this year and the fact that we have used the SS trust fund to pay for everything else it is not part of the budget, which is why SS checks have never been affected by a government shut down, they won't be affected by not raising the debt ceiling.
Medicare is more problematic, but the government can order participating hospitals and doctors to take vouchers. Again, no disruption.
For the rest, Geithner can spend on the bills he decides are more important. In theory he is totally independent in this, but I doubt anyone really believes that. Forcing the US to operate on a cash basis just means that his job gets more interesting, it does not automatically necessitate a complete shutdown, or even default. That will only happen if he does it deliberately or is completely incompetent.
All Society Security payroll taxes are invested in treasury bonds when received, so to make benefit payments each month Society Security must redeem treasury bonds. To avoid default on bonds and contracts, the government could suspend payment of S.S. benefits and Medicaid funds. Clinton threatened to do this in the government shutdown in the 90s. Medicaid is jointly funded by the states so it could continue functioning by suspending some services. Just as in a government shutdown, nonessential government employees could be furloughed. This should guarantee that all government debt and contractual obligations would be met. Pressure from the voters, would force Congress to resolve the issue in a matter of days. Once Congress raises the debt limit, all suspended payments and back salaries could be paid.The US budget for 2011, approximate
Social security $800 billion.
Medicare and medicaid $800 billion
Defense $800 billion
Interest $200 billion
Everything else $1.2 trillion
Total spending $3.8 trillion
Total revenues $2.2 trillion
Deficit $1.6 trillion.
So, to not borrow money, either spending must be cut or taxes raised dramatically. If we aren't going to raise taxes, then we are going to have start cutting social security, medicare and defense because those three account for $2.4 trillion in spending and we only have $2.2 trillion in revenues. Assuming that we don't default on our debt - a tenuous assumption - revenues are $2 trillion. That means we have to cut at least $400 billion from those three, and that is assuming that we don't spend a dime on everything else. "Living within our means" means slashing these items, no way, no how.
The debt ceiling gets hit in the first week in May. Treasury has enough gimmicks to get us through to the beginning of July. And cash flows and expenditures for the government are seasonal, so the exact date when those big items are cut are variable. But they will be cut if the debt ceiling is not raised. It is not debatable.
What do you think those numbers prove?
Social Security takes in money every year. Despite the fact that it will actually take in less than it pays out this year and the fact that we have used the SS trust fund to pay for everything else it is not part of the budget, which is why SS checks have never been affected by a government shut down, they won't be affected by not raising the debt ceiling.
Medicare is more problematic, but the government can order participating hospitals and doctors to take vouchers. Again, no disruption.
For the rest, Geithner can spend on the bills he decides are more important. In theory he is totally independent in this, but I doubt anyone really believes that. Forcing the US to operate on a cash basis just means that his job gets more interesting, it does not automatically necessitate a complete shutdown, or even default. That will only happen if he does it deliberately or is completely incompetent.
There are a number of things government could do to keep things going until the debt ceiling is lifted. I doubt very seriously that any scenario that government might chose would lead to cost savings but could lead to a lot of additional cost.
This just in. Blind Squirrel Finds a Nut!Damn those partisan Republicans that want to destroy the country.
Wait, isn't Pryor a Democrat?
Sen. Mark Pryor said Wednesday he won't vote to raise the federal government's borrowing limit unless there's a commitment to address the nation's debt by cutting spending and overhauling the tax code. The Democrat from Arkansas told members of the Political Animals Club that he was hopeful a bipartisan group of senators could come up with a plan within the next two weeks to reduce the debt based on recommendations issued by a presidential commission last year. The debt will hit its ceiling of $14.3 trillion by mid-May, and administration officials say the cap must be raised by no later than early July.
Democratic Senator warns he might vote NO to raising debt ceiling… « Gretawire
What do you think those numbers prove?
Social Security takes in money every year. Despite the fact that it will actually take in less than it pays out this year and the fact that we have used the SS trust fund to pay for everything else it is not part of the budget, which is why SS checks have never been affected by a government shut down, they won't be affected by not raising the debt ceiling.
Medicare is more problematic, but the government can order participating hospitals and doctors to take vouchers. Again, no disruption.
For the rest, Geithner can spend on the bills he decides are more important. In theory he is totally independent in this, but I doubt anyone really believes that. Forcing the US to operate on a cash basis just means that his job gets more interesting, it does not automatically necessitate a complete shutdown, or even default. That will only happen if he does it deliberately or is completely incompetent.
Well,yes and no.All Society Security payroll taxes are invested in treasury bonds when received, so to make benefit payments each month Society Security must redeem treasury bonds. To avoid default on bonds and contracts, the government could suspend payment of S.S. benefits and Medicaid funds. Clinton threatened to do this in the government shutdown in the 90s. Medicaid is jointly funded by the states so it could continue functioning by suspending some services. Just as in a government shutdown, nonessential government employees could be furloughed. This should guarantee that all government debt and contractual obligations would be met. Pressure from the voters, would force Congress to resolve the issue in a matter of days. Once Congress raises the debt limit, all suspended payments and back salaries could be paid.What do you think those numbers prove?
Social Security takes in money every year. Despite the fact that it will actually take in less than it pays out this year and the fact that we have used the SS trust fund to pay for everything else it is not part of the budget, which is why SS checks have never been affected by a government shut down, they won't be affected by not raising the debt ceiling.
Medicare is more problematic, but the government can order participating hospitals and doctors to take vouchers. Again, no disruption.
For the rest, Geithner can spend on the bills he decides are more important. In theory he is totally independent in this, but I doubt anyone really believes that. Forcing the US to operate on a cash basis just means that his job gets more interesting, it does not automatically necessitate a complete shutdown, or even default. That will only happen if he does it deliberately or is completely incompetent.
There are a number of things government could do to keep things going until the debt ceiling is lifted. I doubt very seriously that any scenario that government might chose would lead to cost savings but could lead to a lot of additional cost.
Or they could stop buying bonds.
If we don't raise the ceiling they will eventually have to cut spending.
I'm not sure if you understand what the numbers mean. SS cash flows are included in the consolidated budget of the US government. I can't remember exactly how much of the $2.2 trillion comes from payroll taxes - I will check later - but SS was in deficit within the last year or two. Let's be generous and assume that SS taxes are $900 billion, you still can't get over the math. If we assume that all SS checks will be sent out, the US budget now looks like this.
Medicare and Medicaid $800 billion
Defense $800 billion
Interest $200 billion
Everything else $1.2 trillion
Total spending ex-SS $3 trillion
Total revenues ex-SS taxes $1.4 trillion
Add back SS surplus $100 billion
Total revenues $1.5 trillion
Deficit ex-SS $1.5 trillion
However, since we aren't going to default, total revenues ex-interest payments are $1.3 trillion for remaining spending of $2.8 trillion.
It's doubtful that we can issue vouchers since vouchers are non-interest bearing liability instruments, ie debt. So that means we are going to slash defense and Medicare.
That's the math.
What do you think those numbers prove?
Social Security takes in money every year. Despite the fact that it will actually take in less than it pays out this year and the fact that we have used the SS trust fund to pay for everything else it is not part of the budget, which is why SS checks have never been affected by a government shut down, they won't be affected by not raising the debt ceiling.
Medicare is more problematic, but the government can order participating hospitals and doctors to take vouchers. Again, no disruption.
For the rest, Geithner can spend on the bills he decides are more important. In theory he is totally independent in this, but I doubt anyone really believes that. Forcing the US to operate on a cash basis just means that his job gets more interesting, it does not automatically necessitate a complete shutdown, or even default. That will only happen if he does it deliberately or is completely incompetent.