Boehner floats deficit ceiling deal.

[The Rabbi]

Maybe Obama will let the country default when Beaner doesn't agree to anything. Now, who do you think the country will blame when they have to pay 21% interest rates?

They'll blame Obama and the Democrats. The public already blames them for this mess.
I guess the Dems will become The Party of No.

Yeah, like they blamed them for the government shutdown in 1995...

Everyone knows who the Party of No is.

And everyone knows who spent us into this mess.
No, this is not 1995 and Obama is not Bill Clinton. And he might even realize it.

 

[Zander]

Sometimes, cutting up the credit cards is the right thing to do.

Sometimes it is.

So you'd be willing to cut $400 billion from defense this year then?

I would. But I also think we need to raise taxes- provided that the taxes are ONLY used to pay down the debt. We need to shrink the government and reform entitlements. We have a crisis, that seems to be the only time we ever get anything done in this country.

 

[editec]

Greenspan Steps Up Call to End Bush-Era Tax Cuts - Washington Wire - WSJ

3.6 Trillion over the next decade, according to this.

Better late than never.

Oh, by the way? In response to the POV that we were sold a line when they told us the sky was falling?

The SKY WAS FALLING starting about 2007.

If the treasure and FED had done nothing, I think the world's economy would have bled out.

My complaint wasn't that Bush II 's economic mavens acted to prevent a complete meltdown, but simply that they ended up reorganizing such that it can HAPPEN AGAIN.

Its like they stopped a drunk driver, gave him time to sober up a little bit, gave him another bottle of whiskey and the car keys and now they're back behind the wheel!

There should be about 14 CEOs in prison, AFAIC. And stockholders of these banks (AIG) et al should have lost every damned cent they put into those banks, too.

THAT'S who got BAILED out ya know, folks.

And the heads of the CEOS of Moody's and Standard and Poors ought to be on pikes on WALL STREET, too.


They didn't just screw up, they LIED.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

There are two players to any negotiation. both sides have to be jackasses for the ceiling to not rise.

the reason the ceiling needs to rise in the first place is we are borrowing too much. Which is caused by spending too much.

So the deal is, in order for us to continue to be a little irresponsible, we must cut down on the major irresponsibility. Cut spending. for real.

We can't keep this level of spending and borrowing up without landing in third world status soon or late. Slowing the stupid will delay the day.

Bohner is telling us he wants to see real spending cuts. Now. No smoke, no mirrors, no tap dancing. Real cuts. And if we are going to do the third world samba, might as well do it now and get it over with, rather than later when paying the piper will be that much worse.

 

[The Rabbi]

Sometimes, cutting up the credit cards is the right thing to do.

Sometimes it is.

So you'd be willing to cut $400 billion from defense this year then?

I would. But I also think we need to raise taxes- provided that the taxes are ONLY used to pay down the debt. We need to shrink the government and reform entitlements. We have a crisis, that seems to be the only time we ever get anything done in this country.

Rising taxes NEVER reduce the deficit. It is simply an excuse for more gov't spending. Taxes have risen in CA, NJ, CT, and a bunch of other states and their deficits are worse now than they were before.
We don't need to raise taxes. We need to reduce spending.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Not raising the debt ceiling will not make us default, but I wouldn't expect an uneducated ignoramus like yourself to understand that. It's easier for you to just repeat talking points you know nothing about.

Doesn't really matter if we default or not - not raising the debt ceiling will cause the bond market to believe default is a real possibility.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I don't see how the Republicans think we can cut a Trillion dollars..? Taking a tax cut off the table, even returning to the pre-Bush tax cut for the rich days is a mistake. I guess they just want to remove the lower class, lower income. Just totally eliminate them...

How much will eliminating the Bush era tax cuts really move the needle?

About halfway there.

 

[Toro]

Sometimes it is.

So you'd be willing to cut $400 billion from defense this year then?

I would. But I also think we need to raise taxes- provided that the taxes are ONLY used to pay down the debt. We need to shrink the government and reform entitlements. We have a crisis, that seems to be the only time we ever get anything done in this country.

Rising taxes NEVER reduce the deficit. It is simply an excuse for more gov't spending. Taxes have risen in CA, NJ, CT, and a bunch of other states and their deficits are worse now than they were before.
We don't need to raise taxes. We need to reduce spending.

Not true at a federal level, at least over the past two decades. Spending relative to GDP declined during the 90s while tax rates went up. Conversely, taxes fell under Bush but spending relative to GDP rose.

 

[Toro]

Not raising the debt ceiling will not make us default, but I wouldn't expect an uneducated ignoramus like yourself to understand that. It's easier for you to just repeat talking points you know nothing about.

It wouldn't necessarily make us default but it might. We will eventually have to cut SS, defense or Medicare and Medicaid, given that those three account for $2.4 trillion in spending, interest payments are $200 billion, and total revenues are $2.2 trillion.

We cannot DEFAULT on social security,

The government owes SS $2.4 TRILLION dollars.

Even if we cut bennies down to ZERO, that debt still must be paid.

WQhy?

Because it is just like all other government promises to pay that we owe to CHINA, JAPAN, our pension funds etc.

Of course the government can default on SS. Al they have to do is change the law and at a stroke of a pen, the liabilities change.

The liabilities in the SS trusts are not the same as bonds held by the public. They are accounting entries, not tradeable bonds. True, they are obligations, but you can get rid of them easily by changing the law.

 

[The Rabbi]

I would. But I also think we need to raise taxes- provided that the taxes are ONLY used to pay down the debt. We need to shrink the government and reform entitlements. We have a crisis, that seems to be the only time we ever get anything done in this country.

Rising taxes NEVER reduce the deficit. It is simply an excuse for more gov't spending. Taxes have risen in CA, NJ, CT, and a bunch of other states and their deficits are worse now than they were before.
We don't need to raise taxes. We need to reduce spending.

Not true at a federal level, at least over the past two decades. Spending relative to GDP declined during the 90s while tax rates went up. Conversely, taxes fell under Bush but spending relative to GDP rose.

A) That isn't a refutation of what I wrote because raising taxes in order to close the deficit NEVER results in a closing of the deficit.
B) You can't make any case out of what happened in the late 1990s because the revenue gusher from the tech boom was basically a one-time event.

Every state that has raised revenue to close a budget gap has found itself in worse shape than before they raised taxes. Without exception.

 

[Big Fitz]

Boehner opts for 'red meat' on debt ceiling - May. 9, 2011

Naw, I think it is time to default...I have always wanted to know how it feels to live in a third world county. Besides, the Chinese language has a certain appeal to it...you know?

As Jason Lewis pointed out on his show last week, the one in charge of whether we default or not is Timmy Geithner. I'm sure that sends a chill of relief up your spine.

he's the one who gets to juggle the books and makes sure we don't default... or those who we DO default to aren't going to burn us.

Huh... maybe it's good after all that we have a tax cheat running the treasury.

 

[Big Fitz]

Sometimes, cutting up the credit cards is the right thing to do.

Sometimes it is.

So you'd be willing to cut $400 billion from defense this year then?

I would. But I also think we need to raise taxes- provided that the taxes are ONLY used to pay down the debt. We need to shrink the government and reform entitlements. We have a crisis, that seems to be the only time we ever get anything done in this country.

The problem is, you can't trust them to do that. They've a 200 year track record of breaking that promise.

 

[Toro]

A) That isn't a refutation of what I wrote because raising taxes in order to close the deficit NEVER results in a closing of the deficit.
B) You can't make any case out of what happened in the late 1990s because the revenue gusher from the tech boom was basically a one-time event.

Every state that has raised revenue to close a budget gap has found itself in worse shape than before they raised taxes. Without exception.

Tax rates went up first under Bush then under Clinton and debt to GDP fell.

Most states over the past few years have raised taxes one way or the other to deal with their budget deficits, whether you want to call them taxes or user fees or whatever. True, spending cuts may have been greater than tax increases, but taxes have risen and states are in better financial condition than they were two years ago. So to say that tax increases never positively contribute to the fiscal balance is simply wrong.

Plus, its an illogical argument. State taxes as a percentage of the economy are higher now than they were 50 years ago. States have been raising taxes for decades yet for most of the time, states have run balanced budgets.

Reagan raised taxes many times as governor of California. The budget was usually balanced.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/156833-ronald-reagan-tax-increaser.html?highlight=Reagan

 

[The Rabbi]

That isn't a refutation of what I wrote. Sorry, try again.
In 1990 Pres Bush broke his no new taxes pledge to close the budget gap. What happened after it took effect?

Again, raising taxes to close a budget deficit NEVER results in closing the deficit.
MI, CT, NY, CA, NJ are all testament to this. They end up with higher taxes AND a bigger deficit.

 

[Toro]

That isn't a refutation of what I wrote. Sorry, try again.

Again, raising taxes to close a budget deficit NEVER results in closing the deficit.
MI, CT, NY, CA, NJ are all testament to this. They end up with higher taxes AND a bigger deficit.

You are exhibiting confirmation bias because I have just given you examples and you refuse to believe them.

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true.[Note 1][1] As a result, people gather evidence and recall information from memory selectively, and interpret it in a biased way. The biases appear in particular for emotionally significant issues and for established beliefs.

Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[The Rabbi]

That isn't a refutation of what I wrote. Sorry, try again.

Again, raising taxes to close a budget deficit NEVER results in closing the deficit.
MI, CT, NY, CA, NJ are all testament to this. They end up with higher taxes AND a bigger deficit.

You are exhibiting confirmation bias because I have just given you examples and you refuse to believe them.

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true.[Note 1][1] As a result, people gather evidence and recall information from memory selectively, and interpret it in a biased way. The biases appear in particular for emotionally significant issues and for established beliefs.

Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It isn't that I refuse to believe them. They aren't germane to my point.

 

[Toro]

That isn't a refutation of what I wrote. Sorry, try again.

Again, raising taxes to close a budget deficit NEVER results in closing the deficit.
MI, CT, NY, CA, NJ are all testament to this. They end up with higher taxes AND a bigger deficit.

You are exhibiting confirmation bias because I have just given you examples and you refuse to believe them.

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true.[Note 1][1] As a result, people gather evidence and recall information from memory selectively, and interpret it in a biased way. The biases appear in particular for emotionally significant issues and for established beliefs.

Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It isn't that I refuse to believe them. They aren't germane to my point.

What is your point then? You said raising taxes never reduces the deficit. Reagan raised taxes and eliminated the California budget deficit.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are exhibiting confirmation bias because I have just given you examples and you refuse to believe them.



Confirmation bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It isn't that I refuse to believe them. They aren't germane to my point.

What is your point then? You said raising taxes never reduces the deficit. Reagan raised taxes and eliminated the California budget deficit.

That isn't what I said. And pulling one example from 40 years ago, even if true, doesn't prove anything. Especially when there are about 20 counter examples.

 

[auditor0007]

Boehner opts for 'red meat' on debt ceiling - May. 9, 2011

Naw, I think it is time to default...I have always wanted to know how it feels to live in a third world county. Besides, the Chinese language has a certain appeal to it...you know?

Not raising the debt ceiling will not make us default, but I wouldn't expect an uneducated ignoramus like yourself to understand that. It's easier for you to just repeat talking points you know nothing about.

You are correct. It would force a huge tax increase on everyone though.

 

[beowolfe]

If I were POTUS, I wouldn't give him anything. See if he has the balls to make all of western civilization third world nations.