But for the Debt Ceiling

[CrusaderFrank]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

 

[waltky]

Dey gonna fix it or dey gonna punt?...

Go big on the debt ceiling
July 9, 2011: President Obama and lawmakers should seize the opportunity to start making real changes to reduce the debt, budget expert Maya MacGuineas argues.

So President Obama has reportedly given congressional leaders a menu of options in the debt ceiling talks: a small, temporary debt deal; a medium-sized "down payment"; or the big "grand bargain." No question -- and it sounds like most of lawmakers agreed -- the motto on the debt ceiling deal must be: Go big or go home. Well, don't go home; keep working. But by all means, go big.

The debt ceiling is forcing lawmakers -- who clearly won't take the initiative on their own or we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place -- to confront the tremendous challenge of reducing the national debt. This is going to be bloody political battle no matter what. So why shed all that blood and not actually fix the problem?

The president and Congress have the chance to save the country from fiscal ruin. There are political gains to be had from a big deal, despite what some pollsters or partisan strategists say. No one wins if Washington's leaders have to go to the American public and say: "We made choices many of you won't like, teetered on the brink of default and reached a deal. But, hey, it's not enough so we'll have to do it all over again soon."

So here is what we should look for in a debt ceiling deal -- and, frankly, should accept no less.

Lift the ceiling. Fast:

 

[waltky]

Gettin' down to the wire...

Obama: Need a debt deal in next 10 days
Jul 10, 2011 - President Obama said tonight that lawmakers have to strike a deficit-cutting deal to raise the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling within the next week and a half, lest the government risk a damaging default on its financial obligations.

When a reporter asked Obama if negotiators could work it all out in the next 10 days, the president said: "We need to." Obama spoke before a White House meeting with Republican and Democratic congressional leaders that ended only with an agreement to hold another session on Monday afternoon -- preceded by an Obama news conference at 11 a.m. After the meeting, Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said it's "baffling" that Obama and Democratic lawmakers "continue to insist on massive tax hikes in the middle of a jobs crisis, while refusing to take significant action on spending reductions at a time of record deficits."

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Cal., said she remains hopeful for an agreement, but it "must do no harm to the middle class or to economic growth. It must also protect Medicare and Social Security beneficiaries, and we continue to have serious concerns about shifting billions in Medicaid costs to the states." Congressional leaders have said they need an agreement well in advance of Aug. 2 -- the Treasury Department's deadline for when borrowing authority runs out -- so that the House and Senate can debate and vote on a final package. Before tonight's meeting, aides said Obama will continue pushing for a $4 trillion debt reduction deal, despite House Speaker John Boehner's decision to give up on the plan because of Republican opposition to tax increases.

Obama "didn't come to this town to do little things," said White House chief of staff William Daley on ABC's This Week With Christiane Amanpour, hours before the White House negotiating session. "He came to do big things." Congressional Republicans said Obama's plan includes higher taxes, which they will oppose at a time of 9.2% unemployment. "We think it's a terrible idea," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Fox News Sunday. "It's a job-killer." Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, on NBC's Meet The Press, said, "we're going to try to get the biggest deal possible."

MORE

See also:

Debt ceiling: Slow grind
July 10, 2011: Still no deal: President Obama met with Democrat Nancy Pelosi and Republican John Boehner on Sunday.

Bye-bye big debt ceiling deal. Hello, 11th hour brinksmanship. That's looking a lot more likely since House Speaker John Boehner said this weekend he can't sign on to a $4 trillion debt-reduction package because the White House continues to insist the package include some tax increases. Even though the White House said it will continue to push for the biggest deal possible, a meeting Sunday evening between President Obama and congressional leaders lasted 75 minutes without any signs of progress toward a so-called "grand bargain." Instead, the White House announced talks would continue on Monday.

Nobody said it would be easy. After all, it took policymakers decades to put the United States at risk of a debt crisis. So it shouldn't be surprising if getting agreement on substantive debt reduction takes more than a couple of weeks. The problem, of course, is that many Republicans have said they won't support an increase in the debt ceiling unless it's pared with a deal to cut spending.

And both Democrats and Republicans have since laid down ultimatums for what they need to support any deal, putting in jeopardy the chances that the debt ceiling gets raised in time. If the ceiling isn't raised by Aug. 2, that would put the country's sterling credit at risk, potentially causing shock waves through the world economy.

The ratings agency Moody's, meanwhile, has said that if progress in talks "is not evident by the middle of July," it would likely place the U.S. government's credit rating on review for a downgrade. For those keeping score, Friday is July 15. For now, a gaping divide remains between the parties on three issues that could derail any debt ceiling deal, large or small.

Tax increases:

 

[editec]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

I think you're right.

But for the fact that Obama is the POTUS would the GOP be demanding spending cuts before they increased the debt ceiling?

The fact that past history of Republican POTUSs raising debt ceilings while also cutting taxes suggest they wouldn't.

So what does that really tell you, Cru?

Is either party really sweating the national debt?

Not really, right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

I think you're right.

But for the fact that Obama is the POTUS would the GOP be demanding spending cuts before they increased the debt ceiling?

The fact that past history of Republican POTUSs raising debt ceilings while also cutting taxes suggest they wouldn't.

So what does that really tell you, Cru?

Is either party really sweating the national debt?

Not really, right?

We never had such a reckless,clueless ideologue as POTUS before. His deficits are more that any Reagan budget and he thinks bank ATM's and airport kiosks are the cause and he thinks it's funny that he can blow a few hundred billion on "Not so shovel ready" projects.

 

[Anachronism]

NEITHER SIDE has any moral high ground to stand on with this issue.

 

[Avatar4321]

Im not convinced they are considering it now. 4 Trillion 12 years from now when most of them wont be in office isn't likely to happen and they know it.

 

[waltky]

Granny says dey's liable to foreclose onna White House...

China Urges US to Protect Investors as Debt Ceiling Deadline Looms
July 14, 2011 - China is calling on the United States to protect the interests of its investors as its politicians engage in a policy battle that has brought it to the brink of default.

At a foreign ministry briefing Thursday, spokesman Hong Lei said China hopes the U.S. government will adopt "responsible policies and measures to guarantee the interests of investors." China is the largest U.S. creditor with more than $1 trillion invested in the United States, which has long been considered a safe harbor with the highest possible credit rating.

However, Moody's Investment Service warned Wednesday it was putting the U.S. rating on a downgrade watch because of uncertainty over the negotiations to raise the American debt ceiling. The Chinese credit rating agency Dagong took a similar action on Thursday.

China has been gradually reducing its holdings in U.S. Treasury bonds since late last year. However, the figure increased slightly in April to $1.153 trillion, according to U.S. data. Dagong said Thursday it believes slow economic growth and large budget deficits will make it more difficult for the United States to meet its debt obligations over the next couple of years.

Source

 

[auditor0007]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

You may well be correct on this point. At the same time though, Republicans are completely against raising revenue in any meaningful way, so it goes both ways. That is why we need both parties to at least attempt to work together. We actually have a the perfect opportunity to get many of the necessary spending cuts done and increase revenue at the same time. All it would take is a bit of compromise on each side. At this point though, the only ones willing to even discuss compromise are the Dems.

 

[auditor0007]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

I think you're right.

But for the fact that Obama is the POTUS would the GOP be demanding spending cuts before they increased the debt ceiling?

The fact that past history of Republican POTUSs raising debt ceilings while also cutting taxes suggest they wouldn't.

So what does that really tell you, Cru?

Is either party really sweating the national debt?

Not really, right?

We never had such a reckless,clueless ideologue as POTUS before. His deficits are more that any Reagan budget and he thinks bank ATM's and airport kiosks are the cause and he thinks it's funny that he can blow a few hundred billion on "Not so shovel ready" projects.

Frank, have you happened to take a good look at what is causing these huge deficits by chance? It isn't massive increases in discretionary spending although there have been a few. The biggest part of these deficits is a loss in revenue, which at this point is falling below 15% of GDP, far below the average of the last 60 years, and a full 5% to 6% below 2000. Considering revenue should be $1 trillion higher than it is, we are really only running a spending deficit of around $700 billion of which around $300 billion is excess military spending due to wars we should not be fighting, especially being that they were never funded through higher taxes. So that leaves $400 billion of deficit due mainly to increases in discretionary spending which has been put in place due to the horrific economy.

You really need to get off the "Obama is a clueless ideologue". The truth is he's caved to almost everything the Republicans have asked. He extended the damn Bush tax cuts, something he should not have. He's offered cuts in entitlement spending, which so far has been refused by the Republicans. I mean, come on, what do you want?

 

[CitizenPained]

oh my fucking god. Go participate in one of the 10,000,000 other debt ceiling threads.

 

[grunt11b]

I hope Cantor calls obamas bluff. Nothing will happen if he does, it's fear mongering at best from the leftist in chief. The only reason obama is willing to go the distance with it is in hopes to blame his own poor economy on the GOP for not voting for higher taxes. What a waste of space this man is.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

You may well be correct on this point. At the same time though, Republicans are completely against raising revenue in any meaningful way, so it goes both ways. That is why we need both parties to at least attempt to work together. We actually have a the perfect opportunity to get many of the necessary spending cuts done and increase revenue at the same time. All it would take is a bit of compromise on each side. At this point though, the only ones willing to even discuss compromise are the Dems.

You keep confusing the words "taxes" and "revenues", Republicans are for revenues but against taxes.

Hope that clears things up

 

[Sallow]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

Because, economically..it's very stupid for government to cut spending in times of economic distress. All the "job creators" (which they are not) have spent the Bush years figuring out, with a compliant Bush administration, to cut payrolls. Bush gave them several big gifts, a change in overtime regulations, big tax cuts, and a way to re-patriate overseas profit at an extremely cheap rate and zero interest rates. What did this do?

-Since employers could effectively stop paying overtime..they made employees, "management". That allowed them to work these "managers" longer hours and fire the rest.
-Sweet tax deals for overseas profit encouraged off and near shoring.
-The low tax rates did absolutely nothing..but to insure that more money was going into the pockets of the (job creators) which they banked.
-Zero interest rates encouraged borrowing that the (job creators) either put into interest bearing accounts or bought back stock.

And Job Creators were letting people go all during the Bush administration. These jobs were not getting replaced. And it was part of a grand "experiment". It's called "Synergy" or more with less. Mergers and Consolidations encouraged and required removal of redudancies. During this time period..which was some of the most breathtakingly profitable for American companies..the American worker saw little gain in paychecks and a collapse in the workforce.

Even that wasn't enough. The Job Creators formulated what amounted to Ponzi schemes, like Madoff or complicated bait and switch schemes like derivatives. And these are the guys the Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to defend.

The Job Creators..are anything but. And we've got a lot of talent that is just wasting away. In fact, we are starting to lose our best and brightest to places like China. People are starting to MOVE out of the USA and build there. The Job Creators have sucked the economy dry..and now we are having a brain drain as well.

Whats really called for is some real spending. Spending on infrastructure and not some batty tax cuts/state revenue plug nonsense. We need to employ our engineers and construction workers in a grand new WPA. That would build needful things like high speed rail and put money BACK into the economy.

 

[Sallow]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

You may well be correct on this point. At the same time though, Republicans are completely against raising revenue in any meaningful way, so it goes both ways. That is why we need both parties to at least attempt to work together. We actually have a the perfect opportunity to get many of the necessary spending cuts done and increase revenue at the same time. All it would take is a bit of compromise on each side. At this point though, the only ones willing to even discuss compromise are the Dems.

You keep confusing the words "taxes" and "revenues", Republicans are for revenues but against taxes.
Hope that clears things up

Bullshit.

They are not allowing things like closing loopholes, getting rid of tax breaks and the sunset of Bush's tax cuts..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

Because, economically..it's very stupid for government to cut spending in times of economic distress. All the "job creators" (which they are not) have spent the Bush years figuring out, with a compliant Bush administration, to cut payrolls. Bush gave them several big gifts, a change in overtime regulations, big tax cuts, and a way to re-patriate overseas profit at an extremely cheap rate and zero interest rates. What did this do?

-Since employers could effectively stop paying overtime..they made employees, "management". That allowed them to work these "managers" longer hours and fire the rest.
-Sweet tax deals for overseas profit encouraged off and near shoring.
-The low tax rates did absolutely nothing..but to insure that more money was going into the pockets of the (job creators) which they banked.
-Zero interest rates encouraged borrowing that the (job creators) either put into interest bearing accounts or bought back stock.

And Job Creators were letting people go all during the Bush administration. These jobs were not getting replaced. And it was part of a grand "experiment". It's called "Synergy" or more with less. Mergers and Consolidations encouraged and required removal of redudancies. During this time period..which was some of the most breathtakingly profitable for American companies..the American worker saw little gain in paychecks and a collapse in the workforce.

Even that wasn't enough. The Job Creators formulated what amounted to Ponzi schemes, like Madoff or complicated bait and switch schemes like derivatives. And these are the guys the Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to defend.

The Job Creators..are anything but. And we've got a lot of talent that is just wasting away. In fact, we are starting to lose our best and brightest to places like China. People are starting to MOVE out of the USA and build there. The Job Creators have sucked the economy dry..and now we are having a brain drain as well.

Whats really called for is some real spending. Spending on infrastructure and not some batty tax cuts/state revenue plug nonsense. We need to employ our engineers and construction workers in a grand new WPA. That would build needful things like high speed rail and put money BACK into the economy.

Dah! Dah!! Only government knows how to spend and invest!! Look at Hoovers and FDR's stellar track record. If only they'd spent even more!

The Stimulus should have been 46 Trillion, maybe 58 trillion, wait Miss Cleo says 176 trillion! Yes that's it!

Government spending was an Epic Fail for Hoover, FDR and Obama. At some point you need to start learning

You mean like the SSC or the Space Shuttle? Yeah, Dems killed those projects

 

[CrusaderFrank]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

Because, economically..it's very stupid for government to cut spending in times of economic distress. All the "job creators" (which they are not) have spent the Bush years figuring out, with a compliant Bush administration, to cut payrolls. Bush gave them several big gifts, a change in overtime regulations, big tax cuts, and a way to re-patriate overseas profit at an extremely cheap rate and zero interest rates. What did this do?

-Since employers could effectively stop paying overtime..they made employees, "management". That allowed them to work these "managers" longer hours and fire the rest.
-Sweet tax deals for overseas profit encouraged off and near shoring.
-The low tax rates did absolutely nothing..but to insure that more money was going into the pockets of the (job creators) which they banked.
-Zero interest rates encouraged borrowing that the (job creators) either put into interest bearing accounts or bought back stock.

And Job Creators were letting people go all during the Bush administration. These jobs were not getting replaced. And it was part of a grand "experiment". It's called "Synergy" or more with less. Mergers and Consolidations encouraged and required removal of redudancies. During this time period..which was some of the most breathtakingly profitable for American companies..the American worker saw little gain in paychecks and a collapse in the workforce.

Even that wasn't enough. The Job Creators formulated what amounted to Ponzi schemes, like Madoff or complicated bait and switch schemes like derivatives. And these are the guys the Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to defend.

The Job Creators..are anything but. And we've got a lot of talent that is just wasting away. In fact, we are starting to lose our best and brightest to places like China. People are starting to MOVE out of the USA and build there. The Job Creators have sucked the economy dry..and now we are having a brain drain as well.

Whats really called for is some real spending. Spending on infrastructure and not some batty tax cuts/state revenue plug nonsense. We need to employ our engineers and construction workers in a grand new WPA. That would build needful things like high speed rail and put money BACK into the economy.

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate / UCLA Newsroom

 

[Sallow]

Dah! Dah!! Only government knows how to spend and invest!! Look at Hoovers and FDR's stellar track record. If only they'd spent even more!

The Stimulus should have been 46 Trillion, maybe 58 trillion, wait Miss Cleo says 176 trillion! Yes that's it!

Government spending was an Epic Fail for Hoover, FDR and Obama. At some point you need to start learning

You mean like the SSC or the Space Shuttle? Yeah, Dems killed those projects

Hoover lost it when he started implementing austerity measures. FDR transformed this country into a super power and created the Middle Class.

The Stimulus should have been 1.4 trillion with no tax cuts. It should have specifically made it clear that all spending was to be done on infrastructure and saving jobs.

President Bush had a unique opportunity to pay down the debt in the beginning of his term. He didn't. Instead he did what conservatives always do..funneled the wealth of the country into the hands of the few.

I personally have no interest in living in a third world theocratic backwater..with a big army. That's what conservatives are now and always been trying transform the United States into.

 

[Sallow]

But for the debt ceiling, would Obama and the Dems even be considering any spending cuts at all?

My guess is no

Because, economically..it's very stupid for government to cut spending in times of economic distress. All the "job creators" (which they are not) have spent the Bush years figuring out, with a compliant Bush administration, to cut payrolls. Bush gave them several big gifts, a change in overtime regulations, big tax cuts, and a way to re-patriate overseas profit at an extremely cheap rate and zero interest rates. What did this do?

-Since employers could effectively stop paying overtime..they made employees, "management". That allowed them to work these "managers" longer hours and fire the rest.
-Sweet tax deals for overseas profit encouraged off and near shoring.
-The low tax rates did absolutely nothing..but to insure that more money was going into the pockets of the (job creators) which they banked.
-Zero interest rates encouraged borrowing that the (job creators) either put into interest bearing accounts or bought back stock.

And Job Creators were letting people go all during the Bush administration. These jobs were not getting replaced. And it was part of a grand "experiment". It's called "Synergy" or more with less. Mergers and Consolidations encouraged and required removal of redudancies. During this time period..which was some of the most breathtakingly profitable for American companies..the American worker saw little gain in paychecks and a collapse in the workforce.

Even that wasn't enough. The Job Creators formulated what amounted to Ponzi schemes, like Madoff or complicated bait and switch schemes like derivatives. And these are the guys the Republicans are fighting tooth and nail to defend.

The Job Creators..are anything but. And we've got a lot of talent that is just wasting away. In fact, we are starting to lose our best and brightest to places like China. People are starting to MOVE out of the USA and build there. The Job Creators have sucked the economy dry..and now we are having a brain drain as well.

Whats really called for is some real spending. Spending on infrastructure and not some batty tax cuts/state revenue plug nonsense. We need to employ our engineers and construction workers in a grand new WPA. That would build needful things like high speed rail and put money BACK into the economy.

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate / UCLA Newsroom

What a load of crap.

This country was well on it's way to becoming either a fascist or communist state.

You can't inflict that much misery on a large percent of the population and expect a good result.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Dah! Dah!! Only government knows how to spend and invest!! Look at Hoovers and FDR's stellar track record. If only they'd spent even more!

The Stimulus should have been 46 Trillion, maybe 58 trillion, wait Miss Cleo says 176 trillion! Yes that's it!

Government spending was an Epic Fail for Hoover, FDR and Obama. At some point you need to start learning

You mean like the SSC or the Space Shuttle? Yeah, Dems killed those projects

Hoover lost it when he started implementing austerity measures. FDR transformed this country into a super power and created the Middle Class.

The Stimulus should have been 1.4 trillion with no tax cuts. It should have specifically made it clear that all spending was to be done on infrastructure and saving jobs.

President Bush had a unique opportunity to pay down the debt in the beginning of his term. He didn't. Instead he did what conservatives always do..funneled the wealth of the country into the hands of the few.

I personally have no interest in living in a third world theocratic backwater..with a big army. That's what conservatives are now and always been trying transform the United States into.

President Bush was a Domestic Progressive who gave us yet another stupid totally unnecessary entitlement program. On virtually the same day Walmart announces they would sell generics for $4, Bush gave us Medicare D, which needs to join so many other Failed Progressive idea on the ash heap of history