Five Reasons Why A National Balanced Budget Amendment Is Lunacy

[Boss]

 

[80zephyr]

Mr. H,

Dovahkiin is right. All the smart leaders were saying that when Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Ireland went to shit with their stupid austerity measures after 2008.

If we did that we'd be in a recession for the next two hundred years.

Wrong. These countries did not chose to go the austerity route, it was forced on them by their financial mistakes. Either we fix our debt, or the same thing will happen to us.

Mark

 

[whitehall]

The word "enslaved" is often exaggerated by both sides to make a political point. The real fact is that the National Debit is a threat and will impact both the political arena and the world's economy in future generations. The problem is that politicians, well versed in propaganda, think they can fool the public into thinking they care about the debit by proposing an impossible amendment to the Constitution that will allegedly solve the problem. While low information Americans ponder the impossibility of an amendment that will force the government to balance the budget, the politicians get to spend more money and drive up the debit.

 

[Grandma]

WE are Person A and Person B.

No WE aren't.

Let go of your overinflated ego. We have elected officials that represent a large group of individuals. WE have TWO senators per state.

That means you're ONE OF MANY voices your senator hears, and your senator is ONE IN A HUNDRED in his/her group.

So YOU won't be calling the shots here, Boss. WE WHO ACTUALLY KNOW HOW THINGS WORK will, fortunately.

 

[Grandma]

Mr. H,

Dovahkiin is right. All the smart leaders were saying that when Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Ireland went to shit with their stupid austerity measures after 2008.

If we did that we'd be in a recession for the next two hundred years.

Wrong. These countries did not chose to go the austerity route, it was forced on them by their financial mistakes. Either we fix our debt, or the same thing will happen to us.

Mark

How do you think the wingnuts want to fix the debt, Mark?

By using austerity measures. Duh.

Even though they were in exactly the same boat as Greece, Italy scrapped the austerity programs and sunk a bunch of money into infrastructure. It paid off.

Where do we get the money? Do we "print more"? No. That's a lie that's been perpetuated for too long. What we do is we tax those that can afford to pay their fair share. We penalize US businesses that take American jobs to overseas sweatshops.

And we invest the money in things that will help America grow - like safe infrastructure. Things that create jobs that create taxpayers, as opposed to creating war machines that cost taxpayers and give a negative return to the average citizen.

But there's no point in trying to explain this sort of thing to some of you, you listen to the likes of Hannity, and Rushbo, and all the other wingnut cult leaders and accept their crap without bothering to do any actual research outside of the cult circlejerk.

 

[80zephyr]

Mr. H,

Dovahkiin is right. All the smart leaders were saying that when Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Ireland went to shit with their stupid austerity measures after 2008.

If we did that we'd be in a recession for the next two hundred years.

Wrong. These countries did not chose to go the austerity route, it was forced on them by their financial mistakes. Either we fix our debt, or the same thing will happen to us.

Mark

How do you think the wingnuts want to fix the debt, Mark?

By using austerity measures. Duh.

Even though they were in exactly the same boat as Greece, Italy scrapped the austerity programs and sunk a bunch of money into infrastructure. It paid off.

Where do we get the money? Do we "print more"? No. That's a lie that's been perpetuated for too long. What we do is we tax those that can afford to pay their fair share. We penalize US businesses that take American jobs to overseas sweatshops.

And we invest the money in things that will help America grow - like safe infrastructure. Things that create jobs that create taxpayers, as opposed to creating war machines that cost taxpayers and give a negative return to the average citizen.

But there's no point in trying to explain this sort of thing to some of you, you listen to the likes of Hannity, and Rushbo, and all the other wingnut cult leaders and accept their crap without bothering to do any actual research outside of the cult circlejerk.

If we don't curtail or spending, the world will do it for us, just like it has done to Spain, Portugal, Greece, etc. You cannot possibly tax the rich enough to fix this problem.

Right now, we are "on the hook" for over 200 trillion dollars

If we don't curtail or spending, the world will do it for us, just like it has done to Spain, Portugal, Greece, etc. You cannot possibly tax the rich enough to fix this problem.

Right now, we are "on the hook" for over 200 trillion dollars over what we expect to collect in taxes on our future obligations.

Mark

 

[Boss]

WE are Person A and Person B.

No WE aren't.

Let go of your overinflated ego. We have elected officials that represent a large group of individuals. WE have TWO senators per state.

That means you're ONE OF MANY voices your senator hears, and your senator is ONE IN A HUNDRED in his/her group.

So YOU won't be calling the shots here, Boss. WE WHO ACTUALLY KNOW HOW THINGS WORK will, fortunately.

You're not following the conversation, granny. The government is not separate from us, the government IS us. It has nothing to do with my ego, it's just a fact of life in this country under our Constitutional system of government. You and I, and everyone else, call the shots here. We elect the representatives who speak for us, but the government is an extension of US... they are not their own separate entity. When the government spends money, they are spending our money... it is literally US spending OUR money. The notion that the government spends THEIR money and WE benefit from it, is ignorance on a profound level. The government doesn't have any money that it doesn't coerce and confiscate from the people, borrow or print.

 

[Boss]

What we do is we tax those that can afford to pay their fair share. We penalize US businesses that take American jobs to overseas sweatshops.

And we invest the money in things that will help America grow - like safe infrastructure. Things that create jobs that create taxpayers, as opposed to creating war machines that cost taxpayers and give a negative return to the average citizen.

We've been doing this for 8 years under Barack Obama and our national debt has doubled. Our GDP growth is anemic at under 2%, we've never had so many on food stamps before, our credit rating has been downgraded, the entire middle east is on fire, more private sector businesses have closed than under any administration since the Great Depression, the "job creation" that is bragged about is laughable at best, our newly socialized health care system is a complete mess, and you clowns are still dreaming up more shit to socialize and heap onto the backs of the taxpayer. AND... you've got the unmitigated nerve to use the exact same rhetoric you were spewing in 2008, as if George W. Bush has been president the past 8 years!

 

[Boss]

Do we "print more"? No.

But that's exactly what your boy, Obama has BEEN doing. It's called "quantitative easing" and the Federal Reserve is printing pallets of new currency every day to inject into the economy to try and keep the balloon in the air. It's devaluing the currency like crazy but by the time it really starts to effect us all, Obama will be long gone and you'll ignorantly blame it on Republicans.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Such an 'amendment' is unwarranted and devoid of merit because it's proposed in bad faith, motivated by wrongheaded conservative dogma, not a desire the 'benefit' the American people.

 

[Boss]

Such an 'amendment' is unwarranted and devoid of merit because it's proposed in bad faith, motivated by wrongheaded conservative dogma, not a desire the 'benefit' the American people.

No, it's purely in good faith. There is no "conservative dogma" and you're a fucking idiot leftist hack who has the agenda and dogma. Now, such an amendment wouldn't benefit commie liberals with their hand out for freebies... they would not benefit one iota because their little gravy train of entitlements would be gone forever... that's what you mean to say here. So let's be honest.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Such an 'amendment' is unwarranted and devoid of merit because it's proposed in bad faith, motivated by wrongheaded conservative dogma, not a desire the 'benefit' the American people.

No, it's purely in good faith. There is no "conservative dogma" and you're a fucking idiot leftist hack who has the agenda and dogma. Now, such an amendment wouldn't benefit commie liberals with their hand out for freebies... they would not benefit one iota because their little gravy train of entitlements would be gone forever... that's what you mean to say here. So let's be honest.

Good faith? A balanced budget amendment is absurd. It's impossible, and absurd, to think that the fed govt. can save in currency in any relevant way. You need to learn that state/local governments are different in relation to the debt, an important point when discussing something as absurd as a "balanced budget" amendment. A "balanced budget" amendment will require a balanced budget even during recessions. I should not have to point out why this is childish. Calling a poster a "fucking idiot leftist hack" while refusing to contribute anything intelligent is telling. Hand out for freebies? Dude, quit the partisan shit. Let's assume for a second we remove all things you view as "leftist entitlements." The damage to the economy would be enormous.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Balancing the Budget !

As election time draws near in the UK , and the US presidential election campaigns start to get underway across the Atlantic, we’ll no doubt hear a lot about this topic shortly, if we haven’t already. Apologies if you’ve heard this all before but the political and economic mainstream still don’t grasp it. Political parties will accuse their opponents of making “unfunded promises”, and of having “black holes” in their budgets etc . Nations’ finances will be likened to a household.

Except that Sovereign Governments, like the USA and UK are issuers of currency. They aren’t at all like a household. If a household has a deficit of say £10k pa then, generally speaking, spending cuts of £5k coupled with an extra £5k of earnings will fix the problem. How many times do we see see the same logic applied to countries too? It never works. It can’t work. Governments afterwards wonder why. It isn’t difficult to understand:

It's hard to discuss anything when someone continues to run with the absurd connection to household debt..

 

[Dovahkiin]

The word "enslaved" is often exaggerated by both sides to make a political point. The real fact is that the National Debit is a threat and will impact both the political arena and the world's economy in future generations. The problem is that politicians, well versed in propaganda, think they can fool the public into thinking they care about the debit by proposing an impossible amendment to the Constitution that will allegedly solve the problem. While low information Americans ponder the impossibility of an amendment that will force the government to balance the budget, the politicians get to spend more money and drive up the debit.

Please explain how the "national debt" is a threat?
The national debt is simply a record of cumulative deficits.
It is impossible for us to default on the debt.
I will try to make this simple: The national debt is all of the US dollars issued by the govt that have not yet been taxed away.

 

[Dovahkiin]

The OP and the blind-sheep liberal replies are just surreal, bizarre. Do you realize that our interest payment on the national debt is now our sixth largest budget item? Think about that: The sixth most expensive budget item is the interest that we're paying on our debt. National debt interest exceeds the budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs, for the Department of Education, for the Department of Agriculture, for HUD, for DHS, and for others. That is mind boggling, and absurd.

Our bloated, dangerous debt is the reason the Federal Reserve has felt compelled to keep interest rates so artificially low. If interest rates were allowed to rise to a normal, natural level, our interest payment on the debt would increase dramatically. These unnaturally low interest rates have killed seniors who were counting on savings interest as part of their retirement portfolio (my own parents saw their retirement income drop by about $700 because of low interest rates).

Ooh.. sixth largest. What's your point? We have a fiat currency, and the US govt has control of the currency. Investors recognize a simple fact: bond obligations will always be repaid, since the US govt has control of the currency with the ability to create all the dollars they need. And before you complain that hyperinflation will occur if the govt creates currency, significant inflation has only ever occurred with shortages, food, labor, energy, etc.. we're not at risk of that at all, hell, we're barely tapping our labor/energy.. You need to recognize that the national debt is nothing like household debt.

 

[Boss]

Good faith? A balanced budget amendment is absurd. It's impossible, and absurd, to think that the fed govt. can save in currency in any relevant way. You need to learn that state/local governments are different in relation to the debt, an important point when discussing something as absurd as a "balanced budget" amendment. A "balanced budget" amendment will require a balanced budget even during recessions. I should not have to point out why this is childish. Calling a poster a "fucking idiot leftist hack" while refusing to contribute anything intelligent is telling. Hand out for freebies? Dude, quit the partisan shit. Let's assume for a second we remove all things you view as "leftist entitlements." The damage to the economy would be enormous.

I've already contributed enormously in one the first responses to the OP. I addressed your stupid 5 points one by one. You decided to start talking down to me and you've still not stopped doing it. So stick it where the sun don't shine, buddy. You are not going to sit here and high-brow me with your crackpot Keynesian theory that has failed everywhere it has been implemented.

A balanced budget is certainly NOT stupid. MILLIONS of American families balance their budgets every single month in America and enjoy economic prosperity and freedom because of it. Those who run up debts they cannot pay, face penalties and hardships too numerous to list here. They are not free, they are shackled to their debt snowball and often have to forfeit everything they have in the end. There is no difference in the principles whether it's a family, a city, a state or a federal government. You keep SAYING it is different but you've not shown anything to support that opinion and frankly, the opinion just doesn't even make rational sense.

The OP title purports to tell us why balancing the budget is lunacy... you had your chance but you merely listed 5 things that are simply excuses for not balancing the budget. That doesn't tell me why it's absurd or stupid to balance the budget, it just tells me you're real good at making up excuses. We can always make up excuses not to do something that is hard to do. That isn't a reason nor is it a justification not to do it. We CAN have a balanced budget and with a Constitutional amendment we'll HAVE to have one. There won't be any more excuses.

Now..... Every proposal that I have heard on a serious BBA, takes into consideration the various assorted things that could potentially happen... wars, catastrophes, disasters, etc. Congress will retain the ability to run a deficit in certain cases if they achieve the necessary super majority to do so. But... this will NOT be a recurring thing and it WILL be tied to the GDP. There will be limits on overspending.

As for the economy, it will skyrocket under this proposal because people will have more of their own money to spend instead of paying it out the ass in new taxation. The billions and trillions we would be paying to service the debt will be going back into the economy. The out-of-control public spending on everything under the sun would return to the private sector where free market solutions would fill the void and begin to generate new jobs and more economic prosperity. In the public sector, we would see more intense focus on making every dollar count, so we would eliminate the waste, fraud and abuse...we'd have no other choice.

 

[imawhosure]

Good faith? A balanced budget amendment is absurd. It's impossible, and absurd, to think that the fed govt. can save in currency in any relevant way. You need to learn that state/local governments are different in relation to the debt, an important point when discussing something as absurd as a "balanced budget" amendment. A "balanced budget" amendment will require a balanced budget even during recessions. I should not have to point out why this is childish. Calling a poster a "fucking idiot leftist hack" while refusing to contribute anything intelligent is telling. Hand out for freebies? Dude, quit the partisan shit. Let's assume for a second we remove all things you view as "leftist entitlements." The damage to the economy would be enormous.

I've already contributed enormously in one the first responses to the OP. I addressed your stupid 5 points one by one. You decided to start talking down to me and you've still not stopped doing it. So stick it where the sun don't shine, buddy. You are not going to sit here and high-brow me with your crackpot Keynesian theory that has failed everywhere it has been implemented.

A balanced budget is certainly NOT stupid. MILLIONS of American families balance their budgets every single month in America and enjoy economic prosperity and freedom because of it. Those who run up debts they cannot pay, face penalties and hardships too numerous to list here. They are not free, they are shackled to their debt snowball and often have to forfeit everything they have in the end. There is no difference in the principles whether it's a family, a city, a state or a federal government. You keep SAYING it is different but you've not shown anything to support that opinion and frankly, the opinion just doesn't even make rational sense.

The OP title purports to tell us why balancing the budget is lunacy... you had your chance but you merely listed 5 things that are simply excuses for not balancing the budget. That doesn't tell me why it's absurd or stupid to balance the budget, it just tells me you're real good at making up excuses. We can always make up excuses not to do something that is hard to do. That isn't a reason nor is it a justification not to do it. We CAN have a balanced budget and with a Constitutional amendment we'll HAVE to have one. There won't be any more excuses.

Now..... Every proposal that I have heard on a serious BBA, takes into consideration the various assorted things that could potentially happen... wars, catastrophes, disasters, etc. Congress will retain the ability to run a deficit in certain cases if they achieve the necessary super majority to do so. But... this will NOT be a recurring thing and it WILL be tied to the GDP. There will be limits on overspending.

As for the economy, it will skyrocket under this proposal because people will have more of their own money to spend instead of paying it out the ass in new taxation. The billions and trillions we would be paying to service the debt will be going back into the economy. The out-of-control public spending on everything under the sun would return to the private sector where free market solutions would fill the void and begin to generate new jobs and more economic prosperity. In the public sector, we would see more intense focus on making every dollar count, so we would eliminate the waste, fraud and abuse...we'd have no other choice.

Know what Boss, I am still waiting for this lefty to address another post added in earlier, maybe if he only will speak to you, you should ask him to explain since he quickly glossed it over.........

If debt means nothing, then why pay any taxes at all? We will just print money, and no American citizen has to pay anything. Why insist on raising taxes on the rich? We don't need to, just print more, right?

 

[Boss]

Know what Boss, I am still waiting for this lefty to address another post added in earlier, maybe if he only will speak to you, you should ask him to explain since he quickly glossed it over.........

If debt means nothing, then why pay any taxes at all? We will just print money, and no American citizen has to pay anything. Why insist on raising taxes on the rich? We don't need to, just print more, right?

Absolutely! We should just abolish all taxation... the more government spends the more we make... so that would be great for the economy... none of us having to pay 35-40% of our paycheck in taxes anymore... think of all that extra money pouring into the economy!

 

[imawhosure]

Know what Boss, I am still waiting for this lefty to address another post added in earlier, maybe if he only will speak to you, you should ask him to explain since he quickly glossed it over.........

If debt means nothing, then why pay any taxes at all? We will just print money, and no American citizen has to pay anything. Why insist on raising taxes on the rich? We don't need to, just print more, right?

Absolutely! We should just abolish all taxation... the more government spends the more we make... so that would be great for the economy... none of us having to pay 35-40% of our paycheck in taxes anymore... think of all that extra money pouring into the economy!

Correct, and it would work perfectly if his main point is accurate------> 1. We have total control of our money, and 2. Debt doesn't matter.

What he is admiting by extrapolation, is that higher rates on SOME people are no more than punishment, because we actually do not need any money as the government can just create it.

And so now it is HIS turn to explain that if his theory is accurate, while all the nice lefty politicians have a tax on the middle class at all, and why he wants to RAISE taxes on anyone, for any reason.

We are waiting their Mr Lefty for your pearls of wisdom-) And be careful what you say, lolol. You either blow your own OP out of the water, or make the Democrats look like Attilla The Hun. In either case, it should be entertaining to watch you try and spin-)

 

[imawhosure]

Mr. H,

Dovahkiin is right. All the smart leaders were saying that when Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Ireland went to shit with their stupid austerity measures after 2008.

If we did that we'd be in a recession for the next two hundred years.

Wrong. These countries did not chose to go the austerity route, it was forced on them by their financial mistakes. Either we fix our debt, or the same thing will happen to us.

Mark

The word "enslaved" is often exaggerated by both sides to make a political point. The real fact is that the National Debit is a threat and will impact both the political arena and the world's economy in future generations. The problem is that politicians, well versed in propaganda, think they can fool the public into thinking they care about the debit by proposing an impossible amendment to the Constitution that will allegedly solve the problem. While low information Americans ponder the impossibility of an amendment that will force the government to balance the budget, the politicians get to spend more money and drive up the debit.

WE are Person A and Person B.

No WE aren't.

Let go of your overinflated ego. We have elected officials that represent a large group of individuals. WE have TWO senators per state.

That means you're ONE OF MANY voices your senator hears, and your senator is ONE IN A HUNDRED in his/her group.

So YOU won't be calling the shots here, Boss. WE WHO ACTUALLY KNOW HOW THINGS WORK will, fortunately.

WE are Person A and Person B.

No WE aren't.

Let go of your overinflated ego. We have elected officials that represent a large group of individuals. WE have TWO senators per state.

That means you're ONE OF MANY voices your senator hears, and your senator is ONE IN A HUNDRED in his/her group.

So YOU won't be calling the shots here, Boss. WE WHO ACTUALLY KNOW HOW THINGS WORK will, fortunately.

You're not following the conversation, granny. The government is not separate from us, the government IS us. It has nothing to do with my ego, it's just a fact of life in this country under our Constitutional system of government. You and I, and everyone else, call the shots here. We elect the representatives who speak for us, but the government is an extension of US... they are not their own separate entity. When the government spends money, they are spending our money... it is literally US spending OUR money. The notion that the government spends THEIR money and WE benefit from it, is ignorance on a profound level. The government doesn't have any money that it doesn't coerce and confiscate from the people, borrow or print.

And as of this writing, the OP author "feverishly" tries to make contact with "the Bern" and Debbie W. Shultz" to get talking points on how to address post 77, 78, and 79, as his followers are on their knees hoping against hope, he can spin this "little" problem away-)

And OP author, you better have an answer, or these questions are just coming back, of that I can assure you! How? I will make sure of it-)