Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I am sorry, to be more clear, I was responding to your post to balance the budget and offering an alternative method to help with that.I have no power to balance the budget.
Do you think it's a good idea, on the federal level?
Is cutting spending a good idea?
Maybe we can agree on these logical things.
Sen Kennedy: America will never default on it's debt, not now, not ever, so everyone should take their pill and chill
Yes, that was Keenes' idea. Asked about how that would play out in the long run, he said, "In the long run, we're all dead."I am sorry, to be more clear, I was responding to your post to balance the budget and offering an alternative method to help with that.
I personally think the budget deficit should be much lower: negative during recessionary periods and surplus in good years. To do so would likely require cuts, freezes, and tax increases.
Politicians add debt whether we pay our due bills or not.
Yes, that was Keenes' idea. Asked about how that would play out in the long run, he said, "In the long run, we're all dead."
Well, Keenes is dead. So at least he won't be coming up with any more such bright ideas. The rest of us are still here, working overtime or multiple jobs trying to keep with the inter-generational theft his ideas inspired.
If the dems use this as an excuse not to care about spending, then it won't matter. It is like a Family Guy Joke where the fat girl drinks a Diet Coke and says she can eat whatever she wants. I'd love for either side to finally do something about the spending, but thinking you can squeeze rich people like Leprechauns and make it all ok is completely dishonest.
Okay
That was hilarious.
Can you just admit the democrats are spending money we don't have? I know the republicans do the same thing, but for the love of toast, can't you admit there is no blank check you can shake rich people for? You can't say you are building up the country on borrowed money. Will not work. Plus, how much of the spending actually gets to Americans anyway? After pork projects and slush funds, plus the ridiculous amount of money we send overseas, the American People see no benefit from borrowed spending.
Did the American people ever get around to holding the Democrat filth accountable for stealing the 2020 Presidential election or hold the Potatohead family accountable for getting rich from selling out the country?
How about just holding Potatohead accountable for the sexual abuse of his daughter? Can't we at least do that?
Do you all know what's worse than the Democrats "Tax and Spend" policies?
The Republicans "Not Taxing yet Spending as much as the Democrats"
It’s Keynes
I'll say Keenes. If I can just say I'm a woman and then i am a woman why can't i say Keynes is Keenes and he is?you stupid ass.
Explain?His policies work in the rest of the first world. They worked in the USA too, before Reagan. Since you abandoned Keynes in favour of Friedman, your economy has slid towards the South American model created by Friedman in the 1970’s.
You’re just one or two more tax cuts away from becoming Brazil.
I have to agree. The Laffer curve is largely invalidated by loopholes. It works well with a flat percent. We could find the top of the curve in a few years trial and error.I do believe in the Laffer curve, but Republicans forget there are 2 parts to it. If you are below the point, then revenues are not maximized. There are enormous loopholes that the rich can use to evade taxes legally. Some states in the US can be used to launder money to lower taxes.
The Biden administration and House Republicans are heading toward an initial Thursday debt ceiling deadline without even a hint of an endgame, ensuring a months-long standoff that’s poised to rattle financial markets amid worries about a recession this year.
The two sides are effectively shrugging as the Treasury Department warns the country will hit the $31.4 trillion borrowing cap Thursday — though it’s not a hard deadline, as the department can still use extraordinary measures to pay the bills for another few months. But it means the potential economic doomsday clock is officially ticking, with House Republicans still insisting on massive spending cuts before they help raise the debt ceiling and Democrats refusing to engage the idea.
Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said last week that the U.S. likely won’t run out of cash or exhaust those measures until at least early June. Until then, the department is suspending investments in certain government retirement funds and hoping the House GOP and Democrats can come to an agreement to keep the government from careening into an economic crisis with far-reaching consequences.
But Yellen’s warning to congressional leaders hasn’t spurred any movement toward even the beginning of a deal between Congress and the White House. The biggest legislative battle of the year is just beginning — and threatening to grow even messier than the 15-ballot speakership fight — and there’s no exit strategy in sight.
Even some Republicans viewed as more likely to negotiate with the White House are already taking aim at the administration’s position after White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said last week: “We will not be doing any negotiation.”
The White House is already working behind the scenes to work around Speaker Kevin McCarthy, including dispatching its top advisers to meet with moderate Republicans — particularly those who won in districts President Joe Biden won in 2020 — in hopes Democrats can count on those GOP lawmakers to cross the aisle and lift the debt ceiling.
Concessions over the debt ceiling were a vital part of the deal that McCarthy negotiated with his 20 conservative holdouts to finally attain the speakership. He agreed that the GOP House wouldn’t move to lift the debt ceiling unless Congress slashes at least $130 billion in federal spending next fiscal year or addresses broader fiscal reforms that tackle the ballooning debt, as many Republicans argue it threatens the nation’s economic security and future.
Some GOP members are beginning to float more specific plans as the debt-ceiling fight gets officially underway, like the return of a controversial payment prioritization plan that former Sen. Pat Toomey’s (R-Pa.) proposed during a similar showdown about a decade ago. Such a plan would allow the government to keep paying its bondholders if both parties can’t reach an agreement, while dictating what other financial obligations would lapse.
Meanwhile, the primary concern for financial markets is whether the debt ceiling brawl forces the U.S. to miss a payment owed to Treasury bondholders. Treasuries — usually seen as extremely safe assets — underpin the global financial system and are closely tied to lending products like mortgages. Missing a payment could send the stock market off a cliff, though Wall Street analysts are split about how much of a threat the standoff actually poses to the economy, with some banking on Congress and the White House reaching some sort of deal before the federal government misses any debt payments.
Some of the Republicans pushing the payment prioritization plan, first reported by the Washington Post, include Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), one of the 20 holdouts. He told the Post: “We agreed to advance a debt prioritization bill through regular order by the end of the first quarter of 2023 … Now, the contours of that were not specified (there are different versions).”
The hotly debated idea divides Republicans and budget experts alike, and the administration has already swatted it down. White House chief of staff Ron Klain tweeted that it would sow “CHAOS” in the U.S. and “cut off funding” for food safety, FAA operations, border security and drug enforcement.
It’s unclear what capability the Treasury Department has to prioritize payments, with officials declining to comment last week on whether it’s even an option. A top Treasury official stressed in a December speech that debt limit stalemates hurt the department’s cash balance and trigger market volatility. Treasury officials told House Republicans in 2014 that while the government could technically prioritize payments, such a plan would be “entirely experimental and create unacceptable risk to both domestic and global financial markets.”
Payment plan aside, the debt ceiling is a critical political battle for the House GOP. With McCarthy commanding only a narrow majority that can move to topple him at any time, even lawmakers who count him as a friend predict the showdown won’t end well for him. It will "cost Kevin his job" predicted independent senator Kyrsten Sinema.
I am embarrassed. Of course you are right about the mandatory spending. You have always been kind to me. I am just frustrated. Voters can't do anything about the debt because nobody in either aisle will touch it. What makes it worse is that lawmakers appear to act like they don't even care. Factor in the corruption and slush funds, it just really rubs it in our faces. You obviously have a great deal of financial knowledge, plus you are a democrat. I would love to hear your views on what you think of the spending and whether you think there is enough revenue untapped to fix the mess we are in. To my simple perspective, it seems wishful to think we can just plug some loopholes and be flush again. If people are going to aggressively tax to try to get us out of the mess, I would like to know if it is even possible. Whatever happens, working people are going to be hurt bad. You might be the only democrat I have ever heard who has admitted the Laffer Curve is real. If we haven't hit it yet, how much do you think you can tax people before it kicks in. When will the Laffer Curve prevent us from farming resources to pay our spending habit.You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Pork projects and money we send overseas is a drop in the bucket. It also actually is partially a taxing problem. Entitlement programs are the biggest drivers of increased spending. There are several issues. First these programs are financed by a separate tax and are income capped and levied only on wages. The second is that there are fewer workers. Mitigating these issues would cut deficits however it would require Republicans to renounce certain parts of their hate agenda.
I am curious. I know you say discretionary is a drop in the bucket, but these huge bills where people want 3 trillion and then negotiate down to about 1.5 trillion seems to be a lot of non mandatory money. It appears much like spree spending and a lack of common sense. Thanks for the insight.I do believe in the Laffer curve, but Republicans forget there are 2 parts to it. If you are below the point, then revenues are not maximized. There are enormous loopholes that the rich can use to evade taxes legally. Some states in the US can be used to launder money to lower taxes.
Your level of intelligence is hilarious.
