U.S. Is Broke, Can't Afford to Raise the Debt Ceiling

[jon_berzerk]

Sure they can, but they have to pay the bills. This money is already spent.

no it isnt spent

they want to raise the limit so they can spend it

by borrowing the money from bonds

im just tired of the run around

from all of them

time to get a handle on it

Good enough. I'm tired of it too.

all of it is sickening to the core

and i know that you and i are not the only ones feeling that way

 

[Wolfsister77]

no it isnt spent

they want to raise the limit so they can spend it

by borrowing the money from bonds

im just tired of the run around

from all of them

time to get a handle on it

Good enough. I'm tired of it too.

all of it is sickening to the core

and i know that you and i are not the only ones feeling that way

Nope, I think most people are and it is indeed sickening.

 

[petro]

The reason this issue comes up every three months is that Harry Reid and the majority have failed to pass a budget since April 29,2009. 1360 days and counting. While this is a bipartisan failure it still shows how unwilling the majority is to compromise and a complete failure of the leadership of the majority.

Last POTUS to balance the budget. Bill Clinton...Reid should take some lessons from the former DFL President. Holding my breath now.

I agree that it's a bipartisan failure. Both sides are completely unwilling to compromise and that's really the biggest problem.

Congressional deadlock due to partisan gamesmanship.

It's getting old.

It is getting old. The two party system is killing the country and has polarized the nation. This is by design as the politicians are more concerned about re-election than passing meaningful legislation and a balanced budget. There should be no such thing as "career politician" within our vocabulary. Until there are term limits for all those in office it will only get worse. Also, as long as voters are more concerned about party lines they will get what they deserve.
I for one will vote Libertarian which is my true views and am done with both the GOP and DFL. I encourage others to vote a third party whatever it is.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Bottom line is raising the debt ceiling has always been an automatic thing with no games being played. It was just done. Most countries don't even have a debt ceiling. This is money that has already been spent. Playing games with it and threatening default only hurts our credit rating and our economy.

There is no reason not to raise it.

Correct.

The notion of allowing the Nation to default over this non-issue is reckless idiocy.

 

[Mac1958]

Didn't obama say when bush was president, that it is lack of leadership if the debt ceiling needs raising?

Here are is exact words:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.

Obviously you people don't realize when Obama is just kidding.

.

 

[Jackson]

The reason this issue comes up every three months is that Harry Reid and the majority have failed to pass a budget since April 29,2009. 1360 days and counting. While this is a bipartisan failure it still shows how unwilling the majority is to compromise and a complete failure of the leadership of the majority.

Last POTUS to balance the budget. Bill Clinton...Reid should take some lessons from the former DFL President. Holding my breath now.

I agree that it's a bipartisan failure. Both sides are completely unwilling to compromise and that's really the biggest problem.

Congressional deadlock due to partisan gamesmanship.

It's getting old.

It is getting old. The two party system is killing the country and has polarized the nation. This is by design as the politicians are more concerned about re-election than passing meaningful legislation and a balanced budget. There should be no such thing as "career politician" within our vocabulary. Until there are term limits for all those in office it will only get worse. Also, as long as voters are more concerned about party lines they will get what they deserve.
I for one will vote Libertarian which is my true views and am done with both the GOP and DFL. I encourage others to vote a third party whatever it is.

I think voting for third parties may end the deadlock we see in Washington. Make a third party a viable choice and mix up the Dem-Rep election ballots! We have to start making sense in Washington and Independents are the way to do it. Or Green Parties or the Party of Lincoln. What ever they want to call themselves. Something has to change. And quickly.

 

[LoneLaugher]

of course it is debatable

the government has plenty of tax receipts coming in

they can spend as they go

Sure they can, but they have to pay the bills. This money is already spent.

no it isnt spent

they want to raise the limit so they can spend it

by borrowing the money from bonds

im just tired of the run around

from all of them

time to get a handle on it

It is already spent. Not raising the debt ceiling means we default. This is bad. Ask your mommy about it.

 

[Mac1958]

I think voting for third parties may end the deadlock we see in Washington. Make a third party a viable choice and mix up the Dem-Rep election ballots! We have to start making sense in Washington and Independents are the way to do it. Or Green Parties or the Party of Lincoln. What ever they want to call themselves. Something has to change. And quickly.

Y'know, I used to think that way, that we need a third party. But it finally occurred to me that it's not so much the parties as it is the system in which they are operating.

Since there are no congressional term limits, since the lack of a Balanced Budget Amendment means these people can buy votes, and since private money can so freely flow into the election process, look at what has (quite predictably) happened: These "leaders" (cough) are far more concerned about fund-raising and pleasing their base than they are about anything else. And that's precisely the way they behave. Worse, this would not change with a third or fourth or fifth party.

Does anyone really believe that these people would behave the way they do, as a whole, if they were not worried about fundraising and getting re-elected?

The problem is the system.

.

 

[JWBooth]

Doesn't matter, it will happen anyway, and it will happen with more than enough votes from both factions of the ruling duopoly.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Sure they can, but they have to pay the bills. This money is already spent.

no it isnt spent

they want to raise the limit so they can spend it

by borrowing the money from bonds

im just tired of the run around

from all of them

time to get a handle on it

It is already spent. Not raising the debt ceiling means we default. This is bad. Ask your mommy about it.

if it is already spent then there is no reason to raise it

there is only a default if the admin decides to default

we have more then enough tax receipts coming in to pay the interest and principal
on your debt

 

[LoneLaugher]

no it isnt spent

they want to raise the limit so they can spend it

by borrowing the money from bonds

im just tired of the run around

from all of them

time to get a handle on it

It is already spent. Not raising the debt ceiling means we default. This is bad. Ask your mommy about it.

if it is already spent then there is no reason to raise it

there is only a default if the admin decides to default

we have more then enough tax receipts coming in to pay the interest and principal
on your debt

Oh! I saw what you did there! My debt! You clever little dummy, you!

You think that.....you hope it.....you really, really do! But you don't know it. If this was as simple as your pebble-sized brain wants to believe, then you and your nutter GOP would have refused to raise it already. What do you supposed stopped them? Respect for Obama and the spend crazy libs?

Please....think.

 

[TooTall]

Again for the idiots...the debt ceiling is for money already spent.

The debt ceiling is for money that is planned on being spent. Maybe the plans need to be changed.

 

[zeke]

I think voting for third parties may end the deadlock we see in Washington. Make a third party a viable choice and mix up the Dem-Rep election ballots! We have to start making sense in Washington and Independents are the way to do it. Or Green Parties or the Party of Lincoln. What ever they want to call themselves. Something has to change. And quickly.

Y'know, I used to think that way, that we need a third party. But it finally occurred to me that it's not so much the parties as it is the system in which they are operating.

Since there are no congressional term limits, since the lack of a Balanced Budget Amendment means these people can buy votes, and since private money can so freely flow into the election process, look at what has (quite predictably) happened: These "leaders" (cough) are far more concerned about fund-raising and pleasing their base than they are about anything else. And that's precisely the way they behave. Worse, this would not change with a third or fourth or fifth party.

Does anyone really believe that these people would behave the way they do, as a whole, if they were not worried about fundraising and getting re-elected?

The problem is the system.

.

To bad we don't have a populist somewhere in the political wings waiting for the right moment to come forth and save our sorry asses.

But that ain't happening.

We live in a plutocracy now. Our challenge (since we will never change that fact since corporations have become "people") is to learn to live and prosper in a plutocracy.

Not easy but not impossible IMO.

I read where someone on here wants to raise the debt limit and give all Americans a billion dollars. I think we would be better off if we just promised the ultra wealthy plutocrats 50% of the nations wealth and income. In exchange we get to elect people who are not plutocrats and we also get term limits in Congress.

Seems like a fair trade to me. If we don't do something, the plutocrats will end up with everything and we will be left holding the bag of debt and promises.

My fortune for a populist.

 

[rightwinger]

By what stretch of the imagination is the US "broke"?

 

[TooTall]

Your second paragraph makes a lot of assumptions that are false.

Yes, we have to raise the debt ceiling and pay our bills that the Treasury is lawfully required to pay. Yes, we can hurt our credit rating and damage our economy if we don't. No, we don't even need a debt ceiling limit in the first place.

If we don't raise the debt ceiling, it will could significantly increase the US's long term debt and our ability to borrow at low rates. Rates increase, debt increases.

Like I said above, there is no reason not to do like we've always done and raise it.

First off, we CAN service our existing debt without accumulating new debt since the Federal Government has sufficient cash flow to cover mandatory spending and debt service (check the numbers yourself instead of relying on the parrots in the media telling you that it can't be done).

Secondly, what exactly is your end game? When does the accumulation of debt and currency debasement end and what exactly does your end game look like?

You make a lot of assumptions. I'm talking about the debt ceiling here. Paying bills we already owe.

It has to be done. There shouldn't even be an argument. There is no reason to even have a debt ceiling. It's pointless.

The debt ceiling has no link to the budget or spending so is not an appropriate tool to use to try to control either.

Budgets are passed separately and if you want to cut spending, do so then. But now we have to pay for the spending that has already been approved by Congress. Congress has already agree'd to this spending. The US can and should pay it's bills.

And yes, if we default we can hurt the rate at which we borrow, therefore raising our debt even more.

This is just simple budgetary matters which I'm sure you understand.

Using the debt ceiling to control spending makes zero sense.

Budget, we don't got no budget! All we get from the Democrat Congress is continuing resolutions that continually increase our debt.

 

[petro]

I think voting for third parties may end the deadlock we see in Washington. Make a third party a viable choice and mix up the Dem-Rep election ballots! We have to start making sense in Washington and Independents are the way to do it. Or Green Parties or the Party of Lincoln. What ever they want to call themselves. Something has to change. And quickly.

Y'know, I used to think that way, that we need a third party. But it finally occurred to me that it's not so much the parties as it is the system in which they are operating.

Since there are no congressional term limits, since the lack of a Balanced Budget Amendment means these people can buy votes, and since private money can so freely flow into the election process, look at what has (quite predictably) happened: These "leaders" (cough) are far more concerned about fund-raising and pleasing their base than they are about anything else. And that's precisely the way they behave. Worse, this would not change with a third or fourth or fifth party.

Does anyone really believe that these people would behave the way they do, as a whole, if they were not worried about fundraising and getting re-elected?

The problem is the system.

.

I agree with your assessment. As much as I would like to see a third party shake up the system, that third party after a short period would fall into the same pattern. The only hope would be that a third party could put some measures in place before they were corrupted. My voting a third party will just be a vote of my real views, as I can no longer in good faith vote for the two parties that are destroying America. Americans at the least need to DEMAND term limits.

When those in power find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the Republic. Benjamin Franklin.

 

[zeke]

First off, we CAN service our existing debt without accumulating new debt since the Federal Government has sufficient cash flow to cover mandatory spending and debt service (check the numbers yourself instead of relying on the parrots in the media telling you that it can't be done).

Secondly, what exactly is your end game? When does the accumulation of debt and currency debasement end and what exactly does your end game look like?

You make a lot of assumptions. I'm talking about the debt ceiling here. Paying bills we already owe.

It has to be done. There shouldn't even be an argument. There is no reason to even have a debt ceiling. It's pointless.

The debt ceiling has no link to the budget or spending so is not an appropriate tool to use to try to control either.

Budgets are passed separately and if you want to cut spending, do so then. But now we have to pay for the spending that has already been approved by Congress. Congress has already agree'd to this spending. The US can and should pay it's bills.

And yes, if we default we can hurt the rate at which we borrow, therefore raising our debt even more.

This is just simple budgetary matters which I'm sure you understand.

Using the debt ceiling to control spending makes zero sense.

Budget, we don't got no budget! All we get from the Democrat Congress is continuing resolutions that continually increase our debt.

I do believe that those dam Senators did pass a budget. But the House has refused to take it (the budget proposal) up in committee to resolve differences.

 

[TooTall]

This thread is about the debt ceiling and raising it and I gave you my on topic answer that you just glossed over and ignored.

Uh-huh.... actually there wasn't really much to "gloss over" since you essentially just repeated your premise without actually acknowledging that your premise completely misses the mark that the debt ceiling is the only tool that has any political impact in Washington with respect to federal spending restraint ..... SEE: SEQUESTER , this in 2013 not 1913, get with the times.


The question I posed was not difficult and you didn't even attempt to answer it... specifically WHAT IS YOUR END GAME ? (the other was a statement of fact relative to the cash flow position of the Federal Government). At least make SOME attempt, like when does cumulative operating deficits become too much 200% of GDP, 300%? when are unfunded liabilities too much for the economy to bear ? What happens when we hit the limit ? Or does it just go on forever?

I'm not going to go into your land of assumptions and critiques of how I answer questions so like I said, if you have something better to add, let me know.

Which "assumptions" would those be? and when you actually answer a question I may or may not "critique" it depending on the quality of your answer.

I don't have a simple answer to your question. When does the deficit become too big? That depends on a number of different factors. The state of the economy is probably the biggest factor and the future prospects for economic growth.

The debt ceiling is supposed to control spending but it doesn't work. Congress is acting irresponsibly as per usual. Just get rid of it and we won't have to have this fight every time the debt ceiling needs to be raised which does damage to our economy and is not a fight that needs to be fought. Fight over the budget instead. That's what Congress does best. Fight with each other.

When the House sends a budget to the Senate, as they do EVERY year, it would be nice if they would fight over it. Instead, Harry Reid leaves it in his in basket of things not to do. They then pass a continuing resolution and send it to the House and tell them to pass it or the government shuts down.

The problem is crystal clear to all but fools.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Uh-huh.... actually there wasn't really much to "gloss over" since you essentially just repeated your premise without actually acknowledging that your premise completely misses the mark that the debt ceiling is the only tool that has any political impact in Washington with respect to federal spending restraint ..... SEE: SEQUESTER , this in 2013 not 1913, get with the times.


The question I posed was not difficult and you didn't even attempt to answer it... specifically WHAT IS YOUR END GAME ? (the other was a statement of fact relative to the cash flow position of the Federal Government). At least make SOME attempt, like when does cumulative operating deficits become too much 200% of GDP, 300%? when are unfunded liabilities too much for the economy to bear ? What happens when we hit the limit ? Or does it just go on forever?



Which "assumptions" would those be? and when you actually answer a question I may or may not "critique" it depending on the quality of your answer.

I don't have a simple answer to your question. When does the deficit become too big? That depends on a number of different factors. The state of the economy is probably the biggest factor and the future prospects for economic growth.

The debt ceiling is supposed to control spending but it doesn't work. Congress is acting irresponsibly as per usual. Just get rid of it and we won't have to have this fight every time the debt ceiling needs to be raised which does damage to our economy and is not a fight that needs to be fought. Fight over the budget instead. That's what Congress does best. Fight with each other.

When the House sends a budget to the Senate, as they do EVERY year, it would be nice if they would fight over it. Instead, Harry Reid leaves it in his in basket of things not to do. They then pass a continuing resolution and send it to the House and tell them to pass it or the government shuts down.

The problem is crystal clear to all but fools.

we really need a balanced budget amendment

 

[jon_berzerk]

Again for the idiots...the debt ceiling is for money already spent.

The debt ceiling is for money that is planned on being spent. Maybe the plans need to be changed.

certainly

i loved how the prezbo yesterday

kept referring to the debt limit

as "the budget"

when in fact we have not had a budget in five years