Page 2 of 26 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 255

Thread: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

  1. #11
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Why don't you guys consider blaming the senate, who voted down or refused to vote for...what was the final total? Four bills?
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  2. #12
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    Why don't you guys consider blaming the senate, who voted down or refused to vote for...what was the final total? Four bills?
    Or do we blame the House for wasting their time passing bills they knew the Senate wouldn't? Goes both ways, IMO.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  3. #13
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Or do we blame the House for wasting their time passing bills they knew the Senate wouldn't? Goes both ways, IMO.
    The way I see it, the House continued to put together bills that the House could agree upon. The senate provided no time for debate, no cross-chamber discussion, and no willingness to meet and hash out a plan. In that sense, the House didn't have much incentive or support for creating a bicameral bill. Hearing, "we won't vote for that..that either...nope, not that one, either...not gonna happen...we want tax increases and no spending cuts", etc doesn't really give the house anything to work with that could pass either House, let alone appease the do-nothing senate. They spent much of the last few months sitting with their arms crossed, telling Obama to do their dirty work because they weren't going to compromise (on what, they were never clear because they never created a plan until Reid's plan came out...which, surprise surprise, had no tax increases). When they finally DID stand up and propose something it was still not voted upon (or was it? Last blurb I saw said Reid shelved the vote...).
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  4. #14
    Sage
    pbrauer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    11-27-15 @ 03:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,394

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Indeed. Goddamn you conservatives. We of course are part of a dictatorship where you all had complete control and chose to delay this out of singularly your own choice.

    ...wait a second...

    No, sorry, I got that wrong. We are a dictatorship, but we're a dictatorship under the Democratic Party, so the Republicans should've just did exactly what the Democrats wanted and dealt with it because we're not a representitive republic where people are elected by their constituents to push for their desires but rather are a dictatorship under teh Democratic Party. Silly me. Damn you conservatives! Damn you to hell for not doing exactly what the Democrats wanted.

    ...wait, no wait another second...

    Oh that's right, we are a represnetitive republic. Both sides have one of the chambers of congress and one side also has the Presidency. Despite that, NEITHER side was able to actually fashion a bill that was able to get support from the other side until the past days. Both sides choices are the reason it took until the 11th hour for this to be done, not just one. But far be it for me to expect hyper partisans to pass up a chance to bash bash bash one sidedly for the sake of political points.
    Budget debates happen every year, there is no reason in my opinion, to hold the country hostage. I have no problem with these debates, the problem as I see it is the debt ceiling which is an arbitrary figure that has been routinely raised until this year.

    Our Congress and President authorize budgets spending which I hope are based upon some need. To say we can't borrow money to satisfy those budgets is stupid.
    Last edited by pbrauer; 08-02-11 at 12:32 PM.


  5. #15
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    Budget debates happen every year, there is no reason in my opinion, to hold the country hostage. I have no problem with these debates, the problem as I see it is the debt ceiling which is an arbitrary figure that has been routinely raised until this year.

    Our Congress and President authorize budgets spending which I hope are based upon some need. To say we can't borrow money to satisfy those budgets is stupid.
    Arbitrary? Continually increasing the debt ceiling without serious consideration to our financial policy has led to us borrowing almost half of every single dollar we spend, but you're calling it arbitrary? Simply passing a new increase (especially a $2.4 trillion increase) would have left those interested in trying to recreate some semblance of fiscal responsibility with absolutely no leverage to get anything accomplished. You know damned well if we had just voted to raise the debt ceiling and said, "Oh, we'll cover our financial disaster later" that we never would have addressed spending.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  6. #16
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    The way I see it, the House continued to put together bills that the House could agree upon.
    Which really means nothing, considering the House is Republican-heavy enough to pretty much overcome any Democratic opposition on pretty much anything, and coming up with partisan bills is a total waste of time.

    The senate provided no time for debate, no cross-chamber discussion, and no willingness to meet and hash out a plan. In that sense, the House didn't have much incentive or support for creating a bicameral bill.
    I don't see that the second sentence necessarily follows the first. Everything the House passed (including Cut Cap and Balance, which was actually a Senate GOP creation, and the Boehner bill), contained at least a few unreasonable provisions that THEY KNEW would cause it to fail in the Senate. Just because the other side is sitting on their thumbs doesn't mean it's a good idea to waste your damn time passing partisan bills instead of bipartisan ones.

    Hearing, "we won't vote for that..that either...nope, not that one, either...not gonna happen...we want tax increases and no spending cuts", etc doesn't really give the house anything to work with that could pass either House, let alone appease the do-nothing senate. They spent much of the last few months sitting with their arms crossed, telling Obama to do their dirty work because they weren't going to compromise (on what, they were never clear because they never created a plan until Reid's plan came out...which, surprise surprise, had no tax increases). When they finally DID stand up and propose something it was still not voted upon (or was it? Last blurb I saw said Reid shelved the vote...).
    Reid didn't really shelve the vote. He simply didn't have enough votes to end the filibuster of his bill, and so the bill died right then and there.

    Bottom line: BOTH sides are to blame in this. Both the Tea Party Grover Norquist Republicans who absolutely wouldn't compromise on anything whatsoever (no tax increases, period! Even though Obama is putting 4 trillion worth of cuts on the table, something we NEVER would have gotten a few months ago!) and the Democrats who didn't want to face reality and realize that if we are to fix our deficit problem, we MUST reform the entitlements.

    And yes, while I do agree that the Senate for the most part let Obama do their dirty work, the House, as I just explained above, wasted their mother****ing time passing bills they knew nobody else would agree to. Cut Cap and Balance would have garnered a hell of a lot more support, even from Dems, if it were simply just "Cut and Balance," for instance.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 08-02-11 at 12:43 PM.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  7. #17
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:39 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    Arbitrary? Continually increasing the debt ceiling without serious consideration to our financial policy has led to us borrowing almost half of every single dollar we spend, but you're calling it arbitrary? Simply passing a new increase (especially a $2.4 trillion increase) would have left those interested in trying to recreate some semblance of fiscal responsibility with absolutely no leverage to get anything accomplished. You know damned well if we had just voted to raise the debt ceiling and said, "Oh, we'll cover our financial disaster later" that we never would have addressed spending.
    When they chose to draw the line is the sand could be considered arbitrary. It wasn't, but it could be. The real reason why republicans chose now to draw their line in the sand, finally, is they thought they could win political points, especially with 2012 coming up, and if they should win in 2012, this opens up a little more spending room for them. You cannot go around spending nonstop, and then when the other guy spends throw a fit and hope to be seen as fiscally conservative.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  8. #18
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Which really means nothing, considering the House is Republican-heavy enough to pretty much overcome any Democratic opposition on pretty much anything, and coming up with partisan bills is a total waste of time.



    I don't see that the second sentence necessarily follows the first. Everything the House passed (including Cut Cap and Balance, which was actually a Senate GOP creation, and the Boehner bill), contained at least a few unreasonable provisions that THEY KNEW would cause it to fail in the Senate. Just because the other side is sitting on their thumbs doesn't mean it's a good idea to waste your damn time passing partisan bills instead of bipartisan ones.



    Reid didn't really shelve the vote. He simply didn't have enough votes to end the filibuster of his bill, and so the bill died right then and there.

    Bottom line: BOTH sides are to blame in this. Both the Tea Party Grover Norquist Republicans who absolutely wouldn't compromise on anything whatsoever (no tax increases, period! Even though Obama is putting 4 trillion worth of cuts on the table, something we NEVER would have gotten a few months ago!) and the Democrats who didn't want to face reality and realize that if we are to fix our deficit problem, we MUST reform the entitlements.

    And yes, while I do agree that the Senate for the most part let Obama do their dirty work, the House, as I just explained above, wasted their mother****ing time passing bills they knew nobody else would agree to. Cut Cap and Balance would have garnered a hell of a lot more support, even from Dems, if it were simply just "Cut and Balance," for instance.
    For the record, I'm not referencing House v. Senate as a means of referencing Republicans v. Democrats. As I saw it, we had one chamber putting things together, asking for discussion, trying to get something done...and we had one chamber who pouted and acted like children, refusing to come to the table. They were trying to remain politically innocent and avoid having their names and faces put to the bill...at least that's my guess, and it's really the only explanation I can come up with that makes any sense...because they had no reason to be so unproductive and unwilling to get involved in any meaningful discussion. As much as the Senate made a political move by remaining inactive, the Houst made one by refusing to include any of the vague Senate demands on paper. In a sense yeah, they're both guilty...but the idea that republican refusal to compromise is the sole or primary reason that we had such a huge (albeit expected) delay and related expenditures is just wrong.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  9. #19
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    look at all the democrats vote against the COMPROMISE and in favor of DEFAULT

    http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll690.xml

    how dangerously IRRESPONSIBLE of them

    how dare they PLAY POLITICS with the full faith and credit, holding the entire united states economy HOSTAGE...

    etc

    meanwhile, our affable, laughable, gaffe-able veep yesterday called those tea party intransigents TERRORISTS

    Vice President Joe Biden calls Tea Party members "terrorists" after tense debt ceiling negotiations

    good thing ms giffords, bless her heart, didn't hear

    civility, anyone?
    Last edited by The Prof; 08-02-11 at 12:53 PM.

  10. #20
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Debt ceiling cost to taxpayers: $1.7 billion

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    Arbitrary? Continually increasing the debt ceiling without serious consideration to our financial policy has led to us borrowing almost half of every single dollar we spend, but you're calling it arbitrary? Simply passing a new increase (especially a $2.4 trillion increase) would have left those interested in trying to recreate some semblance of fiscal responsibility with absolutely no leverage to get anything accomplished. You know damned well if we had just voted to raise the debt ceiling and said, "Oh, we'll cover our financial disaster later" that we never would have addressed spending.
    I disagree. What matters isn't the size of the increase itself (or the length of time until the next debt ceiling vote), it's the size of the increase relative to the amount of cuts. The goal is pretty much for the cuts to exceed the increase. When Boehner said "I'm only going to raise the ceiling by 1 trillion, but my plan only has $900 billion worth of cuts" what does that mean? Why one trillion? If you raise the ceiling by only one trillion, another debt debacle will come up before the end of this year, and we have to go through this three-ring circus again. That only serves to create more uncertainty in the already fragile economy, at this point (and, while I don't agree with this, there are cynics out there who even say that that move by Boehner was intentionally put in there in order to screw up the economy for the President). Why not just come up with an original bill that extends the debt ceiling by a lot, but also cuts a lot so we don't have to go through this bull**** again a mere 4 months from now?
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 08-02-11 at 12:56 PM.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

Page 2 of 26 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •