• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama aide: Debt limit fight could be "catastrophic"

Conservative said:
where would we get the money to defend Canada?
Click to expand...

Where? From the Canadians themselves. In fact Canada can't defend it's territory above the Arctic Circle. That's where America comes in. The Canadians will pay big money to preserve access to its far north and the continental shelf that slopes into the Arctic Ocean.
 
Albert Di Salvo said:
Would you care to revise or retract the portion of your post quoted above? If so, now is the time to do it.
Click to expand...

I see you cut out an important word rather intentionally

SS and medicare currently are well funded and cover todays expenses. Both do have problems in the future,
 
Conservative said:
Maybe Defense can be cut 20% but then where would we get the money to defend Canada? With regard to SS and Medicare they are being funded but the SS "trust fund" has billions in IOU's as Presidents from both parties have used the money on budget. Those IOU's have to be repaid.
Click to expand...

Those IOUs make up a large part of the 14 trillion dollar debt
 
Ockham said:
I'm hoping for "catastrophic".
Click to expand...

exactly. it will be one more hilariously blown economic prediction by the Obama Administration. and hey! who knows? we might even stop piling debt on our children!?! :thumbs:
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Those IOUs make up a large part of the 14 trillion dollar debt
Click to expand...

indeed. if we can find some way to invalidate those and the IOU's held by the Federal Reserve we will be well on our way.
 
Albert Di Salvo said:
Where? From the Canadians themselves. In fact Canada can't defend it's territory above the Arctic Circle. That's where America comes in. The Canadians will pay big money to preserve access to its far north and the continental shelf that slopes into the Arctic Ocean.
Click to expand...

We could pay the Chinese to do it for a tenth the cost
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Those IOUs make up a large part of the 14 trillion dollar debt
Click to expand...

Exactly, if you take money from SS and use it to show a lower public debt of course that is where the bulk of the debt comes from. That is why SS has to be removed from the budget and put back off budget like it was before LBJ.
 
cpwill said:
indeed. if we can find some way to invalidate those and the IOU's held by the Federal Reserve we will be well on our way.
Click to expand...

Support for defrauding the American people?

For shame
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
I see you cut out an important word rather intentionally

SS and medicare currently are well funded and cover todays expenses. Both do have problems in the future,
Click to expand...

My friend Timur,

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at your post. The ability to pay benefits in the future is the whole point.

Do you know what happens to SS and Medicare withholding as soon as the govt. gets it? The federal govt. borrows all of it and places those funds in the General Fund where they can be used for any purpose. No one is talking about the fact that the IOUs for SS and Medicare now come to well over twenty trillion dollars. There's no way to pay for future benefits.
 
Albert Di Salvo said:
The Left won't agree to any spending cuts. The Left is incapable of good faith. The country's current trajectory into the ground is just fine. Collapse works for me.
Click to expand...

I'm ok with it as well. My friends think I'm nutz, literally, but I'm also correct. If America fails, WHICH IT WILL (Mark my words) then everyone fails. There will be a "world" of hurt, war, death like no other, but what will emerge is a more sane approach to governance. Then... It happen all over again, until one culture, or way of governance, wins out over all others in the world.

The problem generally stems from failing to learn the lessons of nature. Dismissing survival of the fittest (yes this soemtimes includes the priviledged), and natural selection by altering selection, are human economic, and governing constructs. The weak never survive in nature, and there is NO SUCH thing as equity. The best that some have hoped for is equillibrium, but even the best of minds have forgotten this law of nature. Equillibrium provides that both opposing sides have something of equal value to offer, one side needs the other. This principle is the philosophical rossetta stone for most modern-day economists. It fails on so many levels in practice that one wonders why we keep trying to make it happen.


Tim-
 
Ockham said:
That might be true to the partisan blind. Reality is both have been spending like there's no tomorrow for decades.
Click to expand...

True, but the Democrats have the reputation for tax and spend, while the Republicans are more borrow and spend.
 
Albert Di Salvo said:
My friend Timur,

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at your post. The ability to pay benefits in the future is the whole point.

Do you know what happens to SS and Medicare withholding as soon as the govt. gets it? The federal govt. borrows all of it and places those funds in the General Fund where they can be used for any purpose. No one is talking about the fact that the IOUs for SS and Medicare now come to well over twenty trillion dollars. There's no way to pay for future benefits.
Click to expand...

All of which is something different then trying to cut todays deficit.

Will both SS and medicare need to be changed signficantly, most definately, but they are not the cause of the 1.4 trillion dollar deficit right now. They will be in 10 years or so if benifits are not cut along with an increase in payroll taxes to pay for them
 
Conservative said:
Exactly, if you take money from SS and use it to show a lower public debt of course that is where the bulk of the debt comes from. That is why SS has to be removed from the budget and put back off budget like it was before LBJ.
Click to expand...

Too late now. SS is now drawing out more than it puts in. The time to not stea.. I mean borrow from SS was 45 years ago.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Too late now. SS is now drawing out more than it puts in. The time to not stea.. I mean borrow from SS was 45 years ago.
Click to expand...

So what good does it do keeping it ON budget. Regardless the only way to address the problem is to get it off budget so that more money cannot be stolen, I mean borrowed, from the SS fund.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
We could pay the Chinese to do it for a tenth the cost
Click to expand...

Do whatever you want, but there is one thing Canada can't change. It can't defend it's north. You don't have the tools or the reach.

The Chinese will give the Canadian North Slope the same status as Xinjiang and Tibet. China can take northern Canada, and the lower provinces would beg to be admitted into a dysfunctional United States.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
All of which is something different then trying to cut todays deficit.

Will both SS and medicare need to be changed signficantly, most definately, but they are not the cause of the 1.4 trillion dollar deficit right now. They will be in 10 years or so if benifits are not cut along with an increase in payroll taxes to pay for them
Click to expand...

There will be no change to SS or Medicare. The young must be taxed and taxed and taxed until the old have had their fill of beer and pizza. Works for me.
 
Conservative said:
So what good does it do keeping it ON budget. Regardless the only way to address the problem is to get it off budget so that more money cannot be stolen, I mean borrowed, from the SS fund.
Click to expand...

What good will it do to take it off budget now? It's too late.

Unless, of course the feds are ready to start paying back those IOUs...

Sure, that will happen, when



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Dittohead not! said:
What good will it do to take it off budget now? It's too late.

Unless, of course the feds are ready to start paying back those IOUs...

Sure, that will happen, when



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Click to expand...

Good point, if they ever do it will show that they are serious about the debt reduction. You are probably right, but would love to see pigs fly.
 
It seems to me that the Obama aid is blaming republicans for setting a debt limit when they should be blaming each and every congress before this that set so many liabilities that the debt ceiling is exceeding feasibility.
 
Obama Aide:(from article)
"The reason the deficit is big this year is because we're coming out of the worst recession since 1929. That's the reason. The longer-run fiscal challenge facing the country is important,"
Click to expand...

I really hope team Obama keeps trying to beat this dead horse into the 2012 election. You would think that they might have gotten a hint in November that the American people see through this kind of BS and aren’t buying it.
 
GPS_Flex said:
Obama Aide:(from article)

I really hope team Obama keeps trying to beat this dead horse into the 2012 election. You would think that they might have gotten a hint in November that the American people see through this kind of BS and aren’t buying it.
Click to expand...

The worst recession I ever saw was in 1980-82 when we had 10% unemployment, 17+% interest rates, and double digit inflation. A lot of spoiled kids today buy the liberal rhetoric and have no concept of history.
 
Conservative said:
The worst recession I ever saw was in 1980-82 when we had 10% unemployment, 17+% interest rates, and double digit inflation. A lot of spoiled kids today buy the liberal rhetoric and have no concept of history.
Click to expand...

The Democrats have controlled congress (with overwhelming majorities) and the white house for the last 2 years and have controlled both houses of congress since 2006. Don’t get me wrong, Bush was an idiot for not using his veto pen but the dems aren’t painting the full story on this one.

They are at least 50% to blame for this recession and 100% to blame for the last couple years of spending. The blame bush dog just won’t hunt anymore and I really, honestly, anxiously hope they haven’t figured it out yet because I know the American people have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom