• 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!

As Debt Limit Reached, Agreement Still Far Off .

You are borrowing money every minute of every hour of every day and you cannot even pay the interest. With due respect, I don't think you realize how deep this problem is.

For once, we can agree on something.

There should be a single issue in this next election, and its the national debt.

**** Iraq, **** Afghanistan, **** abortion... **** it all.

If America does not deal with it's debt, and now, you guys are so severely ****ed it's ridiculous.

Thats the word, I stick to it.

Jet boogieman.
 
right now, the republicans are grandstanding and hoping to make points for 2012. it ain't gonna work.

with all due respect, you are completely outta touch, in my opinion

republicans are demanding and are gonna get huge, multi trillion dollar CUTS

just like cuomo, just like bing and bobb in detroit, just like christie, just like the massachusetts state assembly, just like the legislature in springfield, illinois...

almost everyone except barack the slasher obama is on board

there will be NO raising of this ceiling without huge short term and medium term CUTS, as well as STRUCTURAL REFORM

the nation is screaming for it, republicans are negotiating responsibly, the party in power (which has failed to produce an itemized budget in two terrible years) is coming around

i'm stunned anyone can't see it, but that's cool

taxes, by the way, are completely off the table, it's just the lay of the land

take care
 
Which ever party is "blamed" with making those tough decisions will be the party who stays out of power until the benefits of those decisions start to be made clear.

no, the terms of the deal will be bipartisan

they will be overwhelmingly like what cuomo is doing in new york---in europe they call it austerity

but in dc, the american public will rightly perceive republicans as having led, as having taken a position (ryan, hr1), as having stood thru the politics, as having prevailed

and the party of pelosi will appear to have capitulated, but only after having dithered for two years

as you note, if something isn't done imminently to fundamentally reform our budgets, then our big 3 federal programs, as well as pensions, will simply not be there for our next generation

america wants something done

dem leadership will come around, it's already started

did you catch the slasher's radio address saturday, his sudden call for expedited drilling off alaska, in anwr, off CA, in the gulf, off VA...
 
last friday, the 13th:

By a 47% to 19% margin, Americans say they would want their member of Congress to vote against raising the U.S. debt ceiling, while 34% don't know enough to say. Republicans oppose raising the debt ceiling by 70% to 8% and independents by 46% to 15%. Democrats favor raising the ceiling by 33% to 26%.

Americans Oppose Raising Debt Ceiling, 47% to 19%
 
Last edited:
Not raising the debt limit does not mean defaulting on our loans. That is a talking point set up my the Dems. The loans can be paid and still remain below the debt ceiling. It is other spending that would have to be curtailed...

Can you prove the treasury has such authority to pick and choose who it pays first? What is the seniority of US creditors? Even if you find an answer, what are the penalties for late payments to our "non-interest" creditors? Finally, why should we even mess around with that? If the US defaults once on its debt there is no going back. We cannot call mulligan the next day, "oh we didn't mean it." Our interest rates will be pernamently higher. That is utter stupidity when you have over $14T in outstanding debt. What if our interest rates go up by as little as 1%, thats another 140 billion a year we have to pay soley on interest. Great plan, we will save so much money...
 
This is not the time for political ideologues and a "my way or the highway" approach. The economic health of the United States of America is at stake here, and while the US scrambles in a battle to avoid default on the debt, a battle which is uncertain, I consider whoever fiddles while our economy burns to be traitors.

Right now, this has turned into a battle between Wall Street and the crazies who have hijacked the Republican Party. The way I see it, if Republicans want to destroy their own party, they are on the right track to do it. But destroying America's economy, because they are not getting what they want at this time, is a morally reprehensible act, which will have dire consequences. Time to be responsible. If you (and I am talking to the jihad wing of the GOP here) want to act like babies and brats, you should do it on your own dime, and not that of your country. Just agree to raise the debt limit, and then feel free to engage in your ideological war later, during the 2012 election campaign. This is neither the time nor the place for it.

Article is here.

Not sure why you are so hysterical. Reading the article it says the bond market is not concerned as interest rates have actually gone DOWN recently, not up if there was a real concern.

Also not sure how/where you find this being caused by right wing crazies.

I do find it hard to believe that the above was written by a "Independent" anything.
 
Not sure why you are so hysterical. Reading the article it says the bond market is not concerned as interest rates have actually gone DOWN recently, not up if there was a real concern.

Also not sure how/where you find this being caused by right wing crazies.

I do find it hard to believe that the above was written by a "Independent" anything.

There is no concern in bond markets because they know congress will raise it. Anything else would be complete and utter stupidity.
 
Yes, spending must be cut. Duh. That's obvious.

to almost all americans it sure is

still, strangely, it's not quite yet obvious to their president

but he's coming around
 
Now is not the time to be playing partisan games with the debt limit

we're not playing, we're very serious

the party in power will get its trillions of additional borrowing

for a very heavy price---huge short and medium term cuts, as well as structural reform

that's why the voters sent so many of us to dc in november

and sober senators like claire mccaskill (and ben nelson and jon tester and joe manchin and bill nelson and kent conrad and herb kohl and bob casey and jim combat boots webb...) will make sure it happens

no one's gonna go on record for a clean lifting of the ceiling without constraints
 
This is not the time for political ideologues and a "my way or the highway" approach. The economic health of the United States of America is at stake here, and while the US scrambles in a battle to avoid default on the debt, a battle which is uncertain, I consider whoever fiddles while our economy burns to be traitors.

Right now, this has turned into a battle between Wall Street and the crazies who have hijacked the Republican Party. The way I see it, if Republicans want to destroy their own party, they are on the right track to do it. But destroying America's economy, because they are not getting what they want at this time, is a morally reprehensible act, which will have dire consequences. Time to be responsible. If you (and I am talking to the jihad wing of the GOP here) want to act like babies and brats, you should do it on your own dime, and not that of your country. Just agree to raise the debt limit, and then feel free to engage in your ideological war later, during the 2012 election campaign. This is neither the time nor the place for it.

Article is here.

The GOP will gladly raise the debt ceiling (discreetly). If it doesn't, it won't be able to provide more money for its welfare bums in the oil and offense industries.
 
There is no concern in bond markets because they know congress will raise it. Anything else would be complete and utter stupidity.

I agree that it will happen. It is the responsibility of both parties to make it happen.
 
There is nothing to come to the table over. If we got rid of every single program that the US has, we would still need to raise the debt ceiling to pay for what we already borrowed. We owe this money. We need to pay it. While I would probably agree that some things need to be cut, this is neither the time nor place to argue it. We OWE for what we ALREADY borrowed.

Here is an analogy to what the GOP is attempting to shovel at the rest of us. The analogy is me. A while back, my credit card companies raised the interest rate on my cards, and made that rate retroactive to past purchases. IMHO, that was wrong. So I can demand that the credit card companies eliminate the increase for past purchases, or I will default on the debt I already legally owe. If I do that, then I am in a crapload of financial trouble. Same thing here. The US owes this money, and is responsible for paying it, no matter what transpires in the way of cost reduction in the future. What Republicans demand now is either change the way we do future expenditures, WITHOUT ANY DEBATE WHATSOEVER, or they are going to set our economy on fire, economic arson, so to speak. This speaks directly to the dishonesty of the demands that the GOP are making at this time. Like I said, now is not the time to threaten to crash and burn the economy. And like I said, if the GOP wants to act like babies and brats, let them do it on their own damn dime, not that of our country.

Both your analogy and line of thinking are flawed. Should the debt ceiling not be raised, the federal government will still be able to meet its current P&I payments on its debt. To suggest otherwise is economic dishonesty of the grandest scale. So please spare me any of this foolishness, as you obviously are not very fluent on the relationship between governmental outlays and receipts. So yes, we still we be able to pay for what we borrowed, we just will not be able to borrow any more. With all due respect, that is a very beneficial to the longterm viability of this country. So unless Obama and the DEMS want to come to the table with serious spending cuts in mind, then they have no desire to address the problem in the first place. So screw them, its time this country goes on a forced economic diet. Do not raise the debt ceiling!
 
This is not the time for political ideologues and a "my way or the highway" approach. The economic health of the United States of America is at stake here, and while the US scrambles in a battle to avoid default on the debt, a battle which is uncertain, I consider whoever fiddles while our economy burns to be traitors.

Right now, this has turned into a battle between Wall Street and the crazies who have hijacked the Republican Party. The way I see it, if Republicans want to destroy their own party, they are on the right track to do it. But destroying America's economy, because they are not getting what they want at this time, is a morally reprehensible act, which will have dire consequences. Time to be responsible. If you (and I am talking to the jihad wing of the GOP here) want to act like babies and brats, you should do it on your own dime, and not that of your country. Just agree to raise the debt limit, and then feel free to engage in your ideological war later, during the 2012 election campaign. This is neither the time nor the place for it.

Article is here.

I say enact a law where the military can still be paid and shut the government down for a while. This lets cut a few nickles and dimes and act as though it is somehow a major accomplishment is BS.
 
I agree that it will happen. It is the responsibility of both parties to make it happen.

Agreed. If this does not happen I would also view it as a dramatic failure in leadership by Mr. Obama. However, I don't think it will happen, no matter how dumb politicians can be. Its just grandstanding as usual, not that I approve of hinting at something like this in the first place.

I would prefer politicians duke this out when actually approving the budget. That needs to happen.
 
Last edited:
Not what I'm saying at all.

I'm saying that under current proposals, these are the groups that bear the greatest burden of the cuts; as if they are being punished for the government's mishandling of our tax payer dollars. The entitlement programs must be fixed, no doubt. But so must the frighteningly inflated military budget (still largely being ignored - the best anyone's offered is taking the cuts Gates proposed and pretending that was enough) and the disturbing amounts of corporate tax subsidies are government gives out to the industries who pay the most for lobbying.

These things are all being ignored while we attack the old and the poor.

Again, the guy in the district next door to me ran on the Tea Party platform and won. Good for him. But he collected more than $3.2 million in farm subsidies over the decade leading up to his election and he's done nothing to prevent the suckling of the government teat that his family still maintains (much less so in his name, but still his family's farms). So why should my mother sacrifice her Medicare before a fifty-something elected representative tells his family to stop taking farm subsidies?

I get your mistrust of the left. Believe me, I do. But we spend more than twice on farm subsidies than what we do on college grants for qualified but poor students. Worse, most of that money (and this is redistribution of wealth, by the way) goes to gigantic corporations. And if you don't believe me, I'll give you my far-from-liberal source. So, you can see where I find some of these proposals to be less than fair. I have a guy in the 8th District of Tennessee saying voting for a budget that won't effect his suckling of the government teat, but makes people like my Medicare-recipient mother, my severely mentally-retarded uncle (65 now, doctors said he would die before 13), and people who work at lower-wage jobs suffer the burden, while he takes their tax dollars (except for my severely mentally retarded uncle, he never worked) and pays his family's farms with it.

I'm with you on redistribution of wealth. But I'd rather a poor kid get a grant to go to college than a guy whose already rich getting richer off my tax dollars due to a corrupt system that gets completely ignored in this discussion.


Ok, so tell me what the landscape looks like after we increase taxes on "the rich", on Corporations, and they all pick up and get the hell out of dodge?

Aren't you really promoting a class warfare kind of society, that would see reduced standard of living here in the US so that your vision of social, and economic justice, what ever that is attained?

j-mac
 
Ok, so tell me what the landscape looks like after we increase taxes on "the rich", on Corporations, and they all pick up and get the hell out of dodge?

Aren't you really promoting a class warfare kind of society, that would see reduced standard of living here in the US so that your vision of social, and economic justice, what ever that is attained?

j-mac

hopefully the landscape will look a lot like the 90's......
 
One must crack a few eggs to make an omelet. That said, the debt limit should not be raised. I mean why have a "debt ceiling" if it can be raised all the time? We have spent enough. Time to buckle down boys.
 
This is not the time for political ideologues and a "my way or the highway" approach. The economic health of the United States of America is at stake here, and while the US scrambles in a battle to avoid default on the debt, a battle which is uncertain, I consider whoever fiddles while our economy burns to be traitors.

Right now, this has turned into a battle between Wall Street and the crazies who have hijacked the Republican Party. The way I see it, if Republicans want to destroy their own party, they are on the right track to do it. But destroying America's economy, because they are not getting what they want at this time, is a morally reprehensible act, which will have dire consequences. Time to be responsible. If you (and I am talking to the jihad wing of the GOP here) want to act like babies and brats, you should do it on your own dime, and not that of your country. Just agree to raise the debt limit, and then feel free to engage in your ideological war later, during the 2012 election campaign. This is neither the time nor the place for it.

Article is here.

Great post.

What is interesting is how even the day to day GOP posturing ripples through the market. This effects all of us.

The GOP plays games and postures for their base, meanwhile, portfolios, retirement funds, and POWERFUL hedge funds, take a hit.

I think we need more hearings like the one with the Oil Companies. All Fed Tax Subsidies to Fortune 500's need to be examined. What are we, the tax payer, getting in return for our investment? If a company getting subsidies or some other type of tax incentives is not producing 1) Jobs, 2)New technology, 3)Better goods / services at a lower price... Then what is the point?

A real Tea Party - not the corporate funded joke that it has become - but a REAL TEA PARTY would demand to have all corporate welfare examined in terms of what are we getting in return.
 
The US needs to be more concerned with lowering the debt. Raising the ceiling is not going to accomplish that. As it stands, I dont think politicians on either side are truly working to lower it enough. Most politicians are more concerned with being reelected or making the other side look bad than they are fixing problems. 2 things need to happen for our country to get back on track economically. First the US needs to cut spending to reduce the debt, and secondly we need to be bringing more money in. As Americans we have made doing business here and especially from here a hassle. One that many companies are choosing not to do. We need to bring business back. I know its an obvious point but one that is often overlooked. We need more people paying taxes. And more importantly, we need more big companies paying taxes.
 
hopefully the landscape will look a lot like the 90's......


I can agree that the 90s were a particular boom time. But, how do you see this taking place today. What I mean is that if all we are going to do is attack the "rich" who ever they are, and Corporations raising the cost to them to be a part of this country, then how do we get back to prosperity? Can you articulate please?


j-mac
 
Great post.

What is interesting is how even the day to day GOP posturing ripples through the market. This effects all of us.

The GOP plays games and postures for their base, meanwhile, portfolios, retirement funds, and POWERFUL hedge funds, take a hit.

I think we need more hearings like the one with the Oil Companies. All Fed Tax Subsidies to Fortune 500's need to be examined. What are we, the tax payer, getting in return for our investment? If a company getting subsidies or some other type of tax incentives is not producing 1) Jobs, 2)New technology, 3)Better goods / services at a lower price... Then what is the point?

A real Tea Party - not the corporate funded joke that it has become - but a REAL TEA PARTY would demand to have all corporate welfare examined in terms of what are we getting in return.

It is foolish to give corporations any money, as the government has done with banks and automakers, but treat them too harshly and they'll move elsewhere. and other countries would welcome many of these corporations with open arms. Many Americans are already complaining about jobs moving overseas. Hit American companies at home and more of them will be moving to friendlier climes.
 
I can agree that the 90s were a particular boom time. But, how do you see this taking place today. What I mean is that if all we are going to do is attack the "rich" who ever they are, and Corporations raising the cost to them to be a part of this country, then how do we get back to prosperity? Can you articulate please?


j-mac

i'm for a balanced approach, and that does include cuts to entitlement programs, along with a tax hike on those making over 150k, or hell, even 100k. we need to provide incentives for companies to create new jobs (maybe green energy?), and find ways to discourage outsourcing. perhaps raising taxes on those corporations who employ a significant number abroad. institute tariffs on imports.

bring back inheritance tax, it really affects very few people. up the cap on social security earnings. eliminate fraud and waste....(ha...ha). most of all, get the **** out of afghanistan and iraq......and cut our aid to other countries.
 
When is a 'debt limit' not a debt limit? When you can change it because you dont want to have to live within a debt limit.
 
A real Tea Party - not the corporate funded joke that it has become - but a REAL TEA PARTY would demand to have all corporate welfare examined in terms of what are we getting in return.



Show me tea party members in favor of coporate welfare.

show me which companies are funding the tea party.
 
Back
Top Bottom