• 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 .

I don't think you get it. Money we are about to spend? Even if we don't spend it, we still need to raise the debt ceiling in order to make good on the debt we already have.

I refer back to my mortgage analogy. How can we (the fed) survive if we take out a mortgage with no way to pay for it? It's like paying your Chase credit card with your Capital One credit card. It makes no sense to keep voting out of some sort of manufactured, devised emergency, purely constructed on partisan BS.

The fact is, people have tried to have tough talks...but whenever the attemp is made the other side stands up and says "this is more important. let's discuss your issue later and do this first" and the primary issue is pushed off again and again. It has to stop.

"We'll do it later" will just result in this issue becoming the emergency. And when seniors stop receiving checks or start getting turned away from doctor's offices because the money's gone from those funds somebody will say "damn those (political party you oppose)...they never did anything when they were in power and now (party you support) is left trying to pick up the pieces.

This debate has been raging for weeks and nothing was accomplished even though proposals were put forward. People sent letters, made calls, tried to involve everybody (including Obama and Biden) into getting this resolved and a compromise drummed up. It didn't happen because some people refused to meet and come up with an agreement. This time around, a lot of the foot dragging was on behalf of the dems. Previously, the repubs didn't stand up and say "wait a second, let's do this right". Both parties buggered it up, but somebody is trying to make it work now...so let them make it work.

Stop buying into hysterics. These fear tactics that both sides are using are working way too well.
 
Last edited:
do you have any idea how this works, is is your credit card analogy the depth of your knowledge.

raise the debt ceiling you say, you think we write a check, put money in an envelope
what the GOP is saying is take some of the money you are about to spend, and use that to pay the debt...

what dont you understand about that?

That's not it at all.

The cuts necessary to stop spending more on a daily basis between now and August 2nd, would essentially require us to completely disband the military and stop every Medicare and Medicaid payment. And even them, the interest on the existing debt would still make each daily outlay greater than daily income.

The debt ceiling has nothing to do with future spending (or spending cuts).

The debt ceiling is the point at which the US can no longer spend what it borrows. The only response can be to not make promised payments (usually in repaying Treasury Bonds). If we don't pay on Treasury Bonds, they become worthless. The dollar collapses and the economy falls apart.

This isn't about spending cuts, deficits, or the debt, its self. This is about paying for the sins of the past.

If you cut up your credit card today, but kept making the minimum payment, your interest is still going to accrue. You've done a good thing by cutting up the card; but if your interest goes above your credit limit and you don't pay it, you're going to get your ass in trouble and your account will be cancelled and then, instead of payments, you will be forced to pay the whole thing in one fell swoop. Now, you can call the credit card company and ask for a credit limit extension that will prevent overlimit fees and the risk of your account being cancelled. OR you can decimate your livelihood by trying to pay off your credit balance all at once.

You may disagree, but most Americans of all political stripes agree that we have to cut up the credit card. And we have to make more than the minimum payments on it. But none of that has to do with the debt ceiling. If we don't raise the debt ceiling, cutting spending in the future won't matter; because it will harm our economy to a degree that will only make matters unmanageable. The increase of the debt ceiling shouldn't be held hostage to specific and promised cuts. And anyone who claims that we can fix this without looking at revenues (tax increases), shouldn't be taken seriously.
 
This is why we shouldn't have a debt ceiling. We can't go over it, but politicians still ignore it by just raising it when we get close to it. How is it a limit, if we can just raise it whenever. It's a load of contrived bs that they use to convince voters that they care about fiscal responsibility.
 
That's not it at all.
And anyone who claims that we can fix this without looking at revenues (tax increases), shouldn't be taken seriously.

and anyone who says the answer is to take more of my money to continue this shennagins "shouldnt be taken seriously"
he should actually be taken out back and..but I digress

if revenue is the answer, then create jobs.
and you cant create jobs by raising taxes, thats just silly.

You create jobs by giving companies incentives to keep those jobs at home.
You create that incentive by making the opposite less appealing. Any business man will settle for making what he can make vs nothing.
China wants to continue shipping goods to us made overseas then they pay higher taxes on the imports... or keep it..

they call in their chips, we should have taken that first trillion in "stimulas" and payed them off...

the stimulas did Nothing except make matters worse by prolonging the inevitable, like you're doing again..
you keep peddling fear and we will get nowhere..

games over kimosobi, time to get serious
listen to the GOP on this one
 
That's not it at all.

The cuts necessary to stop spending more on a daily basis between now and August 2nd, would essentially require us to completely disband the military and stop every Medicare and Medicaid payment. And even them, the interest on the existing debt would still make each daily outlay greater than daily income.

The debt ceiling has nothing to do with future spending (or spending cuts).

The debt ceiling is the point at which the US can no longer spend what it borrows. The only response can be to not make promised payments (usually in repaying Treasury Bonds). If we don't pay on Treasury Bonds, they become worthless. The dollar collapses and the economy falls apart.

This isn't about spending cuts, deficits, or the debt, its self. This is about paying for the sins of the past.

If you cut up your credit card today, but kept making the minimum payment, your interest is still going to accrue. You've done a good thing by cutting up the card; but if your interest goes above your credit limit and you don't pay it, you're going to get your ass in trouble and your account will be cancelled and then, instead of payments, you will be forced to pay the whole thing in one fell swoop. Now, you can call the credit card company and ask for a credit limit extension that will prevent overlimit fees and the risk of your account being cancelled. OR you can decimate your livelihood by trying to pay off your credit balance all at once.

You may disagree, but most Americans of all political stripes agree that we have to cut up the credit card. And we have to make more than the minimum payments on it. But none of that has to do with the debt ceiling. If we don't raise the debt ceiling, cutting spending in the future won't matter; because it will harm our economy to a degree that will only make matters unmanageable. The increase of the debt ceiling shouldn't be held hostage to specific and promised cuts. And anyone who claims that we can fix this without looking at revenues (tax increases), shouldn't be taken seriously.


Do you believe 'little' Dick Durban this past weekend when he says that $21 Billion is a good start on Trillions? Hell you might as well piss into the wind.


j-mac
 
I think it's an incredible shame and embarrassment that we have reached the debt ceiling. We shouldn't raise the debt limit, maybe it would force the Obama administration to make a sustainable budget.
 
I think it's an incredible shame and embarrassment that we have reached the debt ceiling. We shouldn't raise the debt limit, maybe it would force the Obama administration to make a sustainable budget.


You are correct, it is a shame. I think it high time that we took a serious look at what got us here. Programs like

Welfare, Medicaid, SS, and Medicare.

Didn't the President enact a panel to render a report to do exactly this? What has he done with their recommendations?

j-mac
 
and anyone who says the answer is to take more of my money to continue this shennagins "shouldnt be taken seriously"
he should actually be taken out back and..but I digress

if revenue is the answer, then create jobs.
and you cant create jobs by raising taxes, thats just silly.

You create jobs by giving companies incentives to keep those jobs at home.
You create that incentive by making the opposite less appealing. Any business man will settle for making what he can make vs nothing.
China wants to continue shipping goods to us made overseas then they pay higher taxes on the imports... or keep it..

they call in their chips, we should have taken that first trillion in "stimulas" and payed them off...

the stimulas did Nothing except make matters worse by prolonging the inevitable, like you're doing again..
you keep peddling fear and we will get nowhere..

games over kimosobi, time to get serious
listen to the GOP on this one

I suggested looking at revenues. To take this problem seriously, you need to have everything on the table.

There are many people who simply state, outright: Government spending is bad for jobs...

Really? So, the building of the Interstate Highway System (government spending) didn't create jobs?

The GI Bill in post-WW2 (government spending) didn't create jobs?

The Space Race (government spending) didn't create jobs?

The Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (government spending) didn't create jobs?

The answer is: they all did - and most of them (even the wars) in the private sector through contracts with private industry.

The problem we've had lately is that we do pass giant spending bills (like two wars) without raising the revenues to pay for them.

I've never said (and I reiterated in my previous post) that we HAVE to cut up the credit card. We've got to cut spending. But we've let this problem (both sides of the spectrum) get so large, that to take some tax increases completely off the table is to be disingenuous in trying to fix the problem.

Hell, even Paul Ryan recognizes this (sort of) in his highly heralded budget plan. He lowers rates, yes. But he does so by eliminating loopholes, meaning some will likely pay more in taxes than they do now.
 
Revenues will have to be a part of this down the road FFG, that's an inescapable truth. however, we have been down this road of asking liberals to bargain in good faith before...they lie. Now it is up to libs to go first.


j-mac
 
and anyone who says the answer is to take more of my money to continue this shennagins "shouldnt be taken seriously"
he should actually be taken out back and..but I digress

if revenue is the answer, then create jobs.
and you cant create jobs by raising taxes, thats just silly.

You create jobs by giving companies incentives to keep those jobs at home.
You create that incentive by making the opposite less appealing. Any business man will settle for making what he can make vs nothing.
China wants to continue shipping goods to us made overseas then they pay higher taxes on the imports... or keep it..

they call in their chips, we should have taken that first trillion in "stimulas" and payed them off...

the stimulas did Nothing except make matters worse by prolonging the inevitable, like you're doing again..
you keep peddling fear and we will get nowhere..

games over kimosobi, time to get serious
listen to the GOP on this one


According to the Congressional Research Service (a division of the Library of Congress):

We CAN make our debt obligations and not default IF we do the following:

"To put this into context," the report said, "the federal government would have to eliminate all spending on discretionary programs, cut nearly 70 percent of outlays for mandatory programs, increase revenue collection by nearly two-thirds, or take some combination of those actions in the second half of FY2011 in order to avoid increasing the debt limit. Additional spending cuts and/or revenue increases would be required, under current policy, in FY2012 and beyond to avoid increasing the debt limit."

For the remainder of the year, it would mean no Medicare Payments (sorry Rand Paul, you and your doctors will HAVE to take cuts); mo Medicaid Payments (sorry states, up to you); no Social Security Payments; cutting pay for soldiers by 70%; and raising taxes by 66.6%.

Do those things, and you won't have to raise the debt ceiling to prevent the US defaulting on its debts. Never mind that it will have defaulted to seniors, soldiers, and veterans...

Again: let's make the cuts. But let's not hold the debt ceiling hostage to it. Utter decimation of existing programs isn't going to win anyone anything. Slowing our spending, altering future outlays in things like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security...these things are all fine. We need to sit down and figure these things out. Looking at ways of increasing revenues without decimating the economy should be part of that discussion as well.

And to j-mac: the President's commission is being looked at. It is being pushed by Biden in outreach to members of both parties and members of the "Gang of Six" (from both sides of the aisle) are trying to craft legislation based on the recommendations.

We've really screwed up in the past. Both parties. The screw-up was shared by both parties and by people on Wall Street, and by people on Main Street who demand too much of their government without paying for it. The sacrifice should be equally shared and not solely placed on the backs of the elderly, the poor, and the working class.
 
And to j-mac: the President's commission is being looked at. It is being pushed by Biden in outreach to members of both parties and members of the "Gang of Six" (from both sides of the aisle) are trying to craft legislation based on the recommendations.

We've really screwed up in the past. Both parties. The screw-up was shared by both parties and by people on Wall Street, and by people on Main Street who demand too much of their government without paying for it. The sacrifice should be equally shared and not solely placed on the backs of the elderly, the poor, and the working class.


I can agree with nearly everything you said to me here, except for one thing....When you talk of the sacrifice being "equally shared" then turn around and say that you can't place it on the backs of:

Ederly: A lion share of Medicare payments go to this group and it has a multi trillion dollar unfunded liability.

Poor: You mean the recipient voter class that pays no tax, but collects tax money back in some quasi redistribution nightmare?

working class: ie: Unions? Because although I am that middle class individual, but not a member of any union, so I guess I don't count.

j-mac
 
Treasury to tap pensions to help fund government - The Washington Post

Looky at what Turbotax Geithner is up to. Now they're going to borrow against money that doesn't belong to them. Of course maybe that's really business as usual, just a different pot of money.

The alternative would be a complete economic meltdown. Doing this, and also a few other things, the administration has put off financial Armageddon until about August 2..... Maybe. Hopefully, in the meantime, people can come to their senses and do what needs to be done.
 
I can agree with nearly everything you said to me here, except for one thing....When you talk of the sacrifice being "equally shared" then turn around and say that you can't place it on the backs of:

Ederly: A lion share of Medicare payments go to this group and it has a multi trillion dollar unfunded liability.

Poor: You mean the recipient voter class that pays no tax, but collects tax money back in some quasi redistribution nightmare?

working class: ie: Unions? Because although I am that middle class individual, but not a member of any union, so I guess I don't count.

j-mac

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.
 
I support the GOP in not raising the debt ceiling. I know they are doing it for the wrong reasons, but the result will be the same.

Once the power to borrow is maxed out, then the government will finally start making crucial changes to the budget that are necessary to save our economy from eventual and complete collapse. Raising the ceiling is just delaying the inevitable, and with the extra time bought the two parties are just going to keep up the partisan fighting. With the ceiling reached, it will create an urgency that would HOPEFULLY make discussion about financial matters more realistic.

If, however, the ceiling is reached and the partisan bitch fest continues, then our economy is doomed. And you know what, if it comes to that, we deserve it. Maybe then people will get off their complacent asses and be more active in the political process.

We have the representatives we asked for. If they can't make it work, then it's our own fault.
 
This is not the time for political ideologues and a "my way or the highway" approach.

Right....because its DNC Koolaid time......yayyyy!

Its clearly time to continue spending our Bankrupt Grandchildren's Grandchildren's money on Democrat Subprime Social Programs to Nowhere.......

To wonder how Leftist Greece, facing collapse under Debt, continues spending with little regard..........is to see the Democrat future this country holds.
.
.
.
.
 
Right....because its DNC Koolaid time......yayyyy!

Its clearly time to continue spending our Bankrupt Grandchildren's Grandchildren's money on Democrat Subprime Social Programs to Nowhere.......

To wonder how Leftist Greece, facing collapse under Debt, continues spending with little regard..........is to see the Democrat future this country holds.
.
.
.
.

You only exhibit a lack of understanding of the actual issue at hand.

Yes, spending must be cut. Duh. That's obvious.

Holding the debt ceiling still will NOT cut spending except in ways that will make the dollar worth much less, raise interest rates on the debt that already exists, thus exacerbating the debt issue.

This is like telling an overweight person that instead of eating right and exercising to get healthy they need to get cheap lipo and become anorexic to solve their problems.
 
I understand both sides of this argument.

On the one hand, we've borrowed trillions of dollars with a clear obligation to repay our loans. It's not something any individual borrower or typical household wouldn't be expected to do. But on the other hand, we've borrowed so much money without affixing a means to pay for said expenditures (i.e., unfunded liabilities) that even if we collected tax revenues for the rest of the year (according to G. Gordon Liddy this morning on his talk show), we wouldn't be able to pay the interest by itself let alone continue to pay for any of the other social programs that are helping to keep the economy relatively afloat (i.e., unemployment insurance) let alone fund both wars that have yet to either fully draw down or disengage from.

As I understand the argument, raising the debt limit would allow the Treasury to continue to borrow money while also being about to pay for those things this nation still needs funding for (i.e., some defense spending, unemployment benefits, etc., etc.). The argument critics have against raising the debt limit is cut some entitlements while also paying down the debt. I'd agree with that if cutting programs didn't mean we also had to forego starving people or forcing more people onto the streets. We have to consider the series of natural disasters that have wreaked havoc across the mid-south and mid-west recently. Folks are still cleaning up from the tornados that hit the mid-south and the mid-west is going to be feeling the affects of the floods - natural and intentional - for months if not years! So, as much as you may not like what danarhea is saying, he is correct.

Now is not the time to be playing partisan games with the debt limit. It's not just about cutting and spending, or shall I say Congress' irresponsible monetary policies no matter which side of the political divide is to blame for it. Now is the time to do what is necessary for the country; we can argue over getting our fiscal house in order afterwards.

Now, if Senate Republicanswant to attach a rider to the debt limit bill that stipulates no more spending above the requested increase amount thru say 2012 either without significant budget cuts or no new taxes (which I know the latter they'd never agree to, but you have to know the tax debt is coming by Ocotober/November of 2012), then I can see room for compromise on this issue. Either way you go, I believe the debt limit has to be raised if for no other reason than we're going to have to borrow more money to help pay for the cleanup and reinburment efforts from these floods and tornados. The price tag for the mid-south is estimated to be in the 100's of billions. I can't imagine what it's going to cost for the floods.

(BTW, yes, personal property and life insurance will cover most of the cost but FEMA is already spending tons of money to help the victims of these disaster, and as I've stated what they've already paid out is just the beginning. Local and state governments will be seeking federal disaster relief for these events for a very long time.)
 
Last edited:
You only exhibit a lack of understanding of the actual issue at hand.

Yes, spending must be cut. Duh. That's obvious.

Wasnt that obvious a few trillion dollars ago?............

Wasnt that obvious a few entitlements or Democrat social teets ago?..........

So Yes Spending must be cut......and the Democrat Party cant bring itself to cut a frickin Cowboy Poetry Contest.

Holding the debt ceiling still will NOT cut spending except in ways that will make the dollar worth much less, raise interest rates on the debt that already exists, thus exacerbating the debt issue.

We have a bunch of (D)runken sailors asking for a bigger credit limit.........good thing that isnt exacerbating the debt issue.

Im betting the (D)runken sailors will be very careful with OUR MONEY...... this time........

This is like telling an overweight person that instead of eating right and exercising to get healthy they need to get cheap lipo and become anorexic to solve their problems.

Well 400 lbs and 30 years later........when you still have the former human/liberal blob........maybe its time for something a bit more drastic.
.
.
.
 
we also cannot default on our loans. right now, the republicans are grandstanding and hoping to make points for 2012. it ain't gonna work.

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...
 
Apparently, the Treasury will be able to stall the inevitable through various accounting tricks through August of this year. Least that's what I heard on NPR, and what the NPR God says, goes.
 
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...

Did you read the article? Defaulting on our debt is not a Democratic talking point. This is straight from the Wall Street Journal.

The Treasury Department said Monday it will stop issuing and reinvesting government securities in certain government pension plans, part of a series of steps designed to delay a default until Aug. 2.

You are one of the more intelligent posters here, ludahai, and I respect most of what you write. But I have to ask you this - What part of "default" don't you understand?
 
Last edited:
It's not a matter of borrowing. It's a matter of paying what we already owe. Would you have the United States of America be a deadbeat?

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.
 
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.

Actually, I do understand how serious it is. But refusing to pay our bills is going to make things orders of magnitude worse. Our Congress critters need to do what needs to be done NOW, and then we can talk about how we are going to cut expenditures beyond what we already owe.
 
Back
Top Bottom