• 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!

Should we default, cut spending, or increase our debt?

When it comes to the debt ceiling, should the government:

  • Raise it. Debt is not a problem.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Default on our debt. Better to declare bankruptcy than cut spending.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .

friday

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
801
Reaction score
196
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Obama and Democrats are acting like there are two choices: increase the debt ceiling or default on our debt and basically declare national bankruptcy. These two choices are dishonest. There is a third choice. We can cut spending for non-essential programs, cowboy poetry festivals, turtle bridges and skate parks, superman capes for the unemployed, NPR, planned parenthood, the war in Libya, etc and cut spending enough to meet our current debt obligations.

The government is like a man in a 5,000 sq ft home with premium cable channels, eating filet mignon for breakfast lunch and dinner, driving five nice cars, with a lawn service, pool service, weekend hookers, and every gaming system known to man claiming that if we don't let him open another credit card to pay the minimum balance on his current card he will either have to declare bankruptcy or choose between taking his medication or eating.

Are those really the options?
 
Obama and Democrats are acting like there are two choices: increase the debt ceiling or default on our debt and basically declare national bankruptcy. These two choices are dishonest. There is a third choice. We can cut spending for non-essential programs, cowboy poetry festivals, turtle bridges and skate parks, superman capes for the unemployed, NPR, planned parenthood, the war in Libya, etc and cut spending enough to meet our current debt obligations.

The government is like a man in a 5,000 sq ft home with premium cable channels, eating filet mignon for breakfast lunch and dinner, driving five nice cars, with a lawn service, pool service, weekend hookers, and every gaming system known to man claiming that if we don't let him open another credit card to pay the minimum balance on his current card he will either have to declare bankruptcy or choose between taking his medication or eating.

Are those really the options?

Maybe people complain about the government but they are just a sympton of the real problem which is the people, its the people who overwhelmingly do not want to cut spending, or if they do want to cut something cannot put partisanship aside long enough to compromise with someone who wants to cut something else.

Until debt reduction becomes more important than getting what you want from the government, its just not going to happen. People need to say "Hey I really like this medicare, social security, and defense spendng among a million other things" but there just isn't money for it. We're no different than say the Greeks for example, although I hope our protests won't be so violent, the gov't literally defaulted and people still rioted because the gov't couldn't provide what they wanted. Its like rioting because the gov't can't turn lead into gold, it just aint gonna happen.
 
I don't see how the second option is a good idea.

Its not, it only appeals the super wealthy that have enough money not to have to worry about anything.
That is what this entire teaparty thing is about...its about the rich taking more money and power from the people. It didnt start out that way thats why the had the support from the working class and baby boomers...but especially since Nov2nd its become evident what they are all about.
On nov2nd I voted straight republican...I voted for Marco Rubio, Rick Scott, and Ted Nugent...Scott was a mistake and so my jury is still out on Rubio and Nugent...rubio has been eerily silent since nov2nd, I believe hes taking the florida old farts pulse and ted nugent is a nice guy desparately trying to sell Ryans plan and hes failing
 
Personally, I am in favor of a combination of selective tax raises (where the pain is minimized) and cuts (where the pain is minimized).

Someone's ox has to be gored by this, so we should do it where the least harm occurs. This, for me translates to the following actions.
Taxes:
1. Let the tax cuts expire for the wealthiest among us
2. Let maybe half or one-fourth of the tax cuts expire for the middle class
3. Keep any tax cuts for the poor

Spending
1. Cut any government services that are duplicated among different agencies (I think a study suggested this could be the tune of 250billion per year)
2. Cut nonessential business subsidies
3. Cut into entitlement programs & DoD

I didn't provide specific numbers as this is more of a priority list and for me the numbers would be "keep doing it until the deficit is 0" Then pass a balanced budget amendment that would allow for emergency overspending but would require something like 80% support in both houses with a straight up or down vote (no parliamentary tricks allowed), meaning we would pretty much have to have a war or major disaster to convince enough people to open the purse strings, given our culture. As for the existing debt, I would let natural economic growth and the fact that pretty much all of this debt has a scheduled paydown period take care of that.
 
Last edited:
Personally, I am in favor of a combination of selective tax raises (where the pain is minimized) and cuts (where the pain is minimized).

Someone's ox has to be gored by this, so we should do it where the least harm occurs. This, for me translates to the following actions.
Taxes:
1. Let the tax cuts expire for the wealthiest among us
2. Let maybe half or one-fourth of the tax cuts expire for the middle class
3. Keep any tax cuts for the poor

Spending
1. Cut any government services that are duplicated among different agencies (I think a study suggested this could be the tune of 250billion per year)
2. Cut nonessential business subsidies
3. Cut into entitlement programs

I didn't provide specific numbers as this is more of a priority list and for me the numbers would be "keep doing it until the deficit is 0" Then pass a balanced budget amendment that would allow for emergency overspending but would require something like 80% support in both houses with a straight up or down vote (no parliamentary tricks allowed), meaning we would pretty much have to have a war or major disaster to convince enough people to open the purse strings, given our culture. As for the existing debt, I would let natural economic growth and the fact that pretty much all of this debt has a scheduled paydown period take care of that.

Not bad I can go along with most of that...but include...a total moratorium on ALL foreign aid and revisit after were out of debt and in the black...attack illegal immigration with whatever it takes to stop it...those two issues alone will put hundreds of billions a year back in our treasury...but no one is even mentioning it...sad
 
cut nonessential spending.

come to understand that "nonessential" includes "everything except Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution.
 
cut nonessential spending.

come to understand that "nonessential" includes "everything except Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution.

Why is it so hard for you and many others to understand that its more than that? Why do you think its impossible for essential spending, even just under Section 8, to not create a deficit at our current tax level? Military spending for example counts over a THIRD of the budget, add veterans care, you get almost 40 percent. Why dont you actually do the math instead of making assumptions
 
We already enjoy a substantial cost advantage over our USA based competetors. My hope is that whatever you do, it increases their costs some but not enough to force them to move their operations off-shore. ;)

.
 
Obama and Democrats are acting like there are two choices: increase the debt ceiling or default on our debt and basically declare national bankruptcy. These two choices are dishonest. There is a third choice. We can cut spending for non-essential programs, cowboy poetry festivals, turtle bridges and skate parks, superman capes for the unemployed, NPR, planned parenthood, the war in Libya, etc and cut spending enough to meet our current debt obligations. ...some of this I agree with, but programs that benefit man's quality of living must continue, I'd like to see more NPR and controls on advertising.

The government is like a man in a 5,000 sq ft home with premium cable channels, eating fillet mignon for breakfast lunch and dinner, driving five nice cars, with a lawn service, pool service, weekend hookers, and every gaming system known to man claiming that if we don't let him open another credit card to pay the minimum balance on his current card he will either have to declare bankruptcy or choose between taking his medication or eating. The is waste, both private and public, we need people to recognize this and do what is right....We may not yet have the quality of people for this.

Are those really the options?
And we need better politicians, the libs want to tax the rich the cons want to tax the poor...what does this accomplish ?
But things were done during the Reagan and Bush years that were bad for our masses but good for the wealthy.
These things must be reversed.
And all the wars must stop.
 
Defaulting would be disastrous for our nation and the world.

Perhaps if raising taxes/closing "loopholes" and decreasing spending weren't mutually exclusive we could increase income and decrease outgo at the same time.
 
We shouldn't even HAVE a debt ceiling. Why do we have to have two of these fights every year (one for the budget and one for the debt ceiling)? Congress just got done reaching a budget deal for 2011, so why the hell would they even consider not honoring the debt that they've just agreed to acquire?

If you want to cut spending and stop acquiring debt, that's fine and dandy. Just convince Congress of your viewpoint, and/or elect new people to Congress. But not raising the debt ceiling after we've just agreed to take on more debt is ****ing stupid.
 
Last edited:
As a sidenote. I cannot vote in this poll because it assigns motive in the poll options and my motive does not match any of those. I hate it when polls try to characterize people.
 
Obama and Democrats are acting like there are two choices: increase the debt ceiling or default on our debt and basically declare national bankruptcy. These two choices are dishonest. There is a third choice. We can cut spending for non-essential programs, cowboy poetry festivals, turtle bridges and skate parks, superman capes for the unemployed, NPR, planned parenthood, the war in Libya, etc and cut spending enough to meet our current debt obligations.

The government is like a man in a 5,000 sq ft home with premium cable channels, eating filet mignon for breakfast lunch and dinner, driving five nice cars, with a lawn service, pool service, weekend hookers, and every gaming system known to man claiming that if we don't let him open another credit card to pay the minimum balance on his current card he will either have to declare bankruptcy or choose between taking his medication or eating.

Are those really the options?

I think we should clarify the list of essential spending, make it to where the troops can still get paid during a government shut down,make a pay as go as federal law(unless there is a national emergency or we are at war) and shut the government down until the debt is paid off.
 
Its not, it only appeals the super wealthy that have enough money not to have to worry about anything.
That is what this entire teaparty thing is about...its about the rich taking more money and power from the people. It didnt start out that way thats why the had the support from the working class and baby boomers...but especially since Nov2nd its become evident what they are all about.
On nov2nd I voted straight republican...I voted for Marco Rubio, Rick Scott, and Ted Nugent...Scott was a mistake and so my jury is still out on Rubio and Nugent...rubio has been eerily silent since nov2nd, I believe hes taking the florida old farts pulse and ted nugent is a nice guy desparately trying to sell Ryans plan and hes failing

I see you changed your lean lpast. You know, it's weird but I really have to disagree with you here. I don't see how the rich and wealthy have anything to benefit from a default, and I honestly don't think the Tea Party is about empowering the rich.
 
Depends, if the plan of action proposed by Congress is to push off the debt on my kids, in the future.
I'd rather we default and get it over with.

I do not believe in making future generations pay for the posterity of those now.
It's immoral.
 
Things are not so cut and dry. This is how we solve this problem. We get rid of the debt ceiling because it's like believing in Santa Claus. Then we cut spending mainly with massive overhauls to the healthcare system that Obama originally promised and not this compromised "better or nothing" thing he has done, cut the military budget by a 1/3, raise the retirement age by 3 years, regulate social programs so that people that are able can't take as much advantage of them, tell China to go **** itself, and lastly and sadly inevitable roll back the Bush tax cuts on us all.
 
Back
Top Bottom