Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   You think this last weekend was fun? Wait two months and enjoy the followup special "Fiscal cliff 2: Electric Booga-farkwe'rebroke"   (politico.com) divider line 168
    More: Scary, obama, credit limits  
•       •       •

1045 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Jan 2013 at 11:40 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



168 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-02 09:13:06 AM  
This is news.. not. It was a given that the debt ceiling wouldn't be changed outside a Grand Bargain of some type.

It is also a given that the House Republicans will use this as leverage during the sequestration negotiations, and that they will likely demand significant concessions to make any agreement. The Senate isn't really going to be able to do anything about it either.

The only real question is how the President will respond. Cave? Gut Defense? Stop paying government employees making, say, $170k and above (ie: Congressional pay rate)? The trillion dollar platinum coin thing?

It'll be an interesting couple of months - by which I mean we won't hear anything useful until we're at a crisis point, the resolution to which will probably to kick the can down the road a bit more.
 
2013-01-02 09:51:04 AM  
Anyone who thinks that the debt ceiling should even be the subject of a debate really needs to watch this clip.

It's from a TV show, but the facts are 100% true
 
2013-01-02 09:53:18 AM  
This time with less leverage!
 
2013-01-02 10:02:27 AM  

Trivia Jockey: Anyone who thinks that the debt ceiling should even be the subject of a debate really needs to watch this clip.

It's from a TV show, but the facts are 100% true


Pretty damn much.
 
2013-01-02 10:24:28 AM  
The richest country in the world pretending its broke is embarrassing.
 
2013-01-02 10:27:55 AM  
I wonder what Republicans say our credit rating should be this time.
 
2013-01-02 10:34:25 AM  
Yeah this is going to work out great for the the Rethuglicans. They create a debt through waging two wars, deregulating the markets and cutting revenue but now they dont want to make the payments on the loans they took out to cover the cost of all that.

Poor Koch suckers. I guess they gotta keep their bosses happy.
 
2013-01-02 10:47:51 AM  
The 2011 debt-ceiling standoff cost the United States its perfect credit standing with rating agency Standard & Poor's, and Fitch Ratings warned earlier this month that it would consider a downgrade of its own if lawmakers again flirt with default.

it is disgusting that certain contingents of congresspeople feel comfortable positioning themselves as willing to send our country into default, even after seeing the effects of such posturing.
 
2013-01-02 11:09:07 AM  

thomps: it is disgusting that certain contingents of congresspeople feel comfortable positioning themselves as willing to send our country into default, even after seeing the effects of such posturing.


Actually, I think it's more a result of many lawmakers not knowing what the debt ceiling is...many believe it's authority to engage in more deficit spending, which is absolutely NOT what it is.
 
2013-01-02 11:13:53 AM  

Trivia Jockey: thomps: it is disgusting that certain contingents of congresspeople feel comfortable positioning themselves as willing to send our country into default, even after seeing the effects of such posturing.

Actually, I think it's more a result of many lawmakers not knowing what the debt ceiling is...many believe it's authority to engage in more deficit spending, which is absolutely NOT what it is.


i'd buy that argument a couple of years ago, but we've been through this once already. i can't believe that anyone who sat through that debacle can honestly claim that they don't understand what the debt ceiling is or what the ramifications are of f*cking with its regular increases. in 2013, you can't hide bad intentions by claiming ignorance.
 
2013-01-02 11:22:19 AM  

thomps: i can't believe that anyone who sat through that debacle can honestly claim that they don't understand what the debt ceiling is or what the ramifications are of f*cking with its regular increases. in 2013, you can't hide bad intentions by claiming ignorance.


If that's true and they do really understand what it is and what it does, then they wouldn't be debating it...they'd be rubber-stamping it.
 
2013-01-02 11:25:09 AM  
Dollar for dollar.  Raise the debt ceiling a $1 then lower spending by a $1.  Grand compromise.
 
2013-01-02 11:29:53 AM  

I_C_Weener: Dollar for dollar.  Raise the debt ceiling a $1 then lower spending by a $1.  Grand compromise.


That's not how the debt ceiling works.  In order for this to make any sense, you'd have to lower spending we've already spent by $1.  Which also makes no sense.

Hence, the debt ceiling should not in any way be a debate or a negotiating tactic.
 
2013-01-02 11:30:22 AM  
Yeah, we know.  The fiscal terrorists will be back to hold the global economy hostage in February.

We need to vote for more Republicans.
 
2013-01-02 11:32:43 AM  

I_C_Weener: Dollar for dollar.  Raise the debt ceiling a $1 then lower spending by a $1.  Grand compromise.


How about dollar for dollar for dollar for dollar?

Raise revenue by 1 dollar, cut entitlement spending by 1 dollar, cut the deficit by 1 dollar and invest 1 dollar in jobs/future (infrastructure, education, R&D).
 
2013-01-02 11:35:03 AM  

I_C_Weener: Dollar for dollar.  Raise the debt ceiling a $1 then lower spending by a $1.  Grand compromise.


As long as $0.85 of the spending cut comes from the defense budget. The other $0.15 can come from Boehner's orange skin cream and tanning bed bill
 
2013-01-02 11:36:20 AM  

mrshowrules: Raise revenue by 1 dollar, cut entitlement spending by 1 dollar, cut the deficit by 1 dollar and invest 1 dollar in jobs/future (infrastructure, education, R&D).


These concepts are definitely worth considering, but they have nothing to do with the debt ceiling issue.  Nothing.
 
2013-01-02 11:36:25 AM  

Trivia Jockey: I_C_Weener: Dollar for dollar.  Raise the debt ceiling a $1 then lower spending by a $1.  Grand compromise.

That's not how the debt ceiling works.  In order for this to make any sense, you'd have to lower spending we've already spent by $1.  Which also makes no sense.

Hence, the debt ceiling should not in any way be a debate or a negotiating tactic.


No.  You want more debt ceiling.  I want less future spending.  Lets reduce spending to Clinton era levels and taxes increased to Clinton era.  I'll give you what you want, you give me what I want.  POLITICS!!!
 
2013-01-02 11:38:56 AM  
Reminder: Under the previous administration, current GOP leaders voted to raise the debt limit 19 times (+$4T) with no spending offsets. Link
 
2013-01-02 11:39:37 AM  

Trivia Jockey: mrshowrules: Raise revenue by 1 dollar, cut entitlement spending by 1 dollar, cut the deficit by 1 dollar and invest 1 dollar in jobs/future (infrastructure, education, R&D).

These concepts are definitely worth considering, but they have nothing to do with the debt ceiling issue.  Nothing.


Neither did spending in Alaska for Hurricane Sandy relief.  But it ended up in the bill anyway.  When you want to talk about how politics works, not how you want it to work, we can discuss this.
 
2013-01-02 11:39:52 AM  

I_C_Weener: Trivia Jockey: I_C_Weener: Dollar for dollar.  Raise the debt ceiling a $1 then lower spending by a $1.  Grand compromise.

That's not how the debt ceiling works.  In order for this to make any sense, you'd have to lower spending we've already spent by $1.  Which also makes no sense.

Hence, the debt ceiling should not in any way be a debate or a negotiating tactic.

No.  You want more debt ceiling.  I want less future spending.  Lets reduce spending to Clinton era levels and taxes increased to Clinton era.  I'll give you what you want, you give me what I want.  POLITICS!!!


hmm, i guess i concede your point, Trivia Jockey, people still have no idea what the debt ceiling is.
 
2013-01-02 11:39:56 AM  

I_C_Weener: You want more debt ceiling. I want less future spending.


Apples and oranges.  The debt ceiling has exactly zero to do with future spending.  The debt ceiling is to address money already spent.

Unless you're just messing with me, in which case I totally fell for it.
 
2013-01-02 11:40:12 AM  

Trivia Jockey: mrshowrules: Raise revenue by 1 dollar, cut entitlement spending by 1 dollar, cut the deficit by 1 dollar and invest 1 dollar in jobs/future (infrastructure, education, R&D).

These concepts are definitely worth considering, but they have nothing to do with the debt ceiling issue.  Nothing.


True.
 
2013-01-02 11:41:49 AM  

I_C_Weener: No. You want more debt ceiling. I want less future spending. Lets reduce spending to Clinton era levels and taxes increased to Clinton era. I'll give you what you want, you give me what I want. POLITICS!!!


Isn't it Congress' job to define spending?  Isn't the issue here that the Congress refuses to pay for spending they've already demanded?  OH WAIT, THAT IS THE ISSUE
 
2013-01-02 11:43:01 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Reminder: Under the previous administration, current GOP leaders voted to raise the debt limit 19 times (+$4T) with no spending offsets. Link


Of course they did...because nobody considered the debt a big problem until a black guy got elected.
 
2013-01-02 11:44:47 AM  
I'm certain Speaker Cantor would never do anything that would endanger the credit rating of the US.
 
2013-01-02 11:45:48 AM  

Mentat: Isn't the issue here that the Congress refuses to pay for spending they've already demanded? OH WAIT, THAT IS THE ISSUE


Right...it's like your wife charges $10,000 on your credit card, but you tell the credit card company you're not paying it back until your wife agrees to spend less next month.  The credit card company doesn't care in the slightest, and will hurt your credit rating for not promptly paying.
 
2013-01-02 11:46:38 AM  

Trivia Jockey: I_C_Weener: You want more debt ceiling. I want less future spending.

Apples and oranges.  The debt ceiling has exactly zero to do with future spending.  The debt ceiling is to address money already spent.

Unless you're just messing with me, in which case I totally fell for it.


He understands that. He is advocating the house's position of using the debt ceiling as leverage.
They are taking the absolutely ridiculous position of using paying today's bill as a poker chip to debate how much to plan to spend tomorrow. The idea they are cutting off their own foot...and a hand....and...lots of other stuff besides is unrealized.
 
2013-01-02 11:47:22 AM  

Mentat: I_C_Weener: No. You want more debt ceiling. I want less future spending. Lets reduce spending to Clinton era levels and taxes increased to Clinton era. I'll give you what you want, you give me what I want. POLITICS!!!

Isn't it Congress' job to define spending?  Isn't the issue here that the Congress refuses to pay for spending they've already demanded?  OH WAIT, THAT IS THE ISSUE


Yep. Pretty hilarious hearing Congress claim their hands are tied on controlling spending when they're the ones in charge of submitting budgets.

The debt ceiling isn't about curbing spending, it's about paying the bills after it's been budgeted and spent. If the GOP want to curb spending, stop passing budgets that spend so much.
 
2013-01-02 11:47:33 AM  

Trivia Jockey: Mentat: Isn't the issue here that the Congress refuses to pay for spending they've already demanded? OH WAIT, THAT IS THE ISSUE

Right...it's like your wife charges $10,000 on your credit card for things you ordered her to buy, but you tell the credit card company you're not paying it back until your wife agrees to spend less next month.  The credit card company doesn't care in the slightest, and will hurt your credit rating for not promptly paying.


FTFY
 
2013-01-02 11:47:35 AM  
Can't we just get rid of the "debt ceiling"? It's essentially pointless to have it if we just raise it each and every time we reach it.

The only thing it seems to be good for is political grandstanding.
 
2013-01-02 11:47:46 AM  
So we're going to have another argument about whether we should pay for stuff we already bought? Sounds reasonable.
 
2013-01-02 11:48:51 AM  

Wicked Chinchilla: He is advocating the house's position of using the debt ceiling as leverage.


Donald Trump makes the same argument.  And I think we all know what it means to agree with Donald Trump on political/economic issues.

No educated, intelligent person should agree with using the debt ceiling as leverage.  For anything.
 
2013-01-02 11:49:23 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: I'm certain Speaker Cantor would never do anything that would endanger the credit rating of the US.


msnbcmedia.msn.com

It's not a knife!
 
2013-01-02 11:49:46 AM  

Wicked Chinchilla: Trivia Jockey: I_C_Weener: You want more debt ceiling. I want less future spending.

Apples and oranges.  The debt ceiling has exactly zero to do with future spending.  The debt ceiling is to address money already spent.

Unless you're just messing with me, in which case I totally fell for it.

He understands that. He is advocating the house's position of using the debt ceiling as leverage.
They are taking the absolutely ridiculous position of using paying today's bill as a poker chip to debate how much to plan to spend tomorrow. The idea they are cutting off their own foot...and a hand....and...lots of other stuff besides is unrealized.


exactly my point. if you are willing to use the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip you are by definition saying that you are comfortable with the idea of the united stated defaulting on its debt. it's an insane position and one that should not be taken seriously (but sadly has to be, given the track record of those taking it).
 
2013-01-02 11:50:46 AM  
"We're broke" is a lie. We just don't have a proper taxation system. Fix that, let the wars end, and you'll find that we have plenty enough to afford better things.
 
2013-01-02 11:52:20 AM  

Trivia Jockey: I_C_Weener: You want more debt ceiling. I want less future spending.

Apples and oranges.  The debt ceiling has exactly zero to do with future spending.  The debt ceiling is to address money already spent.

Unless you're just messing with me, in which case I totally fell for it.


Apples and oranges is called pork.  Look it up.  Happens all the time.
 
2013-01-02 11:52:58 AM  

GanjSmokr: Can't we just get rid of the "debt ceiling"? It's essentially pointless to have it if we just raise it each and every time we reach it.

The only thing it seems to be good for is political grandstanding.


Obama still holds the nuclear option since the debt ceiling isn't constitutionally mandated, at least until Anton Scalia suddenly discovers that it is.
 
2013-01-02 11:53:22 AM  

Markus5: Philip Francis Queeg: I'm certain Speaker Cantor would never do anything that would endanger the credit rating of the US.

[msnbcmedia.msn.com image 396x278]

It's not a knife!


msnbcmedia.msn.com

Sure.
 
2013-01-02 11:54:50 AM  
Obama will offer some small amount of cuts, to let Republicans have a way to save face when the vote to raise the ceiling. It'll probably work - unless Wall Street carries less influence in the GOP that the tea bags.

In the unlikely event the latter is true, Treasury will avoid default on t-bills by stopping payment on anything non-emergency. People will howl with outrage that money they were promised - promised! - is not forthcoming. Among them will be defense contractors. Suddely a deal will get done.
 
2013-01-02 11:55:46 AM  

thomps: Wicked Chinchilla: Trivia Jockey: I_C_Weener: You want more debt ceiling. I want less future spending.

Apples and oranges.  The debt ceiling has exactly zero to do with future spending.  The debt ceiling is to address money already spent.

Unless you're just messing with me, in which case I totally fell for it.

He understands that. He is advocating the house's position of using the debt ceiling as leverage.
They are taking the absolutely ridiculous position of using paying today's bill as a poker chip to debate how much to plan to spend tomorrow. The idea they are cutting off their own foot...and a hand....and...lots of other stuff besides is unrealized.

exactly my point. if you are willing to use the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip you are by definition saying that you are comfortable with the idea of the united stated defaulting on its debt. it's an insane position and one that should not be taken seriously (but sadly has to be, given the track record of those taking it).


I totally agree with you.

Its also a circular argument:
Part R "We must control spending to prevent the economy from shiatting the bed!!"
Part D "Austerity doesn't work. See Recession Dip during 1930's when Roosevelt cut stimulus, see Europe NOW, etc. Lets get the economy working THEN go back with a scalpel"
Part R "DROP FUTURE SPENDING NOW OR I WONT PAY THE BILL!"
Part D "If we don't pay whats already spent we will lose our credit rating, increasing the costs of future borrowing (which you ostensibly are trying to prevent...), stop being stupid. It could also make the economy shiat the bed."
repeat.
 
2013-01-02 11:56:04 AM  

I_C_Weener: Trivia Jockey: I_C_Weener: Dollar for dollar.  Raise the debt ceiling a $1 then lower spending by a $1.  Grand compromise.

That's not how the debt ceiling works.  In order for this to make any sense, you'd have to lower spending we've already spent by $1.  Which also makes no sense.

Hence, the debt ceiling should not in any way be a debate or a negotiating tactic.

No.  You want more debt ceiling.  I want less future spending.  Lets reduce spending to Clinton era levels and taxes increased to Clinton era.  I'll give you what you want, you give me what I want.  POLITICS!!!


Thank you sir or madam I am delighted to have an excuse to explain this to someone.

If you go on a drunken spending spree with a credit card you still have to pay the bill even if the rates change from when you initially made the purchases. Saying youre not going to pay it because you want to negotiate with your spouse (in order to cut food subsidies to your mooching kids and grandparents) would not stop your credit from being trashed if you are late on the payment.

Ironically these delaying tactics are making the debt go up because bills are being put off in order to keep things running and you know how those late fees pile up.
 
2013-01-02 11:59:05 AM  

I_C_Weener: Apples and oranges is called pork. Look it up. Happens all the time.


Yes but on this particular issue doing this is completely asinine and, as it happens, dangerous.  Are you advocating that the GOP should use the debt ceiling as leverage to get concessions on future spending?

I hope you are not advocating this.  Because if you are, you're just as reckless and idiotic as the Congressmen who are actually going to do this.
 
2013-01-02 12:00:25 PM  

Trivia Jockey: mrshowrules: Raise revenue by 1 dollar, cut entitlement spending by 1 dollar, cut the deficit by 1 dollar and invest 1 dollar in jobs/future (infrastructure, education, R&D).

These concepts are definitely worth considering, but they have nothing to do with the debt ceiling issue.  Nothing.


Unless, as a precondition for raising the debt ceiling, we decide that we want to avoid this fight by not reaching that ceiling again - perhaps by raising revenues while cutting spending, or investing now to realize some savings later.

If the debt ceiling is like your credit limit, once you start getting close to that (through things you've already bought), it's a given you'll need to call Peggy at PrimeCredit to get that number raised, but without a budget for the next months/year (or whatever) to avoid this chronic overspending problem could avoid such a tricky situation in the first place.

I realize that's not a perfect metaphor (since Peggy won't raise your credit limit twice in a year, or raise it to 100% of your net worth - the US can raise that limit to infinity without serious troubles, provided revenues keep up with expenses month-to-month), but there's no reason the government can't, for example, deal with hundreds of money-saving ideas to save tens of billions of dollars (if the fellas at the Washington Guardian can be believed; I personally would take those numbers with a grain of salt, but if they're 75% right, that's still more than a little change in our couch cushions) at the Dept of Transportation and others while also investing in next-gen power, a faster internet for Wall St to trade with, and having rich people pay 40% of the top of their income, etc.
 
2013-01-02 12:00:52 PM  

Wicked Chinchilla: thomps: Wicked Chinchilla: Trivia Jockey: I_C_Weener: You want more debt ceiling. I want less future spending.

Apples and oranges.  The debt ceiling has exactly zero to do with future spending.  The debt ceiling is to address money already spent.

Unless you're just messing with me, in which case I totally fell for it.

He understands that. He is advocating the house's position of using the debt ceiling as leverage.
They are taking the absolutely ridiculous position of using paying today's bill as a poker chip to debate how much to plan to spend tomorrow. The idea they are cutting off their own foot...and a hand....and...lots of other stuff besides is unrealized.

exactly my point. if you are willing to use the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip you are by definition saying that you are comfortable with the idea of the united stated defaulting on its debt. it's an insane position and one that should not be taken seriously (but sadly has to be, given the track record of those taking it).

I totally agree with you.

Its also a circular argument:
Part R "We must control spending to prevent the economy from shiatting the bed!!"
Part D "Austerity doesn't work. See Recession Dip during 1930's when Roosevelt cut stimulus, see Europe NOW, etc. Lets get the economy working THEN go back with a scalpel"
Part R "DROP FUTURE SPENDING NOW OR I WONT PAY THE BILL!"
Part D "If we don't pay whats already spent we will lose our credit rating, increasing the costs of future borrowing (which you ostensibly are trying to prevent...), stop being stupid. It could also make the economy shiat the bed."
repeat.


At this point it is the Republicans only path to victory in '14 and '16.
What else do they have to win a national election?
If they can control the message and let the incumbent's party take the heat, it'll work.
 
2013-01-02 12:01:24 PM  

I_C_Weener: Apples and oranges is called pork.  Look it up.  Happens all the time.


What in the hell does this even mean?

Go tell your credit card company that you aren't going to pay the bill this month until your wife agrees to stop spending money on shoes. Let me know what happens when the CC company responds.
 
2013-01-02 12:03:57 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Unless, as a precondition for raising the debt ceiling, we decide that we want to avoid this fight by not reaching that ceiling again - perhaps by raising revenues while cutting spending, or investing now to realize some savings later.


Sounds laudible...until you realize that even having that discussion could lower the U.S.'s credit rating.

Any discussions about cutting future spending, raising revenue, etc. must be done on their own, completely outside the debt celing issue.

Seriously, watch the clip I posted at the beginning of the thread.  Sorkin did his research on this one.
 
2013-01-02 12:04:39 PM  
The debt ceiling makes no sense. When Congress passes a bill that appropriates money, it should also be granting the treasury authority to borrow that money to pay the obligation. Decoupling that action is nonsensical and is why basically no other country faces this kind of issue.

Just aboslih the debt ceiling entirely so we cna quit hurting ourselves, it's a completley outdated and useless idea.
 
2013-01-02 12:05:21 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Unless, as a precondition for raising the debt ceiling, we decide that we want to avoid this fight by not reaching that ceiling again - perhaps by raising revenues while cutting spending, or investing now to realize some savings later.


We don't get to have an either/or in regards to whether the debt ceiling is raised. There isn't an alternative to "raising the debt ceiling". Not raising it will result in the United States defaulting on its debt. With that alternative, there is no reasonable stance to use the debt ceiling as a political football.

The appropriate response is to reasonably discuss spending and revenue independent of something that is inevitable. $1 of revenue for every $1 of spending cuts. And, for the past year, the GOP has been getting $1 in revenue raises for more than $1 in spending cuts....but they are tilting the debate using something that has not ever been a political football.
 
2013-01-02 12:05:57 PM  
If the republicans want to cut spending then all they have to do is get their representatives in congress to stop voting to spend money.

That hurricane Sandy relief bill didn't get aid to Alaska written into by magic.
 
Displayed 50 of 168 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report