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)   If the White House gets the debt ceiling bill that says the Senate must pass a budget or they can't get paid, Obama will look at it before going "I'm okay with this"   (politico.com) divider line 41
    More: Amusing, obama, White House, Senate  
•       •       •

1044 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 Jan 2013 at 8:37 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2013-01-23 08:42:42 AM
CGPGrey did a great video on the debt ceiling the other day. I've been spreading it around.

The Debt Limit Explained
 
2013-01-23 08:44:03 AM
Don't put a hold on their pay.

Forfeit it. They haven't done their job in budgeting for years. Redistribute their wealth.
 
2013-01-23 08:45:53 AM
They're going to get a budget with more revenue, so then what?
 
2013-01-23 08:51:07 AM
Oh they're going to get paid, all right. I don't think we have to worry about Senators defaulting on their mortgages on their summer homes. I'm sure their bribers. . .err donors will help them out with some speaking appearances.
 
2013-01-23 08:51:24 AM
The trick isn't getting one house of the Legislature to pass a budget.   The trick is getting both of them to pass a reconciled version of the same budget.  That's not going to happen any time soon.
 
2013-01-23 08:51:36 AM
Obama added: "I'm not going to have a monthly or every-three-months conversation about whether or not we pay our bills. Because that in and of itself does severe damage. Even the threat of default hurts our economy. It's hurting our economy as we speak. We shouldn't be having that debate."

Keep. Repeating. This.
 
2013-01-23 08:51:41 AM

netcentric: Don't put a hold on their pay.

Forfeit it. They haven't done their job in budgeting for years. Redistribute their wealth.


As much as I would agree, the 27th Amendment to the Constitution prevents any Congress from legislating their pay for their current term. Delaying their pay gets around the amendment but forfeiting it altogether would violate that.

That said, the proposal should affect both the House AND the Senate - the House should have some incentive to pass a budget that can pass the Senate, too.
 
2013-01-23 08:51:55 AM

ampoliros: CGPGrey did a great video on the debt ceiling the other day. I've been spreading it around.

The Debt Limit Explained



Thanks, that was spiffy.
 
2013-01-23 08:52:03 AM
Obama needs to give them enough rope. Sequestration is still happening.
 
2013-01-23 08:54:52 AM

Arkanaut: netcentric: Don't put a hold on their pay.

Forfeit it. They haven't done their job in budgeting for years. Redistribute their wealth.

As much as I would agree, the 27th Amendment to the Constitution prevents any Congress from legislating their pay for their current term. Delaying their pay gets around the amendment but forfeiting it altogether would violate that.

That said, the proposal should affect both the House AND the Senate - the House should have some incentive to pass a budget that can pass the Senate, too.


This proposal specifically targets the Senate? Awful idea. If this proposal becomes law, we might as well abolish the Senate entirely, as they're now subordinate to the House.
 
2013-01-23 08:55:21 AM

pueblonative: Oh they're going to get paid, all right. I don't think we have to worry about Senators defaulting on their mortgages on their summer homes. I'm sure their bribers. . .err donors will help them out with some speaking appearances.


Yeah, it's gimmicky bullsh*t.

Because of the 27th Amendment, any pay that is withheld would eventually be released at the end of the current Congress, even if a budget doesn't ever pass.
 
2013-01-23 09:00:07 AM

imontheinternet: pueblonative: Oh they're going to get paid, all right. I don't think we have to worry about Senators defaulting on their mortgages on their summer homes. I'm sure their bribers. . .err donors will help them out with some speaking appearances.

Yeah, it's gimmicky bullsh*t.

Because of the 27th Amendment, any pay that is withheld would eventually be released at the end of the current Congress, even if a budget doesn't ever pass.


So they'll have to subsist only on lobbyist "gifts" until they get a balloon payment in 2 years. How cruel.

// actually, it'd be funnier if that one-time payment bumped them all into the upper income bracket; the one they just raised the rate on
 
2013-01-23 09:01:40 AM
"Responsibility" is not borrowing more money to simply make the payments on the money you've already borrowed. "Responsibility" is limiting your spending to an amount equal to or less than your income.

Period.
 
2013-01-23 09:04:52 AM

HAMMERTOE: "Responsibility" is not borrowing more money to simply make the payments on the money you've already borrowed. "Responsibility" is limiting your spending to an amount equal to or less than your income.

Period.


So, BSABSVR, eh? Good argument.
 
2013-01-23 09:05:10 AM

HAMMERTOE: "Responsibility" is not borrowing more money to simply make the payments on the money you've already borrowed. "Responsibility" is limiting your spending to an amount equal to or less than your income.

Period.


So then you are in favor of tax increases and massive cuts in defense spending. Good to know.
 
2013-01-23 09:07:27 AM

imontheinternet: pueblonative: Oh they're going to get paid, all right. I don't think we have to worry about Senators defaulting on their mortgages on their summer homes. I'm sure their bribers. . .err donors will help them out with some speaking appearances.

Yeah, it's gimmicky bullsh*t.

Because of the 27th Amendment, any pay that is withheld would eventually be released at the end of the current Congress, even if a budget doesn't ever pass.


Came to say this.

I guess they either fell asleep or skipped over that bit when they did that constitution reading stunt.
 
2013-01-23 09:07:55 AM
If a "limit" is raised each time it is reached, it is not a "limit", it's just a "number".

Just get rid of the damned thing. The only thing it's really used for is political grandstanding.
 
2013-01-23 09:09:18 AM

HAMMERTOE: "Responsibility" is not borrowing more money to simply make the payments on the money you've already borrowed. "Responsibility" is limiting your spending to an amount equal to or less than your income.

Period.


So you wish the republican controlled congress would stop authorizing all of that spending?
 
2013-01-23 09:11:21 AM

GanjSmokr: If a "limit" is raised each time it is reached, it is not a "limit", it's just a "number".

Just get rid of the damned thing. The only thing it's really used for is political grandstanding.


THIS!
 
2013-01-23 09:13:50 AM

netcentric: Don't put a hold on their pay.

Forfeit it. They haven't done their job in budgeting for years. Redistribute their wealth.


I don't think the House is impacted by this at all, and they are the ones who are responsible for originating all spending bills. No. the House wants to punish the Senate (which, TOTALLY coincidentally has a different majority party than the House) for the House's bad behavior. It's sort of a smaller version of the whole debt ceiling fiasco if you think about it.
 
2013-01-23 09:17:11 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: o then you are in favor of tax increases and massive cuts in defense spending. Good to know.


Can't speak for HAMMERTOE, but even though I'm a conservative, I'm for both of those things, as long as there are corresponding cuts in entitlement spending. Pay that shiat off, save some money, and then spend like a drunken sailor (as long as we have the cash to pay for it).
 
2013-01-23 09:23:00 AM

HAMMERTOE: "Responsibility" is not borrowing more money to simply make the payments on the money you've already borrowed. "Responsibility" is limiting your spending to an amount equal to or less than your income. Period.


This is money that's already been spent, and the bill is due. Reducing spending in the future doesn't enable you to pay your bill NOW.
 
2013-01-23 09:23:36 AM

ampoliros: CGPGrey did a great video on the debt ceiling the other day. I've been spreading it around.

The Debt Limit Explained


Virtually all of his videos are great (unless you have no interest at all in the topic, and even then there is some interesting historical stuff in most of them)
 
2013-01-23 09:38:05 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm for both of those things, as long as there are corresponding cuts in entitlement spending


Define entitlement spending.
 
2013-01-23 10:07:51 AM

HAMMERTOE: "Responsibility" is not borrowing more money to simply make the payments on the money you've already borrowed. "Responsibility" is limiting your spending to an amount equal to or less than your income.

Period.


That makes the vast majority of homeowners irresponsible. Most people can't afford a house without a loan. Also, deficit spending is important for getting an economy out of recession. The problem lies in deficit spending when we're not in a recession, something the "fiscal conservatives" did with zeal for many years.

Responsibility also means regulating financial institutions so that they don't fark the economy so they can make a buck.
 
2013-01-23 10:10:33 AM

Felgraf: Edward Rooney Dean of Students: I'm for both of those things, as long as there are corresponding cuts in entitlement spending

Define entitlement spending.


Harsh reality? Social Security. Medicare. Free shiat that goes on, and on, and on, and on...ad nauseum. Cut it back, cut defense spending as much as possible, raise taxes on everybody (even those at the bottom of the scale). Tighten the belt for a few years (however long it takes), get a balanced ledger, make some headway, then we can start adding funding to everybody's pet programs, lowering taxes, whatever.

Note that I realize this will NEVER, EVER happen. But a man can dream...
 
2013-01-23 10:13:38 AM
qorkfiend:
This proposal specifically targets the Senate? Awful idea. If this proposal becomes law, we might as well abolish the Senate entirely, as they're now subordinate to the House.

The bill actually targets both houses.  If either fails to pass a budget, that house's members have their pay held.

But as has others have pointed out, it doesn't require the passage of a reconciled budget by both houses.
 
2013-01-23 10:22:54 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Free shiat


Free shiat? I've take a look at my paychecks over the course of my working life and I couldn't help but notice that I've paid a whole shiat ton of money for that free shiat.
 
2013-01-23 10:57:11 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Harsh reality? Social Security. Medicare. Free shiat that goes on, and on, and on, and on...ad nauseum.


... You don't know how medicare and SS work, do you?

There's thing thing when you look at your paycheck called a FICA tax.

So, as I suspected, "cut entitlement spending" really means "hey, let's take away something people are entitled to, due to them having paid for it."
 
2013-01-23 11:09:17 AM

Felgraf: ... You don't know how medicare and SS work, do you?

There's thing thing when you look at your paycheck called a FICA tax.

So, as I suspected, "cut entitlement spending" really means "hey, let's take away something people are entitled to, due to them having paid for it."


And that's why nothing will ever change. Because that's exactly what I said, "take stuff away from poor people." You don't know how the english language works, do you?

i know exactly how SS and medicare work (my wife is a healthcare provider). i never said anything about taking stuff away. A LOT of the money for those programs (and medicaid, etc...) are pure waste and fraud.

And since a large portion of the public pays no taxes, how does "due to them having paid for it" make any sense at all? I do believe that people who can afford have a responsibility to help care for those who can't, but we have to be smarter about it. Just like defense spending (hint: I worked for a defense contractor for years, and the sheer wasted money is staggering).
 
2013-01-23 11:12:43 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: a large portion of the public pays no taxes


Oh, I get it, you're an idiot.
 
2013-01-23 11:13:00 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: since a large portion of the public pays no taxes,


You may want to look up exactly what that means.

// they still pay taxes - mostly payroll taxes
// also sales/use taxes, not to mention administrative "fees" (like for registering a car)
 
2013-01-23 11:16:43 AM

Dr Dreidel: // they still pay taxes - mostly payroll taxes
// also sales/use taxes, not to mention administrative "fees" (like for registering a car)


*sigh*...

You know what I mean, but Captain Pedantic for the win!

/Because technically correct is the best kind of correct!
 
2013-01-23 11:25:14 AM
Gaddammit so much! It's the House that drafts budgets. Then both the Senate and the House have to approve it.

If the House produces budgets that are not reasonably expected to pass both chambers the blame is on the farking House and not the Senate. The more fair measure here would be to redirect congressional pay into escrow for both the House and the Senate until the agree on a budget. That way all parties involved have the same stake in the game.
 
2013-01-23 11:33:07 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: And since a large portion of the public pays no taxes, how does "due to them having paid for it" make any sense at all?


Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Dr Dreidel: // they still pay taxes - mostly payroll taxes
// also sales/use taxes, not to mention administrative "fees" (like for registering a car)

*sigh*...

You know what I mean, but Captain Pedantic for the win!


So those taxes which they don't pay into entitlements (your OP), are actually taxes they DO pay (since I know what you meant), and they DID pay into "entitlement programs", contradicting your OP.

So...then...what?
 
2013-01-23 11:37:31 AM

Dr Dreidel: So those taxes which they don't pay into entitlements (your OP), are actually taxes they DO pay (since I know what you meant), and they DID pay into "entitlement programs", contradicting your OP.

So...then...what?


Yes, because state sales tax and car registration fees are the same thing as federal taxes. Idiot.
 
2013-01-23 11:41:56 AM

FooDog: Gaddammit so much! It's the House that drafts budgets. Then both the Senate and the House have to approve it.

If the House produces budgets that are not reasonably expected to pass both chambers the blame is on the farking House and not the Senate. The more fair measure here would be to redirect congressional pay into escrow for both the House and the Senate until the agree on a budget. That way all parties involved have the same stake in the game.


What's stopping the Senate from drafting a budget and forcing the House's hand? Either the House would have to deny voting on it or vote it down and look like hypocrites, or acknowledge that it's their Constitutional responsibility to draft the budget and prevent them from constantly blaming the Senate.
 
2013-01-23 11:43:12 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Dr Dreidel: So those taxes which they don't pay into entitlements (your OP), are actually taxes they DO pay (since I know what you meant), and they DID pay into "entitlement programs", contradicting your OP.

So...then...what?

Yes, because state sales tax and car registration fees are the same thing as federal taxes. Idiot.


Payroll taxes are federal taxes. Pretty much everyone who works pays those.
 
2013-01-23 11:45:41 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Felgraf: ... You don't know how medicare and SS work, do you?

There's thing thing when you look at your paycheck called a FICA tax.

So, as I suspected, "cut entitlement spending" really means "hey, let's take away something people are entitled to, due to them having paid for it."

And that's why nothing will ever change. Because that's exactly what I said, "take stuff away from poor people." You don't know how the english language works, do you?

i know exactly how SS and medicare work (my wife is a healthcare provider). i never said anything about taking stuff away. A LOT of the money for those programs (and medicaid, etc...) are pure waste and fraud.

And since a large portion of the public pays no taxes, how does "due to them having paid for it" make any sense at all? I do believe that people who can afford have a responsibility to help care for those who can't, but we have to be smarter about it. Just like defense spending (hint: I worked for a defense contractor for years, and the sheer wasted money is staggering).


IIRC Medicare has a remarkably low overhead as compared to extremely efficient financial engines like the current health insurance industry.  Social security isn't exactly fraught with hundreds of billions of dollars of FW&A either.  I think you're talking out of your ass when you say you're a conservative; you probably mean to say neoconservative, because you propose solutions that don't take into account actual reality, you paint with a broad brush when making statements, and you have to backpedal and explain yourself and hastily include anecdotal evidence such as your wife to justify your opinion.

People pay into "entitlements".  That's why it's an entitlement.  We're entitled to it.  We paid for it.  We are paying for it.  If you want to make cuts to those services to make different payments then I would at least expect you and your ilk to be upfront about this "redistribution of wealth".

Identify where all the savings would come from regarding these entitlements and this supposed crisis of fraud waste & abuse so entailed.  And then while you're doing that, also address the health problems of an aging population and consider the financial implications inexorably linked to the same.  And explain to me how it makes sense to make huge cuts to a service that is increasingly relied on by millions simply to survive.

Then, after all that is done, let's face the boondoggle that is defense.
 
2013-01-23 11:51:00 AM

Edward Rooney Dean of Students: Yes, because state sales tax and car registration fees are the same thing as federal taxes. Idiot.


OK. Let's back up. (Idiot.)

You first repeated the bullshiat claim that "a large portion of the public pays no taxes". I responded that you should look up what that means, as they don't count payroll taxes in there - so the 40+% of people who pay ONLY payroll taxes without owing anything extra on 15 April are, in fact, contributing to "entitlements" like SS and Medicare (via those payroll taxes - 6.2/12.4% for SS; 2% to Medicare). Meaning they DO contribute, and they are, in fact, ENTITLED to draw from those programs once they reach the eligible age/status. (Idiot.)

They also don't count sales taxes and usage taxes/fees. Which aren't part of FICA, but are still taxes "those people" pay. (Idiot.)

So you're wrong for two reasons - in fact and in reading comprehension. Idiot.
 
2013-01-23 12:02:59 PM

NeoCortex42: FooDog: Gaddammit so much! It's the House that drafts budgets. Then both the Senate and the House have to approve it.

If the House produces budgets that are not reasonably expected to pass both chambers the blame is on the farking House and not the Senate. The more fair measure here would be to redirect congressional pay into escrow for both the House and the Senate until the agree on a budget. That way all parties involved have the same stake in the game.

What's stopping the Senate from drafting a budget and forcing the House's hand? Either the House would have to deny voting on it or vote it down and look like hypocrites, or acknowledge that it's their Constitutional responsibility to draft the budget and prevent them from constantly blaming the Senate.


As far as I understand it, the Senate Budget Committee does not have authority over the aggregate budget. It only controls issues pertaining to taxation and entitlements. The House Budget Committee on the other hand is specifically tasked with drafting budget resolutions for the whole budget. But I could be in the wrong on this. I'm sure there are government wonks out there that know better.
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report