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.

(CNN)   China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies. This GOP scheme is going to tank the dollar as the world reserve currency   (money.cnn.com) divider line 507
    More: Interesting, United States, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Singapore, Americanize, action alert, Christine Lagarde, reserve currency  
•       •       •

6847 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Oct 2013 at 9:16 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



507 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-14 08:01:54 AM  
China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.
 
2013-10-14 08:18:52 AM  
I came in here to joke about how some people are probably stupid enough to think this would be a good thing, because they don't understand how economics work and just want to stick it to the furriners, and then I saw this:

dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.

 
2013-10-14 08:22:18 AM  

what_now: I came in here to joke about how some people are probably stupid enough to think this would be a good thing, because they don't understand how economics work and just want to stick it to the furriners, and then I saw this:

dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.


One can hope he's joking, but with the jokers ascendant in the House these days, you can't be sure.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-10-14 08:26:14 AM  
There is zero chance of a default.  I don't think he would do in until the last minute, but I am sure Obama will disregard the debt ceiling if it comes to that.

A default would violate the 14th amendment and if the minute the debt ceiling makes that inveitable it becomes unconstitutional.
 
2013-10-14 08:42:42 AM  
This is just insane.
 
2013-10-14 09:17:14 AM  

Nabb1: This is just insane.


The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.
 
2013-10-14 09:19:58 AM  
I remember when Bush was evil and the President was expected to work with a Congress of the other political party, not the other way around.  But, then, that was like 8 years ago.  Times are different now.
 
2013-10-14 09:20:53 AM  
If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.
 
2013-10-14 09:21:15 AM  
Guys, don't you know that global economy is just a dog whistle for world wide socialisms?
 
2013-10-14 09:21:16 AM  

vpb: There is zero chance of a default.  I don't think he would do in until the last minute, but I am sure Obama will disregard the debt ceiling if it comes to that.

A default would violate the 14th amendment and if the minute the debt ceiling makes that inveitable it becomes unconstitutional.


I see this happening too, there's no way Obama would let it slide if the GOP kicked it off. But no matter what, the economy has been tarnished and back to recession here we go.

Either 2 ways this could play out: Massive GOP backlash for letting the debt ceiling come to Obama saving it OR Congress hungrily trying to kick Obama out for trying to save the debt ceiling via impeachment hearings or just general nuisance.
 
2013-10-14 09:21:38 AM  
Phhhht. Who cares about a couple billion foreigners? We have 30 or so teabaggers who need their egos stroked.
 
2013-10-14 09:22:00 AM  
Well, uh, manifest destiny and American exceptionalism and YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME!

See, libulardos, Real Americans know how to deal with uppity foreigners. Because reasons. And Jesus.
 
2013-10-14 09:22:30 AM  
You know, an American might not try to assassinate the Congress men and women who put us in this corner because given our track record of re-electing these yahoos, we seem to be masochists. But a non-American doing the deed? I can see it. Maybe not a gun shot. But poisoning is a possibility. It will be interesting to see that if the country defaults if any of these people in Congress suddenly drop dead from mysterious heart attacks.
 
2013-10-14 09:22:31 AM  
The TP wants us to default. Are there really people that haven't figured this out yet?

Any Democrat in front of a microphone since Bachmann said they got what they wanted and are excited should have repeated that line over and over
 
2013-10-14 09:23:38 AM  

GORDON: I remember when Bush was evil and the President was expected to work with a Congress of the other political party, not the other way around.  But, then, that was like 8 years ago.  Times are different now.


Look, chucklefark, rubberstamping warrantless wiretapping is quite a bit different from tanking the world economy, so go kindly fark yourself with a cactus.
 
2013-10-14 09:23:50 AM  

Nabb1: This is just insane.


Yup. But that's the country we live in now.
 
2013-10-14 09:24:43 AM  
This could end up costing some of the people who give the GOP the most in contributions a lot of money. I think this might be what finally makes them cut the Tea Party loose, but we'll see.

The ultimate sign for me that that has happened is if Fox News starts being really critical of the teabaggers. Then you know it's over, and Ailes got the memo.
 
2013-10-14 09:24:52 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


Thanks for trying to beat GORDON for one of the stupidest comments in this thread so far.
 
2013-10-14 09:25:29 AM  

GORDON: I remember when Bush was evil and the President was expected to work with a Congress of the other political party, not the other way around.  But, then, that was like 8 years ago.  Times are different now.


Like when Bachmann said they got what they wanted or when Boehner said it in the deal that led to the sequester
 
2013-10-14 09:25:30 AM  
www.jaybusbee.com

"Seence when does mah Tea Party listern ter smelleh ferriners?"
 
2013-10-14 09:25:36 AM  
Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.
 
2013-10-14 09:26:36 AM  
Healthcare companies 5.3 billion dollars annually on lobbying, by far more than any other field including defense. No wonder everybody else can suck it.
 
2013-10-14 09:26:40 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


Bullshiat.  This is nothing more thank brinkmanship.  You what the danger is of standing on the brink on a regular basis?  Sometimes you go over.

These assholes should be in prison.
 
2013-10-14 09:27:06 AM  

GORDON: I remember when Bush was evil and the President was expected to work with a Congress of the other political party, not the other way around.  But, then, that was like 8 years ago.  Times are different now.


Bush IS evil. Guy caused thousands of deaths... lots of wasted money... etc etc... invented wmd charges...

Because "they wanted to kill my daddy"

Now that doesn't mean Obama is in the clear... he's not... he's a misguided ideologue that is damaging to the country... as is many of the people representing the country in DC.

Symptom of the two party system is that you end up with a bipolar government.

We need to partially bring in sortocracy to balance the country... not that it will ever happen.
 
2013-10-14 09:27:08 AM  
I am curious if you have positions shorting all sorts of things and you are a big teabagger either very close to or in congress could you be charged with some crime if the default actually occurs?
 
2013-10-14 09:27:09 AM  

Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.


Too bad all of their attempts to repeal it have failed, which means that you have to suck it up, cupcake. If I had to accept the Iraq War as fait accompli, then you have to accept Obamacare.
 
2013-10-14 09:27:17 AM  

theorellior: Well, uh, manifest destiny and American exceptionalism and 24.media.tumblr.com

See, libulardos, Real Americans know how to deal with uppity foreigners. Because reasons. And Jesus.


FTFY
 
2013-10-14 09:27:30 AM  
We default, different countries start selling off our treasury bonds, the dollar is devalued, more people see this, sell off more treasury bonds, the dollar drops more, ad infinitum. Crash. Not to mention the other countries raise our interest on loans, and Washington has to raise taxes to cover, thus taking more money out of our pockets, and effecting local economies. Just a bad deal all around.
 
2013-10-14 09:27:38 AM  
From WSJ:

"I guess that we could get lower in the polls. We're down to blood relatives and paid staffers now," said Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.) said on CBS...
 
2013-10-14 09:28:20 AM  

AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.


You can say that, but the GOP and the constituents already see it in the opposite way.

In other words, from their view the Jedi are evil
 
2013-10-14 09:28:35 AM  
There is no other reserve currency.

We'll just have a much weaker one thanks to Congressional Republicans.
 
2013-10-14 09:29:17 AM  

Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.


It's no longer about obamacare. It's your economic future. You cannot possibly think destroying your economy and angering the entire world is worth getting rid of Obamacare, can you?
 
2013-10-14 09:29:37 AM  

NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.


Said the British seventy years ago.
 
2013-10-14 09:30:57 AM  
Gosh the farkers who green-light are not even trying a little to hide their political agenda anymore. Out of all the headlines on all the stories submitted it seems they have been hand picking the most, I hate/Republican/religion-Christians/etc... Headline lead in's they can choose. Tired, tired, boring....
 
2013-10-14 09:30:57 AM  
I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?
 
2013-10-14 09:32:37 AM  

Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.


One thing's for sure: there are populist issues that appeal to people who generally side with one party or another, and on most of those issues (TARP, the stimulus, requiring health insurance), the common sense of the common folk is just ignorant and wrong. Everybody needs health insurance. Full stop. TARP saved the world economy from freefall, and the stimulus plan (while too small) is the reason unemployment is under 8 percent today.

Other dumb things that a LOT of people believe: the federal budget should be run like a household budget. The unemployed just aren't trying to find a job. There's a big welfare hammock that any lazy person can access.
 
2013-10-14 09:32:46 AM  
theorellior: 
Too bad all of their attempts to repeal it have failed, which means that you have to suck it up, cupcake. If I had to accept the Iraq War as fait accompli, then you have to accept Obamacare.

Furiner-like typing detected.
 
2013-10-14 09:32:48 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


Yes and it's all protected by the tears of Glen beck.
 
2013-10-14 09:33:12 AM  

Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.


4/10. You probably won't get too many bites.
 
2013-10-14 09:33:54 AM  

Speaker2Animals: what_now: I came in here to joke about how some people are probably stupid enough to think this would be a good thing, because they don't understand how economics work and just want to stick it to the furriners, and then I saw this:

dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.

One can hope he's joking, but with the jokers ascendant in the House these days, you can't be sure.


It is largely a joke.  Largely.  If there were a way to screw China, Saudi Arabia, Germany, and to a lesser extent the others without damaging the American economy, I'd be more for it.
 
2013-10-14 09:34:09 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


No.  It's backed by the full faith and credit of the US Government.  Gold is too rare and has too many industrial uses to make it worthwhile to back currency.
 
2013-10-14 09:34:09 AM  

NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

We'll just have a much weaker one thanks to Congressional Republicans.


It's Ok. We can use Zimbabwe's currency as a reserve. They printed plenty of it. Look. With a single bill from Zimbabwe we could pay off our debt's multiple times.

i.imgur.com
/yes, the dollar will be valued about this much if we default.
www.goldonomic.com
/what paying for a happy meal will soon look like.
 
2013-10-14 09:34:21 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


no I think it's backed by the fiat factory in Sheboygan  or something...
 
2013-10-14 09:34:22 AM  

KimNorth: Gosh the farkers who green-light are not even trying a little to hide their political agenda anymore. Out of all the headlines on all the stories submitted it seems they have been hand picking the most, I hate/Republican/religion-Christians/etc... Headline lead in's they can choose. Tired, tired, boring....


God, I get so tired of this bullshiat. Plonk.
 
2013-10-14 09:34:27 AM  
HindiDiscoMonster:

img.fark.net

/GOP negotiations... (POTUS is the dog btw)


Because he's half black and half white?

i3.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-10-14 09:34:35 AM  

theorellior: NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

Said the British seventy years ago.


They lost their entire f*cing empire. We have not. We will not. We'll just have a damaged reputation, the second largest economy, and the world's largest military. None of that will change with a breach of the debt ceiling because it is not permanent. Even if they breach it trying to get a deal, it will be reset and we will carry on.

It will just cause extremely negative reactions through the entire world financial system. But, we already did that with MBS in 2008. Different animal this, but we will retain the reserve status through it.
 
2013-10-14 09:35:31 AM  
So we are in a perfect position to negotiate, then? Do as we say or we will tank the world economy!
 
2013-10-14 09:35:52 AM  

Parthenogenetic: HindiDiscoMonster:

[img.fark.net image 500x305]

/GOP negotiations... (POTUS is the dog btw)

Because he's half black and half white?

[i3.kym-cdn.com image 150x134]


No.. that is HALF racist.
 
2013-10-14 09:36:50 AM  

Slaxl: Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.

It's no longer about obamacare. It's your economic future. You cannot possibly think destroying your economy and angering the entire world is worth getting rid of Obamacare, can you?


I don't think you understand slaxl.

POOR PEOPLE ARE GETTING HEALTH CARE!
POOR PEOPLE ARE GETTING THINGS!

WE CAN'T HAVE POOR PEOPLE HAVING THINGS OR OUR RICH PEOPLE THINGS ARE WORTHLESS BECAUSE THEY ARE OWNED BY POORS!
 
2013-10-14 09:37:31 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


Yes, you're mistaken. We have gold reserves, but they cover only a fraction of the value of printed currency, and a much smaller fraction of the total money supply. In much the same way that banks have deposits that cover only a fraction of their outstanding loans. It's a much better system of currency; otherwise, your money supply is limited to the amount of gold you can dig up.

We haven't been on the gold standard since 1933. Good riddance to it.
 
2013-10-14 09:37:52 AM  
I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.  I would rather see we work to fix our situation by normal means however I think that's far more impossible than the "impossibility" of the US defaulting on its full credit.  This Congress is so dysfunctional that it really brings in to question the validity of the system.  And maybe by some stroke of luck that dysfunction will force a situation where we're actually forced to face the consequences of the decisions that have been made in the past.
    I really don't know where I was going with any of this, but while a default would be an catastrophic situation, it may be what needs to happen now to ensure a survivable future.
 
2013-10-14 09:40:08 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


That's a load of crap.

The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

They are NOT equivalent. If Boehner brought a clean bill to a vote TODAY it would almost certainly pass. It is the GOP preventing that from happening.

So take your false equivalencies somewhere dumb enough to fall for it. Try freeperrville.
 
2013-10-14 09:42:00 AM  
Yeah Bitcoins! Screw that World Elitist Reserve Currency crap... Time for China to take her rightful place in the gunsights.
 
2013-10-14 09:42:03 AM  

UtileDysfunktion: From WSJ:

"I guess that we could get lower in the polls. We're down to blood relatives and paid staffers now," said Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.) said on CBS...


He's right; after tomorrow, the ones no longer getting paid will change sides.
 
2013-10-14 09:42:32 AM  
So instead of the US losing its status in the world market gradually over the next few decades we will lose it all now. Good luck buying all your oil and other imports in euros.
 
2013-10-14 09:45:29 AM  
For Halloween, is Bohner dressing as Nero?
 
2013-10-14 09:45:55 AM  
Even if the US "defaults", who would realistically step in as a different reserve currency? Who has a more stable economy these days? Certainly not any of the countries mentioned in the headline (and that's before their economies crater right along with ours)
 
2013-10-14 09:46:06 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


Umm, our economy has been a fiat currency model since Nixon took the US off the gold standard in the 70's.
 
2013-10-14 09:46:30 AM  

Prophet of Loss: For Halloween, is Bohner dressing as Nero?


This assumes he survives through Halloween
 
2013-10-14 09:47:11 AM  
Clearly, these countries have never owned a small business.  You see, when a business has bills it needs to pay, it can either pay those bills or default on them.  The fiscally conservative way is to default on your bills.  That's how I run my small business, and why I'm voting for Ted Cruz.
 
2013-10-14 09:48:36 AM  

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: So instead of the US losing its status in the world market gradually over the next few decades we will lose it all now. Good luck buying all your oil and other imports in euros.


Any bets on who is going to step up to be the next reserve currency?
 
2013-10-14 09:49:02 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


The world collectively abolished the Gold standard during the Great Depression, mainly because the Great Depression was caused by the gold standard (or at least worsened to the catastrophic levels it reached)
 
2013-10-14 09:49:40 AM  

Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.


No, no, no. Trolling isn't just posting something patently wrong in the hopes people will correct you. You have to actually stoke the fires of outrage - maybe add a dash of racial tension or fake a persecution complex. Try implying that people who disagree with you are naively optimistic children or jobless moochers. Put some effort into it next time.

DubtodaIll: I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.


Plenty of perfectly stable countries have higher rates of debt-to-GDP than us (Canada, the UK, Japan, etc). The absurd hysterical fearmongering over the national debt has so far been far more harmful than the debt itself, seeing as it has resulted in us cutting government spending during a recession, the absolute worst time to do so.
 
2013-10-14 09:49:41 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


As a general policy, I would agree with you. In this specific instance, however, the blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the GOP. The GOP is throwing a hissy-fit because a bill they didn't like not only got passed, but held constitutional muster  and was protected from all of their attempts to repeal it. They are whinging children, upset that they're being expected to eat their broccoli and then go do their homework.

My general voting habits are to support third parties wherever possible (and write myself in when no suitable third party option presents itself).  However, based on the past decade, the Republican Party has put forth a compelling argument that I should vote straight-line Democrat at the Federal level. It doesn't  really matter- Pittsburgh is True Blue and won't be sending a Republican anywhere anytime soon.
 
2013-10-14 09:50:41 AM  

Lost Thought 00: Even if the US "defaults", who would realistically step in as a different reserve currency? Who has a more stable economy these days? Certainly not any of the countries mentioned in the headline (and that's before their economies crater right along with ours)


The US is the world's reserve currency because we are stable.  If we default that is no longer the case.  There will then be no compelling reason to remain the world's reserve currency.  It wouldn't be overnight but you can bet 100% that if the US defaults, the Euro or the Yuan WILL replace the dollar at some point.

This whole thing is insane.
 
2013-10-14 09:51:00 AM  

vpb: There is zero chance of a default.  I don't think he would do in until the last minute, but I am sure Obama will disregard the debt ceiling if it comes to that.

A default would violate the 14th amendment and if the minute the debt ceiling makes that inveitable it becomes unconstitutional.


The constitution is just a piece of paper written by socialists. Except the Second Amendment, which was written by Jesus.
 
2013-10-14 09:51:09 AM  

dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.


Depends on how you define positive...


img.fark.net

The illusion is that we've got one party that is obstinate and another that is reasonable.  One that cares only for its own glory and one that loves us and wants to save the nation and the world we support.
 The reality is both sides are self serving wenches that really don't care what happens so long as they "win".

If the world really wanted to see a solution then they'd have Putin call the white house and negotiate a settlement. They'd drag both party leaders into a room at the UN and give them a stern talking to.
This chiding is just so other leaders can score points of their own. They couldn't care less if we default.

Politics is a game for our emotions, not a method of leadership. It can't be trusted to run a bank.
To which a default would be "positive" in a sense that, as a planet, we would be forced to rethink what debt means and how it should be managed. We would stop allowing blame to cover for poor leadership skills, and stop seeing grandstanding as a symbol of strength.People would pay more attention to the fine print than the headlines.

So, yes, there might be a silver lining to this. Famines and wars aside.

/A small fire now is sometimes better than a big one later.
/altho it would be best to avoid both entirely.
 
2013-10-14 09:51:18 AM  
Meh.  This debt ceiling thing is like the boy who cried wolf... we've seen this go down to the wire before.  It's political theater, just like most of the other shiat they do.

As the saying here goes, "Wake me when..." we actually default.  Then I'll pay attention and worry again.
 
2013-10-14 09:51:33 AM  

fluffy2097: NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

We'll just have a much weaker one thanks to Congressional Republicans.

It's Ok. We can use Zimbabwe's currency as a reserve. They printed plenty of it. Look. With a single bill from Zimbabwe we could pay off our debt's multiple times.

[i.imgur.com image 850x421]
/yes, the dollar will be valued about this much if we default.
[www.goldonomic.com image 468x351]
/what paying for a happy meal will soon look like.


Sounds like great news for me and lots of regular Americans.

I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates.  Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation.  When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.
 
2013-10-14 09:51:40 AM  
The GOP WANTS this to happen. It's what they have planned for, for years. This is what they want.
 
2013-10-14 09:53:11 AM  

Mawson of the Antarctic: Either 2 ways this could play out: Massive GOP backlash for letting the debt ceiling come to Obama saving it OR Congress hungrily trying to kick Obama out for trying to save the debt ceiling via impeachment hearings or just general nuisance.

 
2013-10-14 09:53:11 AM  

AngryDragon: Euro or the Yuan WILL replace the dollar at some point.


The euro very well may not exist in a few years, and the Yuan is so directly manipulated by the Chinese Government that no one would dare touch it for a reserve currency. Maybe the Yen or the Pound. That's all I can come up with as plausible alternatives
 
2013-10-14 09:53:16 AM  
Fark_Guy_Rob: ....Bring on the inflation.  When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.

AHHAHAHHAAAAA you really think the Mitt Romneys of the world are going to raise your salary so it keeps pace with inflation?


HAHAHAHHAAAAAAAAHOHOHOHHEEEEHHEHEHHEHEEEEEEEHEHEHHOHOHHAAA
 
2013-10-14 09:53:21 AM  
New Babylon is falling. How do I know the US is the New Babylon?

Its all our politicians seem to be able to do there days.

/Please, try the fish
 
2013-10-14 09:53:37 AM  

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: So instead of the US losing its status in the world market gradually over the next few decades we will lose it all now. Good luck buying all your oil and other imports in euros.


Whoa - I remember the Fark Collective telling me, in no uncertain terms, that the Euro was doomed and wouldn't exist!
 
2013-10-14 09:53:48 AM  

theorellior: KimNorth: Gosh the farkers who green-light are not even trying a little to hide their political agenda anymore. Out of all the headlines on all the stories submitted it seems they have been hand picking the most, I hate/Republican/religion-Christians/etc... Headline lead in's they can choose. Tired, tired, boring....

God, I get so tired of this bullshiat. Plonk.


Aren't you the cool kid......
 
2013-10-14 09:53:57 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


That's one of the stupidest things I've ever seen on fark.
 
2013-10-14 09:54:12 AM  

KellyX: Mawson of the Antarctic: Either 2 ways this could play out: Massive GOP backlash for letting the debt ceiling come to Obama saving it OR Congress hungrily trying to kick Obama out for trying to save the debt ceiling via impeachment hearings or just general nuisance.


static.comicvine.com

/meant to include that, should of previewed =(
 
2013-10-14 09:54:16 AM  
Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

I laughed when POTUS nazi'd the national parks and bank rolled his NPR media. What a joke to all of us that work for a living and don't have the time to waste gawking at a tree or a giant hole in the ground. And to the veterans regarding closed memorials - I don't need to stare at a monolith to be reminded of their sacrifice - I see that in everything that I am free and able to enjoy all around me. I and my freedom are not victim to any so-called shutdown.

When a "government shutdown" still leaves 83% of the (bottom feeding) public servants at work, then we have real problem with entitlements at the top and the bottom of society.

And to the foreigners afraid of our debt ceiling, you are welcome - to the financial shelter and stability our American enterprise has afforded you under your own years of tribunal unrest. Suck it up.
 
2013-10-14 09:54:20 AM  

way south: The reality is both sides are self serving wenches that really don't care what happens so long as they "win".


Oh fantastic, BSABSVR! I'm close to winning at Derp Bingo!
 
2013-10-14 09:55:05 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.

That's one of the stupidest things I've ever seen on fark.


Maybe he just got back from a Geico commercial ...

fitumi.co.za
 
2013-10-14 09:55:20 AM  

ghare: The GOP WANTS this to happen. It's what they have planned for, for years. This is what they want.


i.qkme.me
 
2013-10-14 09:55:58 AM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates.  Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation.  When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.


Good plan, but I suspect interest rates will go up to match the inflation.
 
2013-10-14 09:57:17 AM  

Slaxl: It's no longer about obamacare. It's your economic future. You cannot possibly think destroying your economy and angering the entire world is worth getting rid of Obamacare, can you?


Even more evidence that special interests have their fingers far too deeply interwoven in the U.S. government, on both sides of the political coin.

On one hand, we've got a multibillion dollar corporation (Washington Redskins) that's supposed to go to all kinds of expense to change its name because a handful of people that the name has absolutely no effect over suddenly have their panties in a manufactured wad over the name. Yet, a 2000-page travesty of a "healthcare plan" which is already offending millions and was hammered through with barely any review is supposed to stand simply because "it's the law". (If history is any  indication, so was slavery at one time.)
 
2013-10-14 09:57:57 AM  
itsaidwhat: derpderpderp


You get to vote with that brain, huh? This is why we can't have nice things.
 
2013-10-14 09:58:47 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


Let's see, one side specifically planned the shutdown over an unrelated law they already failed to scuttle. It takes the self centered ignorance of a centrist to ignore those facts and claim both sides are the same. Please stop trying to pass off your lazy stupidity as being somehow clever and informed.
 
2013-10-14 09:59:09 AM  
scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2013-10-14 09:59:09 AM  

itsaidwhat: I laughed when POTUS nazi'd the national parks and bank rolled his NPR media.


Those CPB appropriations were approved by Congress in 2012. But go you.
 
2013-10-14 09:59:20 AM  

itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

I laughed when POTUS nazi'd the national parks and bank rolled his NPR media. What a joke to all of us that work for a living and don't have the time to waste gawking at a tree or a giant hole in the ground. And to the veterans regarding closed memorials - I don't need to stare at a monolith to be reminded of their sacrifice - I see that in everything that I am free and able to enjoy all around me. I and my freedom are not victim to any so-called shutdown.

When a "government shutdown" still leaves 83% of the (bottom feeding) public servants at work, then we have real problem with entitlements at the top and the bottom of society.

And to the foreigners afraid of our debt ceiling, you are welcome - to the financial shelter and stability our American enterprise has afforded you under your own years of tribunal unrest. Suck it up.


That you Ted?
 
2013-10-14 09:59:52 AM  

HAMMERTOE: Slaxl: It's no longer about obamacare. It's your economic future. You cannot possibly think destroying your economy and angering the entire world is worth getting rid of Obamacare, can you?

Even more evidence that special interests have their fingers far too deeply interwoven in the U.S. government, on both sides of the political coin.

On one hand, we've got a multibillion dollar corporation (Washington Redskins) that's supposed to go to all kinds of expense to change its name because a handful of people that the name has absolutely no effect over suddenly have their panties in a manufactured wad over the name. Yet, a 2000-page travesty of a "healthcare plan" which is already offending millions and was hammered through with barely any review is supposed to stand simply because "it's the law". (If history is any  indication, so was slavery at one time.)


Again, we see that Republicans have to actually lie for the basis for their beliefs.

Seriously, sweetie, lots of people are capable of using Google and finding out that you are lying. You should stop.
 
2013-10-14 10:00:00 AM  

way south: dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.

Depends on how you define positive...


[img.fark.net image 502x640]

The illusion is that we've got one party that is obstinate and another that is reasonable.  One that cares only for its own glory and one that loves us and wants to save the nation and the world we support.
 The reality is both sides are self serving wenches that really don't care what happens so long as they "win".

If the world really wanted to see a solution then they'd have Putin call the white house and negotiate a settlement. They'd drag both party leaders into a room at the UN and give them a stern talking to.
This chiding is just so other leaders can score points of their own. They couldn't care less if we default.

Politics is a game for our emotions, not a method of leadership. It can't be trusted to run a bank.
To which a default would be "positive" in a sense that, as a planet, we would be forced to rethink what debt means and how it should be managed. We would stop allowing blame to cover for poor leadership skills, and stop seeing grandstanding as a symbol of strength.People would pay more attention to the fine print than the headlines.

So, yes, there might be a silver lining to this. Famines and wars aside.

/A small fire now is sometimes better than a big one later.
/altho it would be best to avoid both entirely.


That's not how you cut a baby in half
 
2013-10-14 10:00:03 AM  
HAMMERTOE:

On one hand, we've got a multibillion dollar corporation (Washington Redskins) that's supposed to go to all kinds of expense to change its name because a handful of people that the name has absolutely no effect over suddenly have their panties in a manufactured wad over the name. Yet, a 2000-page travesty of a "healthcare plan" which is already offending millions and was hammered through with barely any review is supposed to stand simply because "it's the law". (If history is any  indication, so was slavery at one time.)

Sounds like this is an outrage.
 
2013-10-14 10:00:37 AM  

Rapmaster2000: Clearly, these countries have never owned a small business.  You see, when a business has bills it needs to pay, it can either pay those bills or default on them.  The fiscally conservative way is to default on your bills.  That's how I run my small business, and why I'm voting for Ted Cruz.


notsureifserious.jpg
 
2013-10-14 10:00:42 AM  

Gunther: The absurd hysterical fearmongering over the national debt has so far been far more harmful than the debt itself, seeing as it has resulted in us cutting government spending during a recession, the absolute worst time to do so.


The thing I like to point out is that people keep saying "Run the government like a business!" Well, if that's what we want to do (not that I recommend it), then we should continue carrying as large a debt load as we can support. Why?  Because debt is how you grow. When a government takes on debt, that government is spending with the anticipation that this debt is going to allow it to invest in the economy and grow. If our economy gets bigger, than the debt-to-GDP ratio shrinks.

To be concrete: let's say I run a pizza parlor. Like most restaurants, I'm barely scraping by. I haven't got a penny of spare cash at the end of the month. I want to expand my business- there are a lot of people out there who I could sell pizza to, but I can't afford a new oven, I can't afford to pay extra drivers, and I'd need a better phone system to handle the increased call volume. So what do I do?

I take on some debt. I get someone else- a bank, and investor- to give me money in anticipation that this money will let me grow my business. Debt powers economic growth. This "cash on the barrelhead" routine is delightfully simple, but it doesn't scale well to multi-million dollar transactions.
 
2013-10-14 10:01:11 AM  

DubtodaIll: I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.  I would rather see we work to fix our situation by normal means however I think that's far more impossible than the "impossibility" of the US defaulting on its full credit.  This Congress is so dysfunctional that it really brings in to question the validity of the system.  And maybe by some stroke of luck that dysfunction will force a situation where we're actually forced to face the consequences of the decisions that have been made in the past.
    I really don't know where I was going with any of this, but while a default would be an catastrophic situation, it may be what needs to happen now to ensure a survivable future.


The sting survive and the weak perish, is that it?
 
2013-10-14 10:02:39 AM  

itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

I laughed when POTUS nazi'd the national parks and bank rolled his NPR media. What a joke to all of us that work for a living and don't have the time to waste gawking at a tree or a giant hole in the ground. And to the veterans regarding closed memorials - I don't need to stare at a monolith to be reminded of their sacrifice - I see that in everything that I am free and able to enjoy all around me. I and my freedom are not victim to any so-called shutdown.

When a "government shutdown" still leaves 83% of the (bottom feeding) public servants at work, then we have real problem with entitlements at the top and the bottom of society.

And to the foreigners afraid of our debt ceiling, you are welcome - to the financial shelter and stability our American enterprise has afforded you under your own years of tribunal unrest. Suck it up.


oh, I love it! you can practically smell the foam
 
2013-10-14 10:03:41 AM  

NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

We'll just have a much weaker one thanks to Congressional Republicans.


We all wish this, but no.
Destroying the dollar as the world's reserve currency drags the Euro into oblivion, and the healthy economies of Europe crash. The UK? Yeah, no.
Japan and China crash right along with us.
No other economy is big enough, and none is independent enough of ours that it isn't dragged down, too.
You'll have a huge panic sell-off of financial assets affecting tens of trillions in investment.
What's on the line is global financial meltdown followed by a depression that makes that of the 1930s look like a minor sad.
There is no fallback.

/That's why the whole world is becoming increasingly strident about this.
 
2013-10-14 10:03:52 AM  

Weaver95: DubtodaIll: I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.  I would rather see we work to fix our situation by normal means however I think that's far more impossible than the "impossibility" of the US defaulting on its full credit.  This Congress is so dysfunctional that it really brings in to question the validity of the system.  And maybe by some stroke of luck that dysfunction will force a situation where we're actually forced to face the consequences of the decisions that have been made in the past.
    I really don't know where I was going with any of this, but while a default would be an catastrophic situation, it may be what needs to happen now to ensure a survivable future.

The sting survive and the weak perish, is that it?


Approves

www.onlinesheetmusic.com
 
2013-10-14 10:05:38 AM  

itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.


I see this a lot, so let's clear it up:
www.thenaturalhome.com
Leaching

www.leeches.biz
Leeches
 
2013-10-14 10:06:06 AM  

Weaver95: DubtodaIll: I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.  I would rather see we work to fix our situation by normal means however I think that's far more impossible than the "impossibility" of the US defaulting on its full credit.  This Congress is so dysfunctional that it really brings in to question the validity of the system.  And maybe by some stroke of luck that dysfunction will force a situation where we're actually forced to face the consequences of the decisions that have been made in the past.
    I really don't know where I was going with any of this, but while a default would be an catastrophic situation, it may be what needs to happen now to ensure a survivable future.

The sting survive and the weak perish, is that it?


DON'T

DON'T STAND

DON'T STAND SO CLOSE TO MD
 
2013-10-14 10:06:57 AM  
ME

Dammit.
 
2013-10-14 10:07:26 AM  
So why even have a debt ceiling if it is not going to be observed?

BTW Senator Obama voted not to increase it in 2006 when exact same situation came up.

No hypocrisy like liberal hypocrisy.
 
2013-10-14 10:08:09 AM  

way south: If the world really wanted to see a solution then they'd have Putin call the white house and negotiate a settlement. They'd drag both party leaders into a room at the UN and give them a stern talking to.
This chiding is just so other leaders can score points of their own. They couldn't care less if we default.


www.reactionface.info

way south: So, yes, there might be a silver lining to this. Famines and wars aside.


I hope you have some dried beans and a reverse osmosis still in with all those guns.
 
2013-10-14 10:08:41 AM  

way south: dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.

Depends on how you define positive...


[img.fark.net image 502x640]

The illusion is that we've got one party that is obstinate and another that is reasonable.  One that cares only for its own glory and one that loves us and wants to save the nation and the world we support.
 The reality is both sides are self serving wenches that really don't care what happens so long as they "win".

If the world really wanted to see a solution then they'd have Putin call the white house and negotiate a settlement. They'd drag both party leaders into a room at the UN and give them a stern talking to.
This chiding is just so other leaders can score points of their own. They couldn't care less if we default.

Politics is a game for our emotions, not a method of leadership. It can't be trusted to run a bank.
To which a default would be "positive" in a sense that, as a planet, we would be forced to rethink what debt means and how it should be managed. We would stop allowing blame to cover for poor leadership skills, and stop seeing grandstanding as a symbol of strength.People would pay more attention to the fine print than the headlines.

So, yes, there might be a silver lining to this. Famines and wars aside.

/A small fire now is sometimes better than a big one later.
/altho it would be best to avoid both entirely.


Say, who was that guy that used to post derpitude and pictures that were directly opposite of the derpitude?  Those were always fun to have around.
 
2013-10-14 10:09:16 AM  

Testiclaw: DON'T STAND SO CLOSE TO MD


What's wrong with Maryland?
 
2013-10-14 10:09:32 AM  

MilesTeg: So why even have a debt ceiling if it is not going to be observed?


No reason. There is no reason to have one.

MilesTeg: BTW Senator Obama voted not to increase it in 2006 when exact same situation came up.


Now you're getting it! The debt limit is an arbitrary number whose only purpose is to be used as a partisan hammer when the other guy's party is in the White House. It should be abolished. Bring back the Gephardt rule.
 
2013-10-14 10:10:14 AM  

itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.


Close to 90% of the people receiving some kind of federal assistance fall into the categories of working poor, retired or disabled, including veterans and the elderly, people who put in their time. To call them do-nothing leaches [sic] is one of the lowest! most insulting and disgusting lies a person can spread about their fellow citizens. When itsaidwhat employs this lie it demonstrates him to be a dishonest, stupid, hateful human being, one of the worst of us. This is the face of the right wing now, this ignorant malice and selfish dishonesty.
 
2013-10-14 10:10:54 AM  
The US dollar is the world's currency because of the world's (and American public's) faith in the US's ability to execute and its insane purchasing power.  .  Even Boner said that he would not let the US default, because even Boner, in his limited cognitive capacity, knows that the US economy is symbiotic with the world economy.  The world must have faith in the American dollar.
 
2013-10-14 10:11:04 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


No, people like you are the ones who are not paying attention. To say that the Democrats are as much to blame as the Republicans for creating this crisis is completely dishonest and/or lazy.
 
2013-10-14 10:12:01 AM  

MilesTeg: So why even have a debt ceiling if it is not going to be observed?
BTW Senator Obama voted not to increase it in 2006 when exact same situation came up.
No hypocrisy like liberal hypocrisy.



No ignorance like both-sides-are-bad ignorance.

Yeah, that was a hell of a long shutdown and near-default we had back in '06, wasn't it?  The world economy was just all a-flutter.
 
2013-10-14 10:12:34 AM  
I really hate farking autocorrect.
 
2013-10-14 10:12:38 AM  

SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."


Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.
 
2013-10-14 10:13:58 AM  
itsaidwhat


0/0
 
2013-10-14 10:14:03 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: The debt limit is an arbitrary number whose only purpose is to be used as a partisan hammer when the other guy's party is in the White House. It should be abolished. Bring back the Gephardt rule.


This should be inscribed on a baseball bat and that bat should be used to beat some sense into everyone in D.C.

/yes, both side suck donkey balls and no, you shouldn't vote (R)
 
2013-10-14 10:14:47 AM  

Detinwolf: The US dollar is the world's currency because of the world's (and American public's) faith in the US's ability to execute and its insane purchasing power.  .  Even Boner said that he would not let the US default, because even Boner, in his limited cognitive capacity, knows that the US economy is symbiotic with the world economy.  The world must have faith in the American dollar.


Even if we don't default, this could bring another credit downgrade.  That wouldn't be apocalyptic, but it certainly would have long lasting effects.

Think your student loan payments are high now?
 
2013-10-14 10:14:50 AM  
I'd like to yell this at the people who are CONVINCED that we have enough income to cover our debt payments (so we can't default):  What are you going to do when your dollars aren't worth anything?  If you are somehow insulated from those effects, how many of your neighbors with guns and hungry bellies are?
 
2013-10-14 10:14:58 AM  

itsaidwhat: Obama derpityderpityderp.


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-10-14 10:17:16 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


Normally I would agree with you in the both sides are bad thing, however, in this situation, I think one side is clearly worse than the other.

When you start getting votes like the one below, clearly it has nothing to do with what is good for the American people anymore. From my Lehman's understanding - this vote basically was a GOP attempt to "compromise" by voting out a bill that has been singed - also known as a 'law' - and upheld by the US Supreme Court.
An attempt to "compromise" by keeping the government open as long as we eliminate funding that would provide all Americans with healthcare.

www.c-span.org
 
2013-10-14 10:17:28 AM  

jake_lex: This could end up costing some of the people who give the GOP the most in contributions a lot of money. I think this might be what finally makes them cut the Tea Party loose, but we'll see.


That ship has sailed.  There have even been FARK threads about it.  The big GOP donors are as against this as anyone else, but there isn't much they can do until the next election.
 
2013-10-14 10:17:31 AM  

VendorXeno: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

Close to 90% of the people receiving some kind of federal assistance fall into the categories of working poor, retired or disabled, including veterans and the elderly, people who put in their time. To call them do-nothing leaches [sic] is one of the lowest! most insulting and disgusting lies a person can spread about their fellow citizens. When itsaidwhat employs this lie it demonstrates him to be a dishonest, stupid, hateful human being, one of the worst of us. This is the face of the right wing now, this ignorant malice and selfish dishonesty.


media.tumblr.com
 
2013-10-14 10:17:38 AM  
KimNorth:  Out of all the headlines on all the stories submitted it seems they have been hand picking the most, I hate/Republican/religion-Christians/etc... Headline lead in's they can choose.

thechoicedrivenlife.com
 
2013-10-14 10:18:02 AM  

MilesTeg: So why even have a debt ceiling if it is not going to be observed?


It was initially to be a meaningless vote so that pols could go home and say they were being fiscally responsible, not like those evil borrow/tax and spenders like the other side.
 
2013-10-14 10:20:06 AM  
RickN99:GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

Totally true. Also, notice how this removes the "both sides are bad" argument. The House Republicans are acting like a small child- flailing, kicking, and screaming "We don't wanna!"
 
2013-10-14 10:20:35 AM  

Headso: I am curious if you have positions shorting all sorts of things and you are a big teabagger either very close to or in congress could you be charged with some crime if the default actually occurs?


Congress has exempted itself from insider trading laws.  And yes, there are congresscritters shorting US Treasury bonds.
 
2013-10-14 10:20:38 AM  

itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

I laughed when POTUS nazi'd the national parks and bank rolled his NPR media. What a joke to all of us that work for a living and don't have the time to waste gawking at a tree or a giant hole in the ground. And to the veterans regarding closed memorials - I don't need to stare at a monolith to be reminded of their sacrifice - I see that in everything that I am free and able to enjoy all around me. I and my freedom are not victim to any so-called shutdown.

When a "government shutdown" still leaves 83% of the (bottom feeding) public servants at work, then we have real problem with entitlements at the top and the bottom of society.

And to the foreigners afraid of our debt ceiling, you are welcome - to the financial shelter and stability our American enterprise has afforded you under your own years of tribunal unrest. Suck it up.


2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-10-14 10:20:40 AM  

SpectroBoy: itsaidwhat: Obama derpityderpityderp.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 600x682]


That one is so much better than my attempt to make the background black. Thanks for that.

Totally unrelated to what Spectroboy gave me. I admit I have no idea why the debt ceiling MUST BE RAISED or we automatically default. Best guess is that the debt ceiling must be raised because inflation which is on average 3% per year. I also know that fiat currency is also, effectively, debt.

Query: Would the US defaulting start a new World War? Is it possible that the people in charge want a war because of what it did to our economy last time?
 
2013-10-14 10:21:25 AM  

Wasteland: MilesTeg: So why even have a debt ceiling if it is not going to be observed?
BTW Senator Obama voted not to increase it in 2006 when exact same situation came up.
No hypocrisy like liberal hypocrisy.


No ignorance like both-sides-are-bad ignorance.

Yeah, that was a hell of a long shutdown and near-default we had back in '06, wasn't it?  The world economy was just all a-flutter.


Listen, how many times do we have to tell you:

Both sides are equally at fault for this mess. Equally bad. Both sides.

Both sides are equally bad, and at fault, for this mess.

Also, vote Republican.
 
2013-10-14 10:21:56 AM  
static.photo.net
 
2013-10-14 10:22:41 AM  

RickN99: SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.


I guess the Dems should start telling everyone how UNAMERICAN things are.  That shiat works wonders when there's an R in the White House who wants something monumentally stupid.
 
2013-10-14 10:22:43 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


Say Fark Independents when they know Republicans are to blame.
 
2013-10-14 10:23:36 AM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: KimNorth:  Out of all the headlines on all the stories submitted it seems they have been hand picking the most, I hate/Republican/religion-Christians/etc... Headline lead in's they can choose.

[thechoicedrivenlife.com image 238x300]


You're trying too hard.

0/10
 
2013-10-14 10:26:44 AM  

moefuggenbrew: www.c-span.org


What's with the two Democrats voting in favor?
 
2013-10-14 10:27:00 AM  

AeAe: way south: dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.

Depends on how you define positive...


[img.fark.net image 502x640]

The illusion is that we've got one party that is obstinate and another that is reasonable.  One that cares only for its own glory and one that loves us and wants to save the nation and the world we support.
 The reality is both sides are self serving wenches that really don't care what happens so long as they "win".

If the world really wanted to see a solution then they'd have Putin call the white house and negotiate a settlement. They'd drag both party leaders into a room at the UN and give them a stern talking to.
This chiding is just so other leaders can score points of their own. They couldn't care less if we default.

Politics is a game for our emotions, not a method of leadership. It can't be trusted to run a bank.
To which a default would be "positive" in a sense that, as a planet, we would be forced to rethink what debt means and how it should be managed. We would stop allowing blame to cover for poor leadership skills, and stop seeing grandstanding as a symbol of strength.People would pay more attention to the fine print than the headlines.

So, yes, there might be a silver lining to this. Famines and wars aside.

/A small fire now is sometimes better than a big one later.
/altho it would be best to avoid both entirely.

That's not how you cut a baby in half


Yes, it is. You have to chop from the groin - with the help of gravity - through the body. If you struck the skull, the rounded (even if not quite solid yet) skull might partially deflect the blow and cause an uneven bisection. And that wouldn't be fair.

/Metaphor is good, so long as we all agree that the liar "mom" of the story represents the Republicans
//No, Mr. Police Investigator, this post was in jest and I do not, in fact, advocate or...ouch! Easy with those cuffs!
 
2013-10-14 10:28:28 AM  
Hmmm... if this plays out right (or wrong, however you wish to view it), WW3 will be fought with money?
 
2013-10-14 10:28:40 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


So vote ______________?
 
2013-10-14 10:28:56 AM  

fluffy2097: Slaxl: Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.

It's no longer about obamacare. It's your economic future. You cannot possibly think destroying your economy and angering the entire world is worth getting rid of Obamacare, can you?

I don't think you understand slaxl.

POOR GAY PEOPLE ARE GETTING HEALTH CARE MARRIAGES!
 
WE CAN'T HAVE POOR GAY PEOPLE HAVING THINGS OR OUR RICH CHRISTIAN PEOPLE THINGS ARE WORTHLESS BECAUSE THEY ARE OWNED BY POORS GAYS!


Changing a few words, and it comes out to about the same thing. The ppl running their tea party puppets can't seem to tell they are being fed a diet of stupidity based flash cards.
 
2013-10-14 10:29:11 AM  

RickN99: GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.


You proved my point. It is the GOP and only the GOP that is not funding the government at this point. It is THEIR FAULT. It is not a "both sides are bad" issue.

Thanks for backing me up.
 
2013-10-14 10:29:20 AM  

itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

I laughed when POTUS nazi'd the national parks and bank rolled his NPR media. What a joke to all of us that work for a living and don't have the time to waste gawking at a tree or a giant hole in the ground. And to the veterans regarding closed memorials - I don't need to stare at a monolith to be reminded of their sacrifice - I see that in everything that I am free and able to enjoy all around me. I and my freedom are not victim to any so-called shutdown.

When a "government shutdown" still leaves 83% of the (bottom feeding) public servants at work, then we have real problem with entitlements at the top and the bottom of society.

And to the foreigners afraid of our debt ceiling, you are welcome - to the financial shelter and stability our American enterprise has afforded you under your own years of tribunal unrest. Suck it up.


www.alltackle.com
This is good. Even sneaked in a Godwin. A bit forceful for my taste, but you've got raw talent kid.  Refine the presentation and you'll be thread shaitting in no time!
 
2013-10-14 10:30:17 AM  

DubtodaIll: I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.  I would rather see we work to fix our situation by normal means however I think that's far more impossible than the "impossibility" of the US defaulting on its full credit.  This Congress is so dysfunctional that it really brings in to question the validity of the system.  And maybe by some stroke of luck that dysfunction will force a situation where we're actually forced to face the consequences of the decisions that have been made in the past.
    I really don't know where I was going with any of this, but while a default would be an catastrophic situation, it may be what needs to happen now to ensure a survivable future.


Ah, yes the populist deficit hawk. SO concerned about our debt that they support a government shutdown that will cost us billions to undo. SO concerned that they support a default that will raise our interest rates and make our debt more expensive to service, effectively raising our debt. SO concerned that they support austerity measures that slow economic growth and thus hurt our debt to GDP ratio.

In short you can tell the populist deficit hawk from other deficit hawks because they are the only ones gullible enough to buy into ideas that directly and obviously work against their stated goal of reducing the debt.
 
2013-10-14 10:31:11 AM  

Wasteland: MilesTeg: So why even have a debt ceiling if it is not going to be observed?
BTW Senator Obama voted not to increase it in 2006 when exact same situation came up.
No hypocrisy like liberal hypocrisy.


No ignorance like both-sides-are-bad ignorance.

Yeah, that was a hell of a long shutdown and near-default we had back in '06, wasn't it?  The world economy was just all a-flutter.


Stop spinning, you are obviously dizzy. Spouting DNC talking points does not make your argument valid.

Facts are facts. You may want people to think somehow the situation is different now than it was then but it isn't.
 
2013-10-14 10:31:14 AM  

ajgeek: Query: Would the US defaulting start a new World War? Is it possible that the people in charge want a war because of what it did to our economy last time?


Depending on how bad the depression/recession is, some countries might see it as a means to get at resources, but realistically, my concern would be rampant unemployment, especially with young people, and some kind of violent rioting and possible revolution occurring...
 
2013-10-14 10:31:37 AM  

RickN99: SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.


Currently proposed government funding levels are a direct result of Speaker John Boehner receiving "98%" of what he wanted. Current funding levels, therefore, are at Republican-desired levels.

The original Republican-passed spending bill did not change government funding levels; it served only to eliminate an existing law that they did not like, despite that law having been signed into law three years ago, surviving a Constitutional challenge and effectively surviving voter referendum when the President who championed it defeated a challenger who promised to repeal it.

Your argument is a lie and you are a liar for making it.
 
2013-10-14 10:31:54 AM  
Who cares about them thar furriner places. What, a bunch a squinty-eyed commies, weird cartoon watching commies, terrorists, commie nazis, and what ever the hell a Singapore is. I don't know where that is, and real 'Muricans don't! We care about 'Murica and tossing General El Presidente Hussian Commie Osama Fartbongo Obammy outta the WHITE house.
Kin I get a cheer for willful ignorance!
 
2013-10-14 10:32:54 AM  
How many government employees does it take to write checks for the interest on the debt?  One to hold the pen and two to turn the ladder?
 
2013-10-14 10:33:24 AM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: Sounds like great news for me and lots of regular Americans.

I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates. Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation. When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.


I get the idea of how a worthless dollar benefits people who have more debt than assets, but what if a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and your annual salary doesn't inflate accordingly?
 
2013-10-14 10:34:32 AM  

moefuggenbrew: this vote basically was a GOP attempt to "compromise" by voting out a bill that has been singed - also known as a 'law'


Lots of things are laws, like the debt ceiling and the employer mandate.
 
2013-10-14 10:34:33 AM  

vpb: A default would violate the 14th amendment and if the minute the debt ceiling makes that inveitable it becomes unconstitutional.


How so.

By which I mean, explain how that reading is coherent in the context of the "authorized by law" provision of Section 4, and even so, how SCOTUS or POTUS could do anything about it, in the context of Section 5.

Budget issues are, as always, at Congressional discretion.
 
2013-10-14 10:36:01 AM  

MilesTeg: Facts are facts. You may want people to think somehow the situation is different now than it was then but it isn't.


i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2013-10-14 10:37:02 AM  

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: So instead of the US losing its status in the world market gradually over the next few decades we will lose it all now. Good luck buying all your oil and other imports in euros.


We buy our oil from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. Do you really think they won't take dollars?
 
2013-10-14 10:37:20 AM  
media.cagle.com
 
2013-10-14 10:37:53 AM  

flondrix: Fark_Guy_Rob: Sounds like great news for me and lots of regular Americans.

I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates. Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation. When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.

I get the idea of how a worthless dollar benefits people who have more debt than assets, but what if a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and your annual salary doesn't inflate accordingly?


Seeing as wages have not kept pace with inflation, you're probably more right than you realize.
 
2013-10-14 10:38:41 AM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Fark_Guy_Rob: I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates.  Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation.  When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.

Good plan, but I suspect interest rates will go up to match the inflation.


They certainly will...

However for many people the majority of their debt is their fixed rate mortgage.

If we have 1000% inflation...I will still be paying 3% something interest.

Typically inflation hurts the rich but is beneficial to the majority of people... that's why politicians hate it.
 
2013-10-14 10:39:52 AM  

KimNorth: Zeb Hesselgresser: KimNorth:  Out of all the headlines on all the stories submitted it seems they have been hand picking the most, I hate/Republican/religion-Christians/etc... Headline lead in's they can choose.

You're trying too hard.

0/10


A nonsense holiday with no banking, no mail and it's too early to go to the golf course, so, yeah.
 
2013-10-14 10:39:57 AM  

VendorXeno: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

Close to 90% of the people receiving some kind of federal assistance fall into the categories of working poor, retired or disabled, including veterans and the elderly, people who put in their time. To call them do-nothing leaches [sic] is one of the lowest! most insulting and disgusting lies a person can spread about their fellow citizens. When itsaidwhat employs this lie it demonstrates him to be a dishonest, stupid, hateful human being, one of the worst of us. This is the face of the right wing now, this ignorant malice and selfish dishonesty.


Libtard. Look at the numbers. Entitlements are killing America. Wealthy taking social security, abled taking disability, creating children where no family exists to raise them. And before you put a face on my opinions (you racist) be aware that I welcome people of all colors, national origin, religion and sexual orientation to join me on the work line to support "the working poor". You have no idea how I made it to where I am but it starts with self respect and respect for others - including their beliefs and their property. When libtards seek to take away either, they will meet with the harsh reality of my rights. Yes, please - face me - and tell me you deserve what I have earned. You will get what my conscience thinks you deserve.
 
2013-10-14 10:40:45 AM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates. Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation. When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.


You currently have hundreds of thousands of debt and make approximately 15k per year?
 
2013-10-14 10:41:41 AM  
Well, goodbye economy. Thanks, Republicans.
 
KIA
2013-10-14 10:41:50 AM  
As a non-government dependent, non-government employed, hard working, self-insured, productive member of society, I'm getting a kick out of the replies in this thread.
 
2013-10-14 10:42:41 AM  
It's all just a diversionary tactic. We're not taking about about certain GOP members who are trying to redefine rape, running off with Latin American mistresses, harassing male interns, or defending their "wide stance" right now, are we?
 
2013-10-14 10:43:11 AM  

CleanAndPure: HotIgneous Intruder: Fark_Guy_Rob: I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates.  Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation.  When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.

Good plan, but I suspect interest rates will go up to match the inflation.

They certainly will...

However for many people the majority of their debt is their fixed rate mortgage.

If we have 1000% inflation...I will still be paying 3% something interest.

Typically inflation hurts the rich but is beneficial to the majority of people... that's why politicians hate it.


Someone in this thread has "hundreds of thousands" of mostly student loan debt. Aren't most student loans of that size on an adjustable interest rate? If so Fark_guy_rob is boned,
 
2013-10-14 10:44:39 AM  

KIA: As a non-government dependent, non-government employed, hard working, self-insured, productive member of society, I'm getting a kick out of the replies in this thread.


doubtful.
 
2013-10-14 10:44:43 AM  

CleanAndPure: Typically inflation hurts the rich but is beneficial to the majority of people... that's why politicians hate it.


Inflation can be good in some situations to debtors, but it kills savers like old retired people.
 
2013-10-14 10:45:22 AM  
How can you have a paper currency as a reserve currency?
 
2013-10-14 10:45:51 AM  

itsaidwhat: Libtard. Look at the numbers. Entitlements are killing America. Wealthy taking social security, abled taking disability, creating children where no family exists to raise them. And before you put a face on my opinions (you racist) be aware that I welcome people of all colors, national origin, religion and sexual orientation to join me on the work line to support "the working poor". You have no idea how I made it to where I am but it starts with self respect and respect for others - including their beliefs and their property. When libtards seek to take away either, they will meet with the harsh reality of my rights. Yes, please - face me - and tell me you deserve what I have earned. You will get what my conscience thinks you deserve.


You might not be racist but you're certainly lacking in perspective and incapable of empathy, and you're also parroting taking points that were debunked in the 80s.
 
2013-10-14 10:48:13 AM  

jigger: CleanAndPure: Typically inflation hurts the rich but is beneficial to the majority of people... that's why politicians hate it.

Inflation can be good in some situations to debtors, but it kills savers like old retired people.


Only if they keep their cash under the mattress instead of reinvesting.
 
2013-10-14 10:48:25 AM  

GoodyearPimp: I'd like to yell this at the people who are CONVINCED that we have enough income to cover our debt payments (so we can't default):  What are you going to do when your dollars aren't worth anything?  If you are somehow insulated from those effects, how many of your neighbors with guns and hungry bellies are?


I will do what I have always done. Get up and go to work, notwithstanding the government incompetence.

I was naked and penniless when I entered this world. If I haven't learned enough since then to survive and teach others to do the same, or if I'm too old to do it, by what right do I have to ask others to do it for me? The world doesn't owe me the right to be an ongoing fertilizer factory.
 
2013-10-14 10:49:08 AM  

Gunther: way south: The reality is both sides are self serving wenches that really don't care what happens so long as they "win".

Oh fantastic, BSABSVR! I'm close to winning at Derp Bingo!


oh fantastic BSABSVR!  derp, so vote Democrat!

/see how pathetic and stupid you are?
 
2013-10-14 10:52:16 AM  
More people who cant do math.
Take in 250 billion a month.
Monthly interest on debt is 60 billion a month.
We will not default, the debt payments can be made without raising debt celing.
Obama in 2006 " debt celing increase is unpatriotic, i vote no"
Obama 2013 "not raising debt celing is unpatriotic, no votes are economic terrorism"

/living within your means, how does it work?
 
2013-10-14 10:53:03 AM  

way south: This chiding is just so other leaders can score points of their own. They couldn't care less if we default.


someone has zero idea how global economics actually works.

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


So the police are equally to blame for a hostage situation because they won't negotiate with the hostage taker?
 
2013-10-14 10:53:14 AM  

FlippityFlap: itsaidwhat


0/0


"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

George Bernard Shaw
 
2013-10-14 10:53:33 AM  

you have pee hands: itsaidwhat: Libtard. Look at the numbers. Entitlements are killing America. Wealthy taking social security, abled taking disability, creating children where no family exists to raise them. And before you put a face on my opinions (you racist) be aware that I welcome people of all colors, national origin, religion and sexual orientation to join me on the work line to support "the working poor". You have no idea how I made it to where I am but it starts with self respect and respect for others - including their beliefs and their property. When libtards seek to take away either, they will meet with the harsh reality of my rights. Yes, please - face me - and tell me you deserve what I have earned. You will get what my conscience thinks you deserve.

You might not be racist but you're certainly lacking in perspective and incapable of empathy, and you're also parroting taking points that were debunked in the 80s.


I think he's being facetious.

It's really hard to tell these days, though, since parody of the right wing keeps becoming reality, like some sort of nightmarish collective-unconscious fueled warping of reality, where the worst things we can imagine take physical form.
 
2013-10-14 10:53:52 AM  

CleanAndPure: HotIgneous Intruder: Fark_Guy_Rob: I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates.  Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation.  When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.

Good plan, but I suspect interest rates will go up to match the inflation.

They certainly will...

However for many people the majority of their debt is their fixed rate mortgage.

If we have 1000% inflation...I will still be paying 3% something interest.

Typically inflation hurts the rich but is beneficial to the majority of people... that's why politicians hate it.


Actually inflation tends to hurt the poor a little (as wage increases tend to lag behind inflation, so inflation tends to increase poverty rates - especially in the short term after inflation rises compared to recent history), is neutral/mildly beneficial to the middle class overall (helping the middle aged segment due to the debt issue you highlight, tending to hurt the younger and older segments of that group though), but it can hurt certain types of wealthy person (well financially speaking, I doubt it truly makes much difference to them by definition of being rich).
 
2013-10-14 10:53:55 AM  

Rapmaster2000: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

I see this a lot, so let's clear it up:

Leaching


Leeches


Noted.
 
2013-10-14 10:55:13 AM  
To the Tea Party and defaulting. They are first and foremost Libertarians. They want no government and they're hitting the accelerator as they drive towards the brink. The WSJ is overwrought because they know what a default means and they know you can't deal or negotiate with idealists because there's no leverage. Yes, I'm expecting Fox to start sounding sane this week, unfortunately the zealots are where they want to be. Oops, too late.

Assholes, they tear down the country and then expect to rebuild it to their liking regardless of the real pain caused. Even sounds vaguely similar to the plot of Atlas Shrugged.

To being the reserve currency. The dollar has been the world's backup because of its amazing, perennial stability since 1945. Once that trust is broken, it's like finding your significant other has been unfaithful... it will never be the same. Besides, the Euro and the Yuan would *love* to take its place. And don't say they can't displace the dollar because even in the 21st century investors rely on gut instinct vs logic and have as much courage as a rabbit. Markets are already worried because they've noticed brinkmanship is the new norm until 2014 or later.

To the simpletons in congress. There is no similarity between household finances and national finances or international finances.

// Hmm, I wonder if we need to define a Godwin-like law referencing Ayn Rand instead of Herr Schicklgruber.
 
2013-10-14 10:56:27 AM  

VendorXeno: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

Close to 90% of the people receiving some kind of federal assistance fall into the categories of working poor, retired or disabled, including veterans and the elderly, people who put in their time. To call them do-nothing leaches [sic] is one of the lowest! most insulting and disgusting lies a person can spread about their fellow citizens. When itsaidwhat employs this lie it demonstrates him to be a dishonest, stupid, hateful human being, one of the worst of us. This is the face of the right wing now, this ignorant malice and selfish dishonesty.


Yes. I work for a living. That makes me ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest.

I am rubber, you are glue...
 
2013-10-14 10:57:35 AM  
Enitria:
To the simpletons in congress. There is no similarity between household finances and national finances or international finances.

community.secondlife.com
 
2013-10-14 10:57:38 AM  

GORDON: I remember when Bush was evil and the President was expected to work with a Congress of the other political party, not the other way around.  But, then, that was like 8 years ago.  Times are different now.


Yes, because democrats threatened a shutdown and default under bush. Oh and threatened to impeach.

Or not.

False equivalence is false.
 
2013-10-14 10:57:53 AM  

vpb: There is zero chance of a default.  I don't think he would do in until the last minute, but I am sure Obama will disregard the debt ceiling if it comes to that.

A default would violate the 14th amendment and if the minute the debt ceiling makes that inveitable it becomes unconstitutional.


Which would kick of a host of constitutional litigation and doubt, as well as see the GOP finally having a thinly veiled reason to impeach him at the same time.

The markets and other world economies aren't going sit by idle when there's big questions of the validity of the issued debts and ability of the US to pay.  Invoking the 14th might starve off a world depression, but the dollar as a reserve currency will be finished, along with confidence in American markets and sovereign debt.   Meanwhile a triple shiat show at home of the GOP impeaching the president (theater), litigation on the constitutionality of it all (real questions), and the economy immediately going into another recession.

What amusing to me is that this is once again the GOP having to destroy something to prove their ideology.

They biatch and biatch about debt, deficits, and America going bankrupt; but that's just not how international markets work.  When the world economy went to shiat, demand for US debt skyrocketed and rates fell.  NO ONE in the market thought the US would EVER default either sooner or later, and see it as the safest place to put their money.  So much so, they were willing to pay a fee (negative interest rates) to protect their money from much larger contractions elsewhere.  Under no circumstance can the US go bankrupt in climate.  Businesses would LOVE to be in this position to leverage having to only pay back 90 cents for every dollar borrowed to build up capital investments.  It's like me going to the bank for a car loan, taking out a principle and having the bank MAKE ME monthly interest payments.

So, markets rebuffed the GOP's ideology because it's simply not how international finance or economics works, dur to our economy's size and due to our reserve currency status.  So they'll bankrupt the nation, screw over 50 years of being the world reserve currency, and destroy the world economy.  All so people pay attention to a deficit that's been falling at the fastest rate in 50 years, and debt that literally no one in finance or economics gives a shiat about beyond a phantom 50-80 year projection.

WW3 could start and end with a nuclear apocalypse in that time.  If we're worrying about things on that time scale, there's a dozen or so other things that are much more pertinent to worry about.
 
2013-10-14 11:01:51 AM  
If you want the debt ceiling raised so badly then tell the Democrats to compromise

Once again, when two sides refuse to compromise at all standing around screaming and pointing fingers at only one of them just makes you look like an idiot.
 
2013-10-14 11:03:19 AM  
Funny thing is, the tea party is already convinced that "fiat money" is inherently flawed and that leaving the gold standard doomed us all decades ago.
So their blowing up the currency is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And you can be damn sure they're not going to feel any responsibility for it.
It will still be the fault of libs, immigrants, time-traveling Obama, et al.
 
2013-10-14 11:05:09 AM  

MemeSlave: How can you have a paper currency as a reserve currency?


Simple, you are betting on the full faith and credit of the nation in question. Which is no less reasonable than hoping someone doesn't accidentally discover a method for mass-producing whatever commodity you have as a reserve.
 
2013-10-14 11:05:52 AM  
We should just listen to what the POTUS said about raising the debt celling

We will not deafault on our payments, the gov takes in more than enough to pay the interest on our debt.... default talk is just scaremongering
 
2013-10-14 11:06:49 AM  

TyrantII: Which would kick of a host of constitutional litigation and doubt, as well as see the GOP finally having a thinly veiled reason to impeach him at the same time.


I really hope Obama does cite the 14th and then I really do hope the GOP tries to impeach the first black President of the United States of America...

(with respect to my homosexual brothers and sisters)...

i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-10-14 11:09:51 AM  

itsaidwhat: VendorXeno: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

Close to 90% of the people receiving some kind of federal assistance fall into the categories of working poor, retired or disabled, including veterans and the elderly, people who put in their time. To call them do-nothing leaches [sic] is one of the lowest! most insulting and disgusting lies a person can spread about their fellow citizens. When itsaidwhat employs this lie it demonstrates him to be a dishonest, stupid, hateful human being, one of the worst of us. This is the face of the right wing now, this ignorant malice and selfish dishonesty.

Yes. I work for a living. That makes me ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest.

I am rubber, you are glue...


It is your opinions as presented on this website that makes you look ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest, not the fact that you work for a living.
 
2013-10-14 11:09:54 AM  

Joe Blowme: We will not deafault on our payments, the gov takes in more than enough to pay the interest on our debt


So the same people who (rightfully) criticize Obamacare's less-than-stellar exchange rollout now completely trust the same government to prioritize billions in debt payments. Neato.
 
2013-10-14 11:10:18 AM  
Joe Blowme: We should just listen to what the POTUS said about raising the debt celling

We will not deafault on our payments, the gov takes in more than enough to pay the interest on our debt.... default talk is just scaremongering
 I really, really don't understand economics, or how the US government operates financially. In fact, I INSIST on being wrong. And I am proud of not knowing any better.

Tea Partier in a nutshell
 
2013-10-14 11:10:30 AM  

Joe Blowme: We should just listen to what the POTUS said about raising the debt celling

We will not deafault on our payments, the gov takes in more than enough to pay the interest on our debt.... default talk is just scaremongering


The fact that there are people who actually believe this is what I find most scary about this whole situation.
 
2013-10-14 11:11:31 AM  

odinsposse: DubtodaIll: I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.  I would rather see we work to fix our situation by normal means however I think that's far more impossible than the "impossibility" of the US defaulting on its full credit.  This Congress is so dysfunctional that it really brings in to question the validity of the system.  And maybe by some stroke of luck that dysfunction will force a situation where we're actually forced to face the consequences of the decisions that have been made in the past.
    I really don't know where I was going with any of this, but while a default would be an catastrophic situation, it may be what needs to happen now to ensure a survivable future.

Ah, yes the populist deficit hawk. SO concerned about our debt that they support a government shutdown that will cost us billions to undo. SO concerned that they support a default that will raise our interest rates and make our debt more expensive to service, effectively raising our debt. SO concerned that they support austerity measures that slow economic growth and thus hurt our debt to GDP ratio.

In short you can tell the populist deficit hawk from other deficit hawks because they are the only ones gullible enough to buy into ideas that directly and obviously work against their stated goal of reducing the debt.


I mean you if want to throw labels on things to make you feel better about your own positions that's fine but don't assume what I'm SO concerned about.  I just feel that if you're looking at the long-game the system we have is unsustainable in its current state.  I don't support this government shutdown.  I think it's a travesty that a nation as advanced as America is unable to have a government that can cooperate within itself.  I don't want the U.S. to default however it may be something that happens that turns out to be a positive influence on the way the country is ran. When will the debt be so big that we have to do something about it? Or that someone else does something about it? 20 trillion? 50 trillion? Where and when does it actually turn around except in a Congress that is so farked up they can't even keep the government open?  There's no better time than the present to actually put your house back in order. The only thing that has brought us to this point is the lies and denial that debt affords debtors.  The whole thing is a mess of the highest order.
 
2013-10-14 11:11:35 AM  

jst3p: itsaidwhat: ....It is your opinions as presented on this website that makes you look ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest, not the fact that you work for a living.


For opinions to be valid, they have to be based in fact. Otherwise, they are not opinions, they are hallucinations.
 
2013-10-14 11:12:22 AM  

AngryDragon: Detinwolf: The US dollar is the world's currency because of the world's (and American public's) faith in the US's ability to execute and its insane purchasing power.  .  Even Boner said that he would not let the US default, because even Boner, in his limited cognitive capacity, knows that the US economy is symbiotic with the world economy.  The world must have faith in the American dollar.

Even if we don't default, this could bring another credit downgrade.  That wouldn't be apocalyptic, but it certainly would have long lasting effects.

Think your student loan payments are high now?


Interesting thought. How will this affect existing student debt? I imagine the opposite. When the US dollar is worthless, people will have wheelbarrows full, making student debt easy to pay off.

Take note: This is exactly how we are going to screw over to the rest of the financial world (eg China) that we owe money too. We will repay our debt with container loads of worthless US currency. Yes, Made in America will be the new mantra because no one will export to us on credit but then again we make the wheat and we have the oil. Sure - the international money changers in NYC will get screwed. We won't have a faux cloud economy built on the Internet, cheap data, computers, texting, cell phones, electronics, etc. The true irony is how popular the national parks will again become as the populace seeks to escape the awful human mire of the future city. America will look like India. Warren Buffet was right to buy Norfolk Southern. We'll all be hanging off trains to escape the cities in decline (like Detroit).
 
2013-10-14 11:13:08 AM  
I haven't read everything in this thread but has no one stated the obvious that as long as more money flows into the Treasury than exceeds the principle and interest payments on the debt there is 0% chance of defaulting?

Also has anyone questioned the logic of "Be able to borrow more money so you can pay us with borrowed money?"

Also for tl;dr:

at this point in time the only we default on our debt without raising the debt ceiling is if we choose not to pay our debts. We have the money in our hands. We just have to reach our hands out and give the money to them
 
2013-10-14 11:13:58 AM  

SpectroBoy: VendorXeno: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

Close to 90% of the people receiving some kind of federal assistance fall into the categories of working poor, retired or disabled, including veterans and the elderly, people who put in their time. To call them do-nothing leaches [sic] is one of the lowest! most insulting and disgusting lies a person can spread about their fellow citizens. When itsaidwhat employs this lie it demonstrates him to be a dishonest, stupid, hateful human being, one of the worst of us. This is the face of the right wing now, this ignorant malice and selfish dishonesty.


nice troll, fact is they are do-nothing leaches - I would know I have roughly 50 tenants and all are on Federal assistance. Less than 25% worked their entire life, most don't even have a high school education - they worked a dead end job and did not bother to save any kind of money and now given free handouts because they didn't bother to attend career day in high school.

I have at least 10 that didn't even finish high school or have a job in over 10 years, and these are in their 40s collecting foodstamps and other assistance. Sleep well knowing your hard earned money goes to someone who refuses to pick up a shovel and do some god honest work for a days pay, instead our lovely government just hands out assistance to those who simply need to go out and earn their keep.
 
2013-10-14 11:14:01 AM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

We'll just have a much weaker one thanks to Congressional Republicans.

We all wish this, but no.
Destroying the dollar as the world's reserve currency drags the Euro into oblivion, and the healthy economies of Europe crash. The UK? Yeah, no.
Japan and China crash right along with us.
No other economy is big enough, and none is independent enough of ours that it isn't dragged down, too.
You'll have a huge panic sell-off of financial assets affecting tens of trillions in investment.
What's on the line is global financial meltdown followed by a depression that makes that of the 1930s look like a minor sad.
There is no fallback.

/That's why the whole world is becoming increasingly strident about this.


So, saying that, what are the chances that middle eastern countries would use their oil reserves to step in and create a reserve currency? Yes, an oil standard; oil is a heck of a lot more valuable than gold. I know why we went off the gold standard, but do you think a world in deep doo is going to care about the niceties? Besides, controlling the money supply controls how much of a military the US can afford. Something I know they have a keen interest in.
 
2013-10-14 11:14:44 AM  

Dimensio: RickN99: SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

Currently proposed government funding levels are a direct result of Speaker John Boehner receiving "98%" of what he wanted. Current funding levels, therefore, are at Republican-desired levels.

The original Republican-passed spending bill did not change government funding levels; it served only to eliminate an existing law that they did not like, despite that law having been signed into law three years ago, surviving a Constitutional challenge and effectively surviving voter referendum when the President who championed it defeated a challenger who promised to repeal it.

Your argument is a lie and you are a liar for making it.


that's what happens when you pass a law without caring about where the money to pay for it comes from.
the money isn't there.
even the dems thing it's a bad law which is why they're granting labor unions and themselves exemptions from it.

bottom line: we as a country need to spend less money. the crux is that nobody wants to give up their own toys.
 
2013-10-14 11:14:49 AM  

SpectroBoy:


Great illustration of how the Democratic Libtard cancer will be removed from the backs of hardworking Americans.
 
2013-10-14 11:15:30 AM  

randomjsa: If you want the debt ceiling raised so badly then tell the Democrats to compromise

Once again, when two sides refuse to compromise at all standing around screaming and pointing fingers at only one of them just makes you look like an idiot.


The "both sides refuse to compromise so both are equally responsible" was the right's best play, but it isn't working.

sullydish.files.wordpress.com


But if the last election cycle taught us anything it is that once the right has decided on a strategy they stick with it regardless of it's ineffectiveness.


Good luck with that.
 
2013-10-14 11:15:33 AM  

fluffy2097: NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

We'll just have a much weaker one thanks to Congressional Republicans.

It's Ok. We can use Zimbabwe's currency as a reserve. They printed plenty of it. Look. With a single bill from Zimbabwe we could pay off our debt's multiple times.

[i.imgur.com image 850x421]
/yes, the dollar will be valued about this much if we default.
[www.goldonomic.com image 468x351]
/what paying for a happy meal will soon look like.



Wei, mar people should think of doing this.


/Sorry
 
2013-10-14 11:15:44 AM  

This text is now purple: The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: So instead of the US losing its status in the world market gradually over the next few decades we will lose it all now. Good luck buying all your oil and other imports in euros.

We buy our oil from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. Do you really think they won't take dollars?


They'll darn sure take wheat.
 
2013-10-14 11:16:55 AM  

The_Original_Roxtar: that's what happens when you pass a law without caring about where the money to pay for it comes from.
the money isn't there.


Which law are you referring to?

/please say Obamacare so that I can confirm my suspicion that you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
2013-10-14 11:17:27 AM  

The_Original_Roxtar: bottom line: we as a country need to spend less money.


No we don't. Right now we should be spending money. Infrastructure, R&D, clean energy. The size of our debt is not a crisis. 5 years of 7%+ unemployment is a crisis. Fix unemployment, you'll fix revenues, you'll fix the deficit and debt. Not the other way around.
 
2013-10-14 11:19:14 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: We will not deafault on our payments, the gov takes in more than enough to pay the interest on our debt

So the same people who (rightfully) criticize Obamacare's less-than-stellar exchange rollout now completely trust the same government to prioritize billions in debt payments. Neato.


ghare: Joe Blowme: We should just listen to what the POTUS said about raising the debt celling

We will not deafault on our payments, the gov takes in more than enough to pay the interest on our debt.... default talk is just scaremongering I really, really don't understand economics, or how the US government operates financially. In fact, I INSIST on being wrong. And I am proud of not knowing any better.

Tea Partier in a nutshell


Nightjars: Joe Blowme: We should just listen to what the POTUS said about raising the debt celling

We will not deafault on our payments, the gov takes in more than enough to pay the interest on our debt.... default talk is just scaremongering

The fact that there are people who actually believe this is what I find most scary about this whole situation.


Ok, tell me how we will default on a loan payment that say 60 billion/month out of 250billion/month income when by law that intrest has to be paid?
Did the intrest jump to more than what we take in per month?
 
2013-10-14 11:19:56 AM  

what_now: I came in here to joke about how some people are probably stupid enough to think this would be a good thing, because they don't understand how economics work and just want to stick it to the furriners, and then I saw this:

dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.


Congress has aptly demonstrated time and again they don't understand economics or finance and they're proud of it. The right wing circus media encourages their followers to remain ignorant and ignore any other view as "liberal propaganda," and they do so blissfully.

/you stupid Koch brothers are going to lose a ton on this one.
 
2013-10-14 11:20:51 AM  

Rindred: That's not how you cut a baby in half

Yes, it is. You have to chop from the groin - with the help of gravity - through the body. If you struck the skull, the rounded (even if not quite solid yet) skull might partially deflect the blow and cause an uneven bisection. And that wouldn't be fair.

/Metaphor is good, so long as we all agree that the liar "mom" of the story represents the Republicans
//No, Mr. Police Investigator, this post was in jest and I do not, in fact, advocate or...ouch! Easy with those cuffs!


You need a band saw to cut a baby perfectly in half.. otherwise, one party will get more baby than the other.
 
2013-10-14 11:21:03 AM  

jst3p: The_Original_Roxtar: that's what happens when you pass a law without caring about where the money to pay for it comes from.
the money isn't there.

Which law are you referring to?

/please say Obamacare so that I can confirm my suspicion that you have no idea what you are talking about.


every spending/stimulus bill ever.
 
2013-10-14 11:22:31 AM  
Sure. It's the GOP.  Everything is fine, if it weren't for them.  Will the people who believe that line up so the smart people can point and laugh at them?
 
2013-10-14 11:23:59 AM  

fluffy2097: NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

We'll just have a much weaker one thanks to Congressional Republicans.

It's Ok. We can use Zimbabwe's currency as a reserve. They printed plenty of it. Look. With a single bill from Zimbabwe we could pay off our debt's multiple times.

[i.imgur.com image 850x421]
/yes, the dollar will be valued about this much if we default.
[www.goldonomic.com image 468x351]
/what paying for a happy meal will soon look like.


Can you imagine how much a gallon of gas will cost?
 
2013-10-14 11:24:31 AM  

Enitria: So, saying that, what are the chances that middle eastern countries would use their oil reserves to step in and create a reserve currency? Yes, an oil standard; oil is a heck of a lot more valuable than gold.


Good luck. Oil is about the exact opposite of what makes an ideal reference currency.
 
2013-10-14 11:25:11 AM  

CleanAndPure: HotIgneous Intruder: Fark_Guy_Rob: I owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt at ridiculous interest rates.  Much of it is immune from bankruptcy (yay - education bubble!).

Bring on the inflation.  When a loaf of bread costs 100 dollars and my annual salary is 500,000k - my debts will be a drop in the bucket.

Good plan, but I suspect interest rates will go up to match the inflation.

They certainly will...

However for many people the majority of their debt is their fixed rate mortgage.

If we have 1000% inflation...I will still be paying 3% something interest.

Typically inflation hurts the rich but is beneficial to the majority of people... that's why politicians hate it.


Yes. Inflation hurts businesses that need cash for growth. (Take note of the billions that companies like Apple, Johnson & Johnson, etc have squirreled away to insulate their cash hungry research programs from inflation.) Old people complain about inflation because "a tomato use to cost a nickel" but actually, old people have cash. And when inflation comes, cash is king. It makes selling a house difficult because their are fewer folks qualified for financing, which also keeps prices down.

Deflation is different. That's when it's good to owe money - especially if you are holding hard sellable assets. If you are only holding cash - that's bad. Gold doesn't help either. No one is eating gold. Lead is the trump commodity under deflation conditions - you can get anything you need with bullets. (That's why they have become a scarce commodity under this administration.)
 
2013-10-14 11:25:34 AM  
screw it, so what if a couple thousand people die because of the shut down, at least we didn't have to raise taxes on millionaires to balance the budget.  I mean, do you have any idea how many millionaires die each year because they are taxed?  I mean, if some 40 year old is a deadbeat, his or her kids deserve to die, If they don't like it, maybe they shouldn't have decided to be born.  They can get jobs, I mean, there aren't any labor laws for 6 year old kids right?  I hear they make great miners.
 
2013-10-14 11:25:35 AM  

NewportBarGuy: theorellior: NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

Said the British seventy years ago.

They lost their entire f*cing empire. We have not. We will not. We'll just have a damaged reputation, the second largest economy, and the world's largest military. None of that will change with a breach of the debt ceiling because it is not permanent.



Am das Endet ist unser Sieg!  Berlin bleibt Deutsch!  Exceptionalismus!

 
2013-10-14 11:27:05 AM  

Joe Blowme: Ok, tell me how we will default on a loan payment that say 60 billion/month out of 250billion/month income when by law that intrest has to be paid?


1. It's illegal
2. It's also impossible
3. The timing doesn't work
4. Prioritization doesn't solve the problem

Link
 
2013-10-14 11:28:13 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


Oh, bless your heart.
 
2013-10-14 11:28:27 AM  

The_Original_Roxtar: jst3p: The_Original_Roxtar: that's what happens when you pass a law without caring about where the money to pay for it comes from.
the money isn't there.

Which law are you referring to?

/please say Obamacare so that I can confirm my suspicion that you have no idea what you are talking about.

every spending/stimulus bill ever.


The deficit is shrinking.

images.bwbx.io

We are spending less:

moneymorning.com


The problem is being addressed, what is your problem with this?
 
2013-10-14 11:28:28 AM  
I predict nothing will happen. Obummer will put on his cape and stand at the Capital Hill entrance.
The wind will catch the cape and flutter and the decider will pull something out of his butt to end it all.
 
2013-10-14 11:29:37 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


The US dollar is not backed by gold. it's backed by "the full faith and credit of the United States of America", which USED to be absolute. But republicans are now whacking it with a stick hoping candy comes out.
 
2013-10-14 11:30:43 AM  

RickN99: SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.


Would YOU want to set a precedent where if a minority in Congress wants something, they should simply hold hostage the American economy and well-being to do so?  I certainly would not.
 
2013-10-14 11:30:45 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: Ok, tell me how we will default on a loan payment that say 60 billion/month out of 250billion/month income when by law that intrest has to be paid?

1. It's illegal
2. It's also impossible
3. The timing doesn't work
4. Prioritization doesn't solve the problem

Link


 One form this takes is the patently absurd remarks of Rep. Ted Yoho (R-Fla.)

This yahoo's name is really Yoho? As in "You only Herp once! Then you Derp!"?
 
2013-10-14 11:36:28 AM  

Ambivalence: Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?

The US dollar is not backed by gold. it's backed by "the full faith and credit of the United States of America", which USED to be absolute. But republicans are now whacking it with a stick hoping candy comes out.


I lol'd.
 
2013-10-14 11:36:51 AM  
Cruz is most powerful man in universe...
 
2013-10-14 11:37:35 AM  
I love how this is all working out exactly as I predicted.
 
2013-10-14 11:40:31 AM  

brnt00: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

I laughed when POTUS nazi'd the national parks and bank rolled his NPR media. What a joke to all of us that work for a living and don't have the time to waste gawking at a tree or a giant hole in the ground. And to the veterans regarding closed memorials - I don't need to stare at a monolith to be reminded of their sacrifice - I see that in everything that I am free and able to enjoy all around me. I and my freedom are not victim to any so-called shutdown.

When a "government shutdown" still leaves 83% of the (bottom feeding) public servants at work, then we have real problem with entitlements at the top and the bottom of society.

And to the foreigners afraid of our debt ceiling, you are welcome - to the financial shelter and stability our American enterprise has afforded you under your own years of tribunal unrest. Suck it up.


This is good. Even sneaked in a Godwin. A bit forceful for my taste, but you've got raw talent kid.  Refine the presentation and you'll be thread shaitting in no time!


Thank you. But I'm not trolling - because no one is paying me to do that - which I suspect is not the case for some Farkers. I doing what they call "venting". I can't take time from my busy work schedule to drive a tractor trailer thru DC or sleep in a park for an indefinite period / non-specific issue. But I can rant on Fark with the best of them. Don't cost nothin.
 
2013-10-14 11:40:42 AM  

Enitria: demaL-demaL-yeH: NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

We'll just have a much weaker one thanks to Congressional Republicans.

We all wish this, but no.
Destroying the dollar as the world's reserve currency drags the Euro into oblivion, and the healthy economies of Europe crash. The UK? Yeah, no.
Japan and China crash right along with us.
No other economy is big enough, and none is independent enough of ours that it isn't dragged down, too.
You'll have a huge panic sell-off of financial assets affecting tens of trillions in investment.
What's on the line is global financial meltdown followed by a depression that makes that of the 1930s look like a minor sad.
There is no fallback.

/That's why the whole world is becoming increasingly strident about this.

So, saying that, what are the chances that middle eastern countries would use their oil reserves to step in and create a reserve currency? Yes, an oil standard; oil is a heck of a lot more valuable than gold. I know why we went off the gold standard, but do you think a world in deep doo is going to care about the niceties? Besides, controlling the money supply controls how much of a military the US can afford. Something I know they have a keen interest in.


Zero. Because this:
upload.wikimedia.org
This.

And this.
 
2013-10-14 11:40:59 AM  
www.angryflower.com
 
2013-10-14 11:43:46 AM  

This text is now purple: Enitria: So, saying that, what are the chances that middle eastern countries would use their oil reserves to step in and create a reserve currency? Yes, an oil standard; oil is a heck of a lot more valuable than gold.

Good luck. Oil is about the exact opposite of what makes an ideal reference currency.


And that, too.
 
2013-10-14 11:44:01 AM  

ajgeek: SpectroBoy: itsaidwhat: Obama derpityderpityderp.

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 600x682]

That one is so much better than my attempt to make the background black. Thanks for that.

Totally unrelated to what Spectroboy gave me. I admit I have no idea why the debt ceiling MUST BE RAISED or we automatically default. Best guess is that the debt ceiling must be raised because inflation which is on average 3% per year. I also know that fiat currency is also, effectively, debt.

Query: Would the US defaulting start a new World War? Is it possible that the people in charge want a war because of what it did to our economy last time?


The US default would not start a world war. HOWEVER there will be a revolt in the neighnorhood Walmart when the EBT cards stop working permanently.

"They have no bread? Let them eat Little Debbie Cakes!!" - said the honorable senator from the great state of Arkansas.
 
2013-10-14 11:44:09 AM  

www.truthdig.com



cdn2-b.examiner.com



www.wwrl1600.com


 
2013-10-14 11:44:15 AM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


Both sides are equally at fault, right?
 
2013-10-14 11:44:16 AM  

Elroydb: I haven't read everything in this thread but has no one stated the obvious that as long as more money flows into the Treasury than exceeds the principle and interest payments on the debt there is 0% chance of defaulting?

Also has anyone questioned the logic of "Be able to borrow more money so you can pay us with borrowed money?"

Also for tl;dr:

at this point in time the only we default on our debt without raising the debt ceiling is if we choose not to pay our debts. We have the money in our hands. We just have to reach our hands out and give the money to them


The Treasury department writes millions of checks per day. It's automated. They've already said that they have absolutely no way to prioritize what debts to pay and what debts not to pay. They literally can't just write checks for treasury bond interest and/or pick other debts to pay or not pay.

Besides that, do you really want to be in a situation where SS checks aren't sent out, government contracts aren't paid, and many millions of people don't get the wages owed to them because they're working on contracts for the federal govt or working as part of the supply chain for people and companies doing govt contracts? It would be catastrophic.
 
2013-10-14 11:44:38 AM  

AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.


F and U

The Democrats are Hell demon spawn Satan uses to directly destroy Mankind through corruption, death, lies and every form of sin ever known, and they will take down the USA until we become trash heap dwellers like Manila without whimsey.

The Republican Party began as Progressives.

Try not to be a simpleton carrying the water for fools and men of no honor.
 
2013-10-14 11:47:04 AM  

Potter82: Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.

No, people like you are the ones who are not paying attention. To say that the Democrats are as much to blame as the Republicans for creating this crisis is completely dishonest and/or lazy.


Exactly!! The Democrats are currently the majority. That makes it mostly their fault. Or do you subscribe to the theory that minorities are to blame for America's problem (that's racist)?
 
2013-10-14 11:47:12 AM  

Clemkadidlefark: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

F and U

The Democrats are Hell demon spawn Satan uses to directly destroy Mankind through corruption, death, lies and every form of sin ever known, and they will take down the USA until we become trash heap dwellers like Manila without whimsey.

The Republican Party began as Progressives.

Try not to be a simpleton carrying the water for fools and men of no honor.


24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-10-14 11:47:52 AM  

moefuggenbrew: An attempt to "compromise" by keeping the government open as long as we eliminate funding that would provide all Americans with healthcare.


And they talk about Republicans "lying". How does this law "provide" all Americans with healthcare? Simply, it requires that all Americans PURCHASE healthcare insurance. Therefore, it  PROVIDES nothing.
 
2013-10-14 11:49:57 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: Ok, tell me how we will default on a loan payment that say 60 billion/month out of 250billion/month income when by law that intrest has to be paid?

1. It's illegal
2. It's also impossible
3. The timing doesn't work
4. Prioritization doesn't solve the problem

Link


Section 4 of the 14th amendment makes it legal.
 
2013-10-14 11:50:25 AM  

ZurkisPhreek: Hmmm... if this plays out right (or wrong, however you wish to view it), WW3 will be fought with money?


It will be started with data - 0's and 1's and escalate to land grabs and the movement (shipping) of natural resources.
 
2013-10-14 11:53:04 AM  

Joe Blowme: Section 4 of the 14th amendment makes it legal.


Great. It's still impossible.
 
2013-10-14 11:53:26 AM  

SpectroBoy: RickN99: GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

You proved my point. It is the GOP and only the GOP that is not funding the government at this point. It is THEIR FAULT. It is not a "both sides are bad" issue.

Thanks for backing me up.


It's not the GOP but rather America that's not "buying" the crap that Democrats want to serve up as "essential government". Getting a majority and passing shiat laws only works if you can enforce them. That's why the political war is now on with the IRS.
 
2013-10-14 11:55:24 AM  

PC LOAD LETTER: someone has zero idea how global economics actually works.


I didn't say it wouldn't affect the economy.
I said that leaders don't care about the outcomes more than their own standing.

There are things they can do to prevent a trainwreck, but they don't seem particularly concerned about that anymore than they are about preventing famines in Africa or saving civilians in Syria.

As a result we get alot of lip service but no action.
Everyone wants to blame the other guy when anyone could have resolved the problem.
 
2013-10-14 11:58:06 AM  

Dimensio: RickN99: SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

Currently proposed government funding levels are a direct result of Speaker John Boehner receiving "98%" of what he wanted. Current funding levels, therefore, are at Republican-desired levels.

The original Republican-passed spending bill did not change government funding levels; it served only to eliminate an existing law that they did not like, despite that law having been signed into law three years ago, surviving a Constitutional challenge and effectively surviving voter referendum when the President who championed it defeated a challenger who promised to repeal it.

Your argument is a lie and you are a liar for making it.


"You (Libtard Santa Claus and your free money give-away-world policies) sit on a throne of lies!"
 
2013-10-14 11:59:12 AM  

Richard C Stanford: Who cares about them thar furriner places. What, a bunch a squinty-eyed commies, weird cartoon watching commies, terrorists, commie nazis, and what ever the hell a Singapore is. I don't know where that is, and real 'Muricans don't! We care about 'Murica and tossing General El Presidente Hussian Commie Osama Fartbongo Obammy outta the WHITE house.
Kin I get a cheer for willful ignorance!


Sure, I'll cheer for you. "Cheers!"
 
2013-10-14 12:00:36 PM  

jst3p: The_Original_Roxtar: jst3p: The_Original_Roxtar: that's what happens when you pass a law without caring about where the money to pay for it comes from.
the money isn't there.

Which law are you referring to?

/please say Obamacare so that I can confirm my suspicion that you have no idea what you are talking about.

every spending/stimulus bill ever.

The deficit is shrinking.

[images.bwbx.io image 630x420]

We are spending less:

[moneymorning.com image 590x437]


The problem is being addressed, what is your problem with this?


we haven't had a balanced budget since Clinton was in office. Also, listing all your stats as a percentage of GDP is a bit misleading.
 
2013-10-14 12:00:58 PM  

itsaidwhat: Dimensio: RickN99: SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

Currently proposed government funding levels are a direct result of Speaker John Boehner receiving "98%" of what he wanted. Current funding levels, therefore, are at Republican-desired levels.

The original Republican-passed spending bill did not change government funding levels; it served only to eliminate an existing law that they did not like, despite that law having been signed into law three years ago, surviving a Constitutional challenge and effectively surviving voter referendum when the President who championed it defeated a challenger who promised to repeal it.

Your argument is a lie and you are a liar for making it.

"You (Libtard Santa Claus and your free money give-away-world policies) sit on a throne of lies!"


You do your arguments a disservice using such idiotic pejoratives like "libtard". This is why no one takes your side seriously.
 
2013-10-14 12:02:17 PM  
Well, that's my ignore list nicely updated. Now what? Shall I catch up on my stories on Hulu?
 
2013-10-14 12:02:28 PM  

CleanAndPure: However for many people the majority of their debt is their fixed rate mortgage.

If we have 1000% inflation...I will still be paying 3% something interest.


"Leaving the banks full of worthless paper."  Which is why the rest of the world doesn't do fixed rate mortgages.

Unfortunately, ARM's have made a comeback since 2008, as has the practice of lenders trying to get people to take out mortgages they will not be able to pay off so they can sell the mortgages to someone else, and the practice of bundling up these odious debts into financial "products".  Maybe America doesn't deserve to ever come out of this recession.
 
2013-10-14 12:04:42 PM  

way south: The reality is both sides are self serving wenches that really don't care what happens so long as they "win".


THIS RIGHT HYAR. They're more concerned about how their statements and talking points will "poll" than with architecting a rational solution to this mess.

/Which, as I said elsewhere, sucks diarrheal ass.
 
2013-10-14 12:05:06 PM  
Misconduc:nice troll, fact is they are do-nothing leaches - I would know I have roughly 50 tenants and all are on Federal assistance. Less than 25% worked their entire life, most don't even have a high school education - they worked a dead end job and did not bother to save any kind of money and now given free handouts because they didn't bother to attend career day in high school.

I have at least 10 that didn't even finish high school or have a job in over 10 years, and these are in their 40s collecting foodstamps and other assistance. Sleep well knowing your hard earned money goes to someone who refuses to pick up a shovel and do some god honest work for a days pay, instead our lovely government just hands out assistance to those who simply need to go out and earn their keep.


Nice, except you forgot to tell us about your supermodel GF, your five advanced degrees, needing to get to the gym in 26 minutes, etc.
 
2013-10-14 12:06:13 PM  
In other news, has anyone signed up on healthcare.gov yet? Anybody?
 
2013-10-14 12:06:22 PM  

Clemkadidlefark: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

F and U

The Democrats are Hell demon spawn Satan uses to directly destroy Mankind through corruption, death, lies and every form of sin ever known, and they will take down the USA until we become trash heap dwellers like Manila without whimsey.

The Republican Party began as Progressives.

Try not to be a simpleton carrying the water for fools and men of no honor.


What is this?  Satire?

// Good job?
 
2013-10-14 12:06:35 PM  

flondrix: CleanAndPure: However for many people the majority of their debt is their fixed rate mortgage.

If we have 1000% inflation...I will still be paying 3% something interest.

"Leaving the banks full of worthless paper."  Which is why the rest of the world doesn't do fixed rate mortgages.

Unfortunately, ARM's have made a comeback since 2008, as has the practice of lenders trying to get people to take out mortgages they will not be able to pay off so they can sell the mortgages to someone else, and the practice of bundling up these odious debts into financial "products".  Maybe America doesn't deserve to ever come out of this recession.


I never understood why anyone would think an adjustable interest rate is a good idea. The rate goes up (and probably higher than is affordable) and you get hosed.
 
2013-10-14 12:08:18 PM  

The_Original_Roxtar: we haven't had a balanced budget since Clinton was in office. Also, listing all your stats as a percentage of GDP is a bit misleading.


Why?
 
2013-10-14 12:08:40 PM  

Clemkadidlefark: The Republican Party began as Progressives.


If you think Abe Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt wouldn't take massive dumps on what passes for today's GOP, you don't know sh*t about history.
 
2013-10-14 12:09:06 PM  

The_Original_Roxtar: jst3p: The_Original_Roxtar: jst3p: The_Original_Roxtar: that's what happens when you pass a law without caring about where the money to pay for it comes from.
the money isn't there.

Which law are you referring to?

/please say Obamacare so that I can confirm my suspicion that you have no idea what you are talking about.

every spending/stimulus bill ever.

The deficit is shrinking.

[images.bwbx.io image 630x420]

We are spending less:

[moneymorning.com image 590x437]


The problem is being addressed, what is your problem with this?

we haven't had a balanced budget since Clinton was in office.

I

agree that we need to work to that goal, but if we get there too quickly it causes more problems than it solves. Cutting spending increases unemployment. Our recovery is pretty fragile and the sequester has already caused us to miss out on some of the economic growth we should have realized:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/06/14/2161921/imf-says-automat ic -austerity-is-wrecking-us-economic-growth/

In my opinion, Also the Go P knows this. The pretend to champion "fiscal responsibility" but what they really want is for the economy to falter so they can pin it on Obama.

Also, listing all your stats as a percentage of GDP is a bit misleading.

As a percentage of GDP is the only measure that matters. Any other way lacks context.

Have you ever taken a macroecon class?
 
2013-10-14 12:09:10 PM  

Ambivalence: GORDON: I remember when Bush was evil and the President was expected to work with a Congress of the other political party, not the other way around.  But, then, that was like 8 years ago.  Times are different now.

Yes, because democrats threatened a shutdown and default under bush. Oh and threatened to impeach.

Or not.

False equivalence is false.


I remember when democrats said Bush couldn't possibly be American because he was black. Bush must have been born in Kenya... in the bush perhaps.
 
2013-10-14 12:09:41 PM  

you have pee hands: The_Original_Roxtar: we haven't had a balanced budget since Clinton was in office. Also, listing all your stats as a percentage of GDP is a bit misleading.

Why?


Because he went to a top 5 school. Where is that guy that can explain it in coconuts?
 
2013-10-14 12:12:37 PM  

you have pee hands: itsaidwhat: Libtard. Look at the numbers. Entitlements are killing America. Wealthy taking social security, abled taking disability, creating children where no family exists to raise them. And before you put a face on my opinions (you racist) be aware that I welcome people of all colors, national origin, religion and sexual orientation to join me on the work line to support "the working poor". You have no idea how I made it to where I am but it starts with self respect and respect for others - including their beliefs and their property. When libtards seek to take away either, they will meet with the harsh reality of my rights. Yes, please - face me - and tell me you deserve what I have earned. You will get what my conscience thinks you deserve.

You might not be racist but you're certainly lacking in perspective and incapable of empathy, and you're also parroting taking points that were debunked in the 80s.


Which 80's. 1980's? 1880's? 1480's. Self-reliance has never been debunked. As far as empathy, your opinion/perspective is not the yardstick of my empathy. Fark is full of words and devoid of action. No one on Fark is helping anyone that really needs help. It's not a substitute for feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless, aiding the sick, etc. So don't fool yourself into thinking that you are forwarding the great cause of humanity here by preaching the evils of success. You just look like a tool of the current administration. And don't you have a Healthcare Navigator Job to get to?
 
2013-10-14 12:13:26 PM  

pxlboy: I never understood why anyone would think an adjustable interest rate is a good idea. The rate goes up (and probably higher than is affordable) and you get hosed.


Not everyone. We will be able to pay off our house in five years, so we got 5/2 ARM, based on a 30 year loan, at  anout 2.75%, substantially below what conventional mortgages are costing. Make double payments every month and the principal drops fast. We'll never see the 2-point increase.
 
2013-10-14 12:16:39 PM  

you have pee hands: The_Original_Roxtar: we haven't had a balanced budget since Clinton was in office. Also, listing all your stats as a percentage of GDP is a bit misleading.

Why?


jst3p: Also, listing all your stats as a percentage of GDP is a bit misleading.

As a percentage of GDP is the only measure that matters. Any other way lacks context.

Have you ever taken a macroecon class?


A.) because the federal government does not own all of the GDP
B.) because some federal spending contributes to GDP
listing with federal spending per capita and as a percentage of federal tax revenue gives a more complete picture.
 
2013-10-14 12:17:21 PM  

Speaker2Animals: pxlboy: I never understood why anyone would think an adjustable interest rate is a good idea. The rate goes up (and probably higher than is affordable) and you get hosed.

Not everyone. We will be able to pay off our house in five years, so we got 5/2 ARM, based on a 30 year loan, at  anout 2.75%, substantially below what conventional mortgages are costing. Make double payments every month and the principal drops fast. We'll never see the 2-point increase.


Do payment lapses increase the rate or is it something else?
 
2013-10-14 12:18:05 PM  
DubtodaIll: I mean you if want to throw labels on things to make you feel better about your own positions that's fine but don't assume what I'm SO concerned about.

Will do!

I don't want the U.S. to default however it may be something that happens that turns out to be a positive influence on the way the country is ran.

And this is why.The idea that defaulting does anything useful is absolutely foolish. It has nothing to do with resolving our political issues regarding the budget especially if there are groups of people who think it's a good idea.

When will the debt be so big that we have to do something about it? 20 trillion? 50 trillion?

Not for a long time. Debt is not inherently bad and big numbers don't mean anything. If our country has a GDP of 500 trillion then a debt of 50 trillion is inconsequential.
 
2013-10-14 12:18:49 PM  

pxlboy: I never understood why anyone would think an adjustable interest rate is a good idea. The rate goes up (and probably higher than is affordable) and you get hosed.


imgc.allpostersimages.com
 
2013-10-14 12:18:49 PM  
just keep the reckoning away a few more years ... ME degree with math minor and inventions in the wings

/good job not around here....
 
2013-10-14 12:19:27 PM  

itsaidwhat: Dimensio: RickN99: SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

Currently proposed government funding levels are a direct result of Speaker John Boehner receiving "98%" of what he wanted. Current funding levels, therefore, are at Republican-desired levels.

The original Republican-passed spending bill did not change government funding levels; it served only to eliminate an existing law that they did not like, despite that law having been signed into law three years ago, surviving a Constitutional challenge and effectively surviving voter referendum when the President who championed it defeated a challenger who promised to repeal it.

Your argument is a lie and you are a liar for making it.

"You (Libtard Santa Claus and your free money give-away-world policies) sit on a throne of lies!"


And smells like beef and cheese
 
2013-10-14 12:21:04 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: Section 4 of the 14th amendment makes it legal.

Great. It's still impossible.


no, its not.
 
2013-10-14 12:22:40 PM  

Joe Blowme: no, its not.


Hard to know who to believe here. The IG of the Treasury or Some Guy On The Internet Because He Says So. Tough call.
 
2013-10-14 12:24:49 PM  

Speaker2Animals: Clemkadidlefark: The Republican Party began as Progressives.

If you think Abe Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt wouldn't take massive dumps on what passes for today's GOP, you don't know sh*t about history.


woah there big shooter, i believe it was Hoover who had strange sex fetishes like you are describing
 
2013-10-14 12:25:32 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: no, its not.

Hard to know who to believe here. The IG of the Treasury or Some Guy On The Internet Because He Says So. Tough call.


well, i did stay at a Holliday Inn last night
 
2013-10-14 12:27:43 PM  

pxlboy: Speaker2Animals: pxlboy: I never understood why anyone would think an adjustable interest rate is a good idea. The rate goes up (and probably higher than is affordable) and you get hosed.

Not everyone. We will be able to pay off our house in five years, so we got 5/2 ARM, based on a 30 year loan, at  anout 2.75%, substantially below what conventional mortgages are costing. Make double payments every month and the principal drops fast. We'll never see the 2-point increase.

Do payment lapses increase the rate or is it something else?


No, what the 5/2 means is the rate is frozen for five years at which point it can adjust upwards by a maximum of two points. My meaning was that we'll have it paid off before that happens.
 
2013-10-14 12:27:54 PM  
Oh shiat. I better buy that big TV that I deserve but can't afford now instead of later.
 
2013-10-14 12:30:40 PM  

Speaker2Animals: pxlboy: Speaker2Animals: pxlboy: I never understood why anyone would think an adjustable interest rate is a good idea. The rate goes up (and probably higher than is affordable) and you get hosed.

Not everyone. We will be able to pay off our house in five years, so we got 5/2 ARM, based on a 30 year loan, at  anout 2.75%, substantially below what conventional mortgages are costing. Make double payments every month and the principal drops fast. We'll never see the 2-point increase.

Do payment lapses increase the rate or is it something else?

No, what the 5/2 means is the rate is frozen for five years at which point it can adjust upwards by a maximum of two points. My meaning was that we'll have it paid off before that happens.


Oh, okay. Good on you for it.
 
2013-10-14 12:31:02 PM  
Republicans are so f*cking stupid. It's amazing what you morons will do to try to repeal the will of the American people.
 
2013-10-14 12:31:18 PM  

AeAe: Both sides are equally at fault, right?


How are they not?

Lets pretend for a moment that this is not terrorism or a hostage situation, there are no guns to anyones head and no suicide bombs, and that this is not a die hard movie or some fantastical battle of good VS evil.

For this one example, let us look at this like two angry business partners in a room who are shouting at each other, but they need to reach a deal.   One cannot have the other one arrested or thrown out or legally killed.  Maybe one can be voted out of his seat but that option is months down the road. They've brought a bunch of random spectators in to fill the room, but none of them can really do anything but add to the shouting.

A deal must still be reached between the partners and it must be reached now.
If neither side bends then, yes, it is both their faults.

Both of them have put petty wants ahead of the businesses needs.
Maybe one shouldn't have had as much say as he did, maybe the particular deal they are arguing over was a bad idea from the start, but in the end its a trivial difference.  Either they find a way to work together or they don't.

All of the snickering from the peanut gallery doesn't mean much unless people with means become directlyinvolved at the table.
 
2013-10-14 12:33:45 PM  

jst3p: itsaidwhat: VendorXeno: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

Close to 90% of the people receiving some kind of federal assistance fall into the categories of working poor, retired or disabled, including veterans and the elderly, people who put in their time. To call them do-nothing leaches [sic] is one of the lowest! most insulting and disgusting lies a person can spread about their fellow citizens. When itsaidwhat employs this lie it demonstrates him to be a dishonest, stupid, hateful human being, one of the worst of us. This is the face of the right wing now, this ignorant malice and selfish dishonesty.

Yes. I work for a living. That makes me ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest.

I am rubber, you are glue...

It is your opinions as presented on this website that makes you look ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest, not the fact that you work for a living.


Funny, it's because I work for a living, opinions like yours are irrelevant and always will be.
 
2013-10-14 12:37:34 PM  

The_Original_Roxtar: you have pee hands: The_Original_Roxtar: we haven't had a balanced budget since Clinton was in office. Also, listing all your stats as a percentage of GDP is a bit misleading.

Why?

jst3p: Also, listing all your stats as a percentage of GDP is a bit misleading.

As a percentage of GDP is the only measure that matters. Any other way lacks context.

Have you ever taken a macroecon class?

A.) because the federal government does not own all of the GDP
B.) because some federal spending contributes to GDP
listing with federal spending per capita and as a percentage of federal tax revenue gives a more complete picture.


www.mygovcost.org

One of those is improving too, I can't find the data for the other (although I didn't spend much time looking).

In short, we are working on it but these things can't get fixed overnight.
 
2013-10-14 12:38:30 PM  

itsaidwhat: jst3p: itsaidwhat: VendorXeno: itsaidwhat: Obama and his libtard sycophants are equally to blame by representing the do-nothing leaches of society.

Close to 90% of the people receiving some kind of federal assistance fall into the categories of working poor, retired or disabled, including veterans and the elderly, people who put in their time. To call them do-nothing leaches [sic] is one of the lowest! most insulting and disgusting lies a person can spread about their fellow citizens. When itsaidwhat employs this lie it demonstrates him to be a dishonest, stupid, hateful human being, one of the worst of us. This is the face of the right wing now, this ignorant malice and selfish dishonesty.

Yes. I work for a living. That makes me ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest.

I am rubber, you are glue...

It is your opinions as presented on this website that makes you look ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest, not the fact that you work for a living.

Funny, it's because I work for a living, opinions like yours are irrelevant and always will be.



I hope your job doesn't require intellectual honesty, objectivity, or logical thought.
 
2013-10-14 12:41:57 PM  
"This GOP scheme is going to tank the dollar as the world reserve currency"


So it's going just as planned, then?
 
2013-10-14 12:42:13 PM  
If you ever wondered if world economics was a sport, this should answer your question.

Somebody finally mentioned what this theatre is all about, IMHO.
The Dollar.

Not health insurance.
Not GOP stupidity, or DFL.

But, only thing I AM SURE of, it is all a lie.
 
2013-10-14 12:43:46 PM  

KellyX: ajgeek: Query: Would the US defaulting start a new World War? Is it possible that the people in charge want a war because of what it did to our economy last time?

Depending on how bad the depression/recession is, some countries might see it as a means to get at resources, but realistically, my concern would be rampant unemployment, especially with young people, and some kind of violent rioting and possible revolution occurring...


A revolution? Sweet! Hopefully it will be like that show and we'll all fight with swords when the power goes out. I can't wait.
 
2013-10-14 12:43:53 PM  

ghare: jst3p: itsaidwhat: ....It is your opinions as presented on this website that makes you look ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest, not the fact that you work for a living.

For opinions to be valid, they have to be based in fact. Otherwise, they are not opinions, they are hallucinations.


Hallucination? Ha. It's better than the delusions of your libtard kum-ba-ya everyone needs a participation trophy socialism.

We'll see who's living the dream when the shiat hits the fan - those self-sufficient persons that have worked themselves into the position to give help to others OR those that have only ever "prepared" themselves to be helped.
 
2013-10-14 12:45:29 PM  

itsaidwhat: ghare: jst3p: itsaidwhat: ....It is your opinions as presented on this website that makes you look ignorant, malicious, selfish and dishonest, not the fact that you work for a living.

For opinions to be valid, they have to be based in fact. Otherwise, they are not opinions, they are hallucinations.

Hallucination? Ha. It's better than the delusions of your libtard kum-ba-ya everyone needs a participation trophy socialism.

We'll see who's living the dream when the shiat hits the fan - those self-sufficient persons that have worked themselves into the position to give help to others OR those that have only ever "prepared" themselves to be helped.


Oh, you are one of those.
 
2013-10-14 12:46:10 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: Section 4 of the 14th amendment makes it legal.

Great. It's still impossible.


And the government indefinitely continuing to spend more money than it takes in as revenue and borrowing to make up the difference is possible?

Obama and the Democrats' fiscal plan will, eventually, destroy the nation's creditworthiness and bring about the catastrophe they're crying about.  This is not an opinion, it is mathematical certainty.

We can either take our lumps now, while the country can still (granted, barely) afford them, or we can continue on our path and surely be destroyed as a nation.  Your choice.
 
2013-10-14 12:47:47 PM  

itsaidwhat: Which 80's. 1980's? 1880's? 1480's. Self-reliance has never been debunked. As far as empathy, your opinion/perspective is not the yardstick of my empathy. Fark is full of words and devoid of action. No one on Fark is helping anyone that really needs help. It's not a substitute for feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless, aiding the sick, etc. So don't fool yourself into thinking that you are forwarding the great cause of humanity here by preaching the evils of success. You just look like a tool of the current administration. And don't you have a Healthcare Navigator Job to get to?


No man is an island entire of itself.  You don't seem to know what empathy is, or you'd realize that your objectivist dreck shows a lack of it.  And where, exactly, was I "preaching the evils of success"?  You should probably learn what's actually written before you worry yourself too much about my employability.
 
2013-10-14 12:49:12 PM  

Mouser: Obama and the Democrats' fiscal plan will, eventually, destroy the nation's creditworthiness and bring about the catastrophe they're crying about. This is not an opinion, it is mathematical certainty.


No it isn't.
 
2013-10-14 12:49:17 PM  

Mouser: And the government indefinitely continuing to spend more money than it takes in as revenue and borrowing to make up the difference is possible?


See the charts and graphs I posted in this thread and see how that this trend is reversing not getting worse. I know they look like pictures, but they contain actual information.
 
2013-10-14 12:49:43 PM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


You are stupid. "Both sides are the same!" is stupid.

The shutdown, the threat of default, these are 100% the fault of the Republican party.
 
2013-10-14 12:51:40 PM  

Mouser: Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: Section 4 of the 14th amendment makes it legal.

Great. It's still impossible.

And the government indefinitely continuing to spend more money than it takes in as revenue and borrowing to make up the difference is possible?

Obama and the Democrats' fiscal plan will, eventually, destroy the nation's creditworthiness and bring about the catastrophe they're crying about.  This is not an opinion, it is mathematical certainty.

We can either take our lumps now, while the country can still (granted, barely) afford them, or we can continue on our path and surely be destroyed as a nation.  Your choice.


The debt isn't nearly as unmanageable as you make it. Stop buying fancy military hardware for like 5 years and the debt is gone. Or pick your poison, really.

It is NOT so much debt that the GOP should shut down the farking country and threaten to default. Not even close. It would take 100x this much debt for that to be reasonable.
 
2013-10-14 12:52:13 PM  

Speaker2Animals: Clemkadidlefark: The Republican Party began as Progressives.

If you think Abe Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt wouldn't take massive dumps on what passes for today's GOP, you don't know sh*t about history.


Teddy Roosevelt would be seen as liberal today.  The dude helped reform our food and drug practices despite the fact that the new enforcement would cost business owners profit, and he used government funding to start and maintain national parks.   The Tea Party would HATE "big government" getting involved with job creators.
 
2013-10-14 12:52:40 PM  

The_Original_Roxtar: A.) because the federal government does not own all of the GDP
B.) because some federal spending contributes to GDP
listing with federal spending per capita and as a percentage of federal tax revenue gives a more complete picture.


Listing federal spending as a percentage of federal tax revenue is going to give you a very spiky picture because tax revenue and expenditure don't and shouldn't move together.  The government spends more on the social net during bad times and less in good times while tax revenues obviously do the opposite.  For them to track together you'd have to practice increased spending during economic high times and austerity during recessions which is going to cause a big boom-bust cycle.
 
2013-10-14 12:53:00 PM  

blindio: screw it, so what if a couple thousand people die because of the shut down, at least we didn't have to raise taxes on millionaires to balance the budget.  I mean, do you have any idea how many millionaires die each year because they are taxed?  I mean, if some 40 year old is a deadbeat, his or her kids deserve to die, If they don't like it, maybe they shouldn't have decided to be born.  They can get jobs, I mean, there aren't any labor laws for 6 year old kids right?  I hear they make great miners.


People will die, rich or poor. What we are debating is life and specifically, comfort. And, how some people refuse to lift a finger to contribute to their own comfort, and instead, insisting that to be an obligation of the wealthy. Fark that notion.

If I didn't know so many immigrants that came to this country as penniless refugees, that worked two and three jobs for years to get through school, support a family here and in their home country and that now can drive Lexus and Mercedes YET STILL work two or three jobs, then I would have sympathy for the "working poor". Lazy people deserve their discomfort.
 
2013-10-14 12:53:16 PM  
Instead of raising the "debt ceiling", why not lower the "debt"?

All we have to do is dump the "fake" parts of the debt - like the amount "owed" to the Federal Reserve" and the "Social Security Trust Fund".

That would drop it by about 1/3.


/Too obvious?
 
2013-10-14 12:53:40 PM  

LavenderWolf: Mouser: Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: Section 4 of the 14th amendment makes it legal.

Great. It's still impossible.

And the government indefinitely continuing to spend more money than it takes in as revenue and borrowing to make up the difference is possible?

Obama and the Democrats' fiscal plan will, eventually, destroy the nation's creditworthiness and bring about the catastrophe they're crying about.  This is not an opinion, it is mathematical certainty.

We can either take our lumps now, while the country can still (granted, barely) afford them, or we can continue on our path and surely be destroyed as a nation.  Your choice.

The debt isn't nearly as unmanageable as you make it. Stop buying fancy military hardware for like 5 years and the debt is gone. Or pick your poison, really.

It is NOT so much debt that the GOP should shut down the farking country and threaten to default. Not even close. It would take 100x this much debt for that to be reasonable.


This, we have been much deeper in debt than this (relatively) on more that one occasion.
 
2013-10-14 12:55:45 PM  

jst3p: LavenderWolf: Mouser: Dusk-You-n-Me: Joe Blowme: Section 4 of the 14th amendment makes it legal.

Great. It's still impossible.

And the government indefinitely continuing to spend more money than it takes in as revenue and borrowing to make up the difference is possible?

Obama and the Democrats' fiscal plan will, eventually, destroy the nation's creditworthiness and bring about the catastrophe they're crying about.  This is not an opinion, it is mathematical certainty.

We can either take our lumps now, while the country can still (granted, barely) afford them, or we can continue on our path and surely be destroyed as a nation.  Your choice.

The debt isn't nearly as unmanageable as you make it. Stop buying fancy military hardware for like 5 years and the debt is gone. Or pick your poison, really.

It is NOT so much debt that the GOP should shut down the farking country and threaten to default. Not even close. It would take 100x this much debt for that to be reasonable.

This, we have been much deeper in debt than this (relatively) on more that one occasion.


Not to mention, before this stupid GOP shutdown, the budget/debt/deficit situation was improving.
 
2013-10-14 12:56:01 PM  

jst3p: See the charts and graphs I posted in this thread and see how that this trend is reversing not getting worse.


While you are correct that the trend is in the 'better' direction, we still have the debt issue square in front of us.  The CBO has been expecting a partial lessening of the deficits as we climb out of this last recession, however, SS and Medicare costs are expected to still be major issues going into the future.

www.taxnetwealth.com
 
2013-10-14 12:56:51 PM  

you have pee hands: The_Original_Roxtar: A.) because the federal government does not own all of the GDP
B.) because some federal spending contributes to GDP
listing with federal spending per capita and as a percentage of federal tax revenue gives a more complete picture.

Listing federal spending as a percentage of federal tax revenue is going to give you a very spiky picture because tax revenue and expenditure don't and shouldn't move together.  The government spends more on the social net during bad times and less in good times while tax revenues obviously do the opposite.  For them to track together you'd have to practice increased spending during economic high times and austerity during recessions which is going to cause a big boom-bust cycle.


The GoP pushed for the former (Medicare Part D and two unfunded wars while cutting taxes) and now want the latter (while we are still in recovery, not in recession). It is really bizarre that they think either are a good idea. Either they are ignorant of the effects of these policies, or they really do want to crash the economy.
 
2013-10-14 12:57:19 PM  

patrick767: Elroydb: I haven't read everything in this thread but has no one stated the obvious that as long as more money flows into the Treasury than exceeds the principle and interest payments on the debt there is 0% chance of defaulting?

Also has anyone questioned the logic of "Be able to borrow more money so you can pay us with borrowed money?"

Also for tl;dr:

at this point in time the only we default on our debt without raising the debt ceiling is if we choose not to pay our debts. We have the money in our hands. We just have to reach our hands out and give the money to them

The Treasury department writes millions of checks per day. It's automated. They've already said that they have absolutely no way to prioritize what debts to pay and what debts not to pay. They literally can't just write checks for treasury bond interest and/or pick other debts to pay or not pay.

Besides that, do you really want to be in a situation where SS checks aren't sent out, government contracts aren't paid, and many millions of people don't get the wages owed to them because they're working on contracts for the federal govt or working as part of the supply chain for people and companies doing govt contracts? It would be catastrophic.


If they have too many bills to prioritize, maybe start by paying the ones required by the US Constitution instead of the crap it's evolved into.
 
2013-10-14 12:57:36 PM  

LavenderWolf: Stop buying fancy military hardware for like 5 years and the debt is gone.


No it is not. Debt is about 16 Trillion.  We spend about 600 Billion per year on all of the millitary.

Even if we cut out all DoD spending (and assuming no negative revenue feedback), you will not even eliminate the deficit, let alone the debt.
 
2013-10-14 12:58:44 PM  

LavenderWolf: Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.

You are stupid. "Both sides are the same!" is stupid.

The shutdown, the threat of default, these are 100% the fault of the Republican party.



Absolutely not.
The GOP is just the Punch in this theatre.
The 1% is shaking down the US Economy(or maybe somebody else's), enjoy the show.
 
2013-10-14 12:59:18 PM  
Are we really to the point where things could start to crumble? If they do, I am ever so glad to be living in "fly-over-country". It will get bad here, no doubt, but nowhere near as bad as it will in the cities.

You see, while a lot of noise is made about where money goes, not a sound is made about why it goes where it goes. Sure, the city-dwellers pay a larger amount to live in "cultural centers", but their towers are poetically constructed of glass. If the structure of society crumbles, the very first thing that will happen is that food will stop making it to the largest cities, simply because of the economics of transportation and logistics. Then, they will be staring at all that "priceless" artwork, wishing they could eat it. You will see the mother of all diasporas then. The big question: will the powers-that-be attempt to do what Stalin did to the Ukraine, and would that even work? If the cities empty, where will they go? I think the residents of "fly-over-country" are far better armed then the Ukrainians were.
 
2013-10-14 01:00:04 PM  

HeadLever: jst3p: See the charts and graphs I posted in this thread and see how that this trend is reversing not getting worse.

While you are correct that the trend is in the 'better' direction, we still have the debt issue square in front of us.  The CBO has been expecting a partial lessening of the deficits as we climb out of this last recession, however, SS and Medicare costs are expected to still be major issues going into the future.

[www.taxnetwealth.com image 800x427]


By that graph we have until sometime between 2015 and 2025 to figure it out. I agree it is an issue, but congress needs fund the goddamn government and lift the debt ceiling and then get to work on it. The GoP has already stated that they want to be measured by how many laws DON'T get passed, how is that a functional approach to fixing these problems?
 
2013-10-14 01:00:34 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: Stop buying fancy military hardware for like 5 years and the debt is gone.

No it is not. Debt is about 16 Trillion.  We spend about 600 Billion per year on all of the millitary.

Even if we cut out all DoD spending (and assuming no negative revenue feedback), you will not even eliminate the deficit, let alone the debt.


Okay, a few more years.

There are measures you can take that make a lot more sense than "Shut down the government! Who needs the vital services it provides?"

As someone else said, the debt situation has been worse before. The numbers are higher than ever, but the relative debt level isn't unprecedented.
 
2013-10-14 01:02:15 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Are we really to the point where things could start to crumble? If they do, I am ever so glad to be living in "fly-over-country". It will get bad here, no doubt, but nowhere near as bad as it will in the cities.

You see, while a lot of noise is made about where money goes, not a sound is made about why it goes where it goes. Sure, the city-dwellers pay a larger amount to live in "cultural centers", but their towers are poetically constructed of glass. If the structure of society crumbles, the very first thing that will happen is that food will stop making it to the largest cities, simply because of the economics of transportation and logistics. Then, they will be staring at all that "priceless" artwork, wishing they could eat it. You will see the mother of all diasporas then. The big question: will the powers-that-be attempt to do what Stalin did to the Ukraine, and would that even work? If the cities empty, where will they go? I think the residents of "fly-over-country" are far better armed then the Ukrainians were.


You're a little funny in the head if you think the US is going to have entire cities empty because of a lack of food.

You understand that government debt isn't tied to the wealth of the citizenry right? Because there are billions and billions of dollars that say you're full of shiat.
 
2013-10-14 01:05:12 PM  

Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.


Americans crack me up.
 
2013-10-14 01:09:17 PM  

runescorpio: Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.

Americans crack me up.


Yeah, kinda sad that so many of us think that people getting health insurance is bad because.... mostly because talking heads tell them so on TV.
 
2013-10-14 01:10:22 PM  

pxlboy: itsaidwhat: Dimensio: RickN99: SpectroBoy: The Dem's position is "Pass a clean bill to prevent the impending disaster"
The GOP position is "No funding until we get our other demands met too."

Dems: Pass a clean bill and fund the entire government.
Obama:  We won't negotiate with the GOP about government funding until the GOP funds the entire government.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

GOP: We've passed bills to fund some parts of the government that we don't have an issue with.  Let's negotiate about the other parts.
Dems:  Nope. Meet 100% of our funding demands or nothing gets funded.
Obama:  Gonna veto them if they get to me.  Fund the entire government; then we'll negotiate about the funding.
GOP:  We don't want to fund the entire government; THAT'S the issue.

Currently proposed government funding levels are a direct result of Speaker John Boehner receiving "98%" of what he wanted. Current funding levels, therefore, are at Republican-desired levels.

The original Republican-passed spending bill did not change government funding levels; it served only to eliminate an existing law that they did not like, despite that law having been signed into law three years ago, surviving a Constitutional challenge and effectively surviving voter referendum when the President who championed it defeated a challenger who promised to repeal it.

Your argument is a lie and you are a liar for making it.

"You (Libtard Santa Claus and your free money give-away-world policies) sit on a throne of lies!"

You do your arguments a disservice using such idiotic pejoratives like "libtard". This is why no one takes your side seriously.


Libtard. It's fictional. Feel free to suggest a label that you think describes people that think they know best how to direct the lives and resources of others. Some say that's the GOP or Christians or Muslims or Democrats or Tea Bag Party. I am totally open to use another term if you have one that I agree will work. However I suspect that you self identify with some part of Libtard but not my use. Again, I'm okay with that. Make a suggestion.
 
2013-10-14 01:11:17 PM  

odinsposse: DubtodaIll: I mean you if want to throw labels on things to make you feel better about your own positions that's fine but don't assume what I'm SO concerned about.

Will do!

I don't want the U.S. to default however it may be something that happens that turns out to be a positive influence on the way the country is ran.

And this is why.The idea that defaulting does anything useful is absolutely foolish. It has nothing to do with resolving our political issues regarding the budget especially if there are groups of people who think it's a good idea.

When will the debt be so big that we have to do something about it? 20 trillion? 50 trillion?

Not for a long time. Debt is not inherently bad and big numbers don't mean anything. If our country has a GDP of 500 trillion then a debt of 50 trillion is inconsequential.


The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?
 
2013-10-14 01:12:03 PM  
www.urantiansojourn.com
/That is all
 
2013-10-14 01:12:08 PM  

pxlboy: I never understood why anyone would think an adjustable interest rate is a good idea. The rate goes up (and probably higher than is affordable) and you get hosed.


It would be at the peak of an inflation cycle, when interest rates are high and expected to fall.
(You know, just like zero-coupon bonds.)
 
2013-10-14 01:12:11 PM  

itsaidwhat: You do your arguments a disservice using such idiotic pejoratives like "libtard". This is why no one takes your side seriously.


That, and the fact that much of what he says is demonstrably false.
 
2013-10-14 01:13:49 PM  

DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?


It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".
 
2013-10-14 01:14:12 PM  
So, how about you just switch to single-payer?

It is the cheapest method of health care known to mankind. Also the most effective.
 
2013-10-14 01:14:49 PM  

HAMMERTOE: ... I am ever so glad to be living in "fly-over-country". It will get bad here, no doubt, but nowhere near as bad as it will in the cities.
...
I think the residents of "fly-over-country" are far better armed then the Ukrainians were.


You do realize that the use of the term "fly-over-country" is attributed to New Yorkers and Los Angelians and refers to anything between the east and west coast of the U.S., right?  This includes Cleveland, Chicago, St. Louis, Denver, etc.,etc.
 
2013-10-14 01:16:31 PM  

sethen320: KellyX: ajgeek: Query: Would the US defaulting start a new World War? Is it possible that the people in charge want a war because of what it did to our economy last time?

Depending on how bad the depression/recession is, some countries might see it as a means to get at resources, but realistically, my concern would be rampant unemployment, especially with young people, and some kind of violent rioting and possible revolution occurring...

A revolution? Sweet! Hopefully it will be like that show and we'll all fight with swords when the power goes out. I can't wait.


Oddly, discovered that show last week and finally watched up to the latest episode of Season 2... I like it so far.

In seriousness though, when 50% unemployment you have, and starving people there are, violent revolution you have, maybe?

/Yoda chuckle
 
2013-10-14 01:18:17 PM  

jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".


And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?
 
2013-10-14 01:19:13 PM  

LavenderWolf: So, how about you just switch to single-payer?

It is the cheapest method of health care known to mankind. Also the most effective.


How about NO! Because I work for my stuff and if poor people get something I work for then what I have isn't as good! What is the point of working hard if I can't look down on poor people?!?!


/seriously, single payer.
 
2013-10-14 01:19:49 PM  

DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".

And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?


Do you have any evidence to support the idea that it wouldn't?
 
2013-10-14 01:19:49 PM  

LavenderWolf: You're a little funny in the head if you think the US is going to have entire cities empty because of a lack of food.

You understand that government debt isn't tied to the wealth of the citizenry right? Because there are billions and billions of dollars that say you're full of shiat.


Of course not. They'll empty because of the riots and inflation that will result from lack of food.

Yes, I understand quite well. Are you saying that the scenario isn't nearly doom & gloom as those wishing for increased federal spending want to portray it? Because now they're basically forecasting global economic collapse if they don't get more of other peoples' money to spend, and they're not above spending money that won't be earned for generations to buy votes with.
 
2013-10-14 01:20:05 PM  

DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".

And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?


Yes. Their temper tantrum is completely unrelated to the lowering deficit.
 
2013-10-14 01:20:11 PM  

LavenderWolf: So, how about you just switch to single-payer?

It is the cheapest method of health care known to mankind. Also the most effective.


For the same reason we might default of our debt: a politically powerful faction of idiots.
 
2013-10-14 01:20:25 PM  

jst3p: DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".

And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?

Do you have any evidence to support the idea that it wouldn't?


I can't prove a negative, I just asked your opinion.
 
2013-10-14 01:20:32 PM  

GanjSmokr: Meh.  This debt ceiling thing is like the boy who cried wolf... we've seen this go down to the wire before.  It's political theater, just like most of the other shiat they do.

As the saying here goes, "Wake me when..." we actually default.  Then I'll pay attention and worry again.


Plan to wake up two days from now, then.
 
2013-10-14 01:20:59 PM  

DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?


Sure, as long as we're not talking about fixing it by destroying the global economy.
Since you seem to be open to suggestion, let's start with something simple, like increasing revenue by raising taxes on the   bastards who   individuals and institutions that were enriched by turning middle-class citizens into pee-ons, making sure that speech is speech and providing equal access to the courts and legislators, eliminating the debt ceiling, ensuring the population is healthy, and fixing the infrastructure. We even might have a framework and some precedent for that.
 
2013-10-14 01:21:33 PM  
The situation is dire.  So of course, in the middle of TFA, should be a video about how the shutdown has affected the reality show "Deadliest Catch."  Thanks, CNN, for helping us focus on what REALLY matters.

/TFA was very good.  The cross-promotion just made made me facepalm.

DubtodaIll: I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.  I would rather see we work to fix our situation by normal means however I think that's far more impossible than the "impossibility" of the US defaulting on its full credit.  This Congress is so dysfunctional that it really brings in to question the validity of the system.  And maybe by some stroke of luck that dysfunction will force a situation where we're actually forced to face the consequences of the decisions that have been made in the past.
    I really don't know where I was going with any of this, but while a default would be an catastrophic situation, it may be what needs to happen now to ensure a survivable future.


That's like saying your little toe has first degree frostbite, so you'd better take your whole leg off, just to be on the safe side.

Why in the world would you think it's a good idea to create a problem that will make it MORE expensive to pay off our existing debt, in order to solve our debt problem?
 
2013-10-14 01:23:03 PM  

UtileDysfunktion: You do realize that the use of the term "fly-over-country" is attributed to New Yorkers and Los Angelians and refers to anything between the east and west coast of the U.S., right? This includes Cleveland, Chicago, St. Louis, Denver, etc.,etc.


Yes, I understand. I was actually using the term to simplify the mind-set of metropolitan citizens toward the "country hicks" that actually supply them with food cheaply enough that they can spend their time hoarding works of art and "culture" that provide little more than local economic benefit.
 
2013-10-14 01:24:21 PM  

itsaidwhat: blindio: screw it, so what if a couple thousand people die because of the shut down, at least we didn't have to raise taxes on millionaires to balance the budget.  I mean, do you have any idea how many millionaires die each year because they are taxed?  I mean, if some 40 year old is a deadbeat, his or her kids deserve to die, If they don't like it, maybe they shouldn't have decided to be born.  They can get jobs, I mean, there aren't any labor laws for 6 year old kids right?  I hear they make great miners.

People will die, rich or poor. What we are debating is life and specifically, comfort. And, how some people refuse to lift a finger to contribute to their own comfort, and instead, insisting that to be an obligation of the wealthy. Fark that notion.

If I didn't know so many immigrants that came to this country as penniless refugees, that worked two and three jobs for years to get through school, support a family here and in their home country and that now can drive Lexus and Mercedes YET STILL work two or three jobs, then I would have sympathy for the "working poor". Lazy people deserve their discomfort.


I'm not sure what is worse, your feigned outrage at people cheating the system that you seem to personally know about, the fact that you've done nothing to expose them (or you'd be bragging about it here given your clear tendencies for being a self aggrandizing loudmouth) or your sloppy stereotyping of everyone receiving public benefits as lazy.  I'm glad you feel as if you're successful, and I'm glad you know people who were able to get 3 jobs and hold them down.  I question the accuracy of that statement because you make a lot of assumptions and assertions that lack credibility, but that's great for you.  The fact is though, while there may be people out there who are cheating the system, it doesn't mean those who aren't deserve to be cut off.  You don't close the highway because of a few speeders, you put law enforcement on the roads with the tools to detect and catch speeders.

The fact remains that there are people who will die if they lose access to their benefits, but people like you don't don't give a shiat about them as long as you can sit in your ivory tower and throw stones at "elitist liberals"

You don't have a solution because you're the problem.
 
2013-10-14 01:24:44 PM  

HAMMERTOE: LavenderWolf: You're a little funny in the head if you think the US is going to have entire cities empty because of a lack of food.

You understand that government debt isn't tied to the wealth of the citizenry right? Because there are billions and billions of dollars that say you're full of shiat.

Of course not. They'll empty because of the riots and inflation that will result from lack of food.

Yes, I understand quite well. Are you saying that the scenario isn't nearly doom & gloom as those wishing for increased federal spending want to portray it? Because now they're basically forecasting global economic collapse if they don't get more of other peoples' money to spend, and they're not above spending money that won't be earned for generations to buy votes with.


First of all, you're just being obtuse on purpose. You have to be.

Secondly, you're confused. Seriously. The "Doom and gloom" over the shutdown came from a 24 hour news media. Democrats (Who you are clearly implying are the cause of this, which is stupid) did not tell you the sky was going to fall. The media did. The default, however, is different. It has far more serious consequences than a temporary government shutdown. A government shutdown is like putting locks on a building. A default is like burning it down.
 
2013-10-14 01:25:16 PM  
I watched the Hot Coffee documentary on Netflix a few weeks ago. At the end of it the narrator said something like, "the only way to change this is to get congress to act on this issue."

My thought was, "oh, that's never going to get fixed then."

I find myself thinking this at the end of a lot of articles and documentaries.
 
2013-10-14 01:26:25 PM  

jst3p: By that graph we have until sometime between 2015 and 2025 to figure it out. I agree it is an issue, but congress needs fund the goddamn government and lift the debt ceiling and then get to work on it.


That I very much agree with.  It is a long term problem that is very much worth us paying attention to.  However, once we get the short-term problems fixed.
 
2013-10-14 01:26:36 PM  

HAMMERTOE: UtileDysfunktion: You do realize that the use of the term "fly-over-country" is attributed to New Yorkers and Los Angelians and refers to anything between the east and west coast of the U.S., right? This includes Cleveland, Chicago, St. Louis, Denver, etc.,etc.

Yes, I understand. I was actually using the term to simplify the mind-set of metropolitan citizens toward the "country hicks" that actually supply them with food cheaply enough that they can spend their time hoarding works of art and "culture" that provide little more than local economic benefit.


You do realize the "rural vs urban" hatred that you think exists really does not. People in cities know full well where their food comes from. Why you think they hate farmers is beyond me, but they don't. Politically different? Maybe, in terms of demographics, yeah. But you act like city-dwellers are more akin to cave-dwellers. Come on, man, think about it.
 
2013-10-14 01:26:42 PM  

DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".

And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?


I don't know where you get your "trending down", but where I get mine, it is provided by the same chits that manipulate everything all the time.
 
2013-10-14 01:26:46 PM  

DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".

And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?

Do you have any evidence to support the idea that it wouldn't?

I can't prove a negative, I just asked your opinion.


My opinion? I don't know for sure. I am not an economist, but my GED in economics tells me that without the sequester we would have seen greater economic growth which would have been better for most working people and would have led to higher revenues which would have caused similar trends in reducing both the deficit and debt (as a percentage of GDP). I do know that the shutdown isn't helping either metric because the money (almost certainly)  will still be paid retroactively making it a pointless gesture.

I do know that the GoP is scaremongering about "unlimited spending" because simple people will buy it (I am not calling you simple) and we aren't in nearly as bad a position as they want the people to believe, as I stated before we have been in much greater (relative) debt than we are today.
 
2013-10-14 01:27:47 PM  

quizzical: The situation is dire.  So of course, in the middle of TFA, should be a video about how the shutdown has affected the reality show "Deadliest Catch."  Thanks, CNN, for helping us focus on what REALLY matters.

/TFA was very good.  The cross-promotion just made made me facepalm.DubtodaIll: I'm for default not because I think it will do any immediate good but that it will cause global reckoning.  Something needs to happen to jolt this nation out of the decades long cycle of continuing to spend more money than we have and creating a level of debt that is difficult to fathom.  Sure, things have worked fine under this system for a while, but the longer we attempt this mode of economics the worse the situation becomes.  I would rather see we work to fix our situation by normal means however I think that's far more impossible than the "impossibility" of the US defaulting on its full credit.  This Congress is so dysfunctional that it really brings in to question the validity of the system.  And maybe by some stroke of luck that dysfunction will force a situation where we're actually forced to face the consequences of the decisions that have been made in the past.
    I really don't know where I was going with any of this, but while a default would be an catastrophic situation, it may be what needs to happen now to ensure a survivable future.

That's like saying your little toe has first degree frostbite, so you'd better take your whole leg off, just to be on the safe side.

Why in the world would you think it's a good idea to create a problem that will make it MORE expensive to pay off our existing debt, in order to solve our debt problem?


I don't think it's a good idea, I think it's a horrible idea; however often times throughout history catastrophes can lead to a much better existence.  If something like default doesn't jolt our society into thinking "hey, maybe we should take better care of stuff and do a better job and work together instead of kick each other in the nuts over stupid stuff" well then we're already farked.
 
2013-10-14 01:28:18 PM  

LavenderWolf: Okay, a few more years.


Again, no.  If you cannot even zero out the deficit, you are never going to pay down the debt, let alone pay it off.  Do you even have a basic understanding of what the debt and defict even is?
 
2013-10-14 01:28:22 PM  

demaL-demaL-yeH: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

Sure, as long as we're not talking about fixing it by destroying the global economy.
Since you seem to be open to suggestion, let's start with something simple, like increasing revenue by raising taxes on the   bastards who   individuals and institutions that were enriched by turning middle-class citizens into pee-ons, making sure that speech is speech and providing equal access to the courts and legislators, eliminating the debt ceiling, ensuring the population is healthy, and fixing the infrastructure. We even might have a framework and some precedent for that.


With this Congress, nothing is possible.
 
2013-10-14 01:30:45 PM  

jst3p: DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".

And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?

Do you have any evidence to support the idea that it wouldn't?

I can't prove a negative, I just asked your opinion.

My opinion? I don't know for sure. I am not an economist, but my GED in economics tells me that without the sequester we would have seen greater economic growth which would have been better for most working people and would have led to higher revenues which would have caused similar trends in reducing both the deficit and debt (as a percentage of GDP). I do know that the shutdown isn't helping either metric because the money (almost certainly)  will still be paid retroactively making it a pointless gesture.

I do know that the GoP is scaremongering about "unlimited spending" because simple people will buy it (I am not calling you simple) and we aren't in nearly as bad a position as they want the people to believe, as I stated before we have been in much greater (relative) debt than we are today.


That cuts two ways as the Dems are more of the line that we can have everything we want and we can have it now and all we need is public opinion in our favor, no need to actually have the resources in place to make it happen.
 
2013-10-14 01:33:45 PM  

LavenderWolf: Why you think they hate farmers is beyond me, but they don't. Politically different? Maybe, in terms of demographics, yeah. But you act like city-dwellers are more akin to cave-dwellers. Come on, man, think about it.


I never implied outright hatred. But this very thread is replete with examples of the condescending attitude liberals take toward people who would rather keep the money they've earned, rather than have it taken from them by force and redistributed to suit the political goals of the politicians the city-dwellers tend to empower. "Fly-over-country" is just a very apt example of this attitude. Cave-dwellers? Hardly. They're a lot more erudite and educated than that. Educated well enough to understand what's in their benefit, as are most. I used to be one of them.
 
2013-10-14 01:34:01 PM  

jst3p: The GoP pushed for the former (Medicare Part D and two unfunded wars while cutting taxes) and now want the latter (while we are still in recovery, not in recession). It is really bizarre that they think either are a good idea. Either they are ignorant of the effects of these policies, or they really do want to crash the economy.


It's pretty easy to make bad analogies about the federal budget that most people probably won't have the background to shoot down, especially if you're representing the party that considers "intellectual" to be an insult.  I think their only real interest is in getting elected because that's a guarantee of money and power and they don't really care much if their ideas are good for the country in the long run.
 
2013-10-14 01:34:15 PM  

DubtodaIll: That cuts two ways as the Dems are more of the line that we can have everything we want and we can have it now and all we need is public opinion in our favor, no need to actually have the resources in place to make it happen.


As opposed to the GoP, who expanded Medicare (unfunded) to get Bush re-elected and launched two unfunded wars while cutting taxes.

The dems are "tax and spend" today's GoP is "don't tax but spend anyway!" I agree the Dems are spend happy but the GoP's plan is even scarier. It is telling that deficits and spending are only an issue when they aren't in the White House. I am not saying they aren't problems that need to be addressed, but their concern seems a little disingenuous and convenient to me,
 
2013-10-14 01:34:49 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: Okay, a few more years.

Again, no.  If you cannot even zero out the deficit, you are never going to pay down the debt, let alone pay it off.  Do you even have a basic understanding of what the debt and defict even is?


Yes, yes I do. Do you?

16 trillion is not as much money as you think. Eventually, the US (Even the GOP) will realize that you can't pay down debt without money, raise taxes wherever doing so won't cause major economic problems, and cut spending to non-essential programs. The deficit is already shrinking; once you've got a surplus in the budget every year (i.e. no deficit), you can ease the conditions which fix things.

You can't fix a debt problem by shutting things down and defaulting on your loans. That doesn't fix anything, that just makes your creditors unlikely to lend to you again. People are acting like a default means the US debt is gone. It won't be; there is nothing the GOP can do to get out of that. Maybe they shouldn't have run with and backed a financial wrecking ball for 8 years. Now, the adults are in charge, and fixing things, and the children are throwing a tantrum.

A government default is not a solution. Further, this isn't why the GOP is doing this. They're doing this specifically "because Obamacare."
 
2013-10-14 01:35:14 PM  

AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.


Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.
 
2013-10-14 01:36:17 PM  

HAMMERTOE: LavenderWolf: Why you think they hate farmers is beyond me, but they don't. Politically different? Maybe, in terms of demographics, yeah. But you act like city-dwellers are more akin to cave-dwellers. Come on, man, think about it.

I never implied outright hatred. But this very thread is replete with examples of the condescending attitude liberals take toward people who would rather keep the money they've earned, rather than have it taken from them by force and redistributed to suit the political goals of the politicians the city-dwellers tend to empower. "Fly-over-country" is just a very apt example of this attitude. Cave-dwellers? Hardly. They're a lot more erudite and educated than that. Educated well enough to understand what's in their benefit, as are most. I used to be one of them.


Wow, you're stupid. Okay, I'm gonna spell it out.

City dwellers don't hate rural dwellers. Period. When people talk about "Fly-Over Country" they mean that because there's nothing f*cking there, it's not a personal insult.

/Jesus christ
//What the hell
 
2013-10-14 01:37:07 PM  

Drake Maijstral: GanjSmokr: Meh.  This debt ceiling thing is like the boy who cried wolf... we've seen this go down to the wire before.  It's political theater, just like most of the other shiat they do.

As the saying here goes, "Wake me when..." we actually default.  Then I'll pay attention and worry again.

Plan to wake up two days from now, then.


Just MHO, but if you really think this is going to happen without them finding a zero-hour "compromise", you haven't been paying attention.

If I'm wrong and they actually let it go past that point, I'll be happy to publicly admit I was wrong.  I'm pretty confident it won't come to that.
 
2013-10-14 01:39:07 PM  

jst3p: It is telling that deficits and spending are only an issue when they aren't in the White House.


Not necesssarily.  Deficits are managable if kept small.  Bush's average defict over his term (even including 2009) is about 350 to 400 billion.  Deficits during 2008 and past are a far cry from anything that small, though as you pointed out, we are finally headed in the correct dirction (at least for a while).

Anyone with a basic understanding of what these deficts can do are rightly concerned.  Of course you have the trolls on the right that will use this as a club on the current administration, but the issue is more than that.
 
2013-10-14 01:39:28 PM  

GanjSmokr: Drake Maijstral: GanjSmokr: Meh.  This debt ceiling thing is like the boy who cried wolf... we've seen this go down to the wire before.  It's political theater, just like most of the other shiat they do.

As the saying here goes, "Wake me when..." we actually default.  Then I'll pay attention and worry again.

Plan to wake up two days from now, then.

Just MHO, but if you really think this is going to happen without them finding a zero-hour "compromise", you haven't been paying attention.

If I'm wrong and they actually let it go past that point, I'll be happy to publicly admit I was wrong.  I'm pretty confident it won't come to that.


I don't think they will let us default, but if our credit rating gets lowered... well that will hurt a bit.
 
2013-10-14 01:39:59 PM  

Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.


Yeah, no.

That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.
 
2013-10-14 01:40:51 PM  

jst3p: My opinion? I don't know for sure. I am not an economist, but my GED in economics tells me that without the sequester we would have seen greater economic growth which would have been better for most working people and would have led to higher revenues which would have caused similar trends in reducing both the deficit and debt (as a percentage of GDP). I do know that the shutdown isn't helping either metric because the money (almost certainly)  will still be paid retroactively making it a pointless gestur


Prior to the sequester, my company was having the best 2-3 years since the economy crashed... after the sequester, we're on the verge of bankruptcy. And it's not just my company in this industry I'm in, a lot of them are suffering too, even huge names are ready to go under.
 
2013-10-14 01:41:24 PM  

jst3p: DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".

And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?

Do you have any evidence to support the idea that it wouldn't?

I can't prove a negative, I just asked your opinion.

My opinion? I don't know for sure. I am not an economist, but my GED in economics tells me that without the sequester we would have seen greater economic growth which would have been better for most working people and would have led to higher revenues which would have caused similar trends in reducing both the deficit and debt (as a percentage of GDP). I do know that the shutdown isn't helping either metric because the money (almost certainly)  will still be paid retroactively making it a pointless gesture.

I do know that the GoP is scaremongering about "unlimited spending" because simple people will buy it (I am not calling you simple) and we aren't in nearly as bad a position as they want the people to believe, as I stated before we have been in much greater (relative) debt than we are today.


Not to worry:

U.S. refineries are expanding their diesel-production capacity, not so much for truckers in the U.S., but for drivers in places such as Mexico City and Santiago, Chile.
Already running at their highest levels in six years, U.S. refineries are finding strong demand for diesel fuel, used widely in cars outside of the United States, and other distillates, like jet fuel.
"All these companies are expanding their export terminals-Valero, Shell, Marathon Petroleum, all of them," said Fadel Gheit, senior energy analyst at Oppenheimer. "Any companies with refining assets on the Gulf Coast are expanding their export terminals. ...The profitability is not that clear, but the trend is very clear."
The U.S. became a net exporter of petroleum products just two years ago and is now the largest exporter in the world.

Somehow, I have the feeling that we will do OKY DOKEY.
Actually the world oil price/production is tied to The Dollar.
Since oil is kinda important, one should wonder,,,
 
2013-10-14 01:42:10 PM  

jst3p: DubtodaIll: That cuts two ways as the Dems are more of the line that we can have everything we want and we can have it now and all we need is public opinion in our favor, no need to actually have the resources in place to make it happen.

As opposed to the GoP, who expanded Medicare (unfunded) to get Bush re-elected and launched two unfunded wars while cutting taxes.

The dems are "tax and spend" today's GoP is "don't tax but spend anyway!" I agree the Dems are spend happy but the GoP's plan is even scarier. It is telling that deficits and spending are only an issue when they aren't in the White House. I am not saying they aren't problems that need to be addressed, but their concern seems a little disingenuous and convenient to me,


Well of course it's convenient, it's politics!  The duty of the minority is always to tell the majority what it actually should be doing however the majority will always be attempting to do what it wants to do, which is rarely in the actual national interest.  That's the idea behind the two-party system at least.  What we've got here is something else entirely.  It's sophism, not politics, and it has been allowed to reach this point because of the pervasive nature of media these days.  The electorate doesn't have time to think and digest about what's good because before they come to a reasoned solution or judgement there's a new sound bite to attempt to comprehend or whatever.
 
2013-10-14 01:42:44 PM  

HeadLever: jst3p: It is telling that deficits and spending are only an issue when they aren't in the White House.

Not necesssarily.  Deficits are managable if kept small.


During prosperous times (which was most of Bush's presidency) we are supposed to pay down our debts so we can be prepared for the next crash, that is, in my opinion, the biggest domestic failure (with PATRIOT being a close second) of our government during Bush's administration. And to be clear, I am not putting all the blame on Bush or the GoP.
 
2013-10-14 01:42:50 PM  

LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.

Yeah, no.

That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.


No, I blame the idiots that buy into this crappy theatre.
 
2013-10-14 01:43:41 PM  

LavenderWolf: City dwellers don't hate rural dwellers. Period. When people talk about "Fly-Over Country" they mean that because there's nothing f*cking there, it's not a personal insult.


Really? How many examples must I give of what's here (aside from all the major cities,) before you will admit the unspoken qualifier, "...that's worthy of our recognition," that goes with, "There's nothing there." Like I said, it's not hatred; it's condescension.
 
2013-10-14 01:44:28 PM  

HeadLever: Not necesssarily. Deficits are managable if kept small. Bush's average defict over his term (even including 2009) is about 350 to 400 billion. Deficits during 2008 and past are a far cry from anything that small, though as you pointed out, we are finally headed in the correct dirction (at least for a while).


Bush was in a perfect position to pay down his dad's & Reagen's debt if he wanted to, with the economy propped up by people cashing out HELOCs during the real estate bubble, but instead he chose to give tax cuts where it least benefits the economy and start a couple unfunded wars.  His average deficit was only (relatively) low because it took until nearly the end of his term for all his bad policies to gestate.
 
2013-10-14 01:45:24 PM  

you have pee hands: itsaidwhat: Which 80's. 1980's? 1880's? 1480's. Self-reliance has never been debunked. As far as empathy, your opinion/perspective is not the yardstick of my empathy. Fark is full of words and devoid of action. No one on Fark is helping anyone that really needs help. It's not a substitute for feeding the hungry, sheltering the homeless, aiding the sick, etc. So don't fool yourself into thinking that you are forwarding the great cause of humanity here by preaching the evils of success. You just look like a tool of the current administration. And don't you have a Healthcare Navigator Job to get to?

No man is an island entire of itself.  You don't seem to know what empathy is, or you'd realize that your objectivist dreck shows a lack of it.  And where, exactly, was I "preaching the evils of success"?  You should probably learn what's actually written before you worry yourself too much about my employability.


Why does it bother you so much that I don't express your accepted level of empathy? Maybe I don't see people as being as helpless as you need them to be for your existence to have value. Maybe, just maybe, your skills aren't as essential to human survival as you might hope they would be. Maybe what some people really need is the kind of success that sprouts from desperation - when the risk of failure is certain and becomes obvious by inaction.

And you are wrong. A man can be an island unto himself. A man can be a fiery volcano from which an island can grow. Ideas that first revealed seem insufferable yet when tempered by ocean and sky yield a solid surface for all that are willing to take hold, make comfort and survive.

If you don't believe me. Ask POTUS if Hawaii isn't a beautiful paradise built on fiery beginning. Someone has to be the fire before someone gets to be the rose.
 
2013-10-14 01:46:32 PM  

LavenderWolf: once you've got a surplus in the budget every year (i.e. no deficit),


And just how are we going to do that?  Just because the defict is getting smaller does not mean that the trend will continue.  Remember, we are still at $750 Billion in deficit for this year.  How the hell do we get from here to a surplus? You seem to think that we are just a finger's snap away from a surplus when that could be the furthest from the truth.

That deficit alone respresents about 21% of our spending or about 27% of total tax revenues.  There is no way that a few targeted tax increases or spending cuts are going to get us there (especially if you take into account Hauser's Law).
 
2013-10-14 01:48:08 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: once you've got a surplus in the budget every year (i.e. no deficit),

And just how are we going to do that?


The only solution, Dave Ramsey for President!
 
2013-10-14 01:48:30 PM  

HAMMERTOE: LavenderWolf: City dwellers don't hate rural dwellers. Period. When people talk about "Fly-Over Country" they mean that because there's nothing f*cking there, it's not a personal insult.

Really? How many examples must I give of what's here (aside from all the major cities,) before you will admit the unspoken qualifier, "...that's worthy of our recognition," that goes with, "There's nothing there." Like I said, it's not hatred; it's condescension.


Jesus, why do you refuse to understand?

Urban areas have densely packed shiat. Rural areas do not. The vast majority of "fly over country" has nothing but cows and crops. Vital, to be sure, but "flyover country" is an apt descriptor.

You taking offense is unrelated to the meaning people have for the term.  You know what you don't have in rural areas? Urban areas. Guess which area urban dwellers prefer...

/You're TRYING to take offense.
//YOU are the one who hates
///City dwellers didn't do shiat to you, but you're determined to hate them without feeling like a dick, so you assume they hate you.
 
2013-10-14 01:49:29 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: once you've got a surplus in the budget every year (i.e. no deficit),

And just how are we going to do that?  Just because the defict is getting smaller does not mean that the trend will continue.  Remember, we are still at $750 Billion in deficit for this year.  How the hell do we get from here to a surplus? You seem to think that we are just a finger's snap away from a surplus when that could be the furthest from the truth.

That deficit alone respresents about 21% of our spending or about 27% of total tax revenues.  There is no way that a few targeted tax increases or spending cuts are going to get us there (especially if you take into account Hauser's Law).



No, I'm acting like shutting down the government and defaulting on loans is a REALLY shiatTY SOLUTION. There are better solutions; you know, ones that solve the problem.

/Because it is
 
2013-10-14 01:51:23 PM  

HAMMERTOE: UtileDysfunktion: You do realize that the use of the term "fly-over-country" is attributed to New Yorkers and Los Angelians and refers to anything between the east and west coast of the U.S., right? This includes Cleveland, Chicago, St. Louis, Denver, etc.,etc.

Yes, I understand. I was actually using the term to simplify the mind-set of metropolitan citizens toward the "country hicks" that actually supply them with food cheaply enough that they can spend their time hoarding works of art and "culture" that provide little more than local economic benefit.


And by "country hicks" actually supplying the nation's food I assume you mean the handful of multinationals that run everything agricultural? Because, *newsflash* there are probably more small urban farmers supplying the general populace with food then small independent farmers... But don't let that hinder your, "country folks can survive" fapping...please proceed.
 
2013-10-14 01:53:55 PM  

jst3p: During prosperous times (which was most of Bush's presidency) we are supposed to pay down our debts so we can be prepared for the next crash, that is, in my opinion, the biggest domestic failure


I will agree with that 100%.  However, much of this is the fault of extrapolation of economic projections.  Remember the discussion back in 2001 and surplusses as far as the eye can see during the dot com boom?

Prez:  Why not give some of that back to the folks?

*Aid nudges prez a few years later*

Prez: Umm, sorry folks but those surpluses really did not materialize like we thought and that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow is now deficits as far as the eye can see.

Overall, me and you seem to be pretty much in agreement on this issue.
 
2013-10-14 01:57:47 PM  

jst3p: The only solution, Dave Ramsey for President!


Lol.

Works well for personal debt.  Have my doubts if we want to apply all of that to the US, though.

That being said, the general concepts of trying to get to a place where you can earn more than you spend is a good starting point
 
2013-10-14 01:58:35 PM  

Elzar: Because, *newsflash* there are probably more small urban farmers supplying the general populace with food then small independent farmers...


www.dreamwidth.org
 
2013-10-14 01:59:34 PM  

LavenderWolf: No, I'm acting like shutting down the government and defaulting on loans is a REALLY shiatTY SOLUTION.


I agree with that, but it has nothing to do with my argument.  That is nothing but a deflection.

Again, what would you do to reconcile our defict?  You make it sound like it is easy, but I am thinking that you don't have a clear understanding of how big this problem really is.
 
2013-10-14 02:00:28 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: No, I'm acting like shutting down the government and defaulting on loans is a REALLY shiatTY SOLUTION.

I agree with that, but it has nothing to do with my argument.  That is nothing but a deflection.

Again, what would you do to reconcile our defict?  You make it sound like it is easy, but I am thinking that you don't have a clear understanding of how big this problem really is.


Through the same methods that worked the last time we had a Democratic president. The math just has bigger numbers.
 
2013-10-14 02:05:08 PM  

LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.

Yeah, no.

That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.


And social security numbers were promised and it was law that they would not be used for identification, it was law that the funds would never be touched, it was law it was law it was law.  The point is that it was law and this is a law that needs to fall into the was category along with a bunch of other laws and taxes that have happened.  No one is claiming responsibility on either side for anything and there are not any consequences when people who are elected f*ck this country and do things that are against the law.

Dems put it in place, not the GOP.  No one wanted 14 - 17 trillion in debt, the dems spent it anyway.  GOP is simply attempting to bring balance back to what has been a free for all and the free for all is why this country is in shambles and everyone is so upset.

The madmen have shot enough people in the face and somehow by the law.  Time to end it and both sides need to feel a little pain to do it.  Blaming one side or the other remains insane, they are all to blame.

The fact is if the Dems drop Obamacare, a law that was passed with the words "Who cares what's in it, I don't even know what's in it, we just have to pass it."  the debt ceiling can be raised.
 
2013-10-14 02:05:08 PM  

LavenderWolf: Through the same methods that worked the last time we had a Democratic president.


Because we had a baby boom back in the 90s and a dot com bubble to boost economic growth today, amiright?  Trying to equate today's economic situation to that of Clinton's time is a deflection at best.  Again, you have no real ideas to address our problems we currently face.  If you do, please let us know.
 
2013-10-14 02:05:50 PM  

Prophet of Loss: New Babylon is falling. How do I know the US is the New Babylon?

Its all our politicians seem to be able to do there days.

/Please, try the fish


Why, hello there.

"And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory.
 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies."

There certainly are some interesting parallels, I think. Maybe enough to warrant the comparison.
 
2013-10-14 02:06:31 PM  

Speaker2Animals: Not everyone. We will be able to pay off our house in five years, so we got 5/2 ARM, based on a 30 year loan, at anout 2.75%, substantially below what conventional mortgages are costing. Make double payments every month and the principal drops fast. We'll never see the 2-point increase.

Do payment lapses increase the rate or is it something else?

No, what the 5/2 means is the rate is frozen for five years at which point it can adjust upwards by a maximum of two points. My meaning was that we'll have it paid off before that happens.


Do you get penalized, or get a bad credit rating, for "cheating" the lender out of those 25 years at 4.75 that they were obviously counting on when they made the loan?
 
2013-10-14 02:06:38 PM  

itsaidwhat: Why does it bother you so much that I don't express your accepted level of empathy? Maybe I don't see people as being as helpless as you need them to be for your existence to have value. Maybe, just maybe, your skills aren't as essential to human survival as you might hope they would be. Maybe what some people really need is the kind of success that sprouts from desperation - when the risk of failure is certain and becomes obvious by inaction.

And you are wrong. A man can be an island unto himself. A man can be a fiery volcano from which an island can grow. Ideas that first revealed seem insufferable yet when tempered by ocean and sky yield a solid surface for all that are willing to take hold, make comfort and survive.

If you don't believe me. Ask POTUS if Hawaii isn't a beautiful paradise built on fiery beginning. Someone has to be the fire before someone gets to be the rose.

 
I know my skills aren't essential to human survival.  Most skills that most people have aren't.  That's why I'm in favor of a government that ensures a stable society.  Where are you coming up with this stuff?
 
2013-10-14 02:07:21 PM  

CleanAndPure: GORDON: I remember when Bush was evil and the President was expected to work with a Congress of the other political party, not the other way around.  But, then, that was like 8 years ago.  Times are different now.

Bush IS evil. Guy caused thousands of deaths... lots of wasted money... etc etc... invented wmd charges...

Because "they wanted to kill my daddy"

Now that doesn't mean Obama is in the clear... he's not... he's a misguided ideologue that is damaging to the country... as is many of the people representing the country in DC.

Symptom of the two party system is that you end up with a bipolar government.

We need to partially bring in sortocracy to balance the country... not that it will ever happen.


In other words, both sides are bad, so vote republicandon't vote democrat.

Which is voting Republican.

Obama's wrong on a few things, specifically "too liberal" on even fewer things.  The democrats are incredibly conservative already, what more do you farking want?  We got plenty of graft and corruption on "both sides" but the thing that's repeatedly gut-punching the economy (and conveniently distracting from doing things like throwing, say, Charlie Rangel and David Vitter in the same prison cell) is all from one party, and it rhymes with "Canned, bold 'n' tarty".

George W. Bush was given everything he ever wanted with almost no compromises at all, Obama can't even get the Republicans to pass a farking budget.  It's all on red and it's been that way for years.
 
2013-10-14 02:10:36 PM  

GanjSmokr: Elzar: Because, *newsflash* there are probably more small urban farmers supplying the general populace with food then small independent farmers...

[citation needed.jpg]


They're going to subsist on windowbox- grown tomatoes, I suppose.
 
2013-10-14 02:13:55 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: No, I'm acting like shutting down the government and defaulting on loans is a REALLY shiatTY SOLUTION.

I agree with that, but it has nothing to do with my argument.  That is nothing but a deflection.

Again, what would you do to reconcile our defict?  You make it sound like it is easy, but I am thinking that you don't have a clear understanding of how big this problem really is.


We just declare that "wallet" that is above the value of human life at an appraised value of, say, $95 Trillion, put it in Ft Knox, and voila!
 
2013-10-14 02:15:15 PM  

TheBigJerk: Obama can't even get the Republicans to pass a farking budget.


Lol
 
2013-10-14 02:18:11 PM  

snocone: We just declare that "wallet" that is above the value of human life at an appraised value of, say, $95 Trillion, put it in Ft Knox, and voila!


Because that would have absolutly no impact on the dollar and our economic future.
 
2013-10-14 02:23:30 PM  

HeadLever: snocone: We just declare that "wallet" that is above the value of human life at an appraised value of, say, $95 Trillion, put it in Ft Knox, and voila!

Because that would have absolutly no impact on the dollar and our economic future.


Not as long as we have the oil thingie locked down.

oil/dollar

there can be only one
 
2013-10-14 02:25:54 PM  

AngryDragon: Detinwolf: The US dollar is the world's currency because of the world's (and American public's) faith in the US's ability to execute and its insane purchasing power.  .  Even Boner said that he would not let the US default, because even Boner, in his limited cognitive capacity, knows that the US economy is symbiotic with the world economy.  The world must have faith in the American dollar.

Even if we don't default, this could bring another credit downgrade.  That wouldn't be apocalyptic, but it certainly would have long lasting effects.

Think your student loan payments are high now?


Even if things were resolved now, there will probably be another downgrade.  In fact, it should be announced now that credit is downgraded specifically because the Republicans didn't learn from last time.
 
2013-10-14 02:26:06 PM  

snocone: there can be only one


Actually, there can be many.  Just because you chop one head off, does not mean that there won't  be another one next episode.
 
2013-10-14 02:26:14 PM  

dittybopper: It is largely a joke.  Largely.  If there were a way to screw China, Saudi Arabia, Germany, and to a lesser extent the others without damaging the American economy, I'd be more for it.


Should I even ask  why you want to screw over those countries?
 
2013-10-14 02:29:05 PM  

HeadLever: jst3p: The only solution, Dave Ramsey for President!

Lol.

Works well for personal debt.  Have my doubts if we want to apply all of that to the US, though.

That being said, the general concepts of trying to get to a place where you can earn more than you spend is a good starting point


That was not serious post on my part.
 
2013-10-14 02:30:19 PM  

edmo: what_now: I came in here to joke about how some people are probably stupid enough to think this would be a good thing, because they don't understand how economics work and just want to stick it to the furriners, and then I saw this:

dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.

Congress has aptly demonstrated time and again they don't understand economics or finance and they're proud of it. The right wing circus media encourages their followers to remain ignorant and ignore any other view as "liberal propaganda," and they do so blissfully.

/you stupid Koch brothers are going to lose a ton on this one.


The Koch brothers were willing to spend hundreds of millions to buy the last election.  If causing a world economic crash allows them to come in and pick up the pieces, even if they lose half their wealth, it's a win to them.
 
2013-10-14 02:31:42 PM  

HeadLever: snocone: there can be only one

Actually, there can be many.  Just because you chop one head off, does not mean that there won't  be another one next episode.


It is the chopping that pays the bills.
 
2013-10-14 02:32:07 PM  
The great thing about Atlas Smugged is it has a lot of pages that you can tear out and use to wipe your ass. But it's hard to cram any more shiat onto the pages.
 
2013-10-14 02:33:46 PM  

blindio: itsaidwhat: blindio: screw it, so what if a couple thousand people die because of the shut down, at least we didn't have to raise taxes on millionaires to balance the budget.  I mean, do you have any idea how many millionaires die each year because they are taxed?  I mean, if some 40 year old is a deadbeat, his or her kids deserve to die, If they don't like it, maybe they shouldn't have decided to be born.  They can get jobs, I mean, there aren't any labor laws for 6 year old kids right?  I hear they make great miners.

People will die, rich or poor. What we are debating is life and specifically, comfort. And, how some people refuse to lift a finger to contribute to their own comfort, and instead, insisting that to be an obligation of the wealthy. Fark that notion.

If I didn't know so many immigrants that came to this country as penniless refugees, that worked two and three jobs for years to get through school, support a family here and in their home country and that now can drive Lexus and Mercedes YET STILL work two or three jobs, then I would have sympathy for the "working poor". Lazy people deserve their discomfort.

I'm not sure what is worse, your feigned outrage at people cheating the system that you seem to personally know about, the fact that you've done nothing to expose them (or you'd be bragging about it here given your clear tendencies for being a self aggrandizing loudmouth) or your sloppy stereotyping of everyone receiving public benefits as lazy.  I'm glad you feel as if you're successful, and I'm glad you know people who were able to get 3 jobs and hold them down.  I question the accuracy of that statement because you make a lot of assumptions and assertions that lack credibility, but that's great for you.  The fact is though, while there may be people out there who are cheating the system, it doesn't mean those who aren't deserve to be cut off.  You don't close the highway because of a few speeders, you put law enforcement on the roads with the tools to detect and catch speeders.

The fact remains that there are people who will die if they lose access to their benefits, but people like you don't don't give a shiat about them as long as you can sit in your ivory tower and throw stones at "elitist liberals"

You don't have a solution because you're the problem.


Maybe you misunderstood. I'm praising those that come here with nothing but hope and determination and work their asses off (with two and three jobs) to get it all and also demonizing those that are born into the US and can only take from others.
 
2013-10-14 02:35:02 PM  

blindio: itsaidwhat: blindio: screw it, so what if a couple thousand people die because of the shut down, at least we didn't have to raise taxes on millionaires to balance the budget.  I mean, do you have any idea how many millionaires die each year because they are taxed?  I mean, if some 40 year old is a deadbeat, his or her kids deserve to die, If they don't like it, maybe they shouldn't have decided to be born.  They can get jobs, I mean, there aren't any labor laws for 6 year old kids right?  I hear they make great miners.

People will die, rich or poor. What we are debating is life and specifically, comfort. And, how some people refuse to lift a finger to contribute to their own comfort, and instead, insisting that to be an obligation of the wealthy. Fark that notion.

If I didn't know so many immigrants that came to this country as penniless refugees, that worked two and three jobs for years to get through school, support a family here and in their home country and that now can drive Lexus and Mercedes YET STILL work two or three jobs, then I would have sympathy for the "working poor". Lazy people deserve their discomfort.

I'm not sure what is worse, your feigned outrage at people cheating the system that you seem to personally know about, the fact that you've done nothing to expose them (or you'd be bragging about it here given your clear tendencies for being a self aggrandizing loudmouth) or your sloppy stereotyping of everyone receiving public benefits as lazy.  I'm glad you feel as if you're successful, and I'm glad you know people who were able to get 3 jobs and hold them down.  I question the accuracy of that statement because you make a lot of assumptions and assertions that lack credibility, but that's great for you.  The fact is though, while there may be people out there who are cheating the system, it doesn't mean those who aren't deserve to be cut off.  You don't close the highway because of a few speeders, you put law enforcement on the roads with the tools to detect and catch speeders.

The fact remains that there are people who will die if they lose access to their benefits, but people like you don't don't give a shiat about them as long as you can sit in your ivory tower and throw stones at "elitist liberals"

You don't have a solution because you're the problem.


People are dying with and without benefits. Next argument, please.
 
2013-10-14 02:35:29 PM  
No one, anywhere, thinks there is any actual risk of default.
No one.

Our loan payments are only 10% of what the government takes in every month.
 
2013-10-14 02:35:59 PM  

HAMMERTOE: GanjSmokr: Elzar: Because, *newsflash* there are probably more small urban farmers supplying the general populace with food then small independent farmers...

[citation needed.jpg]

They're going to subsist on windowbox- grown tomatoes, I suppose.


http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42155.pdf

Small farms supply a tiny share of overall food sales (< 20%), however direct to consumer sales options (farmers markets, etc.) in the non-flyover states are much, much higher. So basically while your scorched earth policy in flyover country might work, urban centers on the coasts will be much less affected if your doomsday fantasies come true...
 
2013-10-14 02:36:39 PM  

HeadLever: Overall, me and you seem to be pretty much in agreement on this issue.


True. I do want to thank you and the rest of the economics farkers. It is tough to wade through the bullshiat in the politics tab but I think fark has taught me more (and prompted me to research) about econ than the econ classes I have taken. I might go for a degree in it rather than the comp sci degree I am working on.

/I don't need the degree for employment purposes I already have an established career
 
2013-10-14 02:39:17 PM  

Dwindle: No one, anywhere, thinks there is any actual risk of default.
No one.

Our loan payments are only 10% of what the government takes in every month.


Debt problem solved everybody! Sweeeeeeeeeet. Let's spend some goddamn money and put people back to work!
 
2013-10-14 02:42:27 PM  

vpb: There is zero chance of a default.  I don't think he would do in until the last minute, but I am sure Obama will disregard the debt ceiling if it comes to that.

A default would violate the 14th amendment and if the minute the debt ceiling makes that inveitable it becomes unconstitutional.


It doesn't have to come to that. The fact that it's even being discussed as if it's a viable option by Republicans (who have just shown that they're more than willing to shut down the government), political theater or not, is more than enough to cause a problem for us.
 
2013-10-14 02:46:50 PM  

wooden_badger: The Koch brothers were willing to spend hundreds of millions to buy the last election.  If causing a world economic crash allows them to come in and pick up the pieces, even if they lose half their wealth, it's a win to them.


The Koch brothers are also against this shutdown.There is no one driving the Tea Party bus. It is just a collection of people who think "The opposite of progress is Congress!" is a serious policy position and not a fun little joke.
 
2013-10-14 02:54:02 PM  
Just increase the credit card limit, again. Brilliant.
 
2013-10-14 03:02:47 PM  

Thunderpipes: Just increase the credit card limit, again. Brilliant.


Bad analogy is bad.
 
2013-10-14 03:04:01 PM  

odinsposse: wooden_badger: The Koch brothers were willing to spend hundreds of millions to buy the last election.  If causing a world economic crash allows them to come in and pick up the pieces, even if they lose half their wealth, it's a win to them.

The Koch brothers are also against this shutdown.There is no one driving the Tea Party bus. It is just a collection of people who think "The opposite of progress is Congress!" is a serious policy position and not a fun little joke.


From your link "The Koch brothers today distanced the firm from allied political groups lobbying to keep the government shut down unless Obamacare is defunded."

And the "Too Little, Too Late" Award goes to...envelope please...The Koch Brothers!  for funding a beast they can't control.
 
2013-10-14 03:06:20 PM  

jst3p: True. I do want to thank you and the rest of the economics farkers. It is tough to wade through the bullshiat in the politics tab but I think fark has taught me more (and prompted me to research) about econ than the econ classes I have taken.


Well said. when I have 1 fark and 4 google windows open at the same time, I know I am in an economics discussion.

/Not an economist
 
2013-10-14 03:09:06 PM  

Thunderpipes: Just increase the credit card limit, again. Brilliant.


Better than defaulting on said debt.  There are ways of dealing with the debt but messing with the debt ceiling should never be one of them.  There are legitimate ways to deal with this problem, but they just take time and effort.

/And, unfortunatly, cooperation
 
2013-10-14 03:09:27 PM  

flondrix: Speaker2Animals: Not everyone. We will be able to pay off our house in five years, so we got 5/2 ARM, based on a 30 year loan, at anout 2.75%, substantially below what conventional mortgages are costing. Make double payments every month and the principal drops fast. We'll never see the 2-point increase.

Do payment lapses increase the rate or is it something else?

No, what the 5/2 means is the rate is frozen for five years at which point it can adjust upwards by a maximum of two points. My meaning was that we'll have it paid off before that happens.

Do you get penalized, or get a bad credit rating, for "cheating" the lender out of those 25 years at 4.75 that they were obviously counting on when they made the loan?


Definitely not. Paying off loans early gives the money back to the back to lend to someone else. We did this when we re-fi'd on our last house and since we were never late with a payment, the same bank was waiting with open arms when we wanted to do the same deal on our new house. If you think about it, it's really no different than getting a mortgage paid off early because of selling the house.
 
2013-10-14 03:09:56 PM  
Why isn't anyone pissed off at SCOTUS for allowing a clearly unconstitutional law to be put into effect? It's a forced tax to subsidize the private insurance industry. We are being forced to buy something we don't want. Like being forced to buy kale on every burger just to pull it off because it supports the farking kale farmers.

They would have been better off eliminating private insurance altogether and gone straight tax and healthcare. That would have been a bit easier to swallow over this faux social healthcare.


Checks and balances right?
 
2013-10-14 03:11:44 PM  

Visionmn2: LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.

Yeah, no.

That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.

And social security numbers were promised and it was law that they would not be used for identification, it was law that the funds would never be touched, it was law it was law it was law.  The point is that it was law and this is a law that needs to fall into the was category along with a bunch of other laws and taxes that have happened.  No one is claiming responsibility on either side for anything and there are not any consequences when people who are elected f*ck this country and do things that are against the law.

Dems put it in place, not the GOP.  No one wanted 14 - 17 trillion in debt, the dems spent it anyway.


Mostly on time machines, so they could go back and start up the TSA, Medicare Part D, and two un-funded land wars in Asia...and put 90,000 Iraqis on the federal payroll during the "surge"...
 
2013-10-14 03:12:11 PM  

jst3p: Thunderpipes: Just increase the credit card limit, again. Brilliant.

Bad analogy is bad.


Correct analogy is correct.

Not sure why libs don't understand basic finance.
 
2013-10-14 03:14:16 PM  

Thunderpipes: jst3p: Thunderpipes: Just increase the credit card limit, again. Brilliant.

Bad analogy is bad.

Correct analogy is correct.

Not sure why libs don't understand basic finance.


The fact that you think an economy as large as ours is "basic finance" speaks volumes about your ignorance.
 
2013-10-14 03:14:50 PM  

Misconduc: Sorry after being a democrat since Clinton - I side with the GOP over Obamacare. Honestly I could give a crap about how bad Obama has been as president,  but Obamacare really is something to fight against - forcing working people to pay for medical they cannot afford or need.


If only there were some process for opposing legislation that  didn't involve holding the economy of the nation and the entire world at gunpoint. The founding fathers were sure sloppy in not putting in any sort of checks or balances that would allow something like that to happen.
 
2013-10-14 03:15:51 PM  

itsaidwhat: Maybe you misunderstood. I'm praising those that come here with nothing but hope and determination and work their asses off (with two and three jobs) to get it all and also demonizing those that are born into the US and can only take from others.


That is in part because I mistakenly attributed something someone else said in this thread to you.  So yeah, I missed that one.  Still, even a willingness to work does not mean work can be found.  I'm really glad you know people working three jobs, though you'll forgive me if I question the credibility of the anecdote.  Are there people gaming the system?  I'm certain of it.  Does that mean that everyone receiving some kind of assistance is lazy or unwilling to work?  Absolutely not.

itsaidwhat: People are dying with and without benefits. Next argument, please.


The point is that if those benefits are the difference between people living and dying than to target those as a cost cutting measure rather than doing something like raising taxes on millionaires means you are making a conscious choice to let people die so rich people can compile more money.  Your callous disregard for the lives of poor people does not invalidate my argument.

Your inability to make a credible argument beyond "Screw them, I got mine" does not make you right, it just makes you selfish.  We've already played out the "I build this" garbage after the last presidential election, and the assertion was proven demonstrably false.  If you have success in this country, it is in part because of the things the government has provided you to facilitate that success, including a social safety net that is in place just in case you fell to the bottom of the ladder again.
 
2013-10-14 03:17:24 PM  

snocone: jst3p: DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: jst3p: DubtodaIll: The 2012 U.S. GDP was 15.68 trillion.  Total Direct Federal Revenue was 5.12 trillion.  Total Requested Federal Budget was 2.6 trillion.  Current federal debt is 16.7 trillion with exclusions, 62 trillion without exclusions.  And this isn't something we need to fix now?

It is trending down, it is literally "getting fixed now".

And would it be trending down still if the GOP wasn't being such jackasses about it?

Do you have any evidence to support the idea that it wouldn't?

I can't prove a negative, I just asked your opinion.

My opinion? I don't know for sure. I am not an economist, but my GED in economics tells me that without the sequester we would have seen greater economic growth which would have been better for most working people and would have led to higher revenues which would have caused similar trends in reducing both the deficit and debt (as a percentage of GDP). I do know that the shutdown isn't helping either metric because the money (almost certainly)  will still be paid retroactively making it a pointless gesture.

I do know that the GoP is scaremongering about "unlimited spending" because simple people will buy it (I am not calling you simple) and we aren't in nearly as bad a position as they want the people to believe, as I stated before we have been in much greater (relative) debt than we are today.

Not to worry:

U.S. refineries are expanding their diesel-production capacity, not so much for truckers in the U.S., but for drivers in places such as Mexico City and Santiago, Chile.
Already running at their highest levels in six years, U.S. refineries are finding strong demand for diesel fuel, used widely in cars outside of the United States, and other distillates, like jet fuel.
"All these companies are expanding their export terminals-Valero, Shell, Marathon Petroleum, all of them," said Fadel Gheit, senior energy analyst at Oppenheimer. "Any companies with refining assets on the Gulf Coas ...


$50 a gallon. Be ready. The Dollar is going the way of the Peso.
 
2013-10-14 03:17:43 PM  

Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.


What makes you think it would be over, even if the Dems gave up Obamacare?

The Birthers and Tea Partiers would just demand more...de-fund the EPA, OSHA, the FDA etc, etc.

Screw that...you don't negotiate with terrorists.

/not really interested in buying un-inspected meat and un-tested medicine, kthxbye.
 
2013-10-14 03:18:01 PM  
Oh, Thunderpipes has arrived.  Abandon thread.

/someone saw that a couple weeks ago... I can't unsee it.  It just makes sense.
 
2013-10-14 03:18:12 PM  

HindiDiscoMonster: ReverendJynxed: Why isn't anyone pissed off at SCOTUS for allowing a clearly unconstitutional law to be put into effect? It's a forced tax to subsidize the private insurance industry. We are being forced to buy something we don't want. Like being forced to buy kale on every burger just to pull it off because it supports the farking kale farmers.

They would have been better off eliminating private insurance altogether and gone straight tax and healthcare. That would have been a bit easier to swallow over this faux social healthcare.


Checks and balances right?

Make sure you stop driving and surrender your driver's license. After all, you don't want to be forced to buy Auto Insurance, right?


No fault states are great with that.
 
2013-10-14 03:20:01 PM  

blindio: Oh, Thunderpipes has arrived.  Abandon thread.

/someone saw that a couple weeks ago... I can't unsee it.  It just makes sense.


cdn.hsmemes.com
 
2013-10-14 03:21:00 PM  

HAMMERTOE: LavenderWolf: Why you think they hate farmers is beyond me, but they don't. Politically different? Maybe, in terms of demographics, yeah. But you act like city-dwellers are more akin to cave-dwellers. Come on, man, think about it.

I never implied outright hatred. But this very thread is replete with examples of the condescending attitude liberals take toward people who would rather keep the money they've earned, rather than have it taken from them by force and redistributed to suit the political goals of the politicians the city-dwellers tend to empower. "Fly-over-country" is just a very apt example of this attitude. Cave-dwellers? Hardly. They're a lot more erudite and educated than that. Educated well enough to understand what's in their benefit, as are most. I used to be one of them.


Speaking of forced redistribution, it's funny how those self-reliant Middle Americans get all quiet when the subject turns to crop subsidies...
 
2013-10-14 03:24:25 PM  

Thunderpipes: jst3p: Thunderpipes: Just increase the credit card limit, again. Brilliant.

Bad analogy is bad.

Correct analogy is correct.

Not sure why libs don't understand basic finance.


Because if this was "basic finance," then the banks increasing our credit card limit would be people buying T-Bills. And they're giving us interest rates on par with inflation.

What congress is doing is saying, "fark paying people we have contractually agreed to pay, I don't even want to bother putting more money on my ultra-low interest credit card, even though the bank has absolutely no problem with it, and we have already agreed to pay these people."

And you have the farking audacity to claim it's "libs" that don't understand basic finance?
 
2013-10-14 03:25:21 PM  

jst3p: The fact that you think an economy as large as ours is "basic finance" speaks volumes about your ignorance.


Operands: "+"; "-"; "*"; "/"

Show me a different one that relates specifically to National Economies.
 
2013-10-14 03:28:12 PM  

HAMMERTOE: jst3p: The fact that you think an economy as large as ours is "basic finance" speaks volumes about your ignorance.

Operands: "+"; "-"; "*"; "/"

Show me a different one that relates specifically to National Economies.


And all computing breaks down to being able to count to 1, so it is simple right!
 
2013-10-14 03:45:15 PM  

MilesTeg: Wasteland: MilesTeg: So why even have a debt ceiling if it is not going to be observed?
BTW Senator Obama voted not to increase it in 2006 when exact same situation came up.
No hypocrisy like liberal hypocrisy.


No ignorance like both-sides-are-bad ignorance.

Yeah, that was a hell of a long shutdown and near-default we had back in '06, wasn't it?  The world economy was just all a-flutter.

Stop spinning, you are obviously dizzy. Spouting DNC talking points does not make your argument valid.

Facts are facts. You may want people to think somehow the situation is different now than it was then but it isn't.


Oh yes. There's nothing more credible than someone incoherently screaming that "facts are facts" while insisting on something that is a blatant contradiction of the facts.

You need to give your handle back. Miles Teg is a great character that doesn't deserve to be associated with this kind of low level trolling.
 
2013-10-14 03:54:57 PM  
Some congressperson from one side or the other should come out with a surprise bill, completely shocking both sides, and being popular with 70%+ of the American people, and submit a bill with a plan for a single-payer healthcare system.

Why doesn't somebody do this?
 
2013-10-14 03:58:02 PM  

PunGent: Speaking of forced redistribution, it's funny how those self-reliant Middle Americans get all quiet when the subject turns to crop subsidies...


Just who do they go to, anyway, Monsanto? Ethanol subsidies? Personally, I feel they're something we could do without.
 
2013-10-14 04:00:40 PM  

jst3p: And all computing breaks down to being able to count to 1, so it is simple right!


Of course not. But, the rules of math don't change when you're programming. nor does addition suddenly become subtraction when you're dealing with federal budgets. If the rules changed somehow, then governments wouldn't have to borrow money when they run out.
 
2013-10-14 04:01:00 PM  
Failing to lift the debt ceiling does not mean we default unless the president forces us to.
 
2013-10-14 04:03:34 PM  

MugzyBrown: Failing to lift the debt ceiling does not mean we default unless the president forces us to.


So we have a budget surplus then. Because that's the only way that's mathematically possible.
 
2013-10-14 04:06:39 PM  

impaler: MugzyBrown: Failing to lift the debt ceiling does not mean we default unless the president forces us to.

So we have a budget surplus then. Because that's the only way that's mathematically possible.


We receive much more revenue every month than the money we owe our creditors every month.

that's how it's mathematically possible
 
2013-10-14 04:06:49 PM  

The Southern Dandy: Some congressperson from one side or the other should come out with a surprise bill, completely shocking both sides, and being popular with 70%+ of the American people, and submit a bill with a plan for a single-payer healthcare system.

Why doesn't somebody do this?


There is no such thing as legislation that would make 70% of the people happy. But even if there were, if someone in congress were to do this now, he/she would be seen as a distraction, an "attention whore", to use Fark terminology. It would be grandstanding at the worst possible time.
 
2013-10-14 04:09:12 PM  
LavenderWolf:
That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.


Obama:  "A party should know when they are conquered."
GOP:  "Would you?  Would I?"

If our country is going to be run according to the attitude of Obama's supporters as demonstrated here, then I say burn it down--it's no longer worth saving.

Sic semper tyrannis.
 
2013-10-14 04:09:36 PM  

MugzyBrown: impaler: MugzyBrown: Failing to lift the debt ceiling does not mean we default unless the president forces us to.

So we have a budget surplus then. Because that's the only way that's mathematically possible.

We receive much more revenue every month than the money we owe our creditors every month.

that's how it's mathematically possible


Creditors that we've already lent to aren't the only bills (debt) we have to pay. If we don't pay those who we owe money to, by definition, we default on our debts.

So unless we have more money coming in than we owe, we will default.

THAT is how REAL math works, not the math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better.
 
2013-10-14 04:10:38 PM  

Visionmn2: LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.

Yeah, no.

That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.

And social security numbers were promised and it was law that they would not be used for identification, it was law that the funds would never be touched, it was law it was law it was law.  The point is that it was law and this is a law that needs to fall into the was category along with a bunch of other laws and taxes that have happened.  No one is claiming responsibility on either side for anything and there are not any consequences when people who are elected f*ck this country and do things that are against the law.

Dems put it in place, not the GOP.  No one wanted 14 - 17 trillion in debt, the dems spent it anyway.  GOP is simply attempting to bring balance back to what has been a free for all and the free for all is why this country is in shambles and everyone is so upset.

The madmen have shot enough people in the face and somehow by the law.  Time to end it and both sides need to feel a little pain to do it.  Blaming one side or the other remains insane, they are all to blame.

T ...


I love it, blaming the entire debt on the dems.

Learn some history. Democratic presidents fix economies while Republican presidents tank them. Over and over and over we've seen this, yet it's the GOP who bills themselves as financially responsible. Under Obama, the deficit (which feeds the debt) has shrunken. Bush started two pointless wars and added something like 10T to that debt, yet it's the Dems' fault. Clinton finished his presidency with record surpluses; Bush erased that within two years. Still it's the Dem's fault.
 
2013-10-14 04:11:43 PM  

Mouser: LavenderWolf:
That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.

Obama:  "A party should know when they are conquered."
GOP:  "Would you?  Would I?"

If our country is going to be run according to the attitude of Obama's supporters as demonstrated here, then I say burn it down--it's no longer worth saving.

Sic semper tyrannis.


So, it's okay to seriously attempt to destroy the US because of "Obama supporters' attitudes".

You're f*cked.
 
2013-10-14 04:13:19 PM  

Mouser: If our country is going to be run according to the attitude of Obama's supporters as demonstrated here, then I say burn it down--it's no longer worth saving.

Sic semper tyrannis.


"If we Republicans can't get what we want, this country isn't worth saving. Burn it down!"

Tyrannis of the minority-Republicans indeed.
 
2013-10-14 04:15:00 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: Through the same methods that worked the last time we had a Democratic president.

Because we had a baby boom back in the 90s and a dot com bubble to boost economic growth today, amiright?  Trying to equate today's economic situation to that of Clinton's time is a deflection at best.  Again, you have no real ideas to address our problems we currently face.  If you do, please let us know.


Because economic growth happens in a vacuum, right? It is certainly never encouraged by government direction. *cough* the entire IT industry was built on the back of US Gov't funding from the beginning *cough* And baby booms only happen at complete random, unrelated to social and economic position.

/You're an idiot.
 
2013-10-14 04:15:06 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Just who do they go to, anyway, Monsanto? Ethanol subsidies? Personally, I feel they're something we could do without.


The corporate side of that, I would tend to agree.  However, the farm subsidies are also there to keep farmers in buisness even when times are bad.  Most farmers don't have the ability to weather a few years of bad economic times.  You kick them to the curb and you could be in a world of hurt in a few years.

I gernallly don't like subsidies, but I do make an exception for many farm subsidies.  I don't belive that it is prudent to mess with this nation's abillty to feed itself.
 
2013-10-14 04:17:16 PM  

impaler: Creditors that we've already lent to aren't the only bills (debt) we have to pay. If we don't pay those who we owe money to, by definition, we default on our debts.

So unless we have more money coming in than we owe, we will default.

THAT is how REAL math works, not the math you do as a Republican to make yourself feel better.


Yes, we have more money coming in than we owe.

So Treasury would prioritize the debt payments and not be able to fund some other programs.

It's not that difficult, the only reason why it's made out to sound like some coming disaster is political grandstanding.

"" We believe the government would continue to pay interest and principal on its debt even in the event that the debt limit is not raised, leaving its creditworthiness intact," the memo says. "The debt limit restricts government expenditures to the amount of its incoming revenues; it does not prohibit the government from servicing its debt. There is no direct connection between the debt limit (actually the exhaustion of the Treasury's extraordinary measures to raise funds) and a default. " - Moody's
 
2013-10-14 04:17:21 PM  

MugzyBrown: impaler: MugzyBrown: Failing to lift the debt ceiling does not mean we default unless the president forces us to.

So we have a budget surplus then. Because that's the only way that's mathematically possible.

We receive much more revenue every month than the money we owe our creditors every month.

that's how it's mathematically possible


What a ridiculous lie. If you stiff your power company to pay off your credit card bill that doesn't mean you paid off all your debts.

Even if we accepted that lie we would also have to accept another. That the Treasury Department can just choose of their own accord what bills to pay in what order they choose. They can't. They would basically have to build an entirely new system to do things that way.
 
2013-10-14 04:20:12 PM  

odinsposse: If you stiff your power company to pay off your credit card bill that doesn't mean you paid off all your debts.


Wait... I thought any comparisons of this situation to household/personal budgets were asinine.

Or are they OK if they back a certain "side" of this situation?
 
2013-10-14 04:21:12 PM  

LavenderWolf: Because economic growth happens in a vacuum, right?


Strawman argument.  Quit deflecting and anwser the question if you can.  I am beginning to think that you have no real ideas outside of strawman agruments and ad hominem attacks.  Way to keep it at the bottom of the triangle

scientopia.org
 
2013-10-14 04:25:09 PM  

GanjSmokr: odinsposse: If you stiff your power company to pay off your credit card bill that doesn't mean you paid off all your debts.

Wait... I thought any comparisons of this situation to household/personal budgets were asinine.

Or are they OK if they back a certain "side" of this situation?


I'm trying to dumb things down. Is it working or do I need to go further?
 
2013-10-14 04:25:52 PM  

MugzyBrown: So Treasury would prioritize the debt payments and not be able to fund some other programs.

US Treasury: Prioritization of Payments

Treasury officials stated that Treasury also reviewed the idea of attempting
to prioritize the many payments made by the federal government each day.
Treasury noted that it makes more than 80 million payments per month, all
of which have been authorized and appropriated by Congress. According to a
Treasury official, the payments cover a broad spectrum of purposes deemed
important by Congress. While Congress enacted these expenditures, it did
not prioritize them, nor did it direct the President or the Treasury to pay
some expenses and not pay others. As a result, Treasury officials determined
that there is no fair or sensible way to pick and choose among the many bills
that come due every day. Furthermore, because Congress has never
provided guidance to the contrary, Treasury's systems are designed to make
each payment in the order it comes due.


So who do we believe? MugzyBrown, or the US Treasury?
 
2013-10-14 04:27:51 PM  

odinsposse: MugzyBrown: impaler: MugzyBrown: Failing to lift the debt ceiling does not mean we default unless the president forces us to.

So we have a budget surplus then. Because that's the only way that's mathematically possible.

We receive much more revenue every month than the money we owe our creditors every month.

that's how it's mathematically possible

What a ridiculous lie. If you stiff your power company to pay off your credit card bill that doesn't mean you paid off all your debts.

Even if we accepted that lie we would also have to accept another. That the Treasury Department can just choose of their own accord what bills to pay in what order they choose. They can't. They would basically have to build an entirely new system to do things that way.


I find it interesting that going into the sequester, when it became increasingly clear that the people would blame the GoP the talking point became "actually it is a good thing" even though it was later shown that sequester put a drag on our economy, slowing GDP growth.

Now that it is becoming clear the the people will blame the GoP if we default the line is "It won't be a real default, it wont be so bad."
 
2013-10-14 04:28:15 PM  

GanjSmokr: odinsposse: If you stiff your power company to pay off your credit card bill that doesn't mean you paid off all your debts.

Wait... I thought any comparisons of this situation to household/personal budgets were asinine.

Or are they OK if they back a certain "side" of this situation?


If he was making an argument that the macro-economic effects of the later where the same as the former, you would have a point.

He wasn't.
 
2013-10-14 04:28:44 PM  

odinsposse: GanjSmokr: odinsposse: If you stiff your power company to pay off your credit card bill that doesn't mean you paid off all your debts.

Wait... I thought any comparisons of this situation to household/personal budgets were asinine.

Or are they OK if they back a certain "side" of this situation?

I'm trying to dumb things down. Is it working or do I need to go further?


Just to be clear: It's OK to use the household budget comparison if you're trying to "dumb things down" but that comparison is not apt otherwise?

Gotcha.
 
2013-10-14 04:29:05 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: Because economic growth happens in a vacuum, right?

Strawman argument.  Quit deflecting and anwser the question if you can.  I am beginning to think that you have no real ideas outside of strawman agruments and ad hominem attacks.  Way to keep it at the bottom of the triangle

[scientopia.org image 500x380]


You're literally asking me to provide a specific, simple solution for a complex problem.

What would you like, an admission that I simplified the situation in a discussion. Here you go: I admit it.

That said, the complex problem can be solved exactly as it has been solved in the past. Economic growth (stimulated however possible), higher taxation where such taxation doesn't create an undue burden, and being careful about government spending. This is of course a simplification.
 
2013-10-14 04:29:10 PM  

impaler: MugzyBrown: So Treasury would prioritize the debt payments and not be able to fund some other programs.

US Treasury: Prioritization of Payments

Treasury officials stated that Treasury also reviewed the idea of attempting
to prioritize the many payments made by the federal government each day.
Treasury noted that it makes more than 80 million payments per month, all
of which have been authorized and appropriated by Congress. According to a
Treasury official, the payments cover a broad spectrum of purposes deemed
important by Congress. While Congress enacted these expenditures, it did
not prioritize them, nor did it direct the President or the Treasury to pay
some expenses and not pay others. As a result, Treasury officials determined
that there is no fair or sensible way to pick and choose among the many bills
that come due every day. Furthermore, because Congress has never
provided guidance to the contrary, Treasury's systems are designed to make
each payment in the order it comes due.

So who do we believe? MugzyBrown, or the US Treasury?


You make a compelling argument, but I am sure MugzyBrown has studied it out. Have you studied it out?
 
2013-10-14 04:30:16 PM  

impaler: GanjSmokr: odinsposse: If you stiff your power company to pay off your credit card bill that doesn't mean you paid off all your debts.

Wait... I thought any comparisons of this situation to household/personal budgets were asinine.

Or are they OK if they back a certain "side" of this situation?

If he was making an argument that the macro-economic effects of the later where the same as the former, you would have a point.

He wasn't.


I do not think he will understand the difference.
 
2013-10-14 04:30:56 PM  

impaler: So who do we believe? MugzyBrown, or the US Treasury?


Look, all we have to do is build a new system that handles all of the transactions of the American government with a new sub-routine that categorizes and prioritizes debt payments and stuff Republicans like over stuff flagged as "commie stuff" that won't get paid. By Thursday.

This is a great plan. Only Obama's stubbornness is holding it back.
 
2013-10-14 04:34:49 PM  

odinsposse: impaler: So who do we believe? MugzyBrown, or the US Treasury?

Look, all we have to do is build a new system that handles all of the transactions of the American government with a new sub-routine that categorizes and prioritizes debt payments and stuff Republicans like over stuff flagged as "commie stuff" that won't get paid. By Thursday.

This is a great plan. Only Obama's stubbornness is holding it back.


Yeah, why doesn't he just use his time machine and get started on that 2 years ago?
 
2013-10-14 04:39:33 PM  

blindio: itsaidwhat: Maybe you misunderstood. I'm praising those that come here with nothing but hope and determination and work their asses off (with two and three jobs) to get it all and also demonizing those that are born into the US and can only take from others.

That is in part because I mistakenly attributed something someone else said in this thread to you.  So yeah, I missed that one.  Still, even a willingness to work does not mean work can be found.  I'm really glad you know people working three jobs, though you'll forgive me if I question the credibility of the anecdote.  Are there people gaming the system?  I'm certain of it.  Does that mean that everyone receiving some kind of assistance is lazy or unwilling to work?  Absolutely not.

itsaidwhat: People are dying with and without benefits. Next argument, please.

The point is that if those benefits are the difference between people living and dying than to target those as a cost cutting measure rather than doing something like raising taxes on millionaires means you are making a conscious choice to let people die so rich people can compile more money.  Your callous disregard for the lives of poor people does not invalidate my argument.

Your inability to make a credible argument beyond "Screw them, I got mine" does not make you right, it just makes you selfish.  We've already played out the "I build this" garbage after the last presidential election, and the assertion was proven demonstrably false.  If you have success in this country, it is in part because of the things the government has provided you to facilitate that success, including a social safety net that is in place just in case you fell to the bottom of the ladder again.


I think the government is an overfed, over-reaching, wasteful agglomeration of bottom feeding bureaucrats with people like you working double duty to discredit anyone with a dissenting opinion. Sorry, but I'm just not drinking your "government is great" Kool Aide.

I also reject your notion of climbing any sort of ladder - or being at the top or falling to the bottom. That is precisely the kind of sales pitch I would expect to hear from some social-engineering charlatan selling get-rich schemes to the desperate and uneducated amongst us.

There is no "ladder" to success. There is only ever one next step. And each next step made IS the success. Bureacracy and government only widens the steps (or rungs in your example) making them harder for individuals and easier for big corporations.

As for my credibility, who cares? I'm not selling anything. I think it's interesting that you feel the need to say that I'm not credible which definitely suggests that you are selling something.
 
2013-10-14 04:43:13 PM  

LavenderWolf: That said, the complex problem can be solved exactly as it has been solved in the past.


Maybe by enacting more free trade and globalist-centered agreements to put the middle class out of buisness for good?  Maybe if we enacted more policies like the one that got  rid of Glass-Steagall would help us to get back on our feet?

What I find funny is that you have the partisan blinders on so tightly that you cannot see that many of the issues we are currently facing is a direct result of policies that were enacted by Clinton's administration.  You want to go back to that, feel free.  Just don't be suprised when many of us will want to go in another direction entirely.
 
2013-10-14 04:48:17 PM  

LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.

Yeah, no.

That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.


Wait. This is still fark, right? You're supposed to blame the gun.
 
2013-10-14 04:52:16 PM  

GORDON: I remember when Bush was evil and the President was expected to work with a Congress of the other political party, not the other way around.  But, then, that was like 8 years ago.  Times are different now.


Bush wasn't given an ultimatum along the lines of 'do it our way or we'll rupture the economy'.
 
2013-10-14 04:54:36 PM  

blindio: itsaidwhat: Maybe you misunderstood. I'm praising those that come here with nothing but hope and determination and work their asses off (with two and three jobs) to get it all and also demonizing those that are born into the US and can only take from others.

That is in part because I mistakenly attributed something someone else said in this thread to you.  So yeah, I missed that one.  Still, even a willingness to work does not mean work can be found.  I'm really glad you know people working three jobs, though you'll forgive me if I question the credibility of the anecdote.  Are there people gaming the system?  I'm certain of it.  Does that mean that everyone receiving some kind of assistance is lazy or unwilling to work?  Absolutely not.

itsaidwhat: People are dying with and without benefits. Next argument, please.

The point is that if those benefits are the difference between people living and dying than to target those as a cost cutting measure rather than doing something like raising taxes on millionaires means you are making a conscious choice to let people die so rich people can compile more money.  Your callous disregard for the lives of poor people does not invalidate my argument.

Your inability to make a credible argument beyond "Screw them, I got mine" does not make you right, it just makes you selfish.  We've already played out the "I build this" garbage after the last presidential election, and the assertion was proven demonstrably false.  If you have success in this country, it is in part because of the things the government has provided you to facilitate that success, including a social safety net that is in place just in case you fell to the bottom of the ladder again.


I am successful despite what the government has taken from me and has given to others. I your view, that just means the government should take more. That's a great position if you are in charge at the politburo.

Where exactly does the government taking end? My property? My rights? My beliefs? My religion? My freedom of expression (which you CLEARLY have a problem with).

Brother, this administration is not the Hope & Change sold to the masses As-Seen-On-TV. Its' predilection to obfuscate, discredit, prevaricate and dissemble are setting new standards for how to wreck a democracy.
 
2013-10-14 04:54:42 PM  

Director_Mr: If you are blaming one side any more than the other you aren't paying attention.


If Obama gives in a precedent is set that will forever diminish the role of President. The Tea Party are trying to use blackmail to pervert the course of democracy and are therefore 100% to blame.
 
2013-10-14 05:00:22 PM  

MemeSlave: How can you have a paper currency as a reserve currency?


Right now, the US dollar is backed by petroleum.  So long as OPEC sets the price of petroleum in dollars, the dollar has a set value worldwide.  I agree that this is a bizarre situation, to have the currency issued by one nation backed by another, and it could go away at any time if OPEC decides that another currency would be better.  In fact, it could happen this month.
 
2013-10-14 05:02:36 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


I don't know the answer to that but I do know that the value of the dollar had been falling for the last decade or so while the value of gold has hit record highs.
 
2013-10-14 05:05:44 PM  

Speaker2Animals: Paying off loans early gives the money back to the back to lend to someone else. We did this when we re-fi'd on our last house and since we were never late with a payment, the same bank was waiting with open arms when we wanted to do the same deal on our new house.


Some banks don't see it that way, for some reason.

If you think about it, it's really no different than getting a mortgage paid off early because of selling the house.

I've always wondered how the banks that don't let you pay off the mortgage early deal with people who sell their houses before the mortgage is paid up.
 
2013-10-14 05:06:33 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: Because economic growth happens in a vacuum, right?

Strawman argument.  Quit deflecting and anwser the question if you can.  I am beginning to think that you have no real ideas outside of strawman agruments and ad hominem attacks.  Way to keep it at the bottom of the triangle


I see right thru your "triangle" angle... That triangle is really just a lazy man's pyramid. Did you go with "triangle" instead of "pyramid" to avoid possibly offending Egyptians or Jews? I think they would be okay with the pyramid reference. They sure put a lot of work into those pyramids to have them reduced to a 2 dimensional reference.

/totally farking with you
// and hominy might be higher on the food pyramid, er uh, food triangle.
 
2013-10-14 05:07:53 PM  

HeadLever: LavenderWolf: That said, the complex problem can be solved exactly as it has been solved in the past.

Maybe by enacting more free trade and globalist-centered agreements to put the middle class out of buisness for good?  Maybe if we enacted more policies like the one that got  rid of Glass-Steagall would help us to get back on our feet?

What I find funny is that you have the partisan blinders on so tightly that you cannot see that many of the issues we are currently facing is a direct result of policies that were enacted by Clinton's administration.  You want to go back to that, feel free.  Just don't be suprised when many of us will want to go in another direction entirely.


Partisan blinders, wow.

Here, let me explain my entire political life. I was born in '86, and first started paying attention when Clinton was being ousted. Yes, some of today's problems can be traced back to decisions made then. The vast majority of political problems, for my entire life, have come from Republicans. I'm not even a big democrat fan, it's just that they're clearly the lesser of two evils. They've shut down the government over partisan bullshiat twice in my paying-political-attention life. They started two wars, hid them both from the budget, and gave away free money under the guise of economic stimulation; yet they're the fiscally responsible ones?

Anyone born between 5 and 50 years from now has no business thinking the Republicans know finances. They don't. They have consistently farked things up, even when they're not in a position of power.

I don't like Democrats. I hate Republicans. Republicans work their base into a froth over abortion, then disavow responsibility when a Republican voter blows up a clinic or shoots a doctor. They work their base into a froth over weapons of mass destruction, then don't give a flying fark if there ever were any. Republicans are the greatest threat to Western society ever. And I mean that. Democrats might fark up, but at least their farkups aren't intentional.
 
2013-10-14 05:08:16 PM  

NewportBarGuy: theorellior: NewportBarGuy: There is no other reserve currency.

Said the British seventy years ago.

They lost their entire f*cing empire. We have not. We will not. We'll just have a damaged reputation, the second largest economy, and the world's largest military. None of that will change with a breach of the debt ceiling because it is not permanent. Even if they breach it trying to get a deal, it will be reset and we will carry on.

It will just cause extremely negative reactions through the entire world financial system. But, we already did that with MBS in 2008. Different animal this, but we will retain the reserve status through it.


Largest economy, not second largest. China will not immediately overtake the US in the aftermath of a default because their econony will also be ruptured. If their biggest customer is unable to buy any more then they are just as farked.
 
2013-10-14 05:09:38 PM  

dittybopper: Speaker2Animals: what_now: I came in here to joke about how some people are probably stupid enough to think this would be a good thing, because they don't understand how economics work and just want to stick it to the furriners, and then I saw this:

dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.

One can hope he's joking, but with the jokers ascendant in the House these days, you can't be sure.

It is largely a joke.  Largely.  If there were a way to screw China, Saudi Arabia, Germany, and to a lesser extent the others without damaging the American economy, I'd be more for it.


You think inflicting hardship and misery on others is a joke?
 
2013-10-14 05:12:33 PM  

LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.

Yeah, no.

That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.

And social security numbers were promised and it was law that they would not be used for identification, it was law that the funds would never be touched, it was law it was law it was law.  The point is that it was law and this is a law that needs to fall into the was category along with a bunch of other laws and taxes that have happened.  No one is claiming responsibility on either side for anything and there are not any consequences when people who are elected f*ck this country and do things that are against the law.

Dems put it in place, not the GOP.  No one wanted 14 - 17 trillion in debt, the dems spent it anyway.  GOP is simply attempting to bring balance back to what has been a free for all and the free for all is why this country is in shambles and everyone is so upset.

The madmen have shot enough people in the face and somehow by the law.  Time to end it and both sides need to feel a little pain to do it.  Blaming one side or the other remains insane, they are all to blame.

T ...

I love it, blaming the entire debt on the dems.

Learn some history. Democratic presidents fix economies while Republican presidents tank them. Over and over and over we've seen this, yet it's the GOP who bills themselves as financially responsible. Under Obama, the deficit (which feeds the debt) has shrunken. Bush started two pointless wars and added something like 10T to that debt, yet it's the Dems' fault. Clinton finished his presidency with record surpluses; Bush erased that within two years. Still it's the Dem's fault.


Curious. What's your opinion of President Woodrow Wilson?
 
2013-10-14 05:13:02 PM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm no economist, but isn't our dollar value based and backed up by the gold in fort knox? Or am i mistaken.  Anyone?


Not since the 1930's.  For a while, Americans could not redeem their federal reserve notes for gold, but foreign governments could.  Then, sometime in the seventies, the US stopped redeeming federal reserve notes entirely.
 
2013-10-14 05:14:48 PM  

itsaidwhat: LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: LavenderWolf: Visionmn2: AeAe: Nabb1: This is just insane.

The farking GOP, man.  Bunch of assholes.

Yeah, because the liberals have no responsibility in this and the GOP voted 15 trillion dollars in debt. Wake up fool. Sure if the dems said "ok, Obamacare is gone and we will cut our bs programs" this too would be over.

Yeah, no.

That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.

And social security numbers were promised and it was law that they would not be used for identification, it was law that the funds would never be touched, it was law it was law it was law.  The point is that it was law and this is a law that needs to fall into the was category along with a bunch of other laws and taxes that have happened.  No one is claiming responsibility on either side for anything and there are not any consequences when people who are elected f*ck this country and do things that are against the law.

Dems put it in place, not the GOP.  No one wanted 14 - 17 trillion in debt, the dems spent it anyway.  GOP is simply attempting to bring balance back to what has been a free for all and the free for all is why this country is in shambles and everyone is so upset.

The madmen have shot enough people in the face and somehow by the law.  Time to end it and both sides need to feel a little pain to do it.  Blaming one side or the other remains insane, ...


Outside my experience and learning. I'm not even American.
 
2013-10-14 05:16:31 PM  

HindiDiscoMonster: ReverendJynxed: Why isn't anyone pissed off at SCOTUS for allowing a clearly unconstitutional law to be put into effect? It's a forced tax to subsidize the private insurance industry. We are being forced to buy something we don't want. Like being forced to buy kale on every burger just to pull it off because it supports the farking kale farmers.

They would have been better off eliminating private insurance altogether and gone straight tax and healthcare. That would have been a bit easier to swallow over this faux social healthcare.


Checks and balances right?

Make sure you stop driving and surrender your driver's license. After all, you don't want to be forced to buy Auto Insurance, right?


You can choose not to drive.

Not arguing one way or the other, just saying bad analogy.
 
2013-10-14 05:17:20 PM  

LavenderWolf: Anyone born between 5 and 50 years from now has no business thinking the Republicans know finances. They don't. They have consistently farked things up, even when they're not in a position of power.


Log Cabin Republicans supposedly opted to support the Republicans because they valued fiscal responsibility more than their own self-preservation.  So, what is their rationale these days?  And have their numbers increased or decreased?
 
2013-10-14 05:19:01 PM  

Mouser: LavenderWolf:
That's not how two equal sides work. The debate on Obamacare is OVER. The GOP LOST. It is the law of the land. You know how you can't shoot someone in the face for no reason, because there are laws against that? Because that's what Obamacare is now. The f*cking law. The supreme court - the ultimate arbiters, as defined IN the constitution, of what the constitution means - have ruled it constitutional. All challenges against it have failed.

What the GOP is doing right now is taking a hostage to get what it couldn't get through any legal channels.

You don't blame the victim for pissing off the madman with a gun. The blame goes to the madman with a gun.

Obama:  "A party should know when they are conquered."
GOP:  "Would you?  Would I?"

If our country is going to be run according to the attitude of Obama's supporters as demonstrated here, then I say burn it down--it's no longer worth saving.

Sic semper tyrannis.


I recommend you re-take Civics 101.  "Refusing to do your job", ie, pass a budget, isn't the same as "being conquered"...it's just refusing to do your job.   And the House Republicans are even being PAID for not doing any work.

Hmm, they sound like welfare queens...
 
2013-10-14 05:19:11 PM  

HAMMERTOE: jst3p: The fact that you think an economy as large as ours is "basic finance" speaks volumes about your ignorance.

Operands: "+"; "-"; "*"; "/"

Show me a different one that relates specifically to National Economies.


I think those are actually "operators". "Operands" refers to the variables in use.

I'm pretty sure anyway.
 
2013-10-14 05:19:58 PM  

odinsposse: impaler: So who do we believe? MugzyBrown, or the US Treasury?

Look, all we have to do is build a new system that handles all of the transactions of the American government with a new sub-routine that categorizes and prioritizes debt payments and stuff Republicans like over stuff flagged as "commie stuff" that won't get paid. By Thursday.

This is a great plan. Only Obama's stubbornness is holding it back.


Seems totally doable. What we need are National Budget Navigators to help the accountants at the Treasury pay the RIGHT people first, you know - like the Solybndra people.
 
2013-10-14 05:21:59 PM  

MugzyBrown: Failing to lift the debt ceiling does not mean we default unless the president forces us to.


Yes, because he keeps the national checkbook in his desk in the White House...
 
2013-10-14 05:22:22 PM  

jst3p: Thunderpipes: jst3p: Thunderpipes: Just increase the credit card limit, again. Brilliant.

Bad analogy is bad.

Correct analogy is correct.

Not sure why libs don't understand basic finance.

The fact that you think an economy as large as ours is "basic finance" speaks volumes about your ignorance.


We take in a certain amount. We spend more than that every year. We pay debts with credit. Interest gets more and more each year, we need credit increases.

Nope, libs are just wrong, as usual. It is exactly like a credit card. Libs are dumb, they have no argument, so they insult me. No problem. At least I have a brain, unlike the sheeple.
 
2013-10-14 05:24:29 PM  

PunGent: MugzyBrown: Failing to lift the debt ceiling does not mean we default unless the president forces us to.

Yes, because he keeps the national checkbook in his desk in the White House...


Apparently he does, since he directs park rangers to shoo people off federal land at gunpoint, and veterans off of memorials, but claims he has no money.
 
2013-10-14 05:25:51 PM  

Thunderpipes: jst3p: Thunderpipes: jst3p: Thunderpipes: Just increase the credit card limit, again. Brilliant.

Bad analogy is bad.

Correct analogy is correct.

Not sure why libs don't understand basic finance.

The fact that you think an economy as large as ours is "basic finance" speaks volumes about your ignorance.

We take in a certain amount. We spend more than that every year. We pay debts with credit. Interest gets more and more each year, we need credit increases.

Nope, libs are just wrong, as usual. It is exactly like a credit card. Libs are dumb, they have no argument, so they insult me. No problem. At least I have a brain, unlike the sheeple.


i.qkme.me
 
2013-10-14 05:27:33 PM  

Thunderpipes: We take in a certain amount. We spend more than that every year. We pay debts with credit. Interest gets more and more each year, we need credit increases.

Nope, libs are just wrong, as usual.


Yep, look at that interest sky-rocket. Stupid libs.

research.stlouisfed.org
 
2013-10-14 05:31:54 PM  
A little scary to think the "fix" is to keep increasing the debt ad infinitum. Keep blowing the bubble bigger, it'll surely never break?

/not an economist, so who knows
 
2013-10-14 05:33:59 PM  

Nick Nostril: A little scary to think the "fix" is to keep increasing the debt ad infinitum


That's not what the debt limit does.
 
2013-10-14 05:38:08 PM  
Problem is "we the people" are too stupid, fat, and lazy to do anything about these idiots in Congress. We just keep voting for them and watching our sports or reality TV or playing our computer games.

/crap, I got Twinkie all over my keyboard
//I'll have the dog lick it off
 
2013-10-14 05:51:05 PM  

LavenderWolf: I don't like Democrats.


But you seem to think that we need to replicate exactly what they did before?  Sure thing, fanboy.

You may pretend to be a 'independent democrat' but you were caught with your hand in the cookie jar too many times for me to really belive it.  If you really didn't like democrats, you wouldn't be longing for the days of Clinton.
 
2013-10-14 05:51:24 PM  

itsaidwhat: Deflation is different. That's when it's good to owe money - especially if you are holding hard sellable assets. If you are only holding cash - that's bad.


Why is it bad to be holding cash when the purchasing power of that cash goes up?
 
2013-10-14 05:55:09 PM  

flondrix: Speaker2Animals: Paying off loans early gives the money back to the back to lend to someone else. We did this when we re-fi'd on our last house and since we were never late with a payment, the same bank was waiting with open arms when we wanted to do the same deal on our new house.

Some banks don't see it that way, for some reason.

If you think about it, it's really no different than getting a mortgage paid off early because of selling the house.

I've always wondered how the banks that don't let you pay off the mortgage early deal with people who sell their houses before the mortgage is paid up.


Dunno -- but I've never even seen a mortgage contract with an early payoff penalty, and I've now had about 10 mortgages, counting refinancings.
 
2013-10-14 05:56:15 PM  

impaler: Yep, look at that interest sky-rocket. Stupid libs.


I think that he means the interest we pay on the National Debt.
 
2013-10-14 06:04:24 PM  
And for those wondering how to fix the economy, simple, get incomes growing again. Thirty years of stagnation is quite enough.
 
2013-10-14 06:05:01 PM  

wooden_badger: edmo: what_now: I came in here to joke about how some people are probably stupid enough to think this would be a good thing, because they don't understand how economics work and just want to stick it to the furriners, and then I saw this:

dittybopper: China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and Singapore: Raise the debt ceiling NOW, a default by the United States would have a profound effect on our economies.

So, you're saying that there would be some positive effects, then.

Congress has aptly demonstrated time and again they don't understand economics or finance and they're proud of it. The right wing circus media encourages their followers to remain ignorant and ignore any other view as "liberal propaganda," and they do so blissfully.

/you stupid Koch brothers are going to lose a ton on this one.

The Koch brothers were willing to spend hundreds of millions to buy the last election.  If causing a world economic crash allows them to come in and pick up the pieces, even if they lose half their wealth, it's a win to them.


Neo-Feudalism, yay!

/They don't have to be as filthy rich as they are now
//Just richer than anyone else.
 
2013-10-14 06:09:34 PM  

HeadLever: impaler: Yep, look at that interest sky-rocket. Stupid libs.

I think that he means the interest we pay on the National Debt.


Even that's not going up every year.

research.stlouisfed.org

Especially if you look at it in percentage of
payments inflation adjusted
payments/revenue
payments/gdp

research.stlouisfed.org
research.stlouisfed.org
research.stlouisfed.org

I know this doesn't fit well with the GOP doom and gloom prophecies, but there it is.
 
2013-10-14 06:18:29 PM  

impaler: Even that's not going up every year.


I agree, as it has flucturate some with the interest rates dropping to historical levels.  However, the problem with that is that they are poised to bounce in a big way with our great increase in Debt and the fact that interest rates can only stay the same or go up.

You can see this issue on that graph I posted earlier (about 1/2 way to the top of this thread).  It is the gap between Total Spending and the sum of all the other programs and it becomes one of the biggest spending items we have in about 20 years or so.
 
2013-10-14 06:24:04 PM  

PunGent: I recommend you re-take Civics 101. "Refusing to do your job", ie, pass a budget, isn't the same as "being conquered"...it's just refusing to do your job. And the House Republicans are even being PAID for not doing any work.

Hmm, they sound like welfare queens...


ummm, the house did pass several budgets... the senate and potus refused to sign off on them.
who isn't doing their job?
 
2013-10-14 06:37:17 PM  
"Sorry you foreigners. We're too busy pledgin' and Patrotin' to hear you."
www.washingtonpost.com
 
2013-10-14 06:37:49 PM  

HeadLever: You may pretend to be a 'independent democrat' but you were caught with your hand in the cookie jar too many times for me to really belive it. If you really didn't like democrats, you wouldn't be longing for the days of Clinton.


Yeah, right, and I keep meeting guys who claim to be "libertarians" or "fiscal conservatives" but they mimic all the positions of the religious right, right down to supporting faith based initiatives and hating the gays.
 
2013-10-14 06:38:37 PM