Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby sardia » Fri Sep 13, 2013 3:08 am UTC

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/13/us/po ... f=politics
It's begun yet again. Anyone want to pretend he's a pundit and make some flawed predictions? Right now only the GOP is making any demands, like always.

User avatar
Cleverbeans
Posts: 1378
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:16 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Cleverbeans » Fri Sep 13, 2013 3:53 am UTC

I expect the Democrats to dig in and refuse anything that threatens The Affordable Care Act. Personally I think they've realized the Republicans will continue to throw a tantrum no matter what they do, and they've had enough of the dumbfuckery. As long as the Republicans are making the demands if the public is negatively impacted they will take the share of the blame and be forced to concede their position. The Democrats will exploit this fully, and I expect will get what they're after.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." - Abraham Lincoln

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:40 am UTC

Honestly, The Affordable Care Act is a stupid battleground. The GOP needs to realize that was already lost, and they simply don't have the positioning to change that. Obama is not suddenly going to have a change of heart and sign off on a repeal of it.

Another debt ceiling mostly makes me groan. I can look forward to weeks or months of the same recycled news stories. I already hate it. I mean, sure, sequester ended up not actually being that big of a deal, and economic spending is a valid issue, but in actual practice, it's gonna be frigging horrible partisan reciting of the same tired lines. Gah.

Derek
Posts: 2180
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Derek » Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:50 am UTC

sardia wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/13/us/politics/at-meeting-with-treasury-secretary-boehner-pressed-for-debt-ceiling-deal.html?pagewanted=1&ref=politics
It's begun yet again. Anyone want to pretend he's a pundit and make some flawed predictions? Right now only the GOP is making any demands, like always.

What demands do you expect the Democrats to make other than "raise the debt ceiling"?

elasto
Posts: 3750
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby elasto » Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:11 pm UTC

They could demand the GOP not be such asshats ^^

(Fat chance there...)

User avatar
Xenomortis
Not actually a special flower.
Posts: 1445
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:47 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Xenomortis » Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:13 pm UTC

*flips coin*
Go team blue!

(am I doing this right?)
Image

User avatar
WibblyWobbly
Can't Get No
Posts: 506
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:03 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby WibblyWobbly » Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:39 pm UTC

Xenomortis wrote:*flips coin*
Go team blue!

(am I doing this right?)

Better than most.

kiklion
Posts: 513
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:02 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby kiklion » Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:49 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Honestly, The Affordable Care Act is a stupid battleground. The GOP needs to realize that was already lost, and they simply don't have the positioning to change that.


Not entirely sure why you believe this. Every doctor I have spoken to dislikes the ACA and how it is affecting them, the Democrats lost the support of some/all of the unions for the ACA, and some of the important aspects of the ACA haven't even been determined yet (such as conflicting reports on the cost of insurance in the exchanges.)

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Xeio » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:07 pm UTC

kiklion wrote:Not entirely sure why you believe this.
Probably the 40+ failed votes to repeal it? :P

User avatar
Yoshisummons
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 6:47 pm UTC
Location: Happily curled up in a cardboard box alone

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Yoshisummons » Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:11 pm UTC

Xenomortis wrote:*flips coin*
Go team blue!

(am I doing this right?)

No you have to roll a D2 like all the cool kids.
eran_rathan wrote:Listen to the man with the cone on his head - these are Words of WisdomTM.

elasto
Posts: 3750
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby elasto » Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:12 pm UTC

Xenomortis wrote:*flips coin*
Go team blue!

(am I doing this right?)

The crazy thing is I was red team when I was young - and the established wisdom is people get redder as they get older. But it failed to account for the parties going redder faster than I did!

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Роберт » Fri Sep 13, 2013 3:44 pm UTC

You'd think eventually they'd learn to not vote to spend money they don't have the authority to spend, and then vote on getting authority later.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

Puppyclaws
Posts: 391
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:08 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Puppyclaws » Fri Sep 13, 2013 4:16 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Honestly, The Affordable Care Act is a stupid battleground. The GOP needs to realize that was already lost, and they simply don't have the positioning to change that. Obama is not suddenly going to have a change of heart and sign off on a repeal of it.


I don't think they have any desire to win the battle or for Obama to repeal it (or at least, they are not doing it because they think it will work to repeal ACA); their plan is to say "Look! Look! We voted to do what you want but the democrat party blocked us and ignored the will of the people 40 TIMES! You gotta vote the bums out!" The Republican position in general right now is to stall anything happening until they are in power again, and use stubbornness to appear strong and resolute (and shift the national conversation in a way that is favorable to them for upcoming elections). Which is why we will get more foot-dragging and "bargaining" on this (i.e. the Democratic party will have to give up things they want in order for business to be allowed to continue at all).

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby leady » Fri Sep 13, 2013 4:41 pm UTC

On a far more important partisan note, when are you folks going to change your colour scheme to make sense and align with the ROW?

red for conservatives is so wrong

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby nitePhyyre » Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:19 pm UTC

Роберт wrote:You'd think eventually they'd learn to not vote to spend money they don't have the authority to spend, and then vote on getting authority later.
You'd think that they would realize that having two votes, a vote to spend money and then a vote to give themselves access to the money they've already spent, is a fucking stupid idea. And you'd think that the american people would wake the fuck up and stop voting for people who can't do their jobs. But hey this is the real world. Not a world where the average person has a modicum of common sense.
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.

phonon266737
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:41 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby phonon266737 » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:09 pm UTC

It just doesn't make any sense. It's not even like a "check and balance" because it's the same body voting on both this and the budget. The reality is we use this system because it's the closest thing to an unchecked system congress could sneak into place. If we were civilized like most of Europe, we'd have economic targets for deficits (for example "less than 4% GDP") and this sort of thing would only happen if they were exceeded. Instead we just have this stupid system that treats $100 and $1 trillion exactly the same

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:32 pm UTC

kiklion wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Honestly, The Affordable Care Act is a stupid battleground. The GOP needs to realize that was already lost, and they simply don't have the positioning to change that.


Not entirely sure why you believe this. Every doctor I have spoken to dislikes the ACA and how it is affecting them, the Democrats lost the support of some/all of the unions for the ACA, and some of the important aspects of the ACA haven't even been determined yet (such as conflicting reports on the cost of insurance in the exchanges.)


I am not stating that it is a good, clear, or practical law, merely that from a political standpoint, Republicans do not have the pull to repeal it, and it seems wildly unlikely that Obama will renounce his support of it. It's kind of his baby, and the biggest accomplishment he can point to. From my perspective, it's been beat to death, and Republicans can't really hope to get much by beating on this more. I expect that they still hate it, but more could be accomplished by picking more reasonable goals.

nitePhyyre wrote:
Роберт wrote:You'd think eventually they'd learn to not vote to spend money they don't have the authority to spend, and then vote on getting authority later.
You'd think that they would realize that having two votes, a vote to spend money and then a vote to give themselves access to the money they've already spent, is a fucking stupid idea. And you'd think that the american people would wake the fuck up and stop voting for people who can't do their jobs. But hey this is the real world. Not a world where the average person has a modicum of common sense.


Oh yeah, the whole situation is a giant mess in this regard. The problem is...you can't just "stop voting for people who can't do their jobs". Well, you could, but non voting solves nothing. It is extremely rare that a candidate emerges who wants to actually change the systemic issues, and even then, he's probably so outnumbered as to have no actual chance at doing it.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6568
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Thesh » Sat Sep 14, 2013 1:04 am UTC

leady wrote:On a far more important partisan note, when are you folks going to change your colour scheme to make sense and align with the ROW?

red for conservatives is so wrong


We use both red and blue for conservatives here.

As for the debt ceiling debate, just like the last time, just like the sequester, just like the payroll tax hike, we are only stalling recovery and putting ourselves at risk of going back into recession. Of course, macroeconomic policy is complicated, and propaganda is much easier when you have a message that makes sense to a moron (spending bad, deficit bad, taxes bad, private sector good). So who is going to win? I can't answer that, but I know that the losers will be the people.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Silknor
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:21 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Silknor » Sat Sep 14, 2013 1:52 am UTC

Роберт wrote:You'd think eventually they'd learn to not vote to spend money they don't have the authority to spend, and then vote on getting authority later.


That doesn't happen. Rather, our government spends money as required by law (be it the annual budget or mandatory spending such as Medicare). No money gets spent in excess of what the the debt ceiling authorizes. Raising the debt ceiling isn't authorizing the borrowing of funds for money we already spent, it's authorizing us to borrow funds to cover the projected gap between future revenue and future expenditures.
Nikc wrote:Silknor is the JJ Abrams of mafia modding

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby sardia » Sat Sep 14, 2013 4:52 am UTC

I do believe the GOP and the Democrats will come to a deal, just like that last 3 times they came to a deal. What I'm concerned about is how long the investors of the world will be willing to tolerate this brinksmanship year after year. The Republicans did this, specifically the tea party libertarian wing, and it cost us a triple A rating. And then we decided to reelect those tea party assholes. And now we have to deal with this crap until 2014. Why can't anybody come up with the votes to stop the debt ceiling debate? Does anybody know how big the anti-debt ceiling wing of the GOP is now? They can't possibly all be against raising the debt ceiling.

iamspen
Posts: 484
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby iamspen » Sat Sep 14, 2013 7:34 pm UTC

The big fallacy the right is throwing at the electorate during this whole debacle is that any new debt = going deeper into debt, conveniently ignoring the not insignificant fact of global inflation. Currently, in terms of real wealth, debtees are actually paying the US to hold its debt, meaning this whole debt ceiling debate the Republicans insist on having is an imminent threat to the part of the human brain that evolved logical thinking skills.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Jahoclave » Sun Sep 15, 2013 1:16 am UTC

Thesh wrote:
leady wrote:On a far more important partisan note, when are you folks going to change your colour scheme to make sense and align with the ROW?

red for conservatives is so wrong


We use both red and blue for conservatives here.

As for the debt ceiling debate, just like the last time, just like the sequester, just like the payroll tax hike, we are only stalling recovery and putting ourselves at risk of going back into recession. Of course, macroeconomic policy is complicated, and propaganda is much easier when you have a message that makes sense to a moron (spending bad, deficit bad, taxes bad, private sector good). So who is going to win? I can't answer that, but I know that the losers will be the people.

Oh, and don't forget that a flawed study that was never peer-reviewed and contains what has to be an absolutely deliberate error is the "intellectual" backing behind the idea that cutting the debt is necessary for economic growth.

And yeah, I think the closest thing we have to a color for the left is green, and I don't think the socialists get a color yet. But yeah, the right wing party is blue and the far right party is red.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Tyndmyr » Sun Sep 15, 2013 2:43 pm UTC

Debt is *way* too complex to be either simply "good" or "bad", but the likelihood that we'll get to a debate where that is taken for granted and the important stuff gets debated is basically zero.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby sardia » Sun Sep 15, 2013 5:17 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Debt is *way* too complex to be either simply "good" or "bad", but the likelihood that we'll get to a debate where that is taken for granted and the important stuff gets debated is basically zero.

What is simple to state is this: trying to reduce spending using the debt ceiling is the most retarded idea ever. It cuts the programs that don't have giant lobbying machines behind them, and it favors spending via tax loops holes and deductions over traditional spending. In addition, out of all the big three drivers of spending, they managed to cut defense by about 8% after THREE rounds of debt ceiling negotiations. There's been nothing good that has come out of debt ceiling talks. Republicans look like retards, Democrats look spineless. Meanwhile, the idea to raise money never comes up, or to not spend the money on something big*cough S&S + Medicare*cough.

User avatar
Jahoclave
sourmilk's moderator
Posts: 4790
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:34 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Jahoclave » Sun Sep 15, 2013 6:39 pm UTC

I really want to run for office using an add. Hi, this is my Keynesian economist friend, and this is my Austrian economist friend. Before making a decision on how to vote, I promise to lock these two in a room with an assortment of American gladiator equipment that they must use during their debate and post the whole thing on youtube for your amusement.

I also think perhaps we should add a political commentator to both NASCAR and Football that adds some factual information about how things work during the dull bits, which, should give him about 3 hours of time in a NASCAR race.


But really, the terrible reflection is the far to large amount of Americans who support this kind of fucktardery by Congress. Though, if there's an industry to get into, it's pushing fucktardery for the fucktards cause they'll buy whatever stupid crap confirms their bias. Having read some of the tea party books for my degree paper, I honestly think the people with the money leading that movement think they're stupider than I do.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6568
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Thesh » Sun Sep 15, 2013 6:58 pm UTC

Propaganda is a powerful tool; even otherwise intelligent people have been hammered with nothing but bullshit their entire lives, so they believe it themselves. Everyone knows the basic principals of microeconomics, and it makes it easy to call it economics and pretend everything extends perfectly to macroeconomics. The free market is the frictionless vacuum of economics, but no one is really taught otherwise; the result is we have an almost religious devotion to the free market, and religion doesn't care how smart you are. Beliefs are much, much more powerful than facts. For example, I don't know how many times I hear "Fast Food jobs are for High School students!" - mmhmm... Then why are they open during school hours?
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Tyndmyr » Sun Sep 15, 2013 8:12 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Debt is *way* too complex to be either simply "good" or "bad", but the likelihood that we'll get to a debate where that is taken for granted and the important stuff gets debated is basically zero.

What is simple to state is this: trying to reduce spending using the debt ceiling is the most retarded idea ever. It cuts the programs that don't have giant lobbying machines behind them, and it favors spending via tax loops holes and deductions over traditional spending. In addition, out of all the big three drivers of spending, they managed to cut defense by about 8% after THREE rounds of debt ceiling negotiations. There's been nothing good that has come out of debt ceiling talks. Republicans look like retards, Democrats look spineless. Meanwhile, the idea to raise money never comes up, or to not spend the money on something big*cough S&S + Medicare*cough.


Trying to reduce spending by pretty much any political means ends up looking similar, though. Lobbying always ends up being a huge factor.

I'm not certain that "we're terrible at this, so we should just give up" is a good message to send to congress. They're terrible at a lot of shit they should be doing.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby sardia » Sun Sep 15, 2013 9:53 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:

Trying to reduce spending by pretty much any political means ends up looking similar, though. Lobbying always ends up being a huge factor.

I'm not certain that "we're terrible at this, so we should just give up" is a good message to send to congress. They're terrible at a lot of shit they should be doing.

Did you know that being terrible at reducing spending didn't threaten the global economy until just recently? Like say... since the time the Tea Party arose? Telling the extremists at the Tea Party to give up is a pretty damn good idea. What does the country gain by letting them stay? You lost 2 weeks pay because of them. I can think of 1-2 things the Tea Party has done for the GOP. Increase in gun access, if you could afford it, and cutting spending to the poor.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Tyndmyr » Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:41 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:

Trying to reduce spending by pretty much any political means ends up looking similar, though. Lobbying always ends up being a huge factor.

I'm not certain that "we're terrible at this, so we should just give up" is a good message to send to congress. They're terrible at a lot of shit they should be doing.

Did you know that being terrible at reducing spending didn't threaten the global economy until just recently? Like say... since the time the Tea Party arose? Telling the extremists at the Tea Party to give up is a pretty damn good idea. What does the country gain by letting them stay? You lost 2 weeks pay because of them. I can think of 1-2 things the Tea Party has done for the GOP. Increase in gun access, if you could afford it, and cutting spending to the poor.


We've had periods long before the Tea Party where reducing spending came into popularity. The clinton admin would be an obvious recent example with clear parallels.

And nah, I didn't lose any pay. Most people didn't. Sequester got seriously dialed down or canceled entirely for most agencies. It wasn't really that big of an event(either in effect or savings).

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby sardia » Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:04 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
We've had periods long before the Tea Party where reducing spending came into popularity. The clinton admin would be an obvious recent example with clear parallels.

And nah, I didn't lose any pay. Most people didn't. Sequester got seriously dialed down or canceled entirely for most agencies. It wasn't really that big of an event(either in effect or savings).

I would contrast these two events for a couple points. The durations, one was from 1995-96 and ended with a deal that didn't break down for another 4 years. How long have we been negotiating this debt ceiling/budgetary nonsense and how long have those deals lasted?
In addition, you aren't considering the economic background, it's a lot easier to negotiate when you have a strong economy behind you vs a still struggling, dare I say two tiered economy.

As for the sequester, are you claiming that the sequester isn't a big deal or that it isn't a big deal for you?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10187
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby addams » Mon Sep 16, 2013 5:44 am UTC

leady wrote:On a far more important partisan note, when are you folks going to change your colour scheme to make sense and align with the ROW?

red for conservatives is so wrong

ok. finely. Someone I can talk to.

Hi! Right? I Know. It is so wrong.
Yet; It makes sense on some really weird levels.

Red is and has always been The Commie Color.
So; When the Commies start with The Demands,
The first demand is; "We Want Our Color Back!"

That is funny.

There is a lot more funny about them taking Red as the Color of Assholes.
Where to begin?

What color do we want? All of them.
Even that funny color. All of them.

Not one color left for Assholes?
Cover it up. Assholes undercover.

Because they don't have a color?
Do you know what Commies are like?

A bunch of soft hearted sots.
So Romantic about anything and everything.

That must be how the Republicans got Red in the first place.
Maybe. Maybe it was having the word, "Red." used in such bad ways for so long.

Better Dead than Red?
Or was it;
Better Red than Dead?

They are The Reds! That is so funny.
It is also, Great! What color are you?

Don't choose Orange. That is The Bad Guys like the KKK some places.
Paisley does not work either. Some foaming at the mouth petty politician used that as a SurName.
Black is taken. White is taken. Green is taken. So, funny.

Choose a color! Purple? Does purple work?

oh. Back to seriously arguing about money.
Pfft. Four Trillion? Four fucking Trillion.

In 1986 the US national debt was 3.? Million.
It was a big deal for some people. Million.

It was possible to have a million of something.
At schools, teachers would lead a project to gather One Million bottle caps.

That is a lot of Bottle caps. They used a method of estimation. One box this size=X Caps.
It took some schools two years to produce a million bottle caps.

The local media and the mayor and someone working for or with the DOD would show up and there would be a ritual in the Gym.
From the year 1986 until 1996 this nation went from 3. Million in debt to a 3. Million surplus.

In nearly the same amount of time this nation has gone from 3. million surplus to 4 Trillion in debt.
We had $700.00 toilet seats! What have you Got?

I know that the number Trillion is not a Real Number. Not like 5, 6, or 7.
Trillion is a number that is useful to Numbers Guys to do weird probibities.

What is the probability that we can save enough by cutting welfare to balance the budget?
Oh! Oh! I can do that one! When numbers get very, very difficult they sometimes go full circle and become easy to work with, again.

I can do that one! Less Than Zero! The answer is X<0.
The words Billion and Trillion being used by Idiots that are not qualified bothers me.

There is not one thing I can do about it.
Still; Dear FOX news and all the FOX news watchers.

You are like children that have learned a new word and do not know what it means.
You learned a new scary word for the Ogie Boogie Man and you use it like a weapon.
Like the Bullies you are you say it Loud and you say it Often. You use it Wrong so often the meaning has changed.
You are like superstitious commoners of the dark ages. You learned a powerful word and you use it liberally.
You have no idea. That I am sure of.

You jerks are willing to Tighten The Belt. As long as it is not your belt.
I have seen you! Tea Party People! I have seen you!

It is too late for most of you.
So; Into the dark with computer screens lighting the faces of people all over the world.
Into the darkness of the Information Age we stumble.

Information in Zeros and Ones. Lots and lots of Zeros.

Our people are a mess. The ignorance and arrogance of my people is awe inspiring.
It cost 4 Trillion dollars to Not Educate and entire generation? Good You.

How much do you expect it to cost to Not provide Medical Care for the Tea Party's generation?
Insulted?

I know how to balance the budget. It is not that complicated.
Of course, the little talking heads on FOX news will not like the Numbers.

It is not about numbers they can understand. I have seen them! I have listened to them!
They are actors! They know what they are told to say. Nothing More!

Congress is worse. Test Them!
Men and women that have the right and responsibility to show up and work for the people must be Tested!
Repeatedly! You and I Are!

oh. You can't afford to take One Full day from the busy schedule of the Governing body to test it.
oh. You can't afford the test. You are some Imaginary Number in Debt. What do you have to show for your debt?

I know where you can find 16 million dollars worth of DVD's that have video games created to teach safe sex to people that do not have electricity.
Sixteen million is chicken feed, today.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Sep 16, 2013 3:17 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
We've had periods long before the Tea Party where reducing spending came into popularity. The clinton admin would be an obvious recent example with clear parallels.

And nah, I didn't lose any pay. Most people didn't. Sequester got seriously dialed down or canceled entirely for most agencies. It wasn't really that big of an event(either in effect or savings).

I would contrast these two events for a couple points. The durations, one was from 1995-96 and ended with a deal that didn't break down for another 4 years. How long have we been negotiating this debt ceiling/budgetary nonsense and how long have those deals lasted?
In addition, you aren't considering the economic background, it's a lot easier to negotiate when you have a strong economy behind you vs a still struggling, dare I say two tiered economy.


The economy is worse this time around, sure....I'm merely pointing out that the Tea Party isn't terribly original in it's demands. We've seen all this before.

As for the sequester, are you claiming that the sequester isn't a big deal or that it isn't a big deal for you?


Well, both, really. The initial assessments of people who would be furloughed were invariably too large, and as the sequester trudged on, they kept finding places to cut that resulted in decrease of furlough or cancellation altogether. DoD, for instance, cancelled furloughs entirely for some agencies, DoD civilians were down to only six days in non-exempt agencies, military people were unaffected, and DoD contractors were mostly unaffected. Sure, civvies have a pay freeze, but that's been in place for years. That's not a change to the status quo.

The economy here in the DC area, which is disproportionately affected by federal spending, is not really troubled or greatly affected by the sequester at all.

Yet, to hear some people talk about it, you would think it was the end of days. It's really not that large of a cut in spending compared to previous budgets.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby sardia » Wed Sep 18, 2013 11:20 pm UTC

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/us/po ... f=politics
The House signals that they are playing hardball. =(
The GOP said either kill The Affordable Care Act or shutdown the government. Then kill The Affordable Care Act or default. Now where have I heard this before?

"Yet, to hear some people talk about it, you would think it was the end of days. It's really not that large of a cut in spending compared to previous budgets."
And that's how the rich fuck the poor in the ass. You lost maybe a 1/4 of a single paycheck. The poor lost their dinner/medical access/heat/education. Do you even remember being "poor" or was that just something you told yourself so you could ignore the hobo across the street?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:08 am UTC

sardia wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/us/politics/house-gop-to-tie-spending-bill-to-health-law-defunding.html?ref=politics
The House signals that they are playing hardball. =(
The GOP said either kill The Affordable Care Act or shutdown the government. Then kill The Affordable Care Act or default. Now where have I heard this before?

"Yet, to hear some people talk about it, you would think it was the end of days. It's really not that large of a cut in spending compared to previous budgets."
And that's how the rich fuck the poor in the ass. You lost maybe a 1/4 of a single paycheck. The poor lost their dinner/medical access/heat/education. Do you even remember being "poor" or was that just something you told yourself so you could ignore the hobo across the street?


No, I lost nothing at all, and I work for a government agency.

Yes, there were dire warnings of sequester, people not being paid, etc. It mostly didn't pan out. Go, find the actual effects, instead of the overblown predictions of effects.

Yknow how I said it was "not that large of a cut in spending"? It wasn't. Medicare and Medicaid, for instance, is mostly non-discretionary funding, so it was barely affected by sequester at all. Please, justify those claims.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6782
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby sardia » Thu Sep 19, 2013 3:31 am UTC

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sp ... te-impact/
Education, food, and healthcare. Heating was not part of the sequester as far as I can tell. It was part of the 2011 budget cuts, my mistake. The thing is, I agree with you that these are not large budget cuts compared to the non-discretionary budget. However, they are large programs that affect multitudes of poor people in each state. It's annoying that anyone calls themselves budget hawks except the hawks are too afraid to take on the elephant in the room.

Back to the debt debate;
I wonder what the GOP would do if the Democrats counter with the House stopgap budget, but without The Affordable Care Act cuts, would the GOP let it slide?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:20 am UTC

sardia wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/sequestration-state-impact/
Education, food, and healthcare. Heating was not part of the sequester as far as I can tell. It was part of the 2011 budget cuts, my mistake. The thing is, I agree with you that these are not large budget cuts compared to the non-discretionary budget. However, they are large programs that affect multitudes of poor people in each state. It's annoying that anyone calls themselves budget hawks except the hawks are too afraid to take on the elephant in the room.

Back to the debt debate;
I wonder what the GOP would do if the Democrats counter with the House stopgap budget, but without The Affordable Care Act cuts, would the GOP let it slide?


Those numbers are actually also pre-sequestration estimates.

Consider education. Much was made of how Head Start would be gutted, and students would be sent home. Then look at the actual enrollment. 2012 is higher than 2011, not lower. Not by a lot, sure...but it's not what was projected at all.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5926
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Angua » Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:39 pm UTC

So, the house is wanting to cut foodstamps and defund the affordable care act. The White House has, predictably (and rightly, I think), said it will veto any bill that does these things. Looks like another long haul.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby Heisenberg » Fri Sep 20, 2013 7:42 pm UTC

Angua wrote:So, the house is wanting to cut foodstamps and defund the affordable care act. The White House has, predictably (and rightly, I think), said it will veto any bill that does these things. Looks like another long haul.
The foodstamps thing seems like a terrible idea. I think it's big now because Fox News recently found some surfer dude who buys sushi and lobster on food stamps, but in general I think people are pretty positive about the program.

The ACA, on the other hand, is a mystery wrapped in an enigma to most people, so threats to defund it won't piss off anyone who had a snowball's chance in hell of voting Republican next election. It gives them a lot of ideological capital at very little expense.

cphite
Posts: 1360
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby cphite » Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:32 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Honestly, The Affordable Care Act is a stupid battleground. The GOP needs to realize that was already lost, and they simply don't have the positioning to change that. Obama is not suddenly going to have a change of heart and sign off on a repeal of it.


The ACA is a horrible bill. It doesn't have popular support, and what support it does have is diminishing. It is already creating a drag on the economy - a whole lot of companies are cutting hours, cutting back on hires, and dropping insurance options. The whole thing is a mess, and is clearly not going to work as advertised. From a practical point of view, it should be repealed and/or replaced because it will do more harm than good over the long haul.

Politically, opposition to the ACA was a fairly large factor in the republicans taking the House in 2010; and given that public support for it is actually declining, they have every reason to expect it to be a factor in 2014, especially as more and more people lose working hours, or lose jobs.

The bill never should have been passed in the first place. Anyone who actually looked at it who had a modicum of knowledge about the health industry knew that it was going to do the opposite of what it was promised. None of the stuff that's happening now - the cuts to hours, the reduced hiring, the dropping of plans, the sharp premium increases - is a surprise to anyone who was paying attention.

But the democrats were determined to pass something - anything - so that they could say that they finally passed health care reform. So they rammed this turd of a bill through - with the help of some rules gymnastics in the Senate - along purely party lines. And the result is a completely unsustainable mess.

The administration can delay the worst parts of the bill (in terms of their poll numbers) to reduce the damage in 2014 - but they're going to be hard pressed to do the same for 2016. By that time, the law will be fully in effect, and I suspect will be an even bigger political quagmire for the party that forced it.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4581
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Debt Ceiling Round 3? 4?

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Sep 20, 2013 8:41 pm UTC

Polling numbers for support of the ACA have been rock steady for two years.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests