• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Congressman Gohmert blasts the budget deal and 'emergency spending'

ProfJohn

ProfJohn

Lifer
So I am listening to some radio and there is an interview with Louie Gohmert of Texas talking about the 'deal'

He picks the thing apart from top to bottom. Not much of a deal in his eyes.

But the best thing he said was how 'emergency' spending can be used to get around the 'caps' in the bill meant to keep spending low.

He points out that the census was considered 'emergency' spending even though we have know about it for 200 years.


This deal might get passed, but we are so screwed as a country. A balanced budget is the only thing that will save us...
 
ProfJohn said:
...
This deal might get passed, but we are so screwed as a country. A balanced budget is the only thing that will save us...
Click to expand...

Is it worth considering that this whole "crisis" is being a little overly dramatized? After decades of deficit spending, we suddenly decide that deficit spending is literally going to destroy America, right away. I think it's a problem we should solve, but it kind of feels like people are getting way too worked up about it.
 
Rainsford said:
Is it worth considering that this whole "crisis" is being a little overly dramatized? After decades of deficit spending, we suddenly decide that deficit spending is literally going to destroy America, right away. I think it's a problem we should solve, but it kind of feels like people are getting way too worked up about it.
Click to expand...

I agree this was a bit dramatic. However there needs to a line in the sand drawn somewhere. It might as well be sooner than later.
 
Rainsford said:
After decades of deficit spending, we suddenly decide that deficit spending is literally going to destroy America, right away.
Click to expand...

Kind of like when you have 5 credit cards with $25k limit on each and you've maxed out 4 of them and are halfway through the 5th. Do we want to be $30 trillion in debt (not counting unfunded liabilities) before we draw that line in the sand? Sorry. We've been too complacent for too long. Time to pay the piper and it's gonna be painful.
 
Genx87 said:
I agree this was a bit dramatic. However there needs to a line in the sand drawn somewhere. It might as well be sooner than later.
Click to expand...

lolx, ya, right in the middle of a fragile recovery and when its' politically advantageous to make the other guy look bad.
 
Rainsford said:
Is it worth considering that this whole "crisis" is being a little overly dramatized? After decades of deficit spending, we suddenly decide that deficit spending is literally going to destroy America, right away. I think it's a problem we should solve, but it kind of feels like people are getting way too worked up about it.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but we just raised the debt ceiling by more than the entire debt a couple decades ago. And this is not only the largest ever, it's, what, third debt ceiling increase just under Obama's brief reign? Debt took off like a ski slope curve under Bush with both Republican and Democrat Congresses, and it's accelerating even more quickly under Obama. Further, neither party has the gonads to do what is needed - and that's even assuming there IS a possible plan that allows us to stop at least the acceleration of our deficit spending. I'm not at all sure it's even possible to get "too worked up" about it.
 
sandorski said:
lolx, ya, right in the middle of a fragile recovery and when its' politically advantageous to make the other guy look bad.
Click to expand...

When do you want it done? In a decade when we are another 10 trillion in debt? The deficit rate we are running will mean we are in a constant state of "fragile" recovery. It needs to be done. Better now than later.
 
Genx87 said:
When do you want it done? In a decade when we are another 10 trillion in debt? The deficit rate we are running will mean we are in a constant state of "fragile" recovery. It needs to be done. Better now than later.
Click to expand...

How about when it does less harm? 10ish years ago would have been perfect, when it was <$100billion and the Economy was relatively stable. Now you're flirting with falling into yet another Recession.

That said, at least this agreement is not overly onerous as some of the earlier proposals. This whole situation has been far more about Politics than Fiscal Policy though. That much is clear.
 
Genx87 said:
I agree this was a bit dramatic. However there needs to a line in the sand drawn somewhere. It might as well be sooner than later.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I'm not sure the line in the sand approach is the best way to handle it. The problem came about due to long term, cumulative deficit spending that was never checked. I'm not sure trying to reverse our spending history all at once isn't going to have just as much of a negative impact than not doing anything at all.

A dedication to many smaller steps over time, slowing and then reversing the rate of deficit growth seems reasonable to me. The problem is that there's much less incentive to do that, since I think both sides are just all about the next election.
 
brencat said:
...
We've been too complacent for too long. Time to pay the piper and it's gonna be painful.
Click to expand...

That's kind of my question though...WHY does it have to be that way? I'm on board with the idea that there is a problem here that needs addressing, but I'm not convinced the best or only way to address it is by fixing things as abruptly and harshly as possible.
 
sandorski said:
How about when it does less harm? 10ish years ago would have been perfect, when it was <$100billion and the Economy was relatively stable. Now you're flirting with falling into yet another Recession.

That said, at least this agreement is not overly onerous as some of the earlier proposals. This whole situation has been far more about Politics than Fiscal Policy though. That much is clear.
Click to expand...

And when would that be? According to the big govt crowd every time govt is curtailed it will cause damage.

We were\are flirting with a double dip before this happened due to increased fuel costs anyways.

Of course it is politics. When we allow politicians the keys to the economy this is the result.
 
Rainsford said:
I don't know, I'm not sure the line in the sand approach is the best way to handle it. The problem came about due to long term, cumulative deficit spending that was never checked. I'm not sure trying to reverse our spending history all at once isn't going to have just as much of a negative impact than not doing anything at all.

A dedication to many smaller steps over time, slowing and then reversing the rate of deficit growth seems reasonable to me. The problem is that there's much less incentive to do that, since I think both sides are just all about the next election.
Click to expand...

This is a small step. The amount of "savings" is small compared to overall debt accumulation over the next decade. But a step is a step.
 
Genx87 said:
And when would that be? According to the big govt crowd every time govt is curtailed it will cause damage.

We were\are flirting with a double dip before this happened due to increased fuel costs anyways.

Of course it is politics. When we allow politicians the keys to the economy this is the result.
Click to expand...

When the Economy is stable.
 
sandorski said:
When the Economy is stable.
Click to expand...
The economy was staple in 1995 and yet the Democrats tried to stop the cuts every step of the way.

If the economy turned around tomorrow they'd be in her claiming that we don't need to cut because of all the new revenue...
 
wasn't the OP declaring victory last night that a variation of Boehner's bill was the deal struck? Did we just misplace another trillion dollars overnight?

Rainsford said:
Is it worth considering that this whole "crisis" is being a little overly dramatized? After decades of deficit spending, we suddenly decide that deficit spending is literally going to destroy America, right away. I think it's a problem we should solve, but it kind of feels like people are getting way too worked up about it.
Click to expand...
There's a long-term problem for Medicare, but SS doesn't need to be hit with a wrecking ball.

Definitely funny that raising the ceiling 18 times for President Reagan, or deficit-financing W's wars, was always okay but now it's anathema. The crisis was in playing chicken against an opponent who won't flinch at wrecking and dragging the economy back to 2008. Even today, I'm sure the bill only passes with Democrats crossing the aisle in the House since some Tea Partiers have insisted they'll vote down any limit increase.
 
Rainsford said:
That's kind of my question though...WHY does it have to be that way? I'm on board with the idea that there is a problem here that needs addressing, but I'm not convinced the best or only way to address it is by fixing things as abruptly and harshly as possible.
Click to expand...

You realize we're not really cutting anything right? If we assume the current baseline for spending, we will only trim $2 trillion over 10 years but continue to run another $10 trillion in deficits, for a net add of $8 trillion to our national debt.

I would hardly even call that a slowing in the rate of growth of our debt. How about we make the baseline for cuts $0 as opposed to the current year's budget and reduce by 1% per year the absolute level of the budget. Factoring in the effects of inflation, that will add up to some chunky cuts over 10 years.
 
sandorski said:
How about when it does less harm? 10ish years ago would have been perfect, when it was <$100billion and the Economy was relatively stable. Now you're flirting with falling into yet another Recession.

That said, at least this agreement is not overly onerous as some of the earlier proposals. This whole situation has been far more about Politics than Fiscal Policy though. That much is clear.
Click to expand...

Well, genius, you better get started on your time machine.

For the rest of us who prefer to live within the confines of reality...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top