• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

U.S. dangerously close to debt limit

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/1...ow_debt.reut/index.htm
U.S. dangerously close to debt limit
Treasury halts some fund payments; Snow urges Congress to raise debt ceiling soon.
October 14, 2004: 12:08 PM EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Treasury Department suspended investments in a federal employee pension fund Thursday to keep the government below its borrowing limit, Treasury Secretary John Snow said in a letter to Congress.

Snow said payments to the $56 billion Federal Employee Retirement System's Government Securities Investment Fund, known as the G-fund, would be restored once Congress raises the $7.384 trillion debt ceiling.

"Such a suspension action has been taken in the past by my predecessors and by me," Snow said.

The government was just $10 billion below the limit as of Tuesday, according to the latest available data.

Congress adjourned for an election break last weekend without raising the politically sensitive limit. Snow said it was critical that lawmakers raise the debt ceiling when they return on Nov. 16.

"Given current projections, it is imperative that the Congress take action to increase the debt limit by mid-November, at which time all of our previously used prudent and legal actions to avoid breaching the statutory debt limit will be exhausted," he said.

Congress has already raised the debt limit twice during the Bush administration's tenure, in 2002 and 2003.

Now I understand that the debt limit is an arbitrary number, but that does not detract from the fact that Bush's fiscal policies and bleeding deficits are leading the US dangerously further into staggering debt. And this after the "liberal" Clinton stabilized the debt and had the government headed towards surpluses.

Can we afford 4 more years?


btw, 10,000th post.
 

Falloutboy

Diamond Member
Jan 2, 2003
5,916
0
76
oh yes and kerry's plan for goverment health care will really save the goverment tons of money :roll:
 

gtRFan

Banned
Oct 5, 2004
123
0
0
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
oh yes and kerry's plan for goverment health care will really save the goverment tons of money :roll:
Alright then... four more years of r@ping, pillaging and plundering the country and its people. You can add the world too, but let's concentrate on America first.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
oh yes and kerry's plan for goverment health care will really save the goverment tons of money :roll:

Wow, that's an effective argument. :roll:

What Kerry will or will not do is moot to this discussion. What is reality is what Bush IS doing now and will likely continue to do in his second term, unless he does the same thing his father did when the elder said "Read my lips".
Otherwise, when something is broke (and Bush is), it must be fixed. That the fix is only slightly better does not detract from the fact that it is still better.


edit: as for my opinion on Kerry's health care plans, I will first state that I am adamantly opposed to any form of socialist nationalized health care system. For adults. If you are able-bodied and can work, and can't pay for yourself, then I believe you should be working so that you can pay for yourself. Or starve. Children OTOH cannot pay for themselves, and I am not opposed to a system that guarantees children some form of health protection, so long as the system is voluntary and not in place when the child is covered by some form of private health coverage. This has been my belief for many years and that is AFAIK in accordance with the plan that Kerry has discussed.
 

Darkhawk28

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2000
6,759
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
oh yes and kerry's plan for goverment health care will really save the goverment tons of money :roll:

Wow, that's an effective argument. :roll:

What Kerry will or will not do is moot to this discussion. What is reality is what Bush IS doing now and will likely continue to do in his second term, unless he does the same thing his father did when the elder said "Read my lips".
Otherwise, when something is broke (and Bush is), it must be fixed. That the fix is only slightly better does not detract from the fact that it is still better.


edit: as for my opinion on Kerry's health care plans, I will first state that I am adamantly opposed to any form of socialist nationalized health care system. For adults. If you are able-bodied and can work, and can't pay for yourself, then I believe you should be working so that you can pay for yourself. Or starve. Children OTOH cannot pay for themselves, and I am not opposed to a system that guarantees children some form of health protection, so long as the system is voluntary and not in place when the child is covered by some form of private health coverage. This has been my belief for many years and that is AFAIK in accordance with the plan that Kerry has discussed.

I may be wrong but what I gathered from what Kerry said is that he would set up "pool" of willing participants and let you choose a private provider. Also, he would subsidize catastrophic claims so that insurance companies don't get hit with it. I guess it's a health co-op with a governmental twist. Good for workers, good for employers (eases their burden), good for insurance companies. Now combine that with some tort reform (eliminating the most egregious forms of unneccessary litigation) and allow the importation of drugs from Canada, plus increasing funding to stem cell research. I could honestly say it's a plausable solution.

I'll be the first to admit that on the surface, Kerry's healthcare plans do look a bit dubious. But if you take all of his plans and put them together, it could make a real significant impact.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I may be wrong but what I gathered from what Kerry said is that he would set up "pool" of willing participants and let you choose a private provider. Also, he would subsidize catastrophic claims so that insurance companies don't get hit with it. I guess it's a health co-op with a governmental twist. Good for workers, good for employers (eases their burden), good for insurance companies. Now combine that with some tort reform (eliminating the most egregious forms of unneccessary litigation) and allow the importation of drugs from Canada, plus increasing funding to stem cell research. I could honestly say it's a plausable solution.

I'll be the first to admit that on the surface, Kerry's healthcare plans do look a bit dubious. But if you take all of his plans and put them together, it could make a real significant impact.
That is how I saw it as well. Kind of like the modern mortgage industry (which I work in). Some would rightly say that it is socialized by the government, but the reality is that it is very profitable and has created less expensive housing for all. How? By taking smaller local pools and making them into larger national pools to alleviate risk and standardize pricing, while keeping control and administration in the private sector.
 

wirelessenabled

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2001
2,191
41
91
The Admin of course says the deficit is no problem because it is a smaller part of the GDP than Reagan ran in the 1980s. Of course in the 1980s the US dollar was the only storehouse currency. Now there is competition from the Euro. Looking at the exchange rates over the last couple of years ago, Euro +30% or so against the dollar, it would seem that folks around the world are voting with their feet or at least their funds for the Euro.

What will the US have to pay in the way of interest rates over the next few years is likely to bust the budget even more than it already is busted.
 

jpeyton

Moderator in SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones
Moderator
Aug 23, 2003
25,375
142
116
I created a thread about this on Nov. 3rd, seeing as how Bush announced his intentions on raising the debt ceiling right after the American people were fooled once again the day before.

But good news like this deserves to be reposted.
 
Sep 29, 2004
18,656
68
91
Originally posted by: Falloutboy
oh yes and kerry's plan for goverment health care will really save the goverment tons of money :roll:

HHAahahahah. Well bush is digging into retirment funds of governmment employee's in order to prevent raising the debt ceiling. That was pre-election though. Now this news will be coming out.

THANSK TO ALL OF THOSE THAT VOTED BUSH AND LOOKED AT ALL OF THE FACTS.

Thanks again!
 

arsbanned

Banned
Dec 12, 2003
4,853
0
0
What Kerry would or would not do is moot. You Bush supporters can just stop trotting that horse out. What is happeniing is about BUSH'S FAILURES. Get with the program.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Seems like a political ploy to get Democrats on the record for voting to increase the size of the debt.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Seems like a political ploy to get Democrats on the record for voting to increase the size of the debt.
If you don't vote for it, you must be against America.
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,519
595
126
Originally posted by: conjur
Seems like a political ploy to get Democrats on the record for voting to increase the size of the debt.

Yeah, but the next election isnt for two years...the vote would be pretty stale by then.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: conjur
Seems like a political ploy to get Democrats on the record for voting to increase the size of the debt.

Yeah, but the next election isnt for two years...the vote would be pretty stale by then.
Didn't stop the Bush campaign from distorting 20 year-old votes from Kerry.
 

GoPackGo

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2003
6,519
595
126
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Originally posted by: conjur
Seems like a political ploy to get Democrats on the record for voting to increase the size of the debt.

Yeah, but the next election isnt for two years...the vote would be pretty stale by then.
Didn't stop the Bush campaign from distorting 20 year-old votes from Kerry.

Yeah, but did that cause kerry to lose?

Tell you what...and I firmly believe this, but could be wrong, but if John Kerry had used the same level of emotion and heart that he used in his concession speech during the campaign, you would be calling him President Elect Kerry.
 

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Originally posted by: Vic
http://money.cnn.com/2004/10/1...ow_debt.reut/index.htm
U.S. dangerously close to debt limit
Treasury halts some fund payments; Snow urges Congress to raise debt ceiling soon.
October 14, 2004: 12:08 PM EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Treasury Department suspended investments in a federal employee pension fund Thursday to keep the government below its borrowing limit, Treasury Secretary John Snow said in a letter to Congress.

Snow said payments to the $56 billion Federal Employee Retirement System's Government Securities Investment Fund, known as the G-fund, would be restored once Congress raises the $7.384 trillion debt ceiling.

"Such a suspension action has been taken in the past by my predecessors and by me," Snow said.

The government was just $10 billion below the limit as of Tuesday, according to the latest available data.

Congress adjourned for an election break last weekend without raising the politically sensitive limit. Snow said it was critical that lawmakers raise the debt ceiling when they return on Nov. 16.

"Given current projections, it is imperative that the Congress take action to increase the debt limit by mid-November, at which time all of our previously used prudent and legal actions to avoid breaching the statutory debt limit will be exhausted," he said.

Congress has already raised the debt limit twice during the Bush administration's tenure, in 2002 and 2003.

Now I understand that the debt limit is an arbitrary number, but that does not detract from the fact that Bush's fiscal policies and bleeding deficits are leading the US dangerously further into staggering debt. And this after the "liberal" Clinton stabilized the debt and had the government headed towards surpluses.

Can we afford 4 more years?


btw, 10,000th post.

The balanced budget was based on smoke and mirrors. Increased government revenues were largely based on a stock market bubble fuel by speculation mania and corporate accounting scandals.

Bush inherited a recession and the economic effects of 9/11. I think he's done a good job considering the mess he inherited and circumstances clearly outside of his control.
 

Pandaren

Golden Member
Sep 13, 2003
1,029
0
0
"Rise and shine. Wake up and smell the ashes." - G-Man, Half Life 2.

Nearly bankrupt people almost always keep borrowing more and more to pay their previous debts. They get more credit cards. They transfer balances. And in the end usually nothing can save them from insolvency.

I see the national debt as a looming disaster on future generations. There will be a day when those minimum payments come due, and when the government defaults, everything will go to hell...

The US is a country of debtors. Our ever increasing consumption is fueled by ever higher credit card debt. Our economy is running on those debts. Our government survives on loan after loan. People need to stop buying what they can't afford and take some personal responsibility for their actions instead of just borrowing and borrowing.