What? No government shutdown threads?

[michal1980]

Lol what? Obamacare passed the House and Senate. Republicans are having second thoughts about a bill they already passed. By definition, Obama already got his way. The Republicans are grasping at straws to deny this undeniable truth.

what revisionist bull crap. No republican voted for Obamacare.

House republicans got tricked by passing a different spending bill. Then the senate dems deleted that bill, wrote in Obamacare. Which no republican supported.

 

[michal1980]

What's funny is that you don't seem to realize that not raising the debt ceiling would probably make our debt situation worse. Debt is most accurately measured by debt/GDP ratio. The resulting large contraction of GDP along with increased borrowing costs to roll over existing debt would exacerbate the exact problem you think this solves.

Also, will you acknowledge you were wrong about employer health benefits being taxed?

interest rates returning to normal levels will cripple our government. Yet I see none of the brilliant people on the left worried about that...

Theres a reason the fed kept interest rates low. we're fucked with the amount of debt we have.

 

[Juddog]

Theres a reason the fed kept interest rates low.

Yeah to get the economy rolling out of the great recession - now the idiot GOP'ers want to put us right back in there again.

Let the entire country go downhill to try and make themselves look good - go ahead and slap yourself on the back, you earned it!

 

[shady28]

What's funny is that you don't seem to realize that not raising the debt ceiling would probably make our debt situation worse. Debt is most accurately measured by debt/GDP ratio. The resulting large contraction of GDP along with increased borrowing costs to roll over existing debt would exacerbate the exact problem you think this solves.

Also, will you acknowledge you were wrong about employer health benefits being taxed?

What you say above assumes that the money to fund 'debt' is created out of thin air, which is not entirely true.

If the US puts out a brand new million dollar treasury, someone pays a million dollars for it.

If they do not put out a brand new million dollar treasury, that million dollars that would have been paid for it can go elsewhere. And most likely, it would go somewhere more productive than to pay inefficient Gov't agencies and employees.

 

[fskimospy]

What you say above assumes that the money to fund 'debt' is created out of thin air, which is not entirely true.

If the US puts out a brand new million dollar treasury, someone pays a million dollars for it.

If they do not put out a brand new million dollar treasury, that million dollars that would have been paid for it can go elsewhere. And most likely, it would go somewhere more productive than to pay inefficient Gov't agencies and employees.

This turns out not to be the case. Interest rates for business borrowing remain extremely low, there is no crowding out effect in current economic circumstances.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Yeah to get the economy rolling out of the great recession - now the idiot GOP'ers want to put us right back in there again.

Let the entire country go downhill to try and make themselves look good - go ahead and slap yourself on the back, you earned it!

Yet you fail to mention that Obama refuses any negotiations and that he's part of the problem as well....he's a prideful man who's idea of "leadership" is to never give in on anything. He needs to throw Republicans a bone...otherwise default is coming.

 

[K1052]

Yet you fail to mention that Obama refuses any negotiations and that he's part of the problem as well....he's a prideful man who's idea of "leadership" is to never give in on anything. He needs to throw Republicans a bone...otherwise default is coming.

It's like an arsonist who burns down a house then complains to the homeowner that he shouldn't have built a house there in the first place. D:

 

[IronWing]

Yet you fail to mention that Obama refuses any negotiations and that he's part of the problem as well....he's a prideful man who's idea of "leadership" is to never give in on anything. He needs to throw Republicans a bone...otherwise default is coming.

Obama caved on Bush tax cuts after a Rep tantrum. He caved on sequestration after a Rep tantrum. He surrenders so fast his own party can't keep up with him. Your perspective is contrary to reality. Obama is a milquetoast President.

 

[fskimospy]

Yet you fail to mention that Obama refuses any negotiations and that he's part of the problem as well....he's a prideful man who's idea of "leadership" is to never give in on anything. He needs to throw Republicans a bone...otherwise default is coming.

Wait a minute. Half the time Republicans claim that Obama is a weak leader who gives in on everything, now the complaint is that he gives in on nothing?

The entire reason we are in this situation now is that Obama foolishly gave in to Republican demands in 2011 when they took the debt ceiling hostage the first time. He owes it to all of us to correct that mistake. Obama can throw them a tiny bone at the end, but he can only do so after they have capitulated. They need to know that some things are not acceptable in a well functioning government.

 

[Texashiker]

Wait a minute. Half the time Republicans claim that Obama is a weak leader who gives in on everything, now the complaint is that he gives in on nothing?

Obama is nothing more than a puppet.

When there is no puppet master and he has to pull his own strings, he is a weak leader.

When there is a puppet master, such as with the insurance companies telling him what kind of law they wanted passed, he is a strong leader.

With the budget and debt ceiling issue the nation needs a strong leader. But since there is no corporation to point obama in the direction they want him to go, he is a weak leader.

Same thing with gun control. There was no puppet master to pull the strings, so obama was not a strong leader after sandy hook.

As long as obama has a teleprompter to read from everything is fine.

 

[trenchfoot]

Over two thousand furloughed civilian workers at Pearl Harbor just got sent back to work as of today.

I wonder if this method of trickling down the shutdown is going to continue unabated until the Repubs can actually point to it and say the effects were minimal and not technically lie about it.

I still think it's hilarious that all those Tea Party hotheads were gunning for the shutdown until the winds of public opinion they were arrogantly pissing into blew their stinking vitriol right back in their faces.

I think it more hilarious still that all the Tea Party has learned from this humiliation is to piss into the wind without unzippering first.

 

[First]

That was a specific example of the Federal government employing selective enforcement. How many examples do you require before you will acknowledge the Federal government is fully capable of selectively enforcing the law.

The Feds don't challenge these common federal land grants, it's totally non-controversial and 100% constitutional to have, say, a covenant/condition/restriction on land that allows the feds to shut it down. This is a fact you have zero ability to dispute. Meanwhile, I can cite all sorts of case law.

Again, a mechanism of enforcement is not and cannot be justification. One is action, the other is reason.

Don't bother replying until you're willing to actually answer the question: What justification does the Federal government have to shut that man's business down?

It's the law likely embedded in the land agreement. I'm sorry you're so poorly informed about CC&R's and so partisan that you don't have the ability to see otherwise. Your loss, other people's gain (in terms of entertainment).

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The entire reason we are in this situation now is that Obama foolishly gave in to Republican demands in 2011 when they took the debt ceiling hostage the first time. He owes it to all of us to correct that mistake. Obama can throw them a tiny bone at the end, but he can only do so after they have capitulated. They need to know that some things are not acceptable in a well functioning government.

Democrats have held the debt ceiling hostage to get their way many times in the past. Are you saying Republican presidents were fools to negotiate and compromise with them? I just seems so childish to me that Obama won't even talk. We're headed for default and he shares the blame in my opinion.

 

[fskimospy]

Democrats have held the debt ceiling hostage to get their way many times in the past. Are you saying Republican presidents fools to negotiate and compromise with them? I just seems so childish to me that Obama won't even talk. We're headed for default and he shares the blame in my opinion.

No, as we have covered repeatedly this action has no precedent. There have been debt ceiling negotiations in the past that have involved both parties making concessions. There have also been government shutdowns that had other stipulations attached to much larger fiscal compromises. There has never been a case where a single party has unilaterally refused to raise the debt ceiling unless its unilateral demands are met with no concessions. Period.

If you think Obama's refusal to negotiate is childish you do not understand the situation. Demanding the repeal of settled law in order to prevent default on our obligations undermines the basis for governance in the US. If the Republicans find that they can repeal the affordable care act by simply holding the nation's credit hostage, what happens next year? The year after that? What happens when Democrats take one house of Congress and the Republicans are in charge, do they demand its reinstatement or threaten default? It is a source of constant amazement to me that the conservatives on here won't admit the obvious end result of their preferred actions.

If Obama gives in to Republicans here he basically makes future default certain. The only responsible action on here is to make no concessions whatsoever. That's what an adult does. Someday you will thank him for being the adult in the room, even if you don't admit it here.

 

[trenchfoot]

Democrats have held the debt ceiling hostage to get their way many times in the past. Are you saying Republican presidents were fools to negotiate and compromise with them? I just seems so childish to me that Obama won't even talk. We're headed for default and he shares the blame in my opinion.

It would actually seem more foolish for Obama to cave like he always has in the past when he has the upper hand at the moment.

If Obama has any blame to own up to, it's that he's always blinked first in the interest of those constituents he's fighting for.

 

[cubby1223]

Obama did the same thing under a Republican President, he voted against the debt limit increase to voice his opposition against the President.

Precedence was set even longer before then.

This is the way our government works.

You cannot take a stand on general principle that the debt ceiling is not something to ever use in negotiations, while that position simultaneously gives you the "win" you strongly desire in the side negotiation.

Because this pattern repeats itself far more times than not, chances are you too will change your position on the debt ceiling if doing so means a "win" for you in the side negotiations.

 

[fskimospy]

Obama did the same thing under a Republican President, he voted against the debt limit increase to voice his opposition against the President.

Precedence was set even longer before then.

This is the way our government works.

No it wasn't. The precedent is for meaningless protest votes, not actual threats of default.

You cannot take a stand on general principle that the debt ceiling is not something to ever use in negotiations, while that position simultaneously gives you the "win" you strongly desire in the side negotiation.

Of course you can. On what planet can you only make a statement of principle if it harms you? That's idiotic.

 

[cubby1223]

Of course you can. On what planet can you only make a statement of principle if it harms you? That's idiotic.

Of course you can.

But I'll add an extra clause - you cannot if you expect people to believe you are genuine in your argument.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

No, as we have covered repeatedly this action has no precedent. There have been debt ceiling negotiations in the past that have involved both parties making concessions. There have also been government shutdowns that had other stipulations attached to much larger fiscal compromises. There has never been a case where a single party has unilaterally refused to raise the debt ceiling unless its unilateral demands are met with no concessions. Period.

If you think Obama's refusal to negotiate is childish you do not understand the situation. Demanding the repeal of settled law in order to prevent default on our obligations undermines the basis for governance in the US. If the Republicans find that they can repeal the affordable care act by simply holding the nation's credit hostage, what happens next year? The year after that? What happens when Democrats take one house of Congress and the Republicans are in charge, do they demand its reinstatement or threaten default? It is a source of constant amazement to me that the conservatives on here won't admit the obvious end result of their preferred actions.

If Obama gives in to Republicans here he basically makes future default certain. The only responsible action on here is to make no concessions whatsoever. That's what an adult does. Someday you will thank him for being the adult in the room, even if you don't admit it here.

Concessions are highly unlikely without negotiation. Since 1978, our debt ceiling has been "held hostage" 27 of 53 times where negotiations took place and compromises were worked out. To my knowledge Obama is the first president ever to refuse to negotiate over the debt ceiling...I believe this tactic is unprecedented.

 

[Texashiker]

If Obama has any blame to own up to, it's that he's always blinked first in the interest of those constituents he's fighting for.

He did not blink when ensuring the massive profits of insurance companies.

 

[First]

Concessions are highly unlikely without negotiation. Since 1978, our debt ceiling has been "held hostage" 27 of 53 times where negotiations took place and compromises were worked out. To my knowledge Obama is the first president ever to refuse to negotiate over the debt ceiling...I believe this tactic is unprecedented.

lol

 

[Matt1970]

No, as we have covered repeatedly this action has no precedent. There have been debt ceiling negotiations in the past that have involved both parties making concessions. There have also been government shutdowns that had other stipulations attached to much larger fiscal compromises. There has never been a case where a single party has unilaterally refused to raise the debt ceiling unless its unilateral demands are met with no concessions. Period.

If you think Obama's refusal to negotiate is childish you do not understand the situation. Demanding the repeal of settled law in order to prevent default on our obligations undermines the basis for governance in the US. If the Republicans find that they can repeal the affordable care act by simply holding the nation's credit hostage, what happens next year? The year after that? What happens when Democrats take one house of Congress and the Republicans are in charge, do they demand its reinstatement or threaten default? It is a source of constant amazement to me that the conservatives on here won't admit the obvious end result of their preferred actions.

If Obama gives in to Republicans here he basically makes future default certain. The only responsible action on here is to make no concessions whatsoever. That's what an adult does. Someday you will thank him for being the adult in the room, even if you don't admit it here.

Demanding the ouright repeal of Obamacare was never going to happen and they knew that. That was the Repubs bad. The last CR before the shutdown was fair and only contained a 1 year delay of the mandate. Most people will probably opt for the fine/tax the first couple years anyways. Obamacare was going to be in full swing. People would still have been free to enrole for the $2500 savings. Sorry, had to throw that in Dems refused to even look at it. This shit has been going on for decades but now all of a sudden it "undermines the basis for governance in the US". Hell some of the ones in the 70's were for bickering between democrats.

 

[Matt1970]

Obama caved on Bush tax cuts after a Rep tantrum. He caved on sequestration after a Rep tantrum. He surrenders so fast his own party can't keep up with him. Your perspective is contrary to reality. Obama is a milquetoast President.

No, he campaigned on making the evil unpatriotic Bush tax cuts permanent for his second term. He also didn't caved on sequestration.

 

[cubby1223]

Government was, is, and always will be dysfunctional.

Is it good governance that one party wants to use the threat of a debt default to cut back Obamacare?

Was it good governance that one party pushed Obamacare through the legislature the way that they did? Nobody read the legislation before voting on it... pushed through once on contingency that a second bill would be pushed through reconciliation to "fix" the first bill... playing the numbers games they did with the CBO...


I love the example in my home state of Illinois where the Democrats are at war with each other in the state gov't.

Government is dysfunctional all around, you cannot go around saying the other party's dysfunctions are reprehensibly horrible while "my" party's dysfunctions are forgivable.


We all tend to lean towards those types of arguments, because it's easier to argue the process than it is the actual issue. And that is why we cannot have discussions, because there is no way the two sides will agree on the actual issue, all anyone can do is use the process as the point of argument.

 

[shady28]

This turns out not to be the case. Interest rates for business borrowing remain extremely low, there is no crowding out effect in current economic circumstances.

Have you ever hear of QE? Do you know what it is?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/09/18/federal-reserve-quantitative-easing/2831097/

"Also known as QE, it's the technical term for the Federal Reserve's policy of buying bonds and other assets in order to push more money into the economy. The most recent strategy, called QE3, had the Fed buying $85 billion of bonds every month. "

"The Fed hoped to drive up the supply of money available for loans, driving down long-term interest rates so more people would buy and build homes and invest in businesses. With short-term interest rates already near zero, the central bank's traditional tool of lowering rates couldn't be pushed any farther."

"Will ending bond purchases raise interest rates?

It already has. Just the prospect of ending monetary stimulus has helped push up mortgage rates by about 1.2 percentage points since May. "


This is the end game result of excessive Government debt creation. The Fed is now essentially printing money to offset debt that is being created by the US Gov't and would normally suck all financial strength from the markets. For all practical purposes they are staving off a debt-led deflationary depression that should have been triggered a decade ago.

Now they cannot exit this program without tanking the economy.

Anyone with half a brain knows this does not end well. It may be this year, it may be 5 years from now, or 10 years from now.

They tried to end the normal business cycle by socializing its negative effects. Instead they have merely delayed it, though many would say not even that was accomplished. When the cycle asserts itself a final time, it will take down the Gov't with it.