Topic: Debt limit fight
started by: Self-Banished
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 03 2013,11:42 am
So the gov shutdown is front and center but next, very shortly we have the debt limit.Lagarde Urges Swift Hike of US Debt Ceiling
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER AP Economics Writer Oct 3, 2013, 12:17 PM
The head of the International Monetary Fund is warning that if Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling the consequences could be severe not just for the U.S. economy but for the global economy as well.
IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde says that the ongoing political uncertainty in the United States over the federal government shutdown is bad enough but a failure to raise the government's borrowing limit when the current maximum is reached later this month would be far worse.
Lagarde calls it "mission-critical" that the fight over the debt ceiling be resolved as soon as possible. Her remarks came in a speech at George Washington University in which she previewed next week's meetings of the IMF and World Bank.
Now Pres. POS said back when he was a senetor that raising the debt limit would be unpatriotic. And we've been through this crap before. Maybe it's just time to bite the bullet and quit spending so much.
Posted by Liberal on Oct. 03 2013,11:48 am
You don't cut spending by not paying your bills.
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 03 2013,1:17 pm
No you don't and I would have to agree with that but like everyone else, live within your means.
Posted by pepi-lapew on Oct. 03 2013,7:10 pm
If we would quit giving money to all the countries that hate us, we would have more than enough.
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 03 2013,9:41 pm
Unfortunately, as much as the amount of money seems like a large number we spend for more on totally useless programs and even more on programs that are sacred cows.
Posted by Botto 82 on Oct. 04 2013,4:07 am
(Self-Banished @ Oct. 03 2013,1:17 pm)
QUOTE
No you don't and I would have to agree with that but like everyone else, live within your means.
And what is our means, exactly? The Fed continues to print money. As a result we are seemingly paying off the interest of said debt. Where's the problem?
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 04 2013,4:53 am
Because eventually that's all we'll be paying.Plus the fact that our money is becoming more devalued.
Posted by irisheyes on Oct. 04 2013,8:22 am
If deficit spending is so bad, why do Republicans continue to vote for the very bills that cause the overspending? It's like a guy who maxes out his credit card and then ignores the bills because he says he needs to "live within his means". It's a tad too late after you spend the money. But that's always the conservative solution. They promised to balance the budget if they won the House, but they couldn't. Their next best offer is to overspend and then refuse to pay the bills. Even worse, it took the new Republican controlled House less than a year to lower our countries credit rating, the first time that had ever happened. Now we have the first government shutdown in 17 years, the last time that happened was another Republican controlled House also.
Congressional approval ratings are hovering in the single digits, and they're not going up. On the other hand Obama won a second term with Obamacare and the Buffet rule being highlights of his campaign. So we know which side the nation is behind in this. The Dems just have to wait until we win the House back and hope the GOP doesn't push us back into a recession or downgrade our credit again in the meantime.
Posted by Glad I Left on Oct. 04 2013,11:20 am
I usually consider you an informed person Irish and very detail oriented in your replies. One of the few on here I legitimately read your entire responses because you don't engage in the personal attacks like so many others.But I can't think, that even you believe all that you wrote above. Blaming just the house for the credit downgrade? That was a total collapse of our entire gov't starting even before Bush 43. Not living within our means has long been a problem at the federal level, despite which party held power in either chamber or White House.
When either party holds only one chamber its difficult to get anything passed. Case in point is a budget. When was the last time we had a budget approved?
Do you think the ACA would have been passed if the Dem's didn't hold power in both houses?
Blaming one party or the other really solves nothing. Both parties need to grow a pair, man up, and negotiate and quit being drama queens in front of the camera.
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 04 2013,7:36 pm
(irisheyes @ Oct. 04 2013,8:22 am)
QUOTE
If deficit spending is so bad, why do Republicans continue to vote for the very bills that cause the overspending? It's like a guy who maxes out his credit card and then ignores the bills because he says he needs to "live within his means". It's a tad too late after you spend the money. But that's always the conservative solution. They promised to balance the budget if they won the House, but they couldn't. Their next best offer is to overspend and then refuse to pay the bills.
Even worse, it took the new Republican controlled House less than a year to lower our countries credit rating, the first time that had ever happened. Now we have the first government shutdown in 17 years, the last time that happened was another Republican controlled House also.
Congressional approval ratings are hovering in the single digits, and they're not going up. On the other hand Obama won a second term with Obamacare and the Buffet rule being highlights of his campaign. So we know which side the nation is behind in this. The Dems just have to wait until we win the House back and hope the GOP doesn't push us back into a recession or downgrade our credit again in the meantime.
Even worse, it took the new Republican controlled House less than a year to lower our countries credit rating, the first time that had ever happened. Now we have the first government shutdown in 17 years, the last time that happened was another Republican controlled House also.
Congressional approval ratings are hovering in the single digits, and they're not going up. On the other hand Obama won a second term with Obamacare and the Buffet rule being highlights of his campaign. So we know which side the nation is behind in this. The Dems just have to wait until we win the House back and hope the GOP doesn't push us back into a recession or downgrade our credit again in the meantime.
Seems to me that our credit was down-graded on Obama's watch.
Congress' have been I the toilet for along time, under Dems control too
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 09 2013,4:36 am
So are we going past the deadline? Are we prepared for the consequences? 
Posted by alcitizens on Oct. 09 2013,7:17 am
You don't cut spending by not paying your bills.
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 09 2013,11:25 am
So you're saying every last little thing the gov, is spending money on is essential?When you're in a hole, you don't dig deeper,
Posted by alcitizens on Oct. 10 2013,1:16 am
Republican Party Favorability Sinks to Record LowRepublican Party is now viewed favorably by 28% of Americans, down from 38% in September. This is the lowest favorable rating measured for either party since Gallup began asking this question in 1992.
< http://www.gallup.com/poll...ow.aspx >
And Republicans keep digging themselves deeper into a hole..
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 10 2013,4:50 am
^and bummer's rating go lower than Bush < http://o.dailycaller.com/thedail...030bb17 >
Posted by alcitizens on Oct. 10 2013,9:55 am
(Self-Banished @ Oct. 10 2013,4:50 am)
QUOTE
^and bummer's rating go lower than Bush
< http://o.dailycaller.com/thedail...030bb17 >
< http://o.dailycaller.com/thedail...030bb17 >
Obama Job Approval 44%
< http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx >
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 10 2013,10:06 am
^nope, 37%
Posted by MADDOG on Oct. 10 2013,10:18 pm
Amazing. The local < TV station > doesn't really have a good handle on the ceiling and what will happen.
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 12 2013,7:43 am
Only 6 shopping days left
Posted by pepi-lapew on Oct. 12 2013,2:51 pm
I cant wait till everthing hits the fan. that way maybe we will start getting a balanced budget that way we can spend only what we bring in. What should have been done years ago?
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 12 2013,2:57 pm
^ Sorry Pepe, ain't gonna happen, worst thing to happen is they whine some more. Raising the debt limit, as exactly as it says. We'll continue to pay our bills. 
Posted by pepi-lapew on Oct. 15 2013,2:19 pm
I hope we default then, you will see all the free loaders calling the congress because all the BEENIES stopped.Now they will have to work to stay alive.
Posted by irisheyes on Oct. 18 2013,6:31 pm
(Glad I Left @ Oct. 04 2013,11:20 am)
QUOTE
I usually consider you an informed person Irish and very detail oriented in your replies. One of the few on here I legitimately read your entire responses because you don't engage in the personal attacks like so many others.
But I can't think, that even you believe all that you wrote above. Blaming just the house for the credit downgrade? That was a total collapse of our entire gov't starting even before Bush 43. Not living within our means has long been a problem at the federal level, despite which party held power in either chamber or White House.
When either party holds only one chamber its difficult to get anything passed. Case in point is a budget. When was the last time we had a budget approved?
Do you think the ACA would have been passed if the Dem's didn't hold power in both houses?
Blaming one party or the other really solves nothing. Both parties need to grow a pair, man up, and negotiate and quit being drama queens in front of the camera.
But I can't think, that even you believe all that you wrote above. Blaming just the house for the credit downgrade? That was a total collapse of our entire gov't starting even before Bush 43. Not living within our means has long been a problem at the federal level, despite which party held power in either chamber or White House.
When either party holds only one chamber its difficult to get anything passed. Case in point is a budget. When was the last time we had a budget approved?
Do you think the ACA would have been passed if the Dem's didn't hold power in both houses?
Blaming one party or the other really solves nothing. Both parties need to grow a pair, man up, and negotiate and quit being drama queens in front of the camera.
Thanks for the kind words. You're right that dems are partially to blame, I personally blame the Repubs for the credit change and recent shutdown though. But I realize spending increases regardless of whether it's a repub or dem controlled Congress or White House.
Bear in mind, occasionally my posts will sound more heated than I mean them to be. Sometimes it's for fun, sometimes it's me trying to see if I can get CC to spit coffee all over his computer monitor, or S.B. to throw-up all over his dashboard.
Posted by Self-Banished on Oct. 19 2013,6:15 am
^ I don't pile on my dash, do you realize how many little crooks and crevices there would be to clean out So you admit to being a troll, ' certainly glad I rise above that sort of nonsense
Posted by grassman on Nov. 26 2013,7:30 am
Want to Cut Government Waste? Find the $8.5 Trillion the Pentagon Can’t Account ForIf you thought the botched rollout of Obamacare, the government shutdown, or the sequester represented Washington dysfunction at its worst, wait until you hear about the taxpayer waste at the Defense Department.
Special Enterprise Reporter Scot Paltrow unearthed the “high cost of the Pentagon’s bad bookkeeping” in a Reuters investigation. It amounts to $8.5 trillion in taxpayer money doled out by Congress to the Pentagon since 1996 that has never been accounted for. (The year 1996 was the first that the Pentagon should have been audited under a law requiring audits of all government departments. Oh, and by the way, the Pentagon is the only federal agency that has not complied with this law.)
We talk to Paltrow in the accompanying video about his findings.
Here are some some highlights he found among the billions of dollars of waste and dysfunctional accounting at the Pentagon:
•The DOD has amassed a backlog of more than $500 billion in unaudited contracts with outside vendors. How much of that money paid for actual goods and services delivered isn’t known.
•Over the past 10 years the DOD has signed contracts for provisions of more than $3 trillion in goods and services. How much of that money is wasted in overpayments to contractors, or was never spent and never remitted to the Treasury is a mystery.
•The Pentagon uses a standard operating procedure to enter false numbers, or “plugs,” to cover lost or missing information in their accounting in order to submit a balanced budget to the Treasury. In 2012, the Pentagon reported $9.22 billion in these reconciling amounts. That was up from $7.41 billion the year before.
•The accounting dysfunction leads the DOD to buy too much stuff. One example: the “vehicular control arm” to supply Humvees. In 2008, the DOD had 15,000 parts -- a 14-year supply (anything more than three years is considered excess supply). Yet from 2010 to 2012, it bought 7,437 more of these parts and at higher prices than they paid for the ones they already had.
The Defense Department’s 2012 budget was $565.8 billion. Paltrow points out that’s more than the annual defense budgets of the next 10 biggest military spenders combined. He tells us the Pentagon “almost certainly is” the biggest source of waste in the government based on his reporting.
Looking forward, defense spending in the fiscal 2014 budget is set to be cut $20 billion from 2013 levels due to the sequester. In response, military officials, including Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, have raised an alarm over the impact of these cuts. Hagel told a conference the cuts are “too steep, too deep, and too abrupt.”
The Wall Street Journal reports Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James F. Amos told a House panel in September the “abruptness and inflexibility of sequestration…could erode our readiness to dangerous levels.”
“So much of that could be cut, that the impact of the sequester would be much less than [what] Pentagon officials are claiming.” He adds that officials are basing their budget requests on their own priorities, rather than firm knowledge of what’s needed because leaders don’t know what money is slushing around.
The good news is that because of arguments over the deficit and the budget, Paltrow sees signs that members of Congress are getting serious about waste at the Pentagon.
Posted by Self-Banished on Nov. 26 2013,8:11 am
I imagine a general audit of everything the gov spends money on would be quite eye opening, it should be done. Any ideas who the auditor should be?
Posted by MADDOG on Nov. 26 2013,9:25 am
(Self-Banished @ Nov. 26 2013,8:11 am)
QUOTE
I imagine a general audit of everything the gov spends money on would be quite eye opening, it should be done. Any ideas who the auditor should be?
There are < watchdogs > out there in the government. But they lack teeth.
Posted by Self-Banished on Nov. 26 2013,9:59 am
^ something totally independent of the gov. please.
Posted by MADDOG on Nov. 26 2013,10:04 am
They are independent. It's not the < GAO >.
Posted by Self-Banished on Nov. 26 2013,10:36 am
Then why not?
Posted by Botto 82 on Nov. 26 2013,11:36 am
Follow the money. Show me one so-called "watchdog" agency that isn't prone to being paid to look the other way, if the money's right. It's human nature.
Posted by Expatriate on Nov. 26 2013,4:46 pm
Most Companies Pay No Federal Income Tax!< http://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-companies-pay-no-federal-income-tax/ >
If some people would pay their tax and the Supreme Court ruled corporations people we’d have the money to pay our collective debt.
Posted by pepi-lapew on Nov. 27 2013,6:55 am
Corporations are not people, they should only be taxed about 28%. That way they would start hiring people agin!
Posted by grassman on Nov. 27 2013,11:14 am
(pepi-lapew @ Nov. 27 2013,6:55 am)
QUOTE
Corporations are not people, they should only be taxed about 28%. That way they would start hiring people agin!
Well I guess 28% is better than nothing.
Posted by Botto 82 on Nov. 28 2013,11:02 am
(pepi-lapew @ Nov. 27 2013,6:55 am)
QUOTE
Corporations are not people, they should only be taxed about 28%. That way they would start hiring people agin!
This is the point where stupid edges into the realm of retarded.
Since when does a corporation, suddenly burdened with additional tax debt, decide now is a good time to hire?
Posted by pepi-lapew on Dec. 06 2013,10:51 am
Botto I think that the tax rate for corp. is around 38 or39 % It should be lowed to 28% before expt.
Posted by irisheyes on Dec. 16 2013,1:22 am
^The marginal rate is said to be 35%, but the effective rate is often zero. That's fine in some cases, small businesses like S Corporations don't pay corporate tax, we don't expect them too since they're a smaller corporation and they're taxed differently on the owner's income. But we have far too many billion dollar industries that don't pay any corporate income taxes.Lowering to a 28% tax rate would be fine but it won't change the shell game that lets them avoid paying whatever tax rate you claim is the marginal rate.
It's the small to medium sized businesses that get screwed in all this. They're the ones that can't shift the money around the world and keep the Corporate office in a mailbox in the Caribbean.
Posted by MADDOG on Sep. 15 2014,3:32 pm
< tick tock >
Posted by Self-Banished on Sep. 15 2014,6:40 pm
Yep, getting to be that time again