Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 11:15 AM:
Did I hear the President correctly this morning when he said raising our debt ceiling will not raise our debt at all. Will some one correct me if I mis-understood him on this but I don't believe I did. Now, any one in the human race knows that by raising the debt ceiling it will increase the total debt. Does he believe all of us are that stupid not to figure that one out.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 11:22 AM
If raising the debt ceiling does not increase our debt and the President has no intention of increasing our national debt; Why are we having this discussion?
Of course; it depends upon what the definition of is is!
-- Posted by Robert* on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 11:39 AM
Let's apply a little logic to this. Increasing the debt limit on someone's credit card does not increase debt... I saw that example this morning.
While that part is true temporarily, increasing the limit on the credit card of a spendthrift will definitely increase his debt.
And Barack Obama is a spendthrift.
Cutting the credit card up is usually the most effective way to end that problem.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 11:53 AM
miccheck I'm not stupid I know what the debt ceiling is every time you raise it that means you are spending more than what you take in debt is debt regardless the way you define it, I know liberals have different ways defining it when it comes to spending other peoples money.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 12:39 PM
I don't agree with you miccheck, if it is not spending then explain what it is we all would like to know even several in Washington would like to know your explanation may be even the CBO we all might learn a new way here in accounting practices. If he is not spending more then why does he want to increase the debt ceiling? he would be able to operate with what he has. The debt ceiling if increased would allow him to spend more of the peoples money and the way he spends money he will spend every dime of it plus some.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 1:16 PM
This might help you a little miccheck what do you have in mind on how we can decrease spending and start wiping some of this red ink off the board, were bankrupt take a good look at these figures how long do you think we can keep going like this.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 1:20 PM
Not increasing the debt ceiling is not similar to cutting up the credit card.
-- Posted by miccheck on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 12:16 PM
Pray tell why not. The credit card example came from you earlier today, if I am not mistaken.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 1:30 PM
If you think increasing the debt ceiling means we are spending more, you are just plain wrong!
-- Posted by miccheck on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 12:42 PM
If we are not spending more than we have coming in, why is it necessary to raise the debt limit?
-- Posted by Robert* on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 2:06 PM
Spending is Spending this President has a problem of excessive spending. It is simple math debt is debt that is like if I go to my bank to obtain a line of credit that is a liability and it adds to my liability spread sheet it is not an asset, now if I pay down the line of credit the liability decreases like Wheels says it is a credit card no matter how you look at it. Credit Card debt is a liability if you spend it all the time and just make minimal payments, the problem is the President spends all the time and all were doing is making interest payments and nothing going toward the actual principal. The government does not run like a business if they did they would be out of business real quick they can print money the people cannot.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 2:12 PM
Bottomline we are so far in debt we have no idea what we owe or who we owe, Washington has a serious spending problem.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 2:14 PM
Well tonight we just over to 17 trillion dollar plus National Debt, oh how well we are doing the economy is coming back yea you believe that you will believe the Pope is coming down Broadway in the morning. Of course it is all of the past Presidents fault not the current one in office.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 7:34 PM
So why do we have a debt ceiling?
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 7:58 PM
Before we had a debt limit the spending of war required congress to vote to authorize any above the budget spending and that was keeping them busy. A debt limit was given to the president to make things go smoother.
The real control over spending is dependant on the budget that the debt limit was intended to enforce. Problem is, congress is too incompetent as a whole to pass a budget.
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 8:05 PM
I agree Old John to a point, but if a budget would be passed he would veto it because he loves to spend money.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 8:27 PM
If you think increasing the debt ceiling means we are spending more, you are just plain wrong!
-- Posted by miccheck on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 12:42
The reason we are increasing the debt ceiling is because we are going to spend more. If we didn't plan on spending more, there would be no reason to raise the debt ceiling.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 8:41 PM
Swamp,
You know, I kept looking at the title to your thread and thinking.... surely he didn't say that.... so I googled it and yes he did.
He has got to think people are absolutely stupid to buy into that silly crap.... on the other hand, maybe he knows it, after all, the voters stupidly elected him a second time.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 10:05 PM
Swamp,
You know, I kept looking at the title to your thread and thinking.... surely he didn't say that.... so I googled it and yes he did.
He has got to think people are absolutely stupid to buy into that silly crap.... on the other hand, maybe he knows it, after all, the voters stupidly elected him a second time.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 10:20 PM
Wheels, I tossed it out on another thread before this one was created.
This is a classic example of how you can see a duck that looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and walks like a duck and then have someone dang near convince you it wasn't a duck.
Sometimes not understanding what some deem reason is a good thing.
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 10:26 PM
Old John,
He's a duck all right, nobody can convince me otherwise.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 10:37 PM
Quack does seem to resignate from somewhere in this lake of political nonsense.
I figure the loons will be along soon. :)
-- Posted by Old John on Thu, Sep 19, 2013, at 11:07 PM
To summarize: Will our country keep spending more and more?
---Who knows? If you think we will, that's fine.
Mic,
Tell me the last time total government spending decreased from year to year.
-- Posted by Robert* on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 6:06 AM
Zero-based budgeting is an approach to planning and decision-making which reverses the working process of traditional budgeting. In traditional incremental budgeting (Historic Budgeting), departmental managers justify only variances versus past years, based on the assumption that the "baseline" is automatically approved. By contrast, in zero-based budgeting, every line item of the budget must be approved, rather than only changes.[1] During the review process, no reference is made to the previous level of expenditure. Zero-based budgeting requires the budget request be re-evaluated thoroughly, starting from the zero-base. This process is independent of whether the total budget or specific line items are increasing or decreasing.
Our federal government uses baseline budgeting. They do not intend to spend less each year. Once a department, office, or program has been established and funded they avoid the 'problem' of proving it's necessity again. Programs do not accomplish their purpose and go away, they exist in perpetuity. The process of eliminating a program is very difficult and politically charged
-- Posted by Robert* on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 6:36 AM
An example: There are still two recipients of Civil War pensions.
-- Posted by Robert* on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 6:41 AM
Robert,
Maybe she will tell you what YOU think this morning if you keep disagreeing.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 9:47 AM
Mic, you got me on the year to year bit. For once, federal spending did decrease a little from 2011-2012. That bucks the trend.
At the same time, the annual deficit remained over $1 trillion. It is less this year (my bet is it goes back up in following years). But no one predicts a balanced budget much less a surplus in years to come.
This is why the President is asking to raise the debt ceiling. And that demonstrates the ridiculous nature of the present argument over whether raising the debt ceiling increases the national debt.
The present federal government (republican and democrat partisans included) has no intention of living within its means. Therefore it needs either to totally remove the debt ceiling or on a regular basis go through the process of raising the debt ceiling. And the two parties take turns opposing raising the ceiling based solely on which party holds the White House at that particular time. Obama was against raising the debt ceiling before he was for raising the debt ceiling. And republicans were for raising the ceiling before they were against it. It is a charade and few if any are basing their arguments on what is best for the nation as a whole.
And I don't care if you think I am a rude liar. That opinion and $3.15 will buy you a gallon of gas if you go to the right station today.
-- Posted by Robert* on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 10:27 AM
Robert,
Agree with you on the ridiculous part of the argument. We get an oversimplified explanation of what is taking place.... as if we did not already know. If they do not intend to keep on overspending on their income, we could raise it once to cover past transgressions into the area of inability to pay and go on with life. But no, when we raise the debt ceiling, it is to cover the recent past spending and to allow future overspending. Hell it is discussed about future needs and why we must raise it to such and such level.
I'm still waiting for answers to yesterday's questions. Maybe they were too hard.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 10:52 AM
House passes to fund the government but defunds Obamacare. The bill is on the way to the Senate where the battle is on. Majority of the American people do not want Obamacare in it's current unorganized form poorly written and is not ready to implement at all it will throw our health care industry in to complete chaos if it is not fixed before January 1 2014. This thing is also very costly. The 30 million people that are uninsured will actually pay more for health care if they join the exchanges then what people pay that do have health insurance. Many of the 30 million believe this thing is free it is not everybody pays big time. We been lied to and mislead since this monster was signed in to law back in 2010.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 11:16 AM
Instead of usinge the term "raising the debt ceiling", why don't we use the term "Shall we pay the past debts we have already incurred?" Phrased differently I think you would see a different result.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 11:26 AM
Howdy,
Raising the debt ceiling does not just pay past debts..... it anticipates future debt to be made for expenditures over and above income.
You can slice it, you can dice it, you csn try to sell it anyway you want, but when they raise the debt limit, most often you can take it to the bank, we are going deeper in the hole.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 11:38 AM
While media focusses on the debt ceiling crisis Obama sets in motion the end of the coal industry as he promised.
-- Posted by Old John on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 1:07 PM
Old John he is doing every possible thing he can do to shut down our coal industry in this country and cost hundreds and thousands of jobs. The United Coal Miners Union are doing everything possible to keep the coal industry and jobs intact, but apparently the President has different ideas. Jimmy Hoffa Jr has tried to tell him about this screwed up Obamacare Law and the damage it will cause to the working middle class but again he will not listen to nobody.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 2:23 PM
Howdy, I will agree that we must pay past debts we have incurred. I am against giving government a blank check to continue overspending.
-- Posted by Robert* on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 2:25 PM
Raising the debt ceiling does not increase debt. He's right about that. It does give them permission to raise the debt, but it does not raise it automatically.
If your credit card issuer raises your credit allowance, you are not obligated to borrow more to meet it.
-- Posted by Shapley Hunter on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 8:30 PM
SH
I think we are all aware that raising the debt limit does not automatically increase the debt, but essentially it issues a blank check good for up to that limit. And therein lies the problem.
Obama was appealing to his base who believe everything he says, the uneducated voters that re-elected him.
I think what he said is lying by omission and/or deceit.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Fri, Sep 20, 2013, at 8:55 PM
Shapley, I don't think many credit card issuers will raise your limit if you're behind in payments.
Of course if you are dealing with a local bank in a small town where every one knows you and your family of parents and older siblings always makes good on your arears, there is no problem.
As the family gets older the likelyhood of them being around to make good ebbs and the bank may start getting nervous.
That's what we have here as the family of able tax payers is shrinking but the bank continues to raise the card limit.
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 12:40 AM
As usual with the Leftist, you quote a partial statement to try and prove your spin for the president.
We do not agree. Not even close, on the content of the speech in question.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 8:30 AM
"I think we are all aware that raising the debt limit does not automatically increase the debt, but essentially it issues a blank check good for up to that limit. And therein lies the problem."
I already said Me'Lange is lying about my statement, so I have reposted it above.
Half truths are lies. I do not agree with her half truth.
As I stated before, Obama's speech was essentially a lie to mislead his boot licking followers and the Leftist try to spin it as facts.
The thread was about the speech and the speech is what I already stated it is.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 9:03 AM
The purpose of obama's speech was to make the people believe that the national debt would no longer increase, despite the fact that he and congress have every intention to increase the debt exponentially.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 9:16 AM
The purpose of obama's speech was to make the people believe that the national debt would no longer increase, despite the fact that he and congress have every intention to increase the debt exponentially.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 9:28 AM
"Wheels: "I think we are all aware that raising the debt limit does not automatically increase the debt""
That is not a direct quote from me.... that is a partial quote from me posted as what I said. A half truth.
Throw a hissy fit, do whatever, doesn't change a thing. I am not as a blanket statement in total agreement with you. You.... like your glorious leader, try to mislead people with partial truths. My entire statement from last night does not show me in total agreement with you.
Obama tried telling the American people if the debt ceiling went up our debt was not going up.
If that is the truth.... what exactly is all of the fuss in Washington about, why bother with raising the debt limit. His statement was to mislead those people who can not see beyond the end of their nose.
If we are paying past bills, present bills or future bills, mark my words, when Congress raises the debt limit, as they will, the national debt is going to continue to go up, at the minute they do it and every minute in the future.... until spending is brought under control. Watch the debt clock sometime, it is constantly on the uptick.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 9:40 AM
The American people should sit their Congressmen down between now and the end of October and explain to them there will be more new faces in Washington it they do not sit down and create a budget as the Constitution directs them to do, and do it in numbers that will sustain a presidential veto.
The lame duck in Washington no longer has to answer to the mandate of voters.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 9:52 AM
Look, you can shout in caps, if you can make your point no other way and you can break it down into "A"s and "B"s.
The facts are, when we agree on "A"... we never get around to "B".
Somewhere, there has to be a point where we discuss "A" and "B" and get the problem ironed out. Pushing "B" off because it is difficult will not get the job done.
And people like me are not the problem. It is people like me, who are having to pay for the incompetence and waste in Washington and I don't give a Tinker's **** who is the guilty party Democrats or Republicans
So far as who you are.... be who you want to be, but the fact is, you are not smart enough to know what goes on in my head. Kapish? And yes, I knoow both ways of spelling it.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 10:03 AM
I guess I should say thank you for starting to quote an entire statement that I make instead of a partial.
If Washington could at the very minimum agree to immediately start on your "B" and not give up until there was a solution, I think people could abide solving "A" now.
Problem is, where one side compromises and does "A", you never get the side that wants "A" and wants it now, back to the table. And that is why this country is on the fast track to bankruptcy.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 10:25 AM
However, threatening to sending our country into default is not a realistic solution for "B". -- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 10:12 AM
If that isn't a realistic solution then why do you support Obama's position? The threat of default and shutting the government down are democrat fear tactics.
The fact is the government does NOT have to be shut down and there is no need for a default. But your president - trained in the ways of Saul Alinsky and propaganda - will shut down the gov't and default. As his close advisor said "Never let a good crisis go to waste".
Obama could manage this by cutting some spending in non-critical areas and making payment of the debt he has incurred a priority. You can make all your payments and cut some spending - no shutdown, no default.
But he will close air traffic towers to make a crisis, shut down embassies to make a crisis, furlough military personnel to make a crisis. You can bet one thing though - he and Michelle won't miss a vacation or a round of golf.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 10:27 AM
Dug,
We hear all of this talk about how things used to be and we could agree and get along. What has changed in Washington that has caused this?
And I am going to answer my own question. It is the move to the far left by the majority in the Democratic party and a large number of those in the Republican Party. They want to play ball ok.... but it goes like this. 'Play ball with us, or we shove the bat up your.......' Finish it any way you like.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 10:37 AM
You could pull a sophomore with an accounting major from any school in the nation and they could explain what is wrong with Washington.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 11:01 AM
You're combining two different issues. -- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 10:51 AM
No - I'm separating them. You're combining them as Obama does to make it appear that if the debt ceiling isn't raised we must default. That's his position and yours.
I'm separating them. Don't raise the debt ceiling. It has nothing to do with default. Continue to pay the debt without raising the ceiling.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 11:07 AM
I'll give you a compromise. We raise the Debt Limit to the level where we pay only those bills that are agreed upon in past Continuing Resolutions.
Then we make a budget and stick to it and it is agreed upon by the President before any more negotiations on increased Debt Limits.
No agreed upon budget (not kicking the can down the road continuing resolutions) no debt limit increase.
They have a little more than 30 days. Time to get it done if they all buckle down and do what they are paid for.
Can't do it.... then shut down the government, send the hired hands home, whatever.
Bring it front and center and get it over with!
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 11:11 AM
If we default, it will allow the rest of the world to see what a bunch of spendthrift four flushers we are.
They already got a taste of that in the Syrian mess, where the glorious leader had to be baled out of his mouthy red line position by no less than Putin.
That one smarted, how could defaulting be a lot worse.
Detroit defaulted and life goes on.... how much worse would it be if the entire US defaulted? Reality only, no scare tactics.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 11:33 AM
Dug, we can not pay our current obligations without incurring more debt. If we do not pay, we default. -- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 11:26 AM
Nothing could be more wrong.
If we do not pay our DEBT, we will default. So pay the debt payments to our creditors.
If we do not pay our ENTITLEMENTS, we will NOT default. It has nothing to do with a default. They are two different things.
So pay our DEBT payments to our creditors and stop paying:
NPR radio
Obamaphones
Set SS disabillity to the level it was before Obama came into office
Cut food stamps to the level it was before Obama came into office
Suspend social security payments to multi-millionaire retirees
etc.
As the liberal AP said the other day - not increasing the debt ceiling does not have to result in a default to our creditors. Welfare queens are NOT creditors.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 12:02 PM
Suspend social security payments to multi-millionaire retirees
Dug,
So far, I agree with everything to that point. Just because they are wealthy does not mean they should be singled out.
Stop all SS payments until people demand Congress do it's job!
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 12:12 PM
I agree wheels. That's why I said "suspend" but I know that's controversial. But definitely cut welfare, obamaphones and liberal pet projects like NPR. THere is much, much more that can be cut and the country won't miss a beat.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 12:39 PM
They could agree on a sequester down the road if cuts are not made. Oops, did that already.
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 1:03 PM
It is true that failing to raise the debt ceiling does not automatically mean we default. It merely makes it necessary that we prioritize our spending as a nation............funny thing; I do that every month. I pay my bills, put food on the table, and gas in the car and if that puts me at my spending limit I stop spending. The federal government collects tax revenue on a daily basis. If we hit the debt ceiling, perhaps we will have to park Air Force One, put a halt to the celebrity parties at the White House, etc. It would be interesting to watch these politicians operate on a strict budget. Come to think of it........that might be the best reason not to raise the debt ceiling. They will never operate this country on a balanced budget unless their is a hammer of some type hanging over their heads.
-- Posted by Robert* on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 3:16 PM
Not paying our obligations is default. -- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 3:40 PM
Wrong again. That's the liberal play book talking point.
Cutting spending is not refusing to pay our creditors. Apparently you can't discern between entitlement programs and borrowing money. Big difference.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 4:03 PM
Miccheck,
If I know money is going to be tight next month, I cut back on everything. I can get by without the $200 phone bill if I have to. I can use less electricity and reduce that bill. And I can sure as h*** do without the $200 cable bill. And I can reduce other spending so that I end up with more than $400 in the checking account.
That is what a budget does; it helps you to understand how much you can afford to spend on certain items and what items you can do without. Something like planning ahead.
Our government refuses to plan ahead; refuses to operate on a budget and keeps the country in a constant state of crisis. Passing this continuing resolution merely kicks the can down the road about 90 days. We will having the same argument about the first of the year. Seems like we are getting in the habit of doing this every year. It is just another game of political chicken..........nobody is doing any serious negotiation; everybody is watching to see who will blink first and figuring out how to blame the other guy if nobody blinks and we crash the economy. I am tired of the political gamesmanship.
Looking down the road; even if we pass this continuing resolution in the form the President wants we have not solved a problem; just avoided a crisis this month. We are borrowing 40+ cents of every dollar the government spends, have no intention of cutting spending, and passing programs/creating regulations that reduce the ability of our economy to grow. That spells out another economic crisis in the future. And the longer we put it off, the worse it will be. So if we are going to crash the economy I would prefer to do it now and get it over!
-- Posted by Robert* on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 4:22 PM
For example, Wheels suggested stopping Social Security payments. Those payments are obligations we made to workers during their working years to support them in their retirement.
-- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 3:40 PM
I know disagreeing with you will cause another argument... it always has.
But it was not my idea... it was Doug's, I only suggested we share equally. I think the old folks could make it for a couple of weeks, and that is about all it would take if the phones started warming up in Washington.
I just hope the House has what it takes to hold out.... I personally do not care who it hurts politically.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 4:38 PM
-- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 4:46 PM
Read my 11:33 am post!
The world already knows what a bunch of four flushers we are.
As has been stated on here several times over. We have a lot of money going out of Washington that we are not obligated to.
Shut down NPR, roll welfare back to the days before this welfare president, etc. etc. etc. etc..
You are trying to help the administration sell the 'There is no other way' idea and it is not fair to the American taxpayer. The country is on it's arse broke because of your line of thinking.
My best guess since you are so emphatic that everybody on here but you is wrong, you are a part of the concerned about 'where mine is coming from' crowd if we don't obligate our children and grandchildren further.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 4:59 PM
Like someone else suggested.... give little Adolph what he wants before he throws another tantrum and we repeat the process in about 90 days.
Just deeper in debt than we are today.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 5:26 PM
"I will be very bold and dramatic here, but accurate nonetheless: Anyone who argues Congress should not raise the debt ceiling is anti-American and wants our nation to fail. End of story."
Not end of story by a long shot.... except in the viewpoint of the left. Congress should pay our bills, but not without seeing to it that we do not find ourselves in this position again. And that position is... No real budget and you get another raise in the debt ceiling crisis.
Congress should take the position, raise the debt ceiling and immediately start the process to enact a real budget. Failing to do that, no more Debt Ceiling talks until we do, whatever the consequences. . They can do it, they have more than 30 days and 30 nights to get it done.
In my opinion, the real patriotic American is that person who is willing to stand their ground for what is right and stop this power slide into the dumper. Let the chips fall where they may. If a few deadbeats miss a welfare check.... who cares.
It does not take a brain to keep doing what is failing and to continue to condone such actions as some on here are doing.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 5:52 PM
"Refusing to pay our bills is not an option and will destroy our country, and possibly the world economy."
A talking point from the left... nothing more.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 5:53 PM
Nobody goes unpaid unless you are including those in the armed force and contractors as deadbeats. I said welfare... right?
So far as the pencil pushing army in Washington, handle it like we do in the real world. They get a layoff. Or their hours cut, that way they would get some income and not be on unemployment.
I am not trying to prove a point, that is not the issue. The issue is an irresponsible government, who needs to be forced by the citizens to get responsible and do so quickly, or we vote you out and find someone who can do the job.
Now, you have the last word, I have cut grass for four hours this afternoon, rested, showered and intend to take the wife out for the evening, 3 1/2 of those hours was for a church I don't even belong to, just trying to be a good neighbor.
In a sentence. I am tired of listening to a stuck record.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 6:36 PM
Miccheck,
In case there is no agreement......the President has the ability to instruct the Secretary of the Treasury to make sure the people in the armed forces get paid. Or he has the ability to instruct the Secretary to make it as painful as possible in order to get his political point across. There is still revenue coming in and available for pay out. The executive branch decides who to pay and who not to pay.
-- Posted by Robert* on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 7:11 PM
I have never ever seen our country in such a complete all out mess as it is now no doubt these times will go down in history. We lack solid leadership in the White House and in the Congress nobody is guiding the ship taking charge steping up to the plate all we hear is lip service from both sides.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 7:55 AM
obama is as useless a leader as the former president.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 8:14 AM
"President Barack Obama called House Speaker John Boehner late Friday and reiterated that he would not negotiate with Congress on raising the debt limit."
Where will that grand compromise come from without negotiation? 'My way or the highway' does not persuade many swing votes.
As I have stated before, Obama knew how to make the most of a veto proof majority in Congress for two years, but he does not know how to lead.
When first elected to Congress, he chose to immediately begin the campaign for President. He would have done better for the country if he had stayed in Washington and established a working relationship with other members of Congress.
-- Posted by Robert* on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 8:29 AM
When first elected to Congress, he chose to immediately begin the campaign for President. He would have done better for the country if he had stayed in Washington and established a working relationship with other members of Congress.
-- Posted by Robert* on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 8:29 AM
True Robert, but you can't have everything you know... after all, we have our first half-black president. Even if we do have a person that is incapable of leadership for 8 years.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 8:36 AM
Obama is a good talker would make a great used car salesman he could sale you a rusty bucket of bolts and many would buy it. You got to hand it to him he is one good cheer leader when he is out on his daily campaign trail, but he lacks leadership and management skills and with him the blame lies with everybody else but not with him at all. I believe this guy might have "Slick" beat when it comes to campaigning.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 10:07 AM
Obama is not a leader according to the right wing nut jobs on here when he doesn't agree with them entirely. People like Wheels and groucho along with a few others always refer to him as Hitler, Stalin or a socialist or fascist because they can't debate legitimately against his policies. There is an aroma in the air that they really want to use the "N" word when referring to him. They will deny that of course, but it's true. Now I have to keep an eye out for that grandson.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 12:01 PM
Fascist is not necessarily a pejorative. It is used to describe a person or system who/which allows businessmen to own businesses but the state controls those businesses.
A socialist believes in the Marxist philosophy, 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need'. This directly contradicts private property rights.
Both policies are favorably considered in government today.
Why is it that anyone who has a philosophical disagreement with you is automatically considered racist?
-- Posted by Robert* on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 12:32 PM
howdy: I don't believe many on here feel that way regarding the "n" word. He has proven that he has not been an effective leader. He has made so many promises to all of us and also he is hard to believe at times you don't know if it is the truth or not any more. I would feel the same way if it was a Republican President which I was not what you call a great Bush fan but one thing I can say about Bush at least he left the peoples personal liberties alone. Obama came in to office with very little if any experience at all to take on a job such as being President. He mainly went to school and practice and taught some law along with being a community organizer. He surrounded himself with a staff that was way to far left. The Nation works best when a President and Congress stays in the middle of the road not to the far left or right but in the center he did not do that he choose to stay to the far left that is why so many are very disappointed and not happy with his performance. I was born and raised a southern conservative democrat and I can tell you right now Harry Truman and John Kennedy would not even go with the majority of this Presidents agenda. My mom and dad god rest their souls were strong democrats but they would not approve what this President is doing. I don't dislike the man I just don't approve of his far left policies and also he has not led one bit on any issue since he has been in office. A President must have leadership and management skills because as Harry Truman always said "The Buck Stops Here".
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 12:47 PM
First - there seems to be a lot of confusion on my posting yesterday at 12:02PM. To clear the record - I never said a word one about cutting social security retiree payments. Not a word. What I did say - cut and pasted below - is: cut spending to
"NPR radio"
"Obamaphones"
"Set SS DISABILITY to the level it was before Obama came into office"
"Cut food stamps to the level it was before Obama came into office"
"SUSPEND social security payments to MULTI-MILLINAIRE retirees"
Setting disability payments will not affect traditional social security one dollar. Suspending SS payments to multi-millionaires is a temporary "suspension".
======================================
We can't change our mind. You need to stop thinking about this as "cutting spending". That's what's causing your confusion. -- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 4:15 PM
There is no confusion. The only confusion appears to be with you. First you say I combined defaulting and obligations - you are the one that is linking the two and I pointed that out. You want "we" to stop thinking correctly because it doesn't jive with your welfare/food stamp/massive disability increase attitude. You think that all those gov't programs that have increased massively under Obama are more important than the faith and credit of the United States. I say NO.
You're the one threatening the credit rating of the US because you think Obamaphones are more important that the debt payments to our creditors. It's that simple.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 12:56 PM
'We can cut those programs entirely and balance the budget."
"However, we CAN NOT (again, caps for emphasis) simply refuse to pay the bills we run up under those programs."
Conflicting statements. By the way, my CAPS are always for emphasis - not yelling.
What you fail to understand (or simply fail to acknowledge) is this - welfare people are NOT earning their checks. NPR is NOT earning it's checks. They are give away programs - just like the BILLIONS Obama has given to his green buddies for their failed "green" energy dreams. They didn't earn that money.
These give aways - all unearned - can be stopped immediately. They are not and never will be "obligations" if they are cut.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 1:30 PM
You don't think the people who work for NPR earned their paycheck? You don't think the landlords leasing building to NPR earned their rent? -- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 1:53 PM
You do think that NPR is a government entity? You think that the US government is obligated to pay their rent?
Therein, folks, like the problem.
1-create a crisis that doesn't exit. The government does not have to be shut down and we can pay our creditors. Period.
2-In order to inflate the crisis pretend that rent payments to a PRIVATE entity somehow must be paid or we'll default to our creditors.
This is pure and simply all Obama talking points and BS. If you couldn't see the charade Obama foisted by shutting down WH tours you're impossibly deep into his pocket.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 2:01 PM
-- Posted by howdydoody on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 12:01 PM
Same as I posted on the other thread Howdy.... you can got to hell for lying as well as stealing.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 2:27 PM
Mic,
Your household example is pathetic.
Anyone operating a household (or a government) has an opportunity to estimate income and expenses and make adjustments to their lifestyle well before the bill comes due. Remember the Obama motto, 'never let a good crisis go to waste'.
-- Posted by Robert* on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 2:38 PM
However, I still have $600 in bills that are already due that I have to pay. Disconnecting the cable won't change that. Using less electricity going forward won't change that.
-- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 1:18 PM
I disagree with that statement that cutting the cable won't help.
Yes you still owe today's bill, but you will not owe next months.... and a single phone call to the cable company asking them to suspend the service until you can afford it and explaining your situation and that you will next month start paying that bill with interest as you can will get you off the hook.
You cannot however continue to live like a millionaire with a pauper's budget. And that is what is wrong with the United States today.
We don't want to unhook the cable, which is a luxury, we want it all and we want it NOW! until we are forced into bankruptcy. See, I can shout also.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 2:41 PM
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. ... Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that 'the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." ........ Senator Barack Obama
-- Posted by Robert* on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 2:42 PM
it creates an obligation. When Congress authorizes funding, we have to pay that money or we default on those obligations. -- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 2:28 PM
But we don't default on our DEBT (see: "debt ceiling") and your "obligation" example will have zero effect on our credit rating.
Didn't Obama cut the White House tours? Weren't those "obligations" that must be met? What act of congress cut white house tours? None. Obama made a *discretional* move to cut the WH tours under sequestration. So if congress doesn't approve raising the DEBT limit then Obama can use his discretion to keep the agencies open that we can afford and, of course, pay our creditors 100%.
Nice spin move but increasing our obligation ceiling does NOT equal increasing the debt ceiling. Nice try though.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 2:48 PM
TURN THE CABLE SERVICE OFF! (More shouting)
Pay our necessary obligations. Make peace with the cable company. Let the ship right itself before it sinks and get the cable company paid before we make any more unnecessary bills.
It isn't that hard to understand.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 2:53 PM
And with this new resolution congress can commit to not paying the "obligations" - NPR, Obamaphones and 100's of other non-creditor DEBT "obligations".
From the liberal Associated Press:
"While the Treasury Department probably would make interest payments to bondholders to prevent a catastrophic default on the debt..."
Read on if you REALLY want to learn about the horrible, terrible "shutdown" :
The rules for who works and who doesn't date back to the early 1980s and haven't been significantly modified since. The Obama administration re-issued the guidance on Wednesday.
The air traffic control system, food inspection, Medicare, veterans' health care and many other essential government programs would run as usual. The Social Security Administration would not only send out benefits but would continue to take applications. The Postal Service, which is self-funded, would keep delivering the mail. The Federal Emergency Management Agency could continue to respond to disasters at the height of hurricane season.
The Washington Monument would be closed. But it's been closed anyway since an earthquake in 2011.
Museums along the National Mall would close, too. National parks would be closed to visitors, a loss often emphasized in shutdown discussions.
The Capitol would remain open, however. Congress is deemed essential, despite its abysmal poll ratings.
From a practical perspective, shutdowns usually aren't that big a deal.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 5:36 PM
In fact, there are a large number of people who believe that raising the debt ceiling IS an increase in debt.
-- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 6:31 AM
Most on here know the limit will be used. Only the uniformed and the Obamazombies think it won't be raised.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 5:42 PM
You seem to have trouble understanding that "make peace with the cable company" means putting this months payment on the credit card.
-- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 4:29 PM
Does not... read what I said.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 5:45 PM
In fact, there are a large number of people who believe that raising the debt ceiling IS an increase in debt.
-- Posted by miccheck on Sat, Sep 21, 2013, at 6:31 AM
How about we compromise.... you like compromise don't you? We all agree that raising the debt ceiling in very short order is going to increase the national debt. That would be a factual statement and all reasonable thinking people should agree to that.
We compromise and all reasonable parties get something.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 5:55 PM
I agreed with nothing. I made a proposal that we compromise and all agree that raising the debt ceiling would cause a future increase in the national debt.
Surely we can all agree with that.
Didn't say what raising the debt ceiling would do. Just made a simple statement what the result would be in the near future.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 6:33 PM
Let's say the national debt will go up in the near future.
Can we agree on that?
-- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 6:38 PM
That much I can much I can agree with and is basically what everyone is thinking anyway. Thinking hell, we know it will.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 6:49 PM
What the **** throw out the 2nd "much I can"
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 6:51 PM
-- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 5:53 PM
I read the entire thing. Yes - it did make some comments about how the government would proceed just fine and automatic cuts would take place.
The article confirmed:
a) not raising the debt ceiling will not shut down the government
b) automatic cuts to non-essential agencies would go into place
c) we would still make payments to creditors
What other jewels would you like to pick out? Other things we haven't discussed or I haven't brought up?
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 7:12 PM
There would be no savings -- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 7:35 PM
Cutting spending is now not a savings. Hilarious!
You're still including NPR funding, etc. into "debt" obligations. You're clueless what a loan is, what credit is and what debt is. Can't help you anymore with that.
As most liberal Obama supporters you spin it into the ground. A simple person understands what is going on. But Obama - and you - can't have simple. We have to cloud the math to make it look like armageddon. You've failed.
How about all the disasterous consequences of sequestration? From politico:
"Obama and his team have pulled back from a kick-off strategy that portrayed the $84 billion in automatic cuts this year as a parade of instant horrors -- hellish waits at airports, a quick cascade of private job losses resulting from voided federal contracts, teachers immediately sacked."
"They spent two weeks building up sequester as a horror show and then got fact-checked a dozen times and were forced to back off their own claims of it being a disaster once they were forced to acquiesce to the cuts happening."
So we have hype now and, no surprise, you're pimping it hook line and sinker.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 7:43 PM
We didn't "default" on our debt in the last few debt ceiling battles and it still affected our credit rating.
-- Posted by Spaniard on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 6:53 PM
If you owe more than you can pay back you are considered a bad risk in the real world. Add our future liabilities (Obamacare) to it and the risk factor is even worse. No banker would loan money to such a poorly run business with a CEO that has no past business history.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 8:14 PM
I am not including discretionary spending as a "debt" obligation-- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 7:56 PM
Good - then don't include it when raising the debt ceiling. Finally you're starting to get it.
The sequestration is very relevant. Obama hyped all the disastrous consequences. You bought it. Suddenly - when it went into affect the Obama lies caught up with him - according to politico. There was no disaster due to sequestration.
Now Obama is again hyping another manufactured crisis - the debt ceiling. You're buying it hook line and sinker and pushing your man here on SO. Obama and you have no credibility anymore. America is tired of the manufactured crises. You've worn out your only technique to accomplish something. Fear.
Nobody cares. Everyone understands that not raising the debt ceiling will not create a gov't shutdown or cause us to default.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 8:30 PM
"All raising the debt ceiling would do is give us the cash to make the payment."
"Raising the debt ceiling will allow us to borrow cash. That's it. It doesn't approve spending, it doesn't cut spending. It allows us to issue debt in exchange for cash so the bills can get paid."
-- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 7:56 PM
Progress has been made. Finally an admission that raising the debt limit is going to increase the national debt. And it only took 140 posts to get here.
Something Obama denied.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 10:09 PM
Pelosi was also asked why President Barack Obama refuses to negotiate over the debt ceiling when he has done so before, as have other presidents.
"Because the cupboard is bare," Pelosi said. "There's no more cuts to make.
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax
There you have it. The government has already cut all waste, fraud, and unnecessary and/or duplicitous programs. 100% of our tax dollars are being wisely spent on neccessary needs. Praise be to government almighty.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 10:45 PM
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 10:45 PM
Well I'll be damned, I didn't know Obama phones were that necessary to the existence of the human race. And I believe if I worked at it a little I could think of a couple of more unnecessary expenses. How about ground Air Force One if we are that damned broke.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 10:51 PM
The more I think about it.... how did we ever exist without the Obamaphones. My family lived on a dirt road about 1 1/2 miles from the nearest hard service road. What if we needed a loaf of bread for dinner and there was no way to call someone to bring it to us. Oh I forgot, Mom backed bread a couple of times a week.
But what if we needed shortening to bake the bread, what would we do. Oh yes we had a can of lard to use from the last butchering. And eggs, yes call someone to bring some eggs.... ooops the hen house is only a few steps from the kitchen.
Thank God we never had cell phones. We did quite well without them and I think the deadbeats getting then today could as well. What a crock of shat this welfare system has become.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 11:03 PM
How about make that baked bread.... not "backed bread".
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 11:05 PM
According to government, the rich bought cell phones, therefore the poor deserve free ones. Ergo, obamaphones are a neccessary taxpayer expense.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 11:11 PM
FFF,
Help me try to understand this. I operated a small business for 37 years which my kids still run. I worked my arse off sometimes 14 hours a day and I worked nights, Saturdays and Sundays to take care of my customers, because my help refused to work all those hours because they were making more than me many years and didn't need to. Now I am retired and have a cell phone, living the good life off my investments but I should feel bad because some deadbeat SOB that refuses to work doesn't have one.
Why do I not feel bad about this horrible turn of events that caused me to be better off than these poor souls without cell phones. I think I will have another drink, go to bed and think about that for awhile.
Please don't suggest I seek counseling.... that's my line.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 11:26 PM
FFF
Too bad you aren't in the neighborhood, we could run up have a double steakburger with mustard, onions and pickles and a bowl of chili to help us sleep better.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 11:29 PM
I think the administration defined government dead beats to a lot of folks during the Obama backed bailout of GM and Chrysler by deciding the winners and losers.
-- Posted by Old John on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 11:47 PM
Old John,
I am having a hard time feeling like a winner with this community organizer running the country. Did I say running.... maybe I should have said ruining the country.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 11:51 PM
Wheels, I'm thinking of giving up my 28 hours a week and getting a grant and student loan to join Common and others in learning the fine art of political debate. A co-worker was just tonight telling me about the fascinating studies he is involved in including "Halloween Origins" and "TV Game Show Effects On American Culture".
I may have to convince 'she who must be obeyed' to raise our debt limit, but I can do that by explaining my position on compromise and the fact that it won't hinder her clothing store credit card limit.
If for unforseen reason the college degree and skills aquired at my age fails to result in the big bucks coming in, I reckon the family can finish paying off the loans.
-- Posted by Old John on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 12:19 AM
Wheels
I would love to try and help you understand, but don't understand it myself. All I understand is that the government knows better than me what is best for me.
-- Posted by FreedomFadingFast on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 5:46 AM
Since were talking about the debt going up seems nobody ever addresses what is shown in real time on the U.S. Debt Clock. These are the real numbers just look at all the red ink and tell me how are we going to get out of this mess. We have dug a hole that is almost impossible to climb out of at this point. Look at the unfunded liabilities unbelievable and Obamacare is not even in these numbers yet.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 7:31 AM
Swamp
Ive been trying to say all along Obamacare is the great tide that will swallow the economy. You can tell who lives their lives day to day instead of using long term planning by their posts.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 8:19 AM
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 8:19 AM
Yes, but if we will just quit haggling with Obama and give him what he really wants, an unlimited debt ceiling, all will be fine and we can live happily ever after.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 8:58 AM
Fed Owns More Debt Than America Amassed From Washington Through Clinton..."The same day that the Federal Reserve's Federal Open Market Committee announced last week that the Fed would continue to buy $40 billion in mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) and $45 billion in U.S. Treasury securities per month, the Fed also released its latest weekly accounting sheet indicating that it had already accumulated more Treasuries and MBSs than the total value of the publicly held U.S. government debt amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Bill Clinton."
Of course we don't have a spending problem.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 10:06 AM
Regret: Obamacare will shallow us whole just wait and see and just maybe some of this bunch will wake up and stop living in that fantasy world they are in. Off to see the Wizard the wonderful Wizard of Oz. We can't hold much more debt something got to give some where those red numbers are stacking and racking every day.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 10:46 AM
Funny to me when I show the debt clock on here you don't here a word out of the liberal posters I wonder why?
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 10:49 AM
Swamp - it's too painful and something that simply cannot be spun. I noticed that as well.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 10:51 AM
The problem Mcheck is you don't see that in reality it is the discussion.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 11:22 AM
miccheck: The debt clock is reality and whether you or others like it or not it is the fact numbers don't lie. What would be your solution to all of the red ink on the debt clock keep increasing the debt like we have been doing year after year or at least make an effort to slow some of the bleed down? this is what we are leaving our children and grand children with after all of us are out of here I don't believe that is right to those kids after all the majority of this was ran up on our watch 40-50 years of it.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 12:03 PM
swamp started watching the debt clock on Jan 20, 2009 at exactly 12 o'clock noon. Seems he and others on here didn't give a rat's *** prior to that date. Gee, I can't imagine why.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 12:25 PM
howdy, I was watching this clock way before Obama got elected Bush didn't do the clock any favors either so don't throw that liberal crap at me and furthermore I voted for Obama in 2008 because I was one of the millions that took the bait, but early in 2011 I woke up and pulled my head out of the sand and seen this wasn't for real.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 12:45 PM
Howdyunion - how's the union boss doing since he's upset about Obamacare? He told you to vote for Obama so you did. Now he's crying about Obamacare. Suckered!
-- Posted by not_sorry on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 12:51 PM
Yea howdy I for got that one how is the old Union bosses when it comes to Obamacare is that working out for them ok? after you and your bosses voted for this train wreck called the AFFORDABLE CARE ACT or is that the UNAFFORDABLE CARE ACT help me out on that one Dug. Glad to see the bosses are finally opening their eyes I wish you would howdy.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 1:28 PM
Sure glad that the 140th post cleared up what raising the debt limit would ultimately do.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 3:25 PM
-- Posted by howdydoody on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 12:25 PM
I remember seeing the clock during Bush's terms. I guess you guys are just know noting it. It is way higher since Obama started his RULE.
-- Posted by We Regret To Inform U on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 3:38 PM
Regret it has really risen since 2008 but according to howdys friends it is all Bush fault. When Bush left office it was right at 10.5 trillion dollars since Obama took over it is 17 trillion dollars in just under five years. But all of the 10.5 trillion is not just Bush just some of it is because Clinton had somewhere around about 4 trillion when he left office after eight years. Obama has ran that baby up and still wants more money to spend.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 4:35 PM
144th post and spaniard finally figured out what the discussion was about.
-- Posted by rocknroll on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 4:52 PM
Congress' authority to authorize new spending that results in debt is based solely on its powers per the constitution. -- Posted by Spaniard on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 4:45 PM
Just to make sure - if the debt ceiling is not raised, what will happen? Automatic curtailment of spending as has happened in the past? Payment of interest on bonds/debt to creditors will definitely be made?
A serious question.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 5:03 PM
"All raising the debt ceiling would do is give us the cash to make the payment."
"Raising the debt ceiling will allow us to borrow cash. That's it. It doesn't approve spending, it doesn't cut spending. It allows us to issue debt in exchange for cash so the bills can get paid."
-- Posted by miccheck on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 7:56 PM
Progress has been made. Finally an admission that raising the debt limit is going to increase the national debt. And it only took 140 posts to get here.
Something Obama denied.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Sun, Sep 22, 2013, at 10:09 PM
Ike,
An all knowing superior being gave this information to us in the 140th post yesterday, after 139 posts of a great deal of denials and insistence by a number of parties.
Don't blame me if it doesn't agree with your thoughts.... I am just the messenger, doing a public service.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 7:29 PM
"I should have used the phrase "issue bonds""
About the same difference.... they, like a note at the bank, come due. So they are both debt.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 8:24 PM
So why do we or did we need a debt ceiling if it wasn't intended to curtail spending?
-- Posted by Old John on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 11:54 PM
So why do we or did we need a debt ceiling if it wasn't intended to curtail spending? -- Posted by Old John on Mon, Sep 23, 2013, at 11:54 PM
Exactly OJ. There was some discussion to eliminate approving it in the future. Just let it roll with no congressional approval. Talk about the patients running the asylum.
-- Posted by not_sorry on Tue, Sep 24, 2013, at 9:20 AM
For all of the fancy talk, for all of the spinning, for all of the lies told by our President and some Posters, the bottom line is........
Congress is going to raise the Debt Limit and that increase is going to culminate in an increase in the National Debt.
I defy anyone to show proof that I have made a wrong assumption.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Tue, Sep 24, 2013, at 10:01 AM
The only purpose for raising the debt ceiling is to allow the federal government to continue spending more money than it takes in.
-- Posted by Robert* on Wed, Sep 25, 2013, at 11:39 AM
The only way to get out of the deficit-spending mess we are in is two fold. And our present federal government wants to do neither.
1. Restrict spending
If we merely held our spending at present levels, even the present sluggish growth of the economy would eventually balance the budget.
2. Allow small businessmen and entrepreneurs to profit by expanding their businesses
As long as the federal government makes it both difficult and unprofitable for small business to expand, the jobs and revenue we need to grow the economy will not be produced. Government must put decision-making back in the hands of small businessmen.
-- Posted by Robert* on Wed, Sep 25, 2013, at 11:46 AM
The only purpose for raising the debt ceiling is to allow the federal government to continue spending more money than it takes in.
-- Posted by Robert* on Wed, Sep 25, 2013, at 11:39 AM
Amen!
Ike's spin is interesting but irrelevant to what has happened, is happening and is going to continue to happen.
You folks suffering from the Stockholm Syndrome so far as Obama is concerned find yourselves in tougher and tougher situations to try and spin his big mouth utterances into something that makes sense. Saner people would quit and let just him talk his silly arse into positions he cannot talk his way out of.
-- Posted by Have_Wheels_Will_Travel on Wed, Sep 25, 2013, at 11:51 AM
The coming collapse. With the Fed continually printing paper and buying it's own debt, what would happen if the interest rates on that debt would climb? A disaster. The story today:
-- Posted by not_sorry on Wed, Sep 25, 2013, at 12:36 PM
Scary! I sometimes wondered about the effects of increased interest rates. It seems to me that we, as a nation, have painted ourselves into a corner. Present interest rates are artificial and at some point in the future we will lose the ability to control them. Those who think we are 'too big to fail' have a big surprise coming.
-- Posted by Robert* on Wed, Sep 25, 2013, at 12:51 PM
I talked with a small businessman today and due to the ACH his monthly premium will rise to $3,200.00 per month for a family of four. This family works all the time now do you in your right mind feel this is fair just because he and his family work and abide by the rules that they have to pay this outrageous monthly premium, he has no choice he has to shop around in the two available exchanges in the Cape area to see if he can get that price down which he hopes he can but he is not holding his breath. Oh yea "CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN" alright.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Wed, Sep 25, 2013, at 3:15 PM
It comes with a huge price Rick something many of these people have not caught on to yet.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Wed, Sep 25, 2013, at 3:58 PM
Menu
Did I hear the President correctly this morning when he said raising our debt ceiling will not raise our debt at all. Will some one correct me if I mis-understood him on this but I don't believe I did. Now, any one in the human race knows that by raising the debt ceiling it will increase the total debt. Does he believe all of us are that stupid not to figure that one out.
Replies (133)