The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

[unofan]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

So just what is it that you don''t like about Paul's suggestion?

The Fed bought securities in order to inject liquid currency (dollars) into the economy. At some point down the line, when quantitative easing is no longer necessary because the economy is improving, the Fed will sell off those treasuries to pull currency back out of the market. In this way, it will prevent the hyperinflation that people like Ron Paul argue will happen due to quantitative easing.

If you simply cancel those treasuries, the currency stays in the economy because the Fed's tool for bringing it back out of the economy no longer exists. And the very hyperinflation that Ron Paul worries about will happen because Ron Paul eliminated the tool that the Feds would use to prevent said hyperinflation.

So congratulations, you punted the debt crisis down the road by about 12-18 months by cancelling the debt held by the Fed, and all it cost you was 25% (or more) inflation. In other words, the solution is worse than the problem.

 

[busterman62]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Why is Boehner letting 40 Republicans hold him hostage? There are 395 other members of the House. All he needs to do is get something up for a vote that is acceptable to 218 of those 395.

If I were cynical, I'd suggest that everyone involved (Democrats included) has a certain willingness to go over the edge as long as they can pin the blame on the opposing party, though it may be worse with the GOP because the non-teabagger contingent can try to blame both the Democrats and the "renegades" in their own party.

If I were REALLY cynical, I'd suggest that at this point a significant fraction of the parties involved are more afraid of the opposing party getting credit for success than they are of failing.

One of the main problems with being this cynical is that you're usually correct

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Nice Headline today at Salon.

Wall Street shudders as Republicans root for "chaos"
As the Tea Party pushes Boehner further to the right, the Dow drops 198 points

Tick tick tick.

 

[walrus]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

.

You decide which one of those is radical and which is not.

I think both sides are out of touch with reality? Radical doesn't come to mind when thinking about politics in DC, power hungry and corrupt sure as heck does.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

I think both sides are out of touch with reality? Radical doesn't come to mind when thinking about politics in DC, power hungry and corrupt sure as heck does.

Sorry to burst your bubble. I know how much you love GW and the Republicans. But, there is only one party involved here that WANTS to default on the debt and cause irreparable harm to the economy.

Both parties being power hungry and corrupt is an aside to that.

 

[walrus]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

. I know how much you love GW and the Republicans..

Yep, love'em

 

[Bill]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The Fed bought securities in order to inject liquid currency (dollars) into the economy. At some point down the line, when quantitative easing is no longer necessary because the economy is improving, the Fed will sell off those treasuries to pull currency back out of the market. In this way, it will prevent the hyperinflation that people like Ron Paul argue will happen due to quantitative easing.

If you simply cancel those treasuries, the currency stays in the economy because the Fed's tool for bringing it back out of the economy no longer exists. And the very hyperinflation that Ron Paul worries about will happen because Ron Paul eliminated the tool that the Feds would use to prevent said hyperinflation.

So congratulations, you punted the debt crisis down the road by about 12-18 months by cancelling the debt held by the Fed, and all it cost you was 25% (or more) inflation. In other words, the solution is worse than the problem.

Maybe, but I guess it goes back then to the assumption that there will be plenty of buyers for treasuries from the Fed if it comes to the point that the Fed feels it necessary to combat looming hyperinflation. It seems like we would be in uncharted water in such a case (at least for the U.S.) and given the poor job the gov't is doing of managing deficits and overall debt, it seems plausible that smart countries and private parties might no longer be as willing to buy our treasuries. If that were true, the Fed might be seriously hampered in any bid to try and control hyperinflation. It also sounds nice in theory, but given the Fed's predilection for expanding the money supply versus contracting it, I'm not so sure things would go as smoothly as they would like when push comes to shove.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Who is running the GOP??

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E70FBCB6-D504-4E4B-AE83-8422C8B0097B

This email got forwarded to EVERYONE on the Hill about six seconds after it was sent, and everybody immediately said, "dead man walking." An unbelievably stupid and reckless decision considering it was a senior staffer. Even if he's not immediately fired, he will never be trusted by anyone in the RCCC, the RNC, or any group starting with "R" and not well to the right of Attila the Hun.* You expect derp like that from political appointees, not career staff.

(* He's from Duke, so everybody already knew he was a tool... )

 

[leswp1]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Just finished reading Dan Brown's Deception Point. It seemed apropos to the moment

 

[Patman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Sorry to burst your bubble. I know how much you love GW and the Republicans. But, there is only one party involved here that WANTS to default on the debt and cause irreparable harm to the economy.

Both parties being power hungry and corrupt is an aside to that.

On the other hand all but the Tea Party want to spend us all into compounding-interest oblivion. Give either proposal, as far as I can tell our debt vs tax intake rate is going to keep increasing. So, in the next ten years things will get percipitously worse.

And the only reason "default" is threatened by the Tea Party in the first place is because WE KNOW that democrats will do ANYTHING to protect their inner sanctum of key entitlement programs. We're dealing with a core group that just signed a letter from all the Dems in the senate saying that Boehner's recent deal is a non-starter.... so they're basically sanctioning the right solution that the House MUST accept or else we default. Interesting the Senate Dems get to do this but not the House Republicans. It almost sounds like the Dems don't play fair... oh, right, they don't.

edit: does anybody think the Tea Party wants to see America slide into the deep chasm? They want two things... to prevent the Dems from further cratering the economy and to see our nation climb out of debt. You know this... you may disagree with the methods... that's OK... we're used to you being wrong.... but don't slur the intentions.

Craig... do you remember when CCB passed the House?

 

[Patman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The GOP won the House in the last election and netted several Senate seats. The "I won, you lost" logic won't fly anymore.

If the GOP had any sense / brains, they would have used their gains in the last election as leverage to get the bulk of what they wanted. Of course, that was basically Obama's first offer to them (and now Reid's), and they've said no to both. So, I don't know what the **** they're trying to do anymore other than hit the self destruct button. This **** stopped making sense a long time ago.

Clearly, our government has gone from "suck" to "blow".

Its interesting that the Republicans claimed that they'd make the fight for fiscal sanity on the debt debate since we had leverage. Well, look at where that "leverage" got us... agreeing to a meager loss while we rack up increasing debt... we don't even approach a balanced budget and the clock becoming just one of the larger PIIGS ticks away. The Republican leadership is probably just as cynical as the CinC just hoping to lead the suckers along... and then they wonder how they got the "Tea Party". Democrats may be enthralled by being romanced with a pack of nuanced lies (transparency anyone?) by they have to realize that conservatives don't have the stomach for the same. I mean the Dems wax philosophic about how great it is their being lied to or how the dance is played. Its nice to be comfortable enough to survive being lied to... i don't think the rest of American society is willing to tolerate the farcical seduction.

 

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

On the other hand all but the Tea Party want to spend us all into compounding-interest oblivion. Give either proposal, as far as I can tell our debt vs tax intake rate is going to keep increasing.

When the only direction taxes can go is down, no duh.

And the only reason "default" is threatened by the Tea Party in the first place is because WE KNOW that democrats will do ANYTHING to protect their inner sanctum of key entitlement programs. We're dealing with a core group that just signed a letter from all the Dems in the senate saying that Boehner's recent deal is a non-starter.... so they're basically sanctioning the right solution that the House MUST accept or else we default. Interesting the Senate Dems get to do this but not the House Republicans. It almost sounds like the Dems don't play fair... oh, right, they don't.

Democrats offered up cuts to entitlement programs, your argument is invalid. Boner's plan is a non-starter because it is ****. The talking heads at Faux news don't even try to talk about what it contains, only that it's in writing, and that somehow gives it validity.

 

[Patman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

When the only direction taxes can go is down, no duh.

And what miracle happens when they go up? What are the costs when you do so? Of course I'll take a hike in taxes as a trade to a massive descaling of anti-competitve and restrictive regulations... deal? Lower barriers to market entry... its populist after-all. It'll get people employed faster than you can say "Works Progress Administration" and "Tennessee Valley Authority"

Democrats offered up cuts to entitlement programs, your argument is invalid. Boner's plan is a non-starter because it is ****.

Democrats know they'll never need to follow through... we both know that. Besides, the whole argument is a farce anyhow... since when has the government EVER followed through on a 10-year plan... especially with Obamacare coming online in the next few?! This 10 year plan has a shelf-life of the next budget. The only thing we're really doing is frame-shifting the national argument and view on the relation between spending and debt.

BTW, when do the democrats actually plan on putting words to paper... they've proposed JS until they put their "cuts" into a bill.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

On the other hand all but the Tea Party want to spend us all into compounding-interest oblivion. Give either proposal, as far as I can tell our debt vs tax intake rate is going to keep increasing. So, in the next ten years things will get percipitously worse.

And the only reason "default" is threatened by the Tea Party in the first place is because WE KNOW that democrats will do ANYTHING to protect their inner sanctum of key entitlement programs. We're dealing with a core group that just signed a letter from all the Dems in the senate saying that Boehner's recent deal is a non-starter.... so they're basically sanctioning the right solution that the House MUST accept or else we default. Interesting the Senate Dems get to do this but not the House Republicans. It almost sounds like the Dems don't play fair... oh, right, they don't.

edit: does anybody think the Tea Party wants to see America slide into the deep chasm? They want two things... to prevent the Dems from further cratering the economy and to see our nation climb out of debt. You know this... you may disagree with the methods... that's OK... we're used to you being wrong.... but don't slur the intentions.

Craig... do you remember when CCB passed the House?

We're used to you being wrong too. Stock market recover from the passage of the health care law yet?

I remember the House voting on the Duck, Dodge and Dismantle bill, but a Constitutional Amendment needs 290 votes and the GOP came up just a tad short of that mark, thus making the bill null and void. It was then killed again by the Senate.

Even crotchety old men like John McCain say the TP are making "bizarro" demands...

<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2_LQtXytLTQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

But you keep fighting the good fight against those evil Democrats...and many Republicans in the Congress...and your own Speaker...because I'm sure a bunch of crackpots know the economy better than half the PhD's on the planet. That's why so many of them support cutting government, until they're told that might impact their own checks....

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Democrats know they'll never need to follow through... we both know that. Besides, the whole argument is a farce anyhow... since when has the government EVER followed through on a 10-year plan... especially with Obamacare coming online in the next few?! This 10 year plan has a shelf-life of the next budget. The only thing we're really doing is frame-shifting the national argument and view on the relation between spending and debt.

The tax cuts? Those were 10 years...

BTW, when do the democrats actually plan on putting words to paper... they've proposed JS until they put their "cuts" into a bill.

Guess you missed it. Here's a link

 

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

And what miracle happens when they go up? What are the costs when you do so?

What miracle happens when they go down?

Democrats know they'll never need to follow through... we both know that. Besides, the whole argument is a farce anyhow... since when has the government EVER followed through on a 10-year plan... especially with Obamacare coming online in the next few?! This 10 year plan has a shelf-life of the next budget. The only thing we're really doing is frame-shifting the national argument and view on the relation between spending and debt.

Democrats offered, republicans pulled out. Probably because that's the only method of birth control they support. Unless they're catholic.

 

[leswp1]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

On the other hand all but the Tea Party want to spend us all into compounding-interest oblivion. Give either proposal, as far as I can tell our debt vs tax intake rate is going to keep increasing. So, in the next ten years things will get percipitously worse.

And the only reason "default" is threatened by the Tea Party in the first place is because WE KNOW that democrats will do ANYTHING to protect their inner sanctum of key entitlement programs. We're dealing with a core group that just signed a letter from all the Dems in the senate saying that Boehner's recent deal is a non-starter.... so they're basically sanctioning the right solution that the House MUST accept or else we default. Interesting the Senate Dems get to do this but not the House Republicans. It almost sounds like the Dems don't play fair... oh, right, they don't.

edit: does anybody think the Tea Party wants to see America slide into the deep chasm? They want two things... to prevent the Dems from further cratering the economy and to see our nation climb out of debt. You know this... you may disagree with the methods... that's OK... we're used to you being wrong.... but don't slur the intentions.Craig... do you remember when CCB passed the House?

Heard a number of interviews today with tea partiers who don't think there will be a default but when pressed think it is OK if it happens because it won't really be bad. It will be a good lesson for the country. These were not the 'leaders', just people out on the streets. Yipes. I am wondering just how sanctimonious they will be when thier 401Ks are all gone byebye, we slide deeper into the financial abyss and the economy tanks where they live.

I am definitely disenfranchised as far as either party at this point but the lack of reality in the tea party caucus scares me to death- to know that many ignorant (as in not knowledgeable, unable to sythesize basic information regarding how the economy works and unable to see information other than through the prism of what they already assume- kind of like a screwed up teenager) people got elected is a frightening thing.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

What miracle happens when they go down?

Job creation! See all the new jobs the <del>rich</del> job creators have added to the economy in the past decade?

 

[bronconick]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Heard a number of interviews today with tea partiers who don't think there will be a default but when pressed think it is OK if it happens because it won't really be bad. It will be a good lesson for the country. These were not the 'leaders', just people out on the streets. Yipes. I am wondering just how sanctimonious they will be when thier 401Ks are all gone byebye, we slide deeper into the financial abyss and the economy tanks where they live.

This is hilarious because those "people on the street" are the same jackholes that sit around and make comments about how Obama's just crying because the Tea Party took away his "credit card" and claim the government needed to act like a "household budget" now are saying "Eh, defaulting on your owed bills isn't that bad."

Yeah, why don't you guys all go try that with your household budgets first and leave my goddamm country out of your asinine experimentations.

 

[Foxton]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Job creation! See all the new jobs the <del>rich</del> job creators have added to the economy in the past decade?

No.