Your Federal Government Shutdown Thread

[Conan71]

It isn't hyperbole. If we fail to raise the debt ceiling and end up defaulting on treasuries...

Look, if we need to borrow money to pay the interest on money previously borrowed, it's not long before our foreign investors will start raising our interest rates anyhow.

At what point has it ever been considered prudent to borrow money to keep making interest payments?  That's not too terribly far off the concept which got the financial markets and consumers in such deep smile three years ago.  We are headed for a perfect storm again.  Gas prices are up around $3.50 which means higher transportation costs for goods and less money for consumers to spend on groceries and other consumables and durables.  Corn reserves are at their lowest in 10-15 years due to increased ethanol production, steel and other metals prices are on the rise.  It's 2008 all over again except Lehman is already gone and the mortgage scam has already been uncovered.

IOW, raising the debt ceiling solves nothing at this point in terms of lowering our cost of borrowing, especially if others read the writing on the wall that our economy is getting ready to take another dump.

[Gaspar]

So a tax hike and spending cut it is.  Lets get it going.

Why?

If we cut spending alone we will have the budget balanced before 2015.  Heck, even doing the 1% solution gets us on the right track, but the economy must grow for any solution to work. It can be done without any tax increases, and foster additional tax reductions once the budget is balanced in 2015.  This kills three birds with one stone and is relatively simple to implement.  We grow the economy by eliminating the real and threatened tax increase rhetoric, we balance the budget, and we foster future growth by decreasing the tax burden on everyone.



The "Tax the Rich" debate makes little since since they are the job creators.  It's borne more out of liberal envy than logic.

Ok, lets say that President Obama gets his way and we implement a new tax on the wealthiest 2% of the country.  Actually, lets take it a step further and say that we decide to go medieval on them and tax them at 100%.  We would collect a whopping 34 Billion dollars.  That's about 1% of our budget needs, and if we used it to service our debt it would take around 400 years.  It's a freaking joke.  Campaign talk to swoon those envious of success.  In the meantime we would decimate industry and our debt would grow exponentially faster than any pennies we could collect.  

[Cats Cats Cats]

Why?

If we cut spending alone we will have the budget balanced before 2015.  Heck, even doing the 1% solution gets us on the right track, but the economy must grow for any solution to work. It can be done without any tax increases, and foster additional tax reductions once the budget is balanced in 2015.  This kills three birds with one stone and is relatively simple to implement.  We grow the economy by eliminating the real and threatened tax increase rhetoric, we balance the budget, and we foster future growth by decreasing the tax burden on everyone.



The "Tax the Rich" debate makes little since since they are the job creators.  It's borne more out of liberal envy than logic.

Ok, lets say that President Obama gets his way and we implement a new tax on the wealthiest 2% of the country.  Actually, lets take it a step further and say that we decide to go medieval on them and tax them at 100%.  We would collect a whopping 34 Billion dollars.  That's about 1% of our budget needs, and if we used it to service our debt it would take around 400 years.  It's a freaking joke.  Campaign talk to swoon those envious of success.  In the meantime we would decimate industry and our debt would grow exponentially faster than any pennies we could collect.  

Who said anything about "RICH".  And Why?  Because if the country can't go into debt that means that they hvae to have a balanced budget TODAY.  Not in 2015.  Duh...

[swake]

The Romans were warned about this centuries before their collapse.  Apathy and fiscal irresponsibility consumed them.  We are on the fast track.  We cannot stop it, but we can slow the process.

The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced. If the nation doesn't want to go bankrupt, people must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance. – Marcus Tullius Cicero

Good lord. What are you talking about?

You are trying to quote Cicero as being relevant to today?

Hell, this quote isn’t relevant to the end of the Rome, he wasn’t someone that foretold the end of the Roman Empire, he was part of its founding. Cicero died in 43 BC and Roman empire didn’t end until 1453 AD. And even after that The Holy Roman and Ottoman Empires were more successor governments of the Roman and Byzantine Empires respectively than new empires. It can be argued that the real end of the Roman Empire was World War One in the east and that the resulting World War Two was really a Germanic effort to reestablish the western empire. Only 2,000 years after Cicero death. But sure, tax and spending policy in the Roman Republic was a contributing factor to the fall of the Roman Empire hundreds and thousands of years later.  

[Gaspar]

LOL!  How many chances do you want?

We knew we were overspending 4 years ago, and two years ago, and last year.

In December, the president's very own Blue Ribbon Deficit Reduction Committee recommended:
 
$52 Billion in reduction for 2012
$164 Billion in reduction for 2013
$255 Billion in reduction for 2014
$357 Billion in reduction for 2015

They also suggested that the president:

Sharply reduce rates, broaden the base, simplify the tax
code, and reduce the deficit by reducing the many “tax expenditures”—another name for
spending through the tax code. Reform corporate taxes to make America more
competitive, and cap revenue to avoid excessive taxation.

They came out with a great plan, but I don't think the cuts in it are strong enough.

This whole argument is ridiculous anyway.  This president has absolutely no intension on promoting any meaningful decrease in spending whatsoever.  

I anticipate Wednesday's address as being a tung-in-cheek acknowledgement of the necessity of cuts, and then a "BUT" followed by the strong defense of existing and additional spending measures.

[Gaspar]

Good lord. What are you talking about?

You are trying to quote Cicero as being relevant to today?

Hell, this quote isn’t relevant to the end of the Rome, he wasn’t someone that foretold the end of the Roman Empire, he was part of its founding. Cicero died in 43 BC and Roman empire didn’t end until 1453 AD. And even after that The Holy Roman and Ottoman Empires were more successor governments of the Roman and Byzantine Empires respectively than new empires. It can be argued that the real end of the Roman Empire was World War One in the east and that the resulting World War Two was really a Germanic effort to reestablish the western empire. Only 2,000 years after Cicero death. But sure, tax and spending policy in the Roman Republic was a contributing factor to the fall of the Roman Empire hundreds and thousands of years later.  

Awesome!  Lets break that down then.  Tell me how this is not relevant to today?

The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced. If the nation doesn't want to go bankrupt, people must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance. – Marcus Tullius Cicero

What parts are not relevant today?

Should we have a balanced budget?

Should public debt be reduced?

Should the government present its will as superior to that of the people?

Should we reduce our involvement in foreign wars and payments to foreign governments?

Should we discourage dependence among those who can work and be productive?


There is much wisdom in the founding philosophies of civilization.  Temporal distance is of little relevance.  Intelligence is temporary, but wisdom is timeless. 

[we vs us]

I'm not a big fan of comparing personal and macro-government finances, but let's pretend that you're a consumer with $10k in debt and you keep racking up debt and charging it on a card every month.  What should be your first step to minimize your debt? There are several good answers to that question but I can tell you that the answer is NOT "just stop paying your creditors."  This is what not raising the debt ceiling amounts to.  That's the quickest and easiest way to tank your credit score and encourage your creditors to start legal proceedings against you.  

 

[Cats Cats Cats]

Awesome!  Lets break that down then.  Tell me how this is not relevant to today?

The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced. If the nation doesn't want to go bankrupt, people must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance. – Marcus Tullius Cicero

What parts are not relevant today?

Should we have a balanced budget?

Should public debt be reduced?

Should the government present its will as superior to that of the people?

Should we reduce our involvement in foreign wars and payments to foreign governments?

Should we discourage dependence among those who can work and be productive?


There is much wisdom in the founding philosophies of civilization.  Temporal distance is of little relevance.  Intelligence is temporary, but wisdom is timeless. 

Sadly, most of those questions are the wrong answer if you vote for anybody running for office.

[Cats Cats Cats]

IOW, raising the debt ceiling solves nothing at this point in terms of lowering our cost of borrowing, especially if others read the writing on the wall that our economy is getting ready to take another dump.

Doesn't lower, but it could definitely raise it.  (A major bond firm just shorted us debt. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/PIMCO-goes-short-US-rb-3790514655.html   Democrats should hang back and let the Republican's vote for raising the ceiling.  It is going to happen.  Its just a matter of the upcoming elections.  What was the point of passing a budget if you aren't going to pay for it? 

[Cats Cats Cats]

I'm not a big fan of comparing personal and macro-government finances, but let's pretend that you're a consumer with $10k in debt and you keep racking up debt and charging it on a card every month.  What should be your first step to minimize your debt? There are several good answers to that question but I can tell you that the answer is NOT "just stop paying your creditors."  This is what not raising the debt ceiling amounts to.  That's the quickest and easiest way to tank your credit score and encourage your creditors to start legal proceedings against you.  

Luckily Obama changed the credit code though.  So they wouldn't universal default US. 

[Gaspar]

I'm not a big fan of comparing personal and macro-government finances, but let's pretend that you're a consumer with $10k in debt and you keep racking up debt and charging it on a card every month.  What should be your first step to minimize your debt? There are several good answers to that question but I can tell you that the answer is NOT "just stop paying your creditors."  This is what not raising the debt ceiling amounts to.  That's the quickest and easiest way to tank your credit score and encourage your creditors to start legal proceedings against you.  

The first step would be to cut spending.  At this point we don't even acknowledge the reality of the situation.  We are printing money like crazy to service our debt.  We are being totally reactionary.  The budget argument on the hill is ridiculous.  Neither side is willing to cut enough to make a difference.   Someone has to get hurt at this point, or no one learns.  We need to FREEZE the debt ceiling now.

[Conan71]

Instead of both sides insisting on protecting their sacred cows, simply cut all spending by a like percentage across every single government department and make them learn how to operate on less money.  That's the only way you can get around the politicking.  Well not all of it because it will be the awful Republicans tossing gubmint workers out on their ears, but at least the cuts are somewhat blind and not idealogical.

[we vs us]

At this point we don't even acknowledge the reality of the situation.  

That's just patently not true.  We nearly shut down the government over how much money we were going to cut from last year's budget.  The President actually convened the Deficit Commission to come up with suggestions, and he'll probably adopt at least some of the suggestions during his speech on Wednesday.  Even though you choose not to believe it, the HCR bill is also projected to reduce the deficit by $100+ billion, so the President has actually already started work.  Paul Ryan's draconian budget proposal is out and very much under discussion.  Despite the fact that most economists believe it's misplaced, austerity seems to be at the top of everybody's agenda --despite the fact that our debt to GDP ratio isn't nearly as dire as the GOP is saying it is.

Point is, EVERYBODY'S discussing it, and EVERYBODY'S working on it.      

[Conan71]

That's just patently not true.  We nearly shut down the government over how much money we were going to cut from last year's budget.  The President actually convened the Deficit Commission to come up with suggestions, and he'll probably adopt at least some of the suggestions during his speech on Wednesday.  Even though you choose not to believe it, the HCR bill is also projected to reduce the deficit by $100+ billion, so the President has actually already started work.  Paul Ryan's draconian budget proposal is out and very much under discussion.  Despite the fact that most economists lobbyists believe it's misplaced, austerity seems to be at the top of everybody's agenda --despite the fact that our debt to GDP ratio isn't nearly as dire as the GOP is saying it is.

Point is, EVERYBODY'S discussing it, and EVERYBODY'S working on it.      

FIFY

[Gaspar]

That's just patently not true.  We nearly shut down the government over how much money we were going to cut from last year's budget.  The President actually convened the Deficit Commission to come up with suggestions, and he'll probably adopt at least some of the suggestions during his speech on Wednesday.  Even though you choose not to believe it, the HCR bill is also projected to reduce the deficit by $100+ billion, so the President has actually already started work.  Paul Ryan's draconian budget proposal is out and very much under discussion.  Despite the fact that most economists believe it's misplaced, austerity seems to be at the top of everybody's agenda --despite the fact that our debt to GDP ratio isn't nearly as dire as the GOP is saying it is.

Point is, EVERYBODY'S discussing it, and EVERYBODY'S working on it.     

I guess that wasn't fair.  What I meant is that no one is discussing the repercussions of our current spending path.  Sure, it's a political football as it usually is, and the everyone is wrapped up in the drama, but not the reality.

The 100 billion savings in Obamacare has already been reveled to be untrue.  Sebelious admitted in March that $500 billion was double-counted, and the CBO has revised it's estimates.  We cannot afford Obamacare any more than we can afford anything else at this point.  Ryan's budget is not draconian, it's flaccid.  We have to do far more, but both the Democrats and the Republicans realize that it is easier to get things done in a crisis, so I am convinced that they will provide lip-service until there is a crisis that gives them license to act.

I am deeply upset with the new Republican leadership.  They were elected to do what needs to be done and they are playing the same games as the democrats, beholden to the same sacred cows.