Why not, for the time being, raise the debt ceiling just enough to stay current on the debt and maintain all other spending at current levels.

And not one penny more.

Were the government to do so, they would effectively tie their own hands thereby preventing them from doing any spending increases.

Far from a perfect solution, but better than destroying what's left of the economy by defaulting.

Agreed. IF they would not spend the money. But they will blow every penny of it and keep on spending more than they are bringing in. :(

I THINK that is what the Republicans are trying to do here. Call the bluff and push it to the limit to try and get spending reduced right before they end up voting "yes".

Of course it's all just a ploy to get votes in the next election because they know that the majority of people in this country are horrified by all this "deficit spending" bullshit.

Republicans or Democrats. In the end, ALL they care about is THEIR money and THEIR power.

I'm hoping that this so-called "Party Of No" wins this battle. Just like I had hoped that when it was the Dems who were the "Party Of No" during the Bush years that they would win.

The best we can hope for is that some of them will do the right thing for the wrong reasons (scared to lose their senate or house seat in the next election).

Raising the debt ceiling will not give more money to spend to politicians ... That money is already commited ( owed ) and will need to be disbursed.
This process is archaic and only the USA has this type of system.

Expenditures happen in the budget , or like with Bush, in non-funded wars, stimulus or tax cuts.

That is very simplistic ...

Some variables have influence on the budget, for revenues as for expenses ...

For revenues, high unemployment, failed businesses, personnal bankruptcies lower the income.

For expenses, again high unemployment , un-forecasted wars ( though the USA should have a yearly war budget .. ) , natural disaters influebnce those.

Now, you seem to think that is is just like a credit card : thery raise my limit, so I can go and spend more money till I reach again the limit ... it isn`t.

It is more like a bank account with a credit line ... if you ever had that .. you draw on your credit line ... expecting an income to deposit ( like the end to the Bush tax cuts ) .. but it does not come .. so you have those checks in circulation ( already received the services/merchandised ) and they must be covered ... Once they clear, you have no more margin ; you caped it ...

This means you can only pay out the same amount that comes in , leaving alot of expenditures in default ( such as SS ) I understand the teapublicans want that , but you cannot stop a cruiseliner ship in the ocean on a dime .... :2 cents:

I don't think either party really cares about what's good for the country.

All any of them care about is getting re-elected and then spending money that doesn't belong to them. :(

Right now the Republicans are just doing what the majority of people want. Nobody with any common sense thinks it's right to spend that much money and be in this much debt.
So they are going with what will get them elected and whatever makes the President look bad.

Exactly what the Dems did when Bush was President. Whatever issue of the day there is that they can use to get votes they will seize upon it.

Is that a first ? Did Reagan raise the debt ceiling 19 times !!! Bush jr 8 times ( once a year ) ... why the outrage now ... what is the sudden motivation ...

it doesn't appear that way
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/...jgbfjruxng.gif

Because the levels of debt are now hitting critical mass.
If you borrowed a hundred dollars to get you through the end of the month you wouldn't be too worried about it.

But if you borrowed $10,000 every month to get you through and never, ever paid any of it back and just paid the interest each month and continued to spend like a drunken sailor...eventually you would get your debt so high that you would have to say "enough is enough"

And you would have to STOP spending and start paying off the debt.

I think that's where we are at with this country right now. The feds had so much revenue coming in for the last few decades because we have had a relatively long period of pretty good prosperity.

Relatively low unemployment (more taxpayers), and higher salaries (more taxes), and it led to always having a lot of revenue coming in and the politicians got complacent and just kept kicking it down the line.

Now the world economy is in the shitter. Our economy is in bad shape. Unemployment is high.

So the Feds immediately think: "Lets raise taxes and get more revenue and that way we don't have to face this debt. We can just keep paying the interest and do deficit spending"

But a LOT of people are saying: "Oh hell no!"

We are getting the shaft while they are still living it up in Washington.

Personally? I'm pissed that I would have to pay one more penny in tax for this bullshit. BUT...if they STOPPED SPENDING right now (and I would say that a LAW is required to stop them) and actually got serious about this...then yes, I would feel it was my civic duty to pay a little more in.

But that won't happen.

What is going to happen is that they will all make a big deal out of how they are "fighting" with each other. Then the Republicans will ok the debt ceiling being raised and the Dems will "give" a 4 trillion budget reduction over TEN YEARS (which is only 400 billion a year...they spend almost that much in a month).

Then both sides will proclaim victory and make all their constituents happy so they can get re-elected.

The news media will talk about how much the U.S. citizens just want our govt. to "compromise" with each other and "get things done" and then move on to the next big story that is designed to keep us distracted.

Then the Republicans and Dems will have beers together and laugh at how they fooled us once again. And we will still be in debt to our eyeballs and the can will get kicked down the road again.

.. or get a second job .. to increase your revenues while cutting unnecessary spending ( still spending for the basic needs .,.. ) .

We had hard times in business .. I myself adjusted my model ( getting OUT of adult hosting which generated very low level of profit with a very risky exposure .. ) , then increased my revenues by adding services , diversifying in other fields AND being carefull with expenditures, always asking myself : do I really need it .. !

I am doing fine, managed to put aside roughly 350K ( 135K banked at 4.5% average with the Quebec Gov till 2018, another 110K with the National Bank ( 4.2% but expiring next year , and a balance of 100K invested in real estate ( a duplex rental ) ....


But If I had said, I cut my credit, I do not pay my bills, I stop paying for basics, well you would not see this post :2 cents:

Without a balance budget amendment, how can you guarantee that congress will follow Obama's plan or anyone's plan 5, 7, 10 years from now? They are not legally bound to follow his or anyone elses plan. They have a vote on the budget every year, unless you are Pelosi. You can't guarantee it. And the fact is that the government will spend more money then they project.

plenty of info out there showing that this debt ceiling song & dance is political posturing for the upcoming elections 18 months from now. that's why it's all the sudden a big issue.

edit fuck it wrong link

Yep. But they refuse to cut unnecessary spending of any sort.

When any spending cuts are brought up they say: "Well that's only 1% of the budget, blah-blah-blah"

What they don't say is...And yes, if we cut that 1% and this other spending bill that is 0.3%, and this other one that is 2% and so on...we would actually STOP SPENDING on stupid shit. lol

They just won't. All you have to do is turn the news on and see them lobbing missiles in Libya. Or trying to prosecute Roger Clemmons for "lying" to Congress about steroid use (another great example of wasting money), or the thousands of bullshit pork spending bills and ludicrous "research" grants.

The list goes on and on.

Yeah, it would be nice to build a library in Bumfuck. Or do a study on monkeys fucking each other in the ass...IF we weren't in debt.

And that's the rub.
They just refuse to stop spending even on the stupid shit. It's always an excuse so they can keep the federal gravy train flowing in their home states so they can get re-elected.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh I laugh .. but it is so true ...

In the NASA shutdown thread, most Americans were saying it is stupid to cut that, it is less then 1% ... ( just like you said ) ...

A penny saved ....

it's not even near as easy as you suggest. i can cite plenty of research showing the value nasa provided back to the country and individual states over its history. moreover, one can add up every single line item on the budget and they all add up to ~10% of the budget


cut every *stupid* program you and robbie agree is stupid and you still have >90% of the bills left.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...bycategory.png

I am color blind ... :Oh crap:Oh crap

well played. :1orglaugh

Read the two santa clauses and all will be clear. Do a search

It's much better when it's reserved for the hot tub.

After ww2 the debt was 120 percent of gdp
Here is a good read.http://populareconomicsweekly.blogsp...et-debate.html

Well, the 2010 budget was 3.46 TRILLION dollars. :(

So if we cut that 10% we would save 346 BILLION dollars (I think, my head can't even wrap around this many zeros in a number).

I'd say that 346 billion dollars is a damn good start. Especially since Obama himself is wanting to raise taxes that would bring in an additional 989 Billion over TEN YEARS.

So the tax increase would only bring in 98.9 billion a year. While cutting that 10% would save 346 billion a year.

It's a no-brainer when you use common sense.

But here's the real problem. Even if you COMBINED the two. And saved 346 billion and taxed an extra 98.9 billion that's still "only" about 445 billion dollars a year difference.

Guess what? In 2010 the federal govt. spent that 3.46 TRILLION dollars. But we only had revenues of 2.18 trillion. So they spent 1.28 TRILLION dollars more than they brought in!

So even if we did all of that we would still continue going down in debt.

They are going to have to STOP spending. It's just that simple.

Everybody can say what they will about Social Security and the military and medicare...but guess what? If we go bankrupt...NONE of that will be getting paid out.

I don't see how you or anyone else can defend this type of spending by our govt. Especially when they don't even EARN the damn money. It's OURS. We work for it and they steal it.

there is a clear correlation between declining corporate taxes paid and the increase in debt. they run in parallel since the early 70s.

as corp taxes went down the government had to borrow more to meet it's obligations.

it's not that spending went up, but tax collection went down.

pretty simple.

Do you think that maybe the govt. has too many "obligations"

Because "obligations" translates into career politicians giving away a lot of money and jobs to their buddies to ensure their re-elections.

I guess that what we see in this thread is a good example of differing viewpoints on this subject.

But all I personally see when I look at what is happening is a big scam and con game that goes on indefinitely in Washington D.C.

How about this crazy idea: The govt. stops spending on shit it can't afford. And if Agent488 opens a business and it takes off and turns into a giant corporation and makes crazy profits...you know what? He should be able to KEEP his money that his corp. earned.

All of this class warfare is ridiculous and turns us against ourselves.

I WANT to be rich. And I work my ass off to make it happen. I'm not going to join the chorus of folks saying: "OMG! That big corporation is actually SUCCESSFUL and making a ton of money! The govt. should TAKE their money!"

That sounds really good...until you realize that YOU personally will never see that money that they steal from big corporations. They will spend it to fund another war. Or build a bridge to nowhere. Or any of a million other things they do to consolidate power.

That's the way I see it. And no, I don't care if big corporations have found loopholes to not pay taxes.

That's the POLITICIANS doing that shit because they are getting paid under the table and passing out favors.
The EXACT same politicians that you Democrats stand behind and you Republicans stand behind and repeat their party lines and talking points in heated debate.

In my opinion they are all crooks and there is no difference between any of them.

i don't defend the spending. but i certainly do not advocate killing a shit ton of small *stupid* programs because combined that adds up to a good start. there are much better ways to attack the issue eh.

The problem with that argument is that, at present, the government can't afford a whole lot of stuff that most of us would consider essential.


No one is talking about confiscatory taxation. We're talking about taxing the corporations and the upper 2% at the same rate they were taxed under Clinton. As I recall, those folks were living pretty damn well back then too.


I don't know about you, but when I hear Republicans refer to the same folks who are doing all of their hiring in India and East Asia as "job creators", I'm inclined to grab a pitchfork and join the nearest angry mob.

Yes, spending is way out of control and it needs to be cut, but the only real way to get out of this mess is to grow the domestic economy and thereby triple the net worth of the American tax base.

Someone should register PornAndPolitics.com.

Endless possibilities...

http://i28.tinypic.com/2yn44r6.jpg

Great for long romantic rides in the country, or just a short flush around the block!

Here's Bernie's take, and I think it's a valid assessment...



https://youtube.com/watch?v=l8cmEoER6Ic

Why would that make you angry?

A business is supposed to make money. And a penny saved is a penny earned. If you can open a factory and make a big profit in a third world country as opposed to opening the same factory here and losing money because the govt. forces you to pay tons of benefits, health care, matching social security funds, etc., etc. Wouldn't YOU do the same thing?

I think Republicans just call them "job creators" to try and defend against the other side of the imaginary Republicans vs. Democrats (they are both the same).

I believe that IF the American worker could actually compete against the rest of the world we would be better off. And no, I'm not talking about going back to the Draconian pre-labor union days.

But I do feel that the pendulum might have swung too far.

I am now a one man show since I have laid off the 4 people that used to work for me. I am absolutely able to do all of their work myself. But I didn't want to have to lay them off.

I was fortunate to have been able to help them all find new gigs and one of them is even making more money now. So for that I'm thankful.

But I had to lay them off. I'm a small business compared to most...and quite frankly it was killing me just watching that extra money that the govt. forced me to pay in matching funds on their social security tax. Especially knowing that they might never see it since the govt. is so far in debt.

I can only imagine what it would be like to have a business with a hundred employees. And not only have to pay them a big salary, but then have to pay for their health insurance and matching SS taxes and paid vacations and pensions...

Basically the govt. & unions went a little too far over the years and now everybody is bitching because companies move overseas where they can actually turn a big profit.

I don't know what the answer to that is.

But apparently instead of making the U.S. more Business Friendly and bring those jobs back home...the answer is to tax the fuck out of them and put everybody on welfare so we all depend on the govt. to take care of us.

Power. Plain and simple.

Because they're part of the problem.

A big part.


That's all well and fine, but if their (relatively new) hiring practices are hurting the country at large (i.e. by diminishing the national tax base) they shouldn't expect the same tax breaks they were getting from Uncle Sam back when they were providing him with legions of middle class taxpayers.

Years ago people used to say that what's good for General Motors is good for America and it was true... then.

The game has changed and it's only fitting that the rules should be adjusted accordingly.


Of course I would, and like the fat cats, I would continue to do so until and unless I had a reason to rethink my business plan.

A corporate CEO owes his allegiance to his stockholders, not to the country at large, and that's the way it's supposed to be.

Our government, meanwhile, is supposed to be looking out for what's best for the country as a whole... and in that it has failed miserably.


To compete against a peasant workforce, the American worker would have to accept peasant wages. Problem is, Uncle Sam can't collect much in the way of taxes from peasants.

This unfortunate process is already well underway with the new service economy and that is, in fact, a huge part of our current economic dilemma.

not sure why tax incentives to hire domestic wouldn't help the issue.

because the overseas work for 70 cents an hour. How else are the ceos going to pay themselves 700x what the avg worker makes.By hiring lots of cheap overseas workers. I saw when my dad worked for a very large company and this was during the so called good Bush yrs. They were dumping people constantly and putting more work on the people there. The line was to make us more competitive. Then the chairman took a 500 million bonus so we know that that really was about.

As a small biz owners its great to side with the rich guys but the its not rich guys who buy our products its the middle class and they are falling away.

Care to prove an executive at your fathers company took a 1/2 a BILLION dollar "bonus"?

while i see what you are saying, i still see areas where tax incentives would bring jobs home.
not a panacea, but certainly viable. especially these days, i've read a handful of articles re: american businesses bringing jobs back home from china due to china's increases in wages.

Not only are taxes a problem for corporations...but all the other bullshit that our country throws at them.
If any of you have ever tried to start a brick and mortar business from scratch you know what I'm talking about.

Endless fees paid to city, county, state, and federal. Endless paperwork. Endless regulations. The list just goes on and on and on.

It costs a lot of money just to buy property and to build your factory here in the U.S.

MUCH cheaper to do it in another country. And that's before the price of labor even comes into the equation.

Tony brings up something that I see used in class warfare arguments.
But you know what? If I become the CEO of a gigantic multi-billion dollar corporation...you better believe I'm gonna make 700 times what a factory worker makes.

It's called freedom and capitalism. I don't begrudge anybody for making their money. And as much of it as they can. If they are smart enough to make it to the top.

What is the use of being that lowly factory worker in the first place if you can't have the dream and possibility of one day being the "boss" and making a damn fortune?

Why would anybody bust their ass to make it to the "top", if there is no "top"?

I don't get that line of reasoning.

And yes I do believe that a CEO has in most cases already proven himself and worked his way into his position. He should be paid as much as a company is willing to pay him. Not a penny more or a penny less.

Should the govt. be giving a company bailout money while a CEO makes hundreds of millions of dollars? HELL NO. That CEO shouldn't be making one thin dime during a bailout.

But when the company is turning a profit and doing well? Hell yes.

The fact that CEO's did make huge bonus money and huge salaries while the company was getting money from the govt. is...the government's fault.

But the feds didn't really see anything wrong with it. After all, they get a "taxpayer bailout" every year in the form of TAXES. And they spend it in by the TRILLIONS. So a CEO getting a few million dollars while their company was in debt just seemed natural to our thieving politicians.

They spend like drunken sailors every day while being further in debt than all of those companies put together.

And companies that are being smarter are hiring...

I just saw on CNN a few nights ago... a man in Atlanta opened a factory making CHOPSTICKS! lol

It turns out that a couple of species of trees that grow like weeds in the Southeast U.S. and are practically useless for anything...are PERFECT for making chopsticks!

So he's churning them out by the millions. And hiring new people and even preparing to build another factory.

And he's selling them to: The Chinese! Kind of a cool example of how Americans can make money selling TO the Chinese.

You don't realize big CEO's aren't the job creators. The middle class buying shit are the job creators. Middle class is shrinking no buying power =no jobs. This will be the first time where children wont do better than their parents. My grandfather was a presser of woman's coats in the garment industry. He was able to buy house, a car and raise 4 children while my grandmother stayed home. Sorry there is a difference between wealth and gluttony and it hurts the country that gave them a place that they could make millions of dollars.An example A stable currency, there are places they change the money. So you had 5000 in the bank yesterday with the old money but with the new money you got 500. That happened to my friend in turkey. We take that shit for granted but in America you dont have to worry about that.Also no one is talking about taking it all. During Clinton 4% higher tax rate and they had a surplus. So no one is taking everyone's money away. Ge made 11 billion dollars last year and paid nothing in taxes and 60 percent of their operations are overseas now, so they paying nothing taxes here didnt motivate them to hire anyone in the USA.That's the bullshit they push , its the taxes they really dont pay, its the regulations, etc ,etc no its the 70 cents an hour worker.

:1orglaugh Who is going to force the middle class to buy? We have a stable currency? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Did you not just read your own sentences?

That is a direct relationship to an UNSTABLE currency. Why can't the middle class buy as much? Not because of the lack of jobs but because of inflation. Who does inflation benefit? The rich, who can more easily create ways to take advantage of the inflation and unstable currency .

GE made a 11 billion dollars, so? Why should they pay taxes on it?

The 70cent an hour worker could happen in the US too, if there was no regulation. So yes, it is regulation stopping job growth. Has all the safety and wage laws helped the US? Using your own words, no they havent. They have just shifted the "problems" and JOBS to other countries.

In the spirit of all the referenced information in this thread, I should also add it's a known fact that liberals are mentally retarded. The people rooting for higher taxes and bigger governement on THIS board of all places is PURE IRONY. Let that big gubbament help your business.....just let them.....give every nickle you EARN away to some scumbucket that is 100% able to work and can RUN to the welfare office but can't RUN to a job interview.

Fuck Freeloaders.

FYI the Republicans have already voted yes to raise the debt ceiling, the democrats are obstructing in the Senate.

I agree with Tony...CEO's are NOT "job creators" . Nobody is. And especially NOT the govt.

What creates jobs is a stable economy with a stable currency. Whenever that is in place the jobs are here because people BUY things. And when people buy things, more people get hired to MAKE things.

It's pretty simple really.

And the more money that the govt. takes from ANYBODY is less money in the real economy and more money in their propped up subsidies and military "economy".

That's just my opinion. We don't need to go further into debt. SENATOR Barrack Obama had it right when he voted against it and said any raising of the debt ceiling was a failure of leadership.

We need to STOP SPENDING.

Yeah, but if all the hiring takes place overseas what the fuck good does that do?

The government needs a healthy tax base and if the corporations won't provide one by hiring U.S. citizens, then maybe the government would do well to fill that gap by further taxing those very same corporations.

Kinda like the message in that old Midas commercial: "You can pay me now or you can pay me later".


Who's real economy?

Ours or India's?

Have the democrats posted their plan yet, they hadn't last time I checked.

It's not a corporations job or responsibility to "provide" jobs. It's a corporations job to make money for itself. Not to make money for the thieving politicians in Washington. Nor to make money for you or me.

The govt. "needs a healthy tax base"?
No, the govt. needs to do what it is supposed to do as framed by the founding fathers. It doesn't need to invade other countries that have not attacked us. It doesn't need to be a welfare "nanny" state. It doesn't need to bail out giant banks and insurance companies and car manufacturers. It doesn't need to spend money on "investigating" steroids in freakin' baseball.

What our govt. "needs" is to get back to reality. Get rid of all these career politicians and send them home.

Stop spending money like it doesn't mean anything.

Create an environment where businesses CAN hire Americans right here at home. And to "create" that...the govt. doesn't really have to do much at all except get out of the way.

And no, I don't mean let shit run wild. I mean stop with all the constant legislation that in the end doesn't do anything but line the pockets of politicians and drives business to open factories in other countries.

All that's really needed is a balanced govt. that doesn't overreach into everything. Yes, regulation is needed to a degree. But they've went way overboard...just like they do in everything the govt. touches. And then it just becomes a giant bureaucracy that never ends.

I moved from South Carolina to Las Vegas in 2008.

But a few years before that....the upstate of South Carolina where I lived got a GIANT economic boost that provided thousands of real high paying jobs.

It was the opening of the BMW plant in Spartanburg, SC

How did that little redneck town get that? The state, county, and city GAVE THEM GIANT TAX BREAKS & REGULATORY BREAKS.
It was incentive for them and they took it.

It literally turned the entire upstate of South Carolina's economy around (the economy was destroyed by the collapsing textiles industry)

THAT is how the govt. can make a difference and bring jobs in.
Yes, BMW could have built that plant in Mexico...but because the local govt. cut their taxes and made it easier for them to build...they brought that money and jobs to Spartanburg.

Now just think if govt. did that for EVERYBODY trying to open a business. We wouldn't have to worry about job growth anymore and our economy would turn around.

But hey...I understand that everyone has a differing opinion. And I respect that you do. I just feel that it is just plain common sense that if you already have corps LEAVING with jobs now, that if you tax them even harder they are going to leave even faster.

Again ge paid zero taxes on 11 billion in rev and they keep movng everything offshore.

Corporations create jobs when there is demand, not just because the government gives them welfare with the failed "trickle down" theories!

Corporate tax cuts, Canada anyways, only maybe return about 1/3 of their cost to the GDP!
The corporations are currently sitting on a ton of cash, and not doing anything, because the middleclass consumer/worker is balancing rent/gas/food just trying to keep their heads above water!

Bill Maher

The Reason Why Liberals Don't Like Bachmann & Palin

It's Not Because They Have Breasts, It's Because They're Boobs!!



:1orglaugh

Sounds like a job for Super Congress!

"Revenue" is not "profit"

Of course, its just a small and irrelevant detail for someone who doesn't create jobs or run a business.

110 billion in revenues and 11 billion profit $3.2 billion refund which they nicely donated after people figured out they weren't paying any taxes.

http://www.robinlea.com/wordpress/20...on-tax-refund/