PDA

View Full Version : Clowns to the bitter end



Ravi
10-16-2013, 01:15 PM
Republican canít figure out why government shutdown shut down government parks

For nearly six minutes on Wednesday morning, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) angrily berated the head of the National Park Service for closing down parks and memorials in Washington, D.C.

During a joint committee hearing, the Republican congressman asked NPS Director Jonathan Jarvis why protesters associated with Occupy Wall Street were allowed to camp in McPherson Square in 2011 but World War II veterans were not allowed to visit open-air monuments amid the government shutdown.
Jarvis told Gowdy that D.C. parks and memorials must close during a shutdown under the Anti-deficiency Act (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/closed-business-government-shutdown-history), which prohibits federal employees from spending money that has not been authorized by Congress.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/16/republican-cant-figure-out-why-government-shutdown-shut-down-government-parks/

jillian
10-16-2013, 01:16 PM
Republican can’t figure out why government shutdown shut down government parks

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/16/republican-cant-figure-out-why-government-shutdown-shut-down-government-parks/

what can you say about people who protest their own shutdown?

patrickt
10-16-2013, 01:35 PM
Ah, a liberal circle jerk denying the reality of the Democrat's childish efforts to protect unlimited spending. And, they worked. On to more spending, borrowing, and debt.

junie
10-16-2013, 01:46 PM
At the core of conservative dogma about government is that if the national debt gets too big it will soak up all the capital in the world and thus drive up interest rates to some apocalyptic level. Catastrophically high interest rates will kill economic growth and multiply the debt burden through higher interest and falling tax revenues. This, of course, is 19th century nostalgia from a time when such a thing might actually have been possible.

In the 21st century and for much of the 20th century, there has been more accumulated capital in the hands of the wealthy than the entire world could possibly use in its governments. It's absurd, but whips on the Tea Party to prophesy the greatest of economic calamities if the deficit is not eliminated and the debt reduced. Granted if our debt payments begin to exceed our income then we might get a credit downgrade, but as we a re operating right now, that's not within sight. It took the Tea Party to get our first downgrade ever in 2011, from AAA to AA+.


The bald-faced irony of how the Tea Party wants to exorcise debt from government is that in the way they are choosing to do it they are causing the exact same economic carnage that they ostensibly fear. The Tea Party is deliberately attempting to cause the U.S. to default on its current debt. This, unlike continued growth in the debt, will actually cause an economic apocalypse, sooner rather than later. Their fear mongering over debt, of skyrocketing interest rates and the collapse of economic activity, will come to pass deliberately, at their hands, for no reason than that they fear it might happen if they don't cause it to happen. In the future there will be a common expression: that's not just crazy, it's Tea Party crazy. :thumbsup:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-herrington/tea-party-causing-exactly_b_4094123.html

Matty
10-16-2013, 02:15 PM
what can you say about people who protest their own shutdown?
this parrot has a higher IQ than you democrats do



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM4psg9QOnk

Peter1469
10-16-2013, 03:14 PM
Republican can’t figure out why government shutdown shut down government parks

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/16/republican-cant-figure-out-why-government-shutdown-shut-down-government-parks/

The WWII monument just sits there. Other than lawn care (which can wait) there is no expense to keep it open. But it costs money to close it.....

Dangermouse
10-16-2013, 03:18 PM
this parrot has a higher IQ than you democrats do



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iM4psg9QOnk

Thank you for such a well-thought-out and insightful contribution. Have a cracker!

Peter1469
10-16-2013, 03:21 PM
At the core of conservative dogma about government is that if the national debt gets too big it will soak up all the capital in the world and thus drive up interest rates to some apocalyptic level. Catastrophically high interest rates will kill economic growth and multiply the debt burden through higher interest and falling tax revenues. This, of course, is 19th century nostalgia from a time when such a thing might actually have been possible.

In the 21st century and for much of the 20th century, there has been more accumulated capital in the hands of the wealthy than the entire world could possibly use in its governments. It's absurd, but whips on the Tea Party to prophesy the greatest of economic calamities if the deficit is not eliminated and the debt reduced. Granted if our debt payments begin to exceed our income then we might get a credit downgrade, but as we a re operating right now, that's not within sight. It took the Tea Party to get our first downgrade ever in 2011, from AAA to AA+.


The bald-faced irony of how the Tea Party wants to exorcise debt from government is that in the way they are choosing to do it they are causing the exact same economic carnage that they ostensibly fear. The Tea Party is deliberately attempting to cause the U.S. to default on its current debt. This, unlike continued growth in the debt, will actually cause an economic apocalypse, sooner rather than later. Their fear mongering over debt, of skyrocketing interest rates and the collapse of economic activity, will come to pass deliberately, at their hands, for no reason than that they fear it might happen if they don't cause it to happen. In the future there will be a common expression: that's not just crazy, it's Tea Party crazy. :thumbsup:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-herrington/tea-party-causing-exactly_b_4094123.html

No they are not. The servicing of the debt is about ~%10 percent of the Treasury's monthly receipts.

No it would not. It would force the government to prioritize spending- the debt will still be serviced. And all that we are doing is kicking the can down the road- so when the crash comes, the debt will be much larger.

nic34
10-16-2013, 03:26 PM
Republican can’t figure out why government shutdown shut down government parks






...and they can't figure out why they're called teabaggers. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-tcZaeEtpLfo/Tni-75jJ1iI/AAAAAAAAAFI/P7zD0Dkl1Qk/s1600/tea+bagger+hat+3.jpg

junie
10-16-2013, 03:54 PM
No they are not. The servicing of the debt is about ~ percent of the Treasury's monthly receipts.

No it would not. It would force the government to prioritize spending- the debt will still be serviced. And all that we are doing is kicking the can down the road- so when the crash comes, the debt will be much larger.



yeah and then what...?




If Congress doesn’t raise the limit, the U.S. may face the first default in its history, though exactly when isn’t clear; the Congressional Budget Office has said the government would start missing (http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44608) scheduled payments, including benefits, salaries and interest, between Oct. 22 and Oct. 31. The Obama administration (http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/Documents/Debt%20Limit%20Myth%20v%20Fact%20FINAL.pdf) and many economists (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/moodys-economist-mark-zandi-how-to-cut-the-deficit--and-the-trouble-if-we-dont/2011/07/14/gIQAKmX8FI_story.html) predict that a default would be catastrophic, and an earlier battle over the debt ceiling led the Standard & Poor’s credit rating company to downgrade U.S. debt (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-06/s-p-downgrade-may-cloud-obama-re-election-bid-even-as-it-damages-congress.html) for the first time.

http://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/the-debt-ceiling/



Q. When will we reach the limit?


A. The national debt actually reached the limit in May. Since then, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew has made accounting moves to continue financing the government without further borrowing. But Lew says those measures will be exhausted by Thursday. The government will then have to pay its bills from its cash on hand — an estimated $30 billion — and tax revenue.


Q. So what happens after Thursday?


A. The government could pay its bills for a few days. But sometime between Oct. 22 and Oct. 31, the cash on hand and tax revenue wouldn't be sufficient, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The date isn't exact because it's impossible to foresee precisely how much revenue the government will receive and when.


Q. When it runs out of cash, does the government default?


A. No, not right away. A default would occur if the government fails to make a principal or interest payment on any of its Treasurys. The first interest payment after Thursday's deadline is a $6 billion payment due Oct. 31.


Many experts think that to avoid a default, Treasury would make payments on the debt its top priority.


"We believe the government would continue to pay interest and principal on its debt even in the event that the debt limit is not raised, leaving its creditworthiness intact," says Moody's Investors Service, a credit rating agency.


But that is the subject of intense dispute in Washington. The House has approved a bill to require such "prioritization." The Senate hasn't passed it, though. And President Barack Obama has threatened to veto it.


Without an increase in the borrowing limit, the government couldn't pay other obligations on time, such as Social Security benefits, bills from government contractors and Medicare reimbursements. Those payments are also legal obligations, Lew argues, and failure to pay them would essentially be equivalent to a default.


In any case, making some payments and not others is harder than it might sound. Treasury makes roughly 100 million payments a month. Nearly all are automated. Lew says the Treasury's computer systems aren't equipped to choose some and not others among all those outgoing checks.



And without cash in reserve, any minor glitch could cause Treasury to miss a debt payment — and default.


"Treasury would do everything in their power to not miss a debt payment," says Donald Marron, an economist at the Urban Institute and a former economic adviser to President George W. Bush. "But when you're in untested waters under a great deal of stress, bad things happen."


Q. What other problems might be raised by prioritization?


A. Consider the legal and political obstacles. The government is legally obligated to pay its contractors. If not, the contractors could sue for non-payment. And how long would members of Congress stand by as Treasury holders in China and other nations were paid interest, while payments to U.S. veterans and Social Security recipients were delayed?



Q. How would investors react if the government made its interest payments but fell behind on other obligations?



A. Badly, most economists say. If the government couldn't pay veterans' benefits, federal employee salaries or other bills, investors would almost certainly demand higher interest rates at future Treasury auctions. That would drive up the cost to taxpayers of servicing the government's debt.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=232711647




Speaking on the Senate floor John McCain called the government shutdown/near default “one of the more shameful chapters I have seen in the years I have spent here in the Senate.”
John McCain has been in Congress a long time.
He spent four years as a Congressman and has been a Senator for 26 years. He’s seen 9 government shutdowns.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/john-mccain-says-the-government-shutdown-is-one-of-more-sham

Peter1469
10-16-2013, 03:59 PM
Not servicing the debt = default.

Not paying for other government programs = pissed off voters.

Captain Obvious
10-16-2013, 04:02 PM
Not servicing the debt = default.

Not paying for other government programs = pissed off voters.

But how is not servicing federal obligations to US citizens not default? That's the part I don't understand.

I understand "default" to the extent that external creditors are defaulted, however there is an element of "default" interpreted by those same creditors if we do not meet our internal obligations - hence, still "default".

jillian
10-16-2013, 04:27 PM
Not servicing the debt = default.

Not paying for other government programs = pissed off voters.

Except you can't pick and choose

keymanjim
10-16-2013, 04:42 PM
Except you can't pick and choose
Aside from the debt, yes you can.

Peter1469
10-16-2013, 05:52 PM
But how is not servicing federal obligations to US citizens not default? That's the part I don't understand.

I understand "default" to the extent that external creditors are defaulted, however there is an element of "default" interpreted by those same creditors if we do not meet our internal obligations - hence, still "default".

I am not saying that it isn't bad. I am just saying that failing to service the debt = default. Not sending out SS checks does not = default. The former would hurt the US credit rating much more than the later.

Peter1469
10-16-2013, 05:55 PM
Except you can't pick and choose

Of course you can- in fact under the 14th Amendment we are obligated to pay the interest first.

The problem is that we have created expensive programs that we can't afford. Our debt is in an unsustainable bubble- increasing the debt limit is not going to help at all.

Ravi
10-16-2013, 05:55 PM
The WWII monument just sits there. Other than lawn care (which can wait) there is no expense to keep it open. But it costs money to close it.....
Yeah I guess it would have been better to furlough people from the VA

AmazonTania
10-16-2013, 05:56 PM
I am not saying that it isn't bad. I am just saying that failing to service the debt = default. Not sending out SS checks does not = default. The former would hurt the US credit rating much more than the later.

By not making cuts, the US Government has already spent a message to our creditors that they are the low man on the totem poll.

Entitlements are the largest daily withdrawal expenditures made by the Treasury. As far as I can see, the very few cuts need to be made at this time (if any).

Ravi
10-16-2013, 05:58 PM
I am not saying that it isn't bad. I am just saying that failing to service the debt = default. Not sending out SS checks does not = default. The former would hurt the US credit rating much more than the later.
Except you would be defaulting on a promise. What do you think?h

AmazonTania
10-16-2013, 05:58 PM
Of course you can- in fact under the 14th Amendment we are obligated to pay the interest first.

The problem is that we have created expensive programs that we can't afford. Our debt is in an unsustainable bubble- increasing the debt limit is not going to help at all.

People somehow forgot the stagnating economic effect it has when the Government has to continually borrow from the public.

GrassrootsConservative
10-16-2013, 05:59 PM
Yeah I guess it would have been better to furlough people from the VA

Why do you people hate Veterans so much?

zelmo1234
10-16-2013, 06:00 PM
Except you would be defaulting on a promise. What do you think?h

Well this is coming! We will have to cut things,

When we had to cut back in 2009 we had to pink slip workers, the government could do the same? Thus they would not default to anyone!

AmazonTania
10-16-2013, 06:04 PM
There are plenty of things which can be cut which don't involve entitlements at all.

I'll explain in another thread... Maybe.

Ravi
10-16-2013, 06:05 PM
Well this is coming! We will have to cut things,

When we had to cut back in 2009 we had to pink slip workers, the government could do the same? Thus they would not default to anyone!the republicans should furlough themselves

Ravi
10-16-2013, 06:06 PM
There are plenty of things which can be cut which don't involve entitlements at all.

I'll explain in another thread... Maybe.
Your visa would be a good start.

AmazonTania
10-16-2013, 06:08 PM
Also, even if you do use Social Security deposits (assuming the Social Security Administration ran a surplus) all that would happen is there would be less money accumulated in the trust. Since the Government is obligated by law to invest these trust in US Securities, taking deposits from Social Security and using it to pay the maturities cutes out the middle man. Also, it doesn't increase the intragovernmental debt.

You will still have to make up for the money used for securities redemptions, but think of this like a cut in Social Security, without actually cutting Social Security.

AmazonTania
10-16-2013, 06:09 PM
Your visa would be a good start.

It's interesting how you would rather learn more about me than how your own Treasury system works.

Peter1469
10-16-2013, 06:18 PM
Yeah I guess it would have been better to furlough people from the VA


It would have cost $0 to leave the WWII memorial open. It is marble sitting on the Mall.

Peter1469
10-16-2013, 06:19 PM
By not making cuts, the US Government has already spent a message to our creditors that they are the low man on the totem poll.

Entitlements are the largest daily withdrawal expenditures made by the Treasury. As far as I can see, the very few cuts need to be made at this time (if any).

Right, and printing money to cover more spending only devalues the USD.