26
   

Tick, tick. August 2nd is the Debt Limit Armageddon. Or Not.

 
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2011 06:19 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

It would definitely cause a constitutional crisis heading into next year's election. With the SC having the makeup it currently does, it isn't at all clear that Obama would win such an argument; and it would play right into the hands of Republicans for him to do so, who would argue that he's a tyrant, who ignores the law AND the recommendations of his own treasury.

The politics of your recommendation suck.

Cycloptichorn


So what? This is beyond politics. I'm looking for the best plan that serves the needs of the American people and this is the best one I see. You can call the Freshman 90 as many names as you want but if they dig deep then there's going to be a choice to be made and this is the one I would back.

You've made a number of posts today that take the position that you know what's in Obama's head and his heart. I don't have much faith in your crystal ball. I quite honestly don't care if it comes down to a constitutional crisis during an election season. Put it back on to the voters, then, to decide who they want to represent them. Isn't that the way it's supposed to work? Three branches of government striking a balance that best serves the people?

Public service? What a joke!!! I try to keep a neutral lens in my view but I don't see a whole lot of folks in Washington these days who are looking at anything other than their own back pockets and those of who pay to get them there. The system is broken. It's been cracking for some time and the Freshman 90 were elected on the basis of a tremendous frustration with Washington. Unfortunately, they aren't helping matters any.

Let the next election cycle exist during a period of constitutional crisis if that's what it takes for the American public to FINALLY wake up to the fact that "they" are no longer be served and the concept of public service from our elected officials is a complete misnomer.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2011 06:31 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

It's been cracking for some time and the Freshman 90 were elected on the basis of a tremendous frustration with Washington. Unfortunately, they aren't helping matters any.


Absolutely. They went to Washington with the idea they had some sort of mandate. All they really has was the message that we were watching and didn't like what we had been seeing. So far as I can tell, we still don't.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2011 06:31 pm
@JPB,
Quote:
You've made a number of posts today that take the position that you know what's in Obama's head and his heart. I don't have much faith in your crystal ball.


Those posts are indeed based on my best guesses and projections of Obama's strategy, informed by the things I've read on the subject and supported by the way events have gone so far. I said from the beginning that this would backfire on the R's and it indeed has done just that.

The 'freshman 90' are needed for nothing at all. Boehner could and can pass a debt increase limit without them in a heartbeat - by getting the support of the Dems to do so. It would hardly be the first time in history that such a thing has happened.

It's easy to talk tough online about how a crisis should be forced, but it's a lot tougher when you are the person who has to live with the responsibility for the decision to take actions that will actively harm millions of people. That's why they do deals instead holding tough.

It would be easy for me to come here and say "Obama should just tell them to **** off, and then get a clean debt ceiling passed once the crisis hits." Obama could go on TV and demonize the Republicans each and every day on this issue; he could bring everything else to a halt and force the Republican's hand. I think he would likely win such a battle, because the truth is that the R's aren't very popular. Every one of the policies they champion is far more popular than they are personally, and most of those lose out to Dem positions. Obama could force and win this crisis if he wanted to.

But it would be reckless and ******* stupid, exactly as the Republicans forcing a crisis is reckless and stupid. I cannot recommend he take such an action; I would condemn such an action by him, even though in my heart I would agree with him. Just as I condemn Republicans acting so recklessly.

This conversation is all immaterial, as they will end up doing a deal in the end, and everything will lurch onward just a little farther.

Quote:
The system is broken.


People have been saying this for 200 years now, and we just keep truckin' right along. So I'm not sure I would agree.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2011 07:43 pm
@JPB,
Cyclo says it's been broken for much longer, but when have we had any congress that refused to compromise at all?

Obama has made it clear from the very beginning that he wants to negotiate with the GOP on issues, but what he got were nothing but "no's." That's not negotiation or compromise; that's defeatism. When the other side fails to talk about solutions, the only option in cases such as this is to let them have their way to destroy our economy. They seem immune to the realities of what they are doing. They need to pay the piker, or Obama will continue to have a GOP-No Party at every turn.

If that's acceptable, Obama should just give up the reins to the GOP, because he's already made it clear he will bend with the threats. He hasn't taken responsibility of the facts that have the other side just wants to destroy him.

Obama has failed at communicating with the American people too often, and when he has, it's been a bit late.

If he doesn't know how to fight, he can just throw in the towel, and save the American people the slow death.
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Jul, 2011 07:47 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Some of it are owned by the federal reserves (I believe the biggest balance), some state and local governments, funds, corporations, and private citizens, and there are foreign investments in those equities that are not tracked by country.


The Fed currently has $1.6 trillion of Treasury paper on its books. Foreign holdings including central banks are $4.5 trillion, the rest is held in the US.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 02:20 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
The 'freshman 90' are needed for nothing at all. Boehner could and can pass a debt increase limit without them in a heartbeat - by getting the support of the Dems to do so. It would hardly be the first time in history that such a thing has happened.


Precisely what I think he should do.



Cycloptichorn wrote:
...But it would be reckless and ******* stupid, exactly as the Republicans forcing a crisis is reckless and stupid. I cannot recommend he take such an action; I would condemn such an action by him, even though in my heart I would agree with him. Just as I condemn Republicans acting so recklessly.

This conversation is all immaterial, as they will end up doing a deal in the end, and everything will lurch onward just a little farther.


I agree.

revelette
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 07:22 am
On the surface, the plan the "gang of six" seems to have something for both sides to both like and hate. So maybe its good. I noticed that they said cuts in medicare but an overhaul of social security. That is not something that democrats like (including myself , the cuts part anyway) However, in this case, if this passes at some point (probably not in time for the deadline) at least the republicans are giving way too in cutting out the loopholes and special tax breaks and havens. So in this case, this would not be a case of Obama giving it all away in return for nothing. (Which BTW he didn't when he passed the extension of the Bush tax cuts, he got the extended unemployment benefits and other things in return. )

President Obama Gingerly Embraces Ideas Behind Gang of Six (Seven) Deficit-Reduction Plan
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 08:47 am


What's a 'tax expenditure'?

Can anyone define it as it pertains to the plan the so-called gang of six has come up with.

Thanks
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 09:38 am
@H2O MAN,
Deductions and credits to AGI that would be taxable otherwise. I have no idea why they chose that word -- it's tax money that never comes in, not money they spend.

Here's a pdf of the Executive Summary
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/gangofsix.pdf
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 09:54 am
With every day that goes by, the public turns further against the GOP on the debt limit issue.

Quote:
Post-ABC poll: GOP too dug in on debt talks; public fears default consequences
By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen, Published: July 19

Majorities of Americans see both President Obama and congressional Republicans as not willing enough to compromise in their budget negotiations, but the public views the GOP leaders as particularly intransigent, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

There is also growing dissatisfaction among Republicans with the hard-line stance of their congressional representatives: Fifty-eight percent say their leaders are not doing enough to strike a deal, up from 42 percent in March.

While Republicans in Congress have remained united in their opposition to any tax increases, the poll finds GOP majorities favoring some of the specific changes advocated by the president, including higher income tax rates for the wealthiest Americans.

There is also broad dissatisfaction with Obama’s unwillingness to reach across the aisle: Nearly six in 10 of those polled say the president has not been open enough to compromise. Among independents, 79 percent say Republicans aren’t willing enough to make a deal, while 62 percent say the same of Obama.

Republicans may also be losing the war of perception about who stands with whom in the debates over the deficit and the economy. A majority view the president as more committed to protecting the interests of the middle class and small businesses, while large majorities see Republicans as defending the economic interests of big corporations and Wall Street financial institutions.

If there were an economic breakdown, neither side would escape blame. Forty-two percent say they would mostly hold the GOP responsible, and 36 percent say Obama would be at fault. But Republicans in Congress are also under increasing pressure from their own partisans.

Although some Republican lawmakers have cast doubt on the seriousness of the Aug. 2 deadline, majorities across party lines in the poll predict dire economic consequences if the two sides fail to extend the government’s borrowing power and a default results.

The sputtering negotiations and rhetorical standoffs have further damaged the image of Washington in the eyes of the public. Fully 80 percent are now “dissatisfied” or “angry” about the way the federal government is working, rising 11 percentage points from June to the highest level in polls going back to the early 1990s. The sharp increase in dissatisfaction with the government coincides with the fractious deficit negotiations and a clear hardening along party lines in Congress.

In a sign of the potential political consequences of the public’s discontent, 63 percent of all Americans say they are inclined to look around for new representatives in the 2012 elections, the highest on record in Post-ABC polls.

Hope, but also concern

Overall, a 54 percent majority say the president and Congress are likely to reach an agreement to raise the debt ceiling by the August deadline. But there is clear concern that neither side is willing to budge.

More than three-quarters of Americans say the Republican leadership is too averse to compromise on the deficit. Even among Republicans, 58 percent see the GOP as too resistant to a deal, up from 42 percent in March.

In the new poll, fully 50 percent of conservative Republicans and “strong” tea party supporters say the GOP leadership is too unwilling to make a deal on the deficit. But in other areas, the views of GOP leaders are more in sync with those of strong tea party supporters than those of the rest of the party faithful. That is the case on raising taxes on the wealthy, for example, where opposition from strong tea party supporters is 20 percentage points higher than among all Republicans.

Democrats, on the other hand, appear worried that Obama is too prepared to give in to Republicans. Exactly half of all Democrats say the president is “too willing” to compromise.

Most Democrats oppose increasing the age for Medicare eligibility and changing how Social Security benefits are calculated, two major changes that Obama has suggested could be part of a “grand bargain” aimed at overcoming the debt-limit impasse.

Majorities of Democrats and Republicans in the poll agree on other items considered for a potential deal — raising taxes on high-wage earners and on oil and gas companies.

Republicans split on taxes

GOP leaders have said repeatedly that they oppose the inclusion of any new taxes in an agreement, in part because their rank and file is strongly resistant to them. But the Post-ABC News poll shows a Republican Party clearly divided on that question.

Overall, more than six in 10 Americans say a plan to reduce the deficit should include a combination of spending cuts and new taxes, rather than exclusively one or the other. Big majorities of Democrats and independents and nearly half of all Republicans support the mixed approach.

But the GOP argument that spending cuts create jobs has advanced a bit since March. Nearly half of all Americans say big cuts in federal spending would spur new jobs, a six-point increase. But a similar 44 percent see such cuts as more apt to slice the number of jobs.

Although Obama appears to be on more solid ground than Republicans in terms of public opinion on these issues, he has clear political vulnerabilities. His overall approval rating remains below the 50 percent mark and, at 47 percent, is one point from a career low in Post-ABC polling.

Fifty-seven percent of all Americans disapprove of the way the president is handling the economy, and 60 percent give him negative marks on the deficit. Those who “strongly disapprove” of how he is dealing with each of these issues outnumber those who either “strongly” or “somewhat” approve.

But the GOP is doing worse in these areas: Sixty-seven percent of Americans disapprove of the way congressional Republicans are handling the economy, and 68 percent give them low marks when it comes to the deficit.

Who cares more?

On other measures, the president comes out ahead of Republicans: By 47 percent to 37 percent, Americans say Obama cares more about protecting their own families’ economic interests than do the Republicans. By an almost identical margin, the president is seen as caring more about the economic interests of small businesses, which Republicans long have championed as part of their core coalition.

More than eight in 10 — including 80 percent of Republicans — say there would be serious harm to the U.S. economy if the government could not continue to borrow money to fund its operations and pay its debts after Aug. 2.

Nearly as many — more than three-quarters — say the financial reputation of the United States would be severely undermined if the government’s borrowing power dried up. Six in 10 say such an event would deeply hurt their own financial situations.

Polling manager Peyton M. Craighill and polling analyst Scott Clement contributed to this report.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/post-abc-news-poll-public-sees-dire-consequences-if-no-budget-deal/2011/07/19/gIQA4MQPOI_print.html

Cycloptichorn
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 10:11 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Yep, more on that here...

Quote:
By NBC's Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Brooke Brower

*** Disconnect: Yesterday provided us with a clear example of the current disconnect between President Obama and the Senate vs. House Republicans and the Tea Party. In the Senate, we saw dozens of Democratic and Republican senators tripping over themselves to embrace the bipartisan Gang of Six deficit-reduction proposal, which Obama also praised. But in the House, Republicans passed their symbolic "Cut, Cap, and Balance" measure through a mostly party-line vote. And to top it off, freshman Tea Party Rep. Allen West (R-FL) fired off a mean-spirited email to DNC Chair and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), after she suggested that West’s support for “Cut, Cap, and Balance” would increase costs for Medicare recipients. “You are the most vile, unprofessional ,and despicable member of the US House of Representatives,” West wrote. “You have proven repeatedly that you are not a Lady.”

*** The Tea Party vs. everyone else: This disconnect is also evident in our brand-new NBC/WSJ poll. When provided arguments from both sides on whether or not to raise the debt ceiling, 49% support increasing it -- including 66% of Democrats, 50% of independents, and even 50% of non-Tea Party Republicans. Meanwhile, 43% oppose raising the debt ceiling -- including 62% of Tea Party supporters. Moreover, 58% say they favor Obama’s mixed approach to reduce the deficit (through spending cuts, tax increases, and changes to entitlements), including 88% of Democrats and 54% of indies. On the other hand, 36% back the House Republican plan (spending cuts only), including 70% of Tea Party supporters (!!!). House Republican leaders now find themselves caught between their Tea Party base and independents. In 2010, these groups were largely on the same page. That’s not true anymore.

*** The White House is winning the PR battle:
The poll also shows that Obama is clearly winning a legislative argument -- in terms of public opinion -- for the first time in his presidency. In addition to having a 22-point lead on his deficit proposal vs. the House GOP’s, a plurality in the poll (by a 38%-31% margin) says the debt ceiling should be raised, which is a sharp reversal from June when a plurality (39%-28%) opposed the move. When told that failing to raise the debt ceiling could jeopardize payments to Social Security recipient and military personnel, 49% support increasing it. And 43% oppose it when told that an increase would make it harder to reduce the deficit. “You are watching opinion shift as people are learning more about the debate,” says NBC/WSJ co-pollster Bill McInturff (R). By the way, one smart Republican said to one of us yesterday: If only his party hadn't gotten themselves trapped by the debt ceiling, they MIGHT have a better shot at winning the LARGER argument.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 10:12 am
@JPB,
I believe the 'gang of 6' plan was only put out at this time in order to push the House into voting for the McConnell plan put forth last week.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 11:00 am
@Cycloptichorn,
What's the chance it getting approved by the Senate?
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 01:49 pm


Do any of you think Obama and the democrats have the capacity to compromise?
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 02:00 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

With every day that goes by, the public turns further against the GOP on the debt limit issue.


Laughing Don't be so gullible Cyclotroll.

Only the public polls given by the Obama media and not directed at registered voters show these trends.

Obama's internal polling shows the truth and it's the total opposite of what the Obama media is telling America.

Registered voters continue to turn away from Obama and his democrats on all issues.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 05:07 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

What's a 'tax expenditure?"
Thanks.


H2O: JPB probably gave you an answer with her link to a source, but it was in a PDF format and I can't easily access PDF's.
I may be repeating a lot of stuff there.
"Tax expenditures" equate to money lost to the government, as she noted due to, amongst other things, tax laws allowing for deductions, exemptions, exclusions, deferred tax liability and preferential tax rates.
For example, you can deduct the mortgage interest not only on your primary residence but also on your vacation home(s). The "tax expenditure" for the government because of allowing interest deductions on 2nd homes costs the government $X.
Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction on 2nd homes could qualify as a "tax increase" which is a verboten phrase not mentioned in Washington anymore.
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 06:31 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

What's a 'tax expenditure?"
Thanks.


H2O:
"Tax expenditures" equate to money lost to the government, as she noted due to, amongst other things, tax laws allowing for deductions, exemptions, exclusions, deferred tax liability and preferential tax rates.


OK, it sounds like 'tax expenditures' is a strange way of identifying money the government somehow mistakenly allowed those who earned it to keep. And if I read between the lines, the Obama administration is looking to take more money from those that have earned it.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 06:37 pm
Quote:
Congress Continues Debate Over Whether Or Not Nation Should Be Economically Ruined

WASHINGTON—Members of the U.S. Congress reported Wednesday they were continuing to carefully debate the issue of whether or not they should allow the country to descend into a roiling economic meltdown of historically dire proportions. "It is a question that, I think, is worthy of serious consideration: Should we take steps to avoid a crippling, decades-long depression that would lead to disastrous consequences on a worldwide scale? Or should we not do that?" asked House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), adding that arguments could be made for both sides, and that the debate over ensuring America’s financial solvency versus allowing the nation to default on its debt—which would torpedo stock markets, cause mortgage and interests rates to skyrocket, and decimate the value of the U.S. dollar—is “certainly a conversation worth having.” "Obviously, we don't want to rush to consensus on whether it is or isn't a good idea to save the American economy and all our respective livelihoods from certain peril until we've examined this thorny dilemma from every angle. And if we’re still discussing this matter on Aug. 2, well, then, so be it.” At press time, President Obama said he personally believed the country should not be economically ruined.


Source.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 07:12 pm
@sozobe,
Where does Cyclo's confidence come from? I fail to see it from every report I've read in the media. They're close, but they're not.

I'm confused!
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Wed 20 Jul, 2011 07:13 pm
@sozobe,
Eric Cantor, from my state of Virginia, is a loose cannon. He has a big ego and big ambitions. He wants to be the voice of the "new" republicans and if that involves backstabbing the party leadership, he will do it.
I (from the perspective of being a Democrat observer) believe he will get his ears pinned back if he continues with his rhetoric that a government shutdown would not be that bad. He is backing off that here in VA big time.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/19/2025 at 07:44:24