26
   

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

 
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 04:43 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Where's that guy who declared the end of the world recently? Maybe, only his timing was off. Smile Embarrassed Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Mr. Green Mr. Green Drunk Drunk Drunk Drunk


From over here it feels that certain people wouldn't be too upset about some sort of global catastrophe, because it would be a harbinger for the Rapture. How true do you think that is, especially with some of the people in parliament now?
0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  0  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 05:01 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

I can get more pissed off than I am and watch financial Armageddon unfold or I can subscribe to a conspiracy theory that prevents financial meltdown, allows the leaders to all save face and live to survive another election while at the same time exposing fanaticism for what it is...............

The scenario (no conspiracy theory!) has played out many times before us and will continue after we're gone. From the link I posted for Cicerone:
Quote:
Distress is not an easily measured condition for an economy. Investors may have become apprehensive when the values of certain variables diverged significantly from average values...... There may be contemporary awareness of the approach of some limit, such as the ceiling on note issues by the Bank of England stipulated in the Bank Act of 1844, the $100 million gold minimum requirement of the U.S. Treasury in 1893, the ceiling on advances from the Bank of France to the French Treasury in 1924, the gold reserve ratio of the Reichsbank under the Dawes Plan in June 1931, or the free gold available to the Federal Reserve System prior to the passage of the Glass-Steagall Act in February 1932.


Chapter 5, page 95 of "Manias, Panics, and Crashes", by Charles P. Kindleberger, the late MIT professor, ed. 2005 by Prof. Aliber. http://www.traders-library.com/download/Robert%20Aliber%20-%20Manias,%20Panics,%20and%20Crashes%20A%20History%20of%20Financial%20Crises.pdf
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 05:23 pm
@High Seas,
Quote:
ChadPergram Pelosi as she left the Capitol: As we get closer to the time, we have to get closer to the solution. She then told me to go home.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 05:28 pm
@High Seas,
But is there a bus in this scenario? My play includes a bus.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 05:29 pm
@JPB,
Depends on how much fuel that bus has, and how many stops it has to make before reaching its destination.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 06:19 pm
Fox news guest is recommending $1000 in cash. Sure, lets trigger a run on the banks now too!

Quote:
Today 6:23 PM Fox Guest Advises Viewers To Take Out $1,000 In Cash

There is, it appears, an emerging sense of panic developing on the cable news circuit over the state of a deal on the nation's debt ceiling. On Fox News Saturday afternoon, Patricia Powell, founder and CEO of Powell Financial Group, advised viewers that they would be wise to have $1,000 in cash on hand if Congress were unable to come to a deal.

"Everybody needs a cash reserve and I'm talking … seriously about cash, cash dollars in your wallet -- not just maybe money in the bank, but you also want money in the bank and not just in the money market fund," said Powell. "None of us know, if they … choose to default, whether there is going to be a credit crunch, whether you might have some trouble accessing some of your credit, and you might even have some trouble with your money market funds. So none of us know. Make sure you have cash."

"How much are you talking about?" asked the Fox host.

"For most of us, if we had $1000 in bills, in our drawer, we would be fine," said Powell. "I don't expect that you're going to need them, but you know what? If you need them, it would be nice to have."

It should be noted that there are a number of steps that banks take to avoid runs on their cash, including temporarily suspending withdrawals.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 08:48 pm
Senate vote postponed until 1:00 pm Sunday.

Quote:
ABC News has learned that Republicans and the White House have struck a tenative deal to raise the debt ceiling before the Aug. 2 deadline. It's not done yet, but here is the framework of the tentative deal they have worked out, according to a source familiar with the negotiations:

Debt ceiling increase of up to $2.8 trillion
Spending cuts of roughly $1 trillion
Special committee to recommend cuts of $1.8 trillion (or whatever it takes to add up to the total of the debt ceiling increase)
Committee must make recommendations before Thanksgiving recess
If Congress does not approve those cuts by late December, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 08:58 pm
@JPB,
Sounds reasonable - so far.
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:16 pm
@cicerone imposter,
CI wrote:
Sounds reasonable - so far.

No it's not. In a deep recession like the current one, it's disastrous economic policy. It may be less bad than some of the alternatives, which may be even more disastrous. But it's a stretch to call a disastrous bill "reasonable" just because the alternatives are even worse.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:30 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas, I'm not sure where you've been, but they're trying to work on an agreement with both sides still fighting for advantage. We must get through this crisis first, then work on other issues. If this is the only way for "compromise," they have my blessings.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:37 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
If this is the only way for "compromise," they have my blessings.

Not mine. First, paying ransom to hostage takers isn't a compromise, even if you negotiate the amount of the ransom down by a few percent. Second, paying ransom to hostage takers is generally not reasonable, because this only encourages them to do it again. In a blackmail situation like this, escalating the confrontation can be the lesser evil; I think this is the case here. I would have preferred the 14th-Amendment option now over another hostage crisis a few months later.

It almost seems as if you and I are in less than perfect agreement on this one. Smile
cicerone imposter
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 30 Jul, 2011 09:46 pm
@Thomas,
That's because "winning this argument" costs many people their savings, investments, jobs, and future increase in costs that are not necessary.

Also, there are still many "out there" who believe that the tea partiers are doing their bidding to reduce the cost of our government - even if they don't realize that what they are doing is destroying or creating more difficulties for the economies of this world, and the effect to future costs of everything.

We need to put a stop to this destruction, because we should know better.



firefly
 
  0  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2011 12:19 am
Quote:
Pelosi 'Clearly' Backs 14th Amendment Option In Debt Standoff, Congressman Reports
7/31/11

WASHINGTON -- House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) may not be pushing the issue publicly, but in private she "clearly" supports President Barack Obama using the Constitution to raise the debt ceiling as a last resort, according to one Democratic member of Congress.

"Nancy clearly wants it," said the lawmaker, who requested anonymity. "Publicly? No. Privately? She thinks the president should do it. Period."

Several top Democrats have endorsed the idea in recent days as an eleventh hour solution: House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) backed the option on Wednesday, and House Democratic Caucus chairman John Larson (D-Conn.) and Assistant Minority Leader James Clyburn (D-S.C.) emerged from a Monday Caucus meeting announcing their support for the idea as well.

But Pelosi, the highest-ranking House Democrat, has been mum. One possible reason is that she has to preserve the image that Congress will reach a deal before the situation even gets to that point.

The provision at the heart of the constitutional debate, Section 4 of the 14th Amendment, states: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payments of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” Essentially, Democrats are arguing that since the "public debt" cannot be questioned, then the debt ceiling itself is unconstitutional.

A Pelosi aide said he hasn't heard the Minority Leader endorse the constitutional option to any lawmakers. "But who knows," said the aide. "Our official line is her energy is focused on getting a balanced deal."

That "deal," of course, remains nonexistent. Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) met with Obama for nearly two hours on Saturday afternoon, shortly after the House voted down Reid's debt ceiling proposal. Reid took to the Senate floor afterward to knock Republicans for refusing to negotiate and said "the process has not been moved forward during this day."

The crumbling state of discussions over how to raise the debt ceiling by August 2, when the government is expected to run out of money to pay its bills, is causing a growing number of Democrats to nervously turn their attention to the constitutional option as a possible way of averting default. Meanwhile, the White House insists the option remains off the table, citing concerns with Obama's legal authority to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling without congressional approval.

The issue "came up" during a Democratic Caucus meeting on Saturday, Del. Donna Christensen (D-Virgin Islands) told The Huffington Post, but was not considered a viable option "for today."

"It's one I don't like, and I know the president has said he doesn't like," said Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.). "But if that's what it takes to prevent the country from catastrophic default, I think at the very last minute, I think that's something the president's going to have to consider."

When asked if he is optimistic that Congress can reach a deal by August 2, Connolly replied with a resounding "no."

"I think we're coming down the wire and the other side is essentially enthralled to a very narrow orthodoxy that doesn't allow them, ultimately, to recognize their obligations to the United States," he said. "I'm very concerned about that."

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the former chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, charged forward on Saturday, filing a resolution with a group of progressive Democrats calling on Obama to take the constitutional route as a last resort.

"I think it's essential" that Obama be prepared to invoke the 14th Amendment, Nadler told The Huffington Post. "I'm dubious that anybody can come to any agreement that can pass both houses."

Asked if such action would only give ammunition to critics ready to call for Obama's impeachment -- this time for potentially violating the Constitution -- Nadler replied, "Let them try. Let them try."

The New York Democrat wondered aloud how much of the president's insistence that the option is off the table is for show, given that he needs to convey that the situation won't come to that point.

"It's something he should say," Nadler said of Obama's rejection of the 14th Amendment option. "But the fact is, legally, I think it's doable."

The increasing anxiety about an endgame was evident during Saturday's House debate. In the minutes before the House rejected Reid's debt proposal, some Democrats used their floor time to urge Obama to step in.

"The president needs to pull the 14th Amendment," Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) said. "I think he should, because the Republicans have shown no sign of compromise."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/30/congressman-pelosi-clearly-backs-14th-amendment-in-debt-standoff_n_914137.html?icid=main%7Chp-laptop%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%7C220562


I'd be in favor of the 14th Amendment option if that's what it would take to avert default.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2011 12:56 am
@firefly,
Quote:
Pelosi 'Clearly' Backs 14th Amendment Option In Debt Standoff, Congressman Reports
I would be shocked if there are 5 people in Washington who care what Pelosi thinks....
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2011 06:02 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

Senate vote postponed until 1:00 pm Sunday.

Quote:
ABC News has learned that Republicans and the White House have struck a tenative deal to raise the debt ceiling before the Aug. 2 deadline. It's not done yet, but here is the framework of the tentative deal they have worked out, according to a source familiar with the negotiations:

Debt ceiling increase of up to $2.8 trillion
Spending cuts of roughly $1 trillion
Special committee to recommend cuts of $1.8 trillion (or whatever it takes to add up to the total of the debt ceiling increase)
Committee must make recommendations before Thanksgiving recess
If Congress does not approve those cuts by late December, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare.



Good morning. I'm glad I didn't stay up until the wee hours waiting for a vote. This morning I have been racing through articles on this so-called compromise. The debt ceiling crisis would indeed be averted, not to be revisited until the next time we approach the limit. There is some other piece of non-controversial legislation that this could be tied to to get the limit into effect before Tuesday until a stand alone bill can be passed in a week or so.
The special committee thing could be a problem. Congress, even when it can't function, doesn't like the deus ex machina thing. I also see that the committee can look at tax increases vs just spending cuts. The automatic across the board cuts if agreement on the committee's suggestions, estimated at 4%, would cut across the board from Defense through Medicare.
The balanced budget constitutional amendment vote is still in there.
High Seas
 
  0  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2011 06:32 am
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

Quote:
Pelosi 'Clearly' Backs 14th Amendment Option In Debt Standoff, Congressman Reports
7/31/11
....Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the former chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, charged forward on Saturday, filing a resolution with a group of progressive Democrats calling on Obama to take the constitutional route as a last resort.....


Rep. Nadler "charging forward" is enough to scare anybody, but at least - unlike former Rep. Wiener - he's not tweeting nude pictures of himself:
http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2006/06/19/ba_nadler01.jpg

Btw, the "automatic across-the-board cuts" in the Senate compromise proposal are even more constitutionally suspect than the debt ceiling per se.


0 Replies
 
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2011 06:39 am
@realjohnboy,
Skip the talk, look at the numbers as published on the Treasury site: the debt is already over $15 trillion and going higher. This Aug. 2 "deadline" is a joke:
http://www.fundmasteryblog.net/images/whitehouse--USdebtceiling--1980-2011.jpg
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2011 07:31 am
Quote:
The plan, parts of which are still being negotiated by the White House and bipartisan congressional leaders, would allow the debt ceiling to be raised by enough to last at least through the end of 2012.

The debt limit would be increased in two stages, both of which would occur automatically -- a key Democratic demand that would prevent a repeat of the current crisis before the next election.

The agreement includes upfront spending cuts in the range of roughly $1 trillion, the sources said. A special congressional committee would recommend additional spending reductions of up to $1.8 trillion no later than Thanksgiving.

If Congress fails to approve the recommended cuts by late December, automatic, across-the-board cuts -- including both defense and Medicare -- would take effect.

News of a possible deal came shortly after the Senate delayed consideration of Majority Leader Harry Reid's debt ceiling proposal late Saturday night, pushing back a key procedural vote by 12 hours.



source

I am disappointed that special tax breaks and loopholes are not addressed in this bill that I can see while cuts across medicare are (and military.) Thomas is right it is giving in to blackmail and the fourteenth amendment is way more attractive, however, I really can't see Obama doing it if a deal can be reached that is not too out there. They are still negotiating and we don't know if the TPartiers and some democrats will go enough for it to pass.

realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2011 08:58 am
@revelette,
I did find one article, rev, that said "tax reform" was an option for the committee that would be formed in the 2nd step of the debt ceiling increase.
The vote scheduled for 1 pm (ET) is a preliminary vote on the new scheme. I see it as being postponed as there is enough in it as being unacceptable to all sides.
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Sun 31 Jul, 2011 09:05 am
@realjohnboy,
Right, there's still too much time left to make the one-pager necessary, which is a key component of the bus ride. They cannot allow the precedent for holding a debt ceiling increase hostage to a group of fanatics. They're fools if they do.
 

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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 02:55:17