The way I read the article, it's "if the debt limit isn't raised, Geithner will be forced to make some truly ugly choices".

For once it would mean facing reality instead of deferring the tough decisions to a later date. (Monetize the debt and risk hyperinflation? Cut spending dramatically?)

You apparently read it a different way, "Tea party sucks go democrats", perhaps you could explain how you came to that conclusion.

Originally Posted by Symbiote

The way I read the article, it's "if the debt limit isn't raised, Geithner will be forced to make some truly ugly choices".
For once it would mean facing reality instead of deferring the tough decisions to a later date. (Monetize the debt and risk hyperinflation? Cut spending dramatically?)You apparently read it a different way, "Tea party sucks go democrats", perhaps you could explain how you came to that conclusion

First of all I didn't say " Tea Party Sucks, Go Democrats..".. I pointed out the Tea Party because it was Tea Party people who ranted and Raved that their New Majority was going to Do all these Wonderful things, like repeal Health Care, which turned out to be a bust. They also made the Promise of " No Compromise".. I heard this for two months leading up to last years elections. I Read the Article just as it is, and it spells DOOM for the Tea Party. I'll tell you why....

When they are faced with raising the debt ceiling they are going to have two choices.. Yes... or no...

If they say Yes then they are breaking one of their campaign Promises, you know the one not to compromise with the evil Democrats. That pretty much means most of them will be one term congressmen, and some old dogs are going to get a early retirement.

If they say no then Geithner will have to do what he must to keep from defaulting on the Debt. He has the power to Nationalize any Government supported industry in order to save the Union,.. How much money do you think he can come up with if he does so with the insurance companies?.. Worst case he will defer payments to Social Security, Medicare, VA benefits, and any other program he feels can be placed at the back of the line. Trust me, when the Elderly( whom voted the Tea Party and GOP into Power last November) suddenly are faced with not getting their checks and Medical care, what do you think they will do?

All this will be placed squarely at the feet of the House Majority, and they will be voted out as soon as possible.

So really either way it goes from here the Tea Party and the Old Rhino GOP who are left will be gone, the Liberals will once again be in charge and we can go back to Spending ourselves into history.

I'm a Liberal yes, on most issues. But I do not support either side 100%. I just want politicians who will do something instead of continuing this Partisan Political battle that's dragged this country backwards for too many years.

I'm not taking a shot at the Tea Party, I got over that after the election. What I am doing is pointing out a reality that they will face soon, so it's up to them what they do.

You're talking about the possibility of hyperinflation, national default, nationalisation of major industries and cutting off welfare, and your concern is about the implications of this for the political success of the tea party?

Seems a little tangential to me. When you are living in third world conditions, will you take solace in your lord and savior obama retaining ultimate power?

Originally Posted by Symbiote

You're talking about the possibility of hyperinflation, national default, nationalisation of major industries and cutting off welfare, and your concern is about the implications of this for the political success of the tea party?

Seems a little tangential to me. When you are living in third world conditions, will you take solace in your lord and savior obama retaining ultimate power?

LOL... well I don't have a " Lord and Savior", I'm just as disgusted with Obama as I am the rest of our Government Leaders. I guess you didn't pick up on the Sarcasm In my previous post. They're all wasting Valuable time fighting amongst themselves for Power, but they don't seem to realize that their decisions now may just shift all that "Power" to Geithner. Remember who it was who Appointed the Him?

No, this situation is not going to be good for anyone.

Originally Posted by Symbiote

The way I read the article, it's "if the debt limit isn't raised, Geithner will be forced to make some truly ugly choices".

For once it would mean facing reality instead of deferring the tough decisions to a later date. (Monetize the debt and risk hyperinflation? Cut spending dramatically?)

You apparently read it a different way, "Tea party sucks go democrats", perhaps you could explain how you came to that conclusion.

Take it easy. I think Xcaliber is just saying we are screwed either way.

IMO this is a litmus test for the Tea Party. They have the muscle to shut down the government if they all refuse to vote for the debt ceiling increase, which means they have the muscle to force pretty much any cuts through that they want. For all intents and purposes they can dictate terms on a "take it or leave it" basis.

Does anybody really think they will do it?

IMO the most likely scenario is a quick up or down vote...at night if possible...then a bunch of excuses as to why it had to be done and why they could not force spending cuts through with it.

Originally Posted by daewoo

IMO this is a litmus test for the Tea Party. They have the muscle to shut down the government if they all refuse to vote for the debt ceiling increase, which means they have the muscle to force pretty much any cuts through that they want. For all intents and purposes they can dictate terms on a "take it or leave it" basis.

Does anybody really think they will do it?

IMO the most likely scenario is a quick up or down vote...at night if possible...then a bunch of excuses as to why it had to be done and why they could not force spending cuts through with it.

yeah I don't think they can or will use this to try and force anything. If they were to try that and the Liberals didn't budge it would still be blamed on the Right. They don't want to get to that point though because if they say no then the Power will shift to Geithner and with him being an Obama man that could be even more of a disaster. I think they are just going to have to take their lumps and raise the debt ceiling. Either way they go now it's not going to sit well with the voters. Considering the health care repeal will never see daylight they are now batting 0 for 2.

I'm wondering how much Obama is asking them to raise the ceiling to?.. I haven't been able to find a reliable source on the actual Numbers. I think right now if I'm not Mistaken the Ceiling is like 14.3 trillion... and supposedly we are about to exceed that. I'm going to start a Journal my Kids can pass down to their Kids and so on, so that my great Great, GREAT, grandchildren will know why they are paying out their ears for our past mistakes.

After much thought, I think I agree with David Walker (as usual) on the subject. Raise the debt ceiling is properly necessary but we should do it along with a guaranteed way to balance a budget within 2-4 years. The reason I say this is because this budget year is already half over. You might as well finish it out and just work on an ACTUAL plan for FY12. Granted we can't even get a budget for this current year. Anyway, like most government agencies that money is most likely committed already for the foreseeable 5-6 months. Frankly I don't want us to act like the state of Illinois when we could just as easily raise the debt ceiling temporarily on the condition that the budget deficit is cut by 50-60% for FY12 and balanced by FY14.

Let's look at that poll a little closer:
Public strongly opposes debt ceiling increase: Reuters/Ipsos | Reuters

Only 23% think we should cut back Medicare and 20% Social Security. Barely a majority think we should cut back the military at 51%. The only one people seem to think is good is cutting back on foreign aid which is only like $50-60 billion a year I believe. I'm not so sure cutting a portion of only 2% of our budget is going to help much and prevent the debt ceiling from being raised.

It is mathematically impossible to NOT raise the debt ceiling (or balance the budget) without cuts to Medicare/Medicaid (HHS),Social Security, AND Defense. We could cut defense by 100% and cut everything else besides HHS and SS by 50% and run a deficit causing us to increase the debt ceiling. Let that sink in for a second.

There is only one way to go here. Cut Defense by 2/3rds, End Medicare Part D and cut benefits to rich old folks, cut SS benefits to rich old folks, reform SS and Medicare for the long run. Follow that with a REAL reform of Health care and 3 years of 15,10,5% cuts (in that order) for every other department. Raise the maximums for taxing SS and Medicare benefits and increase income taxes on the top 10% of income tax earners. Do that and you'll balance a budget.

Originally Posted by Steeeeve

After much thought, I think I agree with David Walker (as usual) on the subject. Raise the debt ceiling is properly necessary but we should do it along with a guaranteed way to balance a budget within 2-4 years. The reason I say this is because this budget year is already half over. You might as well finish it out and just work on an ACTUAL plan for FY12. Granted we can't even get a budget for this current year. Anyway, like most government agencies that money is most likely committed already for the foreseeable 5-6 months. Frankly I don't want us to act like the state of Illinois when we could just as easily raise the debt ceiling temporarily on the condition that the budget deficit is cut by 50-60% for FY12 and balanced by FY14.

Let's look at that poll a little closer:
Public strongly opposes debt ceiling increase: Reuters/Ipsos | Reuters

Only 23% think we should cut back Medicare and 20% Social Security. Barely a majority think we should cut back the military at 51%. The only one people seem to think is good is cutting back on foreign aid which is only like $50-60 billion a year I believe. I'm not so sure cutting a portion of only 2% of our budget is going to help much and prevent the debt ceiling from being raised.

It is mathematically impossible to NOT raise the debt ceiling (or balance the budget) without cuts to Medicare/Medicaid (HHS),Social Security, AND Defense. We could cut defense by 100% and cut everything else besides HHS and SS by 50% and run a deficit causing us to increase the debt ceiling. Let that sink in for a second.

There is only one way to go here. Cut Defense by 2/3rds, End Medicare Part D and cut benefits to rich old folks, cut SS benefits to rich old folks, reform SS and Medicare for the long run. Follow that with a REAL reform of Health care and 3 years of 15,10,5% cuts (in that order) for every other department. Raise the maximums for taxing SS and Medicare benefits and increase income taxes on the top 10% of income tax earners. Do that and you'll balance a budget.

I have also been thinking about this, and I am not sure I agree.. I WOULD certainly agree if I had any faith at all that they would actully make the cuts later and balance the budget. I just dont see it happening without a crisis. If they refuse to raise the ceiling, then our politicians HAVE TO act. They can not do what they did last time around where they debated it and then came to the conclusion that they would pass it, but fix the problem later, and then embarked on the biggest federal spending spree in history.

Pat Toomey just introduced a bill that requires the treasury to prioritize spending so interest on the national debt is paid first. That takes Armageddon off the table.

I understand what you are saying here, and if I thought there was any way that they would actually take the steps needed to address the problem without having their backs firmly against the wall, I would agree. I just dont see it happening. There is simply no way that congress is going to take the needed steps without being forced to.

That said, you and I both know it will end up being increased. Congress does not care what the american people want. They are not going to make the hard cuts. They are going to pass a ridiculous bill that cuts federal expenditures by 2%, after raising them 20%, and call it good. They will continue down that road until the nation fails, then they will point fingers at each other.

Originally Posted by daewoo

I have also been thinking about this, and I am not sure I agree.. I WOULD certainly agree if I had any faith at all that they would actully make the cuts later and balance the budget. I just dont see it happening without a crisis. If they refuse to raise the ceiling, then our politicians HAVE TO act. They can not do what they did last time around where they debated it and then came to the conclusion that they would pass it, but fix the problem later, and then embarked on the biggest federal spending spree in history.

This is basically the same idea though. If congress is not serious enough to balance the budget after they promised to than they are not going to be serious enough to not raise the debt ceiling. In other words, it really doesn't matter HOW they get serious about the issue, the end result if they DO get serious looks the same.

I understand what you are saying here, and if I thought there was any way that they would actually take the steps needed to address the problem without having their backs firmly against the wall, I would agree. I just dont see it happening. There is simply no way that congress is going to take the needed steps without being forced to.

But my point is they force themselves either way. I mean lets be honest here, they are going to raise the debt ceiling AND increase spending or maybe level it off at unsustainable levels. All we are arguing is if going from A to B to C is better than going from A straight to C. Both end up in the same position.

I mean, if you aren't confident in thinking they will follow their own control with spending than what makes you confident they will follow a control they imposed upon themselves.

That said, you and I both know it will end up being increased. Congress does not care what the american people want. They are not going to make the hard cuts. They are going to pass a ridiculous bill that cuts federal expenditures by 2%, after raising them 20%, and call it good. They will continue down that road until the nation fails, then they will point fingers at each other.

That's why I'm proud to be an American.

On a side note, I'd really like to see someone get up on national TV one day with a huge calculator and show how it is mathematically impossible to not modify spending to Medicare, Social Security, and Defense. Give a 30 min lesson on addition and subtraction. After that show how without tax increases you can't do anything.

Finally, it appears Paul Ryan is a tool. After winning an award for fiscal responsibility and becoming Chairman Mr. Ryan has apparently decided fiscal responsibility is for chumps if you want to make friends in Congress. Way to sell out a-hole. He flat out REFUSED Obama's commission recommendations, voted for the tax cut extension, and thinks that a $32 Billion cut is something to be proud of. That's not even 1% of the budget. Congress shouldn't even mention spending cuts in the news until they reached $1 trillion in cuts for proposal. Until then, don't insult our intelligence.

We are already in default, we have just given it a fancy name. Our congress has been taking care of themselves for years but now we can see the end of the road and something has to give. Maybe everyone can't drive a new car and live in the mini-mansion. I didn't save like I should and now have to figure out how to live on what I have and not rely on using your money for my existence. SS is not a gift, it is my money I loaned the country, without interest, and now I want it back.

Originally Posted by Steeeeve

This is basically the same idea though. If congress is not serious enough to balance the budget after they promised to than they are not going to be serious enough to not raise the debt ceiling. In other words, it really doesn't matter HOW they get serious about the issue, the end result if they DO get serious looks the same.

But my point is they force themselves either way. I mean lets be honest here, they are going to raise the debt ceiling AND increase spending or maybe level it off at unsustainable levels. All we are arguing is if going from A to B to C is better than going from A straight to C. Both end up in the same position.

I mean, if you aren't confident in thinking they will follow their own control with spending than what makes you confident they will follow a control they imposed upon themselves.

Because I think that a lot of the tea baggers are idealistic, stupid, and frankly batchit insane. Look at their stance on freddy and fannie. I agree 100% that we should get them off the government teat, but with 90% of current mortgages being directly backed by the US government, and 80% of them through fannie and freddy, doing as the tea party suggests and just dropping them would absolutely destroy the US economy. I agree that some stuff calls for immediate action, but sometimes you have to wean slowly, not just jerk the teat away all at once.

If we go ahead with the standard "pass it now and later we will revisit....." it will never happen and the tea baggers will end up marginalized. A lot of them wont get re-elected because they literally ran on "no more deficits". I think they will be held accountable at the next election.

And while I hate to admit it, to some degree I just want the BS to end. If that means that we say "screw it" and end up in the streets with a rifle then so be it. There is not enough of what made America great left to be worth trying to save. Sometimes you just have to burn it down and start over.

Finally, it appears Paul Ryan is a tool. After winning an award for fiscal responsibility and becoming Chairman Mr. Ryan has apparently decided fiscal responsibility is for chumps if you want to make friends in Congress. Way to sell out a-hole. He flat out REFUSED Obama's commission recommendations, voted for the tax cut extension, and thinks that a $32 Billion cut is something to be proud of. That's not even 1% of the budget. Congress shouldn't even mention spending cuts in the news until they reached $1 trillion in cuts for proposal. Until then, don't insult our intelligence.

It is starting to look that way. I liked his budget cut proposal as a good starting point. Unfortunately he has the "tax cuts under all circumstances" disease. Everything he has done since he put out his budget reduction plan has pretty much proven his whole plan was nothing but a PR stunt. He does not even seem to support his own plan.

We elected them and we have to live with them. Both sides are out to get us, that is why a lot of the new laws apply to us but not to them. I think we need to see the birth certificates of congress, some times I wonder where they come from.