ImageImageImageImageImage

Political Roundtable - Part VI

Moderators: LyricalRico, nate33, montestewart

hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1221 » by hands11 » Thu Oct 10, 2013 3:04 am

popper wrote:I know most people would rather I not post here and I've been trying hard to accommodate but…..

We've been over this before and I know most here understand the technical definitions that apply were the debt ceiling not increased.

The federal govt. is in no danger of defaulting on its debt. The only possible way that could happen is if the president decided that future payments to NPR (and other programs where obligations to fund in perpetuity don’t exist in law) are more important than paying back the people and countries that loaned us money. That won’t happen because the president is not an idiot.

The real issue is that many gullible Americans have been hoodwinked by politicians into believing that we can continue to borrow, spend and print money without restraint.


Credit rater sees no risk of US defaulting
By Peter Schroeder - 10/09/13 12:12 PM ET

A major credit rater expects the Treasury Department would avoid default if the $16.7 trillion debt limit were not raised.

In a document dated Oct. 7, Moody's Investors Service said it believes that if the borrowing cap were not increased, the government would prioritize making interest and principal payments on its outstanding debt above other government bills, even though the Treasury Department has repeatedly called prioritization plans unworkable.

"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," the rater said.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/b ... mit-boost-


POPS POPS POPS.

First, US debt is US debt. The Constitution doesn't say ... we will only not default on interest payments and principle on some debt. We have obligations. The government owes contractors. SS, etc. That is all debt. From what I hear, we don't even have a system set up to pick and choice which gets payed like you suggest. There are millions of payments that go out.

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

2nd - just what do you think is going to happen when the government drastically reduces payments ? Yah think it might just have a little economic impact ? Its going to reduce tax revenue even more as GDP srinks. Its going to put up more in debt and when the US sneezes, the world catches a cold. And millions of people are going to suffer. Besides where is your rational logic,where is you heart ?

THIS IS INSANE. We have debt issue to deal with over the long term and we have been. Things have been getting better. We got past falling of the fiscal cliff part and economic collapse that was the results of Bush policies. So why are we creating these self inflicted crisis ? Be honest. Who would want to do that and what do they have to gain ?

We needed to do the opposite. We need to have more jobs and a growing GDP. Thats how you get the deficits down and get back to an eventual surplus. Not by cutting throwing a wrench in the engine that causes it to stall. You devert spending to wiser investment like infrastructure instead of war.

PEOPLE. REALLY. I GET YOU HAVE YOUR BELIEFS. But at this point are your the guy sitting in the corner mumbling to yourself. This is .. go see a shrink stuff here. This is Branch Davidian, Manson Family stuff we are talking here. Stop watching Fox, listening to Rush, Hanity, and listening to Beohner, Ryan, Cruz and Rand.

http://www.ted.com/talks/ex_moonie_dian ... think.html

The way out for this is very easy and reasonable. Its actually very easy.
You pass a clean CR and get us out of government shut down.
You except you lost the national elections and 6 house seats and that elections matter in a democracy.
You except we are the United States of America and we have a Constitution and courts and laws
You assign conferenees to negotiate the annual budget and you don't demand things that are settled law
If you want to reverse those settled law, run on that in a national election and win. Then get bills passed.

We know how to do this under our system. Look, Dems didn't want the Bush Tax cuts knowing they would destroy our economy and balloon our debt. They didn't have to power to change that. They tried what was reason and failed. Let let the policies run their course to American could learn first hand they were failed ideas. They regrouped. They ran on the Clinton ideas that actually worked before and they won. They passed bills and reversed what they could regarding the Bush tax ideas We have a process for this.

Please snap out of it. Stop what you are doing and deprogram yourself to reality and facts.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1222 » by hands11 » Thu Oct 10, 2013 3:11 am

daSwami wrote:
Induveca wrote:"Be American or support the crown."

Seriously, are you that daft?

Retail is dying due to the misguided "service economy" (ironically).....Amazon is poised to buy Macy's and other mall anchor stores.....

Only one problem, amazon automates. What happens to the jobs?


This has nothing to do with wealth distribution, but a complete inability for the common citizen or ignorant government to prepare for a seismic shift in retail and consumerism.

Until this shakes out, employment is unpredictable for anyone but manufacturing countries.


That doesn't seem like a huge shift? The products still need to be designeed, manufactured, marketed and delivered - the only big change comes at the transaction level - but fewer cashiers is offset by more shipping/delivery work. Some overhead costs savings (like retail space) might make for more affordable products. Amazon/Macys makes perfect sense, Amazon/Washington Post on the other hand, is worrisome.



We will have to navigate an ever changing world and automation. But that isn't a new story. We have been fighting this out throughout history.

Question is, where will we end up. What is your vision of the future. Will everyone benefit, or just a few.

Image

Image

My understanding of the American is that Star Trek is the future we seek, not Biff. The battle over power and how to approach change and new things is endless. I always saw the Enterprise as the American model of the future. Republicans would be more like the klingons.
popper
Veteran
Posts: 2,873
And1: 411
Joined: Jun 19, 2010

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1223 » by popper » Thu Oct 10, 2013 3:35 am

hands11 wrote:
popper wrote:I know most people would rather I not post here and I've been trying hard to accommodate but…..

We've been over this before and I know most here understand the technical definitions that apply were the debt ceiling not increased.

The federal govt. is in no danger of defaulting on its debt. The only possible way that could happen is if the president decided that future payments to NPR (and other programs where obligations to fund in perpetuity don’t exist in law) are more important than paying back the people and countries that loaned us money. That won’t happen because the president is not an idiot.

The real issue is that many gullible Americans have been hoodwinked by politicians into believing that we can continue to borrow, spend and print money without restraint.


Credit rater sees no risk of US defaulting
By Peter Schroeder - 10/09/13 12:12 PM ET

A major credit rater expects the Treasury Department would avoid default if the $16.7 trillion debt limit were not raised.

In a document dated Oct. 7, Moody's Investors Service said it believes that if the borrowing cap were not increased, the government would prioritize making interest and principal payments on its outstanding debt above other government bills, even though the Treasury Department has repeatedly called prioritization plans unworkable.

"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," the rater said.

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/b ... mit-boost-


POPS POPS POPS.

First, US debt is US debt. The Constitution doesn't say ... we will only not default on interest payments and principle on some debt. We have obligations. The government owes contractors. SS, etc. That is all debt. From what I hear, we don't even have a system set up to pick and choice which gets payed like you suggest. There are millions of payments that go out.

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

2nd - just what do you think is going to happen when the government drastically reduces payments ? Yah think it might just have a little economic impact ? Its going to reduce tax revenue even more as GDP srinks. Its going to put up more in debt and when the US sneezes, the world catches a cold. And millions of people are going to suffer. Besides where is your rational logic,where is you heart ?

THIS IS INSANE. We have debt issue to deal with over the long term and we have been. Things have been getting better. We got past falling of the fiscal cliff part and economic collapse that was the results of Bush policies. So why are we creating these self inflicted crisis ? Be honest. Who would want to do that and what do they have to gain ?

We needed to do the opposite. We need to have more jobs and a growing GDP. Thats how you get the deficits down and get back to an eventual surplus. Not by cutting throwing a wrench in the engine that causes it to stall. You devert spending to wiser investment like infrastructure instead of war.

PEOPLE. REALLY. I GET YOU HAVE YOUR BELIEFS. But at this point are your the guy sitting in the corner mumbling to yourself. This is .. go see a shrink stuff here. This is Branch Davidian, Manson Family stuff we are talking here. Stop watching Fox, listening to Rush, Hanity, and listening to Beohner, Ryan, Cruz and Rand.

http://www.ted.com/talks/ex_moonie_dian ... think.html

The way out for this is very easy and reasonable. Its actually very easy.
You pass a clean CR and get us out of government shut down.
You except you lost the national elections and 6 house seats and that elections matter in a democracy.
You except we are the United States of America and we have a Constitution and courts and laws
You assign conferenees to negotiate the annual budget and you don't demand things that are settled law
If you want to reverse those settled law, run on that in a national election and win. Then get bills passed.

We know how to do this under our system. Look, Dems didn't want the Bush Tax cuts knowing they would destroy our economy and balloon our debt. They didn't have to power to change that. They tried what was reason and failed. Let let the policies run their course to American could learn first hand they were failed ideas. They regrouped. They ran on the Clinton ideas that actually worked before and they won. They passed bills and reversed what they could regarding the Bush tax ideas We have a process for this.

Please snap out of it. Stop what you are doing and deprogram yourself to reality and facts.


I think it plays out something like this:

Option 1 - R's surrender
Option 2 - D's begin to negotiate
Option 3 - Both parties hold fast to their respective positions and the debt ceiling is not increased. Stock market falls about 10-20%. We do not default on our debt and since neither party wants to cut spending by 20 or 30 percent then negotiations would commence immediately to arrive at a settlement of some kind.

I don't see it as a big deal, just political posturing to gain advantage (albeit a bit of brinkmanship that would otherwise be avoided in a less divided country). It's a shame that my sister and many other Americans are losing wages now and may end up losing their jobs permanently if our leaders don't start negotiating.

Common sense dictates that when you have divided govt., where one party controls the House and one the Senate, then of course they must negotiate to pass budgets, increase debt ceilings, etc.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1224 » by hands11 » Thu Oct 10, 2013 3:50 am

Its a shame ?

Wow. How compassionate of you.

Of course those are the choices.

But in options #1, the Dems already caved to what Rs wanted for a budget number, they didn't compromise, they caved. They gave them the number they wanted. Not what the Dems wants. Not a little more then the Rs wanted. They gave them what they wanted. Caving is compromise x10. So #2 is covered.

What have the Rs given in return ?

Option 3, if that happens, we are in major violation of the Constitution. And since I hear so much from the right about how it the house that has control of the purse string and its clear raising the debt limit is their duty, tell me what legal action should fall on them for violation the 14th amendment section 4 in such an abusive way.

What should happen to them given the severity of their violation ?

I'm not interested in how you feel. I'm looking for critical thinking. Act like you are a judge. Objectively evaluate the facts.
popper
Veteran
Posts: 2,873
And1: 411
Joined: Jun 19, 2010

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1225 » by popper » Thu Oct 10, 2013 4:19 am

hands11 wrote:Its a shame ?

Wow. How compassionate of you.

Of course those are the choices.

But in options #1, the Dems already caved to what Rs wanted for a budget number, they didn't compromise, they caved. They gave them the number they wanted. Not what the Dems wants. Not a little more then the Rs wanted. They gave them what they wanted. Caving is compromise x10. So #2 is covered.

What have the Rs given in return ?

Option 3, if that happens, we are in major violation of the Constitution. And since I hear so much from the right about how it the house that has control of the purse string and its clear raising the debt limit is their duty, tell me what legal action should fall on them for violation the 14th amendment section 4 in such an abusive way.

What should happen to them given the severity of their violation ?

I'm not interested in how you feel. I'm looking for critical thinking. Act like you are a judge. Objectively evaluate the facts.


I'm compassionate enough to support my sister and her family financially in this and past trouble spots. I'm compassionate enough to donate 10% of annual earnings to our church which is active around the world in helping those less fortunate. I can do more and should do more. I freely admit that, and do not set myself as any kind of role model to be emulated.

I'm not sure I understood your earlier post about the 14th amendment (I will re-read it). My understanding is that the future federal funding of a vast array of federal spending is contingent upon congress appropriating funds for those line items. If the funds are not appropriated then the program dies. In those cases, it is not a govt. debt but rather a temporary govt. expenditure that might be reneged upon once congress changes its mind or when the country can no longer afford it. A good example might be when the retirement age and social security taxes were increased. Congress changed future obligations once they realized that the program was no longer affordable in its current state.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1226 » by hands11 » Thu Oct 10, 2013 5:08 am

popper wrote:
hands11 wrote:Its a shame ?

Wow. How compassionate of you.

Of course those are the choices.

But in options #1, the Dems already caved to what Rs wanted for a budget number, they didn't compromise, they caved. They gave them the number they wanted. Not what the Dems wants. Not a little more then the Rs wanted. They gave them what they wanted. Caving is compromise x10. So #2 is covered.

What have the Rs given in return ?

Option 3, if that happens, we are in major violation of the Constitution. And since I hear so much from the right about how it the house that has control of the purse string and its clear raising the debt limit is their duty, tell me what legal action should fall on them for violation the 14th amendment section 4 in such an abusive way.

What should happen to them given the severity of their violation ?

I'm not interested in how you feel. I'm looking for critical thinking. Act like you are a judge. Objectively evaluate the facts.


I'm compassionate enough to support my sister and her family financially in this and past trouble spots. I'm compassionate enough to donate 10% of annual earnings to our church which is active around the world in helping those less fortunate. I can do more and should do more. I freely admit that, and do not set myself as any kind of role model to be emulated.

I'm not sure I understood your earlier post about the 14th amendment (I will re-read it). My understanding is that the future federal funding of a vast array of federal spending is contingent upon congress appropriating funds for those line items. If the funds are not appropriated then the program dies. In those cases, it is not a govt. debt but rather a temporary govt. expenditure that might be reneged upon once congress changes its mind or when the country can no longer afford it. A good example might be when the retirement age and social security taxes were increased. Congress changed future obligations once they realized that the program was no longer affordable in its current state.


Sorry about that comment Pops. I over reacted. I'm a bit frustrated over all this. Most of my life he been watching these manufactured crises. Only reprieve I feel I got was under Clinton. And even then, the Rs were relentless with him, shut down the government and impeached him. And that was what I left was my reprieve. I'm just very sick of their approach.

As for you understand of The Houses power in regards to playing the bills for already appropriated things, yeah, go read some of what I posted. I don't think you have a full grasp of the process. You are missing a lot of information about the 14 amendment section 4. But I posted it. Just need to read it.

The budgeting process has evolved over the years. But there isn't a part of that process that involves the house not raising the debt ceiling as a way to spend less on things. The process you are talking about is the budgeting process. President sends down this budget. The House and Senate make theirs. They get written with a goal of what will pass. They have to be realistic to the balance of power at the time. If one party just won the presidency twice in a row, also hold the majority in the senate 52 D plus 2 Indy, and gained seats in the house.... Thats the party in power. The minority can influence and get somethings they want, but not big things. They aren't running the show. Thats how our government works.

Anyway, you never answer my constitutional question. Awaiting your answer.

1997 to 2002 we didn't have to raise the debt limit. Why ? Growing GDP. Budgets that spend on the right things. Eventually we had balanced budgets then surplus. Basically, the period after Clinton cleaned up Reagan's mess and got his budget priorities passed.
popper
Veteran
Posts: 2,873
And1: 411
Joined: Jun 19, 2010

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1227 » by popper » Thu Oct 10, 2013 1:17 pm

Hands - I re-read your post regarding section 4 of the fourteenth amendment. The public debt that is referred to is comprised of the following instruments according to the Treasury Department's Bureau of Public Debt.

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/whoweare/who_we_are.htm

Marketable:
Bills.......................................
Notes.......................................
Bonds.......................................
Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities.....
Federal Financing Bank 1 .................
Total Marketable a...........................

Nonmarketable:
Domestic Series.............................
Foreign Series..............................
State and Local Government Series...........
United States Savings Securities............
Government Account Series...................
Hope Bonds 19...............................
Other.......................................
Total Nonmarketable b........................

Total Public Debt Outstanding ................

TABLE II -- STATUTORY DEBT LIMIT, SEPTEMBER 30, 2013
(Millions of dollars)
barelyawake
Head Coach
Posts: 6,099
And1: 685
Joined: Aug 07, 2004

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1228 » by barelyawake » Thu Oct 10, 2013 2:46 pm

I love how all the "solutions" republicans come up with is cutting things essential for the middle and lower classes to live. How about instead of cutting the EPA and letting our water systems all turn to sludge; or the FDA as ecoli outbreaks are at an all time high; or science research (the thing that will generate new products to rebuild our economy for the middle class); or FEMA (when all scientist say a superbug is right around the corner); etc etc... How about instead we nationalize the banks and oil industry, and use the profits to fund these programs? That's the flip side of what is being debated here. So, that's where Obama should start and "negotiate" into a sensible solution.

All of these made-up crises can be solved by minor tweaks like raising the retirement age and a vibrant GDP. Republicans are purposefully tanking the economy to radically change government as they always wanted. It's not what we need. It's what they philosophically want. Obama certainly would have negotiated with sensible Republicans about sensible solutions. That's not what we are faced with. These are radicals who for a generation have kept pushing right so hard, that now older Republicans are called socialists.

Why isn't the news showing a death total of the number of people who have died due to the government shutdown? I mean cancer patients who haven't gotten treatment, babies unfed by federal programs, etc... Sick of this nonsense. Sick of people voting against their own interests.
W. Unseld
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,935
And1: 123
Joined: Jun 26, 2002
Location: Virginia

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1229 » by W. Unseld » Thu Oct 10, 2013 3:46 pm

I'm putting all of you on valium or at least making you all go back and look at every other prediction from both sides about end of the world doom and gloom, millions dead predictions of the past 10 years vs what actually happened.

After that Dr. Unseld strongly prescribes finding a modicum of positive and a modicum of fault in both parties or better yet an alternative view point so everyone isn't screaming at each other like drunk fans rooting for a football team (at least the drunk fans would be enjoying themselves). Yes there are consequences to every action and inaction but I think they've been a tad hyped up by both parties. R's more at fault for this one and God knows they've predicted the end of the world for every Obama action but D's predicted end times over sequester and while there were consequences the 7th circle of h*ll predictions did not come to pass. I'm confident everyone thinks "but this time it's different!!!!"
User avatar
Induveca
Head Coach
Posts: 7,379
And1: 724
Joined: Dec 02, 2004
   

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1230 » by Induveca » Thu Oct 10, 2013 4:06 pm

W. Unseld wrote:I'm putting all of you on valium or at least making you all go back and look at every other prediction from both sides about end of the world doom and gloom, millions dead predictions of the past 10 years vs what actually happened.

After that Dr. Unseld strongly prescribes finding a modicum of positive and a modicum of fault in both parties or better yet an alternative view point so everyone isn't screaming at each other like drunk fans rooting for a football team (at least the drunk fans would be enjoying themselves). Yes there are consequences to every action and inaction but I think they've been a tad hyped up by both parties. R's more at fault for this one and God knows they've predicted the end of the world for every Obama action but D's predicted end times over sequester and while there were consequences the 7th circle of h*ll predictions did not come to pass. I'm confident everyone thinks "but this time it's different!!!!"


Bravo. I think the sports fan analogy is a good one.....
barelyawake
Head Coach
Posts: 6,099
And1: 685
Joined: Aug 07, 2004

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1231 » by barelyawake » Thu Oct 10, 2013 4:07 pm

I never predicted millions would die at any point (even now). However, people do die as the result of government action or inaction. It's no different than the death toll that accrues from the decision to go to war. When you cut programs that help the lower classes, a good deal die earlier as a result. That's just a fact. When you lower FDA standards, people die as a result. Again, a fact. Same with EPA. The news might not do their jobs and trace back how decision a lead to death b, but that doesn't mean the cause and effect aren't there. Us not having a single payer medical system has resulted in thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of premature deaths. I'm sorry if that sounds hyperbolic. It's simply the case. Look at our infant mortality rate. Those are actual people, actual families, creating that statistic.
dobrojim
RealGM
Posts: 17,060
And1: 4,190
Joined: Sep 16, 2004

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1232 » by dobrojim » Thu Oct 10, 2013 4:47 pm

Induveca wrote:You should add:
January 2014: Together, we've bankrupted the country and watched our credit rating plummet.....but it's YOUR fault!

Both sides of this childish bickering are to blame. Complete dysfunction in a two party system requires the failure of both parties to find any common ground, and label each other as fools to their ill informed constituency.

Mission accomplished. South American style political strategy at its most destructive.


big time false equivalency -

there would be no talk of default but for a handful of wackjob TP/GOPers and a speaker
who will not stand up to them.

speaking of which - the very actions they TP/GOP are taking are having the exact opposite
effect of what they say they want (reduced govt spending). The mere threat of default is
causing our lending costs to increase.

Interest is already approx 1/6 of all govt spending. Their actions are directly
responsible for increasing our lending costs as loaning us money seems a riskier and riskier
prospect and one for which lenders will expect a higher premium for.

Borderline treasonous.
A lot of what we call 'thought' is just mental activity

When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression

Those who are convinced of absurdities, can be convinced to commit atrocities
barelyawake
Head Coach
Posts: 6,099
And1: 685
Joined: Aug 07, 2004

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1233 » by barelyawake » Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:02 pm

Btw just to put a face on this. I know three single mothers, each with two kids. They all work for NIH in some manner (whether directly or indirectly). All three were making great strides up the ladder at a late age (because they put family first, until their husbands cheated on them). All three are waiting to hear how they are going to feed their children this month. One of whom has told me if she didn't have kids she would have bought a gun because she can't handle never knowing if she has a job, and she is still majorly in debt because her hours were cut drastically over the threat of the last shutdown so she got behind. Her lights are off currently. Her kids are with their father until she can figure things out (and this after a promotion she got -- third in two years because of her excellent work that went beyond her boss' expectations on many occasions). All three work directly with doctors who do cancer research or innovate better ways for doctors to share information to help lower costs for patients etc. O

Our government actually does things. And it's employees have families. To them, this isn't a game.
W. Unseld
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 5,935
And1: 123
Joined: Jun 26, 2002
Location: Virginia

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1234 » by W. Unseld » Thu Oct 10, 2013 6:29 pm

barelyawake wrote:I never predicted millions would die at any point (even now). However, people do die as the result of government action or inaction. It's no different than the death toll that accrues from the decision to go to war. When you cut programs that help the lower classes, a good deal die earlier as a result. That's just a fact. When you lower FDA standards, people die as a result. Again, a fact. Same with EPA.


Not accusing you personally of it, I just think those things tend to get exxagerated when any side is trying to make a political point. "Millions of americans die every year from obesity" "Millions of americans die every year from alcohol related deaths" "Millions of americans die every year from drugs" eventually you run out of "millions of americans" I know that isn't your argument, I'm not accusing you of it, I think both political sides do it so that whatever it is they currently care about is elevated to crisis level. If 1/3 of the predictions came true the world would have ended 5 or 6 times in the past decade alone.

Politics aside, I'll wager that gets resolved by the 17th and that it's a temporary resolution so both parties can time another battle to end all battles just in time for elections.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1235 » by hands11 » Fri Oct 11, 2013 12:02 am

W. Unseld wrote:I'm putting all of you on valium or at least making you all go back and look at every other prediction from both sides about end of the world doom and gloom, millions dead predictions of the past 10 years vs what actually happened.

After that Dr. Unseld strongly prescribes finding a modicum of positive and a modicum of fault in both parties or better yet an alternative view point so everyone isn't screaming at each other like drunk fans rooting for a football team (at least the drunk fans would be enjoying themselves). Yes there are consequences to every action and inaction but I think they've been a tad hyped up by both parties. R's more at fault for this one and God knows they've predicted the end of the world for every Obama action but D's predicted end times over sequester and while there were consequences the 7th circle of h*ll predictions did not come to pass. I'm confident everyone thinks "but this time it's different!!!!"


They did ? I don't recall them saying it would hurt right away. I think what I recall is them saying it would hurt more and more over time and it would be a drag on GDP and employment. They said it wasn't a cliff like the debt ceiling is. They also said a hatchet approach to cuts wasn't moral. And that we already made cuts. They said the debt is a problem but its a longer term problem behind to problem of growing the economy. Seeing how we recovered from the debt of 130% debt to GDP after WWII, I would agree with that.

How do you eat an Elephant... A bit at a time. You work on the deficits and debt over time.

That what I heard most the dem mouths saying. Yeah they said it was bad idea and stupid. But we know that. Thats why it was the thing both sides were supposed to not want badly enough that they would negotiated a compromise. But Rs don't work that way. They let it kick in and got right to work trying to pass funding for the military part that was cut. They would rather do that than compromise and actually have their names next to any cuts in the military or closing tax giveaway to corporations.
User avatar
Induveca
Head Coach
Posts: 7,379
And1: 724
Joined: Dec 02, 2004
   

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1236 » by Induveca » Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:27 am

Hands, after many euro drinks...my God you are too damn local.

Your ability to think lies within two ideologies you, nor the party preaching them understand. It's an ever changing target.

The high school football mentality around US politics in our generation is nauseating.

*3:30 AM here and after a better part of 12 hours hearing about the US default from an outside european perspective the R vs D argument here sounds even more foolish and ignorant.
User avatar
Induveca
Head Coach
Posts: 7,379
And1: 724
Joined: Dec 02, 2004
   

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1237 » by Induveca » Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:36 am

Lastly the most sickening portion of coverage today was Belgium's coverage of US CNN's attempt to "shock" the public with a "default" countdown 24/7. Their message was this isn't a game and impacts all world currencies. Irresponsible and childish not only in government but US media as well.

Like it or not, Obama.....as a leader/face of a governmental institution is labeled a monumental failure globally.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1238 » by hands11 » Fri Oct 11, 2013 3:58 am

How interesting is it that the Koch brother spoke out last night.

Today, the Rs finally start to fold.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1239 » by hands11 » Fri Oct 11, 2013 8:34 am

barelyawake wrote:Btw just to put a face on this. I know three single mothers, each with two kids. They all work for NIH in some manner (whether directly or indirectly). All three were making great strides up the ladder at a late age (because they put family first, until their husbands cheated on them). All three are waiting to hear how they are going to feed their children this month. One of whom has told me if she didn't have kids she would have bought a gun because she can't handle never knowing if she has a job, and she is still majorly in debt because her hours were cut drastically over the threat of the last shutdown so she got behind. Her lights are off currently. Her kids are with their father until she can figure things out (and this after a promotion she got -- third in two years because of her excellent work that went beyond her boss' expectations on many occasions). All three work directly with doctors who do cancer research or innovate better ways for doctors to share information to help lower costs for patients etc. O

Our government actually does things. And it's employees have families. To them, this isn't a game.


I thought gov worker just dug holes and then filled them in. That was someones position on this thread. Cant remember which was promoted that view. Seemed like there were a few of them.
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,444
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Political Roundtable - Part VI 

Post#1240 » by hands11 » Fri Oct 11, 2013 8:58 am

Induveca wrote:Hands, after many euro drinks...my God you are too damn local.

Your ability to think lies within two ideologies you, nor the party preaching them understand. It's an ever changing target.

The high school football mentality around US politics in our generation is nauseating.

*3:30 AM here and after a better part of 12 hours hearing about the US default from an outside european perspective the R vs D argument here sounds even more foolish and ignorant.


Oh, its far worse then a high school football mentality. And yes, it is nauseating. That is what I have been saying.

As for my ability to think beyond two ideologies, I have described more then that throughout. What you are saying isn't supported in facts. But we do have 2.5 parties so I am talking in that context a lot because those are the teams on the field right when it comes to votes on bills. A clean CR passes the house or it doesn't. The debt limit is raise, or it isn't.

You have one on ideology. We heard it. We get it.

Again, no one from this side says there aren't problems to deal with. Not even that they aren't serious ones. We are just pointing out the BS double talk, double think, fact free words, and systemic propaganda machines of the other side in our current affair of the US.

Return to Washington Wizards