|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On October 09 2015 03:05 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:00 QuanticHawk wrote:On October 09 2015 02:33 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) stunned lawmakers Thursday by abruptly announcing that he was withdrawing from the race to become the next House speaker.
The California Republican, who was having trouble convincing GOP conservatives to support him, said the party needs a fresh face to take over after current Speaker John. A. Boenher steps down later this month.
Lawmakers had settled in for a long session over BBQ sandwiches when McCarthy stood up told his peers he wasnt the right candidate at this moment for the speakers job.
"He simply said that he didn't want it to be divisive and when it came to running for speaker, [that] he’s not the guy," said Rep. John Fleming of Louisiana, member of the Freedom Caucus.
With Congress on recess next week, another round of nomination voting is not expected until the week of Oct 19 at the soonest.
McCarthy's stunning withdrawal leaves the House GOP in disarray. Though it averts what could have been a nasty, contested leadership fight, it leaves unanswered the question of who might step in to unite the party.
McCarthy's bid for the post was hurt after a high-profile TV stumble in which he appeared to suggest that the GOP-led House investigation into the 2012 Benghazi attack was partly aimed at weakening Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton. Critics capitalized on the remark.
"That wasn't helpful,'' McCarthy said Thursday at a press conference. "I could have said it much better."
But mostly many GOP conservatives were worried the would be hard pressed to explain to voters back in their districts that they had supported McCarthy, who was seen as too closely aligned with the current GOP leadership.
Some Republicans were hoping recruit Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the former GOP vice presidential candidate. But Ryan has repeatedly said he is not interested in the post.
He repeated that in a statement Thursday.
"Kevin McCarthy is best person to lead the House, and so I’m disappointed in this decision," Ryan said. "Now it is important that we, as a conference, take time to deliberate and seek new candidates for the speakership. While I am grateful for the encouragement I’ve received, I will not be a candidate. I continue to believe I can best serve the country and this conference as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.” SourceThoughts? The Schism of the Republican finally starts. ONe could easily predict a new party possibly being formed as a result. it would be very nice, but didn't everyone say the same when Obama spanked them in both elections? Kind of not holding my breath on that one anymore, as much as the split would be good for everyone no matter where you lie politically. And looked what happened a rabid Conservative wing of the Republican party surged the House but parts of the Senate as well. Then they shut down the government, nearly defaulted the US Government, and have managed to block Boehner in on all sides while getting nothing passed in almost 6 years. Now when Boehner tries to escape he can't even do that as the exact same hardliners have managed to oust the man that was supposed to succeed him. This is uncharted waters.
The inmates are running the asylum now, and the warden is now a prisoner.
On October 09 2015 03:23 Plansix wrote:Jesus. Some of them should just fuck it and start working with the democrats. Go out in a blaze of passing bills and spite driven compromise.
That would be beautiful. I wonder what Obama is thinking now.
|
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said.
|
On October 09 2015 03:47 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:05 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 03:00 QuanticHawk wrote:On October 09 2015 02:33 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) stunned lawmakers Thursday by abruptly announcing that he was withdrawing from the race to become the next House speaker.
The California Republican, who was having trouble convincing GOP conservatives to support him, said the party needs a fresh face to take over after current Speaker John. A. Boenher steps down later this month.
Lawmakers had settled in for a long session over BBQ sandwiches when McCarthy stood up told his peers he wasnt the right candidate at this moment for the speakers job.
"He simply said that he didn't want it to be divisive and when it came to running for speaker, [that] he’s not the guy," said Rep. John Fleming of Louisiana, member of the Freedom Caucus.
With Congress on recess next week, another round of nomination voting is not expected until the week of Oct 19 at the soonest.
McCarthy's stunning withdrawal leaves the House GOP in disarray. Though it averts what could have been a nasty, contested leadership fight, it leaves unanswered the question of who might step in to unite the party.
McCarthy's bid for the post was hurt after a high-profile TV stumble in which he appeared to suggest that the GOP-led House investigation into the 2012 Benghazi attack was partly aimed at weakening Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton. Critics capitalized on the remark.
"That wasn't helpful,'' McCarthy said Thursday at a press conference. "I could have said it much better."
But mostly many GOP conservatives were worried the would be hard pressed to explain to voters back in their districts that they had supported McCarthy, who was seen as too closely aligned with the current GOP leadership.
Some Republicans were hoping recruit Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the former GOP vice presidential candidate. But Ryan has repeatedly said he is not interested in the post.
He repeated that in a statement Thursday.
"Kevin McCarthy is best person to lead the House, and so I’m disappointed in this decision," Ryan said. "Now it is important that we, as a conference, take time to deliberate and seek new candidates for the speakership. While I am grateful for the encouragement I’ve received, I will not be a candidate. I continue to believe I can best serve the country and this conference as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.” SourceThoughts? The Schism of the Republican finally starts. ONe could easily predict a new party possibly being formed as a result. it would be very nice, but didn't everyone say the same when Obama spanked them in both elections? Kind of not holding my breath on that one anymore, as much as the split would be good for everyone no matter where you lie politically. And looked what happened a rabid Conservative wing of the Republican party surged the House but parts of the Senate as well. Then they shut down the government, nearly defaulted the US Government, and have managed to block Boehner in on all sides while getting nothing passed in almost 6 years. Now when Boehner tries to escape he can't even do that as the exact same hardliners have managed to oust the man that was supposed to succeed him. This is uncharted waters. The inmates are running the asylum now, and the warden is now a prisoner. Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:23 Plansix wrote:Jesus. Some of them should just fuck it and start working with the democrats. Go out in a blaze of passing bills and spite driven compromise. That would be beautiful. I wonder what Obama is thinking now.
Waiting right now. The speaker has to introduce bills and make things move forward in the house. Without a speaker, there is nothing he can do. And since Boehner clearly leaving, his political capital is zero.
On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said.
The debt ceiling has to be raised by November 5, 2015. If it doesn't' happen, shut down and then possible default after that.
|
On October 09 2015 03:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:26 Gorsameth wrote:On October 09 2015 03:23 Plansix wrote:Jesus. Some of them should just fuck it and start working with the democrats. Go out in a blaze of passing bills and spite driven compromise. I don't know how the numbers would work out but could you imagine how hilarious it would be if the moderate parts of the Republican party defect to the Democrats an mass to avoid association with the crazies? At this point its actually a possibility which is kinda nuts. Fuck, you can look up the video where Mr. Rogers convinces the Republics to fund PBS if you want to see it in action. Its depressing to watch the hearing from back then and see how much the government was about getting shit done, rather than TV sound bites.
As a side note, it's an amazing video that is well worth the watch.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On October 09 2015 03:51 jcarlsoniv wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:38 Plansix wrote:On October 09 2015 03:26 Gorsameth wrote:On October 09 2015 03:23 Plansix wrote:Jesus. Some of them should just fuck it and start working with the democrats. Go out in a blaze of passing bills and spite driven compromise. I don't know how the numbers would work out but could you imagine how hilarious it would be if the moderate parts of the Republican party defect to the Democrats an mass to avoid association with the crazies? At this point its actually a possibility which is kinda nuts. Fuck, you can look up the video where Mr. Rogers convinces the Republics to fund PBS if you want to see it in action. Its depressing to watch the hearing from back then and see how much the government was about getting shit done, rather than TV sound bites. As a side note, it's an amazing video that is well worth the watch. + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKy7ljRr0AA
And this was back in an era before Cspan and 24 hour news. No one is performing here. It is all business and its fucking depressing when you watch the House and Senate now.
|
On October 09 2015 03:49 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:47 ticklishmusic wrote:On October 09 2015 03:05 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 03:00 QuanticHawk wrote:On October 09 2015 02:33 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) stunned lawmakers Thursday by abruptly announcing that he was withdrawing from the race to become the next House speaker.
The California Republican, who was having trouble convincing GOP conservatives to support him, said the party needs a fresh face to take over after current Speaker John. A. Boenher steps down later this month.
Lawmakers had settled in for a long session over BBQ sandwiches when McCarthy stood up told his peers he wasnt the right candidate at this moment for the speakers job.
"He simply said that he didn't want it to be divisive and when it came to running for speaker, [that] he’s not the guy," said Rep. John Fleming of Louisiana, member of the Freedom Caucus.
With Congress on recess next week, another round of nomination voting is not expected until the week of Oct 19 at the soonest.
McCarthy's stunning withdrawal leaves the House GOP in disarray. Though it averts what could have been a nasty, contested leadership fight, it leaves unanswered the question of who might step in to unite the party.
McCarthy's bid for the post was hurt after a high-profile TV stumble in which he appeared to suggest that the GOP-led House investigation into the 2012 Benghazi attack was partly aimed at weakening Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton. Critics capitalized on the remark.
"That wasn't helpful,'' McCarthy said Thursday at a press conference. "I could have said it much better."
But mostly many GOP conservatives were worried the would be hard pressed to explain to voters back in their districts that they had supported McCarthy, who was seen as too closely aligned with the current GOP leadership.
Some Republicans were hoping recruit Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the former GOP vice presidential candidate. But Ryan has repeatedly said he is not interested in the post.
He repeated that in a statement Thursday.
"Kevin McCarthy is best person to lead the House, and so I’m disappointed in this decision," Ryan said. "Now it is important that we, as a conference, take time to deliberate and seek new candidates for the speakership. While I am grateful for the encouragement I’ve received, I will not be a candidate. I continue to believe I can best serve the country and this conference as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.” SourceThoughts? The Schism of the Republican finally starts. ONe could easily predict a new party possibly being formed as a result. it would be very nice, but didn't everyone say the same when Obama spanked them in both elections? Kind of not holding my breath on that one anymore, as much as the split would be good for everyone no matter where you lie politically. And looked what happened a rabid Conservative wing of the Republican party surged the House but parts of the Senate as well. Then they shut down the government, nearly defaulted the US Government, and have managed to block Boehner in on all sides while getting nothing passed in almost 6 years. Now when Boehner tries to escape he can't even do that as the exact same hardliners have managed to oust the man that was supposed to succeed him. This is uncharted waters. The inmates are running the asylum now, and the warden is now a prisoner. On October 09 2015 03:23 Plansix wrote:Jesus. Some of them should just fuck it and start working with the democrats. Go out in a blaze of passing bills and spite driven compromise. That would be beautiful. I wonder what Obama is thinking now. Waiting right now. The speaker has to introduce bills and make things move forward in the house. Without a speaker, there is nothing he can do. And since Boehner clearly leaving, his political capital is zero. Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said. The debt ceiling has to be raised by November 5, 2015. If it doesn't' happen, shut down and then possible default after that.
Failing to raise the debt ceiling does not lead to default, because payments on the debt (interest, etc) are payed first and automatically. More money comes in every month than it costs to service the debt.
Edit: at least the principal is paid automatically. Think interest too. But that could be done separately.
|
On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said.
Here you go:
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) -- who is challenging House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as the conservative alternative to replace House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) -- said he would be willing to risk a default on the national debt or a government shutdown to extract demands from President Obama.
"I have no interest in just simply raising the debt ceiling without changing the trajectory of spending," Chaffetz told CNN Monday. "It's a time where we should be reflecting on, what are we going to do so that we don't have to keep changing the debt ceiling and raising it."
The Treasury Department has signaled a Nov. 5 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, which is only days after Boehner is set to step down from the speakership. In 2011, Standard & Poors downgraded the U.S.'s credit rating after Republicans seemed willing to blow past the debt ceiling deadline.
"It's silly for the president to say he's not even going to have this discussion," Chaffetz said Monday. He also said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was "wrong" for promising that there would be no government default on the national debt.
"I think it's wrong to signal that you're going to cave at the end," Chaffetz said. "That's not what I'm interested in doing."
Source
|
Its like opening negotiations with "Ok, so right now we are going to lite the White House on fire. What will you give us to stop that from happening? What do you mean I am negotiating in bad faith? I am keeping all options on the table, sir."
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
these fucktards are going to ruin this country.
|
On October 09 2015 03:59 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said. Here you go: Show nested quote +Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) -- who is challenging House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as the conservative alternative to replace House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) -- said he would be willing to risk a default on the national debt or a government shutdown to extract demands from President Obama.
"I have no interest in just simply raising the debt ceiling without changing the trajectory of spending," Chaffetz told CNN Monday. "It's a time where we should be reflecting on, what are we going to do so that we don't have to keep changing the debt ceiling and raising it."
The Treasury Department has signaled a Nov. 5 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, which is only days after Boehner is set to step down from the speakership. In 2011, Standard & Poors downgraded the U.S.'s credit rating after Republicans seemed willing to blow past the debt ceiling deadline.
"It's silly for the president to say he's not even going to have this discussion," Chaffetz said Monday. He also said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was "wrong" for promising that there would be no government default on the national debt.
"I think it's wrong to signal that you're going to cave at the end," Chaffetz said. "That's not what I'm interested in doing." Source
He didn't say anything about default. Are you guys serious? Putting words in people's mouths?
|
United States44187 Posts
On October 09 2015 04:04 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:59 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said. Here you go: Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) -- who is challenging House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as the conservative alternative to replace House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) -- said he would be willing to risk a default on the national debt or a government shutdown to extract demands from President Obama.
"I have no interest in just simply raising the debt ceiling without changing the trajectory of spending," Chaffetz told CNN Monday. "It's a time where we should be reflecting on, what are we going to do so that we don't have to keep changing the debt ceiling and raising it."
The Treasury Department has signaled a Nov. 5 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, which is only days after Boehner is set to step down from the speakership. In 2011, Standard & Poors downgraded the U.S.'s credit rating after Republicans seemed willing to blow past the debt ceiling deadline.
"It's silly for the president to say he's not even going to have this discussion," Chaffetz said Monday. He also said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was "wrong" for promising that there would be no government default on the national debt.
"I think it's wrong to signal that you're going to cave at the end," Chaffetz said. "That's not what I'm interested in doing." Source He didn't say anything about default. Are you guys serious? Putting words in people's mouths?
Isn't that what happens if the debt ceiling isn't raised? That's my understanding.
|
On October 09 2015 04:04 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 03:59 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said. Here you go: Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) -- who is challenging House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as the conservative alternative to replace House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) -- said he would be willing to risk a default on the national debt or a government shutdown to extract demands from President Obama.
"I have no interest in just simply raising the debt ceiling without changing the trajectory of spending," Chaffetz told CNN Monday. "It's a time where we should be reflecting on, what are we going to do so that we don't have to keep changing the debt ceiling and raising it."
The Treasury Department has signaled a Nov. 5 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, which is only days after Boehner is set to step down from the speakership. In 2011, Standard & Poors downgraded the U.S.'s credit rating after Republicans seemed willing to blow past the debt ceiling deadline.
"It's silly for the president to say he's not even going to have this discussion," Chaffetz said Monday. He also said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was "wrong" for promising that there would be no government default on the national debt.
"I think it's wrong to signal that you're going to cave at the end," Chaffetz said. "That's not what I'm interested in doing." Source He didn't say anything about default. Are you guys serious? Putting words in people's mouths?
"It's silly for the president to say he's not even going to have this discussion," Chaffetz said Monday. He also said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was "wrong" for promising that there would be no government default on the national debt.
"I think it's wrong to signal that you're going to cave at the end," Chaffetz said. "That's not what I'm interested in doing."
Literally said that he wasn't willing to promise to not willingly default on the nation debt to force the Democrats to cave.
|
I'm going to need more context than that, since, as I said, debt payments are automatic. They probably asked about a shutdown AND default.
I found a CNN article saying that. Im out and about so i can't find more.
|
On October 09 2015 04:08 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 04:04 Introvert wrote:On October 09 2015 03:59 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said. Here you go: Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) -- who is challenging House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as the conservative alternative to replace House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) -- said he would be willing to risk a default on the national debt or a government shutdown to extract demands from President Obama.
"I have no interest in just simply raising the debt ceiling without changing the trajectory of spending," Chaffetz told CNN Monday. "It's a time where we should be reflecting on, what are we going to do so that we don't have to keep changing the debt ceiling and raising it."
The Treasury Department has signaled a Nov. 5 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, which is only days after Boehner is set to step down from the speakership. In 2011, Standard & Poors downgraded the U.S.'s credit rating after Republicans seemed willing to blow past the debt ceiling deadline.
"It's silly for the president to say he's not even going to have this discussion," Chaffetz said Monday. He also said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was "wrong" for promising that there would be no government default on the national debt.
"I think it's wrong to signal that you're going to cave at the end," Chaffetz said. "That's not what I'm interested in doing." Source He didn't say anything about default. Are you guys serious? Putting words in people's mouths? Isn't that what happens if the debt ceiling isn't raised? That's my understanding.
If i understand correctly, once the debt ceiling is reached, the government can no longer take additional debt. This does not mean they have to stop paying back their debt. It means they have less money to do other stuff after paying back their debt, if they prioritize debt payment over other stuff.
A lot of the "other stuff" is pretty important, but a default would only be necessary if the government can no longer pay back its debt on time.
|
A failure to raise the debt ceiling will force a default on interest payments.
|
On October 09 2015 04:15 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 04:08 KwarK wrote:On October 09 2015 04:04 Introvert wrote:On October 09 2015 03:59 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said. Here you go: Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) -- who is challenging House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as the conservative alternative to replace House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) -- said he would be willing to risk a default on the national debt or a government shutdown to extract demands from President Obama.
"I have no interest in just simply raising the debt ceiling without changing the trajectory of spending," Chaffetz told CNN Monday. "It's a time where we should be reflecting on, what are we going to do so that we don't have to keep changing the debt ceiling and raising it."
The Treasury Department has signaled a Nov. 5 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, which is only days after Boehner is set to step down from the speakership. In 2011, Standard & Poors downgraded the U.S.'s credit rating after Republicans seemed willing to blow past the debt ceiling deadline.
"It's silly for the president to say he's not even going to have this discussion," Chaffetz said Monday. He also said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was "wrong" for promising that there would be no government default on the national debt.
"I think it's wrong to signal that you're going to cave at the end," Chaffetz said. "That's not what I'm interested in doing." Source He didn't say anything about default. Are you guys serious? Putting words in people's mouths? Isn't that what happens if the debt ceiling isn't raised? That's my understanding. If i understand correctly, once the debt ceiling is reached, the government can no longer take additional debt. This does not mean they have to stop paying back their debt. It means they have less money to do other stuff after paying back their debt, if they prioritize debt payment over other stuff. A lot of the "other stuff" is pretty important, but a default would only be necessary if the government can no longer pay back its debt on time.
The debt ceiling is a system that is put in place to prevent the treasure from borrowing money(which they are empowered to do without approval). Its was created in 1917. It was put in place to make sure the Treasure from going rogue and just doing shit without approval and to allow the congress time to remove the head of the treasure if that happened. It was never meant to be used as a bargaining tool, but a thing that congress just does to keep the government running.
|
I don't see anything saying that, only that it's a logistical nightmare to sort individual payments.
Idk, im not home so im kind of saying all this on the fly. This default talk as presented, however, is disingenuous to say the least.
|
On October 09 2015 04:21 Introvert wrote:
I don't see anything saying that, only that it's a logistical nightmare to sort individual payments.
Idk, im not home so im kind of saying all this on the fly. This default talk as presented, however, is disingenuous to say the least.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/treasurys-lew-says-congress-must-raise-debt-limit-by-nov-5-1443733802
"Republicans have typically tried to wring concessions from the White House in exchange for debt-limit increases, though they haven’t yet said what that would include this time around. President Barack Obama and officials throughout his administration, pointing to their long-standing stance, say they won’t negotiate on budget or policy changes in exchange for an increase in the debt ceiling.
House Republicans have also prepared legislation to prioritize debt payments, but senior Treasury officials have dismissed those measures as unworkable because the U.S. would still be unable to make certain payments, which constitutes default."
Treasury officials say they will be forced to default if it is not raised.
|
On October 09 2015 04:17 farvacola wrote:
A failure to raise the debt ceiling will force a default on interest payments.
Fundamentally untrue. Not only is there a constitutional provision that (under its most logical reading) mandates that interest and principal on the debt be prioritized for spending purposes, there is plenty of revenue to the treasury to do that from taxes (plus another 80% of the government), and prioritizing debt payments is also the most logical and sound path.
Failure to raise the debt ceiling means spending in some areas of the federal government will cease. There are some bills that inform the executive branch where spending is to be prioritized, but the President has significant discretion on this issue.
|
On October 09 2015 04:20 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2015 04:15 Simberto wrote:On October 09 2015 04:08 KwarK wrote:On October 09 2015 04:04 Introvert wrote:On October 09 2015 03:59 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:On October 09 2015 03:48 Introvert wrote:
I'm pretty sure debt service payments continue, so i doubt that's what he said. Here you go: Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) -- who is challenging House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) as the conservative alternative to replace House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) -- said he would be willing to risk a default on the national debt or a government shutdown to extract demands from President Obama.
"I have no interest in just simply raising the debt ceiling without changing the trajectory of spending," Chaffetz told CNN Monday. "It's a time where we should be reflecting on, what are we going to do so that we don't have to keep changing the debt ceiling and raising it."
The Treasury Department has signaled a Nov. 5 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, which is only days after Boehner is set to step down from the speakership. In 2011, Standard & Poors downgraded the U.S.'s credit rating after Republicans seemed willing to blow past the debt ceiling deadline.
"It's silly for the president to say he's not even going to have this discussion," Chaffetz said Monday. He also said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) was "wrong" for promising that there would be no government default on the national debt.
"I think it's wrong to signal that you're going to cave at the end," Chaffetz said. "That's not what I'm interested in doing." Source He didn't say anything about default. Are you guys serious? Putting words in people's mouths? Isn't that what happens if the debt ceiling isn't raised? That's my understanding. If i understand correctly, once the debt ceiling is reached, the government can no longer take additional debt. This does not mean they have to stop paying back their debt. It means they have less money to do other stuff after paying back their debt, if they prioritize debt payment over other stuff. A lot of the "other stuff" is pretty important, but a default would only be necessary if the government can no longer pay back its debt on time. The debt ceiling is a system that is put in place to prevent the treasure from borrowing money(which they are empowered to do without approval). Its was created in 1917. It was put in place to make sure the Treasure from going rogue and just doing shit without approval and to allow the congress time to remove the head of the treasure if that happened. It was never meant to be used as a bargaining tool, but a thing that congress just does to keep the government running.
Also not true, the debt ceiling replaced an old system where Congress had to specifically authorize each bond issuance. Your explanation is 100% at odds with Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. The default referred to by the treasury is failure to pay Federal employees, medicaid reimbursement, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
