|
On October 07 2013 04:47 Jisall wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 03:33 Sbrubbles wrote:http://www.gao.gov/special.pubs/longterm/debt/ownership.htmlAccording to this, a good part of the american debt is held by the americans themselves (more than half if you consider government entities, including SS funds). Defaulting wouldn't just make international investors weary, it would piss off domestic investors (not only Wall Street itself but everyone who has money in a fund). Of course, this is in relation to a minor default. It's hard to fathom what a real default would do for the american economy, but it would centainly start by sinking the whole financial sector. Also, about inflation, "surprise hyperinflation" doesn't exist, especially when you're stuck at almost 0% inflation. If there was even a hint of it, the US would no longer be able to sell long term treasuries at fixed interest rates (which are currently at less than 4% per year!). It's quite telling that those who are putting their money where their mouth is expect at most 3% inflation per year over the next 20 years. The hyper inflation talk started when someone mentioned that we would never default on our debt because we would just print money to pay for it. The treasury would never let hyperinflation happen.
The US treasury, current or future, would never allow either to happen, at least in the "full catastrophe" mode you guys are talking about. In truth, the US doesn't ever actually need to monetize the debt, because it can always be rolled. You're probably thinking of printing money to pay the deficit, not the debt.
Still, in terms of monetizing the deficit vs partial default (for whatever reason, say, to reduce interest payments), a default is pretty clearly the worse option, because its consequences (political and economic) are both instant and unpredictable. Monetizing the deficit would likely lead to a surge in inflation in the short or medium term, but it's a known problem with known policy tools to deal with it (you did it in the 80s). For that inflation to truly spiral out of control the US government would not only have to keep having deficits and monetizing them, but more importantly it would have to credibly show that its political system is incapable of solving its deficit issue. And seriously, despite the problems as you guys have, you're still quite a ways off "banana republic" political status.
|
Boehner and Cruz both gave interviews today...they both basically solidified that they're not giving in anytime soon...Boehner seems content with defaulting too.
Wonder when our commander in chief is going to take command of this situation.
|
Canada6002 Posts
On October 07 2013 08:00 LuckyFool wrote:
Boehner and Cruz both gave interviews today...they both basically solidified that they're not giving in anytime soon...Boehner seems content with defaulting too.
Wonder when our commander in chief is going to take command of this situation.
Why is it Obama's job to do congress' job? Why do you think he should give in to extortion? Who do you think he is, Reagan?
|
Has the roadkill cleanup department been affected by the shutdown? My area is starting to get littered with animal corpses
|
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit?
|
Canada6002 Posts
On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit?
Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans.
What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue?
|
On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit?
That or we wait for the people to storm capital hill and drag congress kicking and screaming to there job.
Its the wonderful consequence of the Republican tactic. they forced the Democrats into a position where they cannot comprise. The only way this ends is when a clear CR is brought up for vote.
|
On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue?
oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that.
people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem.
|
On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit?
Boehner has a history of giving in, and the Democrats have had a history of blaming the Republicans when their policies take the economy south. It's not leadership, but it isn't exactly a bad bet either.
Maybe he's still coming to terms with government shutdowns coming down on the + Show Spoiler [President's head] +.
Who was the speaker of the house in the 1930s during the Great Depression? Who was the president?
|
On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit?
The President has no real control of the compromise. This is congress 98%. I give the 2% leeway because the President does have a voice that carries weight but they could easily ignore that. Everyone in congress is gambling the other side will give in.
The President has no power over the economy, electing him in because of economical reasons was an silly idea. If you want economic change or progress or staying the same look at the senatorial/house elections (if you live in a small population state might be best to just focus on senate.)
|
On October 07 2013 08:44 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Boehner has a history of giving in, and the Democrats have had a history of blaming the Republicans when their policies take the economy south. It's not leadership, but it isn't exactly a bad bet either. Maybe he's still coming to terms with government shutdowns coming down on the + Show Spoiler [President's head] +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLY8OAW5ZzE . Who was the speaker of the house in the 1930s during the Great Depression? Who was the president?
Well the crash happened under a republican president and congress, and the recovery under a democratic house and president. And the American public is blaming the gop by something like 2 to 1, so this internet argument is a forgone conclusion. The fact is that the house is holding the budget up over non budget reasons, and thats why they are being blamed for this.
|
On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem.
And its people like you to refuse to see what the Republicans have done who are also a part of the problem.
The ACA was passed by House, by the Senate, by the President, by the Supreme Court.
The Republicans failed to repeal it over 40 times.
Until something changes in the distribution of congress the ACA is law.
Yet instead of accepting there (temporary) defeat the Republican party took it upon itself to shut the country down.
They forced the Democrats into a position where they either sit back and wait or allow the Republican party to use government funding to achieve any goal they desire regardless of the democratic progress.
The Democrats cant compromise now even if they wanted to. The Republicans forced them into that position and the Republicans are indeed the sole responsible party for the government shutdown.
|
On October 07 2013 08:30 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? oh for gods sake it is so much more complex than that. people like you who think that all the blame can be placed at one parties doorstep indiscriminately are a huge part of the problem.
Actually, it's the exact opposite. It's people who fail to place the blame where it belongs, namely on the Republican party, who contribute to encouraging behavior like this precisely because the people responsible feel they will not get punished for their behavior at the next election.
|
On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue?
Boehner is plenty to blame as well. Not being able to hash out the division among his own party is unacceptable. Allowing a vote on a clean CR on the house floor could/probably barely pass and resolve the shutdown issue. But as long as there is such vehement opposition from the most conservative Republicans, Boehner is going to have intense pressure not to vote it through.
Democrats don't really seem to care about looking at it from the Republican standpoint- if Boehner lets this go through without enough support from his party (right now an estimated 21 out of 232?) we're talking about voting legislation through by a single vote or two tops. There is serious power behind the opposition with this from the conservative side, it's not just coming out of nowhere. Nobody on the liberal side seems to care about what/where/why this opposition is coming from, they just sit there and say "Boehner needs to have courage." "They're just on some ideological crusade." Obama and Reid saying stuff like this only entrenches the Republicans further in.
At what point does Obama's non-action make him partly responsible for an economic fallout? The debt is going to default if the Republicans don't "surrender" and the world economy is going to suffer and we're supposed to just sit around and say "Well those irresponsible Republicans sure are pretty stupid now aren't they?"
|
On October 07 2013 09:15 LuckyFool wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? Boehner is plenty to blame as well. Not being able to hash out the division among his own party is unacceptable. Allowing a vote on a clean CR on the house floor could/probably barely pass and resolve the shutdown issue. But as long as there is such vehement opposition from the most conservative Republicans, Boehner is going to have intense pressure not to vote it through. Democrats don't really seem to care about looking at it from the Republican standpoint- if Boehner lets this go through without enough support from his party (right now an estimated 21 out of 232?) we're talking about voting legislation through by a single vote or two tops. There is serious power behind the opposition with this from the conservative side, it's not just coming out of nowhere. Nobody on the liberal side seems to care about what/where/why this opposition is coming from, they just sit there and say "Boehner needs to have courage." "They're just on some ideological crusade." Obama and Reid saying stuff like this only entrenches the Republicans further in. At what point does Obama's non-action make him partly responsible for an economic fallout? The debt is going to default if the Republicans don't "surrender" and the world economy is going to suffer and we're supposed to just sit around and say "Well those irresponsible Republicans sure are pretty stupid now aren't they?"
What Republican standpoint is there?
The one where its acceptable to hold the government hostage because you tried to repeal a law and failed 40+ times?
Boehner doesnt even want this shutdown. The Republican leadership doesnt want this shut down, they have said so themselves. The pleaded for the tea party to not do this.
Thats why people are saying Boehner needs the courage. Everyone except a "small" group of extremists want this shutdown to end. So stand up against them and do what is right for the country and heck, what you believe in yourself.
There isnt even a political career to save for Boehner. Hes going to lose his primary to a more extreme republican anyway since hes seen as the weakest speaker in ages.
As for Obama's non-action. Again he has no action to take. The Republicans have forced the Democrats and the President into a position where they cannot negotiate...
|
On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue?
You can not honestly say that the republicans are the sole responsible party, can you? Of course they're the ones refusing to raise the debt ceiling. But the democrats *can* negotiate with them, and they can avert the ensuing catastrophe that would occur if the debt ceiling isn't raised.
If the democrats choose not to negotiate, then they partially share the blame for defaulting the country. I don't think anyone is saying its a fair situation, but they clearly have the power to avert a default by making some uncomfortable concessions; you can't just ignore that!
|
United States7483 Posts
On October 07 2013 08:19 Aveng3r wrote:
Has the roadkill cleanup department been affected by the shutdown? My area is starting to get littered with animal corpses
That's state and local government, not federal, so no, it hasn't been affected.
|
United States7483 Posts
On October 07 2013 09:15 LuckyFool wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? Boehner is plenty to blame as well. Not being able to hash out the division among his own party is unacceptable. Allowing a vote on a clean CR on the house floor could/probably barely pass and resolve the shutdown issue. But as long as there is such vehement opposition from the most conservative Republicans, Boehner is going to have intense pressure not to vote it through. Democrats don't really seem to care about looking at it from the Republican standpoint- if Boehner lets this go through without enough support from his party (right now an estimated 21 out of 232?) we're talking about voting legislation through by a single vote or two tops. There is serious power behind the opposition with this from the conservative side, it's not just coming out of nowhere. Nobody on the liberal side seems to care about what/where/why this opposition is coming from, they just sit there and say "Boehner needs to have courage." "They're just on some ideological crusade." Obama and Reid saying stuff like this only entrenches the Republicans further in. At what point does Obama's non-action make him partly responsible for an economic fallout? The debt is going to default if the Republicans don't "surrender" and the world economy is going to suffer and we're supposed to just sit around and say "Well those irresponsible Republicans sure are pretty stupid now aren't they?"
Would you stop talking about Obama please? For fucks sake, Obama has literally 0 control over the budget. It is entirely in the hands of congress. The only thing he can do is ask nicely. I suppose if the country defaults he might be able to issue an executive order, but that hasn't happened yet so no. Even if he had the power to force the senate to give in, he wouldn't, because he can't negotiate with hostage takers.
I'm sorry, but you're completely wrong on this one. The way the Republicans should be fighting the ACA if they hate it so much would be to appeal to the public, explain why it's a bad bill and should be repealed, put forth their own replacement bill, and ask to be elected to more seats so they can repeal it. If the will of the public is actually behind them, then that would work. They're doing what they are doing because it's clear the will of the public is NOT behind them, and instead of losing gracefully and accepting that they can't win this one, they're resorting to holding the government hostage. That's entirely unacceptable, and as everyone here is saying, the democrats can't back down even if they wanted to, they simply cannot validate this tactic.
|
On October 07 2013 09:23 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 09:15 LuckyFool wrote:On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? Boehner is plenty to blame as well. Not being able to hash out the division among his own party is unacceptable. Allowing a vote on a clean CR on the house floor could/probably barely pass and resolve the shutdown issue. But as long as there is such vehement opposition from the most conservative Republicans, Boehner is going to have intense pressure not to vote it through. Democrats don't really seem to care about looking at it from the Republican standpoint- if Boehner lets this go through without enough support from his party (right now an estimated 21 out of 232?) we're talking about voting legislation through by a single vote or two tops. There is serious power behind the opposition with this from the conservative side, it's not just coming out of nowhere. Nobody on the liberal side seems to care about what/where/why this opposition is coming from, they just sit there and say "Boehner needs to have courage." "They're just on some ideological crusade." Obama and Reid saying stuff like this only entrenches the Republicans further in. At what point does Obama's non-action make him partly responsible for an economic fallout? The debt is going to default if the Republicans don't "surrender" and the world economy is going to suffer and we're supposed to just sit around and say "Well those irresponsible Republicans sure are pretty stupid now aren't they?" What Republican standpoint is there? The one where its acceptable to hold the government hostage because you tried to repeal a law and failed 40+ times? Boehner doesnt even want this shutdown. The Republican leadership doesnt want this shut down, they have said so themselves. The pleaded for the tea party to not do this. Thats why people are saying Boehner needs the courage. Everyone except a "small" group of extremists want this shutdown to end. So stand up against them and do what is right for the country and heck, what you believe in yourself. There isnt even a political career to save for Boehner. Hes going to lose his primary to a more extreme republican anyway since hes seen as the weakest speaker in ages. As for Obama's non-action. Again he has no action to take. The Republicans have forced the Democrats and the President into a position where they cannot negotiate...
Saying the President of the United States is in a position where he "cannot negotiate" doesn't even make logical sense to me.
The reason the repeals have failed is because there hasn't been adequate enough compromise (on both sides probably). Republicans feel as though they've been ignored for the past 3 years. How is this purely the Republicans fault when the Democrats have continued to ignore them, and then say "Look they tried 40 times and it failed." No kidding it failed, because there's been next to no compromise. All the Democrats really did was cut the initial budget figures down which had nothing to do with what the Republicans real concerns where which were with the AFA.
|
On October 07 2013 09:28 radscorpion9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2013 08:24 Roe wrote:On October 07 2013 08:19 LuckyFool wrote:
I think when Congress is at an impasse, who else is there?
Obama is gambling the Republicans give in. If they don't and the country defaults what do we do? Keep blaming the Republicans while our economy goes to utter shit? Yes. You blame whoever is responsible. In this case that's the Republicans. What is it with conservatives trying to shirk their responsibility on this issue? You can not honestly say that the republicans are the sole responsible party, can you? Of course they're the ones refusing to raise the debt ceiling. But the democrats *can* negotiate with them, and they can avert the ensuing catastrophe that would occur if the debt ceiling isn't raised. If the democrats choose not to negotiate, then they partially share the blame for defaulting the country. I don't think anyone is saying its a fair situation, but they clearly have the power to avert a default by making some uncomfortable concessions; you can't just ignore that!
You don't negotiate with terrorists, or hostage takers, or w/e, because by doing so once, you give them the power to force your hand to do so again in the future.
Right now it seems like one side is dangling the fate of the country in order to have their way. If they are successful in getting their way, then it just opens the doors to it happening again in the future.
A lot of those politicians disgust me. They were elected to help people, do work on the behalf of their constituents. And shit like this is the result. It seems like the people who actually want to make a difference never make it into politics.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
