How long will republicans play chicken with the economy?

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Elmer_J.Fudd

…and borrowing a quarter of a billion dollars (what’s that in 2011 dollars?) to finance their revolution.

I read that it was $66 million which would be worth almost $1 Trillion today.

Although they did float 242 million in debt to pay soldiers and stuff (which promptly became worthless)

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Sitnam

On this forth of July let us all toast what started it: wealthy white men deciding to stop paying their taxes.

Most wealthy white colonists wanted nothing to do with the revolution. It was a group of enlightened educated men not merely wealthy white men.

And it wasn’t about not wanting to pay taxes. It was about taxation without representation. See the difference?

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Bloodless_Turnip

We have? When I cut my own personal budget I must have something vastly different going on that when our government claims to cut a budget.

OMFG are you just now realizing that your personal finances are different than the finances of the largest economy in the world?

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@Shodan

@gonzomax

The deficit is equal to the tax cuts plus the unfunded wars.

No it isn’t.

Regards,
Shodan

Well that plus the effects of the recession. So if you back out the tax cuts the war and the effects of the recession you are pretty damn close to a balanced budget.

[foolsguinea]

@Sitnam

On this forth of July let us all toast what started it: wealthy white men deciding to stop paying their taxes.

Actually, it was probably more that they were paying taxes to defray the cost of the French and Indian War, but the Crown didn’t give them access to the former New France. The War for Independence was more land-grab than tax protest, if General Washington is to be believed.

[Steve_MB]

@New_Deal_Democrat

In November 2012 Obama and the Democrat Party

[ TRELAINE ] Really, you must try harder to tuck the elephant ears behind the donkey mask![ /TRELAINE ]

[gonzomax]

Orrin Hatch: The 'Poor' Should Do More To Cut Nation's Debt

Many Repubs will go all the way. the poor just don’t cover enough of the wealth’s costs. It must be fixed. Hatch is clear that the rich are being screwed over.
http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/07/sen-demint-willing-to-cause-serious-disruptions-to-u-s-economy/ Demint doesn’t care if they blow up the economy to get their way.

[gonzomax]

Jeff Sessions: Saying Millionaires Should Share Pain Is 'Rather Pathetic' | HuffPost Latest News And Jeffy singing for his supper.

[gonzomax]

@Shodan

Of course we can - don’t be ridiculous.
Let’s see a cite where we have cut spending overall.
No it isn’t.

Regards,
Shodan

CHART: When Will Tax Cuts Become The Public Debt's Biggest Problem?

As usual you are wrong.

[XT]

Well, I have to admit I didn’t think it would go this far…and it looks like both sides are actually becoming more entrenched and are less likely to compromise. I have no idea what effect it will have if no compromise is reached, but I’m starting to think that we are going to find out.

Meanwhile, coalitions within both parties are trying to keep their leaders from giving up too much in the talks. Democrats, especially the party’s Progressive Caucus, are demanding that tax loopholes and certain credits for business be eliminated from the tax code, and want a tax increase on those earning more than $250,000. On Thursday, caucus leaders again voiced their opposition to any deal that touches Social Security or Medicare and sent a letter to the president urging him reject any Republican efforts to reform the programs.

“[A]ny cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be taken off the table,” the letter read. “The individuals depending on these three programs deserve well-conceived improvements, not deep, ideologically driven cuts with harmful consequences.”

The leaders of the caucus have requested a special meeting with Obama to air their concerns.

Liberal activists, too, have vowed to punish Democrats if they go along with a deal that cuts Social Security. The liberal group MoveOn.org unveiled a poll of its members this week that showed that 76 percent of them said they would be “less likely” to volunteer for the president in 2012 if cuts are made to Social Security.

For Republicans, the conservative wing of the party has put forth a plan to cut trillions from the federal budget on top of a promise of a constitutional amendment that forces the federal government to balance its budget every year. Republican leaders have not said whether a Balanced Budget Amendment is included in the talks with the president, but 28 GOP House members and 12 Senators have said they won’t support a deal without the amendment.

Any final arrangement between congressional leaders and the president will require support from both parties to pass. But with liberals and conservatives pulling hard in both directions, any deal the leaders agree to could be a tough pill to swallow for both parties.

-XT

[gonzomax]

This is where we find out about the Tea Baggers. Many say what they think their constituents want to hear. But will they go all the way and potentially let the economy crash in blind belief or will they become politicians and work out a compromise.

[XT]

Sounds to me as if both sides are hardening their positions, not just the ‘Tea Baggers’. So, I guess it will depend on who will get the blame if it all drops in the pot…and whether or not there will be any point in blame games if things go really bad.

-XT

[ElvisL1ves]

David Brooks Explains It All For You

A normal Republican Party would seize the opportunity to put a long-term limit on the growth of government. It would seize the opportunity to put the country on a sound fiscal footing. It would seize the opportunity to do these things without putting any real crimp in economic growth.
…
But we can have no confidence that the Republicans will seize this opportunity. That’s because the Republican Party may no longer be a normal party. Over the past few years, it has been infected by a faction that is more of a psychological protest than a practical, governing alternative.

The members of this movement do not accept the logic of compromise, no matter how sweet the terms.
…
The members of this movement do not accept the legitimacy of scholars and intellectual authorities.
…
The members of this movement have no sense of moral decency. A nation makes a sacred pledge to pay the money back when it borrows money. But the members of this movement talk blandly of default and are willing to stain their nation’s honor.

The members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the name. Economists have identified many factors that contribute to economic growth, ranging from the productivity of the work force to the share of private savings that is available for private investment. Tax levels matter, but they are far from the only or even the most important factor.

But to members of this movement, tax levels are everything. Members of this tendency have taken a small piece of economic policy and turned it into a sacred fixation. They are willing to cut education and research to preserve tax expenditures.
…
If the debt ceiling talks fail, independent voters will see that Democrats were willing to compromise but Republicans were not. If responsible Republicans don’t take control, independents will conclude that Republican fanaticism caused this default. They will conclude that Republicans are not fit to govern.

And he’s one of their own.

[gonzomax]

Buffett: GOP Threatening To 'Blow Your Brains Out' Over Debt Ceiling

Here is Buffet explaining what a dangerous and hypocritical game the Repubs are playing. They cranked it up 5 times during Bush without questioning it. Now that Obama is in, it suddenly becomes wrong.

[XT]

And Obama and some Dems opposed cranking it up then, but not now. Times change and so do politicians, no?

But ok…which things do you think the Dems should compromise on? Cuts to Social Security? Medicare/Medicaid? What about other social program spending cuts? How about no new taxes on the ‘rich’ making over $250k a year? No closure of tax loopholes? How about revision to Health Care Reform? Which things do you think the Dems should give up and how much should they give up to compromise with the Republicans?

-XT

[gonzomax]

GOP Budget Cuts Would Weaken American Defenses, Risk Thousands of Lives

The Repubs are slashing the National Institute of Health. As this article states it has produced many times the costs in medicines and treatments. It also will remove much of the flu safety net. The flu kills 36,000 a year. An epidemic could be catastrophic. But the wealthy need more tax breaks.

[waterj2]

@xtisme

And Obama and some Dems opposed cranking it up then, but not now. Times change and so do politicians, no?

The debt ceiling vote is an opportunity for the minority party to blame the majority party for the debt. Which is stupid political posturing and hypocritical. But to keep it from being an actual threat to the economy, the Gephardt Rule was put in place in 1979 to raise the limit automatically with thee budget resolution being passed. Thus, if you can pass a budget, you have to own the debt limit associated with it. The Republicans waived it in 1995 so that they could do to Clinton what they are doing now to Obama, take the economy hostage to wring concessions that they couldn’t normally get.

But ok…which things do you think the Dems should compromise on? Cuts to Social Security? Medicare/Medicaid? What about other social program spending cuts? How about no new taxes on the ‘rich’ making over $250k a year? No closure of tax loopholes? How about revision to Health Care Reform? Which things do you think the Dems should give up and how much should they give up to compromise with the Republicans?

Ideally, the Democrats should have started saying months ago that they were going to refuse to negotiate with hostage takers. For whatever reason, they practically wrote a personal invitation to the Republicans to use the debt limit as political leverage.

[XT]

[QUOTE=waterj2]
Ideally, the Democrats should have started saying months ago that they were going to refuse to negotiate with hostage takers. For whatever reason, they practically wrote a personal invitation to the Republicans to use the debt limit as political leverage.
[/QUOTE]

So, what you are saying is that the Dems shouldn’t compromise with the Pubs in any way or make any concessions…right?

(Just wanted to hear the truth…thanks for that)

-XT

[Duckster]

@tim-n-va

If we cut all discretionary spending we would eliminate the deficit. We wouldn’t have a defense department, transportation department, justice department, state department, etc.

Nope. Discretionary spending accounts for about 20 percent of all federal spending, but funds 80 percent of the federal government operations (the 80/20 rule). So if you cut just discretionary spending, the only agencies that would still be funded are the “problem” ones - Defense, HHS, Homeland Security and Social Security, and maybe a couple of others. They account for the 80 percent of the federal spending.

A balance approach is needed and that means raising revenue and cutting spending. Raising revenue is some combination of tax rates, tax breaks and overall economic growth.

And it means funding those programs that truly benefit America, not just the friends of Congress.

[waterj2]

@xtisme

So, what you are saying is that the Dems shouldn’t compromise with the Pubs in any way or make any concessions…right?

(Just wanted to hear the truth…thanks for that)

-XT

I think the Democrats and the Republicans should negotiate these things without using the debt limit for leverage. Everyone sane agrees that the debt limit needs to be raised, regardless of the deal that’s made. If we passed the Ryan Budget tomorrow, the debt limit would need to be raised (and Tea Partiers would be demanding further concessions on top of it). The fact that one party has an incentive to hold the world economy hostage is a flaw in our system of government. One that I think the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment tried to prevent (although it’s far less clear that they managed to specifically prevent the current scenario).

In any event, from my perspective any concession the Democrats might make is bad policy. So, they ought to cave on a few things as they can. And make clear that they are only doing it because the Republicans threatened to sink the economy otherwise. If the Republicans manage to pull off their wet dream of voucherizing Medicare by holding the US’s credit rating hostage, they should have to go into the 2012 elections taking all the blame for it, not getting the Democrats to call it a “Grand Bargain.” And then they’ll lose, because it’s a shitty, unpopular plan.