I think the business community made a huge mistake assuming the Tea Party was already bought and paid for or they would be absorbed into the greater Republican whole. This will be another time known for its “excess of democracy.”
What about the TP though? Is it time to break out the tinfoil yet? Nothing they say makes any sense. The only thing I can think of is that they’re a secret cabal trying to heroically bring down the U.S. empire. If they just came out and said that it’d be better.
WTF? Agree or disagree with the TP. They are of the opinion that taxes are high enough and that government spending needs to be curtailed. That’s all. No cabals or empire breaking. Just an argument for limited government.
The TP takes no stand on moral issues.
And would I take out a 1% interest credit card? Sure. But the rating agencies have put us on notice that failure to take care of trillion dollar per year deficits will make those rates go far higher. We don’t have permission from our creditors to keep doing what we are doing. Some fiscal sanity must take place.
Fine. Argue about that come budget time. This insanity with the debt ceiling is entirely likely to trigger another global recession, just to score partisan political points. That’s not fiscal sanity.
Interesting story on the BBC to the effect that apparently Apple (you know, the guys who make iPods/iPads/iPhones etc) have larger cash-on-hand reserves than the US Government.
Not being in the US I don’t have the background on all the whole situation, but I’m surprised that things are at this point again…
That’s fine and all, but the Dems already caved and agreed to a right wing bill and the TP wants…what exactly? More cuts? Now maybe it’s still all kabuki and they think they can extort even more goodies out of the Dems and maybe that will still happen. And that’ll be fine. But if the USG actually goes into default it’s time to examine ulterior motives.
Sure, but what does that hve to do with the debt ceiling? To use the popular but tortured analaogy of the family budget; does it make sense for the family who finds themselves spending more than they make to threaten to stop paying their mortgage? Because that is what this extortion by the right is; they have economic goals they cannot achieve by reasoned debate and the legislative process, so they must stoop to coercion of the most dangerous kind. We must not negotiate with such terrorists.
Never mind. Found it.
Except you look at what they want to cut and it’s moral majority all over again with a dose of racism.
TP are also completely blind to the fact that raising taxes to pay down the debt is also a reasonable option that should be considered. Cut their SS checks and medicare, and we’ll see how many TP’s there really are. 
Rating agencies have done no such thing. They issued warnings that our rating would be hurt if we DON’T RAISE THE DEBT CEILING.
I read that whole thing, yes I did. The CBO doesn’t say that if the Bush tax cuts are left to expire then revenue will match spending. It says that If the Bush tax cuts are left to expire and the alternative minimum tax is broadened (affecting as much as 50% of households by 2035) that revenues will match spending.
Gangster, with all due respect and without partisan sniping, the rating agencies have not said what you think they said. The rating agencies have in a nutshell said that a) the debt limit needs to be raised, b) there needs to be a credible long term plan and action to reduce the deficit and c) the US needs to demonstrate a political system that will address the long term deficit in a credible manner that d) will not affect the ability of the US to honor it’s debt obligations. They don’t define what “credible” means.
Straight from Moody’swebsite: Potential outcome of US rating review
Our review of the US rating will end when one of two events occurs: A government default on Treasury debt obligations or a raising of the debt limit. The outcome of longer-term deficit reduction negotiations will affect the rating outlook
You can look at a newspaper quoteof S&P from 2 weeks ago.
There’s a lot more out there.
Latest news from Washington:
After much dickering, the House finally passed a “common-sense solution” for the debt ceiling, by a vote of 218-22. Just looking at these vote numbers, you can see the strong desire to embrace all views, and willingness to compromise that marks today’s Republicans.
The Democrat Senate immediately rejected this compromise solution on which both sides had agreed in the House. I guess it’s pretty clear by now which side is at fault.
Is this a woosh? 218-22 refers to Republicans only.
From nytimes.com:
“Demonstrating the deep partisan divide coloring the budget fight, the House voted 218 to 210 to approve the plan endorsed by Speaker John A. Boehner to increase the federal debt ceiling in two stages. No Democrats supported the measure; 22 Republicans opposed it.”
Hunh?? 
:dubious: :smack: If there were Communists or Mormons in the House would you want me to include their votes as well?
I thought it was great that Leadership was able to finally resolve the bickering and get a near-unanimous vote.
˙ʎʇıuɐs s,ǝuo uıɐʇǝɹ oʇ ɔıʇǝɥʇɐd ooʇ ɥɔnɯ ǝq pןnoʍ ʎɔoıpı sıɥʇ ɹoɯnɥ ʇnoɥʇıʍ ˙ɥsooʍ ɐ sɐʍ ʇı ˙ɥɐǝʎ
The House debt-ceiling bill was so insanely “right-wing” that this may be hard to believe, but the 22 Republicans opposed to it, opposed it because it wasn’t insane enough. :smack:
I see two approaches I’d consider if I were Obama. The present Democrat strategy of kissing Republican asses and begging them desperately “Please, please relent and let us help you pass the most right-wing insane budget plan ever” is not one of them.
Plan 1. Finesse the debt ceiling. This can be done in several ways. Declare it unconstitutional. Or mint the trillion-dollar platinum coin, and spend the proceeds of that for a while instead of borrowing.
Plan 2. Drop the deficit down to zero by reduced spending. I’m not sure what the least harmful way to do this is, but Republicans could be invited to help with suggestions. FAA and TSA could lay off many personnel if we simply shut down half the nation’s airports. Soldiers’ pay could be cut in half; give them the alternative of honorable discharge. The Interstate Highways could be used for ransom: shut them down in any state that doesn’t pay tribute to U.S. Treasury. Medicare patients could be rationed, and enocuraged to seek Republican charities. If none of these appeal, again, the wonderful Republicans who know so much can tell us better ways.
Either way, T-bonds will drop to AA for an additional $100 billion annual interest charge; as far as I can tell this was the real goal of the Starve the Beast crowd. They’ve probably done enough to achieve it already. What more do they want? Will they be satisfied if U.S. T-bonds get “junk” status?
It would be nice to demonstrate to the American voter just how crazy these Republicans are. But I’m afraid the voters will react next election with “No … the problem is they weren’t crazy enough.” :smack:
I’m missing how Boehner’s bill is “insanely right wing”. The TP doesn’t like it because it cuts $900 billion in spending that was projected to occur over the next 10 YEARS with a corresponding debt increase that will last SIX MONTHS. A 20 to 1 borrowing vs. spending cuts ratio. That doesn’t seem fiscally conservative to me. The TP wants cut, cap, and balance and they all voted for that. If they had some evil scheme for default, why vote for cut, cap, and balance?
The TP members want a plan that has some semblance of balancing the budget in the near future. None of the plans talked about do any such thing.
Why do it at debt limit increase time? Why not? What’s wrong with saying, “Yes, I will vote to increase our debt, but we need some corresponding plan to stop this from happening in the future.”?
I might be more sympathetic to the ideological purity of the Tea Party’s desire to cut the deficit if their chosen bill weren’t such a farce. But the brave Tea Party’s bill does not actually make any specific cuts – indeed, the only specific thing it does is protect the Tea Party’s old white base from any cuts to their precious entitlements. Anyone who thinks the way to deal with the deficit in a serious way is to set arbitrary spending caps while exempting entitlements is a fool, but since apparently most of the GOP believe that, I’m sure that’s what the final bill will look like. If there is one, after all this madness.
No, they want a plan that holds the economy, the government, and the American people over a barrel so they can implement their vision of a country with minimal government, no social safety net, no environmental regulations, and no health care for seniors. If they wanted to balance the budget, they’d be taking tax increases seriously, but they aren’t – this is just another way to get at their fantasyland version of “the government that governs least governs best.”
This isn’t about the budget, this is about politics.
If he’s put out a plan, I haven’t seen it. Not that I doubt you, just that it seems to have been ignored by the media. If you read Kraut’s article yesterday, he said that Obama didn’t put one out, which I guess i took as confirmation.
You actually have a cite for this? In a quick search, here is what the Tea Party says they want
They also talk about
You can demonize your opponents all you want, and you certainly aren’t the first lefty on this board to do that. But ‘limited federal government’ and returning power to the states - not sure how you get from there to ‘no social safety net’, ‘no environmental regulations’… ie all of your exaggerated statements.