The Debt Ceiling

[Marvin the Martian]

I read they would be able to. Assuming they couldn’t prioritize the debt, then we default. We defaulted in 1971 when we went off the gold standard and the world didn’t end. It wouldn’t end now.

We did make some late payments in 79 because of a computer problem. We were a couple weeks late and the cost of Treasury bills went up 60 basis points. It was a mistake and not intentional. If an intentional default happened, and lasted longer, the results would be far worse.

Actually, the United States Has Defaulted Before

Since the day of Alexander Hamilton, the United States has never defaulted on the federal debt. That’s what we budget-watchers always say. It’s a great talking point. One that helps bolster the argument that default should not be an option in Washington’s latest debt limit showdown. There’s just...

www.google.com

I disagree with the concept of default in 71, we were always going to pay in dollars and we did. The dollars were just no longer transferable to gold

 

[snarlcakes]

I disagree with the concept of default in 71, we were always going to pay in dollars and we did. The dollars were just no longer transferable to gold

I’m sorry, but this is complete nonsense. It was a default.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I’m sorry, but this is complete nonsense. It was a default.

Even if it was, which I don't agree with, it was quantitatively different than what we are talking about now, which is the government simply not paying its bills. That's a whole different ball of wax.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Senate steps up and gets to work quick.

Senate passes debt ceiling deal, staving off default

The Fiscal Responsibility Act, the product of weeks of negotiation between Biden and McCarthy, will raise the debt limit until January 2025 and enact some spending cuts.

abcnews.go.com

 

[snarlcakes]

Even if it was, which I don't agree with, it was quantitatively different than what we are talking about now, which is the government simply not paying its bills. That's a whole different ball of wax.

Ok. I promise you a pound of gold in exchange for 100 snarlcakes bucks. You come back and try to give me a 100 snarlcakes bucks for a pound of gold, but I say sorry no gold. How is that not a failure to fulfill an obligation? What would you call it then?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Ok. I promise you a pound of gold in exchange for 100 snarlcakes bucks. You come back and try to give me a 100 snarlcakes bucks for a pound of gold, but I say sorry no gold. How is that not a failure to fulfill an obligation? What would you call it then?

I wouldn't call it anything, because I'd never buy your shitty fake bitcoin.

 

[snarlcakes]

I wouldn't call it anything, because I'd never buy your shitty fake bitcoin.

Lol…you are not getting any of my Bitcoin

 

[BCCHoosier]

Just like you said, terrorist. We all get it.

Quit being a victim. You know what Marvin meant.

 

[GiggityGoo]

No. They would have prioritized spending and Democrats would have eventually accepted the House’s proposal. The world doesn’t end because some government spending gets cut off for a few weeks (assuming it would have lasted that long).

It seems like Republicans just winning elections would be easier than playing chicken with economy.

 

[Sope Creek]

I read they would be able to.

Link?

 

[snarlcakes]

Link?

I posted a clip of Cruz talking about it already.

 

[Sope Creek]

I posted a clip of Cruz talking about it already.

I thought you said you read it. How was I supposed to know that Cruz was your source.

BTW, Cruz isn't a source I trust much.

 

[snarlcakes]

I thought you said you read it. How was I supposed to know that Cruz was your source.

BTW, Cruz isn't a source I trust much.

I don’t care who you trust. I was just being nice and answering your question. Do you pull this sh#t with your wife?

 

[Spartans9312]

Continuing to spend trillions more dollars than you have year after year won’t eventually crash the economy? Are you from the AOC mindset where the “solution to the government running out of money is to just print more money?”

Were you complaining when Trump signed the Cares Act? Price tag was $2 trillion and it was terrible legislation. He was all in

 

[UncleMark]

Were you complaining when Trump signed the Cares Act? Price tag was $2 trillion and it was terrible legislation. He was all in

That's different.

 

[Spartans9312]

That's different.

It was a boondoggle. IGW should’ve been howling….he may have been

 

[Spartans9312]

https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2023-05/hr3746_Letter_McCarthy.pdf

Page 12…Table 2

 

[twenty02]

Were you complaining when Trump signed the Cares Act? Price tag was $2 trillion and it was terrible legislation. He was all in

The King of Debt is his hero! Trumpy was upset that the checks going out weren't larger!

And don't forget, the $2.2T Cares Act wasn't the end. They did another $900b in stimulus money at the end of 2020, which Trump signed on his way out the door.

All Trump supporters bitching about the debt ceiling are complete and total frauds.

 

[Spartans9312]

The King of Debt is his hero! Trumpy was upset that the checks going out weren't larger!

And don't forget, the $2.2T Cares Act wasn't the end. They did another $900b in stimulus money at the end of 2020, which Trump signed on his way out the door.

All Trump supporters bitching about the debt ceiling are complete and total frauds.

I can’t believe there are still people defending the Cares Act. Especially the ones that complain non-stop about the pandemic and Wall Street. There must be a reason….hmmm?

 

[twenty02]

I can’t believe there are still people defending the Cares Act. Especially the ones that complain non-stop about the pandemic and Wall Street. There must be a reason….hmmm?

PPP was the by far the largest govt fraud in our history.

$100+B flat stolen by scammers. Hundreds of billions directly transferred to the wealthiest people in the country from the Treasury.


All under the auspices of the Trump admin.

 

[mcmurtry66]

PPP was the by far the largest govt fraud in our history.

$100+B flat stolen by scammers. Hundreds of billions directly transferred to the wealthiest people in the country from the Treasury.


All under the auspices of the Trump admin.

Concur. All of the Covid period was gov at its absolute worst

 

[snarlcakes]

I can’t believe there are still people defending the Cares Act. Especially the ones that complain non-stop about the pandemic and Wall Street. There must be a reason….hmmm?

The bill passed unanimously in the Senate and had overwhelming support in the House. What did you want Trump to do? Veto it? It wouldn’t have mattered.

Trump’s mistake was allowing the shutting down if the country, draconian measures, and listening to Fauci. Once the decision to shut the country was made, the bill was getting passed no matter who was in charge.

 

[Spartans9312]

The bill passed unanimously in the Senate and had overwhelming support in the House. What did you want Trump to do? Veto it? It wouldn’t have mattered.

Trump’s mistake was allowing the shutting down if the country, draconian measures, and listening to Fauci. Once the decision to shut the country was made, the bill was getting passed no matter who was in charge.

What about the appropriations bills? Did he veto those? Trump was not some fiscal conservative. Let’s see what the House does going forward. They start over Oct. 1st. With this agreement, if the House does a Continuing Resolution, then spending stays the same and everything goes down 1% in January if they haven’t done appropriations bills. If the House does appropriations bills…military goes up some, non-defense goes down some.

 

[snarlcakes]

What about the appropriations bills? Did he veto those? Trump was not some fiscal conservative. Let’s see what the House does going forward. They start over Oct. 1st. With this agreement, if the House does a Continuing Resolution, then spending stays the same and everything goes down 1% in January if they haven’t done appropriations bills. If the House does appropriations bills…military goes up some, non-defense goes down some.

I agree Trump wasn’t a fiscal conservative, but the Cares Act would have passed no matter who was President.

 

[ButHerEmails]

The King of Debt is his hero! Trumpy was upset that the checks going out weren't larger!

And don't forget, the $2.2T Cares Act wasn't the end. They did another $900b in stimulus money at the end of 2020, which Trump signed on his way out the door.

All Trump supporters are complete and total frauds.

FIFY

 

[twenty02]

The bill passed unanimously in the Senate and had overwhelming support in the House. What did you want Trump to do? Veto it? It wouldn’t have mattered.

Trump’s mistake was allowing the shutting down if the country, draconian measures, and listening to Fauci. Once the decision to shut the country was made, the bill was getting passed no matter who was in charge.

Congress was not responsible for the PPP fraud. That was entirely on the Trump admin. They were shoveling money out the door completely recklessly and with zero safeguards.

 

[IUCrazy2]

We could.

What are you willing to give up? Asparagus? Dessert?

How about everything we added to the menu post 2019.

 

[Sope Creek]

How about everything we added to the menu post 2019.

So no PPP? How we gonna get that money back?

No Covid relief? How we gonna get that money back?

Do you see a theme here?

BTW, I think this whole political BS is more about "I got mine" than anything else. Republicans liked the Reagan tax cuts and Democrats have spent the last 40 years trying to catch up. Meanwhile the Republicans have latched on to tax cuts as if they were a birthright.

It's gone on so long, who knows what the score is. My guess? The GOP has eaten the Democrats for lunch . . . and the country is paying the price, literally.

 

[Sope Creek]

I don’t care who you trust. I was just being nice and answering your question. Do you pull this sh#t with your wife?

*snicker*

And your reading source was?

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Dems got nothing and lost big on the deal, after Biden said he wouldn't negotiate, and shouldn't have.

but after watching CNN and MSNBC since, they assure me that Biden's getting the debt limit extended, (which has always been the case in the past), despite the Dems losing big, is the political equivalent of the passing of Social Security, Medicare, and civil rights legislation, all put together, and that Biden has now easily passed Washington and Lincoln as our greatest president ever because of it, and it isn't even close.

the non stop full court press ever since by Biden's corporate PR machine, has been impressive to say the least, and impossible not to notice.

 

[IUCrazy2]

So no PPP? How we gonna get that money back?

No Covid relief? How we gonna get that money back?

Do you see a theme here?

BTW, I think this whole political BS is more about "I got mine" than anything else. Republicans liked the Reagan tax cuts and Democrats have spent the last 40 years trying to catch up. Meanwhile the Republicans have latched on to tax cuts as if they were a birthright.

It's gone on so long, who knows what the score is. My guess? The GOP has eaten the Democrats for lunch . . . and the country is paying the price, literally.

The annual budget has increased by 40%. You aren't clawing back the money. You are looking at the 2019 budget and comparing it to 2024 and asking, "Why does agency or program X need 40% more money than they did in 2019 which was 5 years ago?" Or you ask "Why do we need to continue to spend X amount of money on this program that maybe did not exist in 2019?"

All your other stuff is just boo hoo. Democrats spend oodles of government money to fund their pet projects and never pass tax increases to cover it and Republicans cut taxes without ever cutting government programs. Both parties are negligent in handling the budget, they just burn the candle from different ends. Also notice I did not mention anything partisan, you brought the parties into the discussion. I just said to stop eating so much. Do you honestly think the world ends if we got the government back to levels it was at less than 4 years ago? Come on.

ETA: I am asking a 300 lbs. man to cut back to a double cheeseburger instead of eating a triple. And the double cheeseburger was something he was eating when he was 250 lbs and increasing his weight. The triple he just started eating put the weight gain into overdrive. He is still going to be eating a double cheeseburger, just like he did 4 years ago. He isn't starving.

 

[IUCrazy2]

There is your increase.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

There is your increase.

link please.

 

[hoot1]

The annual budget has increased by 40%. You aren't clawing back the money. You are looking at the 2019 budget and comparing it to 2024 and asking, "Why does agency or program X need 40% more money than they did in 2019 which was 5 years ago?" Or you ask "Why do we need to continue to spend X amount of money on this program that maybe did not exist in 2019?"

All your other stuff is just boo hoo. Democrats spend oodles of government money to fund their pet projects and never pass tax increases to cover it and Republicans cut taxes without ever cutting government programs. Both parties are negligent in handling the budget, they just burn the candle from different ends. Also notice I did not mention anything partisan, you brought the parties into the discussion. I just said to stop eating so much. Do you honestly think the world ends if we got the government back to levels it was at less than 4 years ago? Come on.

ETA: I am asking a 300 lbs. man to cut back to a double cheeseburger instead of eating a triple. And the double cheeseburger was something he was eating when he was 250 lbs and increasing his weight. The triple he just started eating put the weight gain into overdrive. He is still going to be eating a double cheeseburger, just like he did 4 years ago. He isn't starving.

Bottom line, each spending program has a certain amount of constituents supporting it, and nobody wants the tax increase necessary to balance the budget.

 

[IUCrazy2]

link please.

https://www.cato.org/blog/federal-spending-40-2019

OMG CATO and they are like fascist nazis and stuff!!!!!

Now that we have that out of the way, they provide links to the CBO and others to support the table.

 

[IUCrazy2]

Bottom line, each spending program has a certain amount of constituents supporting it, and nobody wants the tax increase necessary to balance the budget.

Yeah, both parties are cowards who are afraid to lead. The only time we get some sort of cooperation is when we are on the brink of disaster (or something they think will be disaster.) The problem with the debt is that no one can tell you when it will be a problem. I can look at the table and see that our interest payments on the debt went up 70% from 2019 to 2023. We spend almost as much on that now as we used to spend on all nondefense discretionary spending in 2019. ($640B compared to $660B).

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Bottom line, each spending program has a certain amount of constituents supporting it, and nobody wants the tax increase necessary to balance the budget.

by "nobody", you mean the wealthy who aren't cornered in by the blood/turnip relationship they are currently now in.

the wealthy are the ones with money left after expenses are subtracted out.

the working class fight to break even, thanks to the investor class who keep them that way.

the original distribution of wealth of all for owners, none for workers, leaves only one increased tax revenues option.

 

[hoot1]

Yeah, both parties are cowards who are afraid to lead. The only time we get some sort of cooperation is when we are on the brink of disaster (or something they think will be disaster.) The problem with the debt is that no one can tell you when it will be a problem. I can look at the table and see that our interest payments on the debt went up 70% from 2019 to 2023. We spend almost as much on that now as we used to spend on all nondefense discretionary spending in 2019. ($640B compared to $660B).

Craze, agree.

Another problem is our political system focuses our pols on the short term. Short term as in the next election.

Craze, you mention both parties are to blame. Unfortunately another problem is the tendency for us to blame only the other party as we go back and forth sharing power while the unpaid total debt climbs.

 

[hoot1]

by "nobody", you mean the wealthy who aren't cornered in by the blood/turnip relationship they are currently now in.

the wealthy are the ones with money left after expenses are subtracted out.

the working class fight to break even, thanks to the investor class who keep them that way.

the original distribution of wealth of all for owners, none for workers, leaves only one increased tax revenues option.

The rich feel they help the country more by spending and investing their money more wisely than the government would.

For proof the rich have a surplus while the government has to borrow to meet its commitments.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

The rich feel they help the country more by spending and investing their money more wisely than the government would.

For proof the rich have a surplus while the government has to borrow to meet its commitments.

by "investing", you mean investing in themselves only, not the country.

which to them is "wise".

which yes, is why the rich have a surplus. A MASSIVE BEYOND BELIEF SURPLUS.

and why the govt has to borrow to meet it's commitments.

when the original distribution of income is "almost all for ownership, bare minimum to pay expenses for workers", that's to be expected is it not.

and what that leads to in the long run is expected as well.

we've balanced the budget in the past.

what's changed is the initial distribution of income, and the tax rates for the rich and corps.