The 800 Pound Gorilla in the Room

[Bill]

Ending deficit spending will be the only way to even try and save this country from a meltdown. I'm waiting to see if all that come-to-Jesus talk about deficit spending is just talk, or if the House will have the courage to Just Say No.

Pubs have the majority. All they need to do is either not vote on raising the Debt Ceiling, vote no if it comes up, or heck, they could just vote present or not show up. All they need to do is NOT do something, and we can begin our return to fiscal sanity, as painful as that will be.


Don't Raise the Debt Ceiling!by Ron Paul


As of November 7th, the total U.S. public debt outstanding reached an astonishing $13.7 trillion. This means that although Congress just raised the debt ceiling to $14.3 trillion back in February, the new Congress will face another debt ceiling vote almost immediately next year. Otherwise, the Treasury will not be able to continue issuing debt to fund government operations.

The upcoming vote will provide an interesting litmus test for the new Republican congressional majority, especially those new members closely identified with Tea Party voters. The debt ceiling law, passed in 1917, enables Congress to place a statutory cap on the total amount of government debt rather than having to approve each individual Treasury bond offering. It also, however, forces Congress into an open and presumably somewhat shameful vote to approve more borrowing.


If the new Congress gives in to establishment pressure and media alarmism about “shutting down the government” by voting to increase the debt ceiling once again, you will know that the status quo has prevailed. You will know that Congress, despite the rhetoric of the midterm elections, is doing business as usual. You will know that the simple notion of balancing the budget, by limiting federal spending to federal revenue, remains a shallow and laughable campaign platitude.


Of course congressional leaders – now Republicans – will tell America that they plan on balancing the budget soon, but they just need some time. After all, we have to keep the government open, right? We can’t have an “emergency” shutdown of vital government services. But somehow Congress always finds money for emergency spending, in the form of supplemental appropriations bills for TARP bailouts, troop surges, and the like. Why is there never an emergency that justifies less spending???


Surely we are facing an emergency debt spiral, as evidenced by the Federal Reserve’s recent commitment to buy another round of Treasury debt. It’s now quite obvious that the U.S. government plans to inflate its way out of debt, and the world is fleeing our dollar in response. Just 7 years ago Congress raised the debt ceiling to $6.4 trillion, which means the federal government had doubled its indebtedness in less than a decade. Annual deficits for 2011 and beyond are projected to be at least $1 trillion. By contrast, the entire federal debt amassed from the founding of our nation until President Reagan took office in 1981 – a period of roughly 200 years – was $1 trillion. So it’s no exaggeration to state that federal debt is growing exponentially.


I have two simple proposals when the new Congress convenes in January. First, refuse to raise the debt ceiling. Find a way, month by month, for Congress to spend only what the Treasury raises in revenue. Second, start over from scratch with the 13 appropriations bills that fund the federal government. Reject any talk of baseline budgets or discretionary spending. It is all discretionary, and members of both parties should vote against any 2012 appropriation bill that is not at least 10% smaller – in nominal dollars – than its 2011 counterpart.


A motivated Congress could begin to slow the tide of debt by taking the simple step of cutting federal spending by 10% across the board for the next few years. Let’s hope it does not take the complete collapse of the U.S. dollar to provide this motivation.


November 30, 2010

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

[Exotix]

What do the Paulies say about the Debt Ceiling with regards to paying for the wars ?

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

What do the Paulies say about the Debt Ceiling with regards to paying for the wars ?

I'm pretty sure ending our two useless wars and beginning the process to start withdrawing some of our troops from the over 130 countries around the world that they now occupy would be high on the list of things to do.

I believe Ron would approve of that even if we weren't broke.

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

I'm pretty sure ending our two useless wars and beginning the process to start withdrawing some of our troops from the over 130 countries around the world that they now occupy would be high on the list of things to do.

I believe Ron would approve of that even if we weren't broke.

Although I'm behind you all the way ... you're talking about ridding the (R)'s of the only platform they have that woulld collapse their entire platform ... eradicating all Govt. Spending except (to increase) Discretionary spending ... a fake term they use now for Military Spending ...

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Although I'm behind you all the way ... you're talking about ridding the (R)'s of the only platform they have that woulld collapse their entire platform ... eradicating all Govt. Spending except (to increase) Discretionary spending ... a fake term they use now for Military Spending ...

Yet another reason why NOT raising the Debt Ceiling is so important, right this minute.

If Uncle Sam was put on a cash basis, and not allowed to borrow any more, we would finally see what we really can afford to do.

If people were suddenly confronted with the choice of losing their whole Social Security check or funding foreign wars and handing out foreign aid, what do you think their response would be?

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

Yet another reason why NOT raising the Debt Ceiling is so important, right this minute.

If Uncle Sam was put on a cash basis, and not allowed to borrow any more, we would finally see what we really can afford to do.

If people were suddenly confronted with the choice of losing their whole Social Security check or funding foreign wars and handing out foreign aid, what do you think their response would be?

As soon as Paulie & Son just come out and finally say it ...








I'll know they're just not'nutha *anti-conventional wisdom sensationalist(s)* quacks ...

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

As soon as Paulie & Son just come out and finally say it ...








I'll know they're just not'nutha *anti-conventional wisdom sensationalist(s)* quacks ...

Well, as much as I detest Bush (actually, both of them), I still disagree. The fault lies with every president that spent more than he had to spend. Is the country in IMMINENT danger of being invaded by foreign hordes? If not, there is no reason to go into debt. And there is certainly no reason to stay in debt if there is no war for the survival of the country going on.

There isn't anything sensational or magical about being able to balance a checkbook.

The reason it isn't popular to run a balanced budget is because, without passing out pork, it is damn hard to get elected or re-elected.

How popular do you think the guy will be who tells his constituents, sorry, there is no money for that, or sorry, we have to reduce your Social Security check because we don't have the money to pay the full amount? How popular will the guy who says, hey, as much as I would like to invade Iran, we just can't afford it" be?


As one of our Houston TV icons used to say, "It's Hell being poor".

Well, after going $ 14 trillion in the hole, yeah, we are poor. We just refuse to admit it.

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

Well, as much as I detest Bush (actually, both of them), I still disagree. The fault lies with every president that spent more than he had to spend. Is the country in IMMINENT danger of being invaded by foreign hordes? If not, there is no reason to go into debt. And there is certainly no reason to stay in debt if there is no war for the survival of the country going on.

There isn't anything sensational or magical about being able to balance a checkbook.

The reason it isn't popular to run a balanced budget is because, without passing out pork, it is damn hard to get elected or re-elected.

How popular do you think the guy will be who tells his constituents, sorry, there is no money for that, or sorry, we have to reduce your Social Security check because we don't have the money to pay the full amount? How popular will the guy who says, hey, as much as I would like to invade Iran, we just can't afford it" be?


As one of our Houston TV icons used to say, "It's Hell being poor".

Well, after going $ 14 trillion in the hole, yeah, we are poor. We just refuse to admit it.

Congress has voted to raise the debt ceiling 10 times in the past 10 years, and about 70 times in the last 50 ... it's what's called now a *debt elevator* ...

Perhaps this year could be different ... congressional (R)'S ... psuedo-backed by (anti-spending) Tea Party groups ... have vowed to vote against it.

So what will happen if the debt ceiling is not increased, and the federal government runs out of money?
The Treasury would not be allowed, by law, to make debt payments or fund government operations.
This would result in default, causing future borrowing to come at much higher cost, which would more than likely ripple to every American consumer ... this was stated as the an outcome by Austan Goolsbee, chairman of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers (about as non-partisan as the CBO) and describes as catastrophic ...

The sole purpose of TARP & reivestment act was to stop an impending global collapse ... or ... putting out a fire with a grenade ... (watering it down so it has no effect is what we're see'ng now and this was the intent of the (R)'s to ****-over Obama and the Dems ... )


The debt ceiling wether or not to raise it ... is akin to raising taxes now ...

We fell for quack economics and finances back when Bush in 2001 simply stated : *When you have a (Clinton) surplus, you lower taxes* ... when you get away with that ... you can de-regulate the fianacial sectors (Enron) ... wage wars and eliminate U.S. attorneys and other watchdogs who's allegiance to America is dictated by that little known thing called *checks and balances* ...

Thus, the catastrophic deficit(s) that's the 800 LB. gorilla in the room that can't be solved by stomping a womans head into the ground because she disagrees with a Paulie ...

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Congress has voted to raise the debt ceiling 10 times in the past 10 years, and about 70 times in the last 50 ... it's what's called now a *debt elevator* ...

Perhaps this year could be different ... congressional (R)'S ... psuedo-backed by (anti-spending) Tea Party groups ... have vowed to vote against it.

So what will happen if the debt ceiling is not increased, and the federal government runs out of money?
The Treasury would not be allowed, by law, to make debt payments or fund government operations.
This would result in default, causing future borrowing to come at much higher cost, which would more than likely ripple to every American consumer ... this was stated as the an outcome by Austan Goolsbee, chairman of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers (about as non-partisan as the CBO) and describes as catastrophic ... The sole purpose of TARP & reivestment act was to stop an impending global collapse ... or ... putting out a fire with a grenade ... (watering it down so it has no effect is what we're see'ng now and this was the intent of the (R)'s to ****-over Obama and the Dems ... )


The debt ceiling wether or not to raise it ... is akin to raising taxes now ...

We fell for quack economics and finances back when Bush in 2001 simply stated : *When you have a (Clinton) surplus, you lower taxes* ... when you get away with that ... you can de-regulate the fianacial sectors (Enron) ... wage wars and eliminate U.S. attorneys and other watchdogs who's allegiance to America is dictated by that little known thing called *checks and balances* ...

Thus, the catastrophic deficit(s) that's the 800 LB. gorilla in the room that can't be solved by stomping a womans head into the ground because she disagrees with a Paulie ...

Yes, you are right. Capping the Debt Ceiling will necessarily mean defaulting on some of the promises made by the US government. As to increasing the cost of future borrowing, that's GREAT. We shouldn't be borrowing anyway. Borrowing is our problem. Arguing about how to spend those borrowed dollars (guns or butter) is just an interesting diversion.

What will ripple through the economy will be a lack of all those previously borrowed dollars. Yes, there will be pain, as people lose their jobs, entitlement payments get slashed, etc., and it will compound and get worse for a while before it gets better. It will suck, and yet, it is necessary. It will bring this country back to reality, removing our debt funded rose colored glasses that indicate we can afford whatever we can dream up.

With respect to the Bush tax cuts, I like the idea, but what Bush should have done is cap or reduce spending and start whittling down at that pesky National Debt. Once we are continually running surpluses, then I would be happy to have that tax cut. Of course, we both know this never happened and Bush spent like a drunken sailor.

As to the stomping of the woman, well, we can't actually afford the salary of the guy who would do the stomping.

If he gets fired, there will be no stomping, just little old ladies eating cat food when their Social Security checks get slashed and dying because we can't pay for their transplants anymore. And, (you are going to like this part), once we can no longer pay for all of our military payroll and war materiel, that will end both of our wars in a hurry.

We made a bunch of promises that we cannot afford to keep. We are the equivalent of the little old lady that sends all her money AND takes loans out to send money to the televangelist, then loses her house and has to live under a bridge. If you knew her, you would try and stop her from giving away what she doesn't have. That's exactly what calling your Representative to tell them NOT to raise the Debt Ceiling is doing.

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

As to the stomping of the woman, well, we can't actually afford the salary of the guy who would do the stomping.

The Libertarian employee plan to save America ... maybe you're on to something ...

[Peter Pan]

With respect to the Bush tax cuts, I like the idea, but what Bush should have done is cap or reduce spending and start whittling down at that pesky National Debt. Once we are continually running surpluses, then I would be happy to have that tax cut. Of course, we both know this never happened and Bush spent like a drunken sailor.

The last two years during Bush's presidency was governed by Nancy with her pay go in the House and Harry in the Senate, this is when the spending sprial really took off. Time to only spend what the current tax law takes in and in fact less to start paying down the debt. With the current spending that Obama and his crew have put on American's a drunken sailor would be much better than what we have on tap now and the trillion dollar deficts project from his CBO in the future, did the drunken sailer have a 1 trillion defict in any year? Of couse not, but Obama has not seen anything he does not like to throw money at with his deficts

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by Peter Pan

With respect to the Bush tax cuts, I like the idea, but what Bush should have done is cap or reduce spending and start whittling down at that pesky National Debt. Once we are continually running surpluses, then I would be happy to have that tax cut. Of course, we both know this never happened and Bush spent like a drunken sailor.

The last two years during Bush's presidency was governed by Nancy with her pay go in the House and Harry in the Senate, this is when the spending sprial really took off. Time to only spend what the current tax law takes in and in fact less to start paying down the debt. With the current spending that Obama and his crew have put on American's a drunken sailor would be much better than what we have on tap now and the trillion dollar deficts project from his CBO in the future, did the drunken sailer have a 1 trillion defict in any year? Of couse not, but Obama has not seen anything he does not like to throw money at with his deficts

Ahhhhh, Pelosi's fault .... tune us in to what happened during the first 4 years of the Bush neocon admin ...

[Peter Pan]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Ahhhhh, Pelosi's fault .... tune us in to what happened during the first 4 years of the Bush neocon admin ...

The first 6 years the defict was not even close to the deficit the last two years when Pelosi was in charge with pay go, nice try

[Exotix]

Originally Posted by Peter Pan

The first 6 years the defict was not even close to the deficit the last two years when Pelosi was in charge with pay go, nice try

Let me help you out when you weren't taxed enough already ...

[ChasC5]

Thanks for the truth, not that the GOP will admit it.

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Let me help you out when you weren't taxed enough already ...

Klinton had that internet bubble to allay his troubles off to....all them taxes coming in....

GWB on the other hand, got stuck with 9/11/01 course we could have taken the Klinton approach and stood on our hands and ask them to screw us again....

[ChasC5]

Yea and Obama is stuck with the Economy, you know, something W knew nothing about or cared about.

Cleaning up someone elses crap sucks, but someone has to do it.

[Bill]

Originally Posted by Exotix

Ahhhhh, Pelosi's fault .... tune us in to what happened during the first 4 years of the Bush neocon admin ...

ALL are guilty in the eyes of bill_daniels.


What? Do presidents not get issued pens with actual ink these days?

The House can't figure out how to proposed a balanced budget? Shame on the House for offering it, shame on the Senate for agreeing to it, and shame on the President for not running down to the drug store to buy a pen with veto ink in it.

VETO.


I don't care who you are. Voting for deficit spending is MY litmus test. If you vote to put me and every other American further in the hole, you aren't the right candidate or office holder for me.

[mrvette]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Yea and Obama is stuck with the Economy, you know, something W knew nothing about or cared about.

Cleaning up someone elses crap sucks, but someone has to do it.

They not trying too hard and all that mess was the Do Mo Crap party fault anyway....Karter with CRA, Klinton for expanding it, Frank/Dodd for their 'oversite' and GWB tried HOW many times to get that CRAP reigned in???

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

ALL are guilty in the eyes of bill_daniels.


What? Do presidents not get issued pens with actual ink these days?

The House can't figure out how to proposed a balanced budget? Shame on the House for offering it, shame on the Senate for agreeing to it, and shame on the President for not running down to the drug store to buy a pen with veto ink in it.

VETO.


I don't care who you are. Voting for deficit spending is MY litmus test. If you vote to put me and every other American further in the hole, you aren't the right candidate or office holder for me.

Bill, I agree with you, they are ALL at fault....mostly for not grabbing the microphone and going public when they clearly saw the problems coming...THAT I blame Bush for....no question...but Bush is a PROGRESSIVE and so a member/underling of the movement, not about to pull the plug on his bosses.....

[Joecooool]

Sooner or later we will simply inflate ourselves out of the problem.

Its going to be a hell of a mess when that happens, but unless Americans want to pay high taxes and get shit for public services for the next two decades, there is no other option.

Since we tend to do whats easy instead of whats right, I see hyper inflation in about five to ten years. Those invested in cash, bonds, etc are going to lose their asses. Those with tangible assets (gold is for suckers) like property will eventually be OK.