i thought cutting was the goal?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

The bad news is you owe more to the credit card company than you will ever be able to repay, and your children, and your children's children for as many generations as it will take are on the hook for the bill.

The good news is you have a AAA credit rating!

our economy is partly based on this countrys credit rating. i figured you knew that.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Danzig

our economy is partly based on this countrys credit rating. i figured you knew that.

I do know that. But when you hear "raise the debt limit and protect the credit rating", you still have all this debt and we need to really start paying it back, which will never happen as long as we keep borrowing.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

I do know that. But when you hear "raise the debt limit and protect the credit rating", you still have all this debt and we need to really start paying it back, which will never happen as long as we keep borrowing.

yeah, we need to fix the borrowing-but we can't default, which would be an awful result of the stupidity in washington.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

I do know that. But when you hear "raise the debt limit and protect the credit rating", you still have all this debt and we need to really start paying it back, which will never happen as long as we keep borrowing.

We can pay it back, but not if we allow default. Default will send our interest rates on the debt we already have skyrocketing. Then we'll never be able to pay it back.

I thought hope and change was? Empty slogans 4tw.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I thought hope and change was? Empty slogans 4tw.

yeah, anyone who bought that has to be feeling a bit jaded. more of the same old same old.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yeah, anyone who bought that has to be feeling a bit jaded. more of the same old same old.

Speak for yourself. I'm quite happy with Obama.

Especially compared to the Mad Max full-depression third-world wasteland we'd be living in under McCain-Palin.

[clyde]

Originally Posted by Riot

Speak for yourself. I'm quite happy with Obama.

Especially compared to the Mad Max full-depression third-world wasteland we'd be living in under McCain-Palin.

Also enjoys long finger nails screeching across a black slate board as well as sticking her nipples in industrial strength vises.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Speak for yourself. I'm quite happy with Obama.

Especially compared to the Mad Max full-depression third-world wasteland we'd be living in under McCain-Palin.

The report was written by the White House’s Council of Economic Advisors, a group of three economists who were all handpicked by Obama, and it chronicles the alleged success of the “stimulus” in adding or saving jobs. The council reports that, using “mainstream estimates of economic multipliers for the effects of fiscal stimulus” (which it describes as a “natural way to estimate the effects of” the legislation), the “stimulus” has added or saved just under 2.4 million jobs — whether private or public — at a cost (to date) of $666 billion. That’s a cost to taxpayers of $278,000 per job.

In other words, the government could simply have cut a $100,000 check to everyone whose employment was allegedly made possible by the “stimulus,” and taxpayers would have come out $427 billion ahead.

All sides agree on these incriminating numbers — and now they also appear to agree on this important point: The economy would now be generating job growth at a faster rate if the Democrats hadn’t passed the “stimulus.”

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Speak for yourself. I'm quite happy with Obama.

Especially compared to the Mad Max full-depression third-world wasteland we'd be living in under McCain-Palin.

the lesser of two evils is still evil.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

I thought hope and change was? Empty slogans 4tw.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/07/14...consideration/

Administration asks court to reconsider 'don't ask, don't tell' order

From Bill Mears, CNN Supreme Court Producer
July 15, 2011 -- Updated 0145 GMT (0945 HKT)

Washington (CNN) -- The Obama administration Thursday evening asked a federal appeals court in California to reconsider its order last week temporarily blocking the U.S. military from enforcing its "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays and lesbians serving in the military.
U.S. officials have been moving ahead with dismantling the policy but had objected to having the courts force the government to officially repeal it at this time.


further down:


Log Cabin Republicans slammed the administration's newest court action. "This latest maneuver by the President continues a pattern of doublespeak that all Americans should find troubling. All this does is further confuse the situation for our men and women in uniform," said R. Clarke Cooper, the group's executive director, who is also a captain in the Army Reserve.

"'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is an offense to American values that should have been gone long ago. It is shameful that a president who has taken credit for opposing the policy is taking extreme measures to keep it on life support."

[dellinger63]

Obama made it very clear today he is not into cutting anything.

The U.S. has lost its identity of independence and equality to reliance and entitlement. The pursuit of happiness should in no way be subsidized.

[lord007]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Obama made it very clear today he is not into cutting anything.

The U.S. has lost its identity of independence and equality to reliance and entitlement. The pursuit of happiness should in no way be subsidized.

How many times has he said corporate jet owners now???

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Obama made it very clear today he is not into cutting anything.

Didn't watch it?

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

We can pay it back, but not if we allow default. Default will send our interest rates on the debt we already have skyrocketing. Then we'll never be able to pay it back.

OK, that sounds reasonable. And nobody actually WANTS a default, but then the president and the Democrats do need to allow serious cuts in spending. If you can cut the spending enough to actually start paying the (net) debt back, then raising the debt limit in the interim by a small amount seems like a good idea.

Both sides are playing chicken. "No cuts in 'benefits' for entitlements" and "Not raising the debt limit no matter what" are irreconcilable positions.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by joeydb

OK, that sounds reasonable. And nobody actually WANTS a default, but then the president and the Democrats do need to allow serious cuts in spending. If you can cut the spending enough to actually start paying the (net) debt back, then raising the debt limit in the interim by a small amount seems like a good idea.

Both sides are playing chicken. "No cuts in 'benefits' for entitlements" and "Not raising the debt limit no matter what" are irreconcilable positions.

the reps have already said more than once that they won't let us default-that the ceiling will be raised. they're just trying to force some cuts at the same time, which isn't a bad thing. but they won't force too much, as they don't want to do anything that they can't pick on obama about later. they'll only get a certain amount cut, and then the party will say they wanted more, but obama is a tax and spender...but vote for our guy, and we'd have cut this much.

MSM wants Cantor to take the fall for this one. I'm hoping the Orange takes the fall.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

OK, that sounds reasonable. And nobody actually WANTS a default, but then the president and the Democrats do need to allow serious cuts in spending.

Excuse me? You mean the Republicans have to allow serious cuts in spending. The President has already offered multiple spending cuts, the Republicans have refused them.

Cantor and the Tea Party idiots are the ones preventing anything from being voted upon. Boehner doesn't have the votes in his caucus to pass anything, even with the Dems on his side, because he's held hostage by Cantor and the Tea Party types.

A clean debt ceiling raise needs to be passed with the one-sentence bill it always has been in the past, as it was passed 7 times by these guys in the Bush administration, and before that.

If you can cut the spending enough to actually start paying the (net) debt back, then raising the debt limit in the interim by a small amount seems like a good idea.

We are paying the net debt back. We don't need to cut future spending to continue do so. Future spending is a separate thing unassociated with the debt ceiling. It certainly needs to be reined in.

The debt ceiling limit is a minor housekeeping accounting procedure that allows cash flow to pay our bills. It is not a reference "ceiling" for future spending when budgets are prepared.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

The debt ceiling limit is a minor housekeeping accounting procedure that allows cash flow to pay our bills. It is not a reference "ceiling" for future spending when budgets are prepared.

Similar to an individual checking account used to pay household bills and expenses.

If that individual has maxed out his own credit cards/borrowing against his 401K/IRA and is now receiving credit based on his children's future earnings and borrowing money he'll never pay back from his wealthier neighbors.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Similar to an individual checking account used to pay household bills and expenses:

No. The debt ceiling is nothing at all like a checking account. Nor is it a credit card.

It must be very easy for you to comment on the issues of the day, while knowing nothing at all about them.