Once upon a time Indeed?!!

[Cancel 2018. 3]

I do agree that all Americans have an equal share for the problems we are in. For the particular problem RIGHT NOW, the pending default, I lay at the feet of the Tea Party. In my opinion you shouldn't play politics with something that could irrevocably raise interest rates for all Americans. That will impede growth indefinitely. To me the Dems have already moved to the center by agreeing to cut spending. The Tea Party hasn't moved at all. I would prefer no solution right now. Do nothing, except raise the debt ceiling, then everyone can act like petulant children until the next election and let America choose.

I have, on occasion, defended Bush. He never made it easy for me, but I respected his position as my Commander and Chief and as my President. Many Democrats forgot that.

my post was not complete before...

imo....indefinitely raising the debt ceiling will impede growth. the tea party does not make up all of congress, and i believe only a small portion. as to the next election...americans have chosen and they chose to elect reps that stand for tea party principles. remember the whole "elections have consequences"? apparently that only matters if dems are elected to the majority.

 

[Tags]

my post was not complete before...

imo....indefinitely raising the debt ceiling will impede growth. the tea party does not make up all of congress, and i believe only a small portion. as to the next election...americans have chosen and they chose to elect reps that stand for tea party principles. remember the whole "elections have consequences"? apparently that only matters if dems are elected to the majority.

There are about 100 members of the House that align themselves with the Tea Party. That is about 40% of Republicans in the House. I think the the election of these people did say something to the Dems: No Obamacare and you havent done enough for unemployment. I don't think it said "Let the nation default if you can't get the President to turn into a Republican." If you read my other post, you'll see that I agree that elections have consequences and I think the Tea Party could have scored BIG in 2012, but now I think it is less likely.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

OTE=Tags;843364]Defining a few points:
1. The debt ceiling needs to be raised by August 2 or the US defaults.
2. The debt ceiling being raised has nothing to do with tax cuts or expenditures. I say this, because even if we pass a conservative bill, a Tea Party bill, a Democrat bill, or no bill, we still have to raise the debt ceiling or we default.
3. Programs need reform. This includes many entitlement and tax programs.

1. my understanding is that the US will not default on august 2. the US can continue to pay its debt.
2. i disagree, if we cut spending, we take that money and pay off our debt. the US has plenty of money to pay its debt. we are far from a default and really, what does a national default even mean for the US?
3. agreed. and military spending needs to be cut as well.

A

few months ago, Tea Party members in the House started claiming that they would refuse to raise the debt ceiling unless government spending was cut. This handicapped Republicans, such as Boehner, since without the Tea Party members signing on to raise the debt ceiling via a general Republican plan, he is forced to try to appease them. Instead of playing politics and moving towards the center, the Tea Party proposed and passed a bill they knew the President could not sign onto. The rest of the Republican Party in the House had to tag along or be targetted by Tea Party affiliated organizations (like several already have) as closet liberals or RINO's. Any bill that is passed by either House that cannot be passed by the other or by the President is wasting time. I think by catering to the Tea Party, the Republicans have screwed themselves. They could have used this moment to win both Houses and the White House in 2012, with many gains in the Tea Party, by just saying "Obama you are wrong, but you are holding the country hostage with your wasteful spending and the debt ceiling, therefore in the interest of our country, here is the Republican plan." Then offered a reasonable plan. Instead, the Tea Party stance has become "Fuck it. Fuck you. Liberals are un-American. Let the country default." Wrong answer. Now, I fear that REGARDLESS of the outcome, Obama can spin it to make it look like he is the victor and the Tea Party fucked everyone. You, nor many of the right-wing, may see it this way, but for those of us in the middle it will be pretty convincing. You need to remember that policies that attract only extreme left wing people, like Obamacare, make people vote Republican, while letting the country default to prove a point, like what the Tea Party is doing now, will make people vote Democrat. As long as their rhetoric doesn't change, the Tea Party won't lose its base. It might exclude the rest of Republicans and the people that don't align with a party, thus losing the elections, if they aren't careful

.

so now, instead of the gop being the party of no, it is the libs and obama leading the charge to no, no, no to the tea party. it is naive to claim it is only the tea party holding the party line and "wanting" to fuck everyone. all parties do this and no party as of yet has ideas that won't "harm" at least some americans. you're right on the obama spin. i called his victory over the bush tax cuts vs. unemployment months before it happened. and sure enough, it was called a victory (read spin) shortly after. i don't really see what the tea party is doing now to make people vote democrat. people are tired of out of control spending. bush, the supposed fiscal conservative, failed miserably at this. obama skyrocketed past bush....and viola....you have the tea party anti spending folks.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

There are about 100 members of the House that align themselves with the Tea Party. That is about 40% of Republicans in the House. I think the the election of these people did say something to the Dems: No Obamacare and you havent done enough for unemployment. I don't think it said "Let the nation default if you can't get the President to turn into a Republican." If you read my other post, you'll see that I agree that elections have consequences and I think the Tea Party could have scored BIG in 2012, but now I think it is less likely.

i didn't realize there were that many. you might be right. but i remember many on the left saying the gop/cons were a dead party and that conservatism was dead after obama and the libs won in 08'....not that you do...but never understand estimate the fickleness of american politics. further, obama has not done his party any real favors. i don't see people supporting obama and the dems as much in '12, unless the economy comes roaring back.

 

[Tags]

1. my understanding is that the US will not default on august 2. the US can continue to pay its debt.
2. i disagree, if we cut spending, we take that money and pay off our debt. the US has plenty of money to pay its debt. we are far from a default and really, what does a national default even mean for the US?
3. agreed. and military spending needs to be cut as well.

so now, instead of the gop being the party of no, it is the libs and obama leading the charge to no, no, no to the tea party. it is naive to claim it is only the tea party holding the party line and "wanting" to fuck everyone. all parties do this and no party as of yet has ideas that won't "harm" at least some americans. you're right on the obama spin. i called his victory over the bush tax cuts vs. unemployment months before it happened. and sure enough, it was called a victory (read spin) shortly after. i don't really see what the tea party is doing now to make people vote democrat. people are tired of out of control spending. bush, the supposed fiscal conservative, failed miserably at this. obama skyrocketed past bush....and viola....you have the tea party anti spending folks.

As a quick qualification point, I am studying to be an economist at George Mason, the most laissez-faire economist program in the nation. In simple terms (I say that because I am over-simplifying a bit), my fear and the fear of at least some of the professors is that defaulting will raise interest rates. This makes it harder and more costly to get a loan for you and me. It can also stifle economic growth, because it is more expensive for companies to get a loan. Stifling economic growth limits employment and creates a less desirable market. A less desirable market gives incentives to investors and entrepreneurs to look somewhere else, further harming the country. Whereas I don't think the default, if brief, will destroy the government, cause hyper-inflation or deflation, or lead to the coming of days, I do believe that the default will cause definite harm. Depending on which economist you ask, Jimmy Carter's default in 1979 caused interest rates to jump .5% for more than a decade (some say that it is still a factor). PLUS, if interest rates go up, the government will cost more to run, meaning we will be paying more on any other loans, for example bonds (which means government spending goes UP). We should be seeking a stable market. Reducing the debt is important, but not as important as raising the debt ceiling.

Other harms include Moody's and S&P actually downgrading our credit rating. If you compare two people, one with a 750 credit rating and one with a 700 credit rating (both are good), which one gets the loan at the lower rate?

BTW I agree that Bush was a horrible fiscal conservative. I also agree with ending wars in the Middle East. I've been there enough times to know that we can't really do anything else, unless we stay there for 50 years.

 

[Tags]

i didn't realize there were that many. you might be right. but i remember many on the left saying the gop/cons were a dead party and that conservatism was dead after obama and the libs won in 08'....not that you do...but never understand estimate the fickleness of american politics. further, obama has not done his party any real favors. i don't see people supporting obama and the dems as much in '12, unless the economy comes roaring back.

You might be right. I want the Republican party to return to fiscal conservativism, but the Tea Party is just too reactionary for me. That's not the way government should be run. Anything the government does in the public sector should be slow and gradual, so as to buffer the market from shocks. Obamacare in a recession? Bad idea. "Cut, Cap, and Balance" to overturn 235 or so years of debt accumulation or allow the country to default? Bad idea. Remove ALL entitlements immediately? Bad idea. Providing failing corporations

Encourage bottom-up approaches to replace Top-down entitlements while gradually removing them? Great idea. Maintaining low interest rates to encourage entrepreneurship and economic growth? Great idea. Ending expensive wars? Great idea.