DID HE REALLY SAY THAT ?????

[Guest032516]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Actually, the expenditures have already been authorized by Congress.

Correct.

Today, Bernanke said we ought to get rid of the debt ceiling because it serves no purpose. I think he may be right.

What is the point of Congress taking a FIRST vote to spend $300 billion more that the Federal government receive in taxes and then taking a SECOND vote on whether or not to raise the debt ceiling by $300 billion? That decision was already made when you set spending at $4.3 trillion when you are expecting tax revenues of only $4 trillion.

You don't get two bites at the apple.

And how can the votes ever be different on the two issues? How can a Congressman vote in favor of a budget with a $300 billion deficit and then NOT vote to increase the debt ceiling to cover the $300 billion?

Seems like she or he should be voted out of office in the very next election.

[Yssup Rider]

Well said ExNYer.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by CJ7

raising the debt ceiling allows us to pay our bills ... defaulting on the debt our creditors covered would be a wise choice, and be wonderful for the economy ..

eos

You're an idiot, as usual, CBJ7. The Federal government takes in about $200 billion per month, and our debt service is $30-40 billion per month. We can pay our bills without a debt ceiling hike. And if Obama chooses to not pay SS or other similar bills, that is his choice. Actually, it is blackmail. There are plenty of places to cut first.

[Laz]

Originally Posted by ExNYer

What is the point of Congress taking a FIRST vote to spend $300 billion more that the Federal government receive in taxes and then taking a SECOND vote on whether or not to raise the debt ceiling by $300 billion? That decision was already made when you set spending at $4.3 trillion when you are expecting tax revenues of only $4 trillion.

While there is a certain amount of logic to this, I like the fact that they have to be reminded of the consequences of their spending and force them to vote twice.

You don't get two bites at the apple.

Actually you get knew bites every year when a new budget is passed and every two years with the new Congress. The biggest flaw in Obama's argument is that just because prior Congresses passed a spending bill it does not mean future Congresses can't change them

And how can the votes ever be different on the two issues? How can a Congressman vote in favor of a budget with a $300 billion deficit and then NOT vote to increase the debt ceiling to cover the $300 billion?

And finally I would agree with that if they had passed a budget in the past few years. Congress has failed to do that so voting against increasing the debt limit to force action is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

[JD Barleycorn]

Actually there is no budget so nothing has really been "authorized". Money is just being spent without any responsibility. Wasn't this the plan though? It is the democratically controlled Senate that has failed to do their job with the consequence that no one is held accountable.

[Guest123018-4]

My understanding about SS is that they are required by law to invest the money and it is invested in T-bills which are basically IOUs. Sounds like we need to decide if we want to continue to increase our debt or finally take a stand and stop the spending and give-aways. Oh and for the ones that holler about the military, they need a cut too. Maybe it is time we let the rest of the world police themselves and we take care of what we need to take care of at home.

It seems that the growth of an overly large federal government, much like some states such as California, is not practical or beneficial. Seems like the more the federal government is entwined in things the worse off we are, like education. Making something that doesn't work very will bigger does not mean it will be better; it just becomes more costly to maintain and still doesn't work worth a shit..

[Randy4Candy]

Let's hear it for "understanding!" Foreign territory to our Teawipe Parrotriots.

[Whirlaway]

Obama on spending (all you need to know):

"We don't have a spending problem..."

Obama speaking during the fiscal cliff negotiations. The meeting lasted 50-minutes, Our Ego-In-Chief spoke for 45 of the 50.

[Whirlaway]

“Public debt as a percentage of gross domestic product was around 38 percent in 1965. It is around 74 percent now. Debt could approach a ruinous 90 percent of G.D.P. in a decade and a cataclysmic 247 percent of G.D.P. 30 years from now, according to the Congressional Budget Office and JPMorgan.

“Ultimately, we should blame the American voters. The average Medicare couple pays $109,000 into the program and gets $343,000 in benefits out, according to the Urban Institute. This is $234,000 in free money. Many voters have decided they like spending a lot on themselves and pushing costs onto their children and grandchildren. They have decided they like borrowing up to $1 trillion a year for tax credits, disability payments, defense contracts and the rest. They have found that the original Keynesian rationale for these deficits provides a perfect cover for permanent deficit-living. They have made it clear that they will destroy any politician who tries to stop them from cost-shifting in this way.”

Obama is an enabler.........he should be an honest leader; instead, he wants more spending, more debt, and bigger government.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You're an idiot, as usual, CBJ7. The Federal government takes in about $200 billion per month, and our debt service is $30-40 billion per month. We can pay our bills without a debt ceiling hike. And if Obama chooses to not pay SS or other similar bills, that is his choice. Actually, it is blackmail. There are plenty of places to cut first.

The debt ceiling would force us to cut spending. That's why the Demonrats hate it. Not raising the debt ceiling does not cause a default. That's just a Demonrat Big Lie. Idiots like CJ7 blindly accept every lie Obama spews.

[Whirlaway]

If the GOP isn't for less spending, they should close shop and go home.......

Going forward the GOP should:

1. Allow the sequestration cuts to happen.
2. Refuse to raise the debt ceiling.
3. Bring on a government shutdown by refusing to extend the “continuing resolution” that funds current government operation.

[EXTXOILMAN]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You're an idiot, as usual, CBJ7. The Federal government takes in about $200 billion per month, and our debt service is $30-40 billion per month. We can pay our bills without a debt ceiling hike. And if Obama chooses to not pay SS or other similar bills, that is his choice. Actually, it is blackmail. There are plenty of places to cut first.

Exactly right, COG. O'Blunder is Decider-in-Chief on who gets paid. He is a demagoguing POS. Threatening SS recipients and the military is beyond the pale, even for this lying liar. Of course, all the LIV's on this board continue to believe...it's called willful ignorance.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

If the GOP isn't for less spending, they should close shop and go home.......

Going forward the GOP should:

1. Allow the sequestration cuts to happen.
2. Refuse to raise the debt ceiling.
3. Bring on a government shutdown by refusing to extend the “continuing resolution” that funds current government operation.

Maybe at some point, the Republicans will actually grow a pair and take real action to deal with our spending problem. In the past, Republican politicians have played the political game of not insisting on real cuts because they thought it would cost them getting elected.

Our economic mess has gotten so bad that maybe Republican politicians will decide their political careers are less important than saving the country. If we take bold action, we've got a chance of avoiding a complete meltdown. If we do nothing, the meltdown is gauranteed. It's time to throw a Hail Mary.

[EXTXOILMAN]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Maybe at some point, the Republicans will actually grow a pair and take real action to deal with our spending problem. In the past, Republican politicians have played the political game of not insisting on real cuts because they thought it would cost them getting elected.

Our economic mess has gotten so bad that maybe Republican politicians will decide their political careers are less important than saving the country. If we take bold action, we've got a chance of avoiding a complete meltdown. If we do nothing, the meltdown is gauranteed. It's time to throw a Hail Mary.

+1. Plenty of blame to go around.

[Laz]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

If the GOP isn't for less spending, they should close shop and go home.......

Going forward the GOP should:

1. Allow the sequestration cuts to happen.
2. Refuse to raise the debt ceiling.
3. Bring on a government shutdown by refusing to extend the “continuing resolution” that funds current government operation.

I agree they should be clear about being for cutting spending but the primary thing is fiscal responsibility. They should also be for raising taxes if there is no popular support for spending cuts. The core problem we have had is the voters making bad decisions because they are being told they don't have to pay for it. Lets make it clear how much taxes have to go up on EVERYONE if spending is not cut. That would hopefully get the public to support spending cuts. If not then taxes need to be raised. That would be bad but no worse than 20+ trillion dollars of debt and once the taxes are increased they might decide they don't like that after all.