Debt Ceiling Increase or Spending Cuts First?

[NYcarbineer]

Setting your snideness aside, .

If you hold the exclusive rights to snideness on this board you should at least do the rest of us the courtesy of giving us permission to use them.

Cry me a freaking river. I tried being reasonable with you. But you chose to critique the wording of my thread, throw strawmen, false dilemmas, genetic fallacies, red herrings and whatnot at me without even discussing the thread itself or voting on the poll. You are intellectually dishonest.

I stated my position in plain English; you didn't.

 

[TemplarKormac]

If you hold the exclusive rights to snideness on this board you should at least do the rest of us the courtesy of giving us permission to use them.

Cry me a freaking river. I tried being reasonable with you. But you chose to critique the wording of my thread, throw strawmen, false dilemmas, genetic fallacies, red herrings and whatnot at me without even discussing the thread itself or voting on the poll. You are intellectually dishonest.

I stated my position in plain English; you didn't.

Was I speaking in Swahili? Of course I was speaking in English. Probably way over your head, perhaps. Can't blame you if you can't understand the words I write. I do know almost 125,000 words out of almost 250,000 in the English language. That is no joke. You were being plain obfuscatory, Carbine. Now you're lying.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Cry me a freaking river. I tried being reasonable with you. But you chose to critique the wording of my thread, throw strawmen, false dilemmas, genetic fallacies, red herrings and whatnot at me without even discussing the thread itself or voting on the poll. You are intellectually dishonest.

I stated my position in plain English; you didn't.

Was I speaking in Swahili? Of course I was speaking in English. Probably way over your head, perhaps. Can't blame you if you can't understand the words I write. I do know almost 125,000 words out of almost 250,000 in the English language. That is no joke. You were being plain obfuscatory, Carbine. Now you're lying.

Probably, perhaps.

Wow! You sure do know a lot of words. What a terrible waste.

 

[Redfish]

But you 1) called not raising the debt ceiling a crisis, and 2) that you were not willing to accept any outcome which results in a crisis.

So how can you accept not raising the debt ceiling but also not accept any outcome that results in a crisis?

Another false dilemma argument. This is also a red herring. I didn't ask you to critique my grammar, Carbine. No, I called RAISING IT a crisis. Since it will result in further so-labeled "crises" down the road. Sigh, just when I had hope for you.

Raising it is not the crisis. Do you understand the debt ceiling is the money Congress has already agreed to spend? I know conservatives like the bullshit "household budget" analogies (even though government or even business is nothing like a household budget) so how's this...

Would you say "I'm not paying my heating bill until you agree to stop buying clothes."?

No, its not. new debt is for new spending, old spending is covered by previous authorization and appropriation bills. civics 101 wytchey, sign up.

 

[peach174]

But you 1) called not raising the debt ceiling a crisis, and 2) that you were not willing to accept any outcome which results in a crisis.

So how can you accept not raising the debt ceiling but also not accept any outcome that results in a crisis?

Another false dilemma argument. This is also a red herring. I didn't ask you to critique my grammar, Carbine. No, I called RAISING IT a crisis. Since it will result in further so-labeled "crises" down the road. Sigh, just when I had hope for you.

Raising it is not the crisis. Do you understand the debt ceiling is the money Congress has already agreed to spend?

I know conservatives like the bullshit "household budget" analogies (even though government or even business is nothing like a household budget) so how's this...

Would you say "I'm not paying my heating bill until you agree to stop buying clothes."?

You have to stop buying the clothes in order to pay the heating bill.
Which is exactly what the Government needs to do and the left have fought that for the last three years.
The Democrats are unwilling to make the 4 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years. This is what got us the credit rating downgrade.
We can't keep adding more government programs like the ACA, borrowing 1 Trillion, printing 1 Trillion and raise taxes. This ideology kills growth.
We need a long term budget and Dems are totally unwilling to do it.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Given our enormous spending problem and our looming debt ceiling crisis, I was wondering, what should happen? Should we raise the debt ceiling and discuss spending cuts, or should we cut spending first before we raise the debt ceiling?

Since your statement above acknowledges that a debt ceiling CRISIS is looming, you've pretty much answered your own question,

unless of course you want a debt ceiling CRISIS to occur, with all that implies.

You read too much into my statements, Carbine. Yours is a false dilemma argument which implies I wish for there to be a crisis. By repeatedly raising the debt ceiling, you are merely avoiding a crisis, not negating it. That within itself will create a crisis altogether on its own. By reducing spending and paying down the debt, there will be no more need for this "debt ceiling."

I believe the appropriate word would be "postponing" not "avoiding" when referring to the impending fiscal crisis.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Another false dilemma argument. This is also a red herring. I didn't ask you to critique my grammar, Carbine. No, I called RAISING IT a crisis. Since it will result in further so-labeled "crises" down the road. Sigh, just when I had hope for you.

Raising it is not the crisis. Do you understand the debt ceiling is the money Congress has already agreed to spend? I know conservatives like the bullshit "household budget" analogies (even though government or even business is nothing like a household budget) so how's this...

Would you say "I'm not paying my heating bill until you agree to stop buying clothes."?

No, its not. new debt is for new spending, old spending is covered by previous authorization and appropriation bills. civics 101 wytchey, sign up.

You keep repeating that. Does it bother you that you are wrong? Just about every person here knows that you are wrong. You should stop saying it. Really. You should.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Since your statement above acknowledges that a debt ceiling CRISIS is looming, you've pretty much answered your own question,

unless of course you want a debt ceiling CRISIS to occur, with all that implies.

You read too much into my statements, Carbine. Yours is a false dilemma argument which implies I wish for there to be a crisis. By repeatedly raising the debt ceiling, you are merely avoiding a crisis, not negating it. That within itself will create a crisis altogether on its own. By reducing spending and paying down the debt, there will be no more need for this "debt ceiling."

I believe the appropriate word would be "postponing" not "avoiding" when referring to the impending fiscal crisis.

That works too. Corrected.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Raising it is not the crisis. Do you understand the debt ceiling is the money Congress has already agreed to spend? I know conservatives like the bullshit "household budget" analogies (even though government or even business is nothing like a household budget) so how's this...

Would you say "I'm not paying my heating bill until you agree to stop buying clothes."?

No, its not. new debt is for new spending, old spending is covered by previous authorization and appropriation bills. civics 101 wytchey, sign up.

You keep repeating that. Does it bother you that you are wrong? Just about every person here knows that you are wrong. You should stop saying it. Really. You should.

LOL...

Overstatement of the century.

 

[LoneLaugher]

No, its not. new debt is for new spending, old spending is covered by previous authorization and appropriation bills. civics 101 wytchey, sign up.

You keep repeating that. Does it bother you that you are wrong? Just about every person here knows that you are wrong. You should stop saying it. Really. You should.

LOL...

Overstatement of the century.

Do you you know that he is wrong? If so, why are you afraid to tell him as much? Think he'll be mean to you? Why let him keep saying something that is not true? It is cruel. Unless, of course, you think he is right. Do you? Do you think raising the debt limit is an authorization for new spending?

 

[Jackson]

Cut spending by 29% across the board and keep the debt ceiling where it is.

 

[LoneLaugher]

cut spending by 29% across the board and keep the debt ceiling where it is.

29,29,29!

 

[TemplarKormac]

You keep repeating that. Does it bother you that you are wrong? Just about every person here knows that you are wrong. You should stop saying it. Really. You should.

LOL...

Overstatement of the century.

Do you you know that he is wrong? If so, why are you afraid to tell him as much? Think he'll be mean to you? Why let him keep saying something that is not true? It is cruel. Unless, of course, you think he is right. Do you? Do you think raising the debt limit is an authorization for new spending?

My question for you is: Can you prove he's wrong? Afraid he'll blow your liberal talking points out of the water? Yes it is an authorization for new spending. What else would it be? You don't just borrow money and not spend it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

LOL...

Overstatement of the century.

Do you you know that he is wrong? If so, why are you afraid to tell him as much? Think he'll be mean to you? Why let him keep saying something that is not true? It is cruel. Unless, of course, you think he is right. Do you? Do you think raising the debt limit is an authorization for new spending?

My question for you is, can you prove he's wrong? Afraid he'll blow your liberal talking points out of the water?

Easily. It has been proven on these forums several dozen times. Do you think he is right?

 

[Seawytch]

Another false dilemma argument. This is also a red herring. I didn't ask you to critique my grammar, Carbine. No, I called RAISING IT a crisis. Since it will result in further so-labeled "crises" down the road. Sigh, just when I had hope for you.

Raising it is not the crisis. Do you understand the debt ceiling is the money Congress has already agreed to spend? I know conservatives like the bullshit "household budget" analogies (even though government or even business is nothing like a household budget) so how's this...

Would you say "I'm not paying my heating bill until you agree to stop buying clothes."?

No, its not. new debt is for new spending, old spending is covered by previous authorization and appropriation bills. civics 101 wytchey, sign up.

Is it true that raising the debt ceiling gives Congress a "license to spend more"?
No. Raising the debt ceiling simply lets Treasury borrow the money it needs to pay all U.S. bills and other legal obligations in full and on time.

Those bills are for services already performed and entitlement benefits already approved by Congress.

So raising the debt ceiling is more like a license to continue paying what the country owes. And the obligations are incurred because of countless decisions made by lawmakers from both parties over the years.

Debt ceiling: 8 things you need to know

I really hope that helps you understand little fishy.

 

[Geaux4it]

So it's not your position.

Clarify your question

-Geaux

I'm asking if you agree with the Democrat's opinion or not. If not, why did you post it? If so,

why do I have to take it up with him, if it's also your postion? I can take it up with you.

I post the information. It's up to you to process. This was not a FOX news post. Or an interview of a Republican. It was a Democrat who was interviewed

Take it for what it's worth

Doesn't matter what I think

-Geaux

 

[NYcarbineer]

Clarify your question

-Geaux

I'm asking if you agree with the Democrat's opinion or not. If not, why did you post it? If so,

why do I have to take it up with him, if it's also your postion? I can take it up with you.

I post the information. It's up to you to process. This was not a FOX news post. Or an interview of a Republican. It was a Democrat who was interviewed

Take it for what it's worth

Doesn't matter what I think

-Geaux

The Democrat is an idiot. Case closed. And you're a mincer for running away from your own post.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Cry me a freaking river. I tried being reasonable with you. But you chose to critique the wording of my thread, throw strawmen, false dilemmas, genetic fallacies, red herrings and whatnot at me without even discussing the thread itself or voting on the poll. You are intellectually dishonest.

I stated my position in plain English; you didn't.

Was I speaking in Swahili? Of course I was speaking in English. Probably way over your head, perhaps. Can't blame you if you can't understand the words I write. I do know almost 125,000 words out of almost 250,000 in the English language. .

Well, apparently the words you needed to state your position in plain English are in the other 125,000.

btw, to make an analogy you might be able to figure out...

...knowing a lot of numbers does not make you a mathematician.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Clean funding CR and debt increase until December 2014.

Then begin negotiations on reductions.

Here's a better idea, let's start cutting the bloated budget first. Maybe start with a thorough review of every "mandatory" spending requirement? Then identify and evaluate all federal programs, eliminating those that have had little to no effect and combining those that are redundant.

 

[ScienceRocks]

1. Welfare reform and back to 2008...This is our real problem. NOT being a first world country and millions of jobs....
2. Bring our military home. A small fleet of drones can take out the terrorist. 100 billion cut.
3. Small tax increase for all to make the democrats happy...


Working Americans shouldn't have to suffer for keeping this nation number one. O'shit I forgot you don't give a damn if America is number 30....