Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Given this statement, not raising the debt ceiling would not mean we can't spend money. That means that either Obama is lying to us, or we are all crazy.
Reagan raised the debt ceiling 18 times to pay for unprecedented military spending, including the infamous "Star Wars", which turned out to be a wasteful farce.
Reagan tripled Carter's spending.
Tip O'neill and the Democrats vigorously disagreed with Reagan and could have easily used the debt ceiling to handcuff him, but they didn't.
George W Bush doubled Clinton's spending.
He asked for 7 debt ceiling increases - more than double Obama.
We didn't hear a peep from your party.
Obama won two elections against candidates who opposed ObamaCare. Obama defeated Romney, who vowed to repeal ObamaCare, by 5 million votes. AGAIN: ObamaCare won two elections and passed through congress and the Supreme Court. Which is to say: your party has decided to overturn the results of an election.
Not only have the Democrats never used the debt ceiling to obstruct a Republican agenda; they have never overturned the results of an election and thwarted the will of the majority by using the debt ceiling to overturn an existing law.
Currently our national deficits are shrinking faster than they did under Bush.
Obama is not asking to fund government at his preferred spending levels. He is only asking to restore the CR, which reflects much lower (Republican) spending levels.
AGAIN: The CR reflects sequester spending levels which are far less than the Democrats want, and [ironically] far, far less than Bush spending levels.
(Where were Republicans during the Bush spending years?)
Your party never made a peep when Bush continually required debt ceiling increases. And now your party is using this issue to overturn the results of an election, and to undermine legislation that was legally passed and constitutionally sanctioned. History will record this as a crime enacted by deeply corrupt politicians and a collection of very naive voters whose rage has been brilliantly channeled into the most paranoid and toxic revanchism in history. You have been conditioned by dear leader to believe that your country has been stolen and that ObamaCare will kill grandma and lead to pure communism
(meanwhile poor hard working citizens from Kentucky sign up by the thousands. Decent American families will finally receive health care. on the other hand, your party would rather dish out trillions in no bid defense contracts blowing up and rebuilding Arab sand piles)
(You've been lied to)
(You know not what you do)
(God help us)
(Not a peep)
How about this Mr Pres, let's live within our means. We take in a shitload of tax money every month, plenty to pay interest payments on the debt, SS and the military...and then some. How about we cut back on all the shit that isn't absolutely necessary. You can start by firing "non essential" federal employees. Who in the fuck employs someone that isn't essential?!
The Greatest Axiom with respect to Government is this:
THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO MONEY!
That is to say, the Government cannot spend a dime unless it first either takes it out of some taxpayer's pocket, collects it in the way of a fee, or borrows it from someone. It has no money of its own.
And while I recognize that there are times when a national government can wisely spend more than it takes in, this must of necessity be a temporary measure, not a Way Of Doing Business.
And the idea that the economy will collapse if the Government doesn't continue to spend a trillion dollars a year more than it takes in is stupidity belonging in a Ripley's Believe It Or Not cartoon.
Why would we need to borrow money for Social Security if it is fully funded until 2030? Is it remotely possible that Obama is trying to scare gullible people? The fucking government takes in 10 times more money than it needs to prevent default, so I see no reason to believe it when it lies.
If you bothered to be informed you would know that in the last two years Social Security paid its recipients not just with incoming payroll tax receipts,
but also by drawing on the earned interest on the investment of the Trust Fund in government securities.
That interest had to be paid out of the general fund revenues, in other words out of the budget that we are currently borrowing about 1/3rd of.
If the debt ceiling is hit, zero borrowing can occur.
Need I say more?
In short, Social Security is not doing the borrowing, Social Security is collecting the debt from the US budget that borrowed the Trust Fund surpluses.
If you were half as smart as you think you are you would know I have been pointing that out for two years.
That would make it quite a mystery then as to why I had to inform you of it yesterday lol.
For the person you actually are, the US takes in 10 times the revenue it needs to pay all of its debts. That means that, even if we are reduced to spending only the money we actually have, we will still be able to meet all the payments on the debts, including the interest payments to social security, and still have enough money left over to keep Michelle's website up. That means you can relax.
You always play the bitch when you've lost the argument. Very pathetic. And I didn't miss that you quickly tried to change the subject.
After all the US debt obligations are paid, you have to cut 40% of the remaining current spending in order to stay under the debt limit.
Show us, SPECIFICALLY, where you get those cuts, and then show us who the relevant politicians are that will support such cuts.
You won't, because you can't. Case closed.
I'm saying that if the Republicans believe that raising the debt ceiling is a bargaining chip...
Dems believe the same thing. Hell, Obama believed it when he was a Senator.
Yes, both sides believe agreeing to raise the debt ceiling comes with trade offs for their side.
They must then believe that there is a viable budget plan that can be put in place without adding a dollar to the debt past this month.
What is that plan?
Can't speak for Republicans. Easy for libertarians. Live within your means...period.
So you can't tell us what a budget would look like that would not exceed the debt ceiling that is a week away?
Then how do you propose to cope with about a trillion in cuts needed?
The Greatest Axiom with respect to Government is this:
THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO MONEY!
That is to say, the Government cannot spend a dime unless it first either takes it out of some taxpayer's pocket, collects it in the way of a fee, or borrows it from someone. It has no money of its own.
And while I recognize that there are times when a national government can wisely spend more than it takes in, this must of necessity be a temporary measure, not a Way Of Doing Business.
And the idea that the economy will collapse if the Government doesn't continue to spend a trillion dollars a year more than it takes in is stupidity belonging in a Ripley's Believe It Or Not cartoon.
You do realize that the vast majority of our yearly deficits the past few years is due to the downturn in the economy, right? You do realize that the deficit was reduced substantially this year, right? It's only going to be around $700 billion, which is still much too high, but again, a strong economy would bring in more revenue and reduce some social welfare spending.
The problem with most of you cons is that you are reactionaries. You are incapable of seeing the big picture. No, things are not perfect or anywhere near perfect, but they are also nowhere near as bad as you try to make it sound. BTW, while you worry so much about the deficit, you continue to ignore our long term problem with it due to entitlement spending which is a real problem that we need to confront.
That would make it quite a mystery then as to why I had to inform you of it yesterday lol.
You always play the bitch when you've lost the argument. Very pathetic. And I didn't miss that you quickly tried to change the subject.
After all the US debt obligations are paid, you have to cut 40% of the remaining current spending in order to stay under the debt limit.
Show us, SPECIFICALLY, where you get those cuts, and then show us who the relevant politicians are that will support such cuts.
You won't, because you can't. Case closed.
We can cut spending back to 2008 levels and not have to borrow a penny to sustain it.
We can cut spending back to 2008 levels and not have to borrow a penny to sustain it.
Sure, but who doesn't recall the horrors of 2008...the dead rotting in the streets, the starving masses. God it was awful! We couldn't POSSIBLY go back to that level of government spending!!!
