http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/22/john-boehner-debt-ceiling_n_907452.html

Over a lousy $400 billion in revenue increases.  I'm really!  Our economy is on the verge of a meltdown and Obama has to try and deal with psychos like Boehner and Cantor. 

Hey, here's something, WHAT ABOUT NATIONAL SECURITY?

If they just let the Bush tax cuts expire...oh, what's the point?  It's all been said before. 

These maggots have pushed us around long enough.  Maybe it's time somebody pushed back. 

Now, don't quote me on that when the spaghetti hits the fan.  I don't want a visit from Homeland Security, thank you very much.

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/hiding.gif

You mean he ran out of the room crying...  ;D

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/22/john-boehner-debt-ceiling_n_907452.html

Over a lousy $400 billion in revenue increases.  I'm really!  Our economy is on the verge of a meltdown and Obama has to try and deal with psychos like Boehner and Cantor.  


You're presuming that politicians care more about the economy than about what it might do to their opponent's re-election prospects.  Although the markets have yet to crash (probably because it came out on a Friday, a perfect time for political posturing just before the markets close for two days, and during which real negotiations can take place), this is not necessarily a wise assumption.

The situation redux:

S&P: Not raising the debt ceiling would be a bad
GOP: ...for Obama
S&P: No... for everyone. Because it would raise interest rates
GOP: Which is a good thing
S&P: No... that is a bad thing because that would make it more expensive to pay back the debts that are already outstanding
GOP: And that's a good thing, because then we could cut more government programs
S&P: No... its a bad thing, because of compounded interest. If the debt ceiling does not go up and you cut spending to make up the difference you will eventually run out of things to cut
GOP: And then we win!
S&P: No... then the United States implodes because it will be unable to service its creditors.
GOP: Then we will cut those government services to
S&P: facepalm... no, the nation would experience run away inflation like a third country and you will have to raise taxes in order to rescue the economy.
GOP: Oh! This is just another tax and spend Democrat party conspiracy, we are done talking to you now.
S&P: What?! Are you kidding? We are being serious here, you are going to destroy the country.
GOP: sings LA LA LA! LA LA LA! We can't hear you

I can't take credit for that little bit genius, but must refer you instead to Code_Archeologist's post in That Other Place.

Good news: Geithner managed to eke out another week by shuffling payments.  

Bad news: That means we get one more week of...

http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x239/bl4444/RepublicanParty.jpg

So far I've been betting on "There's no real trade here on either the long or short side; the bond market demands that they must kick the can down the road, ideally to the 2012 campaign season", but maybe it is time to think about putting a few chips on the square that represents "what if both sides are dumb enough to call each other's respective bluffs"?  

Consider this: a 1:38 chance of a 36:1 payoff means that roulette isn't worth playing.  If you only get one spin of the wheel, a 1:20 chance of a 36:1 payoff still doesn't make roulette profitable, but it does make it worth playing.

Consider also this: For a suitable amount of money - any sum more than six times your expected lifetime earnings - the same terms apply to Russian roulette.

http://th09.deviantart.net/fs71/150/f/2010/176/f/e/shall_we_play_a_game__by_newSaint.jpg

Can someone PLEASE explain to me why he is not being CRUCIFIED for this???  If the media is so "liberal", why haven't they jumped ALL OVER this?  I've seen more about Amy Winehouse's death than this, other than on CNN & MSNBC.  Of course, FoxNews is acting like he's a war hero or something for doing this ::)  If Obama had been the one to walk away from the talk, he'd have been drawn and quartered and they'd be calling for his impeachment!  The even sadder thing is that if (when?) August 2 rolls around and the US defaults, it will all end up being Obama's fault anyway....what a joke!!!

You mean he ran out of the room crying...  ;D



They don't call him Weeper of the House for nothing.



Cat

I think it's time to cut some fat from the military, of course everybody's afraid to say anything about it but it's a fact we're spending way too much on defense. Do we really need to spend almost as much as the rest of the world combined on the military? I don't think we do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

I think it's already damaged our credit.  Anybody this crazy is a bad risk.  It's like selling life insurance to to the guys from Jackass. 
::)

I think it's time to cut some fat from the military, of course everybody's afraid to say anything about it but it's a fact we're spending way too much on defense. Do we really need to spend almost as much as the rest of the world combined on the military? I don't think we do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures



As a former member of the military, I totally agree!



Cat

As a former member of the military, I totally agree!



Cat


Yeah I'm not anti-military, heck my Dad was in the Navy back in the '70s, but those numbers are ridiculous. It certainly isn't because the military is overpaid. I wonder if all those big defense contracts they give out to large corporations have anything to do with it... It makes me sick that people that work for contractors in Iraq or Afghanistan, make many many times more money than any of our soldiers. It is rather telling of how things work though.  ::)

Yeah I'm not anti-military, heck my Dad was in the Navy back in the '70s, but those numbers are ridiculous. It certainly isn't because the military is overpaid. I wonder if all those big defense contracts they give out to large corporations have anything to do with it... It makes me sick that people that work for contractors in Iraq or Afghanistan, make many many times more money than any of our soldiers. It is rather telling of how things work though.  ::)



That has A LOT to do with it. Many of those contractors got no-bid contracts meaning they can charge the government anything they feel like it. Most of them are friends of Dick Cheney and the Obama Administration has yet to give them their walking papers.  >:( >:( >:(



Cat

That has A LOT to do with it. Many of those contractors got no-bid contracts meaning they can charge the government anything they feel like it. Most of them are friends of Dick Cheney and the Obama Administration has yet to give them their walking papers.  >:( >:( >:(



Cat
The problem is he CAN'T give them their walking papers because they're either locked into contracts or if they're not, it would be MORE costly to bring new contractors in to finish what the others have started due to differences in procedure (in cases of overseas contracts).  IMO, NO government contract should EVER be "no bid"!

The problem is he CAN'T give them their walking papers because they're either locked into contracts or if they're not, it would be MORE costly to bring new contractors in to finish what the others have started due to differences in procedure (in cases of overseas contracts).  IMO, NO government contract should EVER be "no bid"!



Agreed.



Cat

The even sadder thing is that if (when?) August 2 rolls around and the US defaults, it will all end up being Obama's fault anyway....what a joke!!!


Not necessarily.  That was Newt's gamble in 1995 (umm, or was it 1996 that the whole "snub" thing came out?), but in any case, it cost his party the Presidency. 

If the 'pubs can get (yet more) concessions out of Obama, their position will be salvageable in 2012.  If they fail to strike a deal and the world really does come to an end, they'll have lost any support they still have amongst the business community.  That may not matter much in terms of votes, but it matters in campaign dollars.

The problem is he CAN'T give them their walking papers because they're either locked into contracts or if they're not, it would be MORE costly to bring new contractors in to finish what the others have started due to differences in procedure (in cases of overseas contracts).  IMO, NO government contract should EVER be "no bid"!


The way things are going, there will be no no-bid government contracts because there will be no government!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/08/rudolf.gif

I think it's time to cut some fat from the military, of course everybody's afraid to say anything about it but it's a fact we're spending way too much on defense. Do we really need to spend almost as much as the rest of the world combined on the military? I don't think we do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

From that list, the US spends 44% of what the entire world spends on the military.  (very) nearly as much as the rest of the world put together.

That's not just excessive, it's insane.

I think it's time to cut some fat from the military, of course everybody's afraid to say anything about it but it's a fact we're spending way too much on defense. Do we really need to spend almost as much as the rest of the world combined on the military? I don't think we do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
I agree with you on the issue of defense spending and that it needs to be cut.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/22/john-boehner-debt-ceiling_n_907452.html

Over a lousy $400 billion in revenue increases.   I'm really!  Our economy is on the verge of a meltdown and Obama has to try and deal with psychos like Boehner and Cantor. 

Hey, here's something, WHAT ABOUT NATIONAL SECURITY?

If they just let the Bush tax cuts expire...oh, what's the point?  It's all been said before. 

These maggots have pushed us around long enough.  Maybe it's time somebody pushed back. 

Now, don't quote me on that when the spaghetti hits the fan.  I don't want a visit from Homeland Security, thank you very much.

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/hiding.gif


Yeah but nobody has addressed to where the 400 billion dollars of additional revenue is coming from. Isn't that important to know?

The Bush Tax Cuts yeah I agree they should be done with but the GOP wants the Bush Tax Cuts to continue and the Dems want to keep the tax cuts in place for people making 250,000 dollars  a year or under. Still eliminating the Bush Tax Cuts isn't gonna shore up the 14.3 trillion dollar deficit totally.

Boehner is trying to make a deal but the Tea Party Freshman in the US House say not to everything having to do with this debt ceiling negotiations. I mean you can't be that unreasonable in divided government like that. Still I think the left is being sorta being unreasonable to when it come to the issue of entitlements. I mean the left doesn't even to touch the issue of entitlement reform I don't think because if it does "the base" won't like it.

Can someone PLEASE explain to me why he is not being CRUCIFIED for this???  If the media is so "liberal", why haven't they jumped ALL OVER this?  I've seen more about Amy Winehouse's death than this, other than on CNN & MSNBC.  Of course, FoxNews is acting like he's a war hero or something for doing this ::)  If Obama had been the one to walk away from the talk, he'd have been drawn and quartered and they'd be calling for his impeachment!  The even sadder thing is that if (when?) August 2 rolls around and the US defaults, it will all end up being Obama's fault anyway....what a joke!!!
Who is not getting crucified?

Headed for impearchment is kind of an extreme theory for just for walking out of debt talks.

If the US defaults yeah sure Obama will get blame because he is the President but the Republicans will get more blame than him especially the Tea Party Freshman in the US House.

Who is a war hero?

I'm really unhappy with both parties.

Who is not getting crucified?

Headed for impearchment is kind of an extreme theory for just for walking out of debt talks.

If the US defaults yeah sure Obama will get blame because he is the President but the Republicans will get more blame than him especially the Tea Party Freshman in the US House.

Who is a war hero?

I'm really unhappy with both parties.
Boehner is not being crucified in the press for walking away from the talks.

I have some conservative friends who are ALREADY saying Obama should be impeached over this whole fiasco (of course, I pointed out this is hardly an impeachable offense)...

Fox News is treating Boehner like a "hero" for "sticking to his guns" (and yes, that is an EXACT quote).

Yeah I'm not anti-military, heck my Dad was in the Navy back in the '70s, but those numbers are ridiculous. It certainly isn't because the military is overpaid. I wonder if all those big defense contracts they give out to large corporations have anything to do with it... It makes me sick that people that work for contractors in Iraq or Afghanistan, make many many times more money than any of our soldiers. It is rather telling of how things work though.  ::)


Thank to GWB for "privatizing" many of the functions that the military use to perform, like guarding embassies FE

Yeah but nobody has addressed to where the 400 billion dollars of additional revenue is coming from. Isn't that important to know?

The Bush Tax Cuts yeah I agree they should be done with but the GOP wants the Bush Tax Cuts to continue and the Dems want to keep the tax cuts in place for people making 250,000 dollars  a year or under. Still eliminating the Bush Tax Cuts isn't gonna shore up the 14.3 trillion dollar deficit totally.

Boehner is trying to make a deal but the Tea Party Freshman in the US House say not to everything having to do with this debt ceiling negotiations. I mean you can't be that unreasonable in divided government like that. Still I think the left is being sorta being unreasonable to when it come to the issue of entitlements. I mean the left doesn't even to touch the issue of entitlement reform I don't think because if it does "the base" won't like it.


They are called "entitlements" because we are entitled to them.  Why?  Because we paid for them.  I started working when I was 16, and every year since then I have paid FICA, and the medicare tax since it was initiated under Nixon.  I paid for that "insurance" and I dam sure aught to get it.

Boehner is not being crucified in the press for walking away from the talks.

I have some conservative friends who are ALREADY saying Obama should be impeached over this whole fiasco (of course, I pointed out this is hardly an impeachable offense)...

Fox News is treating Boehner like a "hero" for "sticking to his guns" (and yes, that is an EXACT quote).



If anyone should be impeached over this, it is members of the House.

14 Amendment of the Constitution:

Section 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
Section 5.

The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.



Cat

They are called "entitlements" because we are entitled to them.  Why?  Because we paid for them.  I started working when I was 16, and every year since then I have paid FICA, and the medicare tax since it was initiated under Nixon.  I paid for that "insurance" and I dam sure aught to get it.


LOL WUT?

You know your history better than that.  That precise argument was made in 1960 Flemming v. Nestor.  The Supreme Court established that (a) you have no contractual right to receive payments, (b) you have no property rights to the taxes you've paid into the programme, and (c) that your interest in the programme as a benficiary is limited to whatever Congress decides the law says you're supposed to get, as of the day before the check is cut.  

That's been the case since for half a century.  Don't take my word for it, here it is, straight from the horse's ass.  You are entitled to nothing in exchange for your FICA taxes, and neither "you deposited money, you have a right to get it back" or "you paid your premiums, your insurer must pay out the benefits stated in the policy" applies.  Congress took that money with the stroke of a pen, and they can keep it with another stroke of that very same pen.

If you wanted to own some property for which you had paid, you would have advocated the right to opt out of social security in favor of a defined contribution plan back in the 70s and 80s.  You might have lost it all in the crashes of 1987, 2001, and 2008.  You might have bought a thousand-dollar lotto ticket on Apple just in case that iPod thing caught on.  But however well or however poorly you did, at least you'd own whatever was in your account.  

Even if the guy managing your account turned out to be Bernie Madoff (who did the same thing to his investors what Congress did to Social Security - namely paying withdrawals by using the newly-recieved funds from the next crop of suckers, and promising those suckers a return that he could never actually provide based on the assets he had under management), and it turned out that the contents of your account had been stolen, you could sue the thief civilly, the cops could charge him criminally, and even if there wasn't enough left to make up for what was stolen, the courts would still take all his stuff, sell it to the highest bidder, and cut you a check to try and make up for it.

Thus endeth the lesson in the difference between contractual arrangements and political promises.

It didn't help that Nestor was a resident alien card-carrying communist in 1960!

There's right and right.  The Supreme Court ruled you don't have a right to Social Security payments, but paying Social Security is the right thing to do.  Hunger, homelessness, and civil unrest are not social goods.

It didn't help that Nestor was a resident alien card-carrying communist in 1960!


Ironic, huh?  A Communist arguing not only that property rights exist, but that governments ought to respect them :)


There's right and right.  The Supreme Court ruled you don't have a right to Social Security payments, but paying Social Security is the right thing to do.  Hunger, homelessness, and civil unrest are not social goods.


Courts aren't in the business of debating right-vs-wrong.  They're in the business of debating legal-vs-illegal.  Politicians, being in the business of crafting law, are well aware of the difference.  Voters, unfortunately, are still not.

Ironic, huh?  A Communist arguing not only that property rights exist, but that governments ought to respect them :)

Courts aren't in the business of debating right-vs-wrong.  They're in the business of debating legal-vs-illegal.  Politicians, being in the business of crafting law, are well aware of the difference.  Voters, unfortunately, are still not.


I didn't say the courts should be deciding it.  Now, one would assume the law would have something to do with right and wrong, and one would be right -- some of the time.

I'm well aware of the legal issue, but I was making a moral point, not a legal one, or better, a capitalist point.  The fact that the SS trust fund has no $$$, just treasury notes really makes no difference.  Like Yogi said, we'll take cash, which is just like money

I'm well aware of the legal issue, but I was making a moral point, not a legal one, or better, a capitalist point.  The fact that the SS trust fund has no $$$, just treasury notes really makes no difference.  Like Yogi said, we'll take cash, which is just like money


Fair enough.  In defense of the Dems on the whole debt issue, I find it ironic that the 'Pubs are simultaneously arguing that their SS checks ought to be paid out, while simultaneously arguing that the government shouldn't just raise the debt ceiling and print whatever money is required to pay off the interest on the debts.  

It's the same damn money whether you print it out of thin air or promise to tax your grandchildren to the Nth generation.  SS recipients have no legitimate claim on the dollars printed (or taxed) from citizens of the United States, but foreign bondholders do.  (Foreign bondholders also have a legitimate claim on the assets of the United States, although it'd be interesting to see 'em try to collect :)  That these fact is completely lost on the older demographic that tends to vote GOP (read: lots of SS and Medicare recipients) is a supreme irony.  

The 'baggers would be better off raising the debt ceiling and kicking the can down the road until after the 2012 elections.  If that means the currency's devalued by 1-2%, their checks will at least continue to arrive.  Cutting the percentage of GDP represented by federal spending instantly (as would be the case in the event of default - foreign bondholders get paid first, everything else basically shuts down) means the cities burn within weeks.

Meanwhile, over in the Twitterverse, even Reuters has picked up on Jeff Jarvis going viral.  Warning: NSFW language, and an FCC-defined "Fleeting Expletive" screenshot shown on CBS News.

Which, after having wrapped the financial equivalent of a second mid-size sedan around a tree today, sums up my assessment of the situation.  Shoulda just bought TZA on Friday and made 20% while the world burned.  #FYW.

Ironic, huh?  A Communist arguing not only that property rights exist, but that governments ought to respect them :)


I once posed a question to Professor Whitfield, a Marxist-Leninist friend in Boston, that he should open the spare rooms in his big house in Cambridge to homeless people.  He gave me a baleful stare. 

To be fair, the ultimate aim of communism was to do away with government altogether.  Of course, it didn't quite work that way!
:(

Folks, treasure these two posts, because you're not gonna see it that often.  


To be fair, the ultimate aim of communism was to do away with government altogether.  Of course, it didn't quite work that way! :(


A dot-com/small-L-libertarian/minarchist (at least when I was in college) and a (Max, pick a label for your college-age self so I can edit this line fairly!), shaking hands and realizing our disagreement was about means, not ends.  And that it just didn't matter (Don't tempt me to Ponify that), because the actual outcome as played out in the real world was the same whether we played or not.  

Never let your schooling interfere with your education.  Never let your ideology interfere with your humanity.  For any of you young-uns in college, that's a reminder that while you may not be using calculus on a daily basis in 2050, those late-night games of beer pong with your political adversaries will come in handy.