(10-09-2013 01:32 PM)bearcat65 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:27 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:26 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:04 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  So, when does the piling up of debt end?

As soon as we start taking in more than we are spending?

No ****, Sherlock. And when will that be?

When we have tax rates that are actually appropriate for the various economic classes.

Right. Even if that were to increase revenue which it wouldn't, you would still have politicians finding new ways to spend it. Balanced Budget Amendment to constitution would be the only way to ensure we spend no more than we take in.

Yep.

For every additional dollar of tax revenue, they'll increase spending by $1.20.

If we're lucky.

(10-09-2013 01:27 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:26 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:04 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 12:52 PM)RobertN Wrote:  So you stand with the tea party in destroying our and the world economy. Thanks for clarifying(though I already knew that is where you stood).

So, when does the piling up of debt end?

As soon as we start taking in more than we are spending?

No ****, Sherlock. And when will that be?

When we have tax rates that are actually appropriate for the various economic classes.

Soley taxing the rich more will not pay off the debt. I thought that was understood. We have to look at the other side of the equation as well, which is the spending side. A combination of the two would help.

(10-09-2013 01:43 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:27 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:26 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:04 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 12:57 PM)Smaug Wrote:  So, when does the piling up of debt end?

As soon as we start taking in more than we are spending?

No ****, Sherlock. And when will that be?

When we have tax rates that are actually appropriate for the various economic classes.

Soley taxing the rich more will not pay off the debt. I thought that was understood. We have to look at the other side of the equation as well, which is the spending side. A combination of the two would help.

Yes, a combination of the two would be best.

But when nearly one entire political party has said that they will REFUSE to raise taxes, that is a little difficult to accomplish. And honestly, it's not even raising taxes. It's letting Bush's tax cuts expire...

(10-09-2013 01:45 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:43 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:27 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:26 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:04 PM)RobertN Wrote:  As soon as we start taking in more than we are spending?

No ****, Sherlock. And when will that be?

When we have tax rates that are actually appropriate for the various economic classes.

Soley taxing the rich more will not pay off the debt. I thought that was understood. We have to look at the other side of the equation as well, which is the spending side. A combination of the two would help.

Yes, a combination of the two would be best.

But when nearly one entire political party has said that they will REFUSE to raise taxes, that is a little difficult to accomplish. And honestly, it's not even raising taxes. It's letting Bush's tax cuts expire...

Well, the other side has refused to address spending so the two really are no different in the fact that they are both asinine.

(10-09-2013 11:12 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 10:47 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  You Cons really don't understand how this works. If YOU have a $100 limit on YOUR credit card and spend $100, YOU can't spend anymore. Why? YOU have no control on the currency that you pay the card back with. In the case of the debt ceiling, the United States holds the reserve currency. Meaning that we exclusively determine how and when our creditors get paid back. YOU can't do that. All currency in the world is pegged to the dollar. This is why the amount of debt we have really doesn't matter and why people/countries will continue to loan us money. They are still buying Treasury bonds. We actually need to be borrowing more money right now because interest rates are so low and using that to repair our infrastructure. Tea Party Patriots have it all wrong.

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

Is that your way of saying "Just print more money"?

Pretty much sums it up nicely.

Make it rain.

Exactly

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)Firmbizzle Wrote:  As long as we are the world's leading Superpower, we will hold the reserve currency. When we stop being that, then we have bigger problems than the debt.

You realize that the entire reason the debt ceiling was established was to keep our debt problem from CAUSING us to lose our position, right? Were you alive in the 80's? Did you see how fast the Soviet Union fell and why? They were once "right there with us"... and China is closing in quickly. Your solution is merely a means of making the possible, probable.

Quote:Keep borrowing more money. Remember, we are the good guys in the world's best defense. We create the security for the free market to work. Most of our debt comes from that. We should be sending everyone a bill.

All it takes is for ONE of them to refuse to take a dollar.

This is precisely the mentality that caused the housing collapse. You realize, of course, that at the time of the collapse, virtually no homes had been foreclosed and virtually no securities had defaulted or payments on those securities missed. What happened was, ONE "lender" decided that the collateral wasn't worth what we said it was... and then another... and then another... and suddenly, you couldn't GIVE these loans as collateral.

If you don't think it can happen, you need to study history a little more carefully. Rule number one in investing is that if there is only one scenario under which "things can go wrong", expect ONE person with an agenda and the capability (China? Russia? OPEC? The EU? Muslim nations?) to test the markets resolve about that scenario. You realize that the Euro was set up specifically for this purpose... and MANY countries now equally peg oil to the Euro... China used to be in lock step with the dollar but no longer is. Why? Because of OUR relative instability. If you'd like a smaller example than Russia and the mortgage crisis, how about Enron and electricity in California or the Koch Brothers or the Bass Brothers or the Getty's.

I'm not saying it's around the corner. It's just not smart to ignore that it is possible... particularly when like the mortgage crisis, by the time we realize it is here, we won't be able to do much to stop it.

(10-09-2013 01:51 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:45 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:43 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:27 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:26 PM)Smaug Wrote:  No ****, Sherlock. And when will that be?

When we have tax rates that are actually appropriate for the various economic classes.

Soley taxing the rich more will not pay off the debt. I thought that was understood. We have to look at the other side of the equation as well, which is the spending side. A combination of the two would help.

Yes, a combination of the two would be best.

But when nearly one entire political party has said that they will REFUSE to raise taxes, that is a little difficult to accomplish. And honestly, it's not even raising taxes. It's letting Bush's tax cuts expire...

Well, the other side has refused to address spending so the two really are no different in the fact that they are both asinine.

When has one side refused to address spending. Yeah, the Democrats don't want to privatize Social Security or Medicare, but they've offered plenty of cuts. Look at the Sequester, for ****'s sake.

(10-09-2013 01:52 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:51 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:45 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:43 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:27 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  When we have tax rates that are actually appropriate for the various economic classes.

Soley taxing the rich more will not pay off the debt. I thought that was understood. We have to look at the other side of the equation as well, which is the spending side. A combination of the two would help.

Yes, a combination of the two would be best.

But when nearly one entire political party has said that they will REFUSE to raise taxes, that is a little difficult to accomplish. And honestly, it's not even raising taxes. It's letting Bush's tax cuts expire...

Well, the other side has refused to address spending so the two really are no different in the fact that they are both asinine.

When has one side refused to address spending. Yeah, the Democrats don't want to privatize Social Security or Medicare, but they've offered plenty of cuts. Look at the Sequester, for ****'s sake.

They never thought the sequester would actually occur.

(10-09-2013 01:52 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  When has one side refused to address spending. Yeah, the Democrats don't want to privatize Social Security or Medicare, but they've offered plenty of cuts. Look at the Sequester, for ****'s sake.

Which they bitched about from the get-go and took steps to make it as painful on people as possible and blamed the Republicans for and NOW you want to give them CREDIT for it as some kind of a voluntary tax cut?

C'mon


The problem with the cuts they've offered is that they were only based on a desire to sell something as deficit neutral... come in the future and are based on projections while the spending is now... hence the need for a debt ceiling increase.... the LARGER problem is that their projections... every single one of them... has been rampantly aggressive resulting in FAR less revenue than they projected... not to mention the simple fact that a reduction in the rate of increase is STILL spending more money.

It's the same thing we do as young Americans... we buy a 30,000 car with our 30,000/year first job because we're convinced that in 2 years we'll be making 50k... and then when reality sets in and we're only making 38k or worse, get laid off... the bank takes the car or we have to make some really hard decisions like moving home with the parents... Only politicians don't have to make those sorts of hard choices... they just print more money.

If money doesn't matter, then why don't we just spend tens of trillions of dollars and give everyone in the country everything they want? Seriously? Why not? Why do we need to cut physician reimbursements? Why do we need to cut back on insurers profits? Why do we need to submit government projects for public bids? Why do we need the IRS? Why do we need to FORCE people to be insured?

(10-09-2013 01:52 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 11:12 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 10:47 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  You Cons really don't understand how this works. If YOU have a $100 limit on YOUR credit card and spend $100, YOU can't spend anymore. Why? YOU have no control on the currency that you pay the card back with. In the case of the debt ceiling, the United States holds the reserve currency. Meaning that we exclusively determine how and when our creditors get paid back. YOU can't do that. All currency in the world is pegged to the dollar. This is why the amount of debt we have really doesn't matter and why people/countries will continue to loan us money. They are still buying Treasury bonds. We actually need to be borrowing more money right now because interest rates are so low and using that to repair our infrastructure. Tea Party Patriots have it all wrong.

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

Is that your way of saying "Just print more money"?

Pretty much sums it up nicely.

Make it rain.

Exactly

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)Crebman Wrote:  As long as we are the world's leading Superpower, we will hold the reserve currency. When we stop being that, then we have bigger problems than the debt.

You realize that the entire reason the debt ceiling was established was to keep our debt problem from CAUSING us to lose our position, right? Were you alive in the 80's? Did you see how fast the Soviet Union fell and why? They were once "right there with us"... and China is closing in quickly. Your solution is merely a means of making the possible, probable.

Quote:Keep borrowing more money. Remember, we are the good guys in the world's best defense. We create the security for the free market to work. Most of our debt comes from that. We should be sending everyone a bill.

All it takes is for ONE of them to refuse to take a dollar.

This is precisely the mentality that caused the housing collapse. You realize, of course, that at the time of the collapse, virtually no homes had been foreclosed and virtually no securities had defaulted or payments on those securities missed. What happened was, ONE "lender" decided that the collateral wasn't worth what we said it was... and then another... and then another... and suddenly, you couldn't GIVE these loans as collateral.

If you don't think it can happen, you need to study history a little more carefully. Rule number one in investing is that if there is only one scenario under which "things can go wrong", expect ONE person with an agenda and the capability (China? Russia? OPEC? The EU? Muslim nations?) to test the markets resolve about that scenario. You realize that the Euro was set up specifically for this purpose... and MANY countries now equally peg oil to the Euro... China used to be in lock step with the dollar but no longer is. Why? Because of OUR relative instability. If you'd like a smaller example than Russia and the mortgage crisis, how about Enron and electricity in California or the Koch Brothers or the Bass Brothers or the Getty's.

I'm not saying it's around the corner. It's just not smart to ignore that it is possible... particularly when like the mortgage crisis, by the time we realize it is here, we won't be able to do much to stop it.

Hey! You attributed a quote that I sure as hell didn't make!!!!!!

(10-09-2013 02:25 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:52 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 11:12 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)Crebman Wrote:  Is that your way of saying "Just print more money"?

Pretty much sums it up nicely.

Make it rain.

Exactly

(10-09-2013 10:52 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  As long as we are the world's leading Superpower, we will hold the reserve currency. When we stop being that, then we have bigger problems than the debt.

You realize that the entire reason the debt ceiling was established was to keep our debt problem from CAUSING us to lose our position, right? Were you alive in the 80's? Did you see how fast the Soviet Union fell and why? They were once "right there with us"... and China is closing in quickly. Your solution is merely a means of making the possible, probable.

Quote:Keep borrowing more money. Remember, we are the good guys in the world's best defense. We create the security for the free market to work. Most of our debt comes from that. We should be sending everyone a bill.

All it takes is for ONE of them to refuse to take a dollar.

This is precisely the mentality that caused the housing collapse. You realize, of course, that at the time of the collapse, virtually no homes had been foreclosed and virtually no securities had defaulted or payments on those securities missed. What happened was, ONE "lender" decided that the collateral wasn't worth what we said it was... and then another... and then another... and suddenly, you couldn't GIVE these loans as collateral.

If you don't think it can happen, you need to study history a little more carefully. Rule number one in investing is that if there is only one scenario under which "things can go wrong", expect ONE person with an agenda and the capability (China? Russia? OPEC? The EU? Muslim nations?) to test the markets resolve about that scenario. You realize that the Euro was set up specifically for this purpose... and MANY countries now equally peg oil to the Euro... China used to be in lock step with the dollar but no longer is. Why? Because of OUR relative instability. If you'd like a smaller example than Russia and the mortgage crisis, how about Enron and electricity in California or the Koch Brothers or the Bass Brothers or the Getty's.

I'm not saying it's around the corner. It's just not smart to ignore that it is possible... particularly when like the mortgage crisis, by the time we realize it is here, we won't be able to do much to stop it.

Hey! You attributed a quote that I sure as hell didn't make!!!!!!

My apologies... tried to combine two threads. I think I fixed it now

(10-09-2013 01:08 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:02 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  If the Debt Ceiling is not raised, America will suffer. We have already spent the money the debt ceiling needs to be raised to cover. We fail to increase it, then the U.S.'s credit rating takes another hit and the value of the dollar continues to drop. The value of the dollar drops and our economy suffers even more.

I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept.

Obama will have to increase the debt ceiling himself and I believe that is what Boehner's end game plan is. It's the least unconstitutional thing Obama can do to pay off the debt. He could also sell federal property or raises taxes, but that won't happen. Raise da roof.

I'm really sick of this belief from the Right that Taxes are the devil. Taxes serve a very useful purpose. The Netherlands pay high taxes, but guess what? Free healthcare. Free college/university. Rock bottom homeless rates.

It's ridiculous.

I'll tell you what's ridiculous, is tax and spend liberals that think more taxes are the answer to everything, if you want so much free schitt move to the Netherlands.

(10-09-2013 02:32 PM)bevotex Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:08 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:02 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  If the Debt Ceiling is not raised, America will suffer. We have already spent the money the debt ceiling needs to be raised to cover. We fail to increase it, then the U.S.'s credit rating takes another hit and the value of the dollar continues to drop. The value of the dollar drops and our economy suffers even more.

I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept.

Obama will have to increase the debt ceiling himself and I believe that is what Boehner's end game plan is. It's the least unconstitutional thing Obama can do to pay off the debt. He could also sell federal property or raises taxes, but that won't happen. Raise da roof.

I'm really sick of this belief from the Right that Taxes are the devil. Taxes serve a very useful purpose. The Netherlands pay high taxes, but guess what? Free healthcare. Free college/university. Rock bottom homeless rates.

It's ridiculous.

I'll tell you what's ridiculous, is tax and spend liberals that think more taxes are the answer to everything, if you want so much free schitt move to the Netherlands.

How perfect you fit the hillbilly stereotype.

$17 Trillion in the hole and it's because people aren't taxed enough.

It'd be funny if it weren't so disturbing.

(10-09-2013 01:08 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  I'm really sick of this belief from the Right that Taxes are the devil. Taxes serve a very useful purpose. The Netherlands pay high taxes, but guess what? Free healthcare. Free college/university. Rock bottom homeless rates.

It's ridiculous.

Would you rather have their economy or ours?

Theirs Ours
17mm people 317mm
16k sq miles of area 3.8mm
707billion GDP 16 trillion
42k GDP pp 50k

There are LOTS of things that you can do well with 17mm people and 16k square miles of area that become unmanageable with 317mm people and 3.8 million square miles

Delivering things like health care and other "aid" would be chief among them

The Netherlands would be 5th among our now 51 states.

And Republicans aren't really against taxes per se... they are against FEDERAL taxes... hence the word, Republic. If your state (like the Netherlands) wants to collect lots of taxes and provide lots of services, they should be allowed to... because the people of most states usually have more in common with each other than people who live thousands of miles away. What works in NY might not work in Montana, or the Netherlands.

(10-09-2013 03:40 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:08 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  I'm really sick of this belief from the Right that Taxes are the devil. Taxes serve a very useful purpose. The Netherlands pay high taxes, but guess what? Free healthcare. Free college/university. Rock bottom homeless rates.

It's ridiculous.

Would you rather have their economy or ours?

Theirs Ours
17mm people 317mm
16k sq miles of area 3.8mm
707billion GDP 16 trillion
42k GDP pp 50k

There are LOTS of things that you can do well with 17mm people and 16k square miles of area that become unmanageable with 317mm people and 3.8 million square miles

Delivering things like health care and other "aid" would be chief among them

The Netherlands would be 5th among our now 51 states.

And Republicans aren't really against taxes per se... they are against FEDERAL taxes... hence the word, Republic. If your state (like the Netherlands) wants to collect lots of taxes and provide lots of services, they should be allowed to... because the people of most states usually have more in common with each other than people who live thousands of miles away. What works in NY might not work in Montana, or the Netherlands.

Again, apples and oranges. The Netherlands doesn't create the reserve currency.

(10-09-2013 04:13 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Again, apples and oranges. The Netherlands doesn't create the reserve currency.

Your comment has nothing to do with the conversation.

(10-09-2013 04:22 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 04:13 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Again, apples and oranges. The Netherlands doesn't create the reserve currency.

Your comment has nothing to do with the conversation.

I love how this has become the leftist talking point du jour.

No problem with debt, we can just print more money, after all we are the world's reserve currency. Of course, prinitng more money jeopardizes that reserve currency status, and the more we print the more we jeopardize that status. What happens if one day the dollar is NO LONGER the world reserve currency? And be assured that moves are afoot to remove it of that status.

(10-09-2013 04:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 04:22 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 04:13 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Again, apples and oranges. The Netherlands doesn't create the reserve currency.

Your comment has nothing to do with the conversation.

I love how this has become the leftist talking point du jour.

No problem with debt, we can just print more money, after all we are the world's reserve currency. Of course, prinitng more money jeopardizes that reserve currency status, and the more we print the more we jeopardize that status. What happens if one day the dollar is NO LONGER the world reserve currency? And be assured that moves are afoot to remove it of that status.

yep... and have been for quite some time. It can happen very quickly right now. It's particularly dangerous that so many of our bonds and dollars are held by China and members of OPEC.

You've hinted at the fact that they're following the models of small countries (like the Netherlands) when those plans don't work in larger countries... I think I'm onto something here with the "size" issue once again. Of course, it also fits with my personal beliefs so perhaps I'm jaded... but I'd like for someone to INTELLIGENTLY discuss it with me.

(10-09-2013 02:32 PM)bevotex Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:08 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:05 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-09-2013 01:02 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  If the Debt Ceiling is not raised, America will suffer. We have already spent the money the debt ceiling needs to be raised to cover. We fail to increase it, then the U.S.'s credit rating takes another hit and the value of the dollar continues to drop. The value of the dollar drops and our economy suffers even more.

I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept.

Obama will have to increase the debt ceiling himself and I believe that is what Boehner's end game plan is. It's the least unconstitutional thing Obama can do to pay off the debt. He could also sell federal property or raises taxes, but that won't happen. Raise da roof.

I'm really sick of this belief from the Right that Taxes are the devil. Taxes serve a very useful purpose. The Netherlands pay high taxes, but guess what? Free healthcare. Free college/university. Rock bottom homeless rates.

It's ridiculous.

I'll tell you what's ridiculous, is tax and spend liberals that think more taxes are the answer to everything, if you want so much free schitt move to the Netherlands.

Lol. You're close, but that's not really where he's heading- he doesn't want to move to the Netherlands, he wants all the free schit he mentioned previously, only wants someone else to pay for it all, here in the US.

He wants the federal government to forcefully confiscate the property of private citizens that he has seemingly deemed "the evil rich" so he can get something for nothing. Forget that these people have come about this property legally and without taking it from anyone else on the face of the earth, if they have more than he does, or something he doesn't have, that isn't "fair".

Hmmmm, what does that sound like to you?

(10-09-2013 08:34 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  If I have a $100 limit on my credit card. I spend all $100 but pay nothing back.

I go to my credit card company and say “Look homie, if you raise my limit to $200, I’ll pay off $50 now, but I have bills to pay so I have to use up that extra $100 right away”

That means although I’ve paid $50 off. I’ve added $150 to the card and am now at my new limit of $200.

What part of this is confusing?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZSMdlINVAk#t=24

Probably the part where the United States government has been doing this for years and it never was an issue that shut down the government before.