|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Staring at the debt ceiling
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
I watched a clip on CNN where the newsperson tried to put a spokesperson for the House Speaker on the line about a 14th Amendment play. The spokesman demurred, dithered and did everything he could dodge that particular question.
I can understand why nobody wants to go there. It's a bit of a constitutional Twilight Zone.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
...I can understand why nobody wants to go there. It's a bit of a constitutional Twilight Zone.
"There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call "The Constitutional Twilight Zone".
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
romanlion
editorial comment
# 10325
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
We've been fighting the war on poverty for decades and can't win. It's time to surrender and stop fighting.
So you're volunteering to join the ranks of the poor, then?
Might as well....the pay is the same....
--------------------
"You can't get rich in politics unless you're a crook" - Harry S. Truman
Posts: 1486 | From: White Rose City | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
I keep thinking of "A Wind In The Door", one of Madeleine L'Engle's novels. I don't have my copy handy and I can't find the right quote online, so I'll just try to tell it. Please bear with me. It's relevant.
The premise of the book is that everything is connected, and the microcosm is just as important as the macrocosm.
Charles Wallace, the young prodigy from "A Wrinkle In Time", is very ill. He has less and less energy, and the problem seems to be in his mitochondria. (Actually, I suspect he has CFIDS--Chronic Fatigue Immune Dysfunction Syndrome--as I do.)
Meg, CW's sister, and Calvin, her friend, and some other beings go down to the cellular level inside Charles Wallace. They find that there are beings called "farandolae" inside his mitochondria. And they're the root of the problem: the adolescent farandolae want to stay adolescent, and not mature. Worse, they are drunk with their own power, literally running riot, being extremely irresponsible,...and the adult farandolae are dying, and not being replaced. And this is killing Charles Wallace. The mission of the visitors is to persuade the adolescent farandolae to Deepen, to grow up.
The Tea Partiers in Congress are adolescent farandolae. And they're running riot.
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
You mean they believe their own myths?
Serious point. I heard some economic illiteracy spouted as truth by a Republican Representative on a recent Radio 4 interview. His purpose was to defend the argument that the size of the deficit is mainly the fault of the Obama administration. As if the ongoing effects of all Bush policies were virtuous, all Obama policies were vicious.
That's a myth, perpetuated for the sake of politics. Plus it means you don't actually have to look at the fiscal effects of the policies now, rather than when they were introduced. And that is just stupid.
As I heard it, I thought "well, maybe this guy is spouting a superficially plausible line for partisan reasons. After all, politicians do that all the time".
But do they really believe this guff? Seriously? Heck, any A level economics student in the UK knows better than that. If Tea Partiers are that kind of "true believer", your electoral processes are putting some seriously stupid people in office.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
AFAIK, yes, they're True Believers--who are also a teenage street gang.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
...But do they really believe this guff? Seriously? Heck, any A level economics student in the UK knows better than that. If Tea Partiers are that kind of "true believer", your electoral processes are putting some seriously stupid people in office.
You'd have to speak with a teabagger to understand how deep the rabbit hole goes. You can't get through to them with substantiated facts. They will simply ignore them, change the subject or accuse you of liberal bias. It's maddening.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alfred E. Neuman:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
...But do they really believe this guff? Seriously? Heck, any A level economics student in the UK knows better than that. If Tea Partiers are that kind of "true believer", your electoral processes are putting some seriously stupid people in office.
You'd have to speak with a teabagger to understand how deep the rabbit hole goes. You can't get through to them with substantiated facts. They will simply ignore them, change the subject or accuse you of liberal bias. It's maddening.
Not to mention that too many of them either didn't attend college or didn't pay attention in class. The electoral college isn't needed to put stunningly stupid people into office - the Tea Party fringe in Congress is a good example of that.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
The scary part of the whole charade is how it was created by wealthy businessmen through phoney front organizations and Faux News. The "Astroturf" movement - fake grassroots.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alfred E. Neuman:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
...But do they really believe this guff? Seriously? Heck, any A level economics student in the UK knows better than that. If Tea Partiers are that kind of "true believer", your electoral processes are putting some seriously stupid people in office.
You'd have to speak with a teabagger to understand how deep the rabbit hole goes. You can't get through to them with substantiated facts. They will simply ignore them, change the subject or accuse you of liberal bias. It's maddening.
One of the problems with goups like the Tea Party is that they are deeply suspicious of so-called "outside experts" even if such experts have Nobel Prizes in Economics.
For one thing, facts get in the way of fantasy; for another, they like to believe that they are the only ones defending The Truth and, of course, [to paraphrase Dr. Phil] they would rather be right than actually solve the problem.
Both sides are dug in, and I hate that. But I think the Tea Party is doing more to damage a relationship with people they could work with (moderate and right wing conservatives) than any fringe element on the left is doing with their moderates.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
If the debt ceiling isn't raised, the world doesn't come to an end. Obama will have to figure out what to pay, but life will go on.
Opinions differ on this. The Tea Party believes nothing much will happen if the US defaults; the rest of the world thinks otherwise. Only one of the two can be right. Stay tuned...
Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
So, to summarize the last few posts, Teabaggers [sic] are uneducated dupes who stoop to personal attacks instead of being persuaded by dispassionate facts.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:
Opinions differ on this. The Tea Party believes nothing much will happen if the US defaults; the rest of the world thinks otherwise. Only one of the two can be right. Stay tuned...
Careful! Let's be clear. The Tea Party does not want the US to default. That would be bad. The Tea Party is, however, not keen on raising the debt ceiling, if at all, unles there are spending cuts. This is what has to happen to address the problem of which the debt ceiling is the sympton: the debt.
[ 29. July 2011, 13:47: Message edited by: New Yorker ]
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
So, to summarize the last few posts, Teabaggers [sic] are uneducated dupes who stoop to personal attacks instead of being persuaded by dispassionate facts.
In other news, dihydrogen monoxide is liquid at standard temperature and pressure, individuals of the order Ursidae eliminate bodily wastes in sylvan settings, and the successor of Peter is a member of the largest Christian ecclesial body with headquarters in Rome.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
Careful! Let's be clear. The Tea Party does not want the US to default. That would be bad. The Tea Party is, however, not keen on raising the debt ceiling, if at all, unles there are spending cuts. This is what has to happen to address the problem of which the debt ceiling is the sympton: the debt.
This is just plain false. There is no need to cut spending at all to eradicate the debt -- it could be done by raising revenues, lowering expenditures, or a combination of the two. Let's at least state the obvious in a way that is not obviously false.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:
Opinions differ on this. The Tea Party believes nothing much will happen if the US defaults; the rest of the world thinks otherwise. Only one of the two can be right. Stay tuned...
Careful! Let's be clear. The Tea Party does not want the US to default. That would be bad. The Tea Party is, however, not keen on raising the debt ceiling, if at all, unles there are spending cuts. This is what has to happen to address the problem of which the debt ceiling is the sympton: the debt.
That seems implausible. If the Tea Party were concerned about debt, they'd have spoken up when the previous administration was running up debt like a drunken sailor. Given that the Tea Party refuses to consider any alteration to the largest recent policy change to increase the debt (the Bush tax cuts), the concern over U.S. debt is just an excuse for pushing right-wing partisanship.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
Not to mention that too many of them either didn't attend college or didn't pay attention in class. The electoral college isn't needed to put stunningly stupid people into office - the Tea Party fringe in Congress is a good example of that.
If true, it may be a blessing in disguise. All it takes is for the smarter Republicans to present a plan with the explanation, "It's not a tax! Never! How dare you! It's just a mandatory payment made by individuals." (heads nod, "Well that's all right then")
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
In other news, dihydrogen monoxide is liquid at standard temperature and pressure...
[Tangent]The most widely-accepted values for STP are 0 degrees C at 100 kPa, so dihydrogen monoxide is a solid at STP if I am not mistaken.
[/Tangent]
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leaf:
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
Not to mention that too many of them either didn't attend college or didn't pay attention in class. The electoral college isn't needed to put stunningly stupid people into office - the Tea Party fringe in Congress is a good example of that.
If true, it may be a blessing in disguise. All it takes is for the smarter Republicans to present a plan with the explanation, "It's not a tax! Never! How dare you! It's just a mandatory payment made by individuals." (heads nod, "Well that's all right then")
The trouble Boehner is having maintaining discipline in his caucus shows that the Tea Partiers inherently distrust anyone not in the club. If the tactic you suggest would actually work, Boehner would have no trouble getting the votes he needs.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
The Tea Party does not want the US to default.
If I see a man with a baseball bat hitting another man in the head again and again then I assume the is trying to hit him. If he then tells me that in fact he is really trying to hit the ball but the other idiot keeps on putting his head in the way, I don't believe him
If the teabaggers really wanted to reduce the deficit they would go about it some other way than beating up millions of Americans.
As for what happens if they get their way and the US government defaults on its debts, who knows? Nothing quite like that has ever happened before.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
In other news, dihydrogen monoxide is liquid at standard temperature and pressure...
[Tangent]The most widely-accepted values for STP are 0 degrees C at 100 kPa, so dihydrogen monoxide is a solid at STP if I am not mistaken.
[/Tangent]
Maybe where you are but for us it was always 20C.
Anyway, water can be liquid or solid at 0C...
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
In other news, dihydrogen monoxide is liquid at standard temperature and pressure...
[Tangent]The most widely-accepted values for STP are 0 degrees C at 100 kPa, so dihydrogen monoxide is a solid at STP if I am not mistaken.
[/Tangent]
Always used to be 25oC when I was a nipper...
[ 29. July 2011, 14:47: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
The Tea Party does not want the US to default.
Click me
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Always used to be 25oC when I was a nipper...
A couple of small points -- first, I should have said that the pressure of STP was 1 atm. Second, your recollection of 25 degrees C is most likely from the temperature for standard enthalpy data, not a definition of STP. We now return to our regularly-scheduled program...
--Tom Clune
[ 29. July 2011, 14:45: Message edited by: tclune ]
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
Okay, I know that political views are highly charged onboard as in real life. However, the term "teabagger" is offensive. I would ask, simply for one's good sake, that it be avoided.
Thanks.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
Why should one not be offensive about people who are trying to turn the Greatest Country In The World into Guatemala?
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
I managed to buy an ounce of gold yesterday, which I could barely afford to do. The price was close to an all-time high. But at the moment, it is already selling about $25 above what I paid for it eighteen hours ago.
So one can take some grim satisfaction in the decision. Yet overall one prays that the price will go down, and that it will prove to have been a terrible investment (at least in the short term). Such is the ambivalence resulting from trying to hedge one's bets and maintain a diversified nest egg for retirement. I take the likeliest scenario to be that an agreement will be reached at the last minute to stave off disaster for six months, and the whole can of worms kicked down the road, to be opened again in the heat of election-campaign time. Hence any drop in the price of precious metals next week will be only temporary.
According to a recent newspaper column, federal government expenditures are now the highest percentage of gross national product since World War II. This is disturbing on the surface. However, I'd like to compare this to those of other first-world countries (if the word "other" is still appropriate), especially those that offer comprehensive health-care coverage. What people tend to overlook is that to the extent a federal program provides for this need, they don't need to do it themselves, and they will actually save money. The argument that the private sector is always more efficient is demonstrably pure BS in this area.
If we can ever get out of the two wars that Bush got us into, and generally reduce somewhat our homage to the military-industrial complex, things might look better. But I'm not holding my breath.
I've given up trying to understand the news or keep the facts straight, because there are so few facts. Do I gather that the Speaker of the House is still plugging a proposal that not only will the Senate not pass and the President not sign, but that he can't even get enough Reps in his own party to vote for? Yet if he manages to get it passed by the House, it will be considered progress? It seems the system has become completely sclerotic, with just four days to go before we fall off the cliff.
I keep remembering the interesting Web exercise put together by the New York Times a few months ago. A Shipmate cited it for us. Assuming that the formulas under the hood of the program are correct and in accord with reality: with enough fairly reasonable spending cuts and tax/fee increases, the federal budget can be balanced. It's the tax increases that no one wants to talk about. Compared to comparable countries, we are undertaxed. It's time to begin paying for the benefits that we have taken for granted over at least a generation.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leaf:
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
Not to mention that too many of them either didn't attend college or didn't pay attention in class. The electoral college isn't needed to put stunningly stupid people into office - the Tea Party fringe in Congress is a good example of that.
If true, it may be a blessing in disguise. All it takes is for the smarter Republicans to present a plan with the explanation, "It's not a tax! Never! How dare you! It's just a mandatory payment made by individuals." (heads nod, "Well that's all right then")
The hard reality is that it's going to take cuts to programs for the poor AND tax increases on those who can pay. It's going to hurt everyone. Even the patron saint of the conservative right, Ronald Reagan, raised taxes during both his governorship of California (the biggest in state history) and his Presidency.
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
Okay, I know that political views are highly charged onboard as in real life. However, the term "teabagger" is offensive. I would ask, simply for one's good sake, that it be avoided.
Firstly, its not really offensive.
Secondly, looking at what those people are saying and doing I have no problem in saying offensive things about the,m. They are fools, and they are angry and destructive fools. If offending them has a chance of making them realise how badly they are behaving, and the effect their petty vindictiveness is having on their country and the rest of the world, then lets offend away.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
According to a recent newspaper column, federal government expenditures are now the highest percentage of gross national product since World War II.
Not true. Federal expenditures stand at about 8.3% of the U.S. GDP, about the same level as 1992. Total government expeditures (federal + state) is about 20.5% of U.S. GDP, about the same as in 1991.
Federal debt, on the other hand, stands at about 92.9%, a level last seen in 1949. While not technically during the Second World War, most of that debt was accummulated during the war.
It should be noted that most of recent upward motion of the U.S. deficit/debt as a percentage of GDP hasn't been due to a sudden binge of runaway spending but due to the stagnation of the U.S. economy. (i.e. the U.S. GDP has shrunk or held steady but not grown significantly since 2008.) Given this, the obvious step is not for the government to cut spending but rather to encourage growth.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
romanlion
editorial comment
# 10325
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
...the largest recent policy change to increase the debt (the Bush tax cuts)...
The ones that Barry extended in an 850 billion dollar bill back in December? Yeah, I remember those.
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
...the obvious step is not for the government to cut spending but rather to encourage growth.
QE3, we gotta have QE3, it'll work this time for sure, no doubt about it.
--------------------
"You can't get rich in politics unless you're a crook" - Harry S. Truman
Posts: 1486 | From: White Rose City | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
Not QE3. We don't need that. We need a Work Projects Administration, Civilian Conservation Corps, Rural Internet Project (like the Rural Electrification Project), and the like.
We need jobs. And we need them now.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
...the largest recent policy change to increase the debt (the Bush tax cuts)...
The ones that Barry extended in an 850 billion dollar bill back in December? Yeah, I remember those.
IIRC he did it under protest in order to salvage extended unemployment benefits due to the Republicans pulling exactly this kind of hostage-taking activity.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
If offending them has a chance of making them realise how badly they are behaving, and the effect their petty vindictiveness is having on their country and the rest of the world, then lets offend away.
I call 'em teabaggers all the time, but I don't expect that to change anything. When someone offends me, I tend to reflect on how badly they are behaving.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
The hard reality is that it's going to take cuts to programs for the poor AND tax increases on those who can pay. It's going to hurt everyone. Even the patron saint of the conservative right, Ronald Reagan, raised taxes during both his governorship of California (the biggest in state history) and his Presidency.
Yes, I understand that, but apparently the Tea Party doesn't. It was my understanding that Tea Persons were in favour only of program cuts and refused to countenance tax increases. I thought that if they are as immune to reason and logic as presented, they might be fooled as long as you don't say the bad word "tax."
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
Okay, I know that political views are highly charged onboard as in real life. However, the term "teabagger" is offensive. I would ask, simply for one's good sake, that it be avoided.
Thanks.
Oh, I see: Now you would like civil discourse. How refreshing. I assume that you will also dispense with some of the more offensive nicknames for your President, in the name of the civil discourse from which you wish to benefit.
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
While it's always hazardous to work from a single specific example to a generality, this seems to sum up the Tea Party perfectly.
quote:
Freshman U.S. Rep. Joe Walsh, a tax-bashing Tea Party champion who sharply lectures President Barack Obama and other Democrats on fiscal responsibility, owes more than $100,000 in child support to his ex-wife and three children, according to documents his ex-wife filed in their divorce case in December.
“I won’t place one more dollar of debt upon the backs of my kids and grandkids unless we structurally reform the way this town spends money!” Walsh says directly into the camera in his viral video lecturing Obama on the need to get the nation’s finances in order.
<snip>
But court documents examined this week by the Chicago Sun-Times during research for a profile on the increasingly visible congressman showed his financial issues also included a nine-year child support battle with his ex-wife.
Before getting elected, he had told Laura Walsh that because he was out of work or between jobs, he could not make child support payments. So she was surprised to read in his congressional campaign disclosures that he was earning enough money to loan his campaign $35,000.
“Joe personally loaned his campaign $35,000, which, given that he failed to make any child support payments to Laura because he ‘had no money’ is surprising,” Laura Walsh’s attorneys wrote in a motion filed in December seeking $117,437 in back child support and interest. “Joe has paid himself back at least $14,200 for the loans he gave himself.”
Walsh’s attorneys responded in court filings: “Respondent admits that funds were loaned to his campaign fund. . . . Respondent admits that the campaign fund has repaid certain loans.”
In short, when given a choice between providing for the kids or bankrolling toxic political rhetoric, the Tea Party strongly favors the latter over the former.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
IIRC he did it under protest in order to salvage extended unemployment benefits due to the Republicans pulling exactly this kind of hostage-taking activity.
No, they are not the same thing at all. In the case of the extension of tax cuts for the rich, it was a matter of the kind of compromise that is the life-blood of politics. President Obama wanted to pass a policy for which he did not have the votes. The unpleasant cost of getting a policy that he wanted was to give the opposition somethng that they wanted. We can debate whether it was a good trade or not, but there was nothing untoward about it.
Refusing to pay for what you have already bought is a very different ballgame. The approach that the Tea Partiers are taking is analogous to an individual deciding that he can improve his finances not by cutting up his credit cards, but by cutting up his credit card bills. I cannot see this as anything other than immoral. Of course, YMMV.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Horseman Bree:
Why should one not be offensive about people who are trying to turn the Greatest Country In The World into Guatemala?
And I would say the same thing about the lefties who are not trying to turn the country into Guatemala, they are turning us into Guataemala.
------------
Not sure what to make of the third plan now being unveiled in the House. (NOTE: House's third plan. How many plans has the Senate put forth? How many has the president put forth?)
I heard or read somewhere this morning two interesting possible solutions that might present themselves.
Raise the debt ceiling with no strings attached for, say, six months. Talk about spending cuts during the meanwhile.
OR
Raise the debt ceiling for whatever length of time Obama wants as long as there is an immediate dollar for dollar decrease in spending.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
romanlion
editorial comment
# 10325
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Refusing to pay for what you have already bought is a very different ballgame. The approach that the Tea Partiers are taking is analogous to an individual deciding that he can improve his finances not by cutting up his credit cards, but by cutting up his credit card bills. I cannot see this as anything other than immoral.
But people do this all the time, don't they? That's why we have foreclosures and repo men. Refusing to pay for what you have already bought when you have the means to pay for it is immoral. Theft, pretty much, but at what point do you have to admit that you simply cannot afford to continue buying? Where is the morality in borrowing 40% of what you spend? Not to mention grossly inflating the money supply and driving rates up?
Spoiler Alert: The debt limit will rise. There will be no "revenue increases." Barry will suck down a pack of Dunhills and sign whatever they send him. He lacks the huevos to veto.
[ 29. July 2011, 17:05: Message edited by: romanlion ]
--------------------
"You can't get rich in politics unless you're a crook" - Harry S. Truman
Posts: 1486 | From: White Rose City | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Niteowl
Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Refusing to pay for what you have already bought is a very different ballgame. The approach that the Tea Partiers are taking is analogous to an individual deciding that he can improve his finances not by cutting up his credit cards, but by cutting up his credit card bills. I cannot see this as anything other than immoral.
But people do this all the time, don't they? That's why we have foreclosures and repo men. Refusing to pay for what you have already bought when you have the means to pay for it is immoral. Theft, pretty much, but at what point do you have to admit that you simply cannot afford to continue buying? Where is the morality in borrowing 40% of what you spend? Not to mention grossly inflating the money supply and driving rates up?
Spoiler Alert: The debt limit will rise. There will be no "revenue increases." Barry will suck down a pack of Dunhills and sign whatever they send him. He lacks the huevos to veto.
The debt limit isn't to purchase something, it's to pay the bill that has come due on the loan for the shortfall.
Cutting entitlements to the bone, cutting the FAA and other dumb moves without raising taxes will not produce the result the Tea Party is looking for. Disaster is coming. And if you're elderly, disabled or dirt poor good luck. You're gonna need it. Or better said "kiss your ass goodbye"
--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare
Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leaf:
...It was my understanding that Tea Persons were in favour only of program cuts and refused to countenance tax increases. I thought that if they are as immune to reason and logic as presented, they might be fooled as long as you don't say the bad word "tax."
They can't support tax increases without violating the solemn pledge sworn to Grover Norquist and the group, Americans for Tax Reform (as have most Republicans).
"Take the pledge, win the primary. Take the pledge, win the general. Break the pledge, lose," Norquist says.
We have no one to blame but the bone-headed American public who voted these intransigent corporate lackeys into office last fall. Hopefully, enough voters will wake up to their gross mistake and remove them in 2012 - but I'm not counting on it. It's as though the public is mesmerized by a lemming-like suicidal fascination.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
Not to mention grossly inflating the money supply and driving rates up?
When, exactly, are we going to see these rates driven up? As noted earlier, there does not seem to be any inflationary pressure on the U.S. dollar at the current level of spending and the rate on long-term U.S. bonds is currently at 2.87%.
A lot of people are confusing their personal economic theories about how things should be with actual reality of the situation.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
The debt limit isn't to purchase something, it's to pay the bill that has come due on the loan for the shortfall.
Not exactly. It's to pay the bill that has come due without cutting spending. It's increasing the debt without doing anything to decrease the debt.
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by romanlion:
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Refusing to pay for what you have already bought is a very different ballgame. The approach that the Tea Partiers are taking is analogous to an individual deciding that he can improve his finances not by cutting up his credit cards, but by cutting up his credit card bills. I cannot see this as anything other than immoral.
But people do this all the time, don't they?
And how, precisely, do you go about deriving an ought from an is?
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
... It's increasing the debt without doing anything to decrease the debt.
Ah, it's all clear to me now. If we can only increase taxes without doing anything to decrease them, we'll be good to go.
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
there does not seem to be any inflationary pressure on the U.S. dollar at the current level of spending and the rate on long-term U.S. bonds is currently at 2.87%.
A lot of people are confusing their personal economic theories about how things should be with actual reality of the situation.
For you to speak reassuringly, and for Romanlion to say that the sky is falling, is what one would expect from your respective general positions. The puzzling thing to me is that the roles are often reversed these days. It is the Republicans who tell us that a default on the government's part wouldn't be that terrible. I can't grok this. Those who despise defaults and other breaches of contract are the creditors. That would be the Republicans-- or at least those who bankroll them. By and large, Republicans are the only creditors who are citizens of the U.S. I conclude this by a process of elimination, because no one else in this country is capable of buying or holding a significant fraction of outstanding U.S. government bonds.
Can someone explain this anomaly?
(I no longer believe that the levers available to the Feds, or how they may choose to push and pull them, are very efficacious. The situation has obviously been aberrant for quite some time.)
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
Alogon, the Republicans have said (out loud, in public) that their primary objective is to ensure that Obama is a one-term president.
Given that the president usually takes the brunt of the blame when the economy tanks (whether that's reasonable or not), economic chaos will help ensure that objective.
I don't think they care who gets hurt, as long as they get rid of Obama.
[ 29. July 2011, 18:18: Message edited by: Josephine ]
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
The debt limit isn't to purchase something, it's to pay the bill that has come due on the loan for the shortfall.
Sort of.
The U.S. Congress has ordered a certain amount of spending be drawn from the U.S. Treasury.
The Congress has also ordered a certain amount of taxation be collected.
The amount Congress said to spend exceeds the amount Congress authorized to collect by a margin that, when combined with other, pre-existing debts, pushes the amount borrowed by the U.S. government beyond a limit (the "debt ceiling") set by a previous Congress on the amount of total debt that can be owed by the federal government.
The U.S. Congress has the authority to increase taxes collected, decrease spending authorized, or raise the debt ceiling. The Congress does not have the authority to repeal the laws of arithmetic or, according to the Fourteenth Amendment, to not pay its bills once they've been properly authorized. The big problem with the debt ceiling is that it "overconstrains" (to borrow an engineering phrase) the mathematics of federal expenses.
In short, the Congress has ordered the Treasury to collect $X in taxes, to spend $X+$Y [Y > 0], and to keep debt below a level which is incompatible with spending $Y more than is collected in taxes. At least one of these things has to give.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
romanlion
editorial comment
# 10325
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
]When, exactly, are we going to see these rates driven up?
When US debt becomes an unattractive investment.
Buy any bonds lately? The Fed sure has.
--------------------
"You can't get rich in politics unless you're a crook" - Harry S. Truman
Posts: 1486 | From: White Rose City | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
there does not seem to be any inflationary pressure on the U.S. dollar at the current level of spending and the rate on long-term U.S. bonds is currently at 2.87%.
A lot of people are confusing their personal economic theories about how things should be with actual reality of the situation.
For you to speak reassuringly, and for Romanlion to say that the sky is falling, is what one would expect from your respective general positions. The puzzling thing to me is that the roles are often reversed these days. It is the Republicans who tell us that a default on the government's part wouldn't be that terrible. I can't grok this.
I was responding specifically to romanlion's assertion that continued deficit spending at current levels would result in inflation and high interest rates, not what would happen in the event of a default. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough, given the context of the current thread. At any rate, it's fairly clear that accrual of additional debt by the U.S. at its current pace is not leading to the things RL claims it is. What's not clear is what an actual default would do to inflation and bond rates, but it's probably not good.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
