I don't want it raised, but man oh man, the alternative is downright scary. Still, I would rather it happen now, to me and in my lifetime, than wait and have that alternative happen as a result of domestic/global economics in my kid's and grandkid's lifetime and adversely affect them--and make no mistake---no matter when it occurs that alternative is going to be the ultimate defintion of "adversely". I'm just not much on passing our problems off on someone else down the line.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 05-16-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:13 AM
Old Lar Member
Posts: 13797 From: Palm Bay, Florida Registered: Nov 1999
Giving the goverment a never ending increasing debt limit is like giving a shopaholic an endless supply of money. If the money is there, they will spend it. Those elected need to stop their endless spending. They are in those office to make some hard decisions as that was why they were hired. If they are unable to make the decision, they can resign or not run for the office again. No increase now until they do some serious cutting in spending.
Start by cutting foreign aid to Pakistan and other supposed allies.
[This message has been edited by Old Lar (edited 05-16-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:19 AM
Bullet Member
Posts: 797 From: Douglasville, GA Registered: Jul 2007
Raising the ceiling In 30 years, the national debt has gone from just under $1 trillion to $14.3 trillion, and is projected to reach just under $21 trillion by 2016. Congress has passed new debt limits over the years that allow the government to keep running, and is currently preparing to debate whether to raise the ceiling this year.
SOURCE: Office of Management and Budget, White House. GRAPHIC: Tobey/The Washington Post. Published on April 18, 2011, 10:59 p.m.
Not without some serious concessions by the ba$tards in power. But we are doomed when the ones who messed it up believe we should trust them to fix it. They are not serious and the taxpayer are just a good laugh to them. Outside of mass hangings, they will never get busy fixing it.
[This message has been edited by partfiero (edited 05-16-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:30 AM
partfiero Member
Posts: 6923 From: Tucson, Arizona Registered: Jan 2002
Raising the ceiling In 30 years, the national debt has gone from just under $1 trillion to $14.3 trillion, and is projected to reach just under $21 trillion by 2016. Congress has passed new debt limits over the years that allow the government to keep running, and is currently preparing to debate whether to raise the ceiling this year.
SOURCE: Office of Management and Budget, White House. GRAPHIC: Tobey/The Washington Post. Published on April 18, 2011, 10:59 p.m.
For those actually shouldering the debt burden and it's payment and service, that is bad news. For those incurring it, and encouraging it's continuation and postponement of extinction of the debt--not so much.
Not without some serious concessions by the ba$tards in power. But we are doomed when the ones who messed it up believe we should trust them to fix it. They are not serious and the taxpayer are just a good laugh to them. Outside of mass hangings, they will never get busy fixing it.
^ Exactly.
It doesn't really matter if they raise it or not. We are indeed doomed.
A more appropriate question might be can you afford not to raise the debt ceiling?
Of course we can, just as we can afford to raise it---well, not US, but those future generations that will actually suffer the worst from it--and suffer they will, because it is always the poorest and most downtrodden who suffer from a defaut--not those with means and assets.
Of course we can, just as we can afford to raise it---well, not US, but those future generations that will actually suffer the worst from it--and suffer they will, because it is always the poorest and most downtrodden who suffer from a defaut--not those with means and assets.
Depends I guess if one thinks a crisis is inevitable either way. My thought is the current administration will attempt to make it to the next election with as little pain as possible and then lower the boom if a second term is achieved.
I think a recovery is possible, with long term pain. But the pain is a broken arm. If we don't raise it, we take the pain now--but it's more like a broken spine and a few ribs, plus both arms and a leg.
I really don't know which is better. What I do know, is I'd much rather face it now and take the hit, rather than go down in history as the last generation able to hand it off.. because surely the next generation is done if we don't tackle this today.
IP: Logged
04:16 PM
Scottzilla79 Member
Posts: 2573 From: Chicago, IL Registered: Oct 2009
Originally posted by maryjane: For those actually shouldering the debt burden and it's payment and service, that is bad news. For those incurring it, and encouraging it's continuation and postponement of extinction of the debt--not so much.
This reminds me of a line from Newt's announcement. "There are those who don't care if the country is wrecked, as long as they are on top of the wreckage."
IP: Logged
04:52 PM
cliffw Member
Posts: 35918 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by newf: Depends I guess if one thinks a crisis is inevitable either way. My thought is the current administration will attempt to make it to the next election with as little pain as possible and then lower the boom if a second term is achieved.
I think it is a crisis now. By the way, this administration can not raise the debt limit. This administration has spent or borrowed (I forget which) more than all of the others in 235 years of existence.
quote
Originally posted by Scottzilla79: Can we extend it for the current budget temporarily?
No, we can not. Heh ... we do not have one, . The dumbocrats, when they controlled all three branches of gooberment, could not would not pass one. I am no scholar of any sorts. I do not even know where the money is coming from, other than continuing resolutions of the last passed budget, China, you and me.
I'm just not much on passing our problems off on someone else down the line.
A nice thought, and i concur, but really.. we already have. Many times and for a while. I still vote no. Too bad my vote has never counted before and this wont either.
IP: Logged
05:21 PM
cliffw Member
Posts: 35918 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by theBDub: I think a recovery is possible ...
Not me. Not with more and more spending of money we don't have happening. Which is what is going on, and will some more, with a debt ceiling increase. I think any increase, to prevent default, should be met by equal expenditure cuts. No sense increasing the debt just to pay ever increasing interest. We need money to pay off the debt ... hello amerika ?
By the way, this administration can not raise the debt limit.
How do you mean?
quote
Originally posted by cliffw: We can not afford the one we have now. From the chart posted, we have not been able to afford any that we have had since ?1979? .
Yup, it would be great if countries never ran any debt but sometimes it's necessary.
IP: Logged
05:36 PM
partfiero Member
Posts: 6923 From: Tucson, Arizona Registered: Jan 2002
As long as the politicians have the ability to buy votes with taxpayer $, there is little chance of salvaging it. In retrospect, the politician who invented this practice should of been executed, as well as everyone who has done it since.
IP: Logged
05:43 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27079 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by tbone42: A nice thought, and i concur, but really.. we already have. Many times and for a while. I still vote no. Too bad my vote has never counted before and this wont either.
Then maybe it's time to consider changing WHO you vote for? And change the choices of who we get to vote for?
Don't give up. There's too much at stake for you, me, our families, neighbors and this country.
IP: Logged
06:12 PM
Tomski Member
Posts: 152 From: Middletown, DE Registered: Apr 2011
I vote no. If this country wants to solve its debt problem it needs to legalize drugs and put a huge tax on them and also reform or cut the welfare program.
....or zombies
IP: Logged
06:39 PM
cliffw Member
Posts: 35918 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Originally posted by cliffw: By the way, this administration can not raise the debt limit.
quote
Originally posted by newf: How do you mean?
The "administration" refers to only one branch of our government, the Executive branch. It can propose budgets for what he wants to get done. Another branch, Congress, approves a budget recommendation and can pass willy nilly any expenditures it wants and can completely deny the administrations wish.
quote
Originally posted by newf: Yup, it would be great if countries never ran any debt but sometimes it's necessary.
I would have to say define necessary. If it would mean raising the debt ceiling every year, or even three or four times a year, as has been happening, necessary gets a second look.
IP: Logged
06:53 PM
cliffw Member
Posts: 35918 From: Bandera, Texas, USA Registered: Jun 2003
Tomski, I did not get around to welcoming you to the forum. I meant to. That said, and no disrespect, zombies ? What flavor do you like ? Repulsivecan or dumbocrat ? Just saying. The general populace on both sides of the isle are zombies.
IP: Logged
06:57 PM
Tomski Member
Posts: 152 From: Middletown, DE Registered: Apr 2011
Tomski, I did not get around to welcoming you to the forum. I meant to. That said, and no disrespect, zombies ? What flavor do you like ? Repulsivecan or dumbocrat ? Just saying. The general populace on both sides of the isle are zombies.
Thanks for the welcome big guy You could say I'm a mix of both and neither. And as for zombies....i was more talking about a zombie apocalypse....if you think about it that would solve a lot of problems
IP: Logged
07:00 PM
Boondawg Member
Posts: 38235 From: Displaced Alaskan Registered: Jun 2003
