Continuing Resolution/Debt Ceiling

[JohnyMac]

I have done some research on not raising the Debt Ceiling. I can not find anywhere a reasonable reason for raising it. Maybe someone out there would know. 

To my small mind, if we have $X coming in (revenue), and we spend $Y (expenditures) and the expenditures exceed revenue by $Z (debt); why would we fill out another credit card application to increase our deb?

What would happen if we didn't raise the debt limit but lived within our means (revenue coming in) and pay debt + expenditures? Wouldn't that strengthen the USofA dollar Vs. hurting it? 

I am not  here. Just trying to get a grasp on the up and coming situation happening on Oct 17th. 

[Deathstyle]

Jim Rogers: US govt shutdown is sham & charade to jerk us all around

[Well-Prepared Witch]

I think the problem (and I use that word deliberately, because I think it *is* a problem) is that our government doesn't work like your normal family or business.  Congress spends, then the Treasury has to find ways of paying the bill.  It'd be like giving your son a credit card and he buys a Mustang, two trips to Vegas and a complete first edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, then you have to pay the bill.  This is money already spent - hours worked by people, contracts entered into, facilities and bombs built or being built, etc., etc., etc.

The real problem is that Congress, in its infinite ass-hattery, won't sit down and create a budget.  They haven't passed a budget in over three years.  They are using faux outrage over the Affordable Care Act as a smoke-screen for the real issue, which is we're nowhere near a budget.  If they shout & scream about the ACA loud enough, they think the country is stupid enough (and I'm afraid we might be) to not realize that we're at this debt ceiling because they haven't sat down, cut what we can't afford (more bombers) to take care of our responsibilities (making sure our citizens are well-cared for).

My $0.02.

[Currahee]

Sorry, "making sure the citizens are well cared for" is not in the constitution- while defending them is (you can certainly argue the cost of that- but defense has already been hit hard while our demands on them increase.)

Well over half of the government budget is paying people to not work- how is that at all sustainable?

[JohnyMac]

A few things to remember...

1) The Executive Branch of our government proposes a budget. It is up to the Senate to approve the budget.It is
     the House of Representatives to allocate the funds for that budget.
2) Since President Obama has been elected he has proposed four budgets which have all been voted down by
    the Democratic controlled Senate
    http://budget.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=252305
3) 87% of the current Federal Government is working and receiving a paycheck. The other 13% was just
    voted on in the US House of Representatives: To guarantee their payroll check whether they are working or not.

Again, what negativity would our country be subject to if we did not increase the debt ceiling?

[USMC0331]

It's purely bread and circuses. Why have a limit that has never been kept in it's history?  Either live within your means or go full hog, spare everyone the drama.

We have to borrow to pay the interest on the debt we already owe, how can sticking to a budget be that big of an issue in the face of the fact that it is impossible to repay what is owed and we are only paying that interest by printing money out of thin air.


Currahee hits the core issue.  All this welfare state stuff is Unconstitutional and is a "domestic threat" against the Republic.  So were are all the patriots at and what are they doing about it? nada... waiting for the "big one" to start things off. 

Newsflash, the death of a thousand cuts to the Republic started about 100 years ago on a little island called Jekyll.

[crudos]

I think the problem (and I use that word deliberately, because I think it *is* a problem) is that our government doesn't work like your normal family or business.  Congress spends, then the Treasury has to find ways of paying the bill.  It'd be like giving your son a credit card and he buys a Mustang, two trips to Vegas and a complete first edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, then you have to pay the bill.  This is money already spent - hours worked by people, contracts entered into, facilities and bombs built or being built, etc., etc., etc.

The real problem is that Congress, in its infinite ass-hattery, won't sit down and create a budget.  They haven't passed a budget in over three years.  They are using faux outrage over the Affordable Care Act as a smoke-screen for the real issue, which is we're nowhere near a budget.  If they shout & scream about the ACA loud enough, they think the country is stupid enough (and I'm afraid we might be) to not realize that we're at this debt ceiling because they haven't sat down, cut what we can't afford (more bombers) to take care of our responsibilities (making sure our citizens are well-cared for).

My $0.02.

Well said WPW.

[USMC0331]

Even when they do pass a budget it's NEVER balanced!

FACTS:

• The U.S. government suffered budget deficits every year from 1970 through 1997.
• 1998, Democrat Bill Clinton was president the last time the federal budget was balanced, and Republicans controlled Congress.
• According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office , the national debt increases faster than the size of annual deficits because borrowing by ?quasi-government agencies? isn?t reflected in the federal budget ? but again, that?s true for previous presidents. That debt grew even in the Clinton surplus years.
• ?Since March 1962 Congress has enacted 77 separate measures that have altered the limit on federal debt.? (raised the debt limit)
• The sum of five fiscal year deficits under Obama totals $5.296 trillion. If you subtract that amount from $16.7 trillion you?re left with $11.4 trillion.

[sledge]

Actually guys and gals, it's only one party in Congress who hasn't been willing to work on the budget for almost half a decade.  A budget would interfere with their agenda apparently.  The other party put forth a budget but it was turned down.  Hell even the President's own budget was turned down by his own party.  Those people don't want a budget, even if it's bloated, apparently even his wasn't bloated enough to suite them.

You are correct.  There is a problem in Washington.  It's that they don't have any intention of living within our collective means.  They (both sides) have spent more and promised more than we can collectively repay or deliver.

I suppose that is what happens when we move away from the Constitution and start following the concept that it is a living document instead of one written in stone.  Of course, if it was written on stone tablets they would be removing them from in front of court houses.

[sledge]

to take care of our responsibilities (making sure our citizens are well-cared for).

Seems to me that has been tried by folks who prefer the color red.  It has never worked out for them either. 

It has seemed to be a decision between security and freedom.  With security, you get little of it, and become property of the state.  With freedom, you have to accept the responsibility for you own security.

I guess the question is which do we want.  That will most likely be decided by a civil war at some point because one side is trying to shove their choice down the throats of the people who choose the other option.

[JohnyMac]

I agree DVC!

Newsflash, the death of a thousand cuts to the Republic started about 100 years ago on a little island called Jekyll.

Yupper Sledge

It has seemed to be a decision between security and freedom.  With security, you get little of it, and become property of the state.  With freedom, you have to accept the responsibility for you own security.

I guess the question is which do we want.  That will most likely be decided by a civil war at some point because one side is trying to shove their choice down the throats of the people who choose the other option.

Still hoping that someone can explain to old Johnymac... What would happen if we didn't raise the debt limit but lived within our means (revenue coming in) and pay debt + expenditures? Wouldn't that strengthen the USofA dollar Vs. hurting it?

[sledge]

JM we are going to be living within our means at some point regardless of whether they raise the debt limit or not.  Our system will collapse either way.  If they raise the debt it increases a burden that is already going to collapse our economy and cause related shockwaves throughout all other economies.

If they do not raise the debt limit it will cause the same shock wave sooner.  Either way the the world economy is going to implode.  It's a matter of timing and bankers sucking as much out as they can before it occurs.

All countries will be hit hard when it occurs.  A few of the more intelligent countries, although many are underdeveloped, are buying gold tonnage as  reserve to make their currency stronger when the inevitable hit takes place.  Unfortunately, the US isn't among them.  Although, by manipulation the US has driven down the price of gold making it more affordable for everyone else. 

[Well-Prepared Witch]

First, wanted to do a mea culpa! JohnnyMac rightfully pointed out that congress doesn't "create" the budget.  I spoke poorly there - I meant that they needed to take the president's proposed budget, hash out the Senate/House versions and then come together to merge the two into a budget to send back to the president for signature.  My apologies for lazy phraseology!

As to Sledge's point, I fear he's right.  Wolf Blitzer had an excellent video on what the consequences of default would be.  There's no happy ending to this.  Even if, and it's a big if, we avoid default, each time we come to this cliff we erode the faith we and the world have in the US government's ability to function as a country.  I also fear that Sledge is right about a civil war coming.  I don't necessarily agree that it's just about security vs freedom (I think there's also a lot of environmental/resource/religion/gender issues that are part of this, too), but I see our country becoming more and more polarized, our people less and less civil to each other.  There's certainly enough tension in the country, much less the whole world, and you can see the bubbling up of violence that's simmering.  All it would take is a few more degrees of heat to turn it into a roiling boil.  The question is, how do we stop it?  Or is it even possible to stop it?

Debt ceiling domino effect
http://situationroom.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/07/debt-ceiling-domino-effect/?hpt=sr_bn4

[CrystalHunter1989]

Any war that takes place on this continent today would be a "total" war, like Yugoslavia. You might have two armies in the field claiming to represent different governments, but it'd be more of a French or Russian civil war, not like 1861.

It would divide the population along race, religious, ethnic, political, gender, and even age lines. Given the amount of hatred I've seen in the way of Newtown and now the shutdown, I fear that multiple sides would make it into a war of extermination.

One of many reasons not to go there.

[JohnyMac]

Thanks for posting Wolf's video Wellie.

We should all keep in mind nobody is saying to 'default on our debt.' I think the interest on our debt is $25B a month while revenues are around $80B a month. So default is not an issue. China, Japan and others will continue to be paid their interest.

Not increasing the debt limit forces our leaders to take a look at the expenditure lines like military, food stamps, Dept. of Education, etc. to determine what area's to defund on our budget. This ladies and gentleman 2/3rds of our government does not want to do as it will make them look bad. Maybe they will not be reelected to President, Senate or the House.

With that said, a group of patriots has to rise up and call a spade a spade and stand firm on NOT raising our national debt. If they don't there will be a civil war and our children will have nothing. If they do stand up there might be a civil war (Not unlike what is happening in Greece) however our children will have a chance.

It's not about you and I now, it is about the future of our kids, nephews & nieces and grandchildren.
   

[sledge]

Any war that takes place on this continent today would be a "total" war, like Yugoslavia. You might have two armies in the field claiming to represent different governments, but it'd be more of a French or Russian civil war, not like 1861.

It would divide the population along race, religious, ethnic, political, gender, and even age lines. Given the amount of hatred I've seen in the way of Newtown and now the shutdown, I fear that multiple sides would make it into a war of extermination.

One of many reasons not to go there.

This!  But as I don't see any either group willing to stand down and back off, I find it hard to envision a kumbaya moment occurring unless someone else sticks their nose in our business.

[CrystalHunter1989]

Any war that takes place on this continent today would be a "total" war, like Yugoslavia. You might have two armies in the field claiming to represent different governments, but it'd be more of a French or Russian civil war, not like 1861.

It would divide the population along race, religious, ethnic, political, gender, and even age lines. Given the amount of hatred I've seen in the way of Newtown and now the shutdown, I fear that multiple sides would make it into a war of extermination.

One of many reasons not to go there.

This!  But as I don't see any either group willing to stand down and back off, I find it hard to envision a kumbaya moment occurring unless someone else sticks their nose in our business.

Agreed, and there is still such a thing as a justifiable war. But we should lose our illusions that it would have a direct historic parallel. We shouldn't be like Britain and France, avoiding it at the expense of innocents, but we shouldn't be itching for the occasion either.

There was a great documentary about Rome called "Critical Moments." Episode 1 was about the war between Caesar and Pompey.

Before going into battle against Caesar at Pharsalus, Pompey finds the Senators in his camp getting a big feast ready, as a celebration.

He says to Cato, "We're going out there to kill Romans. By the end of the day, there'll be nothing to celebrate."

[sledge]

Any war that takes place on this continent today would be a "total" war, like Yugoslavia. You might have two armies in the field claiming to represent different governments, but it'd be more of a French or Russian civil war, not like 1861.

It would divide the population along race, religious, ethnic, political, gender, and even age lines. Given the amount of hatred I've seen in the way of Newtown and now the shutdown, I fear that multiple sides would make it into a war of extermination.

One of many reasons not to go there.

 

This!  But as I don't see any either group willing to stand down and back off, I find it hard to envision a kumbaya moment occurring unless someone else sticks their nose in our business.

Agreed, and there is still such a thing as a justifiable war. But we should lose our illusions that it would have a direct historic parallel. We shouldn't be like Britain and France, avoiding it at the expense of innocents, but we shouldn't be itching for the occasion either.

There was a great documentary about Rome called "Critical Moments." Episode 1 was about the war between Caesar and Pompey.

Before going into battle against Caesar at Pharsalus, Pompey finds the Senators in his camp getting a big feast ready, as a celebration.

He says to Cato, "We're going out there to kill Romans. By the end of the day, there'll be nothing to celebrate."

Amen to that!  There wouldn't be much left to celebrate by the end of it.  And there would be an ugliness left over that would take generations to get over if it were possible at all.  We aren't facing a pretty picture no matter what road we go down. 

Sorry if that is pessimistic in tone.  But when I look at some pictures of modern art I tend to say "WTF is that?" rather than "Oh, how nice."

[crudos]

With that said, a group of patriots has to rise up and call a spade a spade and stand firm on NOT raising our national debt. If they don't there will be a civil war and our children will have nothing. If they do stand up there might be a civil war (Not unlike what is happening in Greece) however our children will have a chance.

It's not about you and I now, it is about the future of our kids, nephews & nieces and grandchildren.
 

This is where I disagree and not call them patriots, but extremist bomb-throwers who seem to be gleefully and willfully hastening the downfall of this nation in order to score political points for the next election. At their current rate, there may not be a next election for them to try and win.

[JohnyMac]

Crudos, I respectively disagree with your assumption,

This is where I disagree and not call them patriots, but extremist bomb-throwers who seem to be gleefully and willfully hastening the downfall of this nation in order to score political points for the next election.

Please keep in mind that words have meaning's. I have not yet seen Sen. Cruz, Paul, Lee to name a few, throwing any bombs. I have witnessed them doing what they were voted to do by the citizens of their states. Unlike what some politicians do.

Some politicians say one thing and then once they are in 'the club' they seem to forget what they promised their citizens they would do. 

With all of that written, I think we are getting off topic here. My question still is: What would happen if we didn't raise the debt limit but lived within our means (revenue coming in) and pay debt + expenditures? Wouldn't that strengthen the USofA dollar Vs. hurting it?

Remember; we are taking in $80B of revenues a month yet our interest on the debt is $25B a month. We could also increase our revenues if we were to open up more Federal Land to exploration in oil, coal, gas, lumber, etc.

[crudos]

Crudos, I respectively disagree with your assumption,

This is where I disagree and not call them patriots, but extremist bomb-throwers who seem to be gleefully and willfully hastening the downfall of this nation in order to score political points for the next election.

Please keep in mind that words have meaning's. I have not yet seen Sen. Cruz, Paul, Lee to name a few, throwing any bombs. I have witnessed them doing what they were voted to do by the citizens of their states. Unlike what some politicians do.

Some politicians say one thing and then once they are in 'the club' they seem to forget what they promised their citizens they would do. 

Those politicians you mention are some of the biggest offenders of not doing what people put them in their privileged positions to do. Words have meaning, but doing actual governing speaks louder. And it seems the GOP/Tea Party, Inc. would rather wreck the economy now, in order to get their puppet elected in 2016. Support your local Libertarian candidate now and get out of the partisan politics freak parade.

Back to your question, I'm reading a default would crash the stock market, the U.S. economy would plummet, and thus the world economy follows suit. Sounds like a fun time, good thing we prep.
 

[JohnyMac]

Yes Crudos a default would crash our economy plus others; However, nobody is talking about default. Low information voters (Thanks to our lame stream media) keep equating not increasing our countries debt limit to default. They are two different things.

As has been written umpteen times on this subject, the interest on our debt is $25B a month. Our monthly revenue is $80B - How would we be in default by not increasing our debt ceiling (Getting another credit card)? We pay our monthly debt obligation and if we need more money we open federal lands to oil, coal, and gas exploration.

[Currahee]

My question still is: What would happen if we didn't raise the debt limit but lived within our means (revenue coming in) and pay debt + expenditures?

The devil would buy himself a nice parka- cause hell would have frozen over.

With that said, a group of patriots has to rise up and call a spade a spade and stand firm on NOT raising our national debt. If they don't there will be a civil war and our children will have nothing. If they do stand up there might be a civil war (Not unlike what is happening in Greece) however our children will have a chance.

It's not about you and I now, it is about the future of our kids, nephews & nieces and grandchildren.
   

I agree with this- I see a collapse as inevitable, I would rather it be sooner rather than later, faster rather than slower.

As for the hatred we feel towards one another- I see what the government and the leeches have done for the past 50+ years as nothing less than steeling from my children. I have worked hard, two jobs my entire adult life, to have what little I have.  Last night I was behind a woman at the dollar store- multiple trashy tattoos, nice i-phone, payed for a bunch of junk food with an EBT and a pack of cigs with cash and drove off in a newer car than mine.  I have to decide whether I want to buy -a 12 of green tea or replace the light bulbs in my nightstand.

If parts of America looked like the end of Sparticus I would be fine with it.

[JohnyMac]

I hear ya' Currahee

I have to decide whether I want to buy -a 12 [pack] of green tea or replace the light bulbs in my nightstand.