Republicans and the debt ceiling

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They passed a budget in the lame duck session without buyin from Republicans, and now they complain Republicans won't support the budget that was passed.

And Republicans did that multiple times before. In fact there has only been one President in our lifetime that balanced a budget, Clinton. Everyone else is responsible for this debt.

Newt Gingrich and company — for all their faults — have received virtually no credit for balancing the budget. Yet today’s surplus is, in part, a byproduct of the GOP’s single‐​minded crusade to end 30 years of red ink. Arguably, Gingrich’s finest hour as Speaker came in March 1995 when he rallied the entire Republican House caucus behind the idea of eliminating the deficit within seven years.

Ah yes, and then immediately pissed all the savings away the moment GW Bush Administration needed some tax cuts. Remember what Vice President Cheney said, "Deficits don't matter." Or rather, they don't matter unless there's a Democrat in the White House.

I was a much younger man then. I had been a Republican but Gingrich and the House Republicans' impeachment antics really pissed me off. I was not yet comfortable calling myself a Democrat and thought of myself as a libertarian. Prior to the 2000 election, I was part of a pretty active email discussion group where I was particularly aggravated by the idea of cutting taxes rather than using the surplus to pay off debt. My Republican friends started parroting the idea that we needed to to cut taxes because we might *pay the debt off too quickly!*

Damned if Dubya & Co. didn't get that tax cut passed and send that debt roaring again. I don't think I've taken a "fiscal conservative" seriously since then.

You will take it seriously when a loaf of bread costs $40 and we start to look like Venezuela with people chasing dogs as food. If you think the U.S. is immune to the laws of economics and mathematics, you are sadly mistaken.

[Anonymous]

The government brings in 4 trillion plus per year. Interest on the debt is only 600 billion. Why do democrats say they will stiff bond holders unless they lend them more money?

Are they saying bond holders are the last priority?

Cutting government spending is the only way to fix the foundation of the economy at this point. Prosperity from money printing has caught up with the can and there’s no more road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are these 20 so eager to screw around with that debt ceiling and possibly cause us to default.

The are the only legitimate members of congress. Everyone else is corrupt grifter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They passed a budget in the lame duck session without buyin from Republicans, and now they complain Republicans won't support the budget that was passed.

And Republicans did that multiple times before. In fact there has only been one President in our lifetime that balanced a budget, Clinton. Everyone else is responsible for this debt.

Newt Gingrich and company — for all their faults — have received virtually no credit for balancing the budget. Yet today’s surplus is, in part, a byproduct of the GOP’s single‐​minded crusade to end 30 years of red ink. Arguably, Gingrich’s finest hour as Speaker came in March 1995 when he rallied the entire Republican House caucus behind the idea of eliminating the deficit within seven years.

Ah yes, and then immediately pissed all the savings away the moment GW Bush Administration needed some tax cuts. Remember what Vice President Cheney said, "Deficits don't matter." Or rather, they don't matter unless there's a Democrat in the White House.

I was a much younger man then. I had been a Republican but Gingrich and the House Republicans' impeachment antics really pissed me off. I was not yet comfortable calling myself a Democrat and thought of myself as a libertarian. Prior to the 2000 election, I was part of a pretty active email discussion group where I was particularly aggravated by the idea of cutting taxes rather than using the surplus to pay off debt. My Republican friends started parroting the idea that we needed to to cut taxes because we might *pay the debt off too quickly!*

Damned if Dubya & Co. didn't get that tax cut passed and send that debt roaring again. I don't think I've taken a "fiscal conservative" seriously since then.

You will take it seriously when a loaf of bread costs $40 and we start to look like Venezuela with people chasing dogs as food. If you think the U.S. is immune to the laws of economics and mathematics, you are sadly mistaken.

Funny how you weren't screeching about "Venezuela" when Trump was adding trillions to the debt with irresponsible tax cuts that did nothing but make the richest even richer while placing more burden on the rest of us.

I'm a DP but I agree with the PP that this, and your response, are why nobody takes conservatives seriously on fiscal issues anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They'll blame Biden for it as well as the shutdown in October

As should any president.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is literally nothing the GOP does that "saves taxpayers money"

Not a single thing.

This will save tax payers money. By not upping the credit limit you cannot spend anymore money.

[Anonymous]

Default ??

Government brings in 4 trillion in taxes

Debt service is 600 million.


Plenty of money to pay its debt.


Talk about trashy low morals of government. I knew it was a corrupt and untrustworthy entity but this puts the spotlight on its complete sloth and sloppiness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is literally nothing the GOP does that "saves taxpayers money"

Not a single thing.

This will save tax payers money. By not upping the credit limit you cannot spend anymore money.

Nope that’s not how this works. Who told you that and what was their motive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Default ??

Government brings in 4 trillion in taxes

Debt service is 600 million.


Plenty of money to pay its debt.


Talk about trashy low morals of government. I knew it was a corrupt and untrustworthy entity but this puts the spotlight on its complete sloth and sloppiness.

By “it” you mean the Republican Party?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Default ??

Government brings in 4 trillion in taxes

Debt service is 600 million.


Plenty of money to pay its debt.


Talk about trashy low morals of government. I knew it was a corrupt and untrustworthy entity but this puts the spotlight on its complete sloth and sloppiness.

By “it” you mean the Republican Party?

Both parties are responsible for our sloppy, slovenly, trashy and insolvent government. Nobody is an adult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They passed a budget in the lame duck session without buyin from Republicans, and now they complain Republicans won't support the budget that was passed.

And Republicans did that multiple times before. In fact there has only been one President in our lifetime that balanced a budget, Clinton. Everyone else is responsible for this debt.

Newt Gingrich and company — for all their faults — have received virtually no credit for balancing the budget. Yet today’s surplus is, in part, a byproduct of the GOP’s single‐​minded crusade to end 30 years of red ink. Arguably, Gingrich’s finest hour as Speaker came in March 1995 when he rallied the entire Republican House caucus behind the idea of eliminating the deficit within seven years.

Ah yes, and then immediately pissed all the savings away the moment GW Bush Administration needed some tax cuts. Remember what Vice President Cheney said, "Deficits don't matter." Or rather, they don't matter unless there's a Democrat in the White House.

I was a much younger man then. I had been a Republican but Gingrich and the House Republicans' impeachment antics really pissed me off. I was not yet comfortable calling myself a Democrat and thought of myself as a libertarian. Prior to the 2000 election, I was part of a pretty active email discussion group where I was particularly aggravated by the idea of cutting taxes rather than using the surplus to pay off debt. My Republican friends started parroting the idea that we needed to to cut taxes because we might *pay the debt off too quickly!*

Damned if Dubya & Co. didn't get that tax cut passed and send that debt roaring again. I don't think I've taken a "fiscal conservative" seriously since then.

You will take it seriously when a loaf of bread costs $40 and we start to look like Venezuela with people chasing dogs as food. If you think the U.S. is immune to the laws of economics and mathematics, you are sadly mistaken.

One day you might be right, but fiscal scolds have been ringing this bell for 40 years and, when they take power, they almost never do anything to rein in the debt. If anything, the "fiscal conservatives" are the more likely to exacerbate the debt through tax cuts and/or war spending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The government brings in 4 trillion plus per year. Interest on the debt is only 600 billion. Why do democrats say they will stiff bond holders unless they lend them more money?

Are they saying bond holders are the last priority?

Cutting government spending is the only way to fix the foundation of the economy at this point. Prosperity from money printing has caught up with the can and there’s no more road.

The U.S. has incurred obligations to more people than just the bondholders, genius.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is literally nothing the GOP does that "saves taxpayers money"

Not a single thing.

This will save tax payers money. By not upping the credit limit you cannot spend anymore money.

Hah. That's like saying that you'll save money by not fixing the leaking roof on your house. Sure, you won't have any cash going out to the contractors, but meanwhile your house is going to fall apart. Penny wise and pound foolish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The government brings in 4 trillion plus per year. Interest on the debt is only 600 billion. Why do democrats say they will stiff bond holders unless they lend them more money?

Are they saying bond holders are the last priority?

Cutting government spending is the only way to fix the foundation of the economy at this point. Prosperity from money printing has caught up with the can and there’s no more road.

The U.S. has incurred obligations to more people than just the bondholders, genius.

Why don’t they default on those ones?

Bond holders are last…. Cool. So buying treasuries is stupid.