Republicans and the debt ceiling

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental problem here is that McCarthy does not have the votes for any deal he cuts with Biden, but he does not seem to recognize that fact. 30-50 of his members are extreme wackos who will vote against anything, and the Rs don't control the Senate (and there are probably 10 Rs in the Senate who are extreme wackos who will vote against anything). So he's got to cut a deal that will get 50 plus D votes in the House and 30 plus D votes in the Senate. But he's not offering the Ds anything at all. He won't reform prescription drug pricing, won't close the carried interest loophole, won't increase taxes on wealthy, and won't cut defense spending. Negotiation means both sides get something and give up something. But it's just demands from McCarthy with no give.

It is McCarthy who is giving. With no debt ceiling increase you have to cut trillions in spending. That is the starting position of negotiations.
There is no default that would happen, unless Biden wants it to. Not raising the debt ceiling does not produce default, it produces trillions in spending cuts.
Democrats are giving up so much because they are the party of more government and more spending, though Republicans spend even more when they are in power.
If they want to say OK we will cut trillions, McConnell will freak out and be eager to cut a deal.

I find it very curious that the same people who insist Biden is a dictator advocate for him to pick and choice which congressionally authorized spending he will and won’t do. I guess he can just stop paying ag subsidies and cut off all grants to red states? Maybe get rid of the border patrol and ICE?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Her favorite phrase is "we have been very clear on that."
Clearly, they have not been very clear.
What she is really saying is, "We have already told you the lie we want you to believe on that."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental problem here is that McCarthy does not have the votes for any deal he cuts with Biden, but he does not seem to recognize that fact. 30-50 of his members are extreme wackos who will vote against anything, and the Rs don't control the Senate (and there are probably 10 Rs in the Senate who are extreme wackos who will vote against anything). So he's got to cut a deal that will get 50 plus D votes in the House and 30 plus D votes in the Senate. But he's not offering the Ds anything at all. He won't reform prescription drug pricing, won't close the carried interest loophole, won't increase taxes on wealthy, and won't cut defense spending. Negotiation means both sides get something and give up something. But it's just demands from McCarthy with no give.

It is McCarthy who is giving. With no debt ceiling increase you have to cut trillions in spending. That is the starting position of negotiations.
There is no default that would happen, unless Biden wants it to. Not raising the debt ceiling does not produce default, it produces trillions in spending cuts.
Democrats are giving up so much because they are the party of more government and more spending, though Republicans spend even more when they are in power.
If they want to say OK we will cut trillions, McConnell will freak out and be eager to cut a deal.

I find it very curious that the same people who insist Biden is a dictator advocate for him to pick and choice which congressionally authorized spending he will and won’t do. I guess he can just stop paying ag subsidies and cut off all grants to red states? Maybe get rid of the border patrol and ICE?

If you accept the idea that the president can unilaterally ignore spending laws when the debt ceiling is hit, then you also have to accept the idea that he can ignore tax laws. Why couldn't Biden just unilaterally raise taxes in order to pay for the spending that congress has mandated?

[Anonymous]

Government has a spending problem not a revenue problem. I could cut 25 percent of the federal govt workforce and it wouldn’t make a difference to most Americans. Just a jobs program. So much wasteful spending.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Her favorite phrase is "we have been very clear on that."
Clearly, they have not been very clear.
What she is really saying is, "We have already told you the lie we want you to believe on that."

KJP is an absolute joke. But par for the course in the Biden Administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Government has a spending problem not a revenue problem. I could cut 25 percent of the federal govt workforce and it wouldn’t make a difference to most Americans. Just a jobs program. So much wasteful spending.

You're wrong. Every billionaire is a policy failure. Every one of them would have contributed the same amount in exchange for $500 million -- meaning we left half a billion dollars on the table that could have gone to something productive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental problem here is that McCarthy does not have the votes for any deal he cuts with Biden, but he does not seem to recognize that fact. 30-50 of his members are extreme wackos who will vote against anything, and the Rs don't control the Senate (and there are probably 10 Rs in the Senate who are extreme wackos who will vote against anything). So he's got to cut a deal that will get 50 plus D votes in the House and 30 plus D votes in the Senate. But he's not offering the Ds anything at all. He won't reform prescription drug pricing, won't close the carried interest loophole, won't increase taxes on wealthy, and won't cut defense spending. Negotiation means both sides get something and give up something. But it's just demands from McCarthy with no give.

It is McCarthy who is giving. With no debt ceiling increase you have to cut trillions in spending. That is the starting position of negotiations.
There is no default that would happen, unless Biden wants it to. Not raising the debt ceiling does not produce default, it produces trillions in spending cuts.
Democrats are giving up so much because they are the party of more government and more spending, though Republicans spend even more when they are in power.
If they want to say OK we will cut trillions, McConnell will freak out and be eager to cut a deal.

I find it very curious that the same people who insist Biden is a dictator advocate for him to pick and choice which congressionally authorized spending he will and won’t do. I guess he can just stop paying ag subsidies and cut off all grants to red states? Maybe get rid of the border patrol and ICE?

If you accept the idea that the president can unilaterally ignore spending laws when the debt ceiling is hit, then you also have to accept the idea that he can ignore tax laws. Why couldn't Biden just unilaterally raise taxes in order to pay for the spending that congress has mandated?

Because taxing power lies with Congress. People would not have to pay taxes he unilaterally decided to raise.
Now if he cut taxes, declaring that he would not enforce the tax law against anyone who paid a lower rate that he deemed appropriate, then that might be acceptable. Certainly this is what Obama did with DACA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental problem here is that McCarthy does not have the votes for any deal he cuts with Biden, but he does not seem to recognize that fact. 30-50 of his members are extreme wackos who will vote against anything, and the Rs don't control the Senate (and there are probably 10 Rs in the Senate who are extreme wackos who will vote against anything). So he's got to cut a deal that will get 50 plus D votes in the House and 30 plus D votes in the Senate. But he's not offering the Ds anything at all. He won't reform prescription drug pricing, won't close the carried interest loophole, won't increase taxes on wealthy, and won't cut defense spending. Negotiation means both sides get something and give up something. But it's just demands from McCarthy with no give.

It is McCarthy who is giving. With no debt ceiling increase you have to cut trillions in spending. That is the starting position of negotiations.
There is no default that would happen, unless Biden wants it to. Not raising the debt ceiling does not produce default, it produces trillions in spending cuts.
Democrats are giving up so much because they are the party of more government and more spending, though Republicans spend even more when they are in power.
If they want to say OK we will cut trillions, McConnell will freak out and be eager to cut a deal.

I find it very curious that the same people who insist Biden is a dictator advocate for him to pick and choice which congressionally authorized spending he will and won’t do. I guess he can just stop paying ag subsidies and cut off all grants to red states? Maybe get rid of the border patrol and ICE?

That is his negotiating leverage, yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Government has a spending problem not a revenue problem. I could cut 25 percent of the federal govt workforce and it wouldn’t make a difference to most Americans. Just a jobs program. So much wasteful spending.

You know nothing. Cutting federal personnel almost always increases costs. Most waste and misuse of federal funds is committed by state and local governments, contractors, and grantees, in large part because there is just enough federal staff to distribute funds but not to perform adequate management and oversight. Also, almost all the waste is in the most popular departments and programs that have bipartisan support because no one dares challenge to money going to a popular cause. Tax credits and deductions are the most wasteful thing the government does because almost all the tax breaks subsidize the baseline actions that would have happened anyway without the tax breaks. Studies continually document this but no one cares because tax incentives are politically popular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental problem here is that McCarthy does not have the votes for any deal he cuts with Biden, but he does not seem to recognize that fact. 30-50 of his members are extreme wackos who will vote against anything

McCarthy has already gotten the House to pass an increase of the debt limit. How did this happen if 30-50 of his members will vote against anything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental problem here is that McCarthy does not have the votes for any deal he cuts with Biden, but he does not seem to recognize that fact. 30-50 of his members are extreme wackos who will vote against anything

McCarthy has already gotten the House to pass an increase of the debt limit. How did this happen if 30-50 of his members will vote against anything?

.

Because what he passed will never pass the Senate. It’s not a serious proposal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fundamental problem here is that McCarthy does not have the votes for any deal he cuts with Biden, but he does not seem to recognize that fact. 30-50 of his members are extreme wackos who will vote against anything

McCarthy has already gotten the House to pass an increase of the debt limit. How did this happen if 30-50 of his members will vote against anything?

.

Because what he passed will never pass the Senate. It’s not a serious proposal.

The claim was that his own caucus wouldn't pass anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Government has a spending problem not a revenue problem. I could cut 25 percent of the federal govt workforce and it wouldn’t make a difference to most Americans. Just a jobs program. So much wasteful spending.

You're wrong. Every billionaire is a policy failure. Every one of them would have contributed the same amount in exchange for $500 million -- meaning we left half a billion dollars on the table that could have gone to something productive.

Yup, he is wrong. We still have more to do. Plenty of kids to bomb via missle , equipment to surrender to the Taliban, or just have money around for the grifters. Question is what to do next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Government has a spending problem not a revenue problem. I could cut 25 percent of the federal govt workforce and it wouldn’t make a difference to most Americans. Just a jobs program. So much wasteful spending.

Ok, be specific, what would you cut?