Jacob J. Lew: Honor our obligations, raise the debt limit

Um it does though....

 

Seems like cancelling some of the spending or raising taxes to pay for it would be another way to go. But, hey, I'm sure there aren't any consequences for endlessly spending 100s of billions more than you take in.

 

But they hire economists who will tell them what they want to hear: "Spend, baby, spend."

 

Unfortunately, what our representatives do is commit the country to spending the money first and then haggle with themselves about increasing the credit limit. Something bass-ackwards about that whole program.

 

Constitutionally, as I'm sure you know, it's the Congress that adopts the budget. No money for the military would mean the President would have to change his policies considerably.

 

Troops that should never have been there in the first place.

 

So FDR didn't understand them? No Libertarians don't understand economics. You all think we can cut our way to prosperity. Jesus...

 

I agree with you all the way D, but by invoking FDR, you're waving a red flag in front of Mags and Denny. Now Mags is gonna open up another can of that fake whoopass he seems to have bought in bulk.....

 

A small amount of deficit spending is probably a good thing for the economy. In certain times, like a major war or a global depression/recession, a large deficit is warranted. But, I would think that even an ardent liberal would have to recognize that a perpetual massive deficit and continued borrowing from other governments like China, who don't particularly have our best interests at heart, is not a recipe for building prosperity. Tie the fricking debt limit to GDP or some other reasonable financial indicator and get this thing out of DC as a political football. Once that's done, either find the money to pay for stuff, whether through efficiencies or by raising taxes, or don't spend the money in the first place. Is this really so amazingly difficult?

 

I wonder how things would work if there was a federal "kicker". Same rules as Oregon. I'd bet the house that a shitload of Americans would suddenly get on board with holding spending down to what the government takes in (or preferably less) if there was a tax rebate to be had. And they would likely hold the representatives more accountable. Money talks......

 

Hey, if you really want to get the public's interest, how about a "kick in the ass-er"? Government spends more than it takes in and everybody gets a bill. I know that would have me lighting up the lines of communication to my "representatives".

 

This was a graphic back a few years ago that explains the socialistic way..