The cap on spending they are demanding will never be approved, it doesn't make sense historically, nor does it make sense for the programs we already have in place, and yet they are willing to see just what happens if the government defaults.
posted
I wish the saner Republicans had the guts to tell them to take a hike, like they want to. Unfortunately, they seem to view that as a likely route to ousting by the tea party. Sadly, they might be right, not because the tea party is actually all that large an influence, but because it has turned out to be successful at mobilizing key minorities of voters on taxing/spending issues, often for bad reasons, in Republican primaries.
I think the most likely route out for saner Republicans will be a few key Republicans with gravitas and influence (and not worried or not running for reelection) speaking out against the insanity.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:The president said he was offering to cut $1tr in discretionary spending, while seeking $1.2tr in revenues, which could have been achieved with raising income tax rates.
That seems like a low ball offer for spending cuts, compared to what Obama has offered previously. Not to mention 1.2 trillion in revenue from income tax increases doesn't seem right, I was under the impression the White House had given up on increasing taxes while favoring the Bush Tax cuts expiring, and closing loopholes.
The article seems a bit vague, we may need more details, but I am very surprised to hear Obama be so frank and negative about Boehner. Boehner seemed to be our best hope from the Republicans in reaching a deal.
So much for this week. We've got one more before there's hell to pay.
edit: Another thing though is Boehner refusing to talk with Obama and choosing to work with Senate/House leaders is a big slap in the face for Pres. Obama. He may have had legitimate concerns with "new taxes", but it's hard to know the particulars, we have to rely on their descriptions of why talks broke down.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I get so pissed when grocery stores *raise* their prices and stop offering two for one deals. And I hate that I can't get the same coupon prices on multiple items in one visit! What right do they have to RAISE those prices? What right?
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Samp: Well the government suddenly removing the requirement for an individual mandate would have been hilarious to behold as insurance companies for once would have been suckered into dropping their disgusting practices in exchange for getting us all in their networks, only to have the situation suddenly turned on its head.
But that seems like such a weird thing to haggle over at that point, maybe Boehner brought up the mandate so that he'd have more to haggle with since TBH the Republicans basically came to the table with virtually nothing.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: At the last minute, Boehner added a repeal of the Healthcare Reform mandate to his list of demands. That's why he walked.
He was always going to walk. I mean, if he did that, it tells me he was planning to make it an impossible negotiation anyway. Hopefully the American people will finally catch on to what an enormous scumbag he really is.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: He was always going to walk. I mean, if he did that, it tells me he was planning to make it an impossible negotiation anyway. Hopefully the American people will finally catch on to what an enormous scumbag he really is.
To some degree, they are. If polls are any indication, people are getting extremely tired of the GOP's gambles and view Boehner's negoatiations in an outright cynical sense.
It's also advancing the opinion of pretty much any non-conservative voter (and a healthy chunk of conservative voters, too) that the Tea Party is a bunch of dangerous idiots.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, just take images like these. Take them and jam them into the face of these people and pray that there's enough of a spark of intelligence left in them to kind of maybe perhaps sort of wake up.
quote:And, perhaps most telling of all, a Senate GOP Leadership Aide told Politico, "Background guidance: The President killed any chance of its success by 1) Embracing it. 2) Hailing the fact that it increases taxes. 3) Saying it mirrors his own plan."
What a bunch of infants.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Also, just take images like these. Take them and jam them into the face of these people and pray that there's enough of a spark of intelligence left in them to kind of maybe perhaps sort of wake up.
The GOP points to the alarming increase in debt incurred "during" the Obama administration. Never mind that these commitments predate his presidency and are incurred as debt *because* the republicans refused to pay for them in the first place.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Who will profit by the debt ceiling not being raised?
I don't mean politically. Politics are too ephemeral.
I mean who can make billions using some financial investment so that if the debt ceiling is not raised, and the US defaults, and our rating is lowered and interest rates go up.
We were told when the housing bubble burst that everyone suffered--owners, agents, banks. Everyone suffered the terrors of the recession--except those who predicted this would happen and invested accordingly. They made billions.
I find it quite possible that someone has invested in a similar scheme, and has greased the wheels in just the right places, so that come August 3rd, they will be billions richer, even if the rest of the economy of the US collapses.
If there is such an investment, and those who make it helped insure that the default happened, I would label that treason.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Darth_Mauve: I really can't see this development as some sort of "grease the wheels at all the perfect moments" development. It honestly appears to be a horrifying moment where the planets alligned, the Wright Brother Pigs were born 15 years ago and we just didn't realize it, utility companies finally turned off the heat for account ending in 666, and the groundhog saw his shadow at that instant. It wasn't a sudden surprise that broadsided everybody, the seeds were planted a long time ago. I'm sure the opposite will be screamed by both parties when we get downgraded by Moody's.
------
Link. Good job working with Senate leaders Boehner! Edit: Also, I'm loving the stupid political posturing at this critical time.
For those who don't wish to read another article. There is at present no plan close to having enough votes for passage in both the House and Senate. Anything short of a debt increase beyond the next Presidential election runs the risk of getting us downgraded. Republicans are still insisting on no closing of loopholes, raising tax rates, or letting the Bush tax cuts expire. Democrats have distorted spending cuts advertised, and will not accept a plan that does not do one of the three things I just listed.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Darth_Mauve: If there is such an investment, and those who make it helped insure that the default happened, I would label that treason.
At the very least, conspiracy to commit securities fraud, and insider trading, along with a long list of related crimes.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
At this point I wonder if anybody is working under the assumption that a deal is not reached, and what needs to be done in that regard.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is the strategy, and it's the best way to go. The republicans have been negotiating with one arm tied behind their backs, with the house on fire. Boener already showed that he was too weak to get approval of an incredibly sweet deal for him in the Grand Bargain, walking away from it. Now he's going to have to eat whatever the senate gives him. You cannot pass partisan legislation from the house alone. He was incredibly foolish to imagine that he could.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Annnnnd we're going to lose two more days while the Republicans furiously try to write in bigger spending cuts so they meet the 1.2 trillion target as opposed to the 850 billion in cuts the CBO says are in the Boehner plan as is. This mind you is being done purely so Boehner can get enough Republican votes for House passage of his non-starter debt ceiling plan. It's completely understood the Senate will not pass it.
Also, it turns out the Treasury by doing some creative accounting and estimating says that we may or may not have until Aug 10th, to hammer out a deal. Essentially after Aug 2nd, we are maxed at the limit, but by using income tax funds as they come in, the treasury could still pay for things like Social Security cheques, until Aug 10th at the very latest. At any time up until that date they could simply say, "Whelp, that's the last dollar."
Obviously credit rating agencies are not going to be impressed. It's pretty much akin to us saying, "Hey I don't have your money now, but hey don't worry, I've got this guy who owes me big and he told me the money is in the mail, I just need a few more days!"
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Do you think the US could just sell its aircraft carriers?
IP: Logged |
posted
To be fair, I'd buy an aircraft carrier if the price were right. I'd probably need a bigger trailer, though.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think either Monona or Mendota is big enough for an aircraft carrier. Lake Michigan on the other hand...
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Those things lose a third of their value the moment you drive them away from the dock. Decades of wear and tear, and I don't even want to THINK of the mileage on them.
You'd be lucky to not have to PAY to have someone haul them away.
Of course, then you have to see about insuring it.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not to mention the 1,500 people it takes to make the ship work...unless you want working planes on board too...then it's more like 5,000.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bush +Bernanke +Obama +Geithner = ARMAGEDDON
So. If I take out a Credit Default Swap out on the USA defaulting on it's T-bills, and I "win" who pays me off? LAWL
Posts: 377 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
All right, all right; you've convinced me. Clearly we as a country should be giving these lemons away.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well doesn't the entire NASA operating budget Equal about the cost of operating one aircraft carrier?
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: All right, all right; you've convinced me. Clearly we as a country should be giving these lemons away.
The Taiwanese frequently joke that their navy is comprised entirely of WWII US naval vessels that were sunk in action and dredged up by them.
I'm sure they'd take whatever carriers we are giving away, the PRC doesn't even have a carrier yet. Taiwan beating them to it would be hysterical.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Boehner's no go plan can't get enough Republican votes for passage today, so they are going to spend the rest of today and tomorrow trying to cow (R) lawmakers into cooperating with Boehners posturing. It's unclear if the Senate could even vote on it tomorrow, but if they can it won't pass.
Assuming Boehner is successful and it is shelved that same day in the Senate, we will then have negotiations all weekend where it is hoped some sort of ammended version of the Boehner plan will survive, and go back to the House for vote next week. It's clear Boehner is hoping the prospect of default will cause Reid and the Senate to blink, and they will grudgingly pass his plan in some form close to how it exists now. The White House is not going to sign into passage any deal that does not extend the debt limit into the next Presidential election. I can't believe Congress expects us to deal with this circus in just a few months.
I think the Democrats are certain they can pin default squarely on the Republicans, and the Republicans simply don't have the unity of purpose this time to really come together on a plan.
One thing interesting to note is that historically for a long time the Republicans have been noted for their ability to vote as a block and stick together. This in stark contrast to the Democrats who has such a wide base. I can't remember vote in recent memory where the Republican party had this much infighting.
edit: Dare I say it? The Republican party as a monolith seems largely gone. It seems apparent that perhaps certain Democrats might find dealing with certain Republicans to be advantageous in getting their agendas passed. How shocking!
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
We should definatly specify the difference between an "aircraft carrier" and "supercarrier", the latter of which only the U.S. have any of currently (although the Brits are building two, the French are talking about making one in the future and the Russians got 40% built before running out of money).
Supercarriers are generally 70k tons or up, medium class carriers are around 40k tons and light carriers are 20k or so.
A few countries have light and medium carriers...
The U.S. has 11 supercarries, 10 of which are Nimitz Class at 100k tons, the last being the USS Enterprise, at 93k tons.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
You mean like I did in my last post?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
