Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Oct 6, 2013, 01:54 PM   #1
appleisking
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2013
How can the debt ceiling be constitutional?

The 14th amendment sanctions all debt by the U.S as valid, so how can there be a limit on how much we can borrow if our borrowing power is inherently approved by the constitution?
SECTION 4.

The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

So what do people think? Do we really need congress to give the treasury permission to pay the bills, or can we just go ahead and borrow more and use the 14th amendment as an excuse?
appleisking is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 01:55 PM   #2
Michael Goff
macrumors 68040
 
Michael Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
It probably isn't, but nobody is going to call them out on it.
__________________
Surface Pro 3 i5/256gb
Windows 8.1
Michael Goff is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 01:59 PM   #3
lannister80
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicagoland
Yeah, I have to agree, it does not sound Constitutional.

Just about every other country doesn't have a debt ceiling, because it makes no sense to incur debt and then have to argue about whether it should be serviced (of course it should).
__________________
Early 2008 Mac Pro, 8x2.8GHz, 3.25TB, 18GB RAM
UnRAID NAS, 9TB storage, 3TB parity, 400GB cache
lannister80 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 01:59 PM   #4
appleisking
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Goff View Post
It probably isn't, but nobody is going to call them out on it.
I don't know about that. There are already clamors for the president to give the go ahead to the treasury using the 14th amendment.
appleisking is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 02:03 PM   #5
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
I heard it suggested (Maddow?) that this might amount to a Constitutional showdown between Congress—controlling the purse strings, and the President—protecting the full faith and credit of the United States.

The speculation was that if it went to the Supreme Court, that they would rule in Obama's favor, but the House would seek to impeach nonetheless.

If so, we could be looking at a ton of drama in the following months.

Oh joy.
citizenzen is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 02:04 PM   #6
Michael Goff
macrumors 68040
 
Michael Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by appleisking View Post
I don't know about that. There are already clamors for the president to give the go ahead to the treasury using the 14th amendment.
Well, yes, average people will call them out on it. I'm talking about the fact that the Government won't do anything about it.
__________________
Surface Pro 3 i5/256gb
Windows 8.1
Michael Goff is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 02:07 PM   #7
MacNut
macrumors P6
 
MacNut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CT
Does it say anything about when we have to pay off our debts or can we just keep incurring them indefinitely?
__________________
The thoughts in my head are rated TV-MA. Viewer discretion is advised.
Now batting, Number 2 Derek Jeter, Number 2
MacNut is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 02:23 PM   #8
appleisking
Thread Starter
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: May 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacNut View Post
Does it say anything about when we have to pay off our debts or can we just keep incurring them indefinitely?
No mention of when as far as I can see just that the debt is valid
appleisking is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 03:57 PM   #9
Sydde
macrumors 68000
 
Sydde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
I think the key clause is "... authorized by law ...". Congress must act to authorize the debt.
__________________
You got to be a spirit. You can't be no ghost.
Sydde is online now   3 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 03:59 PM   #10
Michael Goff
macrumors 68040
 
Michael Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydde View Post
I think the key clause is "... authorized by law ...". Congress must act to authorize the debt.
Yes, and the law to authorize it is passing the budget.
__________________
Surface Pro 3 i5/256gb
Windows 8.1
Michael Goff is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 04:36 PM   #11
MyMac1976
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
It's been hashed out in a couple places that the pres really does have the power to raise the debt ceiling in spite of congress. I'm not sure how much I like that idea but at this point I think the only way were going to have a functional government is to effectively limit congresses sway.
MyMac1976 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 05:08 PM   #12
jnpy!$4g3cwk
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyMac1976 View Post
It's been hashed out in a couple places that the pres really does have the power to raise the debt ceiling in spite of congress. I'm not sure how much I like that idea but at this point I think the only way were going to have a functional government is to effectively limit congresses sway.
Bad idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucius_...us_Sulla_Felix

The problem the U.S. now has, such as it is, is the system of "checks and balances". The President, the Senate, the House, and the Supreme Court all are separate centers of power and there are frequent deadlocks.

It could make more sense if the President and Senate became figureheads and the House/Speaker ran the government. Then it would like like a parliamentary democracy. Sometimes I think that would be a good idea, but, the U.S. hasn't had a real constitutional crisis since the Civil War-- not too bad a record so far.
jnpy!$4g3cwk is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 05:39 PM   #13
ucfgrad93
macrumors G5
 
ucfgrad93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Colorado
I love how Obama's position has "evolved" concerning the debt ceiling.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	debt.jpg
Views:	96
Size:	61.3 KB
ID:	438930  
__________________
If guns kill people, do pencils misspell words?
ucfgrad93 is online now   3 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 05:43 PM   #14
Michael Goff
macrumors 68040
 
Michael Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by ucfgrad93 View Post
I love how Obama's position has "evolved" concerning the debt ceiling.
And yet he's technically right in 2013.

Raising the ceiling isn't about new debt.
__________________
Surface Pro 3 i5/256gb
Windows 8.1
Michael Goff is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 06:03 PM   #15
squeeks
macrumors 68040
 
squeeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Florida
Send a message via AIM to squeeks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Goff View Post
And yet he's technically right in 2013.

Raising the ceiling isn't about new debt.
No, raising the debt ceiling does not mean they will borrow more, only that they are allowed to... However, the whole reason they want to raise it IS to borrow more, so in this case YES it is about new debt.
__________________
Member of the Pirate Fleet Distributed Computing
Member of Soldiers of Valour BF3 Clan
squeeks is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 06:09 PM   #16
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by ucfgrad93 View Post
I love how Obama's position has "evolved" concerning the debt ceiling.
I think you have a fair point. But it wasn't just Obama ...

Quote:
Senate Votes to Raise U.S. Debt Limit to Nearly $9 Trillion
Published: March 16, 2006

WASHINGTON, March 16 — The Senate voted narrowly today to raise the national debt limit to nearly $9 trillion, averting what would have been the first default ever on United States Treasury notes and giving Democrats an opportunity to portray Republicans as reckless with the people's money.

The 52-to-48 vote, with all Democrats and a handful of Republicans voting "no," increased the debt limit by $781 billion. The increase was the fourth since President Bush took office, prompting Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic minority leader, to declare that "years of Republican mismanagement" have driven the nation deep into the red.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/16/po...pend.html?_r=0
As ye sow ...
citizenzen is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 06:25 PM   #17
NickZac
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
I'm not sure why they use the debt ceiling at all...if a sustainable budget could be passed, than why do you need to vote on something you've already agreed on? It seems redundant.
NickZac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 6, 2013, 06:41 PM   #18
Michael Goff
macrumors 68040
 
Michael Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by squeeks View Post
No, raising the debt ceiling does not mean they will borrow more, only that they are allowed to... However, the whole reason they want to raise it IS to borrow more, so in this case YES it is about new debt.
No, raising the debt ceiling means we're going to pay debts we already established.
__________________
Surface Pro 3 i5/256gb
Windows 8.1
Michael Goff is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2013, 02:06 AM   #19
Dmunjal
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Goff View Post
No, raising the debt ceiling means we're going to pay debts we already established.
That doesn't make sense. How is borrowing more money going to pay debts already established? Isn't that like borrowing from Visa to pay Mastercard?
Dmunjal is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2013, 04:04 AM   #20
Eraserhead
macrumors G4
 
Eraserhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
I think you have a fair point. But it wasn't just Obama ...



As ye sow ...
That seems pretty irresponsible.
Eraserhead is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2013, 06:43 AM   #21
AhmedFaisal
Guest
 
<snip>

Last edited by AhmedFaisal; Nov 14, 2013 at 11:56 PM.
  1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2013, 09:02 AM   #22
Eraserhead
macrumors G4
 
Eraserhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by AhmedFaisal View Post
Err.... Germany de-facto does as they have a constitutional balanced budget law on all levels of government which will kick in in 2020 at the latest with some local laws either already in place or kicking in before that.
Chile has one of those too.
Eraserhead is online now   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2013, 09:22 AM   #23
Michael Goff
macrumors 68040
 
Michael Goff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmunjal View Post
That doesn't make sense. How is borrowing more money going to pay debts already established? Isn't that like borrowing from Visa to pay Mastercard?
No, the debt ceiling has nothing to do with borrowing money except it establishes a limit that we can borrow. The debt limit is not borrowing money, so your question makes no sense. It is more like how credit limit works on a credit card, if you want to go by a normal analogy.

Not that you can, because the Government works differently.

Every time we make a budget, we estimate how much it will be in terms of how much money we get. Sometimes we're wrong, often we're wrong. The extra that we spend has to come from somewhere. We already spent it. So we have to borrow to make up for that. And then we have a debt limit, which is the limit for what we can borrow.

And if we pass that, we're telling people we won't honor the debt we just accumulated.
__________________
Surface Pro 3 i5/256gb
Windows 8.1
Michael Goff is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2013, 10:05 AM   #24
Dont Hurt Me
macrumors 603
 
Dont Hurt Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Yahooville S.C.
The Govt seems to be stuck in in a loop of spend everything and more, borrow everything and more.Then spend everything and more... This math cant sustain itself and something is going to break. Its ridiculous. Both sides are responsible. Vote them all out start over. its the only solution.
__________________
Those that give up Liberty to have temporary Security deserve Neither......Benjamin Franklin.
Dont Hurt Me is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Oct 7, 2013, 10:56 AM   #25
Eraserhead
macrumors G4
 
Eraserhead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dont Hurt Me View Post
The Govt seems to be stuck in in a loop of spend everything and more, borrow everything and more.Then spend everything and more... This math cant sustain itself and something is going to break. Its ridiculous. Both sides are responsible. Vote them all out start over. its the only solution.
Except that between them the current lot have reduced the deficit at a record rate.
Eraserhead is online now   1 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Constitutional amendments lostngone Politics, Religion, Social Issues 23 Feb 4, 2014 07:59 AM
Debt Ceiling validity questioned Michael Goff Politics, Religion, Social Issues 77 Oct 16, 2013 02:24 PM
U.S. Debt Ceiling, Part 79 malman89 Politics, Religion, Social Issues 21 Dec 27, 2012 02:30 PM
The Debt Ceiling Again, Sooner Than Expected itcheroni Politics, Religion, Social Issues 98 Sep 11, 2012 02:39 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:12 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC