The Debt Ceiling Again, Sooner Than Expected

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by itcheroni, Sep 1, 2012.

  1. itcheroni macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Location:
    CA
    #1
    It's evening here in Kunming and as I was debating whether to start drinking earlier than usual, I remembered something.

    Looks like we will be hitting the debt ceiling very soon again. Very soon after the election actually. I'm actually disappointed because my guess was it would be reached just before the election. When it's so close, I guess numbers can be moved around. This current ceiling was supposed to last well past the election, sparing a debate for both parties. I expect them not to plan for our interests, but the least they can do is plan for their own self interest.

    https://www.fms.treas.gov/fmsweb/viewDTSFiles?dir=w&fname=12083000.pdf

    Limit $16,394,000
    Aug 30's debt $15,952,028

    To save paper, figures are in millions.

    For reference, the debt ceiling was raised from $14.294*trillion on Aug 2, 2011.

    So, should we raise the limit again without much fuss, or should we have a discussion?
     
  2. Huntn, Sep 1, 2012
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2012

    Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #2
    We must not give in, continuing to increase our debt. We can adjust, cut some spending, raise some taxes, it should be that simple.
     
  3. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #3

    No, let's not have a discussion and let the Republicans take us to the brink again and maybe have our credit rating lowered again. :rolleyes:

    Are you aware that raising the debt ceiling is not authorizing additional spending, it's money already spent? It's the equivalent of using your credit card and now the bill is due.

    What really has me worried is not only do we have the debt ceiling coming due, the 'Bush' tax cuts and the Obama temporary tax cuts all expire around the same time. Not looking forward to the Republicans giving our 401Ks another 20% haircut.
     
  4. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #4
    Yes, it's as simple as cutting spending.

    Can't spend what you don't have - unless you are the Federal Government.

    This debt will eventually cause the US economy to crumble as the government continues to spend out of control.

    Taxes cannot be raised high enough to solve this problem The debt is higher than the GNP of the country.... This should terrify every one of you regardless of your politics.
     
  5. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #5
    Taxes need to be raised and military spending needs to be cut.

    Two areas the idiots known as the GOP will never touch.
     
  6. Fazzy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Location:
    check the tracking device
    #6
    The number of times the debt ceiling is raised makes you wonder why they have one at all.
     
  7. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    And yet the GOP is against ALL tax rises and there was a surplus under Clinton.
     
  8. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #8
    That's because spending needs to be cut, taxes don't need to be raised.

    There is plenty of revenue, more than under Clinton. There is simply way, way too much spending.
     
  9. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #9
    including inflation?
     
  10. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #10
    Actually I've been terrified where the GOP has been taking us. If you wish to recall, at one time in this country we had fiscal equilibrium, then a Republican President orchestrated the U.S.'s first large debt increase since WWII with a tax cut. Then under a Democratic President, we once again had equilibrium, until the next two term Republican President pushed though another huge tax cut. The trend is clearly established. Lowering taxes with the intent of forcing spending cuts later is a loosing proposition.
     
  11. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #11
    I agree.

    Cut the nearly 1 trillion we spend on the military each year and use it to pay down the debt.

    Good plan, thewitt.
     
  12. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #12
    I'd like to see the numbers on where the economy would be today if the Republicans hadn't gotten us into two wars, driven the economy off the cliff (forcing Obama to stimulate the economy), and instituted unpaid-for tax cuts.
     
  13. itcheroni thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Location:
    CA
    #13
    I guess there can't be a discussion this close to elections. All most people want to do is debate which political party is to blame. I get accused of holding opinions I never express over and over again on this board simply because if you're not with one party, you are assumed to be a part of the other party and hold all the same ideologies. I personally like to talk about issues without mentioning any political party(what's the point? There's absolutely no need). Both parties are absolutely horrible, which is why I'm not bothering to vote this year and for the foreseeable future.

    Now carry on with whatever you guys were talking about.
     
  14. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #14
    If we didn't stimulate we would of been forced to actually do something, all the stimulus did was pass the buck down the road a few years. Now that money is all sucked up and we are still in the same boat. What good did it do?
     
  15. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #15
    I'm pretty sure there's a sizeable debt for each american isn't there? Credit cards? Mortgages?
     
  16. DakotaGuy macrumors 68040

    DakotaGuy

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    South Dakota, USA
    #16
    To get substantial savings out of the only department you sound willing to cut is going to take massive cuts that will gut the force. I guess you must think the world is a very nice place and there are no security threats.

    How about we make smaller cuts all around. Heck just welfare itself is half of the defense budget!

    The debt has to be dealt with and to do so will take both tax increases AND spending cuts. I support spending cuts across the board.

    The problem is many liberals want to see tax increases and defense cuts only to funnel that money into increasing social program spending. That won't work if you want to deal with the debt.
     
  17. AhmedFaisal Guest

    #17
    Does the US absolutely have to have a standing force large enough to fight 2 full scale wars? Does the US need 11+9 aircraft carriers plus a joint strike fighter and several other expensive shenanigans when the majority of wars the US will be engaged in are of the asymmetric kind where such weapons are completely useless? What's over inflating the US military budget is a military that is still stuck in the cold war and unready for modern warfare. That's why you lost in Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan and you will continue to lose and deserve to lose because you are incapable of learning. A US military that was actually ready for the wars of the 21st century would likely cost less than 1/2 of the current budget, have about half of the troops but much more qualified and useful personnel (incidentally also saving healthcare and pension costs) and was actually capable of doing it's job.
     
  18. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #18
    I believe we greatly exaggerate the threats we face.

    I also believe that working with our NATO allies would provide us the worldwide security we need.

    IMO, the really crazy thing is when conservatives complain that Obamacare will cost one trillion dollars over a period of ten years ... as if that is some incredible amount of spending, but have no problem with the military costing that much (and more) in one year alone.
     
  19. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #19
    That's a game anybody can play. We're not at the same 10% unemployment rate we reached at the height of the recession. What would it be now if not for the stimulus? 12%? 14%? Your guess is as good as mine. All I know is the trajectory was reversed.

    Back to the OP's question. Frankly, I just don't know. Would this Congress actually come to a decision now, just because it's for the good of the country? This Congress? Nice as that might be to think about, I just don't see it. I see them kicking the can down the road to the first part of 2013. I doubt the next seated Congress will be a lot better, but it's hard to see how it can be much worse.

    I know the OP doesn't like to play the party/blame game, but it's almost inevitable. What happens if they do let the sequester kick in? Each side will be blaming the other. Frankly I think that gives the Democrats a stronger hand, because few middle class people will give a **** about defense cuts and increased taxes on the rich than they will about their own taxes taking a big jump.
     
  20. astrorider macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    #20
    A quick google search turned this up. Looks like a spending problem.
    [​IMG]
     
  21. DakotaGuy, Sep 1, 2012
    Last edited: Sep 1, 2012

    DakotaGuy macrumors 68040

    DakotaGuy

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    South Dakota, USA
    #21
    That is a very inaccurate statement as far as Korea is concerned. You say we lost Korea? Sure we didn't make it all the way north, but we kept South Korea free. Compare South Korea to North Korea today. I'd say the South Korean people are slightly better off then the North Korean people... wouldn't you? If we pulled our military support for South Korea tomorrow and let them just go it alone I can promise the North would come knocking.

    Everyone knows that Vietnam was a terrible situation and Afghanistan has also been tough. As far as Iraq is concerned it's pretty hard to say we won or lost. Obama himself has stated that it was a successful outcome and we were able to turn it over and get our troops out. It is still somewhat unstable, however it is a far better outcome then many thought possible back in 2005 or so.

    I'm not arguing that the force doesn't need some change and there has been a lot of restructuring going on over the past few years. The modular force structure is still a new concept and evolving. Restructuring and building a lighter and faster force takes time and costs money.

    Last, I still believe that the idea we need to be able to handle two major conflicts at one time is important. Restructuring and more reliance on Guard and Reserve may allow us to retain that capability with less money spent on active duty forces. I personally have no issue with some cuts made to the full time force as long as those cuts go along with an increase of well trained reserve members.
     
  22. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    Yes. But it also shows that revenue is lower than under Clinton.
     
  23. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #23
    I agree with this as well. As for the spending cuts, they need to be actual cuts in spending. Not just a reduction on the rate of increase in spending.
     
  24. DakotaGuy macrumors 68040

    DakotaGuy

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    South Dakota, USA
    #24
    How much of that revenue reduction is due to tax cuts and how much is due to the fact that the economy was much stronger during Clinton's term?

    You could leave taxes alone and if the economy was going gang busters revenue would be way up.

    Now I agree that taxes must be raised (and loopholes closed) and spending cut because we are at the point where something needs to be done about the debt, but a strong economy could help revenue a lot. In my opinion though any new revenue sources at this point needs to go to reducing the deficit, not adding new programs.
     
  25. astrorider macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    #25
    You're talking about revenue now being lower than under Clinton, i.e. this current economy to dot-com bubble economy? Ok...if that's the point you were trying to make.
     

Share This Page