Debt limit will be reached on Monday...government shut down

Of course it is. I asked what the limit of debt is, and you answered saying "Why doesn't the government just give everyone all the money they want then?".

That is a red herring since I did not ask for the Govt to give everyone all the money they want. So either answer the question honestly or just ignore it. Red herrings won't get anywhere with me.

 

I know what the debt ceiling is. I'm asking these people that do not want to raise this arbitrary number what their ceiling is and why.

 

The government IS the people. You are implying, we, the people should not have a debt limit.

 

Not having a "debt limit" does not mean giving everyone all the money they want. We can still have responsible spending and increase our debt like we have been for the last century. It's called a budget. There is no reason to put some ridiculous arbitrary number on how much debt a country with a made up currency can have.

 

Because "The world is going to end at some unspecified time in the near future" is a non-statement. It's sensible to give a general time estimate for your claim because if you don't, you can keep saying, "well, I didn't think it'd happen just yet" forever. As such, you lose credibility by making unfalsifiable statements. The fact remains that Bowles, Greenspan, and the like have been crying about rising inflation for ages, and yet even two Quantitative Easing packages failed to bring rates up. Meanwhile, the classic macroeconomic position has held strong, regardless of how much the prophets of doom have cried about it.

Are they? Cite?

 

Check my signature. These people are still in power today. I rest my case.

http://www.moneynews.com/Markets/Central-Bank-Money-Printing/2012/06/13/id/442156

 

That's the point, it's a made up currency. If the debt keeps increasing relative to GDP, the only way we'll be able to pay our bills is through inflation, which will eventually destroy the made up currency. That's why we need to hold down the debt relative to GDP by balancing the budget.

 

The Amendment is clear the debts of the nation must and always be good, period, he can simply say under the 14th Amendment, Section 4 I as executive officer of the nation invoke the right given to me by the US Constitution as duly ratified and recognized as on par and amending the document raise the debt ceiling as needed. This to be in place until Congress provides a funding bill.

You do know this is a true Constitutional power its there in black and white and as an amendment its a major power and a court would be hard pressed to rule against the president when the document is so clear on this.

And the Constitution trumps any act of Congress if its in conflict they cannot override that you know that its the supreme law of the land, it trumps everything under it and nothing is over it.

So he could do such an order, force this to the Federal courts when he has a clearly good case he can do this and has to do it if Congress refuses to make the debts good.

 

Japan has 200% debt to GDP and actually has had deflation. We have incredibly high debt to GDP yet we have incredibly low inflation. Your logic might be skewed.

 

Al Qaeda wouldn't be a problem if obama would stop killing muslims. I don't see al Qaeda as a real threat to anyone outside of NYC or Washington DC. Those people are on their own.

 

The debt ceiling will remain unchanged. That's the ticket.

 

And what about the Obama pledge to allow no Lobbyists on his staff.
Timothy* Geithner was a former Lobbyist.In fact on Day 8 of Obama's
New Term, {January 27,2009} Widdle Timothy Geithner picked former Goldman
Sachs Lobbyist as a top aide { Mark Patterson }.
That very same day,Geithner announced rules at reducing the role of
Lobbyist in agency decisions.
See what game is being played here.it's right in front of the publics eyes.
Sheer adulterated duplicity.

Lobbied for the Banking Industry and with The Group of Thirty { G30 }.

 

It's time the rest of the world took over government of the US and ran it as a proper socialist democracy.

 

Be sure and bring your A game when you try to do that.

 

You guys are confusing monetary inflation with price inflation. Who cares if they inflate the money supply. They can give me $1 trillion and if I do nothing with it, nothing will change in the economy. Just like the $2 trillion they've given to the banks. That's why Japan and the USA have been "printing" like crazy yet still have very low price inflation. So printing money itself is not a huge deal unless it is used in the real economy.

 

Then why print the money and buy the worthless bonds in the first place?

Just let the banks eat the bonds and keep the Fed out of it.

Of course the money that the Fed is printing will go to the money supply eventually and when it does inflation will skyrocket.

 

Banks do not necessarily need to enter the money supply. Banks can continue to make intra-bank and and inter-bank transactions, including using such reserves to securitize loans or provide collateral against them.

 

In theory although its never been tested the President can increase funding say day by day to meet at least mandated obligations under an executive order in simple terms and I tried to point this out the 14th Amendment in Section 4 demands the debts and financial obligations be good at all times in pretty simple language. Congress cannot override this they can do their duty and do a budget and raise the debt ceiling but cannot if these obligations must be paid block the president from ordering the funding, If nothing else the courts would have to take this up and I will note if its a constitutional power it trumps Congress and any lawmaking measures it took, the Consitution is the law of the land. Period. And he can make a simple case these obligations must be met, the 14th Amendment in section four granted me this obligation as chief executive and as an emergency executive order I enacted measures to raise funds for essential obligations. Congress when they do the needed funding will then overcome my executive order.

It would be a good case IMHO.

 

Banks can not lend reserves. That money the Fed is "printing" will never be used in the real economy because it can't. Your gonna have to come up with another theory.

 

Then what do they need the new federal dollars for that libs now claim are not real dollars after all?

The banks could just buy a Monopoly game and use the money out of that instead.

 

Banks can't use reserves to buy monopoly games

 

In theory what the 14th, sec 4 says is that Obama can pay the pensions of retired military and the costs of suppressing an insurrection but he can't run the rest of the government by dictatorial fiat.

 

Your theory is a supposition until the Supreme Court reaches judgment. obama has said he won't test the 14th Amendment.

There is no basis for a deal. Let obama do whatever he wants...there will be no cooperation whatsover. The consequences are irrelevant.

 

Banks cannot lend required reserves, generally 10% of their deposits. They can lend "excess" reserves which are reserves they have over the required reserves.

When the Fed creates new reserves by buying debt, the new reserves are transferred to the bank (or electronically credited) of the debt seller (whose deposit account is credited) in exchange for the asset (usually Govt debt) of the seller. The new reserves become excess reserves available for lending (assuming the bank wasn't below its required reserve level).

 

what we need is more jobs, which means more taxes paid, which means economy booms, which means state sales tax booms, which means everyone benefits, time to crack down on foreign outsourcing