Obama seeks $1.2 trillion debt ceiling increase

And some stooge in another thread posted that Barry is the most fiscally responsible president since Ike.

 

The man who, as a senator, characterized increasing the national debt as irresponsible and unpatriotic once again wants to increase the national debt.

But accuse the man of being irresponsible and unpatriotic and the left goes bananas.

 

I understand the idea of it, but to make an arbitrary ceiling based on absolutely no mathematical logic or reason is pathetic in the 21st century. Which is why it just gets raised every other year. We should spend our own made up money when we need to spend it on whatever we want to spend it on.

 

Once again, another out of context talker. The unpatriotic comment was in reference to raising the debt ceiling to fund a war that he thought was illegal. His entire stance against voting against the debt ceiling was to not fund the Iraq war. Obviously he looked dumb in the long run for saying it. But it's really not that big of a deal, the fact is you can't change math and logic. The debt ceiling will continue to be raised and everyone will argue about it every step of the way.

 

LOL, okay. I kind of like the idea of congress having to vote to raise it. Then we know who to hold accountable for the debt. But on the other hand, it sort has become common place. Besides no one anymore holds their congressmen responsible for anything. It is like the old saying goes, everyone loves their own congressmen, it is the other 434 they hate or are the problem. Not their congressmen.

 

I just hate having anything dealing with our monetary system in the hands of politicians. They're not the most educated bunch out there.

 

Why not just make it 10 trillion so we don't have to do this again next year?

 

Oh, there are very well educated. Most of them are Lawyers, lawyers in charge of our economy. What they lack is common sense. When anyone mentions common sense in congress, they all dig out their little chain purse to see how much cents they actually do have.

 

OK, I understand. And, actually, I am somewhat relieved. You are one of the relatively few among those on the Left I pay focused attention to, because you're obviously smart, studious, and analytical. I admire many of the same traits in Iriemon, too, even though I know that the two of you don't always see eye-to-eye, either.

But, I am more pessimistic about long-range peace in the world. We've got big trouble brewing with Russia and China, to say the least, and I don't think that many Americans understand that we simply do not command the respect or obedience we once did (whether that was really right or wrong). When you've been on the top, and you stumble and fall, everyone kicks you on your way down. We like to think that everybody needs us more than we need them, and we frequently say that about China now. I remember when we used to say that about Russia while we were rubbing their noses in (*)(*)(*)(*) after the fall of the Soviet Union, all during the '90's. But for 15 years they've been under the leadership of Vladimir Putin, and, the Chinese have been under the guidance of those "wise old Mandarins" in Beijing who project all their growing power from within their labyrinthine "committees", for longer than that.

Frankly, I can think of nothing more disastrous for the United States than to have been under Idiot "W" Bush for eight years, followed by Idiot Obama for eight years, followed by Hillary Clinton for another eight years. Twenty-four years of blathering-ass, abject stupidity, and incomprehensible confusion in the handling of our foreign policy is simply a luxury we cannot afford.... In about five years from now, when Iran demonstrates that it has nuclear weapons (as well as North Korean missiles to deliver them with), the Middle East will go completely to hell, and then we're going to KNOW what it is to harvest what we allowed others to plant while we obsessed on our own inbred "jihads" about "racism", undermining the 2nd Amendment, etc., etc.

At that point, the National Debt really will be the very least of our problems....

 

I think it's all posturing. All countries want respect and not to look like they are the US' beotch. But at the end of the day, no developed country wants to go to war right now with each other. Too much to lose, too global, and too devastating. I think a Southern rebellion is more possible than a massive world war. There's no reason for us to fight China or Russia. Unless they want to take over our land, which they definitely couldn't. And we have no use for taking over their land, so I just don't see it. It will be all talk, sanctions, media driven posturing.

See, you still fail to see my point about the national debt. The national debt is not a problem and will never be a problem. A 3rd of it matures every year, anyone who owns it, will get paid, unless we choose not to pay them. We will never run out of our made up money, and there will never be a time where we'll have to "print" more money to pay people off. It's just a revolving loan that will last til infinity. At the end of the day, no one "owns" it. We exchange assets around that give the perception of ownership, but it truly is not owned by anyone. It's just made out of thin air and when we have to pay it off, we just swap it back in to the system like it never was paid.

Gotta understand the world of banking to know what the heck I'm talking about. But trust me, the national debt will never be a problem for the United States. You can make a case that interest could be since those are actual expenditures they have to make, but still can't see that being much of a problem, with the way we can control it.

 

Did you know that there is an ancient Islamic prophecy that wealth would become abundant in the Last Hour..... and that the deserts of the Islamic nations would be turned green?

If money was directed toward projects that would do more good for more people.... .then perhaps an increase in the money supply could be a positive thing?

http://www.politicalforum.com/opini...saving-new-orleans-florida-rising-oceans.html

The Sahara Forest Project...and saving New Orleans and Florida from rising oceans!

.......I felt a huge sense of relief when I first heard about The Sahara Forest Project!


https://www.facebook.com/SaharaForestProject
Sahara Forest Project

......
http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/koran/index.blog?topic_id=1021110

 

You have probably seen the film "Death By China" haven't you?

 

You are absolutely correct.........… and I am starting to get a little worried?!

The North American work ethic sure does seem to be down from what it used to be!

 

I would greatly appreciate it if you were to pass on to him an offer that I made a few years ago........

https://m.facebook.com/notes/dennis...cian-the-film-series-concept/310416062401072/

"Canada's Worst Politician, the film series concept."

I live about one hundred miles from an area of the world that I strongly suspect is in the position of the proverbial "canary in a coal mine" as far as the danger of rising ocean levels is concerned.

In my part of Nova Scotia, the difference between high tide and low tide will be as little as one meter but in parts of the Bay of Fundy the difference can be between 52 to 56 feet. The Bay of Fundy has a funneling effect on tidal waters.

There are 143,000 acres of productive farmland in that area that have been taken back from the ocean by dikes. I am worried that if ocean levels rose by as little as thirty centimeters that part of the Bay of Fundy could be hit by high tides that could perhaps be close to five meters higher than normal.


I am willing to go all out and make a fool of myself on a totally voluntary basis to attempt to soothe my conscience that I tried my best to do what needs to be done at this time to set in motion a series of events that could actually prevent ocean levels from rising at all?!?!


You can see one of my films that I will give you legal rights to use for one dollar if you will follow down in the comments in this note....and I will sure try to do more for you if you are willing and able to do something with this film concept.

Basically the concept for the film series that I have in mind involves a major star, such as Jim Carrey, playing the role of my grandfather, George Malloy. Johnny Galecki, (Leonard on Big Bang Theory), would be ideal to play the role of my Uncle William Malloy who was killed in Italy on January 2, 1945.

The film takes place in 1938 and 1939 and postulates an entirely different ending to the M. S. St. Louis saga that, as you can guess alters the future so that Uncle Bill not only is not killed in Italy but the holocaust is prevented from occurring.


I love the idea of 28 BILLION George Malloy/Jim Carrey Dollars being printed up, that work much like www.CalgaryDollars.ca except that they are in a sense props in a series of films designed to inspire several companies and nations to get working on a plan to turn deserts green, combat malnutrition worldwide, stabilize the climate all at the same time that we stimulate organized barter and create some jobs in the Nova Scotia, Montreal, USA and Israeli film market!

 

Why not spend what we need this year and what we need next year? No need to get all dramatic.

 

Why thought you just claimed we cant run out of money...

And btw it seems like we are concerned with Russia/China

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-06-22-10-09-33

 

Solid argument, lol. We can't run out of made up money. But we should only spend what we need. No reason to get all dramatic and have to spend it all at once. We can spend what we need this year, next year, and so on. Not all or nothing.

And there is no chance we are going to war with China or Russia no matter what "concerns" there are. We've been concerned about them for a century.

 

So we cant run out but you think we can spend it all at once. You are making zero sense.

 

It is a word problem.
Debt to income ratio. Look it up.

 

No... I replied to the dismissal of simple economic principals applied to the bureaucratic nightmare of government spending.

The fed has held interest rates too low for too long... longer than ever before, and longer than thought even possible to do so, while the printing presses have been churning.

Hyperinflation is coming. As it has in every economy in history (including our own) when such shenanigans are applied.

Thatcher was right. Eventually you run out of other peoples money. We are spending generations of potential income, and it is unsustainable.

 

You keep applying the principle of simple household economics, in which income must be greater or equal to spending, to the principles behind a national economy and government spending. It has been explained to you before by others in this thread that the two are not comparable and that a government cannot, technically, run out of money. However, you keep coming back to the same false principles that are peddled on the gold bug sites.

Keep buying your gold, if that rocks you boat, but don't try to bog down the economy for everyone else by advocating government austerity.

As for money printing, I gave you an answer in my above post, which you conveniently ignored. Where is all the hyperinflation that you are so scared of and that has been predicted by the gold bugs since 7 years? Will it come tomorrow? In 5 years? In 20 years? I bet you have no answer to these questions.

Inflation is currently not a problem because we are in a debt-deflation economy. Private debt is still deleveraging, resulting in money destruction. Even all the QE by the FED was impotent to combat this deflationary pressure. In combination with the rich hoarding the money instead of spending or loaning it, you arrive at our current economic problem: Deflation, not inflation, low money velocity, and lack of spending power of the poor and middle class, due to decades of depressed wages.

 

Well, but isn't the issue of "debt to income ratio" largely the same as National Debt-to-GDP?

Look, I know we've got to spend money, just like I know that we have to breathe, if we plan on going on living. I get that. But I'm trying to understand how we should "drive this car".

Obviously, we can spend money to provide tires, oil, gasoline, windshield wipers, etc., for the car, and, the car will take us dependably and efficiently down the highway. Conversely, we can spend the same amount on the car, plus spending even more money on crap the car doesn't need, tear it up by driving off-road, drive it off a cliff, smash it into a wall, etc., and accomplish nothing but a lot of wasted money and a have a damaged or destroyed car to show for it. Our adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan come to mind....

What I'm trying to understand is how it is OK for the National Debt-to-GDP ratio of the U. S. to be currently ~106% -- and that's all right? And therefore we should have nothing to worry about from the Russian Federation, which has a National Debt-to-GDP ratio of only ~11%, or, China, which even with its stupendous growth has a ratio of ~23%. What is it that Russia and China are doing right that we are doing wrong? Or, is the opposite true...?

The Russians are arming themselves to the teeth with state-of-the-art weaponry as fast as they can, and China is now projecting power throughout all of Eastern Asia and the Pacific. Meanwhile, about all Obama seems capable of doing is stirring the race pot in this country instead of pulling us together, and all this while the Federal Reserve goes on culturing its completely overvalued stock market bubble. This is NOT a recipe for success for the United States

 

I am not one of them.

Can you point to ANY economy in history that has successfully avoided hyperinflation after dropping interest rates for anywhere close to as long as we have, and just printed money like it is a job?

While you cannot apply simple home economics to the beast that is the nations economy, simple principals apply.

What is our way out of debt? What is the national strategy to repay this debt?

 

1) Interest rates are low because the demand for credit is low, and too much capital is seeking a return on investment. It is supply and demand and has nothing to do with the government.

2) As for history, the most famous example is probably the Weimar Republic. However, this is not comparable at all to the current situation in the US, since the cause of inflation was mostly the unrealistic demands for reparations of the winners of WW1 (treaty of Versailles). Thus, Germany's hyperinflation made the claims of the winners of WW1 worthless, which probably saved Germany from decades of paying for reparations, whcih would have brought economic recovery to a halt. None of such conditions exist in the US.

3) There is no way out of debt. The national debt will never be repaid, nor should it. Again, you are wrongly applying principles of household finance, in which debts have to be repaid, to a national economy.

 

When I go into debt, it's usually because I don't have the revenue to cover my bills. Funny how that works. Republicans have found a way to skip out on the bills. They just pretend the bills aren't in the box on the kitchen table.