shutdown

[livinincali]

[quote=SK in CV]Social Security benefits are a current debt. [/quote]

Read the supreme court case. My interpretation of the opinion sounds like social security is not a debt obligation. Maybe you have some source of information that contradicts this supreme court case but I haven’t seen it. Seems like they could they could use the rational justification of we don’t have the money to pay in full to not pay at all or not pay in full. Therefore there would be no debt obligation to default on.

[quote]
The Court ruled that no such contract exists, and that there is no contractual right to receive Social Security payments. Payments due under Social Security are not “property” rights and are not protected by the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The interest of a beneficiary of Social Security is protected only by the Due Process Clause.
Under Due Process Clause analysis, government action is valid unless it is patently arbitrary and utterly lacking in rational justification. This provision of §202(n) is not irrational; it could have been justified by the desire to increase the purchasing power of those living in America, because those living abroad would not spend their payments here.
[/quote]

[quote]
Mostly right, but you’ve changed the equation. If the government doesn’t pay debts already incurred, that’s defaulting on debt, irrespective of whether the debt is secured by a bond or a note.
[/quote]

I already made it clear that government has plenty of money to pay interest on the debt they’ve already incurred. And as more tax revenue comes in with the government shut down they probably have plenty of money to pay for any already completed services that haven’t been paid yet. While all new services would be suspended.

My point being we can cut 30% of government spending that we are currently borrowing and not default on any debt. Will that cut have a massive impact on the economy. Yeah of course it will just as it is in the European countries that are forced to dramatically reduce their deficits in order to still have access to low interest borrowing.

The bottom line being the media and analysts are lying when they say not raising the debt ceiling means a default. No, it just means there’s an immediate and large cut to government spending.

[scaredyclassic]

What if we made the coin a hologram.

[no_such_reality]

No SK, the house already sent over appropriations to reopen critical parts of the government which the Senate rejected.

The Senate is playing our way or the highway and the Media is singing the tune saying the Republicans are to blame.

[SK in CV]

[quote=livinincali][quote=SK in CV]Social Security benefits are a current debt. [/quote]

Read the supreme court case. My interpretation of the opinion sounds like social security is not a debt obligation. Maybe you have some source of information that contradicts this supreme court case but I haven’t seen it. Seems like they could they could use the rational justification of we don’t have the money to pay in full to not pay at all or not pay in full. Therefore there would be no debt obligation to default on.

[/quote]

There is an obligation. The SCOTUS decision didn’t decide that the obligation didn’t exist. It decided that congressional action which provided for termination of benefits for deported communists was legal. Which was exactly my point. Congressional action can reduce or terminate benefits. But absent that kind of action, SS benefits are an obligation of the federal government.

[SK in CV]

[quote=no_such_reality]No SK, the house already sent over appropriations to reopen critical parts of the government which the Senate rejected.

The Senate is playing our way or the highway and the Media is singing the tune saying the Republicans are to blame.[/quote]

Imagine this scenario. We have president Romney, a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled house. And the house refuses any continuing resolution that doesn’t include raising the top tax bracket from 39% to 45%. They’ve refused any conference on the issue with the Senate for nine months. The government shuts down, and they send appropriations bills over to the Senate that only include continuing funding for Obamacare, Head Start and the NIH.

Which party would be playing “my way or the highway”?

[SK in CV]

[quote=livinincali]
The bottom line being the media and analysts are lying when they say not raising the debt ceiling means a default. No, it just means there’s an immediate and large cut to government spending.[/quote]

It also means a severe recession. A spike in unemployment. Probably a depression.

[The-Shoveler]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=livinincali]
The bottom line being the media and analysts are lying when they say not raising the debt ceiling means a default. No, it just means there’s an immediate and large cut to government spending.[/quote]

It also means a severe recession. A spike in unemployment. Probably a depression.[/quote]

Not likely to happen,

As it would all but kill off most local municipalities pension systems (the real thing the Fed has been so desperate to save, not so much the housing market as most everyone believes but the tax base and stock market are the real targets).

Also it would likely increase the Debt even further.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=no_such_reality]No SK, the house already sent over appropriations to reopen critical parts of the government which the Senate rejected.

The Senate is playing our way or the highway and the Media is singing the tune saying the Republicans are to blame.[/quote]

Imagine this scenario. We have president Romney, a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled house. And the house refuses any continuing resolution that doesn’t include raising the top tax bracket from 39% to 45%. They’ve refused any conference on the issue with the Senate for nine months. The government shuts down, and they send appropriations bills over to the Senate that only include continuing funding for Obamacare, Head Start and the NIH.

Which party would be playing “my way or the highway”?[/quote]

Nice extortion, just like the media.

[quote]The second measure would have kept the government open in exchange for delaying the health care law’s individual mandate and eliminating federal health care contributions for lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/government-shutdown-2013-update-senate-house-bill-97551.html#ixzz2gaGfJLFp%5B/quote%5D

I mean, really, let’s not fund anything over whether or not individuals ‘have to’ buy insurance. Not, prevent the exchanges, not gut obamacare, just whether or not there is a financial penalty.

[SK in CV]

[quote=The-Shoveler][quote=SK in CV][quote=livinincali]
The bottom line being the media and analysts are lying when they say not raising the debt ceiling means a default. No, it just means there’s an immediate and large cut to government spending.[/quote]

It also means a severe recession. A spike in unemployment. Probably a depression.[/quote]

Not likely to happen,

As it would all but kill off most local municipalities pension systems (the real thing the Fed has been so desperate to save, not so much the housing market as most everyone believes but the tax base and stock market are the real targets).

Also it would likely increase the Debt even further.[/quote]

It would undoubtedly happen. See Greece. See every single time the Federal government has drastically cut spending.

The Fed is in it for the banks. Not for wall street. Not for pensions. Not for unemployment. Its primary goal is to keep inflation down. That’s what banks MUST have. Everything else is secondary.

Oh, and under your scenario, how can the debt be increased without a increase in the debt limit (which is not the issue congress has been debating the last 3 weeks anyway)? Kind of back to square one. Cuts to government spending increase deficits.

[SK in CV]

[quote=no_such_reality][quote=SK in CV][quote=no_such_reality]No SK, the house already sent over appropriations to reopen critical parts of the government which the Senate rejected.

The Senate is playing our way or the highway and the Media is singing the tune saying the Republicans are to blame.[/quote]

Imagine this scenario. We have president Romney, a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled house. And the house refuses any continuing resolution that doesn’t include raising the top tax bracket from 39% to 45%. They’ve refused any conference on the issue with the Senate for nine months. The government shuts down, and they send appropriations bills over to the Senate that only include continuing funding for Obamacare, Head Start and the NIH.

Which party would be playing “my way or the highway”?[/quote]

Nice extortion, just like the media.

[/quote]

Exactly. The republicans are playing as if they can change laws by funding only the parts of law that they approve of. That is extortion. Pay up or we burn the house down.

[scaredyclassic]

I don’t see either side backing down.

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=no_such_reality][quote=SK in CV][quote=no_such_reality]No SK, the house already sent over appropriations to reopen critical parts of the government which the Senate rejected.

The Senate is playing our way or the highway and the Media is singing the tune saying the Republicans are to blame.[/quote]

Imagine this scenario. We have president Romney, a Republican controlled Senate and a Democratic controlled house. And the house refuses any continuing resolution that doesn’t include raising the top tax bracket from 39% to 45%. They’ve refused any conference on the issue with the Senate for nine months. The government shuts down, and they send appropriations bills over to the Senate that only include continuing funding for Obamacare, Head Start and the NIH.

Which party would be playing “my way or the highway”?[/quote]

Nice extortion, just like the media.

[/quote]

Exactly. The republicans are playing as if they can change laws by funding only the parts of law that they approve of. That is extortion. Pay up or we burn the house down.[/quote]

I can see a future where GOP controls the presidency and Dem.s control the house. Dems will refuse to fund govt. until president agrees to total gun control.

[no_such_reality]

So Obama extends the employer mandate by a year unilaterally and that’s fine.

The Republicans ask for it on the individual mandate and that’s extortion.

Hypocrits.

[SK in CV]

[quote=no_such_reality]So Obama extends the employer mandate by a year unilaterally and that’s fine.

The Republicans ask for it on the individual mandate and that’s extortion.

Hypocrits.[/quote]

Not exactly. Elections have consequences. The executive branch has powers that the legislative branch does not.

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=no_such_reality]So Obama extends the employer mandate by a year unilaterally and that’s fine.

The Republicans ask for it on the individual mandate and that’s extortion.

Hypocrits.[/quote]

Here is an example of real hypocricy

http://www.businessinsider.com/government-shutdown-obamacare-subsidies-boehner-exempt-2013-10

[Author]

Posts