Forbes: GOP Tax Bill Is The End Of All Economic Sanity In Washington

Octavo said:
Because deep down they know that eventually the democrats will regain power and have to play bad cop, trying to dig the country out of debt. Just as they start seeing success, another republican will come along and piss it all away again.

Sorry, the veil is slipping some...
Click to expand...

It's like an acrimonious divorce.

The GOP is the parent that, when they have the child, lets them eat ice cream for breakfast, pizza for every meal, stay up late, and skip school. The parent that actually cares, that makes the child go to bed on time, eat vegetables, go to school, and tries to teach responsibility, is not the "fun" one and often left to deal with the aftermath of overindulgence.
 
Hellbound said:
It's like an acrimonious divorce.

The GOP is the parent that, when they have the child, lets them eat ice cream for breakfast, pizza for every meal, stay up late, and skip school. The parent that actually cares, that makes the child go to bed on time, eat vegetables, go to school, and tries to teach responsibility, is not the "fun" one and often left to deal with the aftermath of overindulgence.
Click to expand...

On the pluss side everything is bigger with trump just like he wanted, I mean who else could have created a 1 trillion dollar deficit and be the party of fiscal responsibility?
 
At this point, China could just tell the US that if they attacked North Korea, they will sell all their Treasury Bonds and not buy any new ones.
America wouldn't be able to afford a war.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Deficits only matter when a Democrat is POTUS. When a Republican is POTUS, the GOP doesn't care about the deficit, in fact they try to explode the deficit with tax cuts and military spending.
Click to expand...

Octavo said:
Because deep down they know that eventually the democrats will regain power and have to play bad cop, trying to dig the country out of debt. Just as they start seeing success, another republican will come along and piss it all away again.

Sorry, the veil is slipping some...
Click to expand...

A.k.a. Republican strategist Jude Wanniski's "Two Santa Clauses" tactic.
 
thaiboxerken said:
Deficits only matter when a Democrat is POTUS. When a Republican is POTUS, the GOP doesn't care about the deficit, in fact they try to explode the deficit with tax cuts and military spending.
Click to expand...
It's even worse than that. The GOP has no economic discipline or plan at all. You're in power, give people tax cuts like free ponies. Spend on whatever your donor base wants.

Economic theory? What's that, never heard of it. Stimulate the economy when it doesn't need it? Check. Tax breaks for billionaires? Check.

What is the GOP to do?

Cut Medicare and Social Security, of course. How convenient.
 
Democrats are trying to hold the budget hostage by insisting money is spend on more than just border security and the military.
Traitors!
 
Belz... said:
I seem to remember a time where politics were a bit more cooperative. Am I blinded by nostalgia?
Click to expand...


The press at that point were much, much less partisan.


It's amazing how many of the worlds problems can be traced back to a Murdoch.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
At this point, China could just tell the US that if they attacked North Korea, they will sell all their Treasury Bonds and not buy any new ones.
America wouldn't be able to afford a war.
Click to expand...

Foreign Ownership of U.S. Debt which in total is 20.24 Trillion.

Foreigners own 6 Trillion of it the majority of the remainder are Americans.

In November 2017, China owned $1.2 trillion of U.S. debt. It's the largest foreign holder of U.S. Treasury securities. The second largest holder is Japan at $1.1 trillion. Both Japan and China want to keep the value of the dollar higher than the value of their currencies. That helps keep their exports affordable for the United States, which helps their economies grow. That's why, despite China's occasional threats to sell its holdings, both countries are happy to be America's biggest foreign bankers. China replaced the United Kingdom as the second largest foreign holder on May 31, 2007. That's when it increased its holdings to $699 billion, outpacing the United Kingdom's $640 billion.

Ireland is third, holding $329 billion. The Cayman Islands is fourth, at $269 billion. The Bureau of International Settlements believes it is a front for sovereign wealth funds and hedge funds whose owners don't want to reveal their positions. So are Luxembourg ($218 billion) and Belgium ($115 billion).

After the Cayman Islands, the next largest holders are Brazil, Switzerland, the UK, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Saudi Arabia, and India. They each hold between $140 and $265 billion. (Sources: "Treasury Bulletin, Monthly Treasury Statement, Table 6. Schedule D-Investments of Federal Government Accounts in Federal Securities, U.S. Department of the Treasury, December 2016. “Treasury Bulletin, Table OFS-2, Ownership of Federal Securities", U.S. Department of the Treasury, December 2016.)
Click to expand...

https://www.thebalance.com/who-owns-the-u-s-national-debt-3306124
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Your point?

If China dumps their share of US bonds, the US wouldn't be able to raise more money for a long time - an extra trillion isn't absorbed quickly.
Click to expand...

The US could buy it back at pennies on the dollar and then reissue it.

Most of US debt is owned by Americans.

They won't need it immediately the 'China dump' meme is not a viable 'plan'.

If they reallllllly needed money they would simply create it and deal with the inflation later.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Your point?

If China dumps their share of US bonds, the US wouldn't be able to raise more money for a long time - an extra trillion isn't absorbed quickly.
Click to expand...

If they "dump" them that means they sell it to someone else on the secondary market. That has no direct effect on interest rates. It might mean we need to raise interest some to issue more though. Only about 6% of our debt is held in China BTW.
 
Last edited:
lobosrul5 said:
If they "dump" them that means they sell it to someone else on the secondary market. That has no direct effect on interest rates. It might mean we need to raise interest some to issue more though. Only about 6% of our debt is held in China BTW.
Click to expand...

the effect is is the price at which the Federal Reserve can sell its bonds if it is competing with China: basically, it has to offer much higher interest rates which will seriously impact the US's future ability to pay back the loans.
Moreover, it would signal that one one but Americans is willing to lend the US government money, especially not if its tax revenue is dwindling sharply.
 
Belz... said:
I seem to remember a time where politics were a bit more cooperative. Am I blinded by nostalgia?
Click to expand...

When Democrats controlled Congress things were more cooperative. Republicans still more or less voted as a single block, but there would be enough Democrats willing to compromise there would be a degree of cooperation overall.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
err - no.
You haven't thought this through, have you?
Click to expand...

It may not be pennies on the $ but it they would be selling at a loss. They would be receiving USD with less purchasing power than the what they paid, which translates into a loss.
The Great Zaganza said:
the effect is is the price at which the Federal Reserve can sell its bonds if it is competing with China: basically, it has to offer much higher interest rates which will seriously impact the US's future ability to pay back the loans.
Click to expand...

The Fed doesn’t sell bonds it buys them. In this case they could just increase their purchases. Interest rates may still go up because as controlling inflation may be a concern.
 
there seems to be the assumption that there is unlimited demand for US debt. But the debt to GDP ratio is already above 1 and set to rise sharply with Trump's tax cuts.
There simply are better investments to be had.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
there seems to be the assumption that there is unlimited demand for US debt. But the debt to GDP ratio is already above 1 and set to rise sharply with Trump's tax cuts.
There simply are better investments to be had.
Click to expand...

Its an extremely safe investment. As interests rates rise, and they are bound to, then yes the amount of money the federal government has to spend to service it will start to become problematic.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
And Zuckerberg and Twitter and Karl Rove and Breitbart and a few more.
Click to expand...
I'd put Karl Rove at the top of the list. His ascendency began with the traumatic defeat of Bush Sr. (representing the Old School) and the Rovian promise to make the Republican Party the only conceivable party of government in perpetuity, by any means necessary. That included making it impossible for Democratic governments to govern, and rat-shagging any Democratic President into oblivion (see Whitewater and Birtherism).

The Old School rules, which seemed to promise Republican oblivion, were replaced by no rules at all. Leading to where we are - which is not at all what Karl Rove wanted. The lunatics took over the asylum.
 
lobosrul5 said:
Its an extremely safe investment. As interests rates rise, and they are bound to, then yes the amount of money the federal government has to spend to service it will start to become problematic.
Click to expand...
The risk lies in what happens to the dollar between purchase and redemption, which is likely to be on the negative side. Given that this is only Trump's first budget, and there's no sign he or the GOP are about to mend their ways, I wouldn't touch US Treasury bonds in the near future. If the Democrats win Congress this year I might reconsider after a year or two.
 
CapelDodger said:
I'd put Karl Rove at the top of the list. His ascendency began with the traumatic defeat of Bush Sr. (representing the Old School) and the Rovian promise to make the Republican Party the only conceivable party of government in perpetuity, by any means necessary. That included making it impossible for Democratic governments to govern, and rat-shagging any Democratic President into oblivion (see Whitewater and Birtherism).

The Old School rules, which seemed to promise Republican oblivion, were replaced by no rules at all. Leading to where we are - which is not at all what Karl Rove wanted. The lunatics took over the asylum.
Click to expand...

You might find this New Yorker article interesting: Karl Rove Has Seen the Enemy and He Is Steve Bannon - Inside the feud between two men battling for the soul of the G.O.P.
To readers of Breitbart News these days, Karl Rove is a familiar, sinister presence. The Republican strategist who twice helped George W. Bush win the Presidency is now, according to Breitbart, “the voice of the hapless Republican establishment,” “out of touch,” and “wrong in nearly every prognostication for the past ten years.” In one article this summer, Breitbart’s Washington political editor, Matthew Boyle, called Rove President Trump’s “arch-nemesis.” Invariably, the voluminous coverage of Rove on the conservative Web site, which is run by Trump’s former chief strategist Stephen Bannon, notes that the President himself has labelled Rove “such a dishonorable guy,” “a total incompetent jerk,” and a “proven loser.”
Click to expand...

Economy, deficits and taxes don't seem to be at the top of the list for either side if you consider these two as the faction leaders.
 
Hans said:
The US could buy it back at pennies on the dollar and then reissue it.

Most of US debt is owned by Americans.
Click to expand...
Whose bonds would have become worth pennies on the dollar. Of course the owners could hold onto them until they pay out, but if they're being used as collateral that could be problematic. The banks wiould have a field day, and not just US American banks. All in all a nightmarish scenario.

They won't need it immediately the 'China dump' meme is not a viable 'plan'.
Click to expand...
Indeed. A better plan is to use them tactically, not dump them all at once.

If they reallllllly needed money they would simply create it and deal with the inflation later.
Click to expand...
It won't be dealt with painlessly, but then again, that's the future's problem, and what has posterity ever done for us?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
You might find this New Yorker article interesting: Karl Rove Has Seen the Enemy and He Is Steve Bannon - Inside the feud between two men battling for the soul of the G.O.P.
Click to expand...
Yes, I caught that (I like the New Yorker). I noticed how Rove now represents the Old School and he's been outflanked. That's what tends to happen when you throw out all the rules.

Rove's vision never included an outsider figure like Trump, but Bannon's always has. Rove' wants a Bush Jr. as President, Bannon wants a Mussolini.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Economy, deficits and taxes don't seem to be at the top of the list for either side if you consider these two as the faction leaders.
Click to expand...
I think for Rove it's all about power, and he'd burn down the world if he then ruled over the ashes. Bannon wants to use power for despicable ends.

Fortunately, Trump is no Mussolini.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom