IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 20th January 2023, 06:01 AM   #1
Tero
Master Poster
 
Tero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North American prairie
Posts: 2,921
US Government default, debt ceiling, cash on hand etc.

I get the same descriptions from news sources about the debt ceiling. None of them explain the big picture, the story is sold as "what does this mean for me personally?"

I have questions. Economics is my weakest subject. I simply think of money as smething related to work and purchasing goods. I understand jobs and inflation and all that.

The government part is a little fuzzy to me.

When the government is out of "cash" what do they do about t-bills for example? And what do our creditors do in general? just wait?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...asury_security
__________________
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Parody: http://karireport.blogspot.com/
Poll: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...proval-rating/
Tero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 06:29 AM   #2
JoeMorgue
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 42,380
Okay before this discussion starts everyone listen.

Let me explain this because it's so stupid it sounds like a joke.

Congress, by law, decides two things.

1. How much money the government will spend.
2. How much money the government collects in taxes.

The President, by law, must

1. Put the budget AND tax law Congress sets into action.

Here's where it get stupid.

Congress can make the amount they want to spend bigger than the amount they want to bring in in taxes, leading to a deficit.

The President must then ask Congress for permission to borrow over a set limit in order to pay for the things Congress says he has to buy with the amount of money Congress gives him.

And Congress can tell him no. That's where reality breaks. In any sane world if Congress goes "You must spend 10 dollars and I'm only giving you 5" the right of the President to borrow the remaining 5 would be implied but that's not how it works in this nut house.

That's it. That's all this is. THAT'S ALL THIS IS. A quirk of governmental procedures allows Congress to go "Here's 10 dollars. Go to the store and buy 20 dollars worth of things. You can only put 5 dollars on the credit card."

That's it. Seriously look at me. Look me in the eyes. That's all it is. I tell you this because literally any moment now Republican Trolls are going to flood this thread to tell you that it is literally anything other than that and it is not, they will be lying.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 20th January 2023 at 06:32 AM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 06:36 AM   #3
Tero
Master Poster
 
Tero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North American prairie
Posts: 2,921
Good.
__________________
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Parody: http://karireport.blogspot.com/
Poll: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...proval-rating/
Tero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 06:37 AM   #4
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 19,300
couple of thoughts:

- not raising the debt ceiling is exactly the same as not paying your credit card bills: any Republican pretending it is anything but honoring your obligations is lying

- a technical default is very unlikely to cause very serious or lasting harm to the US or global financial markets or economies. Everyone would expect the US to make up for whatever didn't get paid on time. It is customary to overstate how bad a default would be, because it makes for better news. But there is a huge difference between no paying your creditors because or can't or because you won't

- Biden could force the issue by ordering the treasury to keep raising money and paying obligations, in clear violation of the Separation of Power. All that Congress could do about that is call upon the Supreme Court or try to Impeach Biden, both of which would go nowhere: if the SC tells Biden that he can't do that (in a month or three), the crisis will be over already, and the President would say: "sorry, won't do it again". No one would try to claw the money back that was already spend. And for obvious reasons, an Impeachment would fail.
__________________
"The only true paradise is paradise lost"
Marcel Proust

Last edited by The Great Zaganza; 20th January 2023 at 06:39 AM.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 07:04 AM   #5
Tero
Master Poster
 
Tero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North American prairie
Posts: 2,921
Ah, the treasury. Print more money?
__________________
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

Politics blog: https://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Parody: http://karireport.blogspot.com/
Poll: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...proval-rating/
Tero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 07:14 AM   #6
JoeMorgue
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 42,380
No I doubt (of course nothing is off the table in the new post-fact political world) we'll ever get that desperate.

I think most people in high finance throughout the world have seen this game being played often enough to see it for what it is. The money will be there eventually.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 07:26 AM   #7
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 64,839
And it's worth pointing out that this is considered a "crisis" only when Congress is controlled by Republicans and the president is a Democrat. A Republican Congress has no problems raising the limit with a Republican president. A Democratic Congress has no problems raising the limit with a Republican president. This is always, and only, Republicans trying to use a situation as a weapon against a Democrat president.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 07:35 AM   #8
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 19,300
A group of Hollywood filmmakers has sent a petition to Biden to have a Trillion Dollar Platinum Coin minted, as this would guarantee an endless supply of Heist movies.
__________________
"The only true paradise is paradise lost"
Marcel Proust
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 08:10 AM   #9
Random
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
couple of thoughts:

- not raising the debt ceiling is exactly the same as not paying your credit card bills: any Republican pretending it is anything but honoring your obligations is lying

- a technical default is very unlikely to cause very serious or lasting harm to the US or global financial markets or economies. Everyone would expect the US to make up for whatever didn't get paid on time. It is customary to overstate how bad a default would be, because it makes for better news. But there is a huge difference between no paying your creditors because or can't or because you won't

- Biden could force the issue by ordering the treasury to keep raising money and paying obligations, in clear violation of the Separation of Power. All that Congress could do about that is call upon the Supreme Court or try to Impeach Biden, both of which would go nowhere: if the SC tells Biden that he can't do that (in a month or three), the crisis will be over already, and the President would say: "sorry, won't do it again". No one would try to claw the money back that was already spend. And for obvious reasons, an Impeachment would fail.
The President has a pretty clear 14th Amendment duty to keep spending money if Congress has told him to, even if they don't give him money to do it. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to decide what gets put on the National Credit Card. The 14th Amendment says the National Credit Card bill has to be paid. A conflict has not been tested in court, but it is difficult to read Congresses budget authority as giving them the right to not pay its bills.
__________________
The road to Fascism is paved with people saying, "You're overreacting!".
Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 08:17 AM   #10
JoeMorgue
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 42,380
And like I said that's where this whole thing passes from just absurd into comically absurd.

The President, by law, has to spend the money Congress tells him to spend.
The President, by law, only has the money Congress gives him to spend.

These are facts and they are not up for debate.

The fact the Congress doesn't have to make those two numbers match is simply inexcusably stupid.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 08:35 AM   #11
lobosrul5
Illuminator
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 4,126
Just have the treasury mint a trillion dollar coin...

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/19/11499...ceiling-debate
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 08:40 AM   #12
ahhell
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,055
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
couple of thoughts:

- not raising the debt ceiling is exactly the same as not paying your credit card bills: any Republican pretending it is anything but honoring your obligations is lying

- a technical default is very unlikely to cause very serious or lasting harm to the US or global financial markets or economies. Everyone would expect the US to make up for whatever didn't get paid on time. It is customary to overstate how bad a default would be, because it makes for better news. But there is a huge difference between no paying your creditors because or can't or because you won't

- Biden could force the issue by ordering the treasury to keep raising money and paying obligations, in clear violation of the Separation of Power. All that Congress could do about that is call upon the Supreme Court or try to Impeach Biden, both of which would go nowhere: if the SC tells Biden that he can't do that (in a month or three), the crisis will be over already, and the President would say: "sorry, won't do it again". No one would try to claw the money back that was already spend. And for obvious reasons, an Impeachment would fail.
That's all basically true. This is all especially stupid because we all know they will raise the debt limit.

We all also know scant few republicans actually give a **** about the looming fiscal crisis.

What's a voter to do if they actually care about this issue. One party doesn't seem to care at all and the other clearly only pretends on occasion.

Its all BS. The only spending that really matters is defense, social security, and medicare and mediaid. Reps won't touch an of it and Dems won't touch but a third of it and then, just a little.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 09:23 AM   #13
lobosrul5
Illuminator
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 4,126
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
That's all basically true. This is all especially stupid because we all know they will raise the debt limit.

We all also know scant few republicans actually give a **** about the looming fiscal crisis.

What's a voter to do if they actually care about this issue. One party doesn't seem to care at all and the other clearly only pretends on occasion.

Its all BS. The only spending that really matters is defense, social security, and medicare and mediaid. Reps won't touch an of it and Dems won't touch but a third of it and then, just a little.
Thats a "fact" not in "evidence". I'd say things like NASA, the NSF, department of Energy, the CDC, infrastructure spending, the justice department, funding the IRS* are all pretty damned vital. I occasionally see articles or videos from right wing sources of all this money thats wasted on something trivial intended to make people angry, and its usually a tiny drop in the bucket. ALL discretionary non-defense spending only adds up to about 13% of federal spending.

*guess what happens if we don't actually enforce tax law... no money at all.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 09:32 AM   #14
crescent
Philosopher
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5,286
Originally Posted by Tero View Post
Ah, the treasury. Print more money?
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
A group of Hollywood filmmakers has sent a petition to Biden to have a Trillion Dollar Platinum Coin minted, as this would guarantee an endless supply of Heist movies.
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Just have the treasury mint a trillion dollar coin...

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/19/11499...ceiling-debate
From what I understand, Treasury can't just print more money to get us out of the situation because that might trigger inflation. Or is there some other law or reason?

And the $1,000,000,000,000 coin is a workaround for that because the money would not really go into circulation, and for other reasons?

The Anti-deficiency act seems to be at play here as well - the government can't spend money it doesn't have.

Another question - would/could the extraordinary measures being used to prevent this result in a government shutdown? I swear I remember one or two shutdowns due to debt ceiling issues rather than budget issues, but looking for that now I seem to have misremembered. Instead it seems to have been times when the budget and debt ceiling were hitting at about the same time.

I seem to recall that the extraordinary measures are not all implemented at once. That was we get closer to potential default, they can implement harsher/more impactful measures to ensure that T-bonds keep getting paid at maturity?

So would shutting down the government or temporarily laying off non-essential personnel be one of the extraordinary measures that could eventually be imposed?
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 09:41 AM   #15
seayakin
Graduate Poster
 
seayakin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,367
I don't remember who it was but I did hear one Republican being questioned say we can't default on the debt and those in his party who want to use this to cut social security and medicare better wear a body armor and helmet. David Brooks calls those who want to do this the nihilist Republicans.

I agree with everyone this is a crazy way to run things but it seems like we will continue to face this as long as the constitution and laws remain the same (understanding this is a quite obvious statement). The Republicans will continue to weaponize this structure rather than try to work with democrats to get some real progress on spending.
__________________
"I kayak, therefore I am"
seayakin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 09:42 AM   #16
ahhell
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,055
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
Thats a "fact" not in "evidence". I'd say things like NASA, the NSF, department of Energy, the CDC, infrastructure spending, the justice department, funding the IRS* are all pretty damned vital. I occasionally see articles or videos from right wing sources of all this money thats wasted on something trivial intended to make people angry, and its usually a tiny drop in the bucket. ALL discretionary non-defense spending only adds up to about 13% of federal spending.

*guess what happens if we don't actually enforce tax law... no money at all.
I must of triggered you, I thought it was clear that in this case, by matter I meant that it doesn't matter in terms of its impact on the budget. As you say, its only 13%. And that's the only 13% that our politicians would even consider touching.

Originally Posted by seayakin View Post
I don't remember who it was but I did hear one Republican being questioned say we can't default on the debt and those in his party who want to use this to cut social security and medicare better wear a body armor and helmet. David Brooks calls those who want to do this the nihilist Republicans.

I agree with everyone this is a crazy way to run things but it seems like we will continue to face this as long as the constitution and laws remain the same (understanding this is a quite obvious statement). The Republicans will continue to weaponize this structure rather than try to work with democrats to get some real progress on spending.
Thing is, we have to cut social security and medicare, they make up almost half the Federal budget. How do you control your deficit with out cutting the biggest line items?

Last edited by ahhell; 20th January 2023 at 09:44 AM.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 09:46 AM   #17
lobosrul5
Illuminator
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 4,126
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
I must of triggered you, I thought it was clear that in this case, by matter I meant that it doesn't matter in terms of its impact on the budget. As you say, its only 13%. And that's the only 13% that our politicians would even consider touching.

Thing is, we have to cut social security and medicare, they make up almost half the Federal budget. How do you control your deficit with out cutting the biggest line items?
No I'm certainly not triggered. I did perhaps misunderstand your meaning.

Highlighted: you increase revenues. One of the quickest ways to reduce inflation is to increase taxation.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 09:52 AM   #18
JoeMorgue
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 42,380
Hey here's a fun game.

Ask a Republican what items we should cut to get us from the Amount They Told Biden to Spend to the Amount They Told Biden He Could Spend.

You will not only not get a straight answer, you won't get an answer.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:07 AM   #19
Random
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
I must of triggered you, I thought it was clear that in this case, by matter I meant that it doesn't matter in terms of its impact on the budget. As you say, its only 13%. And that's the only 13% that our politicians would even consider touching.

Thing is, we have to cut social security and medicare, they make up almost half the Federal budget. How do you control your deficit with out cutting the biggest line items?
No we don't. We can make up the money with tax increases. Of course, the GOP has already ruled that out, and makes a point of never, ever even mentioning that possibility in public. Just because the programs are big doesn't instantly mean that they should be cut.

It also doesn't help that whenever you add up the pluses and subtract all the minuses, every GOP plan that has been presented for "saving" Social Security always ends up being worse than doing nothing.

"If we do nothing, we will have to cut Social Security payouts by 25 percent! We have a plan to save Social Security though, all we have to do is cut payouts by 30 percent. On a completely unrelated note, I think we can find some tax money that we can give back to the rich..."

The GOP goal is to take money out of Social Security and Medicare and give it to the rich. Period. Because of this, it is a mathematical certainty that any plan the GOP will propose for these programs will be worse than doing nothing. (If you have the right sort of mind, it can be fun to sort through the occasional GOP plan to "fix" Social Security and Medicare and figure out how the money will be moved. Is it going through some sort of direct handout like privatization? Will it be laundered through the General Fund through tax cuts? It's like "Where's Waldo?", he might be tough to find, but you know he's in there somewhere.)

The GOP would never be able to get away with this in any kind of rational political environment, so they have to create a confusing crisis to hide their actions...
__________________
The road to Fascism is paved with people saying, "You're overreacting!".
Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:12 AM   #20
seayakin
Graduate Poster
 
seayakin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,367
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
Thing is, we have to cut social security and medicare, they make up almost half the Federal budget. How do you control your deficit with out cutting the biggest line items?
I don't have a specific answer but I also think there are two other areas to consider in addition to social security and medicare: the military and raising taxes. However, I don't see how this will ever get done because all four of these areas are sacred cows for different and overlapping constituencies.

I think all have to take hit if anything is going to work.
__________________
"I kayak, therefore I am"
seayakin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:15 AM   #21
JoeMorgue
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 42,380
The time to have a big showy debate about what goes in the budget is BEFORE you send it to the President along with the amount he is allowed to spend.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:16 AM   #22
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Dharug & Gundungurra
Posts: 13,620
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
I must of triggered you, I thought it was clear that in this case, by matter I meant that it doesn't matter in terms of its impact on the budget. As you say, its only 13%. And that's the only 13% that our politicians would even consider touching.

Thing is, we have to cut social security and medicare, they make up almost half the Federal budget. How do you control your deficit without cutting the biggest line items?
Isn't the biggest line item the military? By a very long shot?

Oh yeah...can't get by with a couple fewer ships, tanks and helicopters to save a few billion here and there for Medicare...
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:19 AM   #23
JoeMorgue
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 42,380
For context and so one side can't play a card dishonestly I feel it necessary to point out that a lot of "military spending" has absolutely nothing to do with what the military wants.

As I said in another thread the United States Army has had tanks forced on it against it will for over a decade and the United States Navy had an entire class of ships it didn't want, didn't ask for, and had no use for dumped on it.

The "Industrial" side of the Military-Industrial-Complex spends a lot more than the "Military" side does.

So before this card is even played we cut a lot of military spending without effecting military readiness even a little bit. Just stop buying stuff for the military that the military doesn't want.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:32 AM   #24
Random
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
For context and so one side can't play a card dishonestly I feel it necessary to point out that a lot of "military spending" has absolutely nothing to do with what the military wants.

As I said in another thread the United States Army has had tanks forced on it against it will for over a decade and the United States Navy had an entire class of ships it didn't want, didn't ask for, and had no use for dumped on it.

The "Industrial" side of the Military-Industrial-Complex spends a lot more than the "Military" side does.

So before this card is even played we cut a lot of military spending without effecting military readiness even a little bit. Just stop buying stuff for the military that the military doesn't want.
Most of those programs exist because the equipment production companies spread out their factories to locations all across the US, bringing jobs to a wide variety of Congressional districts. It makes no logistical sense whatsoever, but it does mean that the programs have lots of Congresscritters interested in keeping them going.

To be clear, I have no problem with Government make-work projects, but how about making stuff that we would actually benefit from like solar panels, wind farms, and battery storage facilities. Building multi-million-dollar weapon systems that are left out to rot in a field is not really any better than hiring one group of people to dig ditched and another group to fill them in.
__________________
The road to Fascism is paved with people saying, "You're overreacting!".
Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:35 AM   #25
lobosrul5
Illuminator
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 4,126
Originally Posted by Random View Post
Most of those programs exist because the equipment production companies spread out their factories to locations all across the US, bringing jobs to a wide variety of Congressional districts. It makes no logistical sense whatsoever, but it does mean that the programs have lots of Congresscritters interested in keeping them going.

To be clear, I have no problem with Government make-work projects, but how about making stuff that we would actually benefit from like solar panels, wind farms, and battery storage facilities. Building multi-million-dollar weapon systems that are left out to rot in a field is not really any better than hiring one group of people to dig ditched and another group to fill them in.
That would be communism, why do you hate America! /s
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:39 AM   #26
JoeMorgue
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 42,380
Originally Posted by Random View Post
Most of those programs exist because the equipment production companies spread out their factories to locations all across the US, bringing jobs to a wide variety of Congressional districts. It makes no logistical sense whatsoever, but it does mean that the programs have lots of Congresscritters interested in keeping them going.

To be clear, I have no problem with Government make-work projects, but how about making stuff that we would actually benefit from like solar panels, wind farms, and battery storage facilities. Building multi-million-dollar weapon systems that are left out to rot in a field is not really any better than hiring one group of people to dig ditched and another group to fill them in.
I am fully aware of all of this. I'm just cutting the legs out of the inevitable "Da demiecrats want to weakne da country!" arguments that every Republican troll has mapped to a keyboard shortcut for use in arguments.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 20th January 2023 at 10:45 AM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:41 AM   #27
Norman Alexander
Penultimate Amazing
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Dharug & Gundungurra
Posts: 13,620
Originally Posted by Random View Post
Most of those programs exist because the equipment production companies spread out their factories to locations all across the US, bringing jobs to a wide variety of Congressional districts. It makes no logistical sense whatsoever, but it does mean that the programs have lots of Congresscritters interested in keeping them going.

To be clear, I have no problem with Government make-work projects, but how about making stuff that we would actually benefit from like solar panels, wind farms, and battery storage facilities. Building multi-million-dollar weapon systems that are left out to rot in a field is not really any better than hiring one group of people to dig ditched and another group to fill them in.
Trillion. Social services cost a fraction compared to military spending. One rotting gun-platform less would pay for a whole national service, and no more money need be found to do it.
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 10:50 AM   #28
lobosrul5
Illuminator
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 4,126
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Trillion. Social services cost a fraction compared to military spending. One rotting gun-platform less would pay for a whole national service, and no more money need be found to do it.
Are you making the claim that our total social spending in the USA is less than our military spending... because if so, no thats patently false. We spend far more on social programs than the military.



That doesn't include state and local spending on social programs who foot some of the bill for Medicaid, and the large majority of the bill for education (as examples).

*** that tiny sliver of revenue we get from corporate taxes, is IMO, our biggest issue. The large majority of the biggest 1000 corps in the world are US based.

Last edited by lobosrul5; 20th January 2023 at 10:55 AM.
lobosrul5 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 11:00 AM   #29
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 35,636
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And like I said that's where this whole thing passes from just absurd into comically absurd.

The President, by law, has to spend the money Congress tells him to spend.
The President, by law, only has the money Congress gives him to spend.

These are facts and they are not up for debate.

The fact the Congress doesn't have to make those two numbers match is simply inexcusably stupid.
As I'm sure one of our Republican members will point out, it was the previous Democrat controlled Congress that told him what to spend. Not that that lets Republicans off the hook, since they are the ones who have repeatedly cut taxes for corporations and the rich.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 11:14 AM   #30
ahhell
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,055
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Isn't the biggest line item the military? By a very long shot?

Oh yeah...can't get by with a couple fewer ships, tanks and helicopters to save a few billion here and there for Medicare...
Nope, its one of the big three or four if you include medicaid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...6_vs._2015.png In Billions:

SS 1000
Medicare, 705
Medicaid, 389
Defense, 639.
ETA: The graphic above appears to be more up to date.

You will see a lot of misleading internet memes that ingnore SS, Medicare, and Medicaid because that's convenient and they call it mandatory spending vs discretionary. Its not really mandatory, its more accurate to call it automatic.

And yes we can and will need to raise taxes, but to do that without cuting spending will kill the economy. And mostly to keep shoveling money at the richest group of people in the world, Baby Boomers. It's as much a fantasy to say we can address our deficit with taxes alone as it is to say we can just cut spending.

Last edited by ahhell; 20th January 2023 at 11:22 AM.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 11:25 AM   #31
ahhell
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,055
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
For context and so one side can't play a card dishonestly I feel it necessary to point out that a lot of "military spending" has absolutely nothing to do with what the military wants.

As I said in another thread the United States Army has had tanks forced on it against it will for over a decade and the United States Navy had an entire class of ships it didn't want, didn't ask for, and had no use for dumped on it.

The "Industrial" side of the Military-Industrial-Complex spends a lot more than the "Military" side does.

So before this card is even played we cut a lot of military spending without effecting military readiness even a little bit. Just stop buying stuff for the military that the military doesn't want.
This, the problem with the Military Industrial complex is more the industry side and congress than the military. Defense manufacture's make sure they have some part of every device made in as many districts as they can. No congress wants to vote against another tank if there's even one job in their district that might be lost.

There some of our foreign aid involved in this too. A lot of our aid to Egypt comes in the form of tanks they don't need. Republicans like to say they can save money by tackling fraud waste and abuse, but its never that abuse.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 11:26 AM   #32
ZiprHead
Muse
 
ZiprHead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sag-Nasty
Posts: 873
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Okay before this discussion starts everyone listen.

Let me explain this because it's so stupid it sounds like a joke.

Congress, by law, decides two things.

1. How much money the government will spend.
2. How much money the government collects in taxes.

The President, by law, must

1. Put the budget AND tax law Congress sets into action.

Here's where it get stupid.

Congress can make the amount they want to spend bigger than the amount they want to bring in in taxes, leading to a deficit.

The President must then ask Congress for permission to borrow over a set limit in order to pay for the things Congress says he has to buy with the amount of money Congress gives him.

And Congress can tell him no. That's where reality breaks. In any sane world if Congress goes "You must spend 10 dollars and I'm only giving you 5" the right of the President to borrow the remaining 5 would be implied but that's not how it works in this nut house.

That's it. That's all this is. THAT'S ALL THIS IS. A quirk of governmental procedures allows Congress to go "Here's 10 dollars. Go to the store and buy 20 dollars worth of things. You can only put 5 dollars on the credit card."

That's it. Seriously look at me. Look me in the eyes. That's all it is. I tell you this because literally any moment now Republican Trolls are going to flood this thread to tell you that it is literally anything other than that and it is not, they will be lying.
Perfect explanation.
__________________
When conservatives realize they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will abandon democracy.

IIDB is back, baby!
ZiprHead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 11:28 AM   #33
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 32,473
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Hey here's a fun game.

Ask a Republican what items we should cut to get us from the Amount They Told Biden to Spend to the Amount They Told Biden He Could Spend.

You will not only not get a straight answer, you won't get an answer.
They might answer honestly. They want to get rid of social safety net programs, all of them.
__________________
1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 11:36 AM   #34
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sydney Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,006
The USA government is hilariously lousy at running the USA.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 11:57 AM   #35
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 19,300
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
The USA government is hilariously lousy at running the USA.
that's by Republican design: it's easier to complain that the Government doesn't get anything done when you make sure that it can't get anything done.
__________________
"The only true paradise is paradise lost"
Marcel Proust
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 12:00 PM   #36
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Not In Follansbee
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
And the $1,000,000,000,000 coin is a workaround for that because the money would not really go into circulation, and for other reasons?
?
It's basically a law allowing the treasury to mint platinum commemorative type coins that has no limit on denomination. A massive loophole, more or less.

JoeMorgue's first post in this thread reflects the reality. The treasury can have infinite money and it doesn't go anywhere unless congress spends it.

There are esoteric complications but compared to default all of them are negligible.
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 12:38 PM   #37
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 19,300
The Fed should start a Multi-level Marketing program to pay down the Debt - every crackpot already thinks it's a Ponzi Scheme, so why not lean into it and make some cash?
__________________
"The only true paradise is paradise lost"
Marcel Proust
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 04:41 PM   #38
Random
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,556
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
(snip)

And yes we can and will need to raise taxes, but to do that without cuting spending will kill the economy. And mostly to keep shoveling money at the richest group of people in the world, Baby Boomers. It's as much a fantasy to say we can address our deficit with taxes alone as it is to say we can just cut spending.
Any kind of Grand Bargain would require two things.

First, you would need trust, which the GOP has already killed. Between voting for the Trump tax cuts in 2017 (and a few of them voted for the 2001 Bush tax cuts), changing House rules so you need a 3/5 majority to raise taxes, making their first bill a $100 billion dollar deficit increase to protect wealthy tax cheats, and taking the deficit ceiling hostage in the first place, there is no way to even pretend the GOP is acting in good faith.

The second thing you would need is a deal that both sides would find acceptable, regardless of trust or political considerations. I am not sure that such a deal actually exists. There are genuine ideological differences here...
__________________
The road to Fascism is paved with people saying, "You're overreacting!".
Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 05:19 PM   #39
Solitaire
Neoclinus blanchardi
 
Solitaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,754
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
The Fed should start a Multi-level Marketing program to pay down the Debt - every crackpot already thinks it's a Ponzi Scheme, so why not lean into it and make some cash?

Or start their own cryptocurrency, wash trade it on an exchange for a year
driving its price from $1 to $1,000,000 before anyone else can get in, and
then open it up so the rich crypto bros jump in and start buying it.
__________________
Schrodinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
Solitaire is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2023, 06:54 PM   #40
Solitaire
Neoclinus blanchardi
 
Solitaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,754
Originally Posted by lobosrul5 View Post
That tiny sliver of revenue we get from corporate taxes, is IMO, our biggest
issue. The large majority of the biggest 1000 corps in the world are US based.

Easily fixed. VAT them.

Corporations can outfox any income tax because they can hire talented people
to scheme around it. Other countries just Value Added Tax them on their sales,
say by 20% or so. On the other hand, the corporation would probably block
such a legislative move by lobbying because such a tax reduces sales and income.
__________________
Schrodinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.
Solitaire is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:56 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.