Debt Ceiling issue

Mehran(ISP)

<b>Administrator</b>
Oct 16, 2002
3,404
0
MD, USA
#1
What does everyone think about the debt ceiling issue and who'se at fault thus far?

I don't think some people recognize how catastrophic a default on payments for the world's largest economy can be. Yes, this is same thing that happened to Greece in principle; luckily for the U.S it will still have a strong credit rating even if it loses it's AAA rating. But if you can't borrow to pay your bills who cares what the credit rating is. This is a dangerous game of politics being played and I think the Republican party is playing it's hand knowing that without a crisis like this they don't stand a chance against Obama in the re-election year. What's your two cents?
 

masoudA

Legionnaire
Oct 16, 2008
6,199
22
#2
Mehran Jaan
The idea of borrowing to pay debts is pretty scary -
but what scares me the most is: Bewteen 2007-2009, between Bush and Obama, about $14 trillion was added to US national debt, in the name of averting economic collapse, creating jobs,........ none of it happened!! That to me is an indication of a sick system that can drain $14 trillion in two years with next to no accountability.
 

ardy

Legionnaire
Nov 25, 2004
6,575
0
San Diego Armando Maradona, CA
#4
The whole thing is nothing but a public show. Both parties are trying to show that they are sticking to their principles (which they've got none these days) and claim that they have major differences with the direction that the other is trying to take. But essentially, there are no significant difference in between as both parties, with a few exceptions, are basically corporate-bitches who would do anything to get re-elected.

Obama's presidency has been a total scam so far. I will not vote for him in 2012 for sure.
 

Mehran(ISP)

<b>Administrator</b>
Oct 16, 2002
3,404
0
MD, USA
#8
I don't think there's anyone that can disagree with the fact that borrowing to pay your bills and living of credit is un-healthy. But I have to disagree with the fact that it hasn't done anything. Noone knows what would of happened if the government didn't pump this cash into the economy. Would the unemployment rate be 20% instead of 10%? Maybe, with the likes of Citi, BOA, and auto industry going down sounds more probable, where will these people that were going to get laid off be hired? I do have a problem of this being a political game. I don't understand why the republicans don't want a tax increase for people that make a very healthy living; it's simple math that you have to bring in more and cut programs. All they want to do is cut programs without the increase in revenue and raise it for another 6 months so the same thing can go on then and it's much closer to the re-election to play politics.
 
Oct 16, 2002
39,533
1,513
DarvAze DoolAb
www.iransportspress.com
#9
It's absolutely mind boggling that ordinary people are still sticking to their useless political beliefs during such dire times. Finger pointing and idiotic advocating of either party (republican or democrat) has destroyed America.

Exactly half of the US population holds a scary 2.5% of its wealth. The top 1% income earners own the whole country and people are still looking for Obama's birth certificate or Bush's connection to Halliburton.

Believe it or not, there are still ordinary unemployed citizens who know the facts above and still manage to find a reason to defend the Republican party's push for corporate welfare or tax breaks for the rich :)

There's one telling quote that should leave many Americans deep in their thoughts for a while:

"American citizens who have incomes less than $250,000/year have become a liability(not an asset, but a liability) to their nation".
 

IPride

National Team Player
Oct 18, 2002
5,885
0
Toronto, Canada
#10
When Clinton was president US had a budget surplus...but instead of using that surplus to pay down the national debt Bush used it instead to give tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations and start two very costly wars which put the country in a position that it could not deal with a crisis.
Of course the republicans are too dishonest to admit to this fact, instead they choose to blame Obama. Like Obama was the guy who created the financial crisis which needed a massive stimulus spending to prevent things from getting worse and a massive spending on social security and unemployment benefits.

Obama is also at fault.. He has been lacking spine in dealing with the black-mailing republicans.. He should have rallied people from the very start to get more involved. Opinion polls show that the position that the house republicans have taken falls even to the right of the centrist view in America.. meaning at this point its not even about finding middle ground..it's about finding a middle ground between the centre and the right.

On issues related to the economy... I still have not seen a credible plan put forward by the republicans that would see the economy grow and create jobs... You talk to any macro economist that knows a thing or two and he/she will tell you that when you're against the zero-interest rate bound, monetary expansion is not enough (not to mention that it will not create inflation) and also that fiscal expansion (by the government) is needed to compensate for the contraction in private demand. Of course, republicans (and more recently Obama himself which amazes me) come up with these retarded analogies saying that the government is like a corporation and if corporations are cutting back so should the government.. THIS IS STUPID. In a recession, when the corporations cut back the government would need to compensate otherwise the whole economy will just go to hell. Government should only consider cutting back when the private demand has rebounded.
These morons don't even bother grabbing a book and reading about what happened in the great depression. Governments started cutting back in spending when the economy was in bad shape and that's what caused the great depression. And what got countries out of it was the one of the greatest government spending projects in the history of mankind (World War II).
Can't expect more from the party of Bachmanns and Palins.
 

Niloufar

Football Legend
Oct 19, 2002
29,626
23
#11
debt ceiling issue is an entertaining story that will benefit both parties' political interests(at the expense of American ppl) at the end.

Everyone knows all Top corporate chairmen and both parties' officials are scared to death to let U.S default on its debt by next week. they'll reach an agreement on min 90 of the last day just to show they have very different opinions!

Its sad that at a time that U.S $ is losing its value every day, its credit rating will go down again soon, and is no longer a top Economic power, playing politics and increasing debt ceiling(so govt can borrow more to pay those top corporations) is the best they can offer to American ppl. In the meanwhile, their insider traders dont care about market downturn until next week, to pile up on cheap stocks until agreement is reached!
 

ardy

Legionnaire
Nov 25, 2004
6,575
0
San Diego Armando Maradona, CA
#12
When Clinton was president US had a budget surplus...but instead of using that surplus to pay down the national debt Bush used it instead to give tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations and start two very costly wars which put the country in a position that it could not deal with a crisis.
That's simply not the whole story. You are completely ignoring the era of irresponsible growth, the bubble, that was essentially created through "anti-regulation" by the Clinton administration- that alone has been one of the most contributing factors to the current climate and overall health of the U.S. economy. It's simply not the case that Bush, arguably the worst president in history, inherited a healthy healthy economy with a strong backbone in place.
 
Jun 7, 2004
3,196
0
#13
I guess I am among the minority that believes that this is a serious issue because it is. It is not exclusively about credit rating. Instead it is about confidence of which crediting rating is a portion. Confidence is about perception. The US is undermining confidence in its ability to pay its debt and that will result in higher interest rates for US borrowing. This is very bad for the US.

Even if the US balanced the budget today, it still will have to borrow money to pay off the treasuries that become due. Even if the US carried a surplus today it will take decades before the current debt that has accumulated since WWII is paid off. So it is very important to secure low interest rates. Acting as if a rise in the cost of borrowing is not a big deal is pure stupidity. It is a serious issue and this is what is the main problem in the most recent episode.

As far as whose fault it is, obviously it is the fault of the political system first and foremost. Secondly it is the fault of the US citizens. Aside from that, among the two parties, both are to be blamed, Republicans slightly more than the democrats.

The tea party crowd do not have the intelligence to understand what I wrote above. But the democrats are nearly as much at fault. Obama has stated that he wants some kind of increase in collected taxes or else he does not accept any package. What a pathetically inept person and president he has turned out to be. He is a coward, with very little understanding of anything really and very little governing ability. He truly is a midget compared to Bill Clinton. Oh, how sorry I am that he instead of Hillary Clinton became President. Obama had both the house and senate. They voted on this very same issue last winter and chose not to let any part of Bush's tax cuts to expire. Now they are saying they want higher taxes!? How pathetic!
 

IPride

National Team Player
Oct 18, 2002
5,885
0
Toronto, Canada
#14
That's simply not the whole story. You are completely ignoring the era of irresponsible growth, the bubble, that was essentially created through "anti-regulation" by the Clinton administration- that alone has been one of the most contributing factors to the current climate and overall health of the U.S. economy. It's simply not the case that Bush, arguably the worst president in history, inherited a healthy healthy economy with a strong backbone in place.
Anti-regulation is a republican theme. A lot of the needed institutions were in place during the Clinton era (look up what Brooskley Born was doing at the CFTC) but nothing too preventative could be done because of the influence of republicans like Alan Greenspan.
 
Feb 22, 2005
6,884
9
#15
You are absolutely correct in your analysis here. It is amazing what is happening with US. We ask why did big Empires fall and its people were not able to stop it, and we can see it in perfect example in the US. Tea party and its damage to the US at this pivotal time in history is shocking to watch. Obama and democrats had senate and congress but it was lack of audacity and the fear that they took control of them. Giving in to fear, they ended up loosing both house.

At the time when government needs to be involved and needs to inject into the economy, as the corporations are cutting back, you have tea party paralyzing it, and republicans try to score points and see Democrats sink. Truth of the matter is the Democrats are spineless and they have not even gone far enough in injecting money into the system. If they had done 1.8 Trillion last year instead of 700, we would have probably see the economy recover much quicker.

This is just not the time to cut and take money out of the economy. These Tea party people who lack intelligent to know any better, are actually going to put themselves out of jobs. I read about the 52 years old whose husband drives hours each day to work and hates Obama because he thinks Obama raising the taxes on the very wealthy is going to put them out of work (That raising the taxes on the very wealthy would put pressure on them and they will take it away). So, they rather see them cut the budget. Idiots dont understand that means loss of jobs as there will be money cut from industries. Idiots dont get it that the taxes on the very wealthy have shown does not make a difference to economy as they end up saving during the hard times or put into international economies, so it does not help US economy.


I guess I am among the minority that believes that this is a serious issue because it is. It is not exclusively about credit rating. Instead it is about confidence of which crediting rating is a portion. Confidence is about perception. The US is undermining confidence in its ability to pay its debt and that will result in higher interest rates for US borrowing. This is very bad for the US.

Even if the US balanced the budget today, it still will have to borrow money to pay off the treasuries that become due. Even if the US carried a surplus today it will take decades before the current debt that has accumulated since WWII is paid off. So it is very important to secure low interest rates. Acting as if a rise in the cost of borrowing is not a big deal is pure stupidity. It is a serious issue and this is what is the main problem in the most recent episode.

As far as whose fault it is, obviously it is the fault of the political system first and foremost. Secondly it is the fault of the US citizens. Aside from that, among the two parties, both are to be blamed, Republicans slightly more than the democrats.

The tea party crowd do not have the intelligence to understand what I wrote above. But the democrats are nearly as much at fault. Obama has stated that he wants some kind of increase in collected taxes or else he does not accept any package. What a pathetically inept person and president he has turned out to be. He is a coward, with very little understanding of anything really and very little governing ability. He truly is a midget compared to Bill Clinton. Oh, how sorry I am that he instead of Hillary Clinton became President. Obama had both the house and senate. They voted on this very same issue last winter and chose not to let any part of Bush's tax cuts to expire. Now they are saying they want higher taxes!? How pathetic!
 
Feb 22, 2005
6,884
9
#16
I think people give too much credit to Clinton. Yes, he was smart and did much good. But him reappointing Greenspan showed his lack of audacity and courage. Clinton failed to push hard enough for regulations. They all knew about the big bubble and they did not have to put it all stop on the bubble. Rather, they could have started gradual regulation that could have help control it so it does not burst like it did.

Obama is even worst as he lacked courage to make any changes and put in power the same people who were responsible for the economy disaster. No surprise, we are heading towards another economy meltdown.

Republicans, forget them. They know as much about economy as Ahmadnejad knows about economy of IRan. They lack knowledge and their only solution is to cut all the taxes on the wealthy top. They still live in 100 years ago and have no understanding of global economy. You give a rich man tax cuts and they will take it and put it in India, Russia, Brazil, China and others where the economies are growing.
 

Pahlevoon Nayeb

National Team Player
Oct 17, 2002
4,138
0
Poshteh Kooh
#17
Published on Tuesday, July 26, 2011 by TomDispatch.com

The Coming Economic Disaster
Crash Club: What Happens When Three Sputtering Economies Collide?

by Mike Davis

When my old gang and I were 14 or 15 years old, many centuries ago, we yearned for immortality in the fiery wreck of a bitchin' '40 Ford or '57 Chevy. Our J.K. Rowling was Henry Felsen, the ex-Marine who wrote the bestselling masterpieces Hot Rod (1950), Street Rod (1953), and Crash Club (1958).

Officially, his books -- highly praised by the National Safety Council -- were deterrents, meant to scare my generation straight with huge dollops of teenage gore. In fact, he was our asphalt Homer, exalting doomed teenage heroes and inviting us to emulate their legend.
One of his books ends with an apocalyptic collision at a crossroads that more or less wipes out the entire graduating class of a small Iowa town. We loved this passage so much that we used to read it aloud to each other.

It's hard not to think of the great Felsen, who died in 1995, while browsing the business pages these days. There, after all, are the Tea Party Republicans, accelerator punched to the floor, grinning like demons as they approach Deadman’s Curve. (John Boehner and David Brooks, in the back seat, are of course screaming in fear.)

The Felsen analogy seems even stronger when you leave local turf for a global view. From the air, where those Iowa cornstalks don’t conceal the pattern of blind convergence, the world economic situation looks distinctly like a crash waiting to happen. From three directions, the United States, the European Union, and China are blindly speeding toward the same intersection. The question is: Will anyone survive to attend the prom?

Shaking the Three Pillars of McWorld

Let me reprise the obvious, but seldom discussed. Even if debt-limit doomsday is averted, Obama has already hocked the farm and sold the kids. With breathtaking contempt for the liberal wing of his own party, he’s offered to put the sacrosanct remnant of the New Deal safety net on the auction bloc to appease a hypothetical “center” and win reelection at any price. (Dick Nixon, old socialist, where are you now that we need you?)

As a result, like the Phoenicians in the Bible, we’ll sacrifice our children (and their schoolteachers) to Moloch, now called Deficit. The bloodbath in the public sector, together with an abrupt shutoff of unemployment benefits, will negatively multiply through the demand side of the economy until joblessness is in teenage digits and Lady Gaga is singing “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?”

Lest we forget, we also live in a globalized economy where Americans are consumers of the last resort and the dollar is still the safe haven for the planet’s hoarded surplus value. The new recession that the Republicans are engineering with such impunity will instantly put into doubt all three pillars of McWorld, each already shakier than generally imagined: American consumption, European stability, and Chinese growth.

Across the Atlantic, the European Union is demonstrating that it is exclusively a union of big banks and mega-creditors, grimly determined to make the Greeks sell off the Parthenon and the Irish emigrate to Australia. One doesn’t have to be a Keynesian to know that, should this happen, the winds will only blow colder thereafter. (If German jobs have so far been saved, it is only because China and the other BRICs -- Brazil, Russia, and India -- have been buying so many machine tools and Mercedes.)

Boardwalk Empire Times 160

China, of course, now props up the world, but the question is: For how much longer? Officially, the People’s Republic of China is in the midst of an epochal transition from an export-based to a consumer-based economy. The ultimate goal of which is not only to turn the average Chinese into a suburban motorist, but also to break the perverse dependency that ties that country’s growth to an American trade deficit Beijing must, in turn, finance in order to keep the Yuan from appreciating.

Unfortunately for the Chinese, and possibly the world, that country’s planned consumer boom is quickly morphing into a dangerous real-estate bubble. China has caught the Dubai virus and now every city there with more than one million inhabitants (at least 160 at last count) aspires to brand itself with a Rem Koolhaas skyscraper or a destination mega-mall. The result has been an orgy of over-construction.

Despite the reassuring image of omniscient Beijing mandarins in cool control of the financial system, China actually seems to be functioning more like 160 iterations of Boardwalk Empire, where big city political bosses and allied private developers are able to forge their own backdoor deals with giant state banks.

In effect, a shadow banking system has arisen with big banks moving loans off their balance sheets into phony trust companies and thus evading official caps on total lending. Last week, Moody’s Business Service reported that the Chinese banking system was concealing one-half-trillion dollars in problematic loans, mainly for municipal vanity projects. Another rating service warned that non-performing loans could constitute as much as 30% of bank portfolios.

Real-estate speculation, meanwhile, is vacuuming up domestic savings as urban families, faced with soaring home values, rush to invest in property before they are priced out of the market. (Sound familiar?) According to Business Week, residential housing investment now accounts for 9% of the gross domestic product, up from only 3.4% in 2003.

So, will Chengdu become the next Orlando and China Construction Bank the next Lehman Brothers? Odd, the credulity of so many otherwise conservative pundits, who have bought into the idea that the Chinese Communist leadership has discovered the law of perpetual motion, creating a market economy immune to business cycles or speculative manias.

If China has a hard landing, it will also break the bones of leading suppliers like Brazil, Indonesia, and Australia. Japan, already mired in recession after triple mega-disasters, is acutely sensitive to further shocks from its principal markets. And the Arab Spring may turn to winter if new governments cannot grow employment or contain the inflation of food prices.

As the three great economic blocs accelerate toward synchronized depression, I find that I’m no longer as thrilled as I was at 14 by the prospect of a classic Felsen ending -- all tangled metal and young bodies.

To listen to Timothy MacBain’s latest TomCast audio interview in which Davis discusses a possible Chinese real estate crash and other perils of the global economic system, click here, or download it to your iPod here.
To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.
© 2011 Mike Davis
 

Pahlevoon Nayeb

National Team Player
Oct 17, 2002
4,138
0
Poshteh Kooh
#18
Published on Tuesday, July 26, 2011 by the New York Times

'Centrism': The Cult That Is Destroying America


by Paul Krugman

Watching our system deal with the debt ceiling crisis — a wholly self-inflicted crisis, which may nonetheless have disastrous consequences — it’s increasingly obvious that what we’re looking at is the destructive influence of a cult that has really poisoned our political system.

And no, I don’t mean the fanaticism of the right. Well, OK, that too. But my feeling about those people is that they are what they are; you might as well denounce wolves for being carnivores. Crazy is what they do and what they are.

No, the cult that I see as reflecting a true moral failure is the cult of balance, of centrism.

Think about what’s happening right now. We have a crisis in which the right is making insane demands, while the president and Democrats in Congress are bending over backward to be accommodating — offering plans that are all spending cuts and no taxes, plans that are far to the right of public opinion.

So what do most news reports say? They portray it as a situation in which both sides are equally partisan, equally intransigent — because news reports always do that. And we have influential pundits calling out for a new centrist party, a new centrist president, to get us away from the evils of partisanship.

The reality, of course, is that we already have a centrist president — actually a moderate conservative president. Once again, health reform — his only major change to government — was modeled on Republican plans, indeed plans coming from the Heritage Foundation. And everything else — including the wrongheaded emphasis on austerity in the face of high unemployment — is according to the conservative playbook.

What all this means is that there is no penalty for extremism; no way for most voters, who get their information on the fly rather than doing careful study of the issues, to understand what’s really going on.

You have to ask, what would it take for these news organizations and pundits to actually break with the convention that both sides are equally at fault? This is the clearest, starkest situation one can imagine short of civil war. If this won’t do it, nothing will.

And yes, I think this is a moral issue. The “both sides are at fault” people have to know better; if they refuse to say it, it’s out of some combination of fear and ego, of being unwilling to sacrifice their treasured pose of being above the fray.

It’s a terrible thing to watch, and our nation will pay the price.

© 2011 Paul Krugman



Paul Krugman is professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University and a regular columnist for The New York Times. Krugman was the 2008 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics. He is the author of numerous books, including The Conscience of A Liberal, and his most recent, The Return of Depression Economics.

more Paul Krugman
 

Mahdi

Elite Member
Jan 1, 1970
6,999
497
Mjunik
#19
It's not like if not Obama, then Pailin. I'm really hoping for a strong third-party candidate to surface before the election especially with another financial meltdown on the horizon.
The Bloomberg party that establishes him as the dictator of the US? Which Third Party? It comes down to the lesser of two evils and since there's no one on the Republican side you can take halfway serious and the Democratic part isn't the smartest either, it comes down to what it is.

Besides, here's an account on Harry Reid and Democrats in Senate and how they got the US in the mess it is now..
http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/07/26/how-harry-reid-caused-the-debt-ceiling-debacle/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...iling-in-2010/2011/07/11/gIQA3uWFbI_blog.html

This is what it comes down to. Yes, Obama lacks balls, he could have handled it better, his centrism bullshit is rubbish...it's not however that anyone else is doing a better job and whenever a grown up has to deal with kids and takes them serious, you get the mess we got now.

Hillary Clinton would have picked the same staff Obama picked. How on earth would she have done a better job and on what basis? Maybe she wouldn't have allowed Republicans to blackmail her but then again, her policies would have been at best a larger stimulus and a more European based medicaid program...programs for which people here criticzed Obama for for doing it at all.
 
Jun 7, 2004
3,196
0
#20
No.
What I wrote is quite the opposite of your statement below that you happen to think that is in agreement to mine. The price of not cutting the budget deficit is far greater than any short-term gain from funding additional government activity at this point. As I noted yesterday, and investors are finding out today and will become even more convinced soon, this is a serious issue with serious consequences. Bond rates will rise and this will hurt the US much, much more than any good that government stimulus will provide.


You are absolutely correct in your analysis here. It is amazing what is happening with US. We ask why did big Empires fall and its people were not able to stop it, and we can see it in perfect example in the US. Tea party and its damage to the US at this pivotal time in history is shocking to watch. Obama and democrats had senate and congress but it was lack of audacity and the fear that they took control of them. Giving in to fear, they ended up loosing both house.

At the time when government needs to be involved and needs to inject into the economy, as the corporations are cutting back, you have tea party paralyzing it, and republicans try to score points and see Democrats sink. Truth of the matter is the Democrats are spineless and they have not even gone far enough in injecting money into the system. If they had done 1.8 Trillion last year instead of 700, we would have probably see the economy recover much quicker.

This is just not the time to cut and take money out of the economy. These Tea party people who lack intelligent to know any better, are actually going to put themselves out of jobs. I read about the 52 years old whose husband drives hours each day to work and hates Obama because he thinks Obama raising the taxes on the very wealthy is going to put them out of work (That raising the taxes on the very wealthy would put pressure on them and they will take it away). So, they rather see them cut the budget. Idiots dont understand that means loss of jobs as there will be money cut from industries. Idiots dont get it that the taxes on the very wealthy have shown does not make a difference to economy as they end up saving during the hard times or put into international economies, so it does not help US economy.