US Federal Government Shutdown | Shutdown Shutdown, Debt Ceiling Raised

Status
Not open for further replies.
FlashFlooder said:
Not irresponsible, inefficient. And I've come to this conclusion through my own observations rather than 'conditioning'.
Click to expand...

No, you haven't. You don't even understand that money, once spent by the government, gets spent again by the person who received it. Other than a discussion about spending being directed in places where it is most likely to get spent again, a discussion about the "efficiency" of government spending in terms of its capacity to improve economic growth is pointless. Yes, we can talk about "efficiency" in terms of whether the government's direct purchases best serve the public interest, but that is an entirely separate discussion from whether the economy grows as a result of government spending. For the latter purpose, the government can spend money paying people to dig holes and fill them back up and the economy would improve because the hole diggers will in turn spend the money that the government pays them on goods and services in the private sector.

Of course, ideally, if the government is going to spend, it makes sense to spend in the most beneficial ways. In a sluggish economy, that would be ways that both serve public ends well (like infrastructure) and that finds its way into the hands of people likely to turn around and spend the money the government paid them.
 
FlashFlooder said:
Thanks for this. I was actually thinking of this very scenario when typing my response earlier, but then realized that the spending in this case was of a very specific type (infrastructure in the first phase, manufacturing in the second). Both things I wish our current government would invest in heavily, btw.

I still have a very hard time jumping from that to "ANY kind of spending helps us get out of a recession".
Click to expand...

Spending is spending. Spending on something like infrastructure just has lasting benefits beyond economic recovery. Which is good.
 
Bulbo only post in OT political threads because he knows he can still troll anyone who doesn't frequent poligaf. Not that people in poligaf can't be trolled, just that they are aware of his shtick more so than others.
 
Fenderputty said:
Bulbo only post in OT political threads because he knows he can still troll anyone who doesn't frequent poligaf. Not that people in poligaf can't be trolled, just that they are aware of his shtick more so than others.
Click to expand...
If this is the case(I don't frequent poligaf nearly as much as I use to) how is he not banned??
 
empty vessel said:
That is precisely what allows the Fed to control interest rates. Do you imagine this graph to be a coincidence?
Click to expand...

The graph is not a coincidence, but the underlying causes of those interest rate movements are different then and now. You have a run-up of inflation affecting nominal rates until the 1980's, and the Fed (culminating with Volcker in the early 80's) pushing the Fed Funds rate higher to reign in that inflation. Then you have the neo-liberals with their puppets Reagan/Thatcher/Greenspan flooding the market with cash (debt), so you had yields fall accross the board. The Fed did adopt a low-interest rate policy, so indeed lower rates were supported by both fiscal and monetary policy.

In the world of today, inability or risk in collecting payments for the ever increasing debt is a more serious problem, and Bernanke himself has said that the Fed is not equiped to handle a "fiscal shock" (debt default). Speaking of the devil, Bank of America/Merrill Lynch just release this supporting my original point:

h4buGzc.jpg


*ahem* no "statistical noise" there...

Rates implications
A shutdown by itself should have only modest implications for the Treasury market, in part because investors had already priced in increased fiscal risks in the two weeks since the FOMC meeting, which served to focus investors on these downside risks. If the shutdown lasts more than a few days, however, we would expect a modest further rally in Treasuries [rates], particularly in the 5-10y sector of the curve, and some widening in swap spreads. Data releases (except for those released by the Fed) could also be delayed. In the 1995 shutdown episode, for example, the December 1995 employment report was delayed by two weeks. A delay in payroll numbers could result in a decline in shorter-dated volatility, in our view.

The debt ceiling has the potential to be much more impactful for the market, and a protracted debt-ceiling battle could lead to a more meaningful rally in rates. We also expect T-bills maturing in late October and early November to experience further selling pressure as the debt-limit deadline approaches. However, we do not expect significant outflows from money funds as occurred in 2011, because the expiration of unlimited FDIC insurance on bank deposits has eliminated deposits as a safe-haven alternative to money funds for many investors.
Click to expand...

empty vessel said:
I don't understand what you are saying here. What I know is that bond issuance is a government spending program for the benefit of (mostly wealthy) investors. That's all it is. Not at all unlike social security.
Click to expand...

QE has been a program to stop the deleveraging in the shadow banking system... with Bernanke hoping that it translates into more jobs. I agree with you that bond issuance is to help wealthy investors, but more specifically, global banks. Here is a loong (but good) paper on the shadow banking system.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr580.pdf
 
NullPointer said:
This is the "Boehner shutdown" after all. He caused it through his own choice and can end it right this moment if he wanted to.

Obama calls it the "Republican shutdown", but I think its time things got more personal. And while Boehner is acting out of self-preservation and fear, I wonder how much he'd like it if the blame shifted from the tea party junior class extremists and was scarfed directly around his neck like the albatross it is.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I think the whole of the GOP should get burned by this. Letting it get pinned on one person will mean the other members will be even less likely to suffer consequences than they already are.
 
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0lFyFJeZSY

Changes nothing.
Click to expand...

It changes nothing that he was actually saying "Why would we want to pit the needs of cancer patient children against the needs of the military that are sitting at home with problems of their own?"

You made it sound like he doesn't care about the cancer patients because he's got politicking to do. He's saying we need to help everybody. If you're going to spread misinformation, do it elsewhere..
 
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:
Harry Reid quote on why he will refuse to pass bill giving funding to NIH to help kids with cancer.



What a callous pile of shit.
Click to expand...

If this passes then a couple of kids get their healthcare help to the exclusion of millions who will not get it if aca is defunded. If the CR os passed, not only do these kids get their funding(and more) but millions of people will be able to get services that they desperately need.

Why should we choose between kids with cancer and starving seniors? Between veterans and health care? Between national parks and our national security?

Because the republicans say so? I say fuck no.
 
Brian Griffin said:
I disagree. I think the whole of the GOP should get burned by this.
Click to expand...
Sadly, I don't even know what this would mean.

You'd think that the Republicans had burned their bridges with the American people to a crisp several times over, even in recent years, but here we are. This is just the latest crisis manufactured by an already burned party.

The junior class extremists here will go back to their constituents and suffer no consequences for these actions. The media will settle upon the standard *balance* of both sides being at fault. And we'll be here again soon enough.

I'd just hope that putting Mr. Orange as THE face of this shutdown, and the one that should feel all the heat for this clusterfuck, it might bring him out of the shadows and pressure him to act.
 
Remember when everyone on the left was tweeting #compromise back a couple years ago? Wonder why compromise was such a great thing then and such a horrible thing now, in basically the same situation. Oh, right, marching orders.
 
Open Source said:
Remember when everyone on the left was tweeting #compromise back a couple years ago? Wonder why compromise was such a great thing then and such a horrible thing now, in basically the same situation. Oh, right, marching orders.
Click to expand...

Because there is nothing to compromise over. Either end the shutdown or keep it going.
 
Open Source said:
Remember when everyone on the left was tweeting #compromise back a couple years ago? Wonder why compromise was such a great thing then and such a horrible thing now, in basically the same situation. Oh, right, marching orders.
Click to expand...

Because we're reaching a breaking point with the right-wing extremists in Congress, and compromising with them empowers them when they need to be marginalized once and for all.

And they are offering nothing worth compromising over, and are in no position to demand a compromise.
 
fallagin said:
If this passes then a couple of kids get their healthcare help to the exclusion of millions who will not get it if aca is defunded. If the CR os passed, not only do these kids get their funding(and more) but millions of people will be able to get services that they desperately need.

Why should we choose between kids with cancer and starving seniors? Between veterans and health care? Between national parks and our national security?

Because the republicans say so? I say fuck no.
Click to expand...

This is obviously the Republican plan. They are going to offer to fund parts of the government and have Reid and Obama say NO so they look like the bad guys. It's been pretty obvious from the beginning.
I just can't believe Reid wasn't prepared for answering those questions and actually answered in the manner he did. What a fucking idiot. Always has been.
 
Open Source said:
Remember when everyone on the left was tweeting #compromise back a couple years ago? Wonder why compromise was such a great thing then and such a horrible thing now, in basically the same situation. Oh, right, marching orders.
Click to expand...
What exactly are the Republicans bringing to the table here?

"Do what we say or the government doesn't get funded" isn't a discussion. There is no tit for tat here. Or do you consider funding the government itself to be the Republican olive branch?

The compromises have already happened, several times over.
 
Open Source said:
Remember when everyone on the left was tweeting #compromise back a couple years ago? Wonder why compromise was such a great thing then and such a horrible thing now, in basically the same situation. Oh, right, marching orders.
Click to expand...

What are the Democrats supposed to compromise on? And in what way would any supposed "compromise" not set a precedent that allows one party to hold the economy hostage over a law they don't like whenever they want? This has been beaten into the ground several times over in this thread. The word "compromise" is just being mindlessly tossed around as a talking point and nothing more.
 
Bulbo Urethral Baggins said:
This is obviously the Republican plan. They are going to offer to fund parts of the government and have Reid and Obama say NO so they look like the bad guys. It's been pretty obvious from the beginning.
I just can't believe Reid wasn't prepared for answering those questions and actually answered in the manner he did. What a fucking idiot. Always has been.
Click to expand...

I will admit that the democrats and reid have been pretty bad at articulating their points, but that certainly doesnt shift the blame from the republicans.
 
Open Source said:
Remember when everyone on the left was tweeting #compromise back a couple years ago? Wonder why compromise was such a great thing then and such a horrible thing now, in basically the same situation. Oh, right, marching orders.
Click to expand...

paul ryan's utterly moronic, dumbfuck budget suggestion is higher than the one dems are looking to pass right now.

people really need to fuck off with this nonsense.
 
So this is the kind of stuff I'm dealing with on Facebook, so I decided to see how little research this friend does when it comes to her confirmation bias. I decided to attribute a pretty famous Joker quote from The Dark Knight to Obama with a few relevant tweaks, and...

 
Open Source said:
Remember when everyone on the left was tweeting #compromise back a couple years ago? Wonder why compromise was such a great thing then and such a horrible thing now, in basically the same situation. Oh, right, marching orders.
Click to expand...

Well, what happens if Obama compromises? We delay obamacare for another year and repeal the medical device tax and then in another 3 months Tea party republicans cause another crises by refusing to fund the government or raise the debt ceiling unless they get medicare and social security cuts, tax cuts, or who knows what else. That will repeat and repeat and repeat.

Do you honestly think that would be a good situation? One party dictating terms by holding the government or its credit rating hostage? That isnt American democracy. Obama can't compromise because the Republicans have proven time and again that they do not want compromise or negotiate. This is just further proof of that. Obama gets to fund the government and republicans get to delay/destory obamacare? What the hell kinda compromise is that?

I mean seriously, if a republican gets elected next would you be okay with the democratic house or senate demand that single payer, carbon tax, universal pre-k be enacted or else they shut down the government or refuse to raise the debt limit? (honestly a bit worried about that since i think some tea partyiers are okay with a government shutdown, which is simply idiotic).
 
BertramCooper said:
Because we're reaching a breaking point with the right-wing extremists in Congress, and compromising with them empowers them when they need to be marginalized once and for all.

And they are offering nothing worth compromising over, and are in no position to demand a compromise.
Click to expand...

So basically, "because we don't want to."

Also (in response to a couple other posts, not this one), raising the debt limit is really not much different from funding government. Either you do or you don't.

Funding government isn't something that happens automatically with no negotiation in any year ever. Otherwise there'd be a law that provides for automatic funding (and there actually should be a "maintenance budget" in place that does exactly this; other countries have it, and it has empirical benefits). Picking this year as the year where no negotiation happens, when in fact this happens each and every year, is rather odd.

I'm not saying I agree with what the GOP is doing, because I don't. I just like to point out the absurd hypocrisy of the left when they get on their moral high horses and take a position diametrically opposed to a previous position because it's better politics.
 
Open Source said:
I'm not saying I agree with what the GOP is doing, because I don't. I just like to point out the absurd hypocrisy of the left when they get on their moral high horses and take a position diametrically opposed to a previous position because it's better politics.
Click to expand...

I'm just going to let the irony sink in.
 
Open Source said:
So basically, "because we don't want to."

Also (in response to a couple other posts, not this one), raising the debt limit is really not much different from funding government. Either you do or you don't.

Funding government isn't something that happens automatically with no negotiation in any year ever. Otherwise there'd be a law that provides for automatic funding (and there actually should be a "maintenance budget" in place that does exactly this; other countries have it, and it has empirical benefits). Picking this year as the year where no negotiation happens, when in fact this happens each and every year, is rather odd.

I'm not saying I agree with what the GOP is doing, because I don't. I just like to point out the absurd hypocrisy of the left when they get on their moral high horses and take a position diametrically opposed to a previous position because it's better politics.
Click to expand...

You don't understand the government or legislative process do you?
 
Open Source said:
So basically, "because we don't want to."

Also (in response to a couple other posts, not this one), raising the debt limit is really not much different from funding government. Either you do or you don't.

Funding government isn't something that happens automatically with no negotiation in any year ever. Otherwise there'd be a law that provides for automatic funding (and there actually should be a "maintenance budget" in place that does exactly this; other countries have it, and it has empirical benefits). Picking this year as the year where no negotiation happens, when in fact this happens each and every year, is rather odd.

I'm not saying I agree with what the GOP is doing, because I don't. I just like to point out the absurd hypocrisy of the left when they get on their moral high horses and take a position diametrically opposed to a previous position because it's better politics.
Click to expand...
"Compromise"
an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
Click to expand...
What concessions are Republicans making and what are Democrats getting in response? Your original post makes no sense.
 
Suikoguy said:
You don't understand the government or legislative process do you?
Click to expand...

It really is amazing how many "citizens" are so clueless and under-informed. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic. But he got us libs oh boy did he.

remist said:
"Compromise"

What concessions are Republicans making? Your original post makes no sense.
Click to expand...

I still haven't seen anyone in favor of this bullshit explain how they reconcile this very simple yet seemingly complex to them point of view. I guess not having an answer is the go-to response for the less than able.
 
Open Source said:
Funding government isn't something that happens automatically with no negotiation in any year ever. Otherwise there'd be a law that provides for automatic funding (and there actually should be a "maintenance budget" in place that does exactly this; other countries have it, and it has empirical benefits). Picking this year as the year where no negotiation happens, when in fact this happens each and every year, is rather odd.
Click to expand...

what in holy hell are you talking about.
 
Open Source said:
Remember when everyone on the left was tweeting #compromise back a couple years ago? Wonder why compromise was such a great thing then and such a horrible thing now, in basically the same situation. Oh, right, marching orders.
Click to expand...

There was at least a bit of legitimate compromise there as democrats at least got equal sized military cuts for equal sized non-military cuts (although it was by dollar amount and not percentages). And the debate was actually about spending and appropriations, which is what these budget bills are supposed to be about.

This time democrats are getting absolutely nothing, and the Republicans have taken this far out of the realm of actual budget talks.
 
Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) just called out Republicans for caring more about kids be able to go to zoos than they do about providing them basic health care.

'Twas amusing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Realizing the truth of my debt
2 3
104
5K
jufonuk replied
[UK] Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row
2
76
5K
Paasei replied
Are the people ready to be governed by AI
Science 
31
465
ReasonBeing replied
US air traffic control still runs on Windows 95 and floppy disks
48
135
sono replied
Temu to stop selling goods from China directly to US customers
33
738
OmegaSupreme replied
Top Bottom