US Federal Government Shutdown | Shutdown Shutdown, Debt Ceiling Raised

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bloomberg just pushed through a notification saying 'Senate fails 53-45 to Advance U.S debt-Limit Measure'
 
What was attached to that debt limit rise? Was it just that democrats didn't want to raise the debt ceiling without reopening the government? Wow, I never thought I would see these kind of balls. Republicans have to know that once they cave here they lose pretty much all the power they've been building over the last few years and have no leverage left especially with the public hating them so much.
 
metalslimer said:
What was attached to that debt limit rise? Was it just that democrats didn't want to raise the debt ceiling without reopening the government? Wow, I never thought I would see these kind of balls. Republicans have to know that once they cave here they lose pretty much all the power they've been building over the last few years and have no leverage left especially with the public hating them so much.
Click to expand...

afaik they were going to shift sequester money around, and also cut the medical device tax completely. don't know if that's what was attached to the bill though.

if it was, then they were right to vote against it. no negotiations until things are open and the ceiling is raised. and obviously, no concessions.
 
IGSaint said:
I wonder do people think removing the medical device tax but reversing the sequester cuts think that it's caving while raising the debt limit and funding the government?
Click to expand...

Killing the sequester in exchange for some minor tax thing that's attached to the ACA would be a terrific deal. I'd be very surprised if the GOP actually agreed to that.
 
empty vessel said:
Because the US government is the sole issuer of its currency, the US government's debt is illusory. In any event, the US owes almost of all of its debt either to itself or to American citizens, which makes it a fiscal wash.
Click to expand...

thepotatoman said:
Just look at what their current future looks like. Even if they win 2014 Obama will still have the veto. Even if they win 2016, the senate is still going to be majority Democrat given what seats are up for election from 2010. And those are both big ifs.

Then 2018 roles around, we'd have 6 more years of minority and age demographic changes since 2012, 5 more years of getting accustomed to Obamacare, and 8 years of republican gerrymandering aging out of effectiveness.

They're panicking. They're trying to find ways out with things like voter suppression and campaign finance deregulation, but that can only take them so far, if they can even get that implemented to the extent they want. They really have no chance to have any power as they exist right now unless they find a way to hold power as a minority.

That's really the crux of this entire issue as I see it. Or they're just incompetent by going into this shutdown in the first place and worried about salvaging the short term harm they will do with their base to get nothing. I don't know anymore.
Click to expand...

KingGondo said:
The Democracy Corps study on the GOP alluded to this: they see Obamacare as the tipping point at which "their" country becomes lost to them forever.
Click to expand...

Ok guys, here me out. I think this is the loonier Tea Party members' long term strategy- Make our debt matter, and the dollar worthless. If the writing is on the wall, and all they see is Hillary being a shoe-in for 2016, their country lost forever, then they would probably see to it to burn the world down if they can't have it for themselves. It would be very easy for them to do, and they're certainly that stupid and evil to do it. Two more similar debt ceiling fiascos that push us to the brink is all they need. Boom - investors lose confidence, our credit rating drops to B+, dollar doesn't become the main world currency of the world. Then our debt really DOES matter, because our interest payments on it will be through the roof. We won't have money to pay all of our obligations. Then they could say, "See, we told you the debt was a big problem." The crazy elements of the tea party couldn't care less if the GOP party becomes dead after something like this. What would happen to them?? Nothing. Even if this ISN'T their plan, this could still be possible, if a debt ceiling limit down to the wire happens a few more times. Right?
 
Mr. E. Yis said:
Two more similar debt ceiling fiascos that push us to the brink is all they need. Boom - investors lose confidence, our credit rating drops to B+, dollar doesn't become the main world currency of the world. Then our debt really DOES matter, because our interest payments on it will be through the roof. We won't have money to pay all of our obligations.
Click to expand...

That can only happen if Democrats politically choose it. The US does not have to sell bonds to acquire money. It is the creator of money. Its decision to sell bonds and promises to pay interest thereon is a political choice, not a financial necessity. Its decision to tie the amount of bonds it sells to the difference between the sum of money it destroys via taxation and the sum it spends ex nihilo is a political choice, not a financial necessity. Investors cannot demand high interest payment on bond sales, because they have no leverage. The US government can, if it wants, tell them take a hike and not sell them any bonds at all.

So, as you can see, what happens to the US economy is fully within the US government's control. Default or not, we are not at the whim of investors. They are in fact at our mercy.
 
slit said:
Lead them to what? The medical device tax wouldn't really do anything to stop Obamacare.
Click to expand...

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe I read somewhere that it would defund the ACA something like $20m annually. That's not going to severely impact the overall system, but it can be seen as a Tea Party victory and a step towards further defunding measures.
 
slit said:
Lead them to what? The medical device tax wouldn't really do anything to stop Obamacare.
Click to expand...

I imagine that removing the tax would allow the GOP to claim that the ACA is ruining the country by adding $20 billion to the debt. It's obvious these guys have no shame.
 
empty vessel said:
That can only happen if Democrats politically choose it. The US does not have to sell bonds to acquire money. It is the creator of money. Its decision to sell bonds and promises to pay interest thereon is a political choice, not a financial necessity. Its decision to tie the amount of bonds it sells to the difference between the sum of money it destroys via taxation and the sum it spends ex nihilo is a political choice, not a financial necessity. Investors cannot demand high interest payment on bond sales, because they have no leverage. The US government can, if it wants, tell them take a hike and not sell them any bonds at all.

So, as you can see, what happens to the US economy is fully within the US government's control. Default or not, we are not at the whim of investors. They are in fact at our mercy.
Click to expand...

In the short run, at least. If the U.S. government tells investors to take a hike frequently enough, or has defaulted frequently enough investors feel that they are unlikely to make a profit from the interest payment on bonds, then investors will refuse to buy any bonds. While the government can then fund any spending programmes through the creation of new money, even if it destroys that money via an increased rate of taxation at the end, it will still have contributed to inflation - not through increasing the money supply but instead via the income velocity of transaction. Do this for long enough, and inflation does end up being a problem. I mean, it's not a problem the U.S. is going to face any time in the near future, but it's still present.
 
Retro said:
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe I read somewhere that it would defund the ACA something like $20m annually. That's not going to severely impact the overall system, but it can be seen as a Tea Party victory and a step towards further defunding measures.
Click to expand...

ACA spending is not arbitrarily tied to any particular tax revenue (unlike, say, social security). So all they are doing by repealing the tax is increasing net government spending, which in turn demonstrates that their professions to be concerned about net government spending are insincere.

Zaphod said:
I imagine that removing the tax would allow the GOP to claim that the ACA is ruining the country by adding $20 billion to the debt. It's obvious these guys have no shame.
Click to expand...

But the increase in net government spending is what they are demanding. That's not to say that Republicans still can't blame it on Democrats, because projection is kind of their game (and damn are they good at it), but Democrats have an easy response to it (should they bother to respond).

Crab said:
In the short run, at least. If the U.S. government tells investors to take a hike frequently enough, or has defaulted frequently enough investors feel that they are unlikely to make a profit from the interest payment on bonds, then investors will refuse to buy any bonds.
Click to expand...

Good. The US doesn't need investors to buy bonds. The US sells bonds for the benefit of investors, not for its own benefit.
 
empty vessel said:
ACA spending is not arbitrarily tied to any particular tax revenue (unlike, say, social security). So all they are doing by repealing the tax is increasing net government spending, which in turn demonstrates that their professions to be concerned about net government spending are insincere.
Click to expand...

Right, I probably could have worded it better; that's money ADA will still need to function, it just won't be provided by a measure it establishes but instead come from the government directly, increasing government spending.

It would still be championed as a victory for the right against the Evil Obamacare Death Panel.
 
empty vessel said:
That can only happen if Democrats politically choose it. The US does not have to sell bonds to acquire money. It is the creator of money. Its decision to sell bonds and promises to pay interest thereon is a political choice, not a financial necessity. Its decision to tie the amount of bonds it sells to the difference between the sum of money it destroys via taxation and the sum it spends ex nihilo is a political choice, not a financial necessity. Investors cannot demand high interest payment on bond sales, because they have no leverage. The US government can, if it wants, tell them take a hike and not sell them any bonds at all.

So, as you can see, what happens to the US economy is fully within the US government's control. Default or not, we are not at the whim of investors. They are in fact at our mercy.
Click to expand...

Investors are already demanding higher interest rates for the short term bills, so you are wrong. Moreover, the behemoth that is our shadow banking system is already applying bigger haircuts to treasury bills, affecting liquidity worldwide. The domino effects have only begun to rear their ugly heads.

Your second sentence highlighted is blatantly false, and has no support in neither theory or practice. We'll see how the markets react next week, and how much our government has control.
 
JPMorgan CEO confident a default won't happen.

“In my opinion we will not default,” JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said during a panel discussion at the annual meeting of the Institute of International Finance, a bank trade group, in Washington. “I think any responsible person I know including in government knows that. I think it would ripple across the global economy in ways you couldn’t possibly understand.”
Click to expand...

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...rnment-shutdown-debt-ceiling-98225.html?hp=l3
 
Can someone explain to me why this hasn't been getting more attention?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/the-house-gop-s-little-rule-change-that-guaranteed-a-shutdown

I just learned that when the Senate rejected the House's last pre-shutdown bill (delaying mandate), ANY member of the House should have been able to bring the clean CR to a vote. But hours before the shut down, the GOP changed the rules for this specific bill and made it so only Eric Cantor could bring it up for vote.

Why the FUCK have the Dems and White House not been talking about this? That's worse than Beohner simply not choosing to bring it to vote in my opinion. WHAT THE HELL
 
My Facebook feed is by and large free of idiocy but...
Newsflash: if you idiots would stop having babies at 16 and stopped using government money to pay for it and your bills, we wouldn't have to raise the damn debt ceiling. So stop bitching and get a god damn job and support yourself and your children like real Americans should.
Click to expand...
 
I have had some extended friends on facebook make similar comments...while they were using unemployment benefits.
 
Sanky Panky said:
Investors are already demanding higher interest rates for the short term bills, so you are wrong.
Click to expand...

You did not read my post well. I said that this was a political choice. If the US wants to pay high interest rates on bonds it sells to investors, that is the US's choice. It need not do so, however. It need not sell bonds at all. Bond sales do not fund government spending. Government spending is ex nihilo. Current law requires the government to sell bonds in the amount of annual net spending, but that is a political choice (as evidenced by the fact of it being an arbitrary law that we can change). It need not do so.

Sanky Panky said:
Moreover, the behemoth that is our shadow banking system is already applying bigger haircuts to treasury bills, affecting liquidity worldwide. The domino effects have only begun to rear their ugly heads.
Click to expand...

The shadow banking system is irrelevant. We can, if we choose, ignore it, and let gamblers lose. Again, a political choice.

Sanky Panky said:
Your second sentence highlighted is blatantly false, and has no support in neither theory or practice. We'll see how the markets react next week, and how much our government has control.
Click to expand...

My second highlighted sentence is a stone cold fact. What happens in the US economy is fully within the government's control. If the government allows the economy to be dictated by investors, that is a political choice that has been made. The US government has no financial constraints, however, and it is not at the whim of investors except by choice. Investors are at our collective mercy.
 
The Technomancer said:
My Facebook feed is by and large free of idiocy but...
Click to expand...
Not exactly the same but I can relate:
D8SA0OF.jpg
Click to expand...
 
empty vessel said:
You did not read my post well. I said that this was a political choice. If the US wants to pay high interest rates on bonds it sells to investors, that is the US's choice. It need not do so, however. It need not sell bonds at all. Bond sales do not fund government spending. Government spending is ex nihilo. Current law requires the government to sell bonds in the amount of annual net spending, but that is a political choice (as evidenced by the fact of it being an arbitrary law that we can change). It need not do so.
Click to expand...

So you basically you're suggesting we inflate away the debt of everyone for shits and giggles because you think the current system is unjust? Printing money has real consequences.
 
jay said:
I've read an article or two explicitly stating the software the government uses is incapable of prioritizing payments.
Click to expand...

there's no mechanism because there's no priority given by congress. Congress tells the executive branch what to spend, and the executive branch has to spend the money congress tells it to spend (per the impoundment act of 1974).
 
Sanky Panky said:
Investors are already demanding higher interest rates for the short term bills....
We'll see how the markets react next week, and how much our government has control.
Click to expand...

I believe TBTF banks blowing up or the recession that will ensue from the immediate spending cut is far more important than selling bonds and paying interest on treasuries to who wants it. The deflationary bias probably will have the same effect as the Great Recession on treasuries where folks pay the US to hold their assets. Much more concerned about the perils in the private sector.
 
brucewaynegretzky said:
So you basically you're suggesting we inflate away the debt of everyone for shits and giggles because you think the current system is unjust? Printing money has real consequences.
Click to expand...

No. All money is printed. Every dollar you own is printed. Are you arguing that because every dollar in your bank account is printed, the debt has been inflated away? If you are opposed to printed money, please cut me a check for whatever you have in your bank account. I'll happily accept all of your printed money.

You don't understand the monetary system.
 
So I have been at Disneyland / Southern Califronia for a week.

Where are we with this? I was making jokes that I get to ride space mountain before we default and everything goes to hell?! How close was that to true now?!
 
JetBlackPanda said:
So I have been at Disneyland / Southern Califronia for a week.

Where are we with this? I was making jokes that I get to ride space mountain before we default and everything goes to hell?! How close was that to true now?!
Click to expand...

Everyone here already owns gun lockers now and lots of ammo. We even lift. Youarealreadydead
 
The ACA isn't perfect but if anything the hard caps need to be completely removed and the baseline for determining who can skip out on having to pay the fee should be increased to 150% PL not 133%.

ACA already passed why are they throwing such a fucking fit about it when it's the same goddamn bill the reps wanted in the early 90s
 
Gvaz said:
why are they throwing such a fucking fit
Click to expand...
Obama is a black man in the White House. Their constituents are crazy racist mofos so if they want to be re-elected they also have to hate the black man in the white house and show they are obstructing him at every turn.

I've said it before but as soon as Obama was elected this country went nuts; like someone unthawed a shit load of racist cavemen.
 
Koomaster said:
Obama is a black man in the White House. Their constituents are crazy racist mofos so if they want to be re-elected they also have to hate the black man in the white house and show they are obstructing him at every turn.

I've said it before but as soon as Obama was elected this country went nuts; like someone unthawed a shit load of racist cavemen.
Click to expand...

Yep, I've seen people of all colors go mad overnight.
 
Gvaz said:
ACA already passed why are they throwing such a fucking fit about it when it's the same goddamn bill the reps wanted in the early 90s
Click to expand...

Because they didn't really want it, it was just a rhetorical alternative to what Clinton was proposing. They won Congress after that and did nothing. They won the Presidency soon after and did nothing. It's an expansion of healthcare provided by the federal government in addition to increased regulation of private insurers. Those words strike fear into the hearts of varied corporate interests and anti-government ideologues.

They are right to fear it, politically. If it's allowed to survive, the ACA going to be popular, then become progressively better through amendments. Conservative ideology re: healthcare is going to be discredited, and Republicans are going to look like complete idiots for acting like it represents the end of western civilization.
 
Koomaster said:
Obama is a black man in the White House. Their constituents are crazy racist mofos so if they want to be re-elected they also have to hate the black man in the white house and show they are obstructing him at every turn.

I've said it before but as soon as Obama was elected this country went nuts; like someone unthawed a shit load of racist cavemen.
Click to expand...

Pretty much exactly what's going on.
 
This is small picture stuff, but I am being affected personally by this now.
As an international student in the US, I got offered an internship and jumped through many hoops to get it. But yesterday I learned that because of the government shutdown, they are not issuing new Social Security cards at the moment. If I don't have it by the end of the month, It'll go by and will have lost it.
I should have acted before Republicans torpedoed the country.
 
MasterOfPastures said:
This is small picture stuff, but I am being affected personally by this now.
As an international student in the US, I got offered an internship and jumped through many hoops to get it. But yesterday I learned that because of the government shutdown, they are not issuing new Social Security cards at the moment. If I don't have it by the end of the month, It'll go by and will have lost it.
I should have acted before Republicans torpedoed the country.
Click to expand...

They don't have any flexibility due to the situation?
 
SnakeXs said:
They don't have any flexibility due to the situation?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm being paid through a grant of the state government for internships in the videogame industry, that the school will hand to me. So I'm considering telling them that they don't have to pay me until this gets resolved, or not at all. Credits and experience are more than enough.
We'll see how it goes monday.
 
Snake said:
Because they didn't really want it, it was just a rhetorical alternative to what Clinton was proposing. They won Congress after that and did nothing. They won the Presidency soon after and did nothing. It's an expansion of healthcare provided by the federal government in addition to increased regulation of private insurers. Those words strike fear into the hearts of varied corporate interests and anti-government ideologues.

They are right to fear it, politically. If it's allowed to survive, the ACA going to be popular, then become progressively better through amendments. Conservative ideology re: healthcare is going to be discredited, and Republicans are going to look like complete idiots for acting like it represents the end of western civilization.
Click to expand...

I dont see why they can't just "be a man" and accept when they were wrong before all this mess.
 
empty vessel said:
No. All money is printed. Every dollar you own is printed. Are you arguing that because every dollar in your bank account is printed, the debt has been inflated away? If you are opposed to printed money, please cut me a check for whatever you have in your bank account. I'll happily accept all of your printed money.

You don't understand the monetary system.
Click to expand...

No, you don't understand the monetary system. You don't understand the velocity of money either, which is why you can't understand why different Government actions result in differing amounts of inflation. You are as bad and ridiculous as any tea partier, completely dug in to your own ideology with nothing to learn from any other person. You fail Socrates definition of the educated man, because the more you seem to know the smaller and simpler your world gets.
 
TheHeretic said:
No, you don't understand the monetary system. You don't understand the velocity of money either, which is why you can't understand why different Government actions result in differing amounts of inflation. You are as bad and ridiculous as any tea partier, completely dug in to your own ideology with nothing to learn from any other person. You fail Socrates definition of the educated man, because the more you seem to know the smaller and simpler your world gets.
Click to expand...

Dude posted his ideology handbook one time. He basically just repeats verbatim from it.
 
TheHeretic said:
No, you don't understand the monetary system. You don't understand the velocity of money either, which is why you can't understand why different Government actions result in differing amounts of inflation. You are as bad and ridiculous as any tea partier, completely dug in to your own ideology with nothing to learn from any other person. You fail Socrates definition of the educated man, because the more you seem to know the smaller and simpler your world gets.
Click to expand...

Not my fight, but, Empty Vessel (EV) is right in this argument, There is no non-political reason for the US to issue debt rather than simply print money.

Can inflation be damaging? Absolutely, and EV has stated so several times.

You are acing a lot like Hannity or Limbaugh. You're making factual statements without factual backing; You're throwing out accusations without facts to back them up.
 
TheHeretic said:
No, you don't understand the monetary system. You don't understand the velocity of money either, which is why you can't understand why different Government actions result in differing amounts of inflation. You are as bad and ridiculous as any tea partier, completely dug in to your own ideology with nothing to learn from any other person. You fail Socrates definition of the educated man, because the more you seem to know the smaller and simpler your world gets.
Click to expand...

yes yes, we know you will shortly disappear from this thread after being addressed, like your buddy Jack_AG
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Realizing the truth of my debt
2 3
104
6K
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
494
ReasonBeing replied
US air traffic control still runs on Windows 95 and floppy disks
2
60
314
YCoCg replied
Temu to stop selling goods from China directly to US customers
33
765
OmegaSupreme replied
Top Bottom