Support NeoGAF

[Diablos]

Obama will cave.

I don't think it really matters, because the Republicans won't give a damn either way. I truly think that's half the reason why Obama acts the way he does in negotiations -- it doesn't make a difference anymore, the Republicans have clearly defined boundries that they will never cross. If Obama tries to be aggressive the GOP will just ignore him, to the point of it hurting their own reputation, until it would go on for so long that the public goes back to being mad at the President.

 

[scorcho]

Joe Nocera writes a giant love letter to former FDIC Commissioner Sheila Blair.

For a moment, Bair seemed a little surprised, too, by the words that had tumbled out. She took a sip of her latte and looked straight ahead, deep in thought.

“Do you really think they should have let Bear fail?” I asked.

When she put her drink down, her hesitation was gone. “Let’s face it,” she said. “Bear Stearns was a second-tier investment bank, with — what? — around $400 billion in assets? I’m a traditionalist. Banks and bank-holding companies are in the safety net. That’s why they have deposit insurance. Investment banks take higher risks, and they are supposed to be outside the safety net. If they make enough mistakes, they are supposed to fail. So, yes, I was amazed when they saved it. I couldn’t believe it. When they told me about it, I said: ‘Guess what: Investment banks fail.’ ”

...

Curbing subprime-lending abuses should have been the job of the Federal Reserve, which has a consumer division. But the Fed chairman, Alan Greenspan, with his profound distaste for regulation, could not have been less interested. The other bank regulators, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which oversees national banks, and the Office of Thrift Supervision, which regulates the savings-and-loan industry, should have cared, too. But their responses to the growing problem were at best tepid and at worst hostile. (The O.C.C. actually used its federal powers to block efforts by states to curb subprime abuses.) By the time Bair got to Washington, the O.C.C. had spent a year devising “voluntary subprime guidance” for the banks it regulated, but it had not yet gotten around to issuing that guidance.

The F.D.I.C. jumped into the breach. Bair knew the issue well, because during her time at Treasury, when the industry was much smaller, she tried, unsuccessfully, to get the subprime lenders to agree to halt their worst practices. Now she was hearing that things had become much worse. Bair instructed the F.D.I.C. to buy an expensive database that listed all the subprime loans in the mortgage-backed bonds that Wall Street was selling to investors. She was shocked by what she saw. “All the practices that we looked at back in 2001 and 2002, which we thought were predatory — things like steep payment resets and abusive prepayment penalties — had gone mainstream,” she said.

more loving juiciness here - http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/magazine/sheila-bairs-exit-interview.html?pagewanted=all

 

[Kosmo]

I'm wondering when the voters are going to get fed up with these games and stop voting in poorly qualified clowns

You talking about Obama? Man, how the worm has turned.

 

[Plinko]

The democrats really have an political advantage in these talks when thinking about next year's elections.

Republicans want to cut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

Democrats want to cut back on the major tax breaks for the rich.

If effectively advertised, this is a colossal advantage for the democrats. The only issue is whether it will be effectively advertised--something the democrats have had major issues with in the past.

 

[eznark]

give us that hopey changey mumbo-jumbo Superman.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

Maybe Pelosi is really the Emperor, and Obama is Darth Vader.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Maybe Pelosi is really the Emperor, and Obama is Darth Vader.

If only

 

[Anno]

The democrats really have an political advantage in these talks when thinking about next year's elections.

Republicans want to cut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

Democrats want to cut back on the major tax breaks for the rich.

If effectively advertised, this is a colossal advantage for the democrats. The only issue is whether it will be effectively advertised--something the democrats have had major issues with in the past.

In the hands of the masterful Republican spin-machine this will turn into "Speaker Boehner refused the President's plan to cut Medicare and Social Security at this time when people need it most. People need jobs, not cuts to vital programs. The Speaker has instead chosen to pursue a path of reigning in wasteful government spending without raising taxes on job creators."

I jest, but only a little bit. They have a captive audience willing to believe anything.

 

[SolKane]

I missed this nugget about SunRail

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/...successes-a-glimpse-of-american-difficulties/


I think when the republicans ask

"Will this proposed rail line be profitable?"

They mean

"How much taxpayer money can we directly inject into our campaign doners accounts?"

SunRail is a massive corporate boondoggle, and just shows Mica's blatant hypocrisy.

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

I don't like how this is worded.

http://news.yahoo.com/white-house-us-suspending-800m-pakistan-aid-135109780.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama's chief of staff confirms that the U.S. is suspending $800 million in military aid to Pakistan.

William Daley says the U.S. relationship with Pakistan is "difficult" and must be made "to work over time." But Daley tells ABC's "This Week" that until "we get through that difficulty, we'll hold back some of the money that the American taxpayers are committed to give" the U.S. ally.

Daley says the countries are trying to work through issues that have strained ties.

The New York Times reported that the U.S. is upset with Pakistan for expelling American military trainers and wants tougher action against the Taliban and others fighting American soldiers in Afghanistan.

Tensions between the countries have surged since U.S. forces killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in May.

 

[Chichikov]

In the hands of the masterful Republican spin-machine this will turn into "Speaker Boehner refused the President's plan to cut Medicare and Social Security at this time when people need it most. People need jobs, not cuts to vital programs. The Speaker has instead chosen to pursue a path of reigning in wasteful government spending without raising taxes on job creators."

I jest, but only a little bit. They have a captive audience willing to believe anything.

You don't even need anything masterful.
Just lay down the options to the American people in plain English.
No need to spin shit.
Just ask which option you prefer -

1. Cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, education and infrastructure.
2. Closing tax loopholes, increased taxation on millionaires and cutting military spending.

I am certain that an overwhelming majority will support the them.

But they won't do it.
I don't don't know if it lack of backbone or the fact that they also mostly care about the rich and powerful (though a slightly different group of rich and powerful than the GOP).
I suspect it's the latter.

Maybe Pelosi is really the Emperor, and Obama is Darth Vader.

Darth Vader was half black too!
It all makes sense now.

 

[richiek]

I heard on NPR news that the President has the constitutional authority to take of this budget mess himself without the approval of Congress, but Obama wants to take care of it "the right way".

 

[eznark]

I heard on NPR news that the President has the constitutional authority to take of this budget mess himself without the approval of Congress, but Obama wants to take care of it "the right way".

Obama would lose just about all congressional support (from Dems as well). Party politics takes a back seat to power politics. Most of these folks assume they will be there long after Obama. Start stripping their purse string power via fiat and face their wrath. It sets a precedent that scares the shit out of the hill.

 

[Chichikov]

Obama would lose just about all congressional support (from Dems as well). Party politics takes a back seat to power politics. Most of these folks assume they will be there long after Obama. Start stripping their purse string power via fiat and face their wrath. It sets a precedent that scares the shit out of the hill.

Yep.
See also: dems refusal to any meaningful filibuster reform.

But man, the debt ceiling is one of the dumbest things in our political system.

 

[empty vessel]

You don't even need anything masterful.
Just lay down the options to the American people in plain English.
No need to spin shit.
Just ask which option you prefer -

1. Cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, education and infrastructure.
2. Closing tax loopholes, increased taxation on millionaires and cutting military spending.

I am certain that an overwhelming majority will support the them.

But they won't do it.
I don't don't know if it lack of backbone or the fact that they also mostly care about the rich and powerful (though a slightly different group of rich and powerful than the GOP).
I suspect it's the latter.

I know it's the latter. Although it's not that they "care" about the rich and powerful so much as they are sponsored by them.

I heard on NPR news that the President has the constitutional authority to take of this budget mess himself without the approval of Congress, but Obama wants to take care of it "the right way".

I think a lot of people (possibly even NPR) are confused about this. The debt limit does not prevent the US from paying its debts. It prevents it from incurring more debt. Thus, it doesn't really implicate the 14th Amendment at all, which says that US debt shall not be questioned.

The problem with the debt limit is that, once reached, the US won't be able to borrow anymore, meaning that it will only have its actual revenue to use. That means it will have to make choices about what to pay for. It is actually extremely unlikely (unfathomable, really) that the US government would opt to decline to pay its creditors over declining to pay for the services it provides to its domestic citizens.

In any event, the Republicans have no intention, and never did, of not raising the debt limit. Their bluff should have been called long ago.

 

[JMB]

What is public opinion like in the US at the moment? Is it more leaning towards the Democrats or the GOP?

 

[Cygnus X-1]

I read on newspapers that The States are near their first default. Is that true?

Cuts to the Pentagon and tax increases for the rich? There's no way they'll go for that.

I would accept these conditions right away...

Because the alternative is to increase even more the public debt.

China: (laughs)

 

[Chichikov]

China: (laughs)

Can we stop with that?
You know it's stupid, right?

 

[Kosmo]

What is public opinion like in the US at the moment? Is it more leaning towards the Democrats or the GOP?

I think it's leaning toward living within reality. While many will dispute that you can equate government spending with household spending (e.g. budget and don't spend more than you have), that seems to be the impression that I think many are starting to lean towards. Yes, while there are vast differences, anyone disputing the similarities can't really say that we can't survive simply living within our means.

This doesn't mean austerity, it doesn't mean eliminating Medicare/Social Security/Military, but it does mean mean taking an honest look at what government NEEDS to provide, cutting smartly where it makes sense and looking at where raising taxes makes sense, like the $106,800 cap on Social Security taxes.

What I think people are sick of is spending billions on foreign aid (even if it's a small percentage of the budget) when we see no return and people here are suffering, and overreaching attempts by the government to "fix things" (e.g. Stimulus I and II) which do little other than save the banksters.

 

[Cygnus X-1]

Can we stop with that?
You know it's stupid, right?

No. Why should be stupid?

The economy of the States after thy crisis did not sink into the helldepths, because of the public sustainments. The idea was to prevent the crisis to be even more larger and wait that the private sector would start to produce jobs again.
Point is that this did not happen and now the state cannot sustain the country anymore, but also cannot leave it otherwise it would shrink like a PET.

China is not laughing especially because they are buying US's debt increasing their political weight. No! It would be childish. I think they are laughing because their communism with capitalistic elements is proving to be very successful. In other words, the state "China" directs money exactly where and when is needed, making the growth steady, but controlled. Sure, with lot of side effect on society and environment, but they don't care. They care to outweight the States as soon as possible. As one economist said "it is the triumph if the public hand onto the private sector. Tuning it, without suffocating it".

And anyway, facts are that China's GDP will surpass States maybe even before 2016. And in the meantime, Republicans and Democratics are fighting on some stupid, old principle. And they don't see the overall picture of the planet's economy.

 

[Chichikov]

No. Why should be stupid?

The economy of the States after thy crisis did not sink into the helldepths, because of the public sustainments. The idea was to prevent the crisis to be even more larger and wait that the private sector would start to produce jobs again.
Point is that this did not happen and now the state cannot sustain the country anymore, but also cannot leave it otherwise it would shrink like a PET.

China is not laughing especially because they are buying US's debt increasing their political weight. No! It would be childish. I think they are laughing because their communism with capitalistic elements is proving to be very successful. In other words, the state "China" directs money exactly where and when is needed, making the growth steady, but controlled. Sure, with lot of side effect on society and environment, but they don't care. They care to outweight the States as soon as possible. As one economist said "it is the triumph if the public hand onto the private sector. Tuning it, without suffocating it".

And anyway, facts are that China's GDP will surpass States maybe even before 2016. And in the meantime, Republicans and Democratics are fighting on some stupid, old principle. And they don't see the overall picture of the planet's economy.

Oh, I thought you meant it like "China own the US, it will come for its money", which is obviously bullshit.
I apologize.

But to the point you actually made, I think China laughs whenever we cut our education and science programs.
And it laughs whenever we outsource more jobs to 3rd world countries.
And it laughs when it see how our financial sector keep growing at the expense of the productive sectors of our economy.
And it laughs when it see our best and brightest go into finance instead of science.
And I'm sure as hell they're getting a hoot when we slash NASA's budget.

Debt is not going to be US's downfall.
We had higher debt in the past.

Many will dispute that you can equate government spending with household spending

You should've stopped there.

But let me ask you, why do you think this is a good metaphor for our economy?
How does it help anyone understand anything?

And seriously, do you think poligaf cannot understand what t-bills are and how our public debt work without dumbing it down?

This is nothing more than equivocation.

 

[Aaron Strife]

The democrats really have an political advantage in these talks when thinking about next year's elections.

Republicans want to cut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

Democrats want to cut back on the major tax breaks for the rich.

If effectively advertised, this is a colossal advantage for the democrats. The only issue is whether it will be effectively advertised--something the democrats have had major issues with in the past.

It worked well enough for Kathy Hochul.

Assuming an Obama budget/compromise doesn't make any significant cuts to Medicare, it will be a significant wedge issue, one that the DCCC and DSCC have been using to great effect. PPP's taken to polling generic ballots in the states themselves, and Democrats have a 45-40 advantage in Florida. We'll probably need to pick up at least 2 seats there to have a chance at regaining the House, and pending redistricting, that shouldn't be a problem with those margins.

 

[worldrunover]

I think it's leaning toward living within reality. While many will dispute that you can equate government spending with household spending (e.g. budget and don't spend more than you have), that seems to be the impression that I think many are starting to lean towards. Yes, while there are vast differences, anyone disputing the similarities can't really say that we can't survive simply living within our means.

This doesn't mean austerity, it doesn't mean eliminating Medicare/Social Security/Military, but it does mean mean taking an honest look at what government NEEDS to provide, cutting smartly where it makes sense and looking at where raising taxes makes sense, like the $106,800 cap on Social Security taxes.

What I think people are sick of is spending billions on foreign aid (even if it's a small percentage of the budget) when we see no return and people here are suffering, and overreaching attempts by the government to "fix things" (e.g. Stimulus I and II) which do little other than save the banksters.

People only care about the deficit because they are being told to care about the deficit. No one should give a shit about the deficit until the economy is straightened out. Everyone is screaming about the crack in the foundation of the house but neglecting the fact that it's on fire. Would seem prudent to prioritize what's ACTUALLY affecting people. (hint: it's not the deficit).

 

[Ether_Snake]

Maybe Pelosi is really the Emperor, and Obama is Darth Vader.

Yeah right, if she was things would be much better off.

 

[Jackson50]

According to Secretary Panetta, the key to success in Afghanistan is a successful transfer of responsibility. Not that I expected better from Panetta, I opposed his nomination, but it disquiets me that our leaders consistently ignore the danger of Afghan governance. A successful transfer of responsibility is inconsequential if the government remains corrupt and impotent. Of course, I expect them to ignore that issue; it is largely outside our influence. Unfortunately, it is inflating the perception of success; we are setting ourselves up for a terrible awakening when we withdraw.

What is public opinion like in the US at the moment? Is it more leaning towards the Democrats or the GOP?

Neither party enjoys a considerable advantage. Moreover, support has been vacillating between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats probably enjoy a marginal advantage in debt negotiations; the presidency as an institution receives more support.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

According to Secretary Panetta, the key to success in Afghanistan is a successful transfer of responsibility. Not that I expected better from Panetta, I opposed his nomination, but it disquiets me that our leaders consistently ignore the danger of Afghan governance. A successful transfer of responsibility is inconsequential if the government remains corrupt and impotent. Of course, I expect them to ignore that issue; it is largely outside our influence. Unfortunately, it is inflating the perception of success; we are setting ourselves up for a terrible awakening when we withdraw.

There is nothing US can do about that, at this point US needs to transfer power and get out. US isn't the popular entity in Afghanistan as it was at one point. Make them responsible for their future and hope some leaders take responsibility.

 

[worldrunover]

According to Secretary Panetta, the key to success in Afghanistan is a successful transfer of responsibility. Not that I expected better from Panetta, I opposed his nomination, but it disquiets me that our leaders consistently ignore the danger of Afghan governance. A successful transfer of responsibility is inconsequential if the government remains corrupt and impotent. Of course, I expect them to ignore that issue; it is largely outside our influence. Unfortunately, it is inflating the perception of success; we are setting ourselves up for a terrible awakening when we withdraw.Neither party enjoys a considerable advantage. Moreover, support has been vacillating between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats probably enjoy a marginal advantage in debt negotiations; the presidency as an institution receives more support.

I swear to god every time you post you have thesaurus.com on another tab and just cycle back and forth.

 

[Chichikov]

There is nothing US can do about that, at this point US needs to transfer power and get out. US isn't the popular entity in Afghanistan as it was at one point. Make them responsible for their future and hope some leaders take responsibility.

I don't often agree with Thomas Freedman (like, almost never) but I agree with him on this point -
Our options in Afghanistan are lose early, lose late, lose big or lose small.
We should really focus on trying to lose early and small.
And after Osama, we could've done it and claim victory at the same time.
But no.
We gonna keep throwing good money after bad.

I swear to god every time you post you have thesaurus.com on another tab and just cycle back and forth.

God forbid someone write at a level above 6th grade.

 

[Diablos]

The GOP is running this country into the fucking ground. We're going to default and they don't even fucking care. It's the reason why I don't pay attention to politics like I used to. It makes me depressed and outraged at the same time. A helpless feeling. The GOP is single-handedly oppressing this country and the sad part only half (or below) of the population can come to terms with that.

We need another FDR and a Supreme Court packed with progressives... there's nothing else that is going to stop their neverending greed. Nothing.

 

[worldrunover]

God forbid someone write at a level above 6th grade.

There's a difference between intelligent writing and being verbose just for the hell of it.

 

[ToxicAdam]

The GOP is running this country into the fucking ground. We're going to default and they don't even fucking care. . It makes me depressed and outraged at the same time. A helpless feeling. The GOP is single-handedly oppressing this country and the sad part only half (or below) of the population can come to terms with that.
I].

Uhhh ...

It's the reason why I don't pay attention to politics like I used to

You mean your other opinions used to be informed? When?


--- /// ---

Thanks George Soros, lets make this political cycle even more of a circus.

 

[state-of-the-art]

Oh, I thought you meant it like "China own the US, it will come for its money", which is obviously bullshit.
I apologize.

But to the point you actually made, I think China laughs whenever we cut our education and science programs.
And it laughs whenever we outsource more jobs to 3rd world countries.
And it laughs when it see how our financial sector keep growing at the expense of the productive sectors of our economy.
And it laughs when it see our best and brightest go into finance instead of science.
And I'm sure as hell they're getting a hoot when we slash NASA's budget.

Debt is not going to be US's downfall.
We had higher debt in the past.

I just wanted to second this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXIR9ve0JU0

 

[Kosmo]

The GOP is running this country into the fucking ground. We're going to default and they don't even fucking care. It's the reason why I don't pay attention to politics like I used to. It makes me depressed and outraged at the same time. A helpless feeling. The GOP is single-handedly oppressing this country and the sad part only half (or below) of the population can come to terms with that.

We need another FDR and a Supreme Court packed with progressives... there's nothing else that is going to stop their neverending greed. Nothing.

Hmm, who was in control of the budgeting process from 2006-2010 and basically free reign over anything and everything they would have wanted from 2008-10?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Hmm, who was in control of the budgeting process from 2006-2010 and basically free reign over anything and everything they would have wanted from 2008-10?

Fucking filibusters, how do they work?

 

[Jackson50]

There is nothing US can do about that, at this point US needs to transfer power and get out. US isn't the popular entity in Afghanistan as it was at one point. Make them responsible for their future and hope some leaders take responsibility.

Certainly. I merely wanted to note the folly in our reasoning.

God forbid someone write at a level above 6th grade.

Precisely.

 

[eznark]

I swear to god every time you post you have thesaurus.com on another tab and just cycle back and forth.

I say old chap, the derision you so vehemently cast towards our esteemed peer Jackson is quite incorrigible.

 

[Superman00]

Hmm, who was in control of the budgeting process from 2006-2010 and basically free reign over anything and everything they would have wanted from 2008-10?

Yeah let just ignored everything the Republicans did to during those time. Fucking Congress, how do it work?

 

[leroy hacker]

Fucking filibusters, how do they work?

Kosmo knows perfectly well how they work but he can only troll the way he wants to if he pretends not to.

 

[FlawlessCowboy]

So, what are the odds that education receives significant cuts in funding? I got a little nervous when I saw that as a possibility for budget cuts when I watched the news this evening (going to need a student loan for the first time this fall at university).

 

[eznark]

So, what are the odds that education receives significant cuts in funding? I got a little nervous when I saw that as a possibility for budget cuts when I watched the news this evening (going to need a student loan for the first time this fall at university).

This is the American politics thread, bub.

 

[Salazar]

This is the American politics thread, bub.

You think "university" is an alien word in the US ?

 

[eznark]

You think "university" is an alien word in the US ?

Muricans say college when referring to attendance. As in "I'm going to college," "I need tuition for college" etc. Dirty commie pinko's say "universitaaaaay"

 

[Byakuya769]

I swear to god every time you post you have thesaurus.com on another tab and just cycle back and forth.

You could probably attack the writing of that message board post pretty fairly. However, stating that he must have used thesaurus.com to come up with mind blowing words like 'inconsequential' might just reveal a truth about you.

 

[Salazar]

Dirty commie pinko's say "universitaaaaay"

Consider me educated, although I feel as if our exchange has actually zapped some brain cells.

 

[eznark]

Consider me educated, although I feel as if our exchange has actually zapped some brain cells.

better dead

Spoiler

brains cells

than red

 

[Kosmo]

Kosmo knows perfectly well how they work but he can only troll the way he wants to if he pretends not to.

When Democrats give it up, Republicans will give it up. It serves a purpose, as bastardized as it's use has been in the past by both parties.

 

[demon]

There's a difference between intelligent writing and being verbose just for the hell of it.

I really didn't get that from the post you quoted.

 

[GhaleonEB]

When Democrats give it up, Republicans will give it up. It serves a purpose, as bastardized as it's use has been in the past by both parties.

You know perfectly well the GOP has used it at record levels since Obama got in office. Literally, levels never before seen, and for hosts of non-controversial legislation and appointees. As was said, you have to ignore reality to make the kind of assertions you are making.

 

[Journeywalker]

When Democrats give it up, Republicans will give it up. It serves a purpose, as bastardized as it's use has been in the past by both parties.

Yay, false equivalences! Didn't we have this conversation at some point? I thought the number of "filibusters" and indefinite anonymous holds roughly doubled when Democrats took control of the Senate in 2007. This is an older article, but it would be nice to have something more up-to-date.

 

[demon]

When Democrats give it up, Republicans will give it up. It serves a purpose, as bastardized as it's use has been in the past by both parties.

When I read posts like this I really don't know whether view it as ignorance or trolling. Do you really believe it's been used equally by both parties? Can you back that up with facts, or are you trying to live up to your tag?