• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT1| Never mind, Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
I'm not sure Obama has the high ground here. All it'll take is another week of brinkmanship for us to get close to default; the Treasury says it could happen in mid February. As we get closer the WH will start moving toward the GOP. I'm very interested to see whether this alleged four year debt ceiling extension will get majority support from republicans at their conference this week.

Hawkian said:
I keep losing this thread, damnit.
Click to expand...

is GW2 better than it was during the demo? I hated the controls/jumping :(
 
G

GaimeGuy

Volunteer Deputy Campaign Director, Obama for America '16
empty vessel said:
It may be good politics, but in pursuit of bad policy. We should be trying to make the sale of bonds irrelevant to spending decisions, and that's what the coin accomplishes. Obama is trying to save the legal connection between bond sales and spending in excess of tax receipts that was forged under a different monetary regime and which has since become needless and arbitrary as a result of the adoption of a fiat monetary system based on nonconvertible currency.
Click to expand...

It's bad policy to have a debt ceiling that congress raises and lowers independently of budgets and appropriations.

It makes no sense that congress can authorize (or rather, order) $3.5T in expenses on $2T in revenues over a 12 months period when the debt ceiling is $500B away. Either the debt ceiling should not exist, or it should automatically increase as a consequence of congress authorizing the budget they did. Authorizing the budget specified above should AUTOMATICALLY increase the debt ceiling to accomodate the specified deficit. Approprations bills should AUTOMATICALLLY increase the debt ceiling to accomodate that appropriations.
 
V

Vermillion

Banned
Won't raising the debt ceiling so much hurt our grandchildren down the road, as we'd be incurring so much debt? Couldn't that be thrown off on them in the long term, and shouldn't we stop spending so much?
 
G

Gotchaye

Member
JokerOfSpades said:
Won't raising the debt ceiling so much hurt our grandchildren down the road, as we'd be incurring so much debt? Couldn't that be thrown off on them in the long term, and shouldn't we stop spending so much?
Click to expand...

Certainly there are people here who would disagree with the premise, but fortunately it just doesn't matter in this case. The debt ceiling is not about enabling our spending. The debt ceiling is about paying for spending that we have already decided to do. If you're worried about increasing debt, the appropriate time to be talking about that would be when Congress is deciding how much to spend.
 
S

sangreal

Member
JokerOfSpades said:
Won't raising the debt ceiling so much hurt our grandchildren down the road, as we'd be incurring so much debt? Couldn't that be thrown off on them in the long term, and shouldn't we stop spending so much?
Click to expand...

the debt ceiling and spending are independent of each other. the debt ceiling just limits the ability to pay for spending already authorized
 
C

Clevinger

Member
Hitokage said:
They're puerile libertarians that shoot from the hip, and it's gotten them far. Pity how dumb they reveal themselves to be if you're well informed.
Click to expand...

I remember even as a little kid being taken aback by the bullshit strawman they set up in one episode about how the anti-smoking movement murder children to promote their message or some horseshit like that.

"See kids? The anti-smoking movement is just as bad as those big tobacco corporations. Everyone sucks."

Fuck you, South Park.
 
I

ISOM

Member
Oblivion said:
Brother Benen made a really interesting point on Obama's decision to forgo the coin thing:




dat 11th dimensional chess?
Click to expand...

This is what I also thought about obama rejecting the coin idea. If obama entertained the idea of a trillion dollar coin, republicans would be able to shift all the blame to obama for the debt ceiling without having any need for personal responsibility over whether the country defaults. Now that obama has flat out rejected it the responsibility turns right back on republicans.
 
S

slit

Member
JokerOfSpades said:
Won't raising the debt ceiling so much hurt our grandchildren down the road, as we'd be incurring so much debt? Couldn't that be thrown off on them in the long term, and shouldn't we stop spending so much?
Click to expand...

Not raising it would hurt them much more.

As far as spending. The GOP doesn't really want to reduce spending. They want the DEMS to do it for them.
 
empty vessel

empty vessel

Member
Black Mamba said:
No it's good policy on both ends. The coin option is a bad option even if its better than no debt ceiling raise. We don't know what it will do on the perceptions of people.

Economics still struggles to understand how human psychology plays a role. In a perfect world, you'd be right to push for it. But this isn't one. The change you're looking for has to come about from a much bigger change in the general perception of money.

Obama is right to take it off th table from a political level. But the right long term move, even economically, would be congress effectively making the debt ceiling useless or getting rid of it. It is not minting coins to bypass congress.
Click to expand...

I don't know that the inability to predict perception renders it a bad option. You seem to me to be expressing a fear of bond vigilantes or something. Monetarily sovereign governments are immune from bond vigilantes because they do not have to rely on the private sector in any way to spend. That is secured by their power to tax and to specify the currency in which they will tax.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
JokerOfSpades said:
Won't raising the debt ceiling so much hurt our grandchildren down the road, as we'd be incurring so much debt? Couldn't that be thrown off on them in the long term, and shouldn't we stop spending so much?
Click to expand...

If the use we put the money to has better return on investment than the interest on the loan, they will be BETTER able to pay the debt than us. That's actually the entire foundation of capitalism! Borrow, invest, pay back and keep the difference.
 
C

CharlieDigital

Banned
codhand said:
War is paid for through borrowing, and has material impacts on our standards of living.
Click to expand...

Our standards of living have gone up tremendously since the Revolutionary War, since the Civil War, since the First World War, and since the Second World War.

Heck, our standard of living has gone up even after the Vietnam War, Korean War, and Iraq War.
 
G

gcubed

Member
Mr. Obama wants to severely neuter the Second Amendment and disarm the law-abiding citizens of this nation, a similar act of tyrants throughout the 20th century such as Stalin, Mao and Hitler. Absolute certainties are a rare thing in this life, but one I think can be collectively agreed upon is the undeniable fact that the Holocaust would have never taken place had the Jewish citizenry of Hitler’s Germany had the right to bear arms and defended themselves with those arms.
Click to expand...

I love you John Rocker
 
C

codhand

Member
CharlieDigital said:
Our standards of living have gone up tremendously since the Revolutionary War, since the Civil War, since the First World War, and since the Second World War.

Heck, our standard of living has gone up even after the Vietnam War, Korean War, and Iraq War.
Click to expand...

You implied it doesn't have any impacts ever, I'm saying it does, sure we're better now, but it wasn't a straight line.

$4-8 billion a month for Afghanistan, yet we have no single payer health care option, crumbling bridges, outdated airports and trains. I'm not saying standards of living haven't improved since the Revolutionary war, that's absurd and I didn't say that, I'm suggesting it could be better.

EDIT It's four to eight billion a month for the war, not 100. [not actually sure on the figure]
 
C

ClassyPenguin

Banned
codhand said:
You implied it doesn't have any impacts ever, I'm saying it does, sure we're better now, but it wasn't a straight line.

$100 billion a month for Afghanistan, yet we have no single payer health care option, crumbling bridges, outdated airports and trains. I'm not saying standards of living haven't improved since the Revolutionary war, that's absurd and I didn't say that, I'm suggesting it could be better.
Click to expand...
Also that we are failing veterans in both health and employment, what a great thank you.
 
H

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
Just saw an AMAZING show transition on MSNBC where just after the idiot talking on The Cycle was going on about how gun-related terms are all overblown and how banning "high capacity" guns was like banning big gulps and people can just get more magazines...

Martin Bashir immediately comes in to ask how many rounds did the Aurora shooter(I think) fire before people were able to tackle him.

Ahahahahaha
 
S

Shadow Hog

Member
Hitokage said:
Just saw an AMAZING show transition on MSNBC where just after the idiot talking on The Cycle was going on about how gun-related terms are all overblown and how banning "high capacity" guns was like banning big gulps and people can just get more magazines...

Martin Bashir immediately comes in to ask how many rounds did the Aurora shooter(I think) fire before people were able to tackle him.

Ahahahahaha
Click to expand...
I don't think the Aurora shooter was tackled; I thought he casually walked back out of the theater and surrendered to police, as if it was his plan all along. Correct me if I'm wrong, which I very well could be.
 
S

sangreal

Member
Shadow Hog said:
I don't think the Aurora shooter was tackled; I thought he casually walked back out of the theater and surrendered to police, as if it was his plan all along. Correct me if I'm wrong, which I very well could be.
Click to expand...

Yeah... the Tucson shooter was stopped while reloading, however
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Tweet from @LOLGOP: “The GOP is rebranding itself from a party that accidentally blows up the world economy to one that purposely blows up the world economy.”
 
G

grkazan12

Member
Just saw this on facebook from a girl who is the same age as me (21) and incredibly cute. I'm amazed that someone my age in 2013 can think like this, I mean come on.

541680_125777554256645_1808456745_n.jpg
 
R

Rocket Scientist

Member
grkazan12 said:
Just saw this on facebook from a girl who is the same age as me (21) and incredibly cute. I'm amazed that someone my age in 2013 can think like this, I mean come on.
Click to expand...
Don't fall for it bro. It's not worth it. Unless you're certain you can make it a hit and run without the crazy family coming after you with their guns.
 
E

el retorno

Member
Oblivion said:
Brother Benen made a really interesting point on Obama's decision to forgo the coin thing:




dat 11th dimensional chess?
Click to expand...

Not gonna say I called this but I did.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=46375561&postcount=4883

grkazan12 said:
Just saw this on facebook from a girl who is the same age as me (21) and incredibly cute. I'm amazed that someone my age in 2013 can think like this, I mean come on.

541680_125777554256645_1808456745_n.jpg
Click to expand...

Looks like this is gonna be the rights meme

h9vVI.png
 
C

codhand

Member
el retorno said:
Good but I can't help but feel state gun control is kinda useless because guns can cross borders very easily
Click to expand...

You've never tried to drive into Manhattan have you? ;)


and that FB post, omg the faux outrage. Black presidential family gets something white affluent family does not, the humanity!
 
S

speculawyer

Member
grkazan12 said:
Just saw this on facebook from a girl who is the same age as me (21) and incredibly cute. I'm amazed that someone my age in 2013 can think like this, I mean come on.

541680_125777554256645_1808456745_n.jpg
Click to expand...

Who the fuck thinks they need that gun to protect their family? If you think you need that gun you either are paranoid or you live in a really shitty place and should move.
 
R

RDreamer

Member
Yes, because it's hypocritical for the most important man in the world, and probably the most likely in the world to have an assassination attempt to have trained armed guards and not think your untrained ass needs an assault rifle to protect you on the completely minuscule chance that someone might possibly break into your house while you're there instead of a using more practical instrument of self defense. Yep, totally the same situations. Total hypocrisy.
 
A

Amir0x

Banned
speculawyer said:
Who the fuck thinks they need that gun to protect their family? If you think you need that gun you either are paranoid or you live in a really shitty place and should move.
Click to expand...

That's because what the image doesn't tell you is that the white dude in the final panel is actually one of the world's largest drug kingpins, and is always under threat for assassination.
 
I

Incognito

Troll
i've been out of the county for the last 10 days so i'm just now getting around to the news, but can someone direct me to the leadoff for the trillion dollar coin option? every few days i'd scroll through twitter and see mentions, but assumed it was a running joke.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
codhand said:
Breaking


It heads to Cuomo now.
Click to expand...

I love my state. When we want to get shit done it gets done. Too bad Cuomo's marijuana decriminalization got nowhere.

el retorno said:
Good but I can't help but feel state gun control is kinda useless because guns can cross borders very easily
Click to expand...

This is kind of the problem. Until stuff like the gun show loophole is closed New York's new measures will only go so far. If nothing else it should keep guns away from a few of the sort of mentally ill people who really shouldn't have them (those at risk to hurt themselves and others).
 
V

Vermillion

Banned
CharlieDigital said:
We've had a debt since just about the very founding of this republic.

Has it hurt us in any material fashion?
Click to expand...

Gotchaye said:
Certainly there are people here who would disagree with the premise, but fortunately it just doesn't matter in this case. The debt ceiling is not about enabling our spending. The debt ceiling is about paying for spending that we have already decided to do. If you're worried about increasing debt, the appropriate time to be talking about that would be when Congress is deciding how much to spend.
Click to expand...

sangreal said:
the debt ceiling and spending are independent of each other. the debt ceiling just limits the ability to pay for spending already authorized
Click to expand...

GhaleonEB said:
What matters is the % share of the economy, which has grown as well.
Click to expand...

Cyan said:
Why would raising the debt ceiling do anything of the sort?

Again, the effect of not raising the debt ceiling is very likely economic disaster. The effect of raising it is status quo. The debt ceiling is merely a convenient weapon to hold over the head of the ruling party. We're almost the only country that even has a debt ceiling, because it's a stupid idea that only does harm.
Click to expand...

slit said:
Not raising it would hurt them much more.

As far as spending. The GOP doesn't really want to reduce spending. They want the DEMS to do it for them.
Click to expand...

pigeon said:
If the use we put the money to has better return on investment than the interest on the loan, they will be BETTER able to pay the debt than us. That's actually the entire foundation of capitalism! Borrow, invest, pay back and keep the difference.
Click to expand...

Thanks all - hopefully I'm not irritating you guys. As always, I ask these questions so that I can respond to them in the future. In context, argument with my father. Double thanks for those who gave links...

What class do you guys think will help me learn this stuff best. I was considering macroeconomics. College, and I can still change my schedule.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
empty vessel said:
I don't know that the inability to predict perception renders it a bad option. You seem to me to be expressing a fear of bond vigilantes or something. Monetarily sovereign governments are immune from bond vigilantes because they do not have to rely on the private sector in any way to spend. That is secured by their power to tax and to specify the currency in which they will tax.
Click to expand...

It's not about that. I'm not worried at all about the bonds.

What i'm worried about is the signal that the government can't even function at a base level properly and what this means.

What if first stock traders overreact to the coin idea? And what then if regular folk start over-saving by not spending because they are worried. These people don't understand the system the way you, I, and others here do. We can't predict their behavior.

Like I said, between an actual default and the coin, I take the coin. But only after the GOP has let it happen. We are much better off with the GOP playing politics and caving than we are with the coin idea. We simply do not know how regular people will react.
 
E

el retorno

Member
Black Mamba said:
It's not about that. I'm not worried at all about the bonds.

What i'm worried about is the signal that the government can't even function at a base level properly and what this means.

What if first stock traders overreact to the coin idea? And what then if regular folk start over-saving by not spending because they are worried. These people don't understand the system the way you, I, and others here do. We can't predict their behavior.

Like I said, between an actual default and the coin, I take the coin. But only after the GOP has let it happen. We are much better off with the GOP playing politics and caving than we are with the coin idea. We simply do not know how regular people will react.
Click to expand...

This is the biggest problem with the government today. It doesn't work anymore when one party's mantra is to destroy the thing they're supposed to lead.
 
A

Amir0x

Banned
speculawyer said:
Mark Sanford will run for Congress
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/mark-sanford-run-congress-211459050--election.html

Well why the fuck not.

It is not like they held David Vitter accountable. I think it is OK to cheat on your spouse now as long as you don't support those homos.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't believe politicians should have repercussions for what they do in their personal private relationships. Cheating on his spouse is wrong, but it's really none of our business. As long as he's doing a good job in his PUBLIC position, that's what should be judged. Not that he was doing that either, of course ;)

Plus, Anthony Weiner needs to get the fuck back to Congress, so yeah let's hope that a little fuck up is overlooked down the line
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Sounds like Obama will announce his gun plans tomorrow, including an AWB. So it'll be dead on arrival.

Why not let Feinstein's AWB bill die in the senate, and propose regulations that don't include it?
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
JokerOfSpades said:
Thanks all - hopefully I'm not irritating you guys. As always, I ask these questions so that I can respond to them in the future. In context, argument with my father. Double thanks for those who gave links...

What class do you guys think will help me learn this stuff best. I was considering macroeconomics. College, and I can still change my schedule.
Click to expand...

A. You are never annoying people here asking questions to get a better understanding of something and don't ever be afraid to ask to same things twice if you still don't get it. Ask away!

B. Not sure if there would be a class unless you have some elective about economic history of the US or something. This is more stuff you research on your own. Macroeconomics will teach standard theories and might possibly throw in some examples from the past, but it won't talk about things like the debt ceiling (you will learn about monetary and fiscal policy effects according to mainstream economics, however). That said, I always recommend taking economics. But I would take both micro and macro if you're going to opt to take one. Might as well learn both!

A lot of this is politics overriding economics. The very notion that Congress passes X amount of spending but then doesn't allow for Y amount of borrowing to account for the spending is nonsensical. It is like a doctor saying your blood pressure is too high, prescribing you medication, but then telling the pharmacy not to give you the pills.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

How is it that I own a bunch of Xbox 360 games I never bought digitally?
9
947
dragonyeuw replied
The Drunk GAF Containment Thread
Social Community 7 8 9 10 11
520
11K
ForAcademicPurposes replied
What are you thankful for this turkey day?
17
847
MaestroMike replied
Bad games with redeeming qualities
2 3
116
5K
Koenigssee replied
Next Generation is going to be really strange because of A.I
2
58
2K
midnightAI replied
Top Bottom