Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes he does. The 14th Amendment requires the Government to preserve the full faith and credit of the United States. By refusing to raise the debt ceiling, The Republican Congress would be bringing America's credit into question which is unconstitutional. The President could invoke the 14th Amendment and fight it out with the Republicans in the courts (if they go that route) or he could just go Platinum.
You don't learn do you? " The Republican Congress" Nuff said!
GOP legislators love signing into law lavish spending and tax cuts, but they REFUSE to pay for them, that's a real classy way to deal with the people who lend us money.
A DEM myth. Kennedy, Regan and Bush LOWERED taxes and REVENUES INCREASED.
Yes he does. The 14th Amendment requires the Government to preserve the full faith and credit of the United States. By refusing to raise the debt ceiling, The Republican Congress would be bringing America's credit into question which is unconstitutional. The President could invoke the 14th Amendment and fight it out with the Republicans in the courts (if they go that route) or he could just go Platinum.
how will he 'use' the 14th
the 14th ACKNOWLEDGES and VALIDATES the debt...says NOTHING about raising a debt ceiling
You write as if the paramount worry is lowering of the credit rating. If the cost of having a higher rating is to immediately trim $ one trillion from the current budget, which would drive the nation into recession, I'd vote for a lower rating.
In any case, raising the debt ceiling without a fight would not effect the U.S. credit rating. The credit agencies have no worry that the nation can finance its debt. What they do worry about is gridlock.
In any case, any case, the last time the credit rating was lowered do you remember what happened to interest rates on U.S. debt? They fell.
Tell me one time in history, less spending = a lower credit rating FOR ANYONE..
And when you're done, tell me when allowing people to keep more money, resulted in a catastropic recession..
Backup your ridiculous assertions.. You guys are laughable with your lack of understanding how credit works. You guys ran around spreading the same fear when the same crap happened under Clinton, and now you guys take credit for "surpluses" that never even appeared.
lets add some truth here. returning to spending levels of 2008 would just about wipe out the need to raise the debt limit.
NO not raising the debt limit would NOT require insane austerity. It would require some reductions in spending but not the kind of insane austerity you speak of.
I am FOR cutting spending on everything across the board including education and military.
Because I am NOT for paying my mortgage with my credit card that i cannot repay.
In 2008 our government engaged in borrowing a trillion dollars to allow for emergency spending. Our problem is that 0bama took that trillion in emergency spending, and called it the new norm, and now thinks we taxpayers must spend at emergency levels for all time. So answer is simple, stop spending as if we are still trying to prevent the world financial crisis of 2008.
BTW, it's not as if $6 trillion in deficit spending got us a damn thing except for increasing the number of poor people in the US, causing more unemployment and giving us nothing but more debt.
You have no clue. Here is an analogy that maybe you can get your head around: You have a home mortgage. Due to circumstances, you have only enough money to service the debt (pay interest) on your mortgage. There is nothing for food, for clothing, gasoline or your car payment, nothing for medical bills even. That is what you propose by not raising the debt limit - austerity beyond belief including an end to defense spending, education spending, Medicaid for elderly people, food stamps, you name it. It is an absurd (and illegal) proposition, but you RWNJs are nuts enough to think it is acceptable because your minds are not capable of grasping the suffering of the people or the consequences to the world economy of a such a stupid move. Once again, Obama has the Republicans over a barrel of their own making, on the wrong side of an argument. The time to cut spending is before you commit to it. So if the Reps want to have it out, make it over the budget not over the obligations it has already incurred.
So you're saying you cant live on $200B of income because the $30B in debt load you have incurred is overburdensome, but you are suggesting we take on more of it.
Thats one of the dumbest things I've heard in my entire life, but here ya are..
It took America 230 years to get 10 Trillion in debt. It has taken Obama 4 years go add 6 trillion to that number.
Not being concerned about 300 million in deficit spending is not wise (we did that during the Bush 43 years).
Being indignant when someone who was not wise is now concerned over 1.25 Trillion PER YEAR in deficit spending is suicide.
There is a supreme difference between being unwise and being suicidal!
Being unwise is no defense for the suicidal!
good grief.
We are arguing with partisan retards.
In 2008 they said Bush was "irresponsible" and "unpatriotic" for spending $4 trillion in new debt over EIGHT years, and when 0bama spends SIX trillion over four years, they yawn, and demand we spend $6 trillion more. They have lost their minds, have sold their souls for politically partisan reasons, and we should view them as suffering some type of mental illness.
Ponderosa suggested "if the Reps want to have it out, make it over the budget not over the obligations it has already incurred."
I wonder if my C-D friend here realizes that democrats simply don’t pass budgets. They simply pass legislation with new spending requirements then demand that continuing resolutions be passed to extend previous budgetary commitments.
They have found a very nice parliamentary trick to avoid budget fights that would expose them to the public finding out how irresponsible they have been.
It is not possible to have a budget fight with democrats because the democrats will not engage. The only way to curb spending (by that I mean racking up uncontrollable credit card debt) is to find a proxy to link the spending to.
Here we are.... which incidentally is the reason why we have a debt limit. At some point in the deep dark past, legislators realized they could not trust themselves to not spend more than they ought. So they created a legislative road block to slow down the growth of National Debt. Now that Republicans seem to show some commitment to restraint, democrats cry foul that this legislative road block is being honored….
A DEM myth. Kennedy, Regan and Bush LOWERED taxes and REVENUES INCREASED.
We have been there before on CD. I have shown countless times (anyone can use the search feature and find them) how this isn't true and you just keep repeating zombie lies
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
