This is why Washington should :diaf:

LINK



Not one fucking stick of honesty in the whole rotting crew.

We need the asteroid ASAP!!!

It's all just showmanship. Both sides are stylin' for the camera. The real work has always been done behind the scenes.

They're really not going to let the deadline pass. You heard it here first.

Its the total bullshit of half the savings being non existant savings.

I know that the economy(and the world's economy) would take a huge hit, but I honestly believe(from my little understanding of all this) that we shouldn't raise the debt ceiling.

If a private citizen defaults on a loan, the bank tanks their stuff. Why is it any different for our government? They fucked up and they(our country) should pay. Yeah, it will suck, but it also sucks for the private individual when they lose everything.

The debt ceiling was created for war time efforts, infrastructure improvement, and financial crisis -- but a lot of our debt comes from bull shit spending as well IMO.

I like this:

I mean, honestly, why are the people that are risking their lives in an effort to defend what this country stands for being paid CONSIDERABLY less than the people sitting inside air conditioned offices signing papers into law. MOSTLY bull shit laws.

Like I said, I don't have a very comprehensive understanding of this whole situation, but from what I've read, these are my feelings.

You say this and provide no explanation as to why. Is inflicting misery on people by risking a severe depression a good thing?

You think that's a justification? It will suck, but let's do it anyway?!!!

If you think the average politician is going to suffer due to a default, you're out of your mind. Mostly this would just hurt your average citizen. Additionally if your choices are between default or not default, the smart choice is not default.

The debt ceiling was created because prior to the legislation that created it, Congress had to vote to authorize any issuance of debt. Why Congress is allowed to vote for a spending bill that it can't pay for without raising the debt ceiling is beyond me.

A few things:
1. The President is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, do you know of many organizations where the boss makes less than everyone else?
2. Do you really think there's no risk to being a politician? How many assassinations or assassination attempts have we had on Presidents or Congressman? We've had 4 successful assassinations on Presidents with more than a dozen failed. We even had a somewhat successful attack on a Congresswoman last year, Gabrielle Giffords.
3. Are we really to the point that we're bitching about the most powerful man in the world being paid about 6 times the minimum wage? Sure he gets $400,000, but he's also on call 24/7/365.
4. The skills required to pick up a gun and go fight for your country are not the same as the skills necessary to run the country. Additionally the private sector premium for those skills is very different. A private sector executive could make millions or even billions, a private sector security guard or mercenary might make at most a couple hundred thousand.

Increasing the debt ceiling does nothing to pay the nations debt, or to lower what we owe. All it will do is allow the asshole in Congress and the White House to spend more money we do not have as well increase our debts.

You should ask the Government for a job as Captain Obvious.

It allows the government to pay what it already agreed to pay when it signed the budget into law a few months ago. I would think you'd be in favor of raising the debt ceiling, when the checks stop going out for social services, do you think people are just gonna just go along with it? No, they'll bitch and moan and raise hell, and the end result is going to be a bunch of politicians afraid of being tarred and feathered by geriatrics. I can't see that resulting in legislation favorable to lowering our deficits.

Nice try.

In other news...California "Dream Act" approved for illegal immigrants...

The checks are not going to not go out. You're falling for the lie.

The very fact that half of the Dem's "spending cuts" are fake and not real should make very clear that raising the limit at this point will only lead to more spending and then the need to raise it again and again. A line must be drawn. This far and no further. Either there are real honest major spending cuts or no raising of the debt limit.

We do not need to take on more debt so that we can pay our bills.

OOOOOK, after reading more about the current situation and seeing the President's national address. I take back what I previously said, mostly.

I can now understand the need for the debt ceiling to be raised, however the reason that we have this standstill is complete bull shit.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but for the first time in my life I actually agree with the republicans in the house. We need to increase the debt ceiling and cut spending considerably, especially in the government.

The only thing that I don't agree with the republicans in the house on is this: we need to increase the tax rate on LARGE corporations (i.e. Apple, Microsoft, IBM, BofA, Chase, etc.) and increase the tax rate on the richest of our country. I'm not talking about a ridiculous tax hike, something like 1% would work perfectly. I know most of you can do math, but for every billion that's another million for our nation.

We had a prosperous and great economy through the 90's due to measures taken by Reagan, H.W. Bush, and Clinton. G.W. Bush fucked us all, I'm sure I'll catch some shit for that, but it's the truth.

I'm a true believer when it comes to people fucking up, they need to fuck up and fall flat on their faces -- it's the only way to learn. That's what I was going along with earlier, but now I realize that that train of thought can not be applied to a nation as a whole.

However, I still believe that some of our government spending needs to be cut here:

I understand what these people do for our country, but if we're all having to make sacrifices, then they should as well. Excluding the soldiers.

To The Defender: The President might be on call 24/7/365, but so are the soldiers of this nation. I understand that the President is under constant risk of attack, but he's got a WHOLE battalion of armed guards protecting him. When I get shipped, which I know I will, I will just have myself and my gun and my brothers in arms. THAT'S IT. But yet, I'll only make $24,000/yr.

The difference between our President's risk and mine is, I have more of a chance of being killed than him.

Definitely.

When a doctor making $500k a year spends ~40% on taxes while a person collecting $500k in long term capital gains pays ~20%, we have a problem in how our tax rate is structured.

G.W. Bush did, but any President who has ran a deficit while borrowing from Social Security instead of raising tax rates to pay for it is just as guilty to causing damage. Now we have a Social Security Trust Fund full of Treasury Bonds that have to be paid out by the general government fund.

People should be held accountable for their actions. Defaulting absolves our nation of responsibility for our past actions. The alternative is long term economic damage to our country, and that isn't fair to those who have no responsibility for the current mess. What surprises me is that so many people in their 40's and 50's aren't standing up and saying, "no, we let this happen, it's time for us to make some sacrifices." Instead I see a lot of, "well, it's the government's fault."

I won't disagree that army pay is too low, but to use it as justification to slash the pay of elected representatives is dubious at best. We have this really bizarre self-fulfilling prophecy in our country where public sector compensation for executive positions is orders of magnitude lower than private sector, yet we get upset when the government can't deliver results comparable to the private sector. The thing that confuses me even more is that a lot of the people who complain about governments inability to compare to the private sector are the same ones who would defend private sector compensation because its necessary to attract the talent that can deliver the results. So we end up in this position where most of the people who will take these public sector positions are corrupt, and then point at it and go, SEE, THIS IS WHY YOU CAN'T TRUST GOVERNMENT!

You should do some research on how small businesses, which are 2/3 of the jobs in this country are not hiring because of Obama and his tax policies. You should do some research on how many of the "rich" are really small business owners reporting as individuals (as most do).

Tax policies? You mean the tax cuts that businesses and individuals have had over the last few years? The credits for hiring new employees?

Where are these massive new taxes on businesses, I'd really like to see them.

When Obama talks about taxing the rich, he refers to people making over $250,000. What you (and maybe he) don't seem to realize is that most small businesses report as private individuals and make more than that. Under Obama they'll be taxed. Do you think they're going to take home less, or lay off/not hire?

Today on the radio I heard an interview with the guy who started Home Depot in 1979. He spent quite a while explaining why he'd never be able to start up a company now and how much small business is not spending due to Obama and his policies.

That guy would be characterized by President Obama, Democrats in Congress, and all other liberals as a "greedy rich guy." A "corporate jet owner."

Your explanation is falling on deaf ears. They simply don't care.

I restate what I said.

Where are these massive new taxes on businesses, I'd really like to see them. Talking about new taxes is not new taxes. Talking about policies is not new policies.

As for the small business owner thing, they're paying a lower marginal tax rate than if they were a corporation in most cases, and federal tax rates for individuals are at the lowest rate in decades. The Home Depot guy is full of shit, the current maximum rate for either corporations or individuals is 35%, when he started Home Depot in 1979 it was 70% for individuals making over $215,400 and 46% for corporations making over $100,000. Now, if he wants to make some gripe about how the laws are more byzantine and that's why, I can see that, but saying that it's harder to start a business because taxes are higher is absolute horse shit.

It's been raised over 100 times in our nation's history and we haven't been ruined. It's only a big issue right now because the primaries start in about five months. Both parties are holding the nation hostage to win what they consider a game.

KamelReds agrees: I understand that it's been raised hundreds of times, but there's a point it has to stop.

Sure, the time is just not next week, it's sometime in the next few months when we're finalizing the FY 2012 budget.

The US is not in a position where it needs to default, or where it can't get credit.

EDIT: I see that in your subsequent post, you seem to have increased your understanding somewhat.

Where are you getting the 24k number?

Is that just Base Pay?

As an E5 w/dependents and living off post even before I deployed I was taking home 1700 and change every pay period. That's over 40k a year NET, and doesn't take into considering free healthcare for me and my family, subsidized shopping at the PX/Commissary, 4.5k a year in free money for school, and the host of other benefits that come with being in the military.

Now that I'm deployed and taking in Hazard Duty Pay, Hostile Fire Pay, Family Separation Pay, and not paying any taxes (but still have to pay into Medicare and SS) I'm.... BALLIN'!

No, it wouldn't 'suck', it would be a total, collossal disaster. Some way beyond suckage.

You're merely repeating the rhetoric without stopping to think about what you're saying. Yes, it's been raised quite a few times. Yes, we have primaries starting in a few months. But don't you think we've had that timing happening several times before?

The issue now really is different because of the severity of the problem and the alignment of the parties at this particular moment. Those factors make NOW the time to address the spending problem that we have.

The bottom line is we need to stop the runaway wreck thar is Fed spending at almost any cost. Ulimately, the damage from runaway deficits (40% when obama too office, noe about to reach 70% next year) will far exceed any short term issues from not raising the debt limit. Most of those issues are non issues raised as scare tactics by the vile vermin in the WH who will lie, cheat and bullshit to get his way.

Of course you know better than a guy who runs a multiple million dollar company.

The atmosphere of not knowing, but expecting tax increases is extremely toxic to business growth. Businesses hate uncertainty and combine that with an anti-business president and they're in hunker down mode, not hire and e pand mode, which is what we need.

Yeah, because no one ever looked at the past through rose colored glasses and ignored objective reality. Those numbers I gave you were from the IRS's historical tax rates.

So, in other words there are no new tax policies, and you're absolutely and totally full of shit, you're so full of shit that it is oozing out of your ears. There's always uncertainty in business, will tax rates rise, will interest rates rise, will the dollar rise or decrease in value respective to the currency of the country I export to.

Oh, hey, you know else is a big uncertainty for businesses? Will the debt ceiling be increased? If not, what effect will that have on my business?