Jump to content

Official Republicans In Congress Are Idiots Thread


Recommended Posts

There is probably nothing in this World that I hate as much as dogmatic ideologues. I find it hard to believe that the Congressional Republicans are so set in their no revenue increases of any sort position that they would actually not increase the debt ceiling and are putting the US Gov't in a position to possibly default on it's debt.The debt ceiling is actually an insane thing to have in your system of government. All of the spending has already happened and been approved. If the debt ceiling isn't increased it's exactly like running up your credit card bill willingly and then just not paying. Not increasing the debt ceiling can't magically make that money that has been spent not get spent.I think this editorial from the Economist sums things up pretty well when they call the Republican position "economically illiterate and disgracefully cynical". The Economist is a right wing pro business magazine but they aren't ideologues and I think it's the smartest best magazine in the English speaking World.Don't get me wrong, the morons in the Democratic Party who refuse to even consider reform of entitlements are just as bad. Basically I think you're all screwed since it seems there is no such thing as a talented reasonable politician in the US currently who actually has any influence. It's the idiots on the fringes who are controlling things.http://www.economist.com/node/18928600?story_id=18928600

The sticking-point is not on the spending side. It is because the vast majority of Republicans, driven on by the wilder-eyed members of their party and the cacophony of conservative media, are clinging to the position that not a single cent of deficit reduction must come from a higher tax take. This is economically illiterate and disgracefully cynical. A gamble where you bet your country’s good name This newspaper has a strong dislike of big government; we have long argued that the main way to right America’s finances is through spending cuts. But you cannot get there without any tax rises. In Britain, for instance, the coalition government aims to tame its deficit with a 3:1 ratio of cuts to hikes. America’s tax take is at its lowest level for decades: even Ronald Reagan raised taxes when he needed to do so. And the closer you look, the more unprincipled the Republicans look. Earlier this year House Republicans produced a report noting that an 85%-15% split between spending cuts and tax rises was the average for successful fiscal consolidations, according to historical evidence. The White House is offering an 83%-17% split (hardly a huge distance) and a promise that none of the revenue increase will come from higher marginal rates, only from eliminating loopholes. If the Republicans were real tax reformers, they would seize this offer. Both parties have in recent months been guilty of fiscal recklessness. Right now, though, the blame falls clearly on the Republicans. Independent voters should take note.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 574
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

TIf the debt ceiling isn't increased it's exactly like running up your credit card bill willingly and then just not paying.
No, it's not like that at all. It's like reaching the limit on your credit card and then just quit wasting money instead of calling your credit card company and ask for an increase.In both cases, eventually the answer will be no. It should be obvious that the sooner someone gives you a dose of fiscal reality and says no, the better, whether it's your personal credit card or your national debt.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The White House is offering an 83%-17% split (hardly a huge distance) and a promise that none of the revenue increase will come from higher marginal rates, only from eliminating loopholes.
I have no idea if this is true, it's the first I heard of this claim. If it is, and it was accompanied by a massive simplification of the tax code, then I agree with you. A small increase due to a simplified tax code would offset the deadweight losses caused by the costs of obeying -- and avoiding -- a too complex code.Just increasing taxes and spending for the fun of it is a horrible, horrible idea, and the Republicans should resist that at all costs. Enough already.
Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it's not like that at all. It's like reaching the limit on your credit card and then just quit wasting money instead of calling your credit card company and ask for an increase.In both cases, eventually the answer will be no. It should be obvious that the sooner someone gives you a dose of fiscal reality and says no, the better, whether it's your personal credit card or your national debt.
So you think the right thing to do for the government is to in one fell swoop go from running a massive deficit to a balanced budget in one year with all of the cuts and massive dislocation that will entail because that's the reality of not increasing the debt ceiling ? That and costing the government billions in increased interest costs.
Link to post
Share on other sites
So you think the right thing to do for the government is to in one fell swoop go from running a massive deficit to a balanced budget in one year with all of the cuts and massive dislocation that will entail because that's the reality of not increasing the debt ceiling ? That and costing the government billions in increased interest costs.
It's difficult to get a real rundown of the numbers, but it seems unlikely it could be done in one year, considering the percent of the budget devoted to entitlements that have been promised for decades.Having said that, there is absolutely no way they should make a deal that does not provide 1) a balanced budget for all non-entitlement programs within 2 years and 2) a balanced budget for entitlement programs within 10 years and 3) a means to keep it balanced (such as a balanced budget amendment) permanently after that.Anything less and they are just engaging in more-of-the-same political cowardice.PS -- reducing deficits decreases interest costs, not increases them, so I don't get that comment.
Link to post
Share on other sites
PS -- reducing deficits decreases interest costs, not increases them, so I don't get that comment.
Don't increase the debt ceiling and default on your debt and see how much more expensive it is for the US gov't to pay for the existing debt you have.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with fiscal conservatives using the debt ceiling as a lever and negotiating catalyst to get some of their policies in place but at the end of the day any US politician who actually believes that they should not increase the debt ceiling and that it's a reasonable option is not fit to govern and is either so stupid as to not understand the consequences of their actions or such ideologues that they don't care as long as their narrow religion of smaller government comes about no matter what the cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problem with fiscal conservatives using the debt ceiling as a lever and negotiating catalyst to get some of their policies in place but at the end of the day any US politician who actually believes that they should not increase the debt ceiling and that it's a reasonable option is not fit to govern and is either so stupid as to not understand the consequences of their actions or such ideologues that they don't care as long as their narrow religion of smaller government comes about no matter what the cost.
This exact line of thinking has been going on to justify the problem that keeps getting worse for decades."Sure, we are all for being realistic, but we just can't do it right now because the situation is so bad"The amount of money coming in is decreasing, their spending is increasing.No matter how much your intentions are to do good tomorrow, today has already forced the issue.I can already guarantee the republicans will cave on this. 100% they will give in.And the new 'We can't possibility spend less than this" level will rise again. And in a year or two we will be talking about how we 'have to raise the debt ceiling' all over again. "Only this time its never been so important that we continue to spend at the rising levels we are used too"The long term is a default resulting in a global economic depression.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Please please PLEASE quit calling a Tax Increase a "Revenue Increase".
Not all revenue increases are tax increases.Here's an example for you.Hedge Fund managers make money in two ways. They get a management fee and then they also get a percentage of the increase in the value of the fund they manage. The income that they earn as a result of the fund going up in value is for some inexplicable reason other than the fund managers having enough politicians in their pockets as a capital gain and taxed at the reduced capital gain rate instead of as ordinary income. The thing is that there is no justification at all for classifying it as a capital gain since the fund manager has zero capital invested to earn this income and is at no risk of losing capital. If you change this interpretation it would increase revenue but it would not be a tax increase.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob is very right.Obama has offered an excellent offer to congress. Republicans and Democrats should take it and, in doing so, simultaneously raise the debt ceiling (which is 100% necessary, anyone who tells you otherwise is wasting your time) and reduce the deficit.It'll be interesting and very telling to see how things play out. I think the next few week will have (or should have) a major effect on next year's election. They'll demonstrate in a very real way who in Washington is willing to get things done, to compromise, and to look forward to the future. And it'll show who has fallen so deep into their own fundamentalism that they would sacrifice the well-being of this country for symbolic points.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Didn't say. Didn't agree with it. But it's still a tax increase.
Clearly. I'm not afraid to say that we should increase taxes on some to help reduce the deficit. I'm also not afraid to say that, in the long term, social programs need to be addressed because they will quickly become unsustainable. The need to change them, however, would be dramatically reduced if this country's healthcare costs were in line with the rest of the world's costs.It's embarrassing that both sides are using the debt limit as a point for arguing some abstract political position that has little relevance to the real world.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Didn't say. Didn't agree with it. But it's still a tax increase.
I'm just trying to point out that there are tax increases that are punitive and tax increases that make perfect sense. If I can't get conservatives to agree that something wildly common sense like that should happen, what is my incentive as a liberal to concede on other isses?Liberals are pre-disposed to compromise. For every inch the GOP gives, the Democrats will give an inch and a half. Guaranteed. But if the GOP refuses to compromise anywhere, they might accidentally give the Dems a spine and they will lose the PR battle over this. 2010 is old news now and I think the GOP is overplaying their hand.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Double Post
yeah like I'm going to be able to take your word on anything you post in this thread now. idiot.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The need to change them, however, would be dramatically reduced if this country's healthcare costs were in line with the rest of the world's costs.
Yeah, we don't want rationing here. That's the whole point of being rich, so we don't have to beg bureaucrats for the care we need.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Liberals are pre-disposed to compromise. For every inch the GOP gives, the Democrats will give an inch and a half.
I guess you didn't notice Obamacare.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Bob is very right.Obama has offered an excellent offer to congress. Republicans and Democrats should take it and, in doing so, simultaneously raise the debt ceiling (which is 100% necessary, anyone who tells you otherwise is wasting your time) and reduce the deficit.It'll be interesting and very telling to see how things play out. I think the next few week will have (or should have) a major effect on next year's election. They'll demonstrate in a very real way who in Washington is willing to get things done, to compromise, and to look forward to the future. And it'll show who has fallen so deep into their own fundamentalism that they would sacrifice the well-being of this country for symbolic points.
Anyone who makes a compromise in order to make a deal that doesn't address the long-term financial picture should be immediately impeached
Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone who makes a compromise in order to make a deal that doesn't address the long-term financial picture should be immediately impeached
No. People should try to achieve long term goals and use this opportunity as a chance to make things better. But if it's the night before the the debt limit is to be reached, anyone who refuses to accept a deal to raise the limit based should be impeached. It's too serious a thing to mess around with.
Link to post
Share on other sites
No. People should try to achieve long term goals and use this opportunity as a chance to make things better. But if it's the night before the the debt limit is to be reached, anyone who refuses to accept a deal to raise the limit based should be impeached. It's too serious a thing to mess around with.
This is a can that cannot be kicked down the road any longer. The biggest problem is the entitlement programs. The entitlement programs are promises to people 20 or 30 years from now. Right now those promises are unsustainable. Anyone who is willing to keep making promises that they know will get broken later is too irresponsible to be in office. The time to fix the problem is now; anyone who is unwilling to do that is not fit to serve.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess you didn't notice Obamacare.
I'm going to guess you didn't actually. I saw a party that controlled the White House and both houses of Congress go from "public option!!!" to "small tweaks to the current system." They compromised every step of the way. Just because you still did not enjoy the end result doesn't make something else true.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to guess you didn't actually. I saw a party that controlled the White House and both houses of Congress go from "public option!!!" to "small tweaks to the current system." They compromised every step of the way. Just because you still did not enjoy the end result doesn't make something else true.
The Dem leadership refused to meet with the Republicans to discuss ideas for most of the year. The bill was written in the form it passed before any Democratic leader met with any Republican leader. There was no compromise with Republicans; any changes were due to infighting among Democrats.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...