Tell me again why the GOP thinks they can negotiate "substantial spending and entitlement cuts" in exchange for a debt ceiling raise? _Congress already approved the spending of that money._ If they want to cut spending and entitlements, then do so in a straightforward fashion, not by demanding give-backs.
It's like saying, "Honey, I don't like how much we're spending on clothes, so I'm not going to pay the credit card bill."
Embedded Link
Report: House GOP Leaders Weighing 4-Year Debt Ceiling Raise
House Republican leaders are weighing a proposal that would increase the debt limit for four years in exchange for substantial spending and entitlement cuts, Roll Call reports: The plan would, howeve…
Google+: Reshared 1 times
Google+: View post on Google+
Here's why: because since Obama has yielded nearly every time before, they think that he will again. The problem is that they're playing a game of chicken with the entire economy in the balance, and Obama is playing at brinksmanship rather than just torpedoing the whole argument dead. It's as simple as #mintthecoin
The GOP is playing politics with the world economy on this one. They depend on uninformed constituents who have now clue how the mechanics of the debt ceiling or federal budget work. Most of the conservatives I know think that a debt ceiling increase is to pay for new spending, when it is actually the opposite. As has been said a million times, some of these hypocrites are refusing to pay the bills they created through legislation. They also try to convince people that the President can actually appropriate federal money.
They truly under estimate how angry voters will be when the following happens:
1) Markets tank, taking investments and savings with them
2) Dollar tanks, (less reason to invest in it after a default)
3) Unemployment goes to Great Depression levels.
4) Even a late debt ceiling increase will actually INCREASE the debt and deficit because of higher borrowing costs.
5) Most Americans lose EVERYTHING and so on….
Yeah that will buy some votes…..
I've heard many GOP politicians make the mistake of saing that we can avoid technical default by servicing the debt through existing revenue. Won't happen as tax revenue will plummet because of the damaged economy.
You can only demand dollar for dollar cuts so long until there is nothing left to cut. Ironically they want to cut programs that benefit seniors and tons of people in poor Southern red states, the only people that still support the GOP. Irony is that with some exception these conservative constituencies in red states, with the exception of the 1% and possible Texas, have been siphoning money from blue states through the very programs that their elected representatives want to cute, for years now.
So go head and do it GOP. We though we only had to wait a few more years until your base died off, this will only speed things up, as far as the party dying.
+Gary Roth — thanks — I had been going to mention that as one reason, and forgot by the time I got to the end of the post.
But minting the coin is no answer. It's a cheap gimmick, and would do as much harm as good;.
The only hope is to make the GOP take clear, unequivocal responsibility for whatever happens next.
+Cord Scott — I would very much like to think that the GOP extremists would rush themselves to political extinction through such an action. Problem is, not only am I not sure of it, but the damage that would happen to everyone else in the meantime.
In the end the GOP won't default. The Tea Party crazies will vote no to save face and the center-right members will vote yes in numbers needed for passage. I'm sure right now their big money supporters, like the American Chamber of Commerce , are reminding them of their responsibilities, just like in 2011. Affluent people have much to lose in this as well, just like all of us.
Hopefully the Tea Party loses a few more seats next election as well.
+Dave Hill It's not a cheap gimmick. It's a manifestation of a classic mechanism by which countries control their debt: pushing more currency into circulation to pay it. While in some cases this leads to inflation (the harm you refer to), the fact is that if bailouts of massive proportion and a federal interest rate of less than 1% haven't led to tremendous inflation, neither will a gradual influx of currency that is locked directly into routine payments that directly follow the government's business-as-usual.
Don't forget, even for a second, that the debt crisis is purely imaginary. Debt doesn't do a lick on it's own to hurt our economy. The only thing that would make it hurt is a failure to pay or worries that we might fail to pay. That's what killed Greece and that's specifically why we are not Greece.
What's killing our credit isn't the debt itself. It's the damage done by this stupid political brinkmanship. If Obama does his job and uses the tools available to him instead of playing politics, that brinkmanship ends now and forever, because it will utterly crush any notion that the deficit hawks were right in any way while at the same time demonstrating that the US has the means necessary to avoid a default under any circumstances.
As soon as I heard about this proposed coin, I thought of the trouble Zimbabwe had back in 2008 when they started printing $10,000,000 bills (each of which could then buy two rolls of toilet paper). Money has to be backed by something, whether that’s gold or production.
@Avo – The fact is, we have the production capacity. There’s no question about our physical ability to back that amount to be able to pay our debts (which is why countries continue to invest in US bonds, etc.). The question is about our political ability to do so right now.