Thread in which the world laughs at America

[DaShi]

It's an easier talking point than talking about unemployment for which the republicans have no plans for. Plus, if they do anything that might actually help the country, they fear Obama could take credit for it.

Just look at this thread. Obama has been coming out fairly good from these deficit talks because of his moderate stance. This is killing the conservatives who irrationally hate him to the point that they post the BS above just to have something to attack him on.

[KrazyHorse]

Hey, why don't they just vote to raise the debt ceiling? No one has given any reason to treat the deficit like it's some kind of emergency that must be eliminated immediately. I don't think a meteoroid is going to hit the US if we increase the national debt.

This is idiotic. "Nothing bad will happen tomorrow if we do this, so this is fine to do"

[giblets]

"Nothing bad will happen in the near future if we do this, so it's not an emergency and we don't need to fix it instantly"

[KrazyHorse]

It's an easier talking point than talking about unemployment for which the republicans have no plans for. Plus, if they do anything that might actually help the country, they fear Obama could take credit for it.

Just look at this thread. Obama has been coming out fairly good from these deficit talks because of his moderate stance. This is killing the conservatives who irrationally hate him to the point that they post the BS above just to have something to attack him on.

The only things anybody in government can do to substantially increase employment and output is to fire the idiots holding back the Fed from printing more money, reduce unemployment benefits and kill some of the idiotic governmental interference in the economy that's grown up over the last few years. Which of those 3 things are on the Democrats' agenda?

[KrazyHorse]

"Nothing bad will happen in the near future if we do this, so it's not an emergency and we don't need to fix it instantly"

Right, so we should just go on as previously. We'll fix it at some time in the future.

Stop being so retarded. The level of public debt in the US is on a bad path. The faster that's remediated the better.

[Hauldren Collider]

If they don't use the debt limit as something to force obama to stop spending money, he will never stop spending money. The only reason he's even considering spending cuts is because the Republicans forced his hand.

[giblets]

Right, so we should just go on as previously. We'll fix it at some time in the future.

Stop being so retarded. The level of public debt in the US is on a bad path. The faster that's remediated the better.

Yes, if the current level of spending is too high we can adjust that when we come up with the next federal budget. That makes more sense than manufacturing a crisis. Why would I want to risk the government doing something stupid because congress didn't vote to raise the debt ceiling in time?

[KrazyHorse]

Yes, if the current level of spending is too high we can adjust that when we come up with the next federal budget. That makes more sense than manufacturing a crisis. Why would I want to risk the government doing something stupid because congress didn't vote to raise the debt ceiling in time?

Who the **** cares about this "crisis" except for the deal that will come out of it? I've already demonstrated that the credit market views this as a sideshow. Nothing bad has happened; the only effect is that this stuff is being reported on cnn/cnbc/foxnews instead of whatever other news would have been reported.

[KrazyHorse]

As I said, stop being retarded. "Why don't we just go on spending more money than we take in because I think the issue should wait until the budget" is an idiotic sentiment. I don't gie a **** about what you think is proper in the context of overnmental niceties. Governmental deficits are a pressing issue in the US, and the sooner they're addressed, the better.

[giblets]

Who the **** cares about this "crisis" except for the deal that will come out of it? I've already demonstrated that the credit market views this as a sideshow. Nothing bad has happened; the only effect is that this stuff is being reported on cnn/cnbc/foxnews instead of whatever other news would have been reported.

Well you can't exactly use a threat in a negotiation if that threat doesn't seem credible. I guess Obama should just be like "whatever, you wouldn't really let anything bad happen, so I'll just sit here and wait for you to increase the debt ceiling. The credit market trusts you so I should too."

[Jon Miller]

The only things anybody in government can do to substantially increase employment and output is to fire the idiots holding back the Fed from printing more money, reduce unemployment benefits and kill some of the idiotic governmental interference in the economy that's grown up over the last few years. Which of those 3 things are on the Democrats' agenda?

I assume you favor transfer payments rather than unemployment benefits?

I understand that.

JM

[KrazyHorse]

By the way, I think that the Republicans appear to be rejecting a pretty good deal (one that reduces tax expenditures, reduces marginal rates and cuts spending significantly). I haven't been following that closely, but I can't really understand why they are doing this.

[KrazyHorse]

I assume you favor transfer payments rather than unemployment benefits?

I understand that.

JM

I'm in favor of non-contingent transfers whenever possible. Contingent transfers reduce work incentives or distort other choices.

[KrazyHorse]

Let's all remember that 99 weeks of unemployment benefits is TWO YEARS.

I doubt this is the major thing keeping output so low (though it may have a significant effect on the headline unemployment number).

As I've stated previously, I think that the major problem here is the Federal Reserve's reaction function; it is far too conservative. The Fed moves last in a fiat currency regime, and fiscal policy is essentially impotent in the face of Fed resolve to keep nominal output/inflation so low.

[Kuciwalker]

By the way, I think that the Republicans appear to be rejecting a pretty good deal (one that reduces tax expenditures, reduces marginal rates and cuts spending significantly). I haven't been following that closely, but I can't really understand why they are doing this.

QFT.