Debt limit talks stall as Republicans 'press pause'

“Look, we can’t be spending more money next year,” McCarthy told reporters as he entered the Capitol. "We have to spend less than we spent the year before. It’s pretty easy.”

Japan could use this straightforward thinking.

As Republicans demand spending cuts and policy changes, Biden is facing increased pushback from Democrats, particularly progressives, not to give in to demands they argue will be harmful to Americans.

So they wanna default instead huh?

House Freedom Caucus said there should be no further discussions until the Senate takes action on the House Republican bill that was approved last month to raise the debt limit into 2024 in exchange for spending caps and policy changes. Biden has said he would veto that Republican measure.

Oh so Biden wants to default instead too huh?

Where is the alternative to the House approved plan then?

There are not the votes in the GQP caucus for ANY deal. The recent whip count shows them 50-100 votes short. On the other hand, Democrats have 213 solid votes for a clean debt ceiling passage today.

Kevin made a deal with the insanity caucus and now that is coming home to roost.

Congrats, Kevin. Or something like that.

Where is the alternative to the House approved plan then?

The Democrat plan was released well in advance of the garbage GOP one.

Why are right-wingers so insistent on taking healthcare and welfare benefits away from the most vulnerable?

Paying the debt on money you already owe and shrinking budgets on future spending are two separate things that the GQP purposely conflate because their low information base cannot tell them apart.

But they are separate issues. You don't decide to Welch on your CC debt for things you've already purchased because you need to spend less in the future (unless you're Trump. In that case, you just Welch on your debts for fun.)

The CC lender would destroy you financially and while most analogies linking micro and macro economic behaviors are silly, this one is not. Defaulting on already authorized spending would be catastrophic for the US economy.

The fact that Trump and several GQP members of Congress think otherwise shows just how stupid and unfit they are.

The full faith and credit of the United States is not a hostage to be taken in a negotiation. Its not something the Democrats (or the GQP) sought to do when they lifted the debt limit 3 times under the former guy.

And that was while he was racking of 25% of all outstanding debt accumulated over 240 odd years in just 4 years.

But NOW, they are worried about deficits! Not worried enough to reverse the tax cuts for the richest 1%, mind you. Just worried enough to demand that the poorest get fewer services.

So take your pause, then raise the debt ceiling.

If not the Democrats should try a discharge petition. Lets see if there are 5 sane Republicans left in the House.

In lue of that, Biden should invoke the 14th Amendment which requires that the national debt not be questioned, wave to Kevin with one finger (not the index finger) and invite the strict constructionist on SCOTUS to provide a plain text interpretation of the following:

 “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”

The full faith and credit of the United States is not a negotiating tool.

Only Congress is authorized to raise the debt limit and as several GQP cheerleaders here have boasted, they are in the majority.

It's their job. If the GQP defaults they will be held responsible by the voters just as they have every other time they have created this type of artificial crisis.

Why are right-wingers so insistent on taking healthcare and welfare benefits away from the most vulnerable?

Because Biden cut their legs off on live tv at the State of the Union for trying to cut Social Security and Medicare.

They can't cut that now. And they aren't going to raise taxes on their corporate masters and hedge fund bros.

All that is left is the poor. And the GQP doesn't care about them.

Good on McCarthy, dig in and dig in hard.

Good on McCarthy, dig in and dig in hard.

Yeah, Kevin, dig! (Kevin is too stupid to realize he is digging his and his party's political grave.)

Who cares if the SS checks don't go out or VA services lapse?

Granny will just have to get by on cat food for a while, won't she? I mean, you've drawn a false premise, I mean "a line in the sand"....

I'm sure the elderly, wounded vets (and their families), single parents with children needing assistance will all understand.

Not to mention the holders of US debt (and equities). I am sure your false dichotomy between budgetary and financing issues will be accepted without question or penalty.

Somebody get Kevin some drilling equipment!

The Democrat plan was released well in advance of the garbage GOP one.

Did the Senate approve it?

My understanding of the facts (correct if wrong) is that only the House has passed a bill.

If Biden wants to veto it fine, but why doesn’t the Senate pass a plan Biden can sign? Why not?

Yeah, Kevin, dig! (Kevin is too stupid to realize he is digging his and his party's political grave.)

Not this time. This is exactly why Nancy lost the gavel, people got tired of the frivolous spending.

Who cares if the SS checks don't go out or VA services lapse?

Dems care?? Next you’ll be telling me the Dems care about the border as well.

I'm sure the elderly, wounded vets (and their families), single parents with children needing assistance will all understand.

From the anti war crowd that disparaged our vets historically and ignores the plights and struggles of minority communities?

Not to mention the holders of US debt (and equities).

Exactly! All the more reason why Kevin should be digging in.

Somebody get Kevin some drilling equipment.

He won’t need that, just tell Biden, No.

fxgai

The Democrat plan was released well in advance of the garbage GOP one.

Did the Senate approve it?

My understanding of the facts (correct if wrong) is that only the House has passed a bill.

That's correct. The GOP house doesn't like it because although it will lower debt, it doesn't cut benefits that would hurt Americans.

These funding bills traditionally start in the House.

I cannot remember if the Senate can independently start its own bill or not. It’s a good question.

Granny will just have to get by on cat food for a while, won't she? I mean, you've drawn a false premise, I mean "a line in the sand"....

I'm sure the elderly, wounded vets (and their families), single parents with children needing assistance will all understand.

Japanese response to the above:

Cat? Do you have a cat? My grandmother has two cats.

Defaulting on already authorized spending would be catastrophic for the US economy.

“Default on spending”?

Not spending the money is a valid choice, who is going to complain?

As a holder of US debt, yes I would be peeved if the Biden admin doesn’t get its act together and pass a plan to raise the debt limit and make sure they can pay me.

But if the also decide to not spend some money from the crazy spending plans, that doesn’t mean a disaster, only that Santa is not bringing so many goodies for Christmas.

Government changing spending plans is what governments do, it is not a “default” to do so.

in the 4 years Orange-kun was in office - the Rep's voted to up the debt ceiling 3 times - not a quarrel....a cool 1trillion in tax breaks for the richest 1%...280 pages of the 320 pages McCarthy submitted as gimmes to the petroleum industry....Reps know their lord and master

Did the Senate approve it?

lol What does the Senate have to do with this? You'll notice this about the Republican led house.

The Senate is led by the Democrats. Also, the plan has already been released.

My understanding of the facts (correct if wrong) is that only the House has passed a bill.

Yes. A garbage bill that slashes funding for healthcare for the poor and veterans.

If Biden wants to veto it fine, but why doesn’t the Senate pass a plan Biden can sign? Why not?

Because it's a stupid bill that will lead to real harm to millions of Americans. Why are we so keen on just passing anything?

The GOP house doesn't like it because although it will lower debt, it doesn't cut benefits that would hurt Americans.

Its funny, what the GOP House thinks about it would seem to be irrelevant, since as per my understanding, the Senate has not even passed this enigma plan that a few excited JT posters are telling me exists.

I cannot remember if the Senate can independently start its own bill or not. It’s a good question.

Thank you. I am no expert in US politics but I am under the impression that the Senate can come up with something, and then the House and Senate could “conference” over the different bills.

Its funny, what the GOP House thinks about it would seem to be irrelevant, since as per my understanding, the

Your understanding is flawed. A bill has to pass both the house and senate.

Senate has not even passed this enigma plan that a few excited JT posters are telling me exists.

That's not what you said originally. You're moving the goal posts from:

Where is the alternative to the House approved plan then?

to

the Senate has not even passed this enigma plan that a few excited JT posters are telling me exists.

Bass thinks that Kevin is in control, lol. He’s not even the driver of a tractor trailer with its breaks out. THAT would imply some form of actual control.

No, Kevin is the poor fool stuck on the hood of the out of control truck, clinging to the hood ornament trying desperately not to get run over as it careens toward a cliff.

He doesn’t have the votes from his own caucus on anything he negotiates. The zealots in his insanity ward want to force the bill they passed. That’s not going to happen, so “the hair” is along for the ride.

When cornered by logic or facts, default to “Nancy”!

Nancy isn’t in the chair anymore, Bass. Kevin is. If she were, this would have been solved long ago regardless of which party held the White House because she is both competent and sane. Kevin is stupid and craven

But he’s your guy and if the country defaults, it’s on him and the GQP

ChatGPT is telling me, “Yes, the United States Senate can initiate spending bills. The U.S. Constitution grants the power of initiating revenue-raising legislation to the House of Representatives, but it does not restrict the Senate from introducing spending bills.”

Lol, I get downvoted for just posting a ChatGPT answer that clarifies a question under debate… that’s political discourse I guess.

Sorry Cards Fan, but a plan that hasn’t passed the Senate nor House does not constitute a viable alternative in my mind, hence my two statements were completely consistent, in my mind. Apologies if you felt it confusing.

That is what I thought but could not confirm. Any bill still has to pass the house and that is not happening as long as the insanity caucus says “do it our way or we will burn the National economy to the ground.”

Kevin doesn’t have the votes from his own caucus and he’s not getting them from the Democrats as a reward for taking the full faith and credit hostage.

Any bill still has to pass the house 

And the Senate too.

I am gonna guess you are a US citizen and favour the Democrats?

Hence you are dumping on the Republicans although they actually passed a plan, which is one up on the Democrat Senate at this point.

Just a non-US observer here, although be it Japan or the US, I do not favour massive government debt financed spending.

Hence you are dumping on the Republicans although they actually passed a plan,

Imagine that! Democrat supporters criticizing a stupid Republican plan. Shocking!

Sorry mate, no credit given for passing a bill that leads to misery for millions.

 do not favour massive government debt financed spending.

We know, and we wouldn't need massive debt if Republicans weren't constantly cutting taxes on the richest Americans. All in all, your economic prescriptions widely unpopular, and frankly, disasterous.

Congressional Republicans voted to raise the debt ceiling under Trump multiple times with no demands. That alone should key people into the fact that it's all politics for the GOP.

No way around it.

Yeah, Kevin, dig! (Kevin is too stupid to realize he is digging his and his party's political grave.)

Not this time. This is exactly why Nancy lost the gavel, people got tired of the frivolous spending.

Yea, you know - frivolous spending like that UNFUNDED $1.9 TRILLION tax break in 2018 or that INCREASE in the debt by $7.8 TRILLION from 2016 to 2020...

Who cares if the SS checks don't go out or VA services lapse?

Dems care??

Repubs don't...

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2023/may/09/mike-bost/republicans-vow-not-to-cut-veterans-benefits-but-t/

I'm sure the elderly, wounded vets (and their families), single parents with children needing assistance will all understand.

From the anti war crowd that disparaged our vets historically and ignores the plights and struggles of minority communities?

Anti-war? Who's supports standing up to Russia in Ukraine? Who's for cutting and running away?

Not to mention the holders of US debt (and equities).

Exactly! All the more reason why Kevin should be digging in.

He's digging alright - his political grave...

Somebody get Kevin some drilling equipment.

He won’t need that, just tell Biden, No.

And MTG and Gaetz are ready to dance on his grave...ROFL...

A day earlier, the conservative House Freedom Caucus said there should be no further discussions until the Senate takes action on the House Republican bill that was approved last month to raise the debt limit into 2024 in exchange for spending caps and policy changes.

This Orwellian Newspeak named, evangelical, prosperity gospel believing MAGA gang has held McCarthy hostage since the beginning since their game is accelerationism.

Tanking the economy and creating chaos, blaming Biden and progressives will help to bring a Trump election victory closer next year.

They are extremists who want to drag the nation further right.

Bass thinks that Kevin is in control, lol.

Biden buckled a bit so…

He’s not even the driver of a tractor trailer with its breaks out. THAT would imply some form of actual control. 

Kept his caucus together, beg to differ

No, Kevin is the poor fool stuck on the hood of the out of control truck, clinging to the hood ornament trying desperately not to get run over as it careens toward a cliff. 

Not really

https://news.yahoo.com/mccarthy-shifts-voices-confidence-debt-202705356.html

He doesn’t have the votes from his own caucus on anything he negotiates.

Not yet, but it coming together nicely

The zealots in his insanity ward want to force the bill they passed. That’s not going to happen, so “the hair” is along for the ride. 

As Biden is

When cornered by logic or facts, default to “Nancy”!

True, but no one is thinking about her.

Nancy isn’t in the chair anymore,

Seems the Dems think she is.

Bass. Kevin is. If she were, this would have been solved long ago regardless of which party held the White House because she is both competent and sane. Kevin is stupid and craven 

Then if that were true Biden would have solidly won this, not happening. Biden got checkmated so far.

But he’s your guy and if the country defaults, it’s on him and the GQP

Not this time.

Once again, the" Kooks in the Crazy Caucus" are showing Kevin who's the boss...

They want the complete destruction of our economy - ruining our credit rating, throwing millions out of work, making us a laughingstock on the world stage...

Interesting who else wants this....Putin, Xi, The Mullahs...

Remember whose values they share when voting in 2024...

Remember whose values they share when voting in 2024...

Traditional American values, sure they will.

Another Republican negotiator, Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, said, “There is a “serious gap” between the sides.

When one side regularly attends churches that preach a prosperity gospel that says the poor are not rich because they are not right with their evangelical Jesus it is hard to negotiate to have a budget that cares for the welfare of the many unfortunate in the number one economy in the world.

For example the individual above supported a 2020 rule change by the Trump administration whereby payday lenders would no longer have to check whether prospective borrowers can afford to repay high-interest loans.

Basically sees the poor as exploitable targets like their slumlord daddy.

When cornered by logic or facts, default to “Nancy”!

True, but no one is thinking about her.

You brought her up.

Nancy isn’t in the chair anymore, 

Seems the Dems think she is.

? Just incoherent.

we wouldn't need massive debt if Republicans weren't constantly cutting taxes on the richest Americans.

Just not SALT.

I also asked ChatGPT the other day about those tax reforms and it told me that tax revenues increased after the changes, not decrease. Increasing revenues don’t cause debt, but excessive spending beyond tax revenues does.

I also asked ChatGPT the other day about those tax reforms and it told me that tax revenues increased after the changes, not decrease. Increasing revenues don’t cause debt, but excessive spending beyond tax revenues does.

Funny that. I asked GPT 4 about Modern Monetary Theory and it said fiat currency is a convenient fiction and modern nation states frequently spend far beyond their means when the need suits them, for example during the pandemic with quantitative easing QE that disproportionately benefited large investors.

EFD, good points.

Raising the debt ceiling and cutting the budget are two very different things, akin to threatening not to pay your credit card bill if your partner does not agree to reign in future spending. The former is water under the bridge; the correct forum for the latter is budget discussions.

McCarthy is more worried about retaining his precarious position than of the wellbeing of Americans, particularly the less well-off.

I also asked ChatGPT the other day about those tax reforms and it told me that tax revenues increased after the changes, not decrease. Increasing revenues don’t cause debt, but excessive spending beyond tax revenues does.

Sorry, this just isn't true. This is not what the CBO has said. And if it were true, no one would be opposed to tax cuts. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fiscal-deficit-idUSKBN1HG2RW

Traditional American values, sure they will.

Threatening to default on the country’s debt obligations unless we get to stick it to poor people and make it easier for billionaires to cheat on their taxes —is so traditional American values!

Threatening to default on the country’s debt obligations unless we get to stick it to poor people and make it easier for billionaires to cheat on their taxes —is so traditional American values!

Oh, please without billionaires, Americans would be living like Somalians, thank god for the rich that keep the country afloat and provide jobs, robbing Paul to give to Peter will only last until Paul runs out of cash.

Oh, please without billionaires,

Nonsense. Without workers to exploit, we wouldn't have billionaires.

Republicans had 0 problem running up the national deficit last time they controlled all of congress and the Whitehouse.

Oh, please without billionaires, Americans would be living like Somalians, thank god for the rich that keep the country afloat and provide jobs, robbing Paul to give to Peter will only last until Paul runs out of cash.

None of this is relevant to paying our debt obligations.

Nonsense.

Poor people provide jobs? How? 

Without workers to exploit, we wouldn't have billionaires. 

And yet, the billionaires are the ones smiling and the poor are the ones needing the jobs.

Republicans had 0 problem running up the national deficit last time they controlled all of congress and the Whitehouse.

Biden is outpacing every Republican President

https://www.cato.org/blog/debt-deficits-default-president-bidens-state-union

And we still have a year and a half to go with this guy.

None of this is relevant to paying our debt obligations.

It does and Rich people do, in fact, if the Rich paid 100% of all the takes it wouldn't help the poor, not in a long sustained manner. Like my father used to say, teach a man how to fish and he will buy the entire coastline.

Poor people provide jobs? How? 

That isn't what I said. You act as if billionaires and corporations hire people as an act of charity, which it most certainly isn't. The only reason billionaires exist is because they're able to extract more value from the labor of the employees than they compensate those same laborers for.

And yet, the billionaires are the ones smiling and the poor are the ones needing the jobs.

You would be too if gullible schmucks were spreading your propaganda for free too.

Biden is outpacing every Republican President

That doesn't change the fact that Republicans raised the debt ceiling 3 times while Trump was president.

This is all just another GOP circus to gaslight the MAGA base with McCarthy leading the clown show, but in the end the Republicans will show disloyalty to their leader who has urged them to default. Biden is clearly unruffled by their noisy bluster because he knows "all's well that ends well".

Without workers to exploit, we wouldn't have billionaires. 

And yet, the billionaires are the ones smiling and the poor are the ones needing the jobs.

don’t you claim economic populism?

kinda rings of “let them eat cake” Bass…

Paying already accumulated debt and future budgetary outlays are TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THINGS.

The only thing they have in common are they are both paid in US dollars and they are both the exclusive prerogative of congress.

So for starters, it is most certainly NOT ok to just Welch on accumulated debt because you don't get what you want regardless of what Trump says. That is not how responsible entities, and entities that want to be taken seriously by financial markets behave. (Side note: I have flat out confronted Bass on the question of "Is it ok to just not repay debt you are obligated and able to pay?" It has refused to answer the question.)

And linking past debt repayment to future budget outlays is like linking debt repayment to gun rights or abortion rights, or wearing a red tie. Other than both involve money they are no more related. The GQP wants a policy win and they are threatening to default as a negotiating tactic. Its really that simple and every bit as irresponsible.

If one party said "I'm defaulting on the national debt unless I get a post office in my district named after my dog" you would call them insane. This is literally no different.

Republicans are intentionally conflating the two by saying "We cannot continue spending this much money." That is AT BEST 1/2 true and its mostly false.

For starters, we can continue to service current debt levels indefinitely. The ability to pay our debts is not in doubt. What is in doubt is the willingness to do so.

How we fund FUTURE spending is the issue. No, we cannot continue the current spending trends USING CURRENT REVENUE FORECASTS.

And here, we must deal with the Trump Tax cuts. Tax cuts are classically used to stimulate spending due to frictional downturns and to boost flagging growth. When the economy returns to full employment, taxes return to previous levels and spending is fueled back.

Trump took an economy at full employment and fully recovered from the Great Recession (Thanks, President Obama!), and instituted fiscally irresponsible tax cuts WHILE INCREASING SPENDING which provided the equivalent of a sugar high to a 5 year old.

It was inflationary. It created an asset bubble. It blew a ginourmous hole in the deficit as far as the eye could see. AND it went overwhelmingly to the top 1% and to very large corporations, not to average workers.

IF the taxes were reinsituted, almost all our current budget problems regarding near future spending would be dramatically alleviated. But dear GOD, don't ask the wealthy to pitch in!

So we are back to the false dichotomy that unsustainable future spending requires holding debt repayment hostage.

Oh, and how are we going to cut spending? On the backs of the poor and low wage earners. Those that need help the most will bear almost all of the burden.

Oh, AND the GQP somehow thinks that even though they crowed about holding the purse strings, and even though they are the ones threatening default, somehow people won't blame them.

That isn't what I said. You act as if billionaires and corporations hire people as an act of charity,

Not at all, I am saying without the rich, people wouldn't have jobs. 

which it most certainly isn't.

Not really.

The only reason billionaires exist is because they're able to extract more value from the labor of the employees than they compensate those same laborers for.

That means they were smarter. 

You would be too if gullible schmucks were spreading your propaganda for free too.

Not sure about all of that, I just thought you can be a leader or a follower. I chose the first. 

That doesn't change the fact that Republicans raised the debt ceiling 3 times while Trump was president.

If Biden and the Dems were spending it on Americans and we were able to see exactly where the money is going and how it benefits Americans they would have a convincing argument to make, but they don't.

Oh, please without billionaires, Americans would be living like Somalians

This isn't even remotely true and reveals a level of economic ignorance that gives lie to the claim of somehow being a big time businessman.

The fact that Trump and several GQP members of Congress think otherwise shows just how stupid and unfit they are.

Unfit perhaps, maybe even a bit desperate but not stupid. The Repubes know full well that their ideas would be non starters outside of a crisis situation. So what do you do? You create a crisis by refusing to authorize the payment of existing debt in order to leverage the fear of default to achieve legislative ends that are not possible outside of a "crisis". I have seen the Repubes play this game year after year in California leading to annual late budgets and state shut downs, stiffing vendors and employees alike. This is how the Repubelicken party works. In 1999 and 2000 there were small budget surpluses and talk of splitting future surpluses to pay down the national debt and build up the Social Security trust fund. Seemed pretty reasonable. So what did the Repubes do as soon as a Repube Pres came to power? Cut taxes and drive the nation back into debt, using the debt as leverage to get Social Security privatized and cut Medicare. This is how the Repubes operate. A smooth running balanced budget is the last thing they want. They want a crisis to leverage to end social welfare programs of all descriptions including and especially Social Security which they absolutely detest, and to make life as miserable as possible for the poor. The Repubes have cold narrow hearts and are pathological liars.

None of this is relevant to paying our debt obligations.

It does and Rich people do

Think about a Trump supporter who has the lack of self-awareness to say this.

I think a debt crisis and economic chaos is a feature, not a bug for the 'Freedom Caucus."

How we fund FUTURE spending is the issue. No, we cannot continue the current spending trends USING CURRENT REVENUE FORECASTS.

The solution is to repeal the Bush and Trump tax cuts, tax capital gains as earned income and remove the wage ceiling on the Social Security Payroll Tax. In 1999 and 2000 the US ran a small current accounts surpluses. Reversing those two big tax cuts and treating capital gains the same as other earned income would go a very long way towards balancing the budget and you would do no harm to the overall economy. In fact removing the lower tax rate for capital gains would remove a primary motivation for paying executives in stocks and stock options instead of paying them a salary.

What I was saying only worded better and more directly.

Thank you, DT.

AND no wealthy person would cease being wealthy to boot.

The solution is to repeal the Bush and Trump tax cuts, tax capital gains as earned income and remove the wage ceiling on the Social Security Payroll Tax. In 1999 and 2000 the US ran a small current accounts surpluses. Reversing those two big tax cuts and treating capital gains the same as other earned income would go a very long way towards balancing the budget and you would do no harm to the overall economy. In fact removing the lower tax rate for capital gains would remove a primary motivation for paying executives in stocks and stock options instead of paying them a salary.

In 2020, the top 1% paid 42.3% of total federal taxes. the nonrich paid 57.7%.

Oh, please without billionaires, Americans would be living like Somalians, thank god for the rich that keep the country afloat and provide jobs, robbing Paul to give to Peter will only last until Paul runs out of cash.

I think you have it backwards. A nation where a few are very rich and the rest relatively poor does not make for a prosperous society. Even Adam Smith recognized that as far back as 1775 when he wrote:

"No society can surely be flourishing and happy of which by far the greater part of the numbers are poor and miserable."

From "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations", 1775

I will also mention that some of the founders of the US, in particular James Madison and Thomas Jefferson warned that if a nation intends to be self governing then wealth (in those days land equaled wealth) had to be spread as broadly and thinly as possible. They knew that power accrues to wealth and if a nation intends to be self governing the people cannot allow great wealth to accumulate in the hands of the few as those wealthy few will soon enough control the government and turn it towards their benefit at the expense of the nation as a whole.

Not at all, I am saying without the rich, people wouldn't have jobs. 

Not true. The "rich" only provide jobs because people want to buy things, and they need workers provide those things. We could get rid of billionaires and people would still have jobs. Arguably, all of society would be much, much better without billionaires.

Not really.

No. It isn't a charity. Full stop. The only reason companies and "rich people" provide jobs is if they can make more money.

That means they were smarter. 

Ah yes, exploiting people makes you smarter. Nice. Obviously this is an absurd claim to make. People don't get rich only because they are smart.

If Biden and the Dems were spending it on Americans and we were able to see exactly where the money is going and how it benefits Americans they would have a convincing argument to make, but they don't.

Again, this is just absurd. Republicans voted three times to increase the debt ceiling. Why to military spending? Can the defense department pass an audit? Of course not. It's not about "seeing" where the money goes. It's about making the poor suffer. It's about providing ever worsening healthcare to veterans. Very "traditional" American values.

When people talk about the great post war boom years of the 50s and 60s, the income inequality gap was the smallest it had ever been due to progressive taxation, stepped marginal tax rates and spending on services to increase overall productivity and public good.

The middle class was attainable to a much greater slice of the population. My grand parents on both sides who did not graduate or just barely graduated from High school put put 4 of their collective 5 children through university including a law degree and 2 PhDs without crushing student debt because state universities were funded by taxes from businesses and wealthy Americans

The current tax system neither finances necessary expenditures nor does it benefit society through wealth redistribution in the form of services that lift entire generations out of poverty.

But Bass’ imagined buddies do ok, so screw everyone else, eh?

Oh and cut welfare for the poor or we are going to default on money we’ve already spent.

Can the defense department pass an audit? Of course not.

So this is close to me because I work in the budget process and have to adhere to the Federal Acquisition Regulations. The problem is how the Federal budget is developed, funded and expended. This is not confined to the DoD. If you examine major defense programs you find a process called Earned Value Management where the money expended and what has been produced for an individual program are tracked with great care against the schedule and expected expenditure to that point in the program. Most programs review their EVM every month and adjust accordingly. It is a painstaking process often accompanied by contention when delinquent and sometimes devious contractors try to blame us for their failures. But the way the acquisition regs work a contractor might not be paid for three years after the work is funded because there are so many detailed steps that everyone involved has to go through to ensure money is spent on what it was budgeted for and because the money is not spent all at once. I might obligate money to buy something this year but the work takes some time to accomplish and payment might not happen until two or three or even five years from now, depending upon whether the money was for procurement, research and development, civilian pay, military pay, military construction, shipbuilding of operations and maintenance (the "colors of money" we call them). It is not like you go to the store and pay X dollars up front that day and go home with what you bought. Rather you go on contract this year for X dollars, but payments of that X dollars occurs over a period of years because you are buying components from a bunch of different companies over that time and paying them piecemeal in accordance with the regs then they have to be assembled by a prime contractor and the prime is paid. But tracking what was paid when is a real nightmare to do. I know this because my work is in this arena and it is the same for every Federal agency, not just the DoD. Most people do not understand the complexity of the Federal budget.

This isn't even remotely true

It is very true, prove to me that poor people provide jobs, give it a shot.

It is very true,

Then prove it.

prove to me that poor people provide jobs

Where'd I say that? Nice straw man.

Not true. The "rich" only provide jobs because people want to buy things, and they need workers provide those things. We could get rid of billionaires

You could and then what? Poor people will take their place and provide the supply and demand chain exactly how?

and people would still have jobs.

So then why does LA have over 50k homeless and that number is rising why are the rich still filthy rich and why are some of the rich leaving while the growing poor have few options?

Arguably, all of society would be much, much better without billionaires. 

I beg to differ. Poor people as well.

Not really.

No. It isn't a charity. Full stop.

No one said it was.

The only reason companies and "rich people" provide jobs is if they can make more money.

I learned that in the 3rd grade.

Ah yes, exploiting people makes you smarter. Nice. Obviously this is an absurd claim to make. People don't get rich only because they are smart.

Well, it does. I will tell you what, if you have the choice between being poor or rich, I would think you would choose the first, I would without blinking. Again, I love the rich, nothing wrong with having money.

Again, this is just absurd. Republicans voted three times to increase the debt ceiling. Why to military spending?

So you think a stronger Chinese military or even Russian is better for us? Give me a break!

It's about providing ever worsening healthcare to veterans. Very "traditional" American values

Ahh, now all of a sudden the left cares about the veterans, next they will care about the lives of children as well.

When one can do nothing other than copy-paste and a bhromide or a blurb meaning nothing, you know they have no argument.

Bass has not clue one as to matters budgetary, the proper use and maintenance of debt, taxation and its multi-faceted role in a capitalist system or issues of macroeconomic policy and long run aggregate growth.

The Prototype of know-nothing economics.

Sounds to me like the DOD has forgotten more about budgets and auditing than Bass will ever learn or is capable of learning.

The only reason companies and "rich people" provide jobs is if they can make more money.

I learned that in the 3rd grade.

And not one damn thing since by the sound of things.

When one can do nothing other than copy-paste

Like everyone else.

and a bhromide or a blurb meaning nothing,

Like the left…

you know they have no argument. 

And yet, they still try.

Bass has not clue one as to matters budgetary, the proper use and maintenance of debt, taxation and its multi-faceted role in a capitalist system or issues of macroeconomic policy and long run aggregate growth. 

You can think that if you like, nothing new. Keep trying.

The Prototype of know-nothing economics.

Hearing that from the left is funny.

DT

a solid long paragraph is very difficult to read.

Like the left…

Pkease tell me more about this monolithic entity that seems to comprise all the non-Trunp supporting commentators on this board , the Democratic Party, Hollywood, Blue State bureaucracy and residents etc.

What is their view on the budget crisis that you disagree with?

Pkease tell me more about this monolithic entity that seems to comprise all the non-Trunp supporting commentators on this board , the Democratic Party, Hollywood, Blue State bureaucracy and residents etc.

Yes

What is their view on the budget crisis that you disagree with?

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/remarks/democrats-reckless-tax-and-spending-bill-is-bad-for-jobs_bad-for-the-economy

Perfectly stated.