The U.S. Debt Ceiling and the Possible Financial Cliff

[conon394]

Democrats: we need to raise the debt ceiling so we don’t go broke
Republicans: ok but we should probably at least cut spending too so this doesn’t keep happening

Republicans: ok but we should probably at least cut spending too so this doesn’t keep happening - and to show were honest will get rid of the Trump and super reckless Bush Jr Tax cuts... wait that was not on the table? Oh your right they are proposing restoring the tax system from the 60s when we and growth and no massive wealth and income inequality - no? hmm?

[Lord Thesaurian]

Breaking news: Republicans prefer cutting spending to raising taxes.

[antaeus]

Breaking news: Republicans* prefer cutting spending to raising taxes.

*some

[conon394]

Breaking news: Republicans prefer cutting spending to raising taxes.

Breaking news too many republicans live an Ayn Rand inspired fantasy work - and lately that likely is an insult to Ayn. But be my guest explain the logic of launching the forever war on global terror and cutting taxes I am sure that makes sense somehow.

[antaeus]

Breaking news too many republicans live an Ayn Rand inspired fantasy work - and lately that likely is an insult to Ayn. But be my guest explain the logic of launching the forever war on global terror and cutting taxes I am sure that makes sense somehow.

I somehow doubt that you're going to insult anyone who is inspired by Rand by saying they're Randian.

The GOP however stopped being inspired by Rand with the end of the Neocons. They've drifted into populism lately - and mass movements was definitely not a Rand thing.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Breaking news too many republicans live an Ayn Rand inspired fantasy work - and lately that likely is an insult to Ayn. But be my guest explain the logic of launching the forever war on global terror and cutting taxes I am sure that makes sense somehow.

Ayn Rand is a meme and I’m not sure why I’m obligated to justify decades of bipartisan policy either or what that has to do with the thread topic. If the public wants Democrats to agree to spending cuts before raising the debt limit, the only motivation for refusal is generic partisanship, not moral opposition to Ayn Rand or the War on Terror.

[The spartan]

Well this is your thread so I just figured you had a point. But if it’s just to ignore the fact 60% of the public doesn’t want to raise the debt ceiling without spending cuts and thinks the Democrats spend too much and should negotiate, then we can conclude this is just a rant thread with no real basis for discussion.

So, in the US we don't run policy based off a poll, we do it based on THE polls; elections. I don't see the US public being big fans of crashing the economy in a bid to "negotiate", right now. If the Dems don't play ball and negotiates with the GOP, what do you think happens next? What does the GOP do, exactly? Because to me, it seems like they have two choices: cave and pass the debt ceiling raise and look weak, or not pass the debt ceiling raise and default the US debt. Neither of those seem like strong moves.

Breaking news: Republicans prefer cutting spending to raising taxes.

No, they don't. They only say this when they aren't in a position to actual cut spending. When they have the power to do so they chicken out and don't reduce spending.

[antaeus]

No, they don't. They only say this when they aren't in a position to actual cut spending. When they have the power to do so they chicken out and don't reduce spending.

Oh it goes beyond "don't reduce spending"

[chilon]

So, in the US we don't run policy based off a poll, we do it based on THE polls; elections. I don't see the US public being big fans of crashing the economy in a bid to "negotiate", right now. If the Dems don't play ball and negotiates with the GOP, what do you think happens next? What does the GOP do, exactly? Because to me, it seems like they have two choices: cave and pass the debt ceiling raise and look weak, or not pass the debt ceiling raise and default the US debt. Neither of those seem like strong moves.

No, they don't. They only say this when they aren't in a position to actual cut spending. When they have the power to do so they chicken out and don't reduce spending.

It's such a disingenuous line to take.

Public opinion also supports increasing taxes on the wealthy, especially billionaires and the majority of Americans want to eliminate the outdated electoral college for a popular vote. Let's see the quotes showing the allegedly populist GOP supporting increasing taxes on billionaires and eliminating the unpopular electoral college.

[The spartan]

Public polls have many shortcomings as well. I learned this when looking at a poll that showed that most Americans want universal healthcare; while it was true that poll showed that, it did NOT account for what the policy would actually be. Within that statistic was a hidden disagreement about single-payer, potential ban on private healthcare, and a number of other policy nuances that would not be agreed upon by the people who answered they wanted "universal healthcare". So from a policy standpoint, there is nothing to do with that poll. It doesn't help policy makers figure out what to do.

Likewise, with the poll Lord Thesaurian linked, there may be a general belief that the public wants to reduce government spending but I can guarantee there is a strong disagreement about which expenditures should be reduced. So there is nothing the GOP can really do with that other than hold the debt hostage and try to figure out which cuts their constituency, specifically, wants. It's not really a sound strategy and, like I said, if Dems simply refuse to negotiate then Republicans are pretty much left with the choice of looking weak or wrecking the US economy. It's like trying to threaten somebody with MAD.

[antaeus]

Public polls have many shortcomings as well. I learned this when looking at a poll that showed that most Americans want universal healthcare; while it was true that poll showed that, it did NOT account for what the policy would actually be. Within that statistic was a hidden disagreement about single-payer, potential ban on private healthcare, and a number of other policy nuances that would not be agreed upon by the people who answered they wanted "universal healthcare". So from a policy standpoint, there is nothing to do with that poll. It doesn't help policy makers figure out what to do.

Likewise, with the poll Lord Thesaurian linked, there may be a general belief that the public wants to reduce government spending but I can guarantee there is a strong disagreement about which expenditures should be reduced. So there is nothing the GOP can really do with that other than hold the debt hostage and try to figure out which cuts their constituency, specifically, wants. It's not really a sound strategy and, like I said, if Dems simply refuse to negotiate then Republicans are pretty much left with the choice of looking weak or wrecking the US economy. It's like trying to threaten somebody with MAD.

To be fair, politics isn't about policy, or what benefits policy provides.

The GOP doesn't need to provide solutions to what they claim are problems. Just to point out that the problems exist. Because while they may control one house on the hill, they are still effectively an opposition party.

In that context, their role is to hold to account, and that's what they're doing. Lord is right to point out that they shouldn't automatically give in to Democratic party demands. It should be a negotiation. The real problem occurs here because the US doesn't really have a two party system any more, so it is difficult to come to an agreement between parties. The extreme faction of the GOP is only marginally more receptive to the GOP mainstream than they are to the Democrats. So we're stuck with an opposition party that is being oppositional without the ability to move beyond this in any constructive way. Which is kinda the point.

Of course, the GOP can continue to do this so long as enough of their constituents agree with their position and aren't being obviously materially affected. As in previous bouts of hostage taking over debt, at some point enough GOP constituents start to become materially impacted, and the GOP mainstream moves to consensus. It would be nice if we didn't have to watch this process unfold, knowing how it will end up. But hey...

[Ramashan]

To me, the shame of this whole thing is, with such tight margins between GOP and Dems one would think that it would be obvious that neither side has a real 'mandate' and that both sides need to be doing the work to negotiate a deal.

But on both sides, and more so currently with in the GOP since they have the greater voter margin, there are extremes that have dug in. And on this site, being one based off of games concerning historical warfare, we all know how well Trench Warefare works. Sure, eventually one side will win, but it's going to be a long battle of attrition to get there.

The bill that's now being asked to be paid was spent by both parties. Personally, I feel that if the GOP really wants to moderate spending, then they have 2 years to make the cuts and moderate spending after paying for the expensive of past admins.

All the debates right now having nothing to do with the debt we owe, but with the future debt we're going to accrue. Do you sit down with your family and say, "I'm not going to pay our credit card bill unless you all agree to spending cuts. Well, you need to agree to them, I'm going to just keep putting money into that fresh Camaro I've been building in the garage." (Camaro is code for US military spending in case the metaphor wasn't obvious)

At some point we need to see the slim majority for what it is: A mandate to compromise.

Be safe - Ramashan