Crash the train to stop it

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

In short, it's fine to negotiate over the budget. It's not fine to negotiate over whether or not to pay your bills for spending already incurred. You're obviously too far in the bag for the wingnuts that you're unable to recognize their bad faith.

That's the point, genius. We're NOT paying our bills for spending already incurred. We haven't been doing that for YEARS and have no apparent plans to do so in the future. Extending the credit card analogy, we're paying the monthly minimum and keep right on running up the balance on the account.

Your comment above was either a mistake in a post made in haste or an example of how far out in left field your assessment of the facts truly is.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

That's the point, genius. We're NOT paying our bills for spending already incurred.

Bullshit. We have never stiffed our creditors, an action the Wingnut Caucus is advocating. Your specious argument is akin to saying that a person who faithfully pays their monthly mortgage or car payment is not paying their bills.

Arguing economics with you, a believer in supply-side sophistry, is like discussing literature with an illiterate.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Bullshit. We have never stiffed our creditors, an action the Wingnut Caucus is advocating. Your specious argument is akin to saying that a person who faithfully pays their monthly mortgage or car payment is not paying their bills.

Arguing economics with you, a believer in supply-side sophistry, is like discussing literature with an illiterate.

You can dance on the head of a pin all you want. I'm not aware of anyone who is advocating "stiffing our creditors" In fact, past temporary shutdowns have never resulted in the kind of catastrophic scenarios that the left always trots out. The bills get paid, the employees take some time off and then collect back pay, and after the smoke clears it's like nothing ever happened.

The fact of the matter is that were are NOT paying our bills. We're borrowing to pay those bills, and the debt increases yearly because we're using someone else's money to make ends meet while more debt is incurred.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

You can dance on the head of a pin all you want. I'm not aware of anyone who is advocating "stiffing our creditors" In fact, past temporary shutdowns have never resulted in the kind of catastrophic scenarios that the left always trots out. The bills get paid, the employees take some time off and then collect back pay, and after the smoke clears it's like nothing ever happened.

The fact of the matter is that were are NOT paying our bills. We're borrowing to pay those bills, and the debt increases yearly because we're using someone else's money to make ends meet while more debt is incurred.

You seemingly don't understand the difference between shutting down the government over a budget impasse (which has happened a number of times thanks to the GOP) and defaulting on our sovereign debt (which has never happened). Accordingly, my assertion as to your economic illiteracy stands.

Somehow, you also seem to believe that Republicans genuinely care about reducing the debt because for the 2 years they were in charge of the White House, the House and Senate, they fought hard to reduce the debt. Just kidding. They deliberately blew up the debt.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Bullshit. We have never stiffed our creditors, an action the Wingnut Caucus is advocating. Your specious argument is akin to saying that a person who faithfully pays their monthly mortgage or car payment is not paying their bills.

Arguing economics with you, a believer in supply-side sophistry, is like discussing literature with an illiterate.

Taking a post out of context to make an invalid point. Some things never change,

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by nailer

Taking a post out of context to make an invalid point. Some things never change,

Somebody horning in on your gig, Nailer?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

You seemingly don't understand the difference between shutting down the government over a budget impasse (which has happened a number of times thanks to the GOP) and defaulting on our sovereign debt (which has never happened). Accordingly, my assertion as to your economic illiteracy stands.

It "stands" only because of your desperate desire to prop it up. Please name for me one lasting devastating consequence of any of those prior shutdowns, which you conveniently absolve Dems for their participation, has had on the function of the US Treasury. You can't. Name for me one elected official who has advocated default. You can't. So please spare me from any further straw man arguments in some half-baked attempt to critique my understanding of economics.

Originally Posted by finnbow

Somehow, you also seem to believe that Republicans genuinely care about reducing the debt because for the 2 years they were in charge of the White House, the House and Senate, they fought hard to reduce the debt. Just kidding. They deliberately blew up the debt.

I won't judge the Repubs for the impact of COVID spending, which I've been critical of in the past. The Dems were all-in on that spending and continued it under Biden, so I'll spare you any more of your own hypocrisy for bringing it up.

In fact, I'm not confident in the Repubs, based on the prior habit of talking a good game but failing to deliver. I've said so here before many times. John "Cry Me a River" Boehner still gives me heartburn. So, that's one less falsehood for you to propagate.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

It "stands" only because of your desperate desire to prop it up. Please name for me one lasting devastating consequence of any of those prior shutdowns...

Once again, you conflate a government shutdown with a sovereign debt default, thereby confirming my point. Indeed, the pending debt ceiling debate is about whether to pay for budgetary items already approved by bipartisan Congressional votes. IOW, the GOP is threatening to default on our sovereign debt if we pay the bills for programs that they themselves already approved.

I won't judge the Repubs for the impact of COVID spending, which I've been critical of in the past. The Dems were all-in on that spending and continued it under Biden, so I'll spare you any more of your own hypocrisy for bringing it up.

The GOP's $2 trillion tax cut was passed over 2 years before COVID showed up.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Once again, you conflate a government shutdown with a sovereign debt default, thereby confirming my point. Indeed, the pending debt ceiling debate is about whether to pay for budgetary items already approved by bipartisan Congressional votes. IOW, the GOP is threatening to default on our sovereign debt if we pay the bills for programs that they themselves already approved.

Good Lord. You've twisted yourself up in so many knots on this one, you're absolutely lost on this. YOU are the one who connected the use of the debt limit as a pathway to "stiffing our creditors". Let me see if I can help you get back on track.

1) We were initially discussing the use of the debt limit as a lever in negotiations. You were critical of that strategy, insisting that Biden was right for not negotiating on it.


2) I think where I lost you was post 61.

2) While criticizing the use of the debt limit as a negotiation tool you insisted in post 62 that some Repubs were advocating "stiffing our creditors". This is the first link that YOU made between federal payment obligations and the Republican negotiating tactic of not negotiating on the debt ceiling.

3) I seem to have lost you with my "...not paying our bills..." comment. I'll restate it here. We're absolutely not paying our bills. This is where your economic literacy is apparently challenged. So, let me water it down for you.

I go to the store, and I buy a new laptop. I pay for the laptop with my Visa card. Did the store get paid? Sure. Have I paid my bill yet? No. The obligation to pay has shifted from the store to Visa: I still owe the credit card company for the laptop.

I realize I don't have the money to pay Visa. I go to my bank and take out a loan, and use the money to pay Visa. Have I paid for the laptop yet? No. The obligation for making the payment has simply shifted from paying the store to paying Visa and then paying the bank.

Of course, there has been a shitload of inefficiencies and additional costs associated with making that payment, including the interest on the balance which may have incurred interest or late fees from VISA, and now will certainly incur interest and potential late fees from the bank. At this point, not only has the bill not been paid - it's simply been shifted between creditors - that bill is now getting more expensive by the day with the interest and additional inefficiencies with create indirect costs.

This is EXACTLY what's happening, and it's why our debt continues to balloon. A certain percentage of the Fed's budgeted expenditures don't get paid for, which is why the federal debt goes up every year.

There, does that help a bit? Is the statement "We're not paying our bills..." now making more sense, or do you still reject this very simple economics lesson as "bullshit" as you did in post 62?

3) By the way, I stated that I wasn't aware of anyone who advocated stiffing creditors. You were challenged to name the Republican(s) who were advocating this. You didn't/wouldn't/couldn't).

4) "Conflating the budget limit" with "the government shutdown" is something that you started accusing me of in post 64. That's actually a pretty lame debate tactic and something I never said or even implied.

5) Point of fact, it's the Dems who always roll out specters of government shutdowns and all matters of fiscal armageddon when budget negotiations involving the debt limit happen. Here are your friends at the Brookings Institution doing just that. What's under-reported is the reminder that there's always been a fallback plan in these instances: temporary spending packages that kick the can down the road. And the GOP has already put that on the table as a fallback option, which is why I'm skeptical about either siding being ready or able to do the hard work of getting spending under control.

Originally Posted by finnbow

The GOP's $2 trillion tax cut was passed over 2 years before COVID showed up.

We're talking about budget deficits and debt, and you bring up tax policy? OK, whatever. You're still apparently still clinging to the idea that a reduction in tax rates = a reduction in tax revenue. And you call me an economic illiterate? LOL!

Federal Revenue, Fiscal 2017 (which would be the last Obama-era budget year): $3.32 trillion

Federal Revenue, Fiscal 2021 (the last Trump Era budget): $4.05 trillion

Could you please help me find the $2 trillion tax cut in those numbers?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Good Lord. You've twisted yourself up in so many knots on this one, you're absolutely lost on this. YOU are the one who connected the use of the debt limit as a pathway to "stiffing our creditors". Let me see if I can help you get back on track...

The axiom that "the longer a post by Whell, the more bullshit it contains" once again holds true. Your argument is akin to saying that it is perfectly OK to run down to Walmart and buy a $1000 high-end TV on your credit card with the full approval of your family, but then tell your credit card company at the end of the month that you're unwilling to pay for such an expensive TV, notwithstanding the fact that you specifically approved the purchase, signed the credit card receipt saying you would pay in full and in good faith, while knowing that your actions would trash your credit rating.

If you're actually interested in the history of debt ceiling debates (and why Biden is taking his current approach) as opposed to continuously spouting supply-side inspired nonsense, here's a very informative article:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-obama/672858/

We're talking about budget deficits and debt, and you bring up tax policy? OK, whatever. You're still apparently still clinging to the idea that a reduction in tax rates = a reduction in tax revenue. And you call me an economic illiterate? LOL!

Federal Revenue, Fiscal 2017 (which would be the last Obama-era budget year): $3.32 trillion

Federal Revenue, Fiscal 2021 (the last Trump Era budget): $4.05 trillion

Could you please help me find the $2 trillion tax cut in those numbers?

You are seemingly unaware that deficits/debts occur when tax receipts don't match public expenditures. Meanwhile, Republicans say they don't want to cut Social Security, Medicare or Defense while making massive tax cuts for the wealthy while falsely maintaining that these tax cuts wouldn't increase the deficit (which you seemingly believe).

Needless to say, the Tax Policy Center disagrees (as does Forbes, the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Tax Foundation):

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cut taxes substantially from 2018 through 2025. The resulting deficits will add $1 to $2 trillion to the federal debt, according to official estimates. The debt increase will be larger if some of TCJA’s temporary tax cuts are extended.