Do you borrow money to pay your bills?

[Boltlady]

If you do the piper will certainly surface one day.

When I was a young, financially stressed single mom with 4 kids to feed, I had to do that very thing more than once. I did have sense enough to not borrow to buy things that I didn't need though. Our gov't doesn't seem to understand that concept however.

In his speech yesterday Obama kept saying that we needed to raise the debt limit for things that we've already spent money on. As I recall, the last time this problem came up, not long ago, as soon as a temporary fix was put into place we immediately resumed seeing how much money we could give away and how much more we could put into the military industrial complex. That is despite the fact that we already spend several times the amount of the whole rest of the world put together. This is also despite the fact that there is no other country at war with us.

As for the looming cuts in social security, a program that would be self sustaining except for the fact that we took all of it's money and now have to come up with new money to pay the IOUs, we should still be able to pay the bills with the money that is already coming in. The fact is that we continue with new spending virtually every day.

This does not mean that I agree with the types of spending cuts that the republicans are demanding, but new spending really has to stop for a while if we are ever to catch up. This idea of constantly borrowing ever more money to pay bills is the same as if you were living off of your credit cards. Surely you know by now that that is not a good idea.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-troops-Social-Security-checks-wont-paid.html

 

[worldlymrb]

I hear millions of small business owners must now choose between paying taxes, or putting food on the table.

NAZI left would of course demand taxes (alms to their God), be paid before they eat.

 

[as seen on tv]

i think the debate america is failing to have is "what is worth borrowing for"?

if an average working class stiff went to the bank, and applied for a car loan or home mortgage, he's likely to be approved (too likely, if you think back to the junk mortgage crisis, when banks didn't do their homework on borrowers who lied about their income and put zero down).

if the same person knocks on the bank's door and asks for a loan for day to day expenses (groceries, the rent, filling up the gas tank) he will of course be justifiably turned down cold. (those cruel banks!)

this highlights the difference between a capital investment, and short term cash flow.

the federal government is actually making few capital investments (road infrasturcture, new pentagon weapons programs, land purchases along the lines of alaska or the lousiana purchase). instead, our trillion dollar a year deficit (not including social security) goes mainly toward thousands of poorly defined day to day programs with no demonstrable track record of success. for example, there are 221 different federally sponsored teacher training programs alone. crop federal farm aid not only on ethanol, but everthing from milk to rice to sugar beets to peanuts.

this is why big government is so difficult to tame - everybody gets a benefit, and they're okay with that as long as somebody else pays. but there aren't enough millioinaires to raise the living standards of the middle class, as much as politicians of both parties would like it to be so.

 

[Frandia]

That's part of the problem. Obama doesn't see spending as a serious issue. Now he couches his argument along the lines of ‘They Order Me to Spend’. They also asked him for cuts. They get rhetoric back.



"Regrettably, the proposal he outlined on behalf of your Administration contains very little in the way of common ground. The proposal calls for $1.6 trillion in new tax revenue, twice the amount you supported during the campaign. The proposal also includes four times as much tax revenue as spending cuts, in stark contrast to the “balanced approach” on which you campaigned. While administration officials are claiming that this proposal contains 2.5 dollars of spending cuts for each dollar in new revenue, counting as part of this ratio previously enacted savings – as if these were new spending reductions – only confuses the public debate. What’s worse, the modest spending cuts in this offer are cancelled out by the additional ‘stimulus’ measures the Administration is requesting. And, this proposal would remove any and all limits on federal borrowing."

http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/house-gop-leaders-make-new-offer-avert-fiscal-cliff





While the GOP-dominant House of Representatives has passed budgets for the last two years, the Democrat-led Senate hasn’t passed a budget since April 2009. Also, the House passed several annual appropriations bills but they too were not taken up by the Senate, headed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Instead, over the last few years, Congress and the White House have ended up passing Continuing Resolutions to keep the federal government operating. In September 2012, the GOP-led House passed a $1.047 trillion funding bill, a Continuing Resolution, which will fund the government through March 27, 2013. To become law that CR also needed to pass the Senate and be signed by Obama.

Once the current CR expires in March, the executive branch will only be able to spend the money that Congress authorizes it to spend after that date.



http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-congress-they-order-me-spend

 

[NightSwimmer]

I have, in the past, refinanced my home mortgage loan in order to pay down personal debt that was owed at a much higher interest rate.

You are like many on this forum who have no clue what the debt ceiling debate is all about, because you don't understand what the debt ceiling actually is.

 

[Boltlady]

I hear millions of small business owners must now choose between paying taxes, or putting food on the table.

NAZI left would of course demand taxes (alms to their God), be paid before they eat.

We certainly should not have any new taxes either. Every time we do, the spending accelerates because it's seen as new money instead of a means to pay old bills.

 

[Frandia]

We certainly should not have any new taxes either. Every time we do, the spending accelerates because it's seen as new money instead of a means to pay old bills.

I forget who said it. Never put tax increases on the same table with spending cuts. A politician will always take the easy road...to raise taxes.

 

[OldGaffer]

The Winger problem is that the executive branch gets to choose what gets paid and what gets cut when congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, and they can maximize the pain for republican districts.

 

[OldGaffer]

Expect defense contactors to squeal likw stuck hogs as their republican pork goes bye bye

 

[OldGaffer]

Those republican voters on social security and medicare might feel the pinch when they dont get their checks and their doctors dont get paid.

 

[Bo-4]

I have, in the past, refinanced my home mortgage loan in order to pay down personal debt that was owed at a much higher interest rate.

You are like many on this forum who have no clue what the debt ceiling debate is all about, because you don't understand what the debt ceiling actually is.

I've done the same.. most have actually and they'd have been stupid not to. Obama is out there explaining the debt ceiling in a manner that even a child could understand it, but with the mental midget crowd.. they'll believe Fox when they tell them that it's like handing Obama a blank check.

 

[Frandia]

"they'll believe Fox when they tell them that it's like handing Obama a blank check."

That's your take on it.

No rational person is saying that. The point the Republicans are trying to make is that yes the debt ceiling must be raised but show us some real spending cuts. They reached an argreement once before with promised future cuts and got zero. Now they want to hold his feet to the fire.

Instead of antagonizing the opposition via the media, he might want to try the art of compromise with sincerity this time. Offering $2.50 of cuts per every dollar of tax increases isn't going to resolve the issue in the long run.

Also the blank check argument is made of straw. An honest person would readily admit that if the ceiling was raised with no limit, he would spend us into oblivion and be back looking for more tax increases, post haste.



"From Republican Study Committee Chairman Steve Scalise:

President Obama seems to be the only person in Washington who threatens default on America’s debt obligations.

The President has an obligation to preserve the credit rating of the United States, and hitting the debt ceiling does not immediately trigger a default unless his administration fails to do its job and prioritize our debt payments. Default is not an option unless President Obama and his administration choose it to be.

The root of our economic problem is out of control spending. Until Washington stops spending money it doesn’t have, America will continue down the path towards insolvency paved by Greece. President Obama continues to run trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. We can’t continue borrowing money from China as we rack up more debt and send the bill to our children and grandchildren. The federal government has a spending problem and the only remedy is to control spending.

From House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio):

The American people do not support raising the debt ceiling without reducing government spending at the same time. The consequences of failing to increase the debt ceiling are real, but so too are the consequences of allowing our spending problem to go unresolved.

Without meaningful action, the debt will continue to act as an anchor on our economy, costing American jobs and endangering our children’s future.

The House will do its job and pass responsible legislation that controls spending, meets our nation’s obligations and keeps the government running, and we will insist that the Democratic majority in Washington do the same."




http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...-ceiling-has-nothing-to-do-with-new-spending/

 

[NightSwimmer]

Obama is out there explaining the debt ceiling in a manner that even a child could understand it, but with the mental midget crowd.. they'll believe Fox when they tell them that it's like handing Obama a blank check.

Indubitably...

Stupid is as stupid does.

 

[worldlymrb]

The Winger problem is that the executive branch gets to choose what gets paid and what gets cut when congress fails to raise the debt ceiling, and they can maximize the pain for republican districts.

You are right, Executive Branch decides WHO GETS PAID, and who don't.

Problem is... How is the collective who voted democrat going to react when interest on debt held by foreign banksters get paid FIRST, while EBT cards don't get reloaded and OBAMA phones get shut off?

 

[Frandia]

Speaking of Obama Phones:

[video=youtube;1ghmBInC2N8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ghmBInC2N8&feature=player_detailpage[/video]

 

[LeRoy_Was_Here]

We certainly should not have any new taxes either. Every time we do, the spending accelerates because it's seen as new money instead of a means to pay old bills.

Really?!?? Then how did we EVER get to a budget surplus in the late 1990s?????????

 

[888888]

I hear millions of small business owners must now choose between paying taxes, or putting food on the table.

NAZI left would of course demand taxes (alms to their God), be paid before they eat.

that is the dumbest thing you have said for some time now Worldly?
Thats as dumb as saying well I am not going to try to make money if I have to pay higher taxes on that money.
You republicans are so full of shit it smells when you walk bye.

 

[OldGaffer]

Really?!?? Then how did we EVER get to a budget surplus in the late 1990s?????????

Simple answer, Clinton raised taxes, cut defense spending and vetoed all republican bills to cut taxes for the 1%. Bush did just the opposite and see where it got us.

 

[Frandia]

There Are ‘Dummies’ on Both Sides of the Debt Ceiling Debate: Davidowitz

"Howard Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates, argues that both President Obama and Republicans need to change their mentality on the debt ceiling. The president should be open to negotiations, Davidowitz says, and Republicans should not use the debt ceiling as leverage to force government spending cuts.

Davidowitz's recommendation: Let the spending cuts already agreed to by Congress and the president take effect.

“The sequester looks like something that these dummies on both sides can actually do," he says."




http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...debt-ceiling-debate-davidowitz-163335587.html

 

[OldGaffer]

You are right, Executive Branch decides WHO GETS PAID, and who don't.

Problem is... How is the collective who voted democrat going to react when interest on debt held by foreign banksters get paid FIRST, while EBT cards don't get reloaded and OBAMA phones get shut off?

You can only hope, but Obama will take care of his voters, its RMoneys voters that will be biting the bullet.