Fiscal Cliff deal "within sight", according to Obama

[ScottsdaleHokie]

U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000, budget: $3,820,000,000,000, debt: $14,271,000,000,000, recent cuts: $ 38,500,000,000.

Let’s now remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s a household budget:

* Annual family income: $21,700
* Money the family spent: $38,200
* Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
* Total budget cuts so far: $3.85

We sure avoided the cliff alright. Morons.

[Daelak]

U.S. Tax revenue: $2,170,000,000,000, budget: $3,820,000,000,000, debt: $14,271,000,000,000, recent cuts: $ 38,500,000,000.

Let’s now remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s a household budget:

* Annual family income: $21,700
* Money the family spent: $38,200
* Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
* Total budget cuts so far: $3.85

We sure avoided the cliff alright. Morons.

Yes I love these! Comparing the operating budget of the largest first world's country's government to your fucking household checkbook is ludicrous.

But please keep pasting more conservative lube.

[Rukentuts]

Yes I love these! Comparing the operating budget of the largest first world's country's government to your fucking household checkbook is ludicrous.

But please keep pasting more conservative lube.

Because we need budget cuts, but at the same time we need to nominate a candidate that wants to increase DOD spending to 4% GDP.

[ScottsdaleHokie]

Yes I love these! Comparing the operating budget of the largest first world's country's government to your fucking household checkbook is ludicrous.

But please keep pasting more conservative lube.

Please explain how it's ludicrous when the numbers are pruned down to a level people can actually comprehend. I'll be waiting.

[Daelak]

Because we need budget cuts, but at the same time we need to nominate a candidate that wants to increase DOD spending to 4% GDP.

Haha yes! I don't understand why conservatives point to a strategy that has never worked, has no empirical evidence to back up their claims, and goes against what business leaders and the global market has been wanting.

The national debt is irrelevant during times of slow growth and under-utilization of our existing infrastructure and resources. We have an under-utilized labor pool and capital.

---------- Post added 2013-01-03 at 03:45 PM ----------

Please explain how it's ludicrous when the numbers are pruned down to a level people can actually comprehend. I'll be waiting.

Because the debt is irrelevant. The entire world will continue to purchase our debt until the cows come home. We are the safest investment in the world. Long term debt draw-down is the only rational choice, not any of this hyperventilating from freshman republicans in the house that have no idea what the fuck they are talking about. Once we hit 5-8% GDP growth, with full employment, then and only then we will talk about the debt. The past 12 years have been full of wars, tax cuts, the largest recession in 80 years, a guaranteed premium price on prescription drugs for seniors on medicare, and the largest expansion of government in the history of the US under president Bush.

We are also the reserve currency, and we print our own. Every global investor, institutional, country, or otherwise, are all looking at the US to start large infrastructure spending. We are the ONLY country in the world with an economy strong enough to lead the world into the 21st century. We have the technology, we have the skilled labor, we even have shitloads of capital, but of course we have no political will because we voted in people that are complete idiots.

[Xeones]

Because we need budget cuts, but at the same time we need to nominate a candidate that wants to increase DOD spending to 4% GDP.

Yea man! Thats what we need to do cut domestic spending, increase the money we are giving to other countries with no return when our infrastructure is decades behind countries like South Korea.

[Rukentuts]

Yea man! Thats what we need to do cut domestic spending, increase the money we are giving to other countries with no return when our infrastructure is decades behind countries like South Korea.

We gotta fund that military machine brah. But if we ever have a domestic incident we'll just ignore the crumbling roads, bridges, and other infrastructure they will have to use to respond.

One could easily make a case that our outdated and failing infrastructure is a national security risk. I'm surprised I don't hear it [more often]. I mean shit, that's the case Eisenhower made to build the Interstate Highway System.

[stabetha]

Haha yes! I don't understand why conservatives point to a strategy that has never worked, has no empirical evidence to back up their claims, and goes against what business leaders and the global market has been wanting.

The national debt is irrelevant during times of slow growth and under-utilization of our existing infrastructure and resources. We have an under-utilized labor pool and capital.

---------- Post added 2013-01-03 at 03:45 PM ----------



Because the debt is irrelevant. The entire world will continue to purchase our debt until the cows come home. We are the safest investment in the world. Long term debt draw-down is the only rational choice, not any of this hyperventilating from freshman republicans in the house that have no idea what the fuck they are talking about. Once we hit 5-8% GDP growth, with full employment, then and only then we will talk about the debt. The past 12 years have been full of wars, tax cuts, the largest recession in 80 years, a guaranteed premium price on prescription drugs for seniors on medicare, and the largest expansion of government in the history of the US under president Bush.

We are also the reserve currency, and we print our own. Every global investor, institutional, country, or otherwise, are all looking at the US to start large infrastructure spending. We are the ONLY country in the world with an economy strong enough to lead the world into the 21st century. We have the technology, we have the skilled labor, we even have shitloads of capital, but of course we have no political will because we voted in people that are complete idiots.

you are living in a dream world, many countries are already talking about switching from the dollar for the reserve currency. China is frustrated with what it sees as the US government’s mismanagement of the dollar, and is now actively promoting the cross-border use of its own currency.Word came out in mid-November that the IMF is likely to reclassify the Australian dollar and Canadian dollar as "official" reserve currencies.

as for a "safe investment" moody's has already said if we continue with the outrageous deficit spending they will downgrade us again.

we are currently keeping interest rates very low at some point they will have to go back up The federal government currently owes $16 trillion and is paying more than $350 billion a year in interest to its lenders. If interest rates rise just to the level where they were in 2007, prior to the beginning of the Great Recession, those payments would double to more than $700 billion. That’s close to a third of the entire revenue stream of the government.you can't tax the "evil rich" out of the problems our Glorious leader has put us in.

[Daelak]

you are living in a dream world, many countries are already talking about switching from the dollar for the reserve currency. China is frustrated with what it sees as the US government’s mismanagement of the dollar, and is now actively promoting the cross-border use of its own currency.Word came out in mid-November that the IMF is likely to reclassify the Australian dollar and Canadian dollar as "official" reserve currencies.

as for a "safe investment" moody's has already said if we continue with the outrageous deficit spending they will downgrade us again.

Of course our competition always "talks" about switching. But they won't. It is not advantageous for China or Russia to switch because their influence in trade and international affairs is limited compared to ours. We own the oceans, we own international business and trade. China won't do anything that will cause them to go head to head with us because they will lose because they do not have the economy nor strategic allies to become the reserve currency. Maybe in 30 years or so if we keep dithering with inexperienced statesmen who care more about trans-vaginal ultrasounds and if homosexuals can get married.

Haha, Australia and Canada have neither the infrastructure or trade alliances we have. We are at the top, and we will be if our elected representatives start caring about our country.

Moody's and all the other rating agencies are completely full of it. If our downgrade was so destructive and made us a "riskier" investment, why the hell did the interest rates on our t-bills continue to fall?

We are too strong of an economy and too large of a tax-base to be influenced by what a rating agency says.

[Wildtree]

It still baffles me that people really believed we were going over this so-called "cliff".

When has there EVER been a deal done weeks before a deadline? Both sides knew there was a deadline... so both sides just held out as long as possible in hopes of getting as much as possible until the last minute (this time, LITERALLY the last minute!)... but the end result would be passed in the deadline time.

Don't believe me? Well... stay tuned for the Media coverage of the "Debt ceiling" being raised.... will the government agree to a debt ceiling hike? Or will a deal not be brokered and the government get shut down!!!!

...(((Spoiler from the future!))) they'll just keep rejecting bills back n' forth to keep getting more for what they want until the last day, then it will pass.

It never changes... seriously, wake up and see how the damn game is played and stop believing in the damn media hype to keep you glued to reading their articles for fear of your lives... or worse, your wallets! >_<

They certainly did an exceptional job this time around...
The result of it: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...s-markets-down

They apparently forgot that them dragging everything out, made people holding back on spending money, which on the other hand would have been very well needed for the struggling economy. If anything politicians should do is, to ensure and encourage money flow.

[Felya]

I dunno, I'm just miffed that they didn't address it and then rushed this mess of a bill out so they could say they did something. And by "they" I mean our collection of monkeys we call Congress.

They did address it, Boehner passed the buck to Obama by asking him to list the programs that need to be cut, without listing his own. With both sides obviously fighting over who gets the blame from those who use or depend on the programs they cut. McConnell even dared to give Obama full control of the debt ceiling, but filibustered his own bill.

[Wildtree]

Of course our competition always "talks" about switching. But they won't. It is not advantageous for China or Russia to switch because their influence in trade and international affairs is limited compared to ours. We own the oceans, we own international business and trade. China won't do anything that will cause them to go head to head with us because they will lose because they do not have the economy nor strategic allies to become the reserve currency. Maybe in 30 years or so if we keep dithering with inexperienced statesmen who care more about trans-vaginal ultrasounds and if homosexuals can get married.

Haha, Australia and Canada have neither the infrastructure or trade alliances we have. We are at the top, and we will be if our elected representatives start caring about our country.

Moody's and all the other rating agencies are completely full of it. If our downgrade was so destructive and made us a "riskier" investment, why the hell did the interest rates on our t-bills continue to fall?

We are too strong of an economy and too large of a tax-base to be influenced by what a rating agency says.

Well.... The thing with infrastructure is, that in that particular field the USA fell way behind the other modern nations. It's the worlds largest economy, that's a fact, as for now.
But it neglected it's infrastructure badly. It'll cost somewhere between $700 bio and a trillion to bring the country up to par with Europe again.
Even a lot more if it would adapt to the construction quality in Europe. Except for a few metro areas the majority of houses built in the USA are made of nothing but Wood and Drywall sheets with a few tar shingles slapped onto the roofs. Pretty much all private residencies are built that way.
On the contrary almost all European buildings, whether public, commercial or residential are made entirely out of solid stone, and concrete.

As for trade currency... It's a matter of what the World trade market decides. It's true that a strong economy is preferred as international trade currency.
But it wasn't always the dollar that ruled the market. It was for a long time in competition with the Japanese Yen, and the German Deutsche Mark,
Especially the latter was more than often preferred over the Dollar... the DM is gone.. that's why the Dollars position is stronger again.
So from there it would be rather natural that if the US economy keeps paddling in the hole, and another economy rises up, that their currency becomes more attractive.
The importance of a trade currency is it's stability and reliability.

[FusedMass]

They did address it, Boehner passed the buck to Obama by asking him to list the programs that need to be cut, without listing his own. With both sides obviously fighting over who gets the blame from those who use or depend on the programs they cut. McConnell even dared to give Obama full control of the debt ceiling, but filibustered his own bill.

That was actually pretty amusing. There are our congress that SHOULD be passing the Sandy Bill. However they are playing games while earning six figure paychecks a year to do almost nothing. This congress is compared to the do nothing congress passing almost a hundred and something bills total while the average is three hundred.

Republicans almost refused to fund Gov of NJ efforts to restore their houses and city's. Because we spent so long arguing on fiscal cliff it delayed it. If republicans had accepted the offer which Mitch laughed at. The very first offer Obama gave them. Then those people sitting in freezing cold would have gotten things moving. Republicans are actually spending a total of 60 billion dollars to help restore the homes and city's.

[Grizzly Willy]

They did address it, Boehner passed the buck to Obama by asking him to list the programs that need to be cut, without listing his own. With both sides obviously fighting over who gets the blame from those who use or depend on the programs they cut. McConnell even dared to give Obama full control of the debt ceiling, but filibustered his own bill.

I'm not seeing where they addressed spending cuts in that process. It's just passing the blame to other people until it's too late.

[FusedMass]

I'm not seeing where they addressed spending cuts in that process. It's just passing the blame to other people until it's too late.

Actually Obama offered to give SSI a chained CPI. Which means it would save around rougly 300 billion dollars. It means when the cost of living adjustments go up. It would stay down. For example the price of chicken rises. Instead of rising with higher prices. It would assume the person is eating another food of equal cost costing thousands of dollars of Benefits to go down for millions of Americans.

That actually angered a ton of Dems.

He also hinted at cutting medicare which is insurance program for elderly. There ARE spending cuts. Republicans John Mc Cain took SSI off the table. He did not want to have a argument tax cuts for rich people vs slashing programs for the poor.

[Deleted]

I've heard the argument, "You want European-style government? Then pay for it!"

Problem for me is, I don't want European-style government.

So instead you want a government who takes your money, and doesn't use it for transport, educational, medical, security and enviromental projects and services, and uses it mainly for funding the military and making sure big businesses are fine?

[mvaliz]

It still baffles me that people really believed we were going over this so-called "cliff".

When has there EVER been a deal done weeks before a deadline? Both sides knew there was a deadline... so both sides just held out as long as possible in hopes of getting as much as possible until the last minute (this time, LITERALLY the last minute!)... but the end result would be passed in the deadline time.

Don't believe me? Well... stay tuned for the Media coverage of the "Debt ceiling" being raised.... will the government agree to a debt ceiling hike? Or will a deal not be brokered and the government get shut down!!!!

...(((Spoiler from the future!))) they'll just keep rejecting bills back n' forth to keep getting more for what they want until the last day, then it will pass.

It never changes... seriously, wake up and see how the damn game is played and stop believing in the damn media hype to keep you glued to reading their articles for fear of your lives... or worse, your wallets! >_<

Wa-hey! Less than a week after the so-called "Fiscal Cliff" guess what? That's right! CNN says it right here:

Debt Ceiling is the New Cliff



Not that I want to toot my own horn... but more importantly, I want to make a VERY clear point from my previous post.

Take this as a lesson folks... live and learn to ignore the news networks. It's pure shovelcrap to make you believe there's going to be no agreement, when there will ALWAYS be an agreement in the end before the deadline.

[FusedMass]

I have been watching this situation closely. As everyone else is frustrated with the last minute show down that lead to the Republicans barely passing the bill without the night before. However have you ever heard of a trillion dollar mint coin solution. I know it sounds insane. But some Dems are suggesting the President could actually mint a coin.

Make it out to be a trillion dollars. It would not affect inflation because its a coin its not printing money. It would left the debt just like that. No votes. No back door meetings. Nothing. Just raising the debt. I been slighted annoyed at Mitch minority leader in the senate boasting that the President would have a debate over spending cuts.

Despite the President telling the Republicans he will not debate on bills that were racked up through laws that they passed. So its legal. It requires virtually no votes. And it would stop a show down. I say do it. Stop the Republicans from cutting programs in a short term package that affects everyone.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2410557.html

[Ausr]

That's actually quite amusing, Fused. I think I would laugh very hard if Obama went with it.

[FusedMass]

That's actually quite amusing, Fused. I think I would laugh very hard if Obama went with it.

Why It would stop a show down with Republicans. People would have confidence again. Do we really need two months of drama on the TV. I would rather the President focus on other bills. Congress had an approval rating of 10 percent with House Speaker rating the lowest out of all the members. Even the Gov of NJ a Republican ripped his own party.

It seems like a great loop hole to bypass the republicans.

In this article. It states House Speaker is prepared to shut down the goverment in order to get what he wants. The other solution seems less healthy to me.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2409656.html