News How About That Us Government Money Management?

[The Albatross]

So far as the Republican position, on May 9th... before Lew's letter to Boehner:
H.R. 807 (Full Faith and Credit Act) Approved by House - Legislation authored by Congressman McClintock, H.R. 807 (the Full Faith and Credit Act), was approved by the House of Representatives on May 9, 2013

Congressman McClintock today: Rep. McClintock: Obama Creating 'Constitutional Crisis' by Threatening Default

 

[The Albatross]

Too late to edit now, but I think this morning my "million" should have been "billion" in post number 23.

Breaking today in conservative news is that Valarie Jarret orchestrated the shut down... though I'm on the fence about this still for a time (until new information and credible news sources come froward). Paving the way for Obama to push forward on immigration reform. The White House, did in fact signal this morning that at the end of the shutdown they intend to move on their immigration policy.

Interestingly, Illegals were able to use the national mall... but during the recent vet protest, there was a heavy policing element and arrests. So let me get this straight... Republicans orchestrated this shut down? I think not.

 

[Pietro]

I recently became aware of the "extraordinary measures" policy. That was a poor policy itself. I also read about the "full faith and credit" bill you referenced. The vote on this bill, mostly along partisan lines, illustrates the primary problem -- no one is voting or negotiating, anymore, based upon the issue at hand. Instead, all votes are cast mostly upon what makes their own party look good and the other party look bad. In this way, nothing can get done.

This bill would probably have been a good one to get passed. I'm sure the Democrats would have wanted to modify some things, if they'd been invited and/or willing to negotiate. But there's no reason that the House couldn't have passed this bill in a bipartisan manner, because it's very practical and, given what we've seen these last few weeks, necessary.

I realize that there's been a lot of financial shenanigans going-on. But, regardless of all of that, I really do believe that the main sticking-point in the latest battle was around the Obamacare provisions. This is even what Republican sources have been stating. Ted Cruz is either a hero or a villain, depending upon your perspective. ;) Personally, I think, at best, he's a fool, and, at worst, he used this situation to help give him necessary visibility to use towards a presidential run.

There was no reason the Republicans needed to use Obamacare as an issue. The nation is divided on this -- but most people understand that the government has to deal with its debt. Really, I'm not even sure why the Republicans see today's events as a defeat -- they are now forcing negotiation on a sound, long-term budget and budget strategy. They forced the Democrats to agree to short-term spending authorizations, instead of long-term blanket authorizations. Had this been their platform, they would have had a much stronger hand. But, by focusing on Obamacare, it was clear it wasn't just about budget issues -- they wanted to give Obama and the Democrats a black eye. And it back-fired. Again, legislating for the purpose of winning popularity or demonizing the "other side", instead of for the purpose of getting something done.

Hopefully, the House GOP is smart enough to vote for the extensions tonight. If they don't, it will be all over the world media tomorrow morning: "House GOP Causes US Financial Armageddon". ;) Better they take the deal they have today, because it's not that bad a deal -- it forces negotiation. After that, it's going to be up to us, the US electorate, to make sure our representatives know that we want them to focus on the real issues, not the damned politics.

 

[Pietro]

So let me get this straight... Republicans orchestrated this shut down? I think not.

I still feel that this is largely true. I'm not saying that the Democrats didn't try to use this to their advantage, but, as I mentioned above, I think that by making Obamacare a target, they set themselves up for this mess.

This article supports this view.

 

[The Albatross]

The banks MUST collapse eventually, because they aren't getting anything back.

Hey Anthony, I watched several parts of a series (haven't seen the whole thing yet) - The Hidden Secrets of Money. Episode four covers the relationship between the Federal Government, the Federal Reserve, Banks, Inflation, Deflation and the Debt Ceiling.
It is a good series for the layperson and has some things I didn't even know:

 

[The Albatross]

I think that Representative McClintock's comments were astute and spot on. HR 807 would have rectified the risk of defaulting on debt but the Dems wouldn't take it up and President Obama threatened to veto it. Lew, US Treasury's DUTY required him to prioritize spending. Yet he did not do so... he towed the Obama administration and Democratic party line.

I am one of those who is not pleased with the deal and consequent votes last night in the House and Senate. The fact of the matter is that 83% of the government was still running, 17% was not. This stand off was a manufactured crisis that did not need to occur. It was orchestrated by the president and the Democratic party. Even the deal was orchestrated because the pork spending/kickback... 2 billion dollars for a Kentucky project was put in by Barbara Boxer, Lamar Alexander and is reported to have come from the president himself. The gift/kickback gives with one hand and gives a black eye to Senator Mitch McConnell as the Republican position is to forgo things of this nature as a matter of principle since the sweetheart dealing that got the 60-61st vote for Obamacare. He is going to be excoriated by his party and constituency... as on the surface it would appear he took a bribe/kickback for a project he has long advocated for.

President Obama will go down in history as the single solitary US President who was willing to default on our debts, and threaten to violate the constitution if need be to protect his legislation. I can't believe the lengths that the majority party was willing to go and the scandalous, venomous rhetoric that passed for dissent and disagreement. Some very fine and astute points were made during the course of the past few weeks... only to be met with grandstanding, fear-mongering, and name calling by the majority party. This is indicative of the caliber of Democratic leadership in our nation and the character of our standing president who was sworn to uphold the constitution.

"Our revenues are more than ten times our debt payments, so paying the debt first to prevent a sovereign default is well within the financial ability of the federal government – and indeed, it is a fiscal imperative.

Earlier this year, the House passed HR 807, which not only explicitly requires the payment of the national debt in the case of an impasse over the debt limit, but even allows the President to exceed the debt limit itself in order to protect the nation’s credit.

That measure languishes in the Senate under the threat of a Presidential veto.

Protecting the sovereign credit by prioritizing payments would mean delaying paying other bills – which is untenable, unthinkable and something much to be avoided. But it would not imperil the nation’s sovereign credit. Only the President can do that.

The House leadership met with the President last week and offered to extend the debt limit until November 22nd with no strings attached. The President refused. Senate Republicans offered a six month extension, but the Senate Democratic leader refused.

What the President threatens to do would be catastrophic and unprecedented. The full faith and credit of the United States is what gives markets the confidence to loan money to the federal government. Even a credible threat of default – exactly the kind the President is now making -- could have dire consequences to a nation that now owes more than its entire economy produces in a year.
So where do we go from here?

Republicans have miscalculated on two key assumptions: First, that the Democrats would negotiate the issues that divide the country; they have not. Second, that Democrats would seek to minimize the suffering caused by the impasse; they have not.

Given the ruthless and vindictive way the shutdown has been handled, I now believe that this President would willfully act to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States unless the Congress acquiesces to all of his demands, at least as long as he sees political advantage in doing so. His every statement and action is consistent with this conclusion.

If the Republicans acquiesce, the immediate crisis will quickly vanish, credit markets will calm and public life will return to other matters.

But a fundamental element of our Constitution will have been destroyed. The power of the purse will have shifted from the representatives of the people to the executive. The executive bureaucracies will be freed to churn out ever more outlandish regulations with no effective Congressional review or check through the purse. A perilous era will have begun, in which the President sets spending levels and vetoes any bill falling short of his demands. Whenever a deadline approaches, one house can simply refuse to negotiate with the other until Congress is faced with the Hobson’s choice of a shut-down or a default.

The nation’s spending will again dangerously accelerate, the deficit will again rapidly widen, and the economic prosperity of the nation will continue to slowly bleed away.

This impasse may have started as a dispute over a collapsing health program but it has now taken on the dimensions of a Constitutional crisis. "

 

[The Albatross]

I also read about the "full faith and credit" bill you referenced. The vote on this bill, mostly along partisan lines, illustrates the primary problem -- no one is voting or negotiating, anymore, based upon the issue at hand. Instead, all votes are cast mostly upon what makes their own party look good and the other party look bad. In this way, nothing can get done.

This bill would probably have been a good one to get passed. I'm sure the Democrats would have wanted to modify some things, if they'd been invited and/or willing to negotiate. But there's no reason that the House couldn't have passed this bill in a bipartisan manner, because it's very practical and, given what we've seen these last few weeks, necessary.

You do realize this is about the fiscal state of the Union and not a social matter right? The only thing the party line vote revealed for me was that it was the democrats position to stay sucked up to the hog trough and keep spending unrestrained so they could use or threaten "default" as a hammer. And they did.

We were receiving the revenues necessary to avoid default even during the shut down. The US government lied to the American people and have been manipulating the process of taxation by creating crisis' that trump representation.

Obamacare represents the largest tax in the history of the United States. It hurts the middle class and jobs creation. We have been hoodwinked and lied to. There had been much ado about the "tactic"... Republicans split about the "tactic" Cruz and company took. But you know what? Not one Republican during the past several weeks came forward with another tactic. Why was that? Because there wasn't one.

 

[anthony]

@The Albatross I liked the video. Whilst I agree that is correct for the US and some foundational points for all systems, it isn't accurate to reflect on all countries, as not all countries work on that model. Most countries only create currency based on ore mined and assets owned. The US stopped that long ago, and do follow the videos model of money creation based on... well... nothing. The country is mined to the teeth and there is nothing to create more assets, so they create money from nothing, and most countries outside the US can already see what the US is doing and why its considered a joke by most.

 

[The Albatross]

Ron Paul, wasn't wrong when he talked about the Federal Reserve. I didn't concur with other aspects, but I did agree with him on this.

 

[Pietro]

The only thing the party line vote revealed for me was that it was the democrats position to stay sucked up to the hog trough and keep spending unrestrained so they could use or threaten "default" as a hammer.

I would first like to know whether the Democrats were allowed to have any part in crafting the bill. Of late, both parties have been very inclined to either craft bills without much input from the other part, or have refused to participate in bills crafted by the other party when invited. Again, all politics. This bill should have had bipartisan support, but it didn't, likely because one of these two political dynamics was at work.

You do realize this is about the fiscal state of the Union and not a social matter right?

Not sure what you mean?

We were receiving the revenues necessary to avoid default even during the shut down. The US government lied to the American people and have been manipulating the process of taxation by creating crisis' that trump representation.

There was apparently some wiggle room with regard to the Oct 17th date, but I'd seen it mentioned by multiple sources, including sources outside the government, that expenditures would exceed both cash on hand and income sometime between the 17th and, at latest, Nov 1st.

Republicans split about the "tactic" Cruz and company took. But you know what? Not one Republican during the past several weeks came forward with another tactic. Why was that? Because there wasn't one.

Actually, I think there were plenty. The problem is that the Republican Party has a big problem, at the moment, keeping it's extremes under control. Every party has this issue now and then, and the Republican Party is dealing with this currently. They need someone like Gingrich who can better manage party unity.

Altogether, the one thing I disagree with you on is that one party is responsible for all of the problems and shenanigans. Both parties have behaved poorly. And both parties are responsible for the run-up of debt over the last 13 years. The one big difference I see between the parties, right now, is that the Republicans have at least returned to the idea of fiscal responsibility, while the Democrats keep pretending that the debt pool is infinite, and keep insisting that all of the services provided from this debt are more important than the ability to pay for them. This is a major problem I have with the Democratic Party right now, one that will not be solved as long as they retain the bulk of power in lawmaking.

But I have big problems with the Republican Party because of the current power of Tea-Party aligned groups, because they are ideologues who have the 180 degree opposite mindset of the Democrats. What's needed are some people who know how to negotiate and strike deals. There was a time when this was considered a favorable quality, one that produced great benefits for those good at it. This doesn't seem to be the case anymore -- those who negotiate and compromise are now considered "weak" and even "traitors". If this remains the case, things are only going to get much worse.

 

[Pietro]

Regarding the art of negotiation and compromise, seems Mitch McConnell has this skill, according to this article.

 

[The Albatross]

Will look it up later... family matter, need to continue this another time.