30 replies to this topic

[Gromdor]

Well, in theory, Congress is supposed to manage spending.  Making it a dept and thus switching it to the exectutive branch probably would upset a few people.

[socrates.junior]

ninjadude, on 16 January 2013 - 02:39 AM, said:

no the solution is to apply a spending limit. Not a debt ceiling. The difference is between what we could spend and what we already spent.

Uh, a debt ceiling which was actually observed would be a spending limit. Sorry, is that too complex?

[ninjadude]

socrates.junior, on 16 January 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

Uh, a debt ceiling which was actually observed would be a spending limit. Sorry, is that too complex?

apparently for you it is. The debt ceiling is a limit on PAYING bills ALREADY SPENT not future spending.

[socrates.junior]

ninjadude, on 17 January 2013 - 02:47 AM, said:

apparently for you it is. The debt ceiling is a limit on PAYING bills ALREADY SPENT not future spending.

Yep, it was too complex for you. Here, I'll try to explain again. If the government didn't spend MORE than it had (oh look, a limit on spending) it wouldn't go OVER the debt limit. Still too complex? Yeah, duh, the limit is paying bills which were already spent. Wait, would a solution be to NOT KEEP SPENDING?

I know, how radical?

[F3SS]

Socrates, now you know that government math isn't the same as people math. Ninja has explained that many times.

[sslama]

I'm an outsider but pay attention to US politics.  Because as the old saying goes, if the US sneezes the rest of the world gets a cold.  The grand old Republican Party is over.  In chess....they call it Zugzwang...that is a situation in which every move avail to a player just worsens his position....that's the Republicans now. The Party cannot sustain itself in it's present form.  Perhaps they need a third party...that might change things.  In other countries they have more than two parties and it works better I think.

[acidhead]

sslama, on 17 January 2013 - 03:44 AM, said:

I'm an outsider but pay attention to US politics.  Because as the old saying goes, if the US sneezes the rest of the world gets a cold.  The grand old Republican Party is over.  In chess....they call it Zugzwang...that is a situation in which every move avail to a player just worsens his position....that's the Republicans now. The Party cannot sustain itself in it's present form.  Perhaps they need a third party...that might change things.  In other countries they have more than two parties and it works better I think.

I'm canadian and most people who Ive talked american politics(in Canada) call the R's racist gun lovers because thats what the TV told them and they repeat it.  Most people don't generally research the news.  That's their own ignorance.  Most people have also been brainwashed into believing that Liberals(the D's) are more compassionate while Conservatives(the R's) are less caring.

I too believe that a 3rd party needs to rise.  The rise of the Libertarian Party.....  if it weren't for Libertarians America would have already gone to hell.  Many don't even realize that many of their personal opinion align with Libertarian values until its spelled out to them.

Fact:  Libertarians created America... they were called Classical Liberals back then

Edited by acidhead, 17 January 2013 - 03:59 AM.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

acidhead, on 17 January 2013 - 03:54 AM, said:

Fact:  Libertarians created America... they were called Classical Liberals back then

They were called traitors to the King
Maybe that's what your nation needs, some good solid traitors to stand up for your beliefs.

[Michelle]

acidhead, on 17 January 2013 - 03:54 AM, said:

I'm canadian and most people who Ive talked american politics(in Canada) call the R's racist gun lovers because thats what the TV told them and they repeat it.  Most people don't generally research the news.  That's their own ignorance.  Most people have also been brainwashed into believing that Liberals(the D's) are more compassionate while Conservatives(the R's) are less caring.

I too believe that a 3rd party needs to rise.  The rise of the Libertarian Party.....  if it weren't for Libertarians America would have already gone to hell.  Many don't even realize that many of their personal opinion align with Libertarian values until its spelled out to them.

Fact:  Libertarians created America... they were called Classical Liberals back then

Most people think you are an American.

[acidhead]

Wearer of Hats, on 17 January 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:

They were called traitors to the King
Maybe that's what your nation needs, some good solid traitors to stand up for your beliefs.

We're called Libertarians.  ... and they're coming.... lol

[F3SS]

Wearer of Hats, on 17 January 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:

They were called traitors to the King
Maybe that's what your nation needs, some good solid traitors to stand up for your beliefs.

Maybe. But today the traitors are mostly those in power and those who believe them and while knowing what they're all about. Back then the king was just doing what he always did. Whatever he wanted. Today, our leaders aren't allowed to do whatever they want. They are to adhere to some pretty clear cut and strict guidelines on what they call an old piece of paper. When they don't, they become traitors.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

acidhead, on 17 January 2013 - 07:22 AM, said:

We're called Libertarians.  ... and they're coming.... lol

I must be tired, I read that as "we're called librarians".

[questionmark]

Wearer of Hats, on 17 January 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

I must be tired, I read that as "we're called librarians".

Not so wrong given that most "libertarians" don't know the difference.

Edited by questionmark, 17 January 2013 - 12:50 PM.

[ninjadude]

socrates.junior, on 17 January 2013 - 03:18 AM, said:

If the government didn't spend MORE than it had (oh look, a limit on spending) it wouldn't go OVER the debt limit.

apparently too simple of a concept for you. That is NOT how it works. The debt limit is limits what can be PAID not what can be spent.

[socrates.junior]

And ninja once...again...misses...the...point. Probably because it's hard when you're used to responding in one sentence, to read more than once sentence of somebody's post. I get it. It's hard for everyone. But we struggle through it.

Because I'm mildly insane, and I think that repetition helps with reading comprehension, I'll try one more time.

Yes, ninja, I'd like to start by acknowledging that you're ONE HUNDRED PERCENT CORRECT. The debt limit is indeed a limit on what can be PAID. Cue the fireworks. You're brilliant. But...you unfortunately missed the point. You see, the reason that the government PAYS is because the government SPENDS. In fact, believe it or not, it SPENDS what it does not HAVE. That is what the DEBT LIMIT is for. I'm glad you've grasped that part so far. Now, if the government paid attention to the DEBT LIMIT, and respected it, it would not SPEND more than it had, so it would not go beyond the DEBT LIMIT to PAY. Keeping up so far? That means that the DEBT LIMIT would become a de facto SPENDING LIMIT. This is because the government would not SPEND what it cannot PAY without raising the DEBT LIMIT.

God, I hope you get it this time.