Deficit Deal will Kill Jobs

[jeff f]

citation is needed.

this should be hilarious to watch you try to justify this false statement



oh, that explains a lot. you mean JUNIOR college, i.e. high school with an ashtray.

Nice of you to make fun of someone actually paying their way to try and better themselves. Jerk

 

[UncleBuck]

Nice of you to make fun of someone actually paying their way to try and better themselves. Jerk

ever heard of loveline or adam carolla?

 

[beardo]

ever heard of loveline or adam carolla?

I don't get it?
He's funny but why do you bring him up? I watched that movie where he was a boxer, did any one see that?
Are you going to say he went to a community college? that would be cool then we could call him community college Corrola, but he would still be cool so it wouldn't matter.
You know who else comes to mind? Joe Rogan, sometimes when i'm drunk I think I want to fight him for some reason and I consider calling him out to have a MMA fight someplace and it would pretty much be win win for me weather I won or lost it would be cool but then sometimes I worry he might break my bones and shit and I get scared so I haven't called him out yet......but i'm thinking about it.
I think he's cool to so he will probably do it if I decide to someday.

 

[beardo]

I am hoping they will not be able to raise the debt ceiling but I am pretty sure they will do it at the last possible moment and then pretend they accomplished something.

 

[redivider]

I am hoping they will not be able to raise the debt ceiling but I am pretty sure they will do it at the last possible moment and then pretend they accomplished something.

yeah and if republicans don't pull their head out of their ass we might get our credit rating downgraded. which means we'll pay more in INTEREST. less money we'll be able to put to work and instead pay off to creditors... lovely eh???

 

[beardo]

yeah and if republicans don't pull their head out of their ass we might get our credit rating downgraded. which means we'll pay more in INTEREST. less money we'll be able to put to work and instead pay off to creditors... lovely eh???

That is not true and does not make sense, the things you mention are not related. The credit rating is not dependant on the debt ceiling and republicans have nothing to do with any threat to our credit rating. These are lies being sold to justify spending and borrowing more.

 

[jeff f]

yeah and if republicans don't pull their head out of their ass we might get our credit rating downgraded. which means we'll pay more in INTEREST. less money we'll be able to put to work and instead pay off to creditors... lovely eh???

i am for anything that prevents the govt from confiscating money that working people have EARNED.

 

[redivider]

That is not true and does not make sense, the things you mention are not related. The credit rating is not dependant on the debt ceiling and republicans have nothing to do with any threat to our credit rating. These are lies being sold to justify spending and borrowing more.

yes it is. you want a lesson??

the debt ceiling is an imaginary, arbitrary number which doesn't have to exist. we borrow more when tax revenues are down to keep the machine running and pay off debt when times are good. it's always been this way.

a credit agency gives you a grade depending on how likely it is you are going to default on existing and all new loans. the closer the US gets to 'd-day', the more likely it becomes we default. therefore our credit rating may go down.

example time:

an investor has something called 'required rate of return' [RR]. an investor has an RR of around 9% for a AAA rated bond. the interest on a 1,000 bond pays is 9%. that bond will cost the guy 1,000. he pays 1,000 dollars, gets 9% annual interest for 30 years, gets the principal back the last year, 1,000. that's how it works. ok.

the very same investor has an RR of 19% for a AA rated bond. the very same bond discussed above has been downgraded to AA. it still pays 9%. the investor will only have to pay around 910 for a 1,000 bond. while he receives 9% of 1,000 in interest, AND get's back 1,000 as the final payment.

MORE of OUR money went to interest b/c we were forced to take 910 for a 1,000 bond, AAAND we had to pay 9% of 1,000 for 30 years, AAAND give him back 1,000 the last day of the note...

see how borrowing money becomes MORE expensive the lower your credit rating??? or was that too complicated??

 

[beardo]

yes it is. you want a lesson??

the debt ceiling is an imaginary, arbitrary number which doesn't have to exist. we borrow more when tax revenues are down to keep the machine running and pay off debt when times are good. it's always been this way.

a credit agency gives you a grade depending on how likely it is you are going to default on existing and all new loans. the closer the US gets to 'd-day', the more likely it becomes we default. therefore our credit rating may go down.

example time:

an investor has something called 'required rate of return' [RR]. an investor has an RR of around 9% for a AAA rated bond. the interest on a 1,000 bond pays is 9%. that bond will cost the guy 1,000. he pays 1,000 dollars, gets 9% annual interest for 30 years, gets the principal back the last year, 1,000. that's how it works. ok.

the very same investor has an RR of 19% for a AA rated bond. the very same bond discussed above has been downgraded to AA. it still pays 9%. the investor will only have to pay around 910 for a 1,000 bond. while he receives 9% of 1,000 in interest, AND get's back 1,000 as the final payment.

MORE of OUR money went to interest b/c we were forced to take 910 for a 1,000 bond, AAAND we had to pay 9% of 1,000 for 30 years, AAAND give him back 1,000 the last day of the note...

see how borrowing money becomes MORE expensive the lower your credit rating??? or was that too complicated??

I guess you still don't follow- We do not need to raise the debt ceiling to avoid default- We need spending cuts- We bring in more than enough to cover payments on our debt- The only reason for a default would be if they refused to pay it with the money that we already have coming in.
If your rent is 1000$ and you really want a car that is 5000$ but you only have 1100$ you could say you need 4900$ or you will be homeless, but that is not the truth, you could decide to pay your rent with your money, If you spend your 1100$ as a down payment on your new car and don't pay rent and get evicted you can not say it was because I didn't give you the 4900$ It would be because you choose not to use your money properly. .

 

[redivider]

I guess you still don't follow- We do not need to raise the debt ceiling to avoid default- We need spending cuts- We bring in more than enough to cover payments on our debt- The only reason for a default would be if they refused to pay it with the money that we already have coming in.
If your rent is 1000$ and you really want a car that is 5000$ but you only have 1100$ you could say you need 4900$ or you will be homeless, but that is not the truth, you could decide to pay your rent with your money, If you spend your 1100$ as a down payment on your new car and don't pay rent and get evicted you can not say it was because I didn't give you the 4900$ It would be because you choose not to use your money properly. .

spending cuts. americans are soooo used to the government being there making their life better i guess a good dose of spending cuts setting our economy back is just what you need...

GOD DAMMIT, IF I SAY IT AGAIN I WILL GO FUCKING INSANE:

PERSONAL FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT FINANCE IS NOT THE SAME. IT JUST ISN'T. YOU CANNOT COMPARE A PERSON TRYING TO MAKE ENDS MEET WITH THE GOVERNMENT. THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T EVEN USE THE SAME ACCOUNTING PRACTICES AS CIVILIAN ENTITIES DO.

GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS, I'M TIRED OF REPEATING MYSELF.

 

[beardo]

PERSONAL FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT FINANCE IS NOT THE SAME. .

You are correct, I have to work for my money.
I make careful decisions on how to spend my money, I have to wait untill after I have earned it before I can spend it. When I run out of money I have to work to earn more before I am able to spend any more money.

 

[jeff f]

spending cuts. americans are soooo used to the government being there making their life better i guess a good dose of spending cuts setting our economy back is just what you need...

GOD DAMMIT, IF I SAY IT AGAIN I WILL GO FUCKING INSANE:

PERSONAL FINANCE AND GOVERNMENT FINANCE IS NOT THE SAME. IT JUST ISN'T. YOU CANNOT COMPARE A PERSON TRYING TO MAKE ENDS MEET WITH THE GOVERNMENT. THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T EVEN USE THE SAME ACCOUNTING PRACTICES AS CIVILIAN ENTITIES DO.

GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS, I'M TIRED OF REPEATING MYSELF.

so because youre loud and yelling we should listen? ever sat on a city council? schoolboard?

govt spending is exactly like family spending except the family mostly earns their money, and govt steals it from the earners.

when the cash runs out and the bank says, we aint given you anymore, games over.

sorry dude, cant borrow your way to the forbes list. just doesnt work that way

 

[mame]

sorry dude, cant borrow your way to the forbes list. just doesnt work that way

I feel like this is wrong; I'm not going to go through the entire forbes top 100 list but I am 100% certain that a good handful of them used capital that they themselves did not save to start their business via investors, banks loans, whatever...

School loans come to mind as an example of borrowing your way to prosperity (the unemployment rate for bachelors grads is below 4% BTW)...

Buying a home instead of renting comes to mind as an intelligent reason to borrow as well.

Really, borrowing is an effective tool - but just as any other tool, you need to know how to use it.

 

[jeff f]

I feel like this is wrong; I'm not going to go through the entire forbes top 100 list but I am 100% certain that a good handful of them used capital that they themselves did not save to start their business via investors, banks loans, whatever...

School loans come to mind as an example of borrowing your way to prosperity (the unemployment rate for bachelors grads is below 4% BTW)...

Buying a home instead of renting comes to mind as an intelligent reason to borrow as well.

Really, borrowing is an effective tool - but just as any other tool, you need to know how to use it.

while i understand your point, the difference to me is that in those cases, you go in with enough assets to know you will more than likely be able to pay them back.

with the borrowing the govt is doing, there is little to know chance we will be able to pay it back. we are way way way over extended.

and i shouldnt have to remind you of the problems that people have experierenced in the housing market when they were over extended. not only individual purchasers, but the banks that loaned the money.

and dont get me started on the student loans....do you realize how many have quit paying those off? it aint just a couple.

 

[mame]

while i understand your point, the difference to me is that in those cases, you go in with enough assets to know you will more than likely be able to pay them back.

with the borrowing the govt is doing, there is little to know chance we will be able to pay it back. we are way way way over extended.

Our debt problems are long term, in the short term there is no reason we shouldn't be building roads and bridges.

and i shouldnt have to remind you of the problems that people have experierenced in the housing market when they were over extended. not only individual purchasers, but the banks that loaned the money.

This is true, but the US government is not over extended ATM; We are on a path to over extension in the long term but we can "invest in the future" even as we "tighten our belts" as Obama usually says... I think it's obvious to us all that even as the government cuts it's budget it is going to be borrowing for quite some time; If we borrow just enough to reach full employment now - not later - than our long term fiscal situation actually gets better, not worse, because more revenue would be coming in and our economy would be growing at a faster pace.

edit: here's a few numbers: In 2010, the deficit was ~10% of GDP - in 2013 it is projected to be at ~4% GDP... So it's not a short term problem. But like I said, we do have a long term problem... By 2085 US yearly deficits are projected to be ~62% of GDP! That's staggering of course, but as you can see by these numbers our problem is not short term - it's long term. Do I sound redundant yet? I hope so, because for some reason you righties have completely missed this point.

 

[jeff f]

Our debt problems are long term, in the short term there is no reason we shouldn't be building roads and bridges.

This is true, but the US government is not over extended ATM; We are on a path to over extension in the long term but we can "invest in the future" even as we "tighten our belts" as Obama usually says... I think it's obvious to us all that even as the government cuts it's budget it is going to be borrowing for quite some time; If we borrow just enough to reach full employment now - not later - than our long term fiscal situation actually gets better, not worse, because more revenue would be coming in and our economy would be growing at a faster pace.

edit: here's a few numbers: In 2010, the deficit was ~10% of GDP - in 2013 it is projected to be at ~4% GDP... So it's not a short term problem. But like I said, we do have a long term problem... By 2085 US yearly deficits are projected to be ~62% of GDP! That's staggering of course, but as you can see by these numbers our problem is not short term - it's long term. Do I sound redundant yet? I hope so, because for some reason you righties have completely missed this point.

here is the folly in your thinking, the govt doesnt/cant set demand. the market does.

ie the volt. windmills, solar panels, ethanol, post office, the bridge to nowhere, etc .

so what will happen is you get some govt fat cat to finance his "personal" highway or bridge or fbi building or fill in the blank and the money isnt spent smartly.

can you get a more perfect example than ethanol? my God man, the money that we sent down the shitter for this and the economic problems that were set into motion world wide because of corn shortages, borders on criminal.

this doesnt happen a little bit, it happens constantly.


and you are one of the ones suggesting "high speed rail". talk about throwing money down the shitter. basically every public transportation project in the US is a dreaded money pit. high speed rail would be a beautifully painted, union made and operated train, that nobody uses. a complete waste of money. nobody would use it, including you.

i can point to the big dig in boston that was a cluster fuck, the chunnel in europe, and about a thousand other projects initiated by govt.

you guys like to point to the internet as a govt project that was/is useful. it wasnt made useful by the govt. it was made useful by businessmen and women. and the majority of it was built by private sector business who started building huge, profit making servers, search engines, sales sites like ebay etc.

you can take any govt agency you want, look at the internals, and find that their methods and equiptment are decades behind the private sector.

 

[jeff f]

here's a few numbers: In 2010, the deficit was ~10% of GDP - in 2013 it is projected to be at ~4% GDP... So it's not a short term problem. But like I said, we do have a long term problem... By 2085 US yearly deficits are projected to be ~62% of GDP! That's staggering of course, but as you can see by these numbers our problem is not short term - it's long term. Do I sound redundant yet? I hope so, because for some reason you righties have completely missed this point.

lets be clear here, it was OBAMA and his little tax cheat that threatened seniors with their SS checks. it hasnt been from the right. matter of fact, for the most part, its been the right that has had a pretty moderate hand. even ryans plan was a 10-15 year process.

he never threatened to take away SS and medicare from seniors, that was your guys. his plan didnt even change the system for people under 55 (i think that was the age).

 

[MrDank007]

here is the folly in your thinking, the govt doesnt/cant set demand. the market does.

ie the volt. windmills, solar panels, ethanol, post office, the bridge to nowhere, etc .

so what will happen is you get some govt fat cat to finance his "personal" highway or bridge or fbi building or fill in the blank and the money isnt spent smartly.

can you get a more perfect example than ethanol? my God man, the money that we sent down the shitter for this and the economic problems that were set into motion world wide because of corn shortages, borders on criminal.

this doesnt happen a little bit, it happens constantly.


and you are one of the ones suggesting "high speed rail". talk about throwing money down the shitter. basically every public transportation project in the US is a dreaded money pit. high speed rail would be a beautifully painted, union made and operated train, that nobody uses. a complete waste of money. nobody would use it, including you.

i can point to the big dig in boston that was a cluster fuck, the chunnel in europe, and about a thousand other projects initiated by govt.

you guys like to point to the internet as a govt project that was/is useful. it wasnt made useful by the govt. it was made useful by businessmen and women. and the majority of it was built by private sector business who started building huge, profit making servers, search engines, sales sites like ebay etc.

you can take any govt agency you want, look at the internals, and find that their methods and equiptment are decades behind the private sector.

Acquiring bad debt does not create jobs? Aww man...

 

[beardo]

If we borrow just enough to reach full employment now - not later - than our long term fiscal situation actually gets better, not worse, because more revenue would be coming in and our economy would be growing at a faster pace.
.

Here is the MAJOR problem with your arguments- The government creating imployment is a huge part of our problem. The government can not employ everyone they can not employ a majority and they should not employ a significant precentage. The government does not create wealth. We can not improve or situation by borrowing to create employment to boost GDP because even if GDP increases because of Govt spending and Govt jobs and programs we would actually be worsening our fundamental problem.

 

[redivider]

Here is the MAJOR problem with your arguments- The government creating imployment is a huge part of our problem. The government can not employ everyone they can not employ a majority and they should not employ a significant precentage. The government does not create wealth. We can not improve or situation by borrowing to create employment to boost GDP because even if GDP increases because of Govt spending and Govt jobs and programs we would actually be worsening our fundamental problem.

one of the reasons so much wealth is concentrated in the US economy is because of our stable government, a government that always got the job done. no matter what. now for some reason republicans are looking for any excuse to make obama look bad.

for ex:

the internet. the government sure as hell had a hand in it's creation and it's launch....

the government didn't create ebay though....

yet ebay wouldn't be possible if there wasn't internet in place....

that should get your neurons firing....