This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
ABC Reports Tentative Debt Ceiling Deal Reached Between GOP And Obama
This could very well be another red herring like the NYT article from two weeks ago that proved to be a dud, but for what it's worth according to ABC's Jonathan Karl, the White House and the GOP have just reached a tentative deal as follows...
- Debt ceiling increase of up to $2.8 trillion
- Spending cuts of roughly $1 trillion
- Special committee to recommend cuts of $1.8 trillion (or whatever it takes to add up to the total of the debt ceiling increase)
- Committee must make recommendations before Thanksgiving recess
- If Congress does not approve those cuts by late December, automatic across-the-board cuts go into effect, including cuts to Defense and Medicare.
In other words, virtually the same as the Boehner deal in the actual cuts, which will likely be back-end loaded (we expect about $10-20 billion in 2012 cuts), but the Democrats get what they want in that it will not require a second debt ceiling hike before Obama's re-elecetion as $2.8 trillion should last well into 2013. As for "future cuts", well, that's easily what Congress is so very good at. Indefinite future cuts that is.
Some more recent details from the National Journal:
Here are the outlines of a debt-ceiling deal that congressional leaders and the Obama White House are firming up in preparation for a possible announcement as early as Sunday afternoon.
In many respects, the deal will, if approved by all parties, resemble the contours of a short-lived pact negotiated last weekend by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Obama rejected that deal, forcing Congress to wrestle with other inferior legislative options throughout the week.
Among the newest wrinkles, according to informed sources, is an agreement to extend the current $14.3 trillion debt ceiling very briefly to give the legislative process time to work without resorting to emergency, hurry-up measures.
President Obama has said he would only sign a short-term extension (days, not weeks) if it were linked to an extension of borrowing authority that lasts beyond the 2012 election.
According to sources, the Senate would use the military construction appropriations bill, one currently available for action, as the vehicle for the short-term extension. This element of the arrangement, like everything else, is subject to modification. But those close to the negotiations expect Congress to slow things down without jeopardizing the nation's full faith and credit. A debt extension of days would achieve that goal.
»
- 24158 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I didn't edit that response in. I edited for grammar. You missed it the first time around.
BTW, I'm not in favor of central planning of the Soviet style. I don't believe the government should pick winners, but I think there is a degree of legitimacy in picking losers in certain cases. I believe in government steering away but not towards.
For instance, I'm in favor of carbon taxes because I believe they will eventually become instituted by the market anyway. I'd prefer we pay them now and use the proceeds to subsidize research and development of alternatives. I believe in this because while I know the market will eventualy correct the problem itself, the downside to allowing a crisis as the impetus is outweighed by the benefit of avoiding the problem in advance.
I'm also in favor of nuclear, albeit with far better regulation and enforcement.
I don't believe I've ever heard so much meaningless bullshit. Have you ever thought about reading some Austrian economics?
I've read a lot actually, but most of it's wishful thinking based upon fictional rational actors with no accounting of human psychology whatsoever. I actually used to be a huge Randian libertarian who espoused such points of view until I grew up and realized how utterly wrong most of it is.
WTF are you smoking? What wishful rational? You think the fact that people will make decisions based upon needing to make a living is not accounting for human psychology?
WOAAHHHHH
Oiiii.
..."For instance, I'm in favor of carbon taxes"...
Lost my interest in any aspect of your ability to articulate intelligently and factually right there. Nothing personal. Carbon Tax? Have you been smoking Al Gore's carbon based root?
Global warming is irrelevant. The problem is economic. The world economy, and the US in particular, are heavly dependent upon fossil fuels, and imported fossil fuels at that. The growth potential of our economy is at risk from the obvious rise in the cost of energy over the next few decades.
If we wait and let the market do it, we will have a ton of missed opportunity because we allowed ourselves to be strangled by volatile energy costs. If we opt to pay those costs in advance in order to get the process started now, our transition will be far less volatile and we will miss fewer economic opportunities.
It's really simple. Oil and coal are finite, and their peak inexpensive production has already occurred or will very soon. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Man you are extremely brainwashed. Price volatility of carbon fuels has more to do with the FED having printed up 16 trillion dollars in the last 3 years to make up for a popping credit bubble than anything else.
Not to mention the fact that their are other ways to produce energy, they may not currently be cost effective but by the time we run out of fuel they will be for obvious reasons. Central planning energy is going to cause problems.
"but most of it's wishful thinking based upon fictional rational actors with no accounting of human psychology whatsoever."
Does this guy think he's on theThink(backwards)Progress or Media(doesn't)Matter site?
1. "Global warming is irrelevant."
2. "If we wait and let the market do it, we will have a ton of missed opportunity"
1. Why is it that when a statement or questoin is posted (disparaging, dispelling or disputing) about an ultra liberal wingnut's core beliefs it is never addressed. Simply parsed off as "irrelevant" and the issue is dismissed as though it was never brought up?
and
2. That's a great example of stupidity. Sure. Take the freedom away from the market and give the power to govt. That will result in trillions of opportunities. I'd say right now is a good example: 1.5 trillion dollars worth of govt. funded, admitted openly, opportunity. How's that working out for you and everyone you know?
It is proven over time that when govt. forces a solution down our throats the only thing we end up with is a mass of jelly like substance in our throats and no other solution except back to square one or -1. The expense is needed to stimulate the PAIN that will force the development and implementation of new technology. If people can't afford it they use less. Simple fact. Branch that out from crude and all of it's byproducts. Eventually the lessening of demand (and I mean sustained, not artificial from a contraction or pullback) will result in advanced R&D in new technology industry. Then you'll get your alternate sources and not before.
I get very leary of someone that suggests govt. solutions to private needs or enterprise. And yes, energy production should be in that category- no govt intervention. Scrap the Dept. of Energy & the EPA and we'll have half the battle won.
Preemptive response: Plenty of state, county and local laws to protect the planet; just enforce what's there and problem solved. More laws or even the number on the books right now are not needed.
My appologies to all for being so far off topic!
Spoken like a true central planner.
I've got one response: leave me alone with your insane "plans". I'll take my chances with my own skills and abilities. What failing infrastructure? I repair my own potholes even at risk of arrest by public sector unions. Also do my own electrical repair, plumbing and chemical synthesis.
Watch the movie "Brazil" if you want to understand the endgame of central planning and control and get a huge laught to boot. It will be less challenging for you than Hayek.
We are already in a bubble - pulling forward yet more future demand is only going to make the resulting crash worse.
And you should brush up on our energy constraints , maybe even understand how oil , population and money growth all need to be in harmony to keep the ponzi going. Well 2 of those 3 are easy to sustain a parabola in. The problem is the first. And without that , the other 2 crash and burn.
We live in a finite world.
Back to the drawing board for you.
removed
Demand increases through public policy can be achieved. We can fix our failing infrastructure as an investment in the future and create jobs by doing so
Here is the problem with what you just wrote: Those government infrastructure jobs are temporary, and they are paid for with debt. Let's say you build a road and employ some people to do that. When the road is finished, the jobs go away but the debt remains. The road is not a productive asset. It's nice to drive on, but it costs money to maintain and the government now has to pay interest on that debt.
Now, let's look at another example. A private company builds a factory. The factory produces real goods and permanently employs a bunch of people. Taxes paid by the company can be used by the government to build a road. Now you have permanent jobs and a road and don't have to pay interest on the debt to do it.
what percentage of government borrowing represents transfer payments in the form of welfare payments
You've piqued my curiosity. I'm interested. Can you tell us? What percentage?
Are SS and Medicare "welfare"? Foodstamps/SNAP? Military pensions or veterans' disability benefits?
If there's a deficit, how do you decide which part of the spending was paid for and which part wasn't?
If I earned $1000 last month, and spent $1500, with $500 going to rent, $500 going to my car/commute expenses, and $500 going to food and utilities, "what percentage" of my rent was deficit spending?
(Please show work.)
$120 billion in ssi disability; 44million folks on food stamps at $1500 per year, what's that, um, another $66 billion; Medicaid is what by now, um, $300 billion; unemployment averaging what $300 a wk for 4 million people is what, um, $60 billion. So $550 billion in transfers to the pre-retired underclass, and I have not included free lunches for kids, housing subsidies, on and on...
None of the above even touches upon the two biggies, now cresting a trillion a year.
Ev Dirksen was right: a billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money.
Too many promises.
Payroll taxes set aside and earning safest-vehicle interest WOULD more than cover social security, medicare and more.
But taking from them to cover for revenue shortfalls caused in large part by reducing taxes on the rich, and on corporations is STEALING from beneficiaries to provide further WELFARE for the rich and for corporations.
They've stolen the common man's money - death by a thousand cuts - and now twith the nation on the ropes would have us believe the only way out is to let them steal more and steal faster. Its easy -- just 'tips' to legislators from our STOLEN money.
So... you can stuff your phony figures up your ass. Got it?
I'll show you where....
$500 for your car is excessive - Get a used car and lower payments and lower insurance....
$500 for food and utilities - turn off the AC, shut your lights, get an unlimited cell phone use and buy beans and rice and baked potatoes etc....
Oh, don't be silly. I don't have a car. You can't answer the question, though, not because you're a moron, but because anywhere you draw the lines is arbitrary.
So one guy says "Medicare" is deficit spending, and the other guy says the wars in the mid-East are deficit spending, and there's no way to determine which guy is "correct."
No truth-value, there. Just an excuse to rant about your opinions. Good luck with that.
How about the non-transfer payments(outright gifts) to the banks and balance of non-entitled entitlements?
Sorry Shanken, every time I hear anyone chip in about welfare payments, I get really pissed because the single largest welfare program in US history went to guarantee IBM, MMM, US Steel of contracts signed under the Marshall plan.
We are so phucking conditioned against ourselves-----where else does this self-detructive mania come from????
There is a utopian dreamland-----in the forest you dudes are driving me to!
respectfully om
A divided house will never stand.
Try to grip this concept, lamebrain. SS is NOT A TAX.
It's money government forces me to pay them. I'm not sure what else you can call that but a tax.
I concur. In public schools they have a forced retirement program in which your money is extricated from your check before you can cash it. Don't teach in Arkansas if you want to keep your hard earned money. Or anywhere in the public school system here for that matter.
+3,068.42
(thats the number of dollars I was taxed thru SS withholding last year and will never see in my life because it has been spent)
SS is a tax. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....
Yeah tell that to your employer.
Clinteastwood
A rose by any other name is still a rose.
The monies collected as SS payroll deductions, are treated no differently than IRS deductions.
They are not "invested", they are tossed in with general revenues and spent on anything including wars and handouts to financial racketeers.
The government's promise to pay it back tomorrow does not negate its use as a straightforward tax today.
Had the monies actually been "lockboxed" to Social Security, and invested in something other than IOUs, an argument that it was an insurance payment more than a tax would have some standing. But that is not the case.
Let's put that dumbass statement I hear OVER AND OVER about SS not being a tax to bed right now. Directly from the IRS as to whether or not Social Insecurity would be considered a tax:
"1.1.1.2 (06-23-2009)
Definitions...
119. Tax is a sum that legislation imposes upon persons, property or activities to pay for Government operations (broadly defined to include individuals, trusts, estates, partnerships, associations, companies, and corporations). The power to impose and collect Federal taxes is given to Congress in Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution. Collections that arise from the sovereign powers of the Federal Government constitute the bulk of governmental receipts, which are compared with budget outlays in calculating the budget surplus or deficit."
"1.34.1.2 (06-23-2009)
Definitions...
62. Governmental Receipts are collections from the public based on the Government’s exercise of its sovereign powers, including:
Individual and corporate income taxes
Social insurance taxes,
Excise taxes,
Duties,
Court fines,
Compulsory licenses, and
Deposits of earnings by the Federal Reserve System.
Gifts and contributions (as distinguished from payments for services or cost-sharing deposits by state and local Government s) are also counted as governmental receipts. Total governmental receipts include those specifically designated as off-budget by provisions of law. Total governmental receipts are compared with total outlays in calculating the budget surplus or deficit."
Guess that kind of pisses on your parade (see above). No offense intended, just reprinting facts (see above).
missiondweller selfish cunt: Tell me you don't drop the word "income" when arguing this with less discerning types.
If 50% pay no taxes it is not because they have good lawyers. It is because they have no money.
gh
"If 50% pay no taxes it is not because they have good lawyers. It is because they have no money."
- sellstop
At least that is true for most of the alleged 50% regarding their IRS tax.
But for the umpteenth time, there are many other federal and local regressive taxes that also have to be paid. And taxes are but one way in which the flow of money is directed upward.
The overall excess flow of monies is upward, the concentration of wealth is at the top. There is NO excessive flow of monies or wealth downward.
I don't get how some of the people here are rightfully upset about monetary policy unfairly benefitting the richest amongst us, yet they're completely against taxing those profits to help cut our defict.
If somebody rapes your momma, is your idea of justice to go rape their momma?
Unfortunately, the "rich" aren't homogenous. Like the poor, there are the justly rich, and the unjustly rich. Unfortunately, the later crowd keeps growing along with the total state.
If you actually have any principles, then trying to cure a robbery with a counter-robbery involves entirely too much collateral damage.
9 Billion people. Start taxing coke and whores instead of covering it up with a TARP. Or just end the tax code and see who escapes new york.
At this point, it's not even about justice. It's about what works.
Supply-side's effects are way past the threshold of diminishing returns. Demand-side is the only thing which will increase economic activity and restore the most important element: Confidence.
The type of shit the Tea Party is pulling right now is the exact opposite of confidence inducement. It tells the entire world we're stuck with a small minority for the next year and a half who march to the beat of their own drum and may or may not desire to destroy the entire system.
I'm not entirely of the belief that the system can be saved, but I can guarantee it won't be with cuts to demand-side and an ever-growing disparity of wealth.
Cramer from CNBC advertises here and has made a chitlod of money investing in gold. Gold does not work. it just sits there. Gold miners are pretty last week.
I'm not in the TP, but I'm sympathetic so I'll take a stab at answering your question about taxes on the wealthy.
1.) I'd support closing some loopholes and lowering overall rates to make things fair. It is wrong that a hedge fund manager pays 15% while a neurosurgeon pays 36%. But until the government shows they can control themselves I have no reason to believe sending them more money wouldn't just result in even more spending.
2.) I do not believe that either party is serious about taxing the uber-wealthy. If they were, they'd stop talking about the marginal tax rates on wages. The top 1% don't make their money on wages, they earn their income via capital gains, dividends, real estate, tax-free bonds, etc. Raising marginal rates just punishes the middle & upper middle class, the people who are already getting screwed on taxes.
The Democrats had two years of holding the presidency and the Congress. If they were really serious about raising taxes on the mega-rich they had their opportunity...... and passed. Republicans can't raise taxes, they'd get booted out of office. Low taxes are a central tenet of their party, and the few who have violated this principle have been been punished at the polls (see George HW Bush).
4.) The uber-wealthy are the ones who can most easily avoid paying taxes. They have lawyers & accountants to help them navigate the tax code to minimize their tax burden. I just think no matter what happens they'll find a way out. And it doesn't matter anyway because our politicians are corrupt to the core and would never go after their masters.
5.) All that aside....I don't think anyone should be forced to send the federal government more than 15-20% of their income.
We had a perfect opportunity to stick it to the thieving plunderers who brought us this depression in 2008, when their greed and gluttony had brought many of their companies to the point of collapse. We should have given them the collective middle finger and let them go. But our politicians (both parties) decided to bail them out. I hate it, but you can't now raise taxes on everyone else under the mistaken belief that you are somehow punishing the people who caused (and are now benefitting from) this economic mess. Just my 2 cents.
I think you make a lot of sense actually. I agree that capital gains taxes are what should be raised. I'm simply approaching the issue from where we now stand, not 2008. I wish we had that chance again.
Unfortunately, at this point, our fates are inextricably intertwined. We can either bring the whole thing down or work with what we have.
I just see a humongous amount of dishonesty on the part of people who think balancing the budget without tax increases will somehow save us. That, or they're complete morons. If the TP came out and said "we're actively obstructing everything because we're trying to destroy the system," I'd have massive amounts of respect for them. Unfortunately, they're just cronies of the Koch brothers and other rich sociopaths who don't see that symbiosis requires balance.
When you lean forward too far, You just fall on your face
"All the men who have vanished, the men you hated, yet dreaded to lose; it is I who have taken them away from you. Do not attempt to find us. We do not choose to be found. Do not cry that it is our duty to serve you. We do not recognize such duty. Do not cry that
you need us. We do not consider need a claim. Do not cry that you own us. You don't. Do not beg us to return. We are on strike, we, the men of the mind.
We are on strike against self-immolation. We are on strike against the creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. We are on strike against the dogma that the pursuit of one's happiness is evil. We are on strike against the doctrine that life is guilt.
There is a difference between our strike and all those you've practiced for centuries:
our strike consists, not of making demands, but of granting them. We are evil, according to your morality. We have chosen not to harm you any longer. We are useless, according to your economics. We have chosen not to exploit you any longer. We are dangerous and to be shackled, according to your politics. We have chosen not to endanger you, nor to wear the shackles any longer. We are only an illusion, according to your philosophy. We have chosen not to blind you any longer and have left you free to face reality -- the reality you wanted, the world as you see it now, a world without mind." -- John Galt
"war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength"
1984
or 2011
game plan is the same, fOOk with your brain, we have gone insane. sws
how is a cut to an entitlement a "tax hike"
most who receive entitlements pay no taxes.
Please dont advance the same dishonest half truths and arguments as the scumbags on capital hill
When the bottom 50% of wage earners pay ANY income tax, as opposed to getting a check, then we will have all paying their "fair share". Let's start with that, or better yet, let's have a weighted voting system, where one's vote size, is based on the amount of income tax they pay. How about that?
"Cuts to entitlements are tax hikes."
Spoken like a true socialist..
I can understand your confusion though, so let me clear it up some for you - your sole "entitlements" (as guaranteed by our countries founding document) are spelled out in the Bill of Rights. Let me condense it for you, you are entitled to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. There were ten original amendments to ensure that "entitlement" was allowed for all.
You are not "entitled" to free housing, food, medical care, transportation, utilities, higher education, or cell phones provided through the government by assessing a tax on me.
Among other things...
Obama and administration basically shoves Reid and democrats aside to work out a deal.
Maybe the same 50 percent that doesn't graduate from high school? What really doesn't make sense is that income earned by the rich is taxed at 15 percent (passive income from inheritance and hedge fund managers) while working stiffs making the same amount via wages pay a higher rate.
Google Translation: Wall Street +$2.8 Trillion, Main Street -$1 Trillion.
It's a Biflation Miracle!!
perhaps they should form a committee to investigate the feasibility of the possibility of the formation of a committee to recommend future cuts
Congressional committee = circle jerk
They form a committee just to decide where to go for dinner and drinks to discuss how to f**k us yet again
Well, at least they're doing something by forming a committee - sarc
ironically, the banner on the left-hand side of the this page is the barackobama.com 2012 campain ad.
LOL, I bet their ROI sucks big time.
Perfect, now the inevitable weak holiday sales numbers can be chalked up to 'uncertainties surrounding the 11th hour negotiations going on in Congress as part of the required spending cuts, but the jittery consumer and cautiousness by business leaders is likely to be transitory. Analysts expect GDP to pick up in the first half of 2012.'
My money is on that they blame it on the weather, speculators, or solar flares.
The Business of America is War...Plus Anti War/Obama Slogans...
http://seenoevilspeaknoevilhearnoevil.blogspot.com/2011/06/anti-waranti-...
OT: 2 min Vid...Hilarious...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0Uju3tYS2s
Republican Obama would be okay with this plan to cut Medicare without raising taxes, and with the old guard GOP he'd be delighted to put Senate dems on the hook for triggering default. Senate dems should be right pissed at him for trying to sneak it in by way of a "trigger."
And don't ever forget it. This is Amerika.
Here's a rough calculation of second-round effects:
Gasoline $4.50, Unemployment 11%, Core PCE 3.2%, GDP 0.5%
Gasoline $5.20/gallon, unemployment @ 10.7% using U3 & 23% using U6, Core PCE 3% to 3.5% (you nailed it), GDP 0.2% officially (-1.8% in reality), and 30 year U.S. tnotes yielding 0.007% - these are the official numbers prior to Obama's re-election, after which time, each will be revised to a 40% to 100% worse number.
We're on the same wavelngth bro. I like that bond yield! And the 5 Year TIPS at -3%, PCLN at 1,250, Gold at 2,400
TIPS, lulz.
I bet The Bernank literally laughs out loud whenever someone mentions TIPS to him in a private meeting.
It's how they can claim they made money on the bailouts
TIPS have always seemed a ludicrous idea to me. You don't trust the government to keep inflation under wraps so you pay extra for bonds where the government gets to tell you what the inflation rate really is???
+++
That is what gold is for...
At least TIPS pay something right now, unlike short-term Government debt that pays nothing.
I think ZH should run a betting pool to see which predictions come up 3 months and 6 months with a couple of silve oz.s as the prize.
.
If they default we get a transient deflationary spiral from deleveraging which should cause silver to plunge. The weak hands will be throwing silver eagles at us. Hell, if that happens then I might have to rent a U-haul trailer.
Why do Americans continue to accept the scam of baseline budgeting, the Kick The Can mentality in Washington, the Ponzi scheme called Social Security, and a debt "limit" that isn't limited at all?
We need a real leader in Washington, one who is going to say, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!"
This is so freaking frustrating.
That leader would take a bullet in under a week, courtesy TPTB.
Because they are the 'frog' in the scorpion and the frog tale.
They're going to get a deal done within 24 hours, and this is probably it.
Does anyone really believe the few members of Congress who planned on making this their last stand, and the nations last stand, on the absurdity ad infinitum that is the perpetual and greater debt ceiling hikes, would not be pushed into a category known as the 'radical right,' as Wall Street & the Banking Lobby puts the heat on captured bitchez Boehner, Cantor and the rest of the alleged fiscal conservatives, even going so far as to threaten them in all kinds of ways?
Conference call with Jamie Dimon, Lloyd Blankfein, John Boehner & Eric Cantor (with The Bernank listening in with his phone on mute, unknown to Boehner & Cantor):
Jamie Dimon: So, John, Eric, we've let you play this up enough to try and save your sorry asses with your constituencies, but make no mistake, we will get the taxpayer teet back, with or without you, and consider all favors extended to you, including family members hired, campaign contributions, and you know what, suspended and in jeopardy of a serious downgrade, if you don't feign helplessness and 'reluctantly agree' to raise the debt ceiling.
Lloyd Blankfein: Exactly, gentlemen. I think I speak for all of us when I tell you that now is the time to fold. It's been a great show, but the show is over.
{Ben Bernanke is so titilated by the tone of Jamie and Lloyd's voices that he's sexually turned on at this point, anticipating more QE and MBS purchases from TBTF institutions}
John Boehner: Alright, message received. We'll do the deal tomorrow.
Eric Cantor: Yes, it's not like we were actually going to push this much past Sunday, anyways. We'll comply.
Jamie Dimon: Great talk. Lloyd and I will see both of you at the usual time and usual place. ANd the checks are in the mail, gentlemen. Goodnight,
Lloyd Blankfein: You two are such whores. I just can't help but to tell you that before hanging up. You might possibly even be bigger whores than Obama and McCain. But at least you're our whore, bitchez.
{The Bernank is near climax}
Conference call is terminated.
Good stuff!
I'm betting there's a little quid pro quo that the banksters keep enough interest in Treasuries to enable the August borrowing boom to go forth without blowing yields up and defeating the "spending cuts" by mid-month.
Should be fun to watch the MSM breathe credit to everyone for getting us the next leg in the coming debacle...
Perhaps you meant squid pro quo Mayhem??? ;-)
ORI
Yeah, you know The Bernank was pleasuring himself during that call.
Tyler, you forgot the last part of the quote: "
A senior White House aide pushed back against the idea that a deal was struck.
"Talks continue, but there is no deal to report," the aide said."
That was added after the initial article was released
The powers that be are doing a masterful job of keeping the public in the dark as to what will happen with this situation. I can hear an echo of Mr. Kennedy, from Gone with the Wind..."Don't keep me on tenterhooks!"
Well one answer for us shrimps is: Gold bitchez!
Wait, wait, wait a fucking minute. Do you think the drama queens are going let one of the years biggest events just die down with at least 2 more days to spin more BS? Nope, just another teaser before their off to the next one.
Hostage situation over? Tea Party GOP Confederate traitors can go straight to hell.
Oh, I'm a good old Rebel
Now that's just what I am
For this fair land of freedom
I do not care a damn.
I'm glad I fought against it
I only wish we'd won.
And I don't want no pardon
For anything I've done.
I hates the Constitution
This great Republic too
I hates the Freedmen's Bureau
In uniforms of blue.
I hates the nasty eagle
With all his brag and fuss
But the lyin', thievin' Yankees
I hates' em worse and worse
Three hundred thousand Yankees
Lies still in Southern dust
We got three hundred thousand
Before they conquered us
They died of Southern fever
And Southern steel and shot
I wish they was three million
Instead of what we got.
I can't take up my musket
And fight' em now no more
But I ain't a-goin' to love' em
Now that is certain sure
And I don't want no pardon
For what I was and am
And I won't be reconstructed
And I do not give a damn.
I love that song,an all time great. I find myself paying it more and more, and particularly next to cars with northeastern plates.
Y'all boys still sore ya lost? Well, shucks.
(Comin' on 150 years, bro. Get over it.)
A large portion of this part of the country still has no interest in sharing a nation with the northeast and left coast.
We just arent that into you, sorry. Its not you, its us, we've grown apart but can still be friends, etc.
I hear ya. Do what you gotta do, man.
Truth be told, personally, I know a lot more worthless Northeasterners than I know worthless Southerners or Midwesterners or whoever else. I just don't think the place of birth means anything.
You're a waste of space, but it's not because you're from a different part of the country, it's rather because you're a smallminded provincial bigot.
We got your kind up here too. You'd fit right in at the proper bars.
Oh please.
Are the Ukranians also narrow minded provincial bigots? Czechs? Slovaks?
Trying to hammer 300+million people into the same box doesnt make you sophisticated.
Eh?
I'm all for your independence. Get hoppin, son, quit wasting time on the innerwebz. I'm an anarchist--I *am* my own country.
You should achieve the same. I'm saying you're an asshole, but I'm fully in favor of your self-determination to be such.
Go somewhere and shoot a cop or a congressman or whatever. Be free.
And you lose the internets. Sorry, better luck next time.
And we await your pitiful attempts to send us there. Shooting real guns isnt like Halo, boy.
In the meantime we'll just take your money and keep pouring sand in your gears until your states implode, then toast marshmellows on the flames and sing "Dixie" and the classic "Im a Good Ole Rebel" posted here.
Its coming, count on it.
Been to Iraq chickenhawk?
No. Which has what to do with anything?
And why are you bringing your sexual preferences into the discussion?
Just as I suspected zerohedge filled with deliverence dixie traitors,
Oh theres stellar logic. Self determination = treason.
Be honest, I doubt you had a problem when the Ukraine went independent, of Kosovo, or a ton of other regions in Eastern Europe. You only have a problem when other people in the US decide they dont want anything to do with you anymore.
NY rules your sorry ass. Get used to it.
Don't be silly. There's no need to rule some guy's ass...these bastards here OWN it.
At least that "owning people" tradition is appreciated in some parts.
Well that hurt. Excellent refutation of my point that youre a complete hypocrite, fantastic display of intellect and logic..
We will laugh when your city falls apart later this decade.
Stick to scaring some metrosexual twit in Manhattan, only New Yorkers are impressed by New Yorkers.
Your fascist attitude is unbecoming of reefer.
smoke another joint
Obviously, way too stoned.
This is interesting, I continue to suspect ZH has a major support from Tea Party symptahizers and the vote on this guy's comment gives evidence that there is a lot of Tea Party tilt here. While the Tea Party has its agenda, I do not agree with its no holds barred no compromise approach.
As long as both sides can claim some sort of victory in that they got what they were holding out for, then it's a done deal.
The Tea Party may not like it, but they are still a small minority. The spending won't stop until the house of cards collapses.
I have a feeling the Tea Party will be a lot larger after the next election, but that may be too late.
A deal like the one described in the article, assuming the Tea Party has nothing to do with it, sets the stage for the Tea Party to get larger and larger
It is still early days, I don't think "too late" shows up for a while yet.
We need a rule that everyone who forecasts a "false flag" that does not happen must send Tyler a dollar.
He'd be a millionaire inside a month.
This will most likely change in the next few hours. They are going to say that it will be martial law if Obama doesnt get dictator powers!
They are even using the word martial law in legislation!
http://theintelhub.com/2011/07/29/obama-to-use-dictatorial-powers-to-rai...
Hey,why don't they just get some money from Benny,he's got lots....and lots and lots....and well you know.
There are some built-in scheduled assumptions into the pre-deal baseline FY 2012, that now presumably can't be tampered with. Relative to what was going on before this is a degree of not business as usual austerity. In addition Boehner's plan cut $22 billion more. The question then is how much of the $1.8 trillion to come going to fall into 2012 and 2013.
1. The 30% reimburshment cut to physicians under Medicare. Normally the Congress automatically repeals this. If they add it back on it costs about a $100 billion, so this would have to go through, or they'd have to cut somewhere else.
2. There is controversy on how to budget for the housing agencies: CBO says $317 billion, OMB says $130 billion. Both of these were presumed on housing prices stabilizing, which now is problematic. The baseline uses OMB.
3. .The FY 2012 budget presumes that the one-year unemployment extension to 99 weeks will go away. If it does, then 6.7 million quasi-permanent unemployed will fall off of benefits, resulting in a hard to imagine amount of distress, disorder and rioting. The cost of the 73-week extension beyond the traditional 26 weeks is $100 billion. This program should be dead.
4. In addition, as a facilitation to maintaining unemployment insurance, the states have utilized a little discussed credit line from the Federal government The balances are currently $40.5 billion owed by the states. The Federal loans to support the State Unemployment Trust Fund remained interest free through Dec. 31 of last year, but interest began to accrue on Jan. 1, 2011. The first interest payment will be due on Sept. 30, 2011. Will the Federal Government defer this, too? If not, it will be just one more burden on the states.
5. The 2% payroll tax reduction was designed as a one-year stimulus and will automatically expire at the end of 2011. Its extension, the cost of which is $120 billion, is not included in the FY 2012 budget. One would now presume this is dead?
That's ok. A few internet stocks will be on a tear. We expect that all Americans will be fully invested. Medicare? We have a deal going where Medicare will be accepted in China. Brand new facilities too! Lots cheaper
Doctors already routinely refuse Medicare patients because they are such money losers due to the Fed cutting payments in a world of Jackpot Justice diagnosis and treatment.
Medicare is fast becoming FIAT health care.
I am trying to be more optimistic, so let me just say that I'm glad the U.S. isn't bankrupt, because by being able to borrow another several trillion, it just proves that we must be filthy wealthy, because no one is going to loan another 3 trillion dollars to someone who is even remotely close to insolvent, especially when they already have such a large outstanding balance.
Am I right?
/sarc
Not to worry - Ben has us covered !
these pols are setting a bad example for all of our little boys and girls out there. so many will now know how to avoid taking the medicine that mom tries to give them.
Country run by idiots.
Great. Does this mean we can quit this fruitless crock and get back to what is far more entertaining political theater? Like NAILING THE DOJ to the wall for "Fast & Furious"
It's bad enough to gamecock gun control. It's quite another thing to make Baja so dangerous that we can't go to The Palm for Top Shelf tequila shots. THAT is an impeachable offense.
Oh yeah. So is murder.
yawn.............
Everyone of these congrifters desperately wants to forge a deal before the Sunday morning news circuit begins. The details of the outcome are trivial to these 'people' in comparison to the optics of the situation. 'Listen up, Jack, give me a feather to put in my cap that I can boast about on the Sunday morning news-talk shows and I'll provide you the same. We both can express angst over having to make 'hard sacrifices' to achieve the outcome but the host has assured me they'll play it up as a new day of bipartisanship in America. Win-win.'
Sorry to break this, but it was a mistake. That wasn't a news report, the guy was reading the pilot for the next series spinoff: Law and Order: Dollars to Donuts
Even if true (which I don't believe) don't think this would pass the House.
A vote on the BBA will probably get enough tea partiers to support it. I suspect it could easily pass the house if Obama supports it. That gives the donks all the cover they need.
you don't need to "pass" anything
this bullshit will be incomprehensible and impossible to straighten out for years with these contigencies and so on
don't do anything
this results in the goobermint having to equate money in with money out. no more debt laid upon the nation, for a while
this will not lead to default
it can be managed
scare; lie; cheat; more lies; more fear. have a nice day, yourself, shitforbrains, pretending we can't manage without more debt.
i'm looking at the top of the pagewhere williambanzai_6.9 has posted the cute title: "to default or not to default" which, unfortunately, is, again, another false dichotomy by zH writers/"priveleged" posters. cute, tho! just darling! what an artiste!
I kinda want to see it too. Not because I care so much about whether the Feds can float more bonds, but because the REAL fireworks would only just get started when every single aggrieved party who is "owed" a dollar from the US gummit calls some hack with a JD to file suit demanding payment.
There's nothing I could think of that'd promote individual liberty and responsibility MORE than 3 million lawsuits, class-action and individual, being brought against Uncle Sam.
Now that'd be some kinda entertainment.
the goobermint would probably give them permission to sue so it could say: see? we need more debt, here! bizarro passed a coupla weeks ago!
myself, i fear for the nation. when we went full tilt retard and nationalized the losses of the "financial sector" we put the nation at risk for the sake of the banksters and the life savings of their everyday clients as much as anything, really, i think
and, it didn't work out, even tho they kept telling us how wonderful they were doing. green shoots. a G/sachs "estimate" last december or so which was so "goldi-fried" as to defy common sense and tyler is still talking about it which, believe it or not, is healthy, imo
i just want the debt load on the american people to stop growing
this will probably seem corny as hell, but it reminds me of moses & pharoah, before the final scene and the parting of the sea, before even all the battles of the magicians and the signz and wonders
what happened? well, if i understand the story, the hebrews had been doing ok as a "slave nation" within egypt
some of their power hitters had worked with the power, but then, things changed
new taskmaster
they were making bricks and had to produce so many, blahblahblah
new guy says: less straw for you to put in the bricks you make (for strength), but i demand the same number of bricks and they must be the same strength and quality
fun stuff like that
what happened to the straw? i don't know, but maybe mr big-shot had a little brick business, off books, on the side... or maybe he just sold it, if he was a lazy pirate... or his boss was doing the skim and making him cover... like a "command" situ
weird, huh?
pharoah's army got drown-ded; over straw? ?pharoah's army got drown-ded, BiCheZ!!!
Well, simply. who plays golf with who? Do you play with Lloyd, Ben, Tim or Braack? No? No bailout for you! Ah, but for the golfing buddies, after the brags on the new, hot girlfriends stashed in Manhattan and the 6-7 figure priced cars: Hey, John, Harry, help a Brother out, spot me a few hunert billion and I'll see you get a taste- oh and your friends, too.
Who can forget Rahm Emanual making millions off Global Crossing and getting out just weks before the big BK while Joe Average took it in the shorts - hard! What a stroke of luck or genius or some such!
Sorry Slewie
You can't trick us with"don't do anything". You re a 'do-nothing dude' if I ever heard one. Congratulatios and
WELCOME ABOARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!! om
aren't you the passive-aggressive little BiCh, tho?
mommy's happiness must be very important to y-o-u!!!
Part of the ABC news report directly from the ABC news website sited in the above article (abcnews.com):
A senior White House aid pushed back against the idea a deal was struck.
" Talks continue, but there is NO DEAL to report".
hi, mr fireman or woman!
you may have missed this in some of the above comments, or you may just be another mindless troll, with another mindless troll giving you the + on your comment.
some of these cut/pastes don't come out very well, but this is just PART of what you musta missed, brainiac:
Sat, 07/30/2011 - 23:34 | FidelityBoyTyler, you forgot the last part of the quote: "
A senior White House aide pushed back against the idea that a deal was struck.
"Talks continue, but there is no deal to report," the aide said."
Sat, 07/30/2011 - 23:47 | Tyler DurdenThat was added after the initial article was released
Thanks Slewie..
My error. I didn't see that in the original post. I only saw it on the abc news website.
y.w.
thank you for not taking that too personally, f_f.
some of these posts, recently, with all the politics (partisan R/D/?) have been brrrruuuutalll! and i see trolls everywhere!
L0L!
peace
"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." –Cicero, 55 BC
very nice...his words were weapons wielded in defense of the republic
– Thomas Jefferson
– Theodore Roosevelt
-James Madison
-Thomas Jefferson
-Andrew Jackson
Woodrow Wilson signed the 1913 Federal Reserve Act. A few years later he wrote:
-Woodrow Wilson
No, Wilson wittingly ruined it. The Great Progressive wanted to create substantial and profound change. That he lies to his diary is no surprise. No one since has lifted a finger to change it.
Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men's protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked: 'Account overdrawn'.
~ Ayn Rand: Atlas Shrugged (1957)
Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men's protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper.
The sequence shows the great downfall in propaganda quality.
So, destroyers appeared only after money was invented...
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/cicero-plan.htm
If we dont raise the debt ceiling (again), then we may not be able to pay off the debt! Welcome to wonderland bitchez.
Funny, they're saying the same thing about CMBS. If the agencies won't rate new issues, and new issues therefore can't be sold, the default rate on existing CMBS could go up.
Maybe I'm crazy but I think they won't do it by deadline. They need more panic on the financial markets to give them the excuse for caving in.
Somebody has to (indirectly) buy the toxic levereged crap they are selling, so guess who that is going to be?
Bagholder Ma & Pa's 401(k) will now share MBS risk as deemed so by oversight of the US Govt. Wait for it....
It's the only pot of literal gold the scumbags have left to tap.
I don't think that's coming anytime soon, personally. I don't think the Feds are anywhere *near* the stage of audacity where they'll wantonly seize 50% of the population's "retirement" assets...
BUT:
I'd say that IF the scamalicious nature of the corporate-sponsored 401K/mutual fund hasn't become obvious to you yet...IF you haven't cut your potential losses by cashing that shit out and taking the tax penalty and actually getting to do something productive with your own money...well...
...sorry if that shit doesn't work out, suckers.
There is absolutely NO reason to raise the debt ceiling. About 95% of what the federal government spends is unconstitutional anyway. Screw them. Close down all foreign bases and outposts. Bring all military home. No more foreign aid. Close down 98% of federal departments... they are blatantly unconstitutional and counterproductive. This is just insane. Do not raise the debt ceiling. And to give in to Obama on his utterly and completely personal temper-tantrum to have unlimited spending money for the rest of his term as a pre-condition? He is holding the entire country hostage. Arrest him and lock him away. Then lock away the congress and the courts. Then nuke DC. That's a good start. Freaking morons.
i still sense that you're holding back, h_ann. L0L
i can only encourage you to: ?[Buddy Holly]-Rave On? - YouTube
I'm not quite as extreme as honestann, but I was thinking about the Department of Education. Why do we even have one? What purpose(s) does it serve? It seems like they could simply eliminate it entirely and pass educational issues to the state and local level. The 2011 budget for Department of Ed was $71B. Take that over 10 years and it's $710B. That would be 1/3 of the target cuts right there. What am I missing here?
Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of France, 1815
Ralph M Hawtry, former Secretary to the Treasury.
The Earl of Caithness, in a speech to the House of Lords, 1997.
William Paterson, founder of the Bank of England in 1694, then a privately owned bank
Reginald McKenna, as Chairman of the Midland Bank, addressing stockholders in 1924.
H W White, Chairman of the Associated Banks of New Zealand, to the New Zealand Monetary Commission, 1955.
Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company.
Major L L B Angus.
John Kenneth Galbraith (1908- ), former professor of economics at Harvard, writing in ‘Money: Whence it came, where it went’ (1975).
Nicolas Trist – secretary to President Andrew Jackson – said about the incredibly powerful privately owned Second Bank of the United States:
The Galbraith quote is great. Highly recommend the book as well.
Well here it is, the headline we have been waiting for. My god, can you believe all the misleading articles, interviews with politicians, and just the total BULLSHIT drama? Damn I should have BTFD. S&P up what on monday,3-5%? 1500 by year end?
The algos are interested only in profits, and the impact on GDP of this has been badly miscalculated in the S&P earnings projections.
US GDP weakness takes down the whole world. All those multinationals padding their earnings with foreign sales are going to get shocked when those foreign sales dry up.
Don't pay taxes? You can't even rent beer without paying taxes. Hell kids buying candy pay taxes.
I'm sure a 7% tax rate on the poor takes a bigger chunk of their purchasing power than a 50% plus tax rate on the so-called super rich. Gov spends too much on nothing anyway, why would we want to enable this wasteful game any further? Really, I'm surprised the Al Gore types don't come out against big gov and our current tax system and collection of revenues, surely our tax system alone is responsible for the cutting down of hundreds of thousands of acres of forested land alone. Not to say what a waste of intellectual resources our many paged tax code requires.
The wording of the baseline is critical. CBO has more than one baseline. If they compute against the "Plausible Baseline" then these can be real cuts.
I concur with Tyler that we are looking at about 20 billion in actual, no bullshit FY2012 money stoppage. This is a very big deal.
We're looking at 0.4% GDP with full on QE2 in progress and only months after the 2% SS tax cut began 31 December 2010. That Is Stimulus, and Brent laughed at it and took GDP to 0.4%.
Now we are going to have the 2% SS tax cut expire, Brent is still $118 and extract an additional 20 Billion dollars from gov't spending.
GDP is going to get slapped hard. U3 will NOT decline in this environment. Obama's re-election prospects are not great.
I'll take the deal, lock stock and barrel, just enough already damnit.
I'll use the borrowed time until the elections to prepare accordingly.
USD should be testing all time lows within 72 hours.
oh the joy.