Posted on 07/13/2011 9:22:40 AM PDT by yoe
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Wednesday that his party is united in opposing any effort to raise the debt ceiling, even as he maintained that the country will not default on its debt obligations.
“I bet there won’t be a single Republican vote to raise the debt ceiling at the end of the day,” the Senate’s top Republican said in a radio interview Wednesday morning with conservative commentator Laura Ingraham.
McConnell’s remarks come one day after the Kentucky Republican (sketched out a “back-up plan”) that would shift the political burden of raising the debt ceiling to President Obama and congressional Democrats, allowing for the borrowing limit to be raised without any Republican votes.
McConnell’s “Plan B” would first need to be approved by both chambers and signed into law by Obama in order to take effect – a prospect that was uncertain at best Tuesday evening, as some lawmakers of both parties balked at the idea.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Well you know we don’t have to agree on everything: we still have the right to disagree and state our positions which is a great thing.
I do agree that hard work counts for a lot. My point was looking beyond all the “keyboard” people who do the investing to pension funds to the majority of hard working people(there are still a lot of those out here in flyover country) who lost much of their lifesavings in what was supposed to be a safer investment than stocks.
I simply can not dismiss all the other hard workers who are getting their benefits cut, loosing their jobs, and loosing their retirement savings, and/or funds for their children’s education.
We have lots of hard working people who are paid less than the auto workers, with lesser benefits, who are taxpayors and will help foot the bill for all the bailouts. When they are dead, their children and grand children will continue to pay, if we can’t get Washington to cut spending. I just don’t think Wall Street, and the autocompanies should be treated as more special than the rest of the workers.
I do think that the car companies are important to us, and we need to do all we can to keep manufacturing in the USA. In the long run, I don’t think the bailout will help their real problems.
As for me personally, I’ll be buying any new car from Ford, if I should ever be able to afford a new car again, which is not likely with the present administration’s approach to jobs.
Not exactly.
The devil is in the details of the cuts. If the cuts started immediately and sufficiently reduced spending so that we didn’t have to borrow 40 cents out of every dollar we spend, but instead we need to borrow zero cents out of every dollar we spend, it would be true that if you cut, you don’t have to raise the debt ceiling.
But that isn’t even what people are talking about when they say cuts. They don’t mean, cut 40 cents of spending out of every spent dollar, immediately.
So, the two things don’t line up exactly, and there is still the problem of bumping up against the debt ceiling and exceeding the limit.
Yes I also read a good number of those workers were hooked on opium. Frankly through no fault of their own, they were sent here hooked by their colonial masters. Google opium wars.
I think a better example is the Hoover Dam. It is not a perfect example but it relates better imho.
Just another thought or two: The risk taken turned out to be more than it was supposed to be. I doubt if any one thought there was a risk of the bankruptcy laws not being followed. Your statement is true for the common stockholders.
Now as to the other: when you work for a living you get paid. Not always. I know a construction guy who was called in to help finish a job so the contractor could get finished on time (thereby avoiding penalties).
The contractor never paid him. We also have companies that have folded overnight, and the workers did not get their final pay checks.
As for the future, don't count on getting paid. Once it is ok to ignore the law, someone can choose to just ignore that little detail of paying people.
If that happens, look back at this period, and remember - they came for the bondholders before they came for the workers.
Well, maybe ~ at the same time the the bridges got built.
I still remember the point of the cold war. We (capitalist) strongly believed workers should get paid. That our labor is not some free gift to the greater good of the collective.
Americans did not stare down nuclear extinction for 45 years, for bondholders. I get your point about bondholders but the US will one day default on t-bills, since the debt is presently laughably unpayable and will only become more comedy as the years go by.
When default day comes will we put our debtors first before we pay the salaries of our military? No. We will just tell our debtors this is what we will pay, lol to the rest.
At the end of the day whether it is a stock, bond, or t-bill.. It’s all a risk. Since you are depending on someone else (not yourself) to generate the wealth.
As to the future, who knows what kind of crappy government and economy we will have then? Bottom line is you can not depend on the law to be followed, which was my beginning point in responding to Tublecane.
“When default day comes will we put our debtors first before we pay the salaries of our military? No. We will just tell our debtors this is what we will pay, lol to the rest.”
When default day comes the dollars we pay our military will most certainly be worth a lot less than it is now, hence they are not free from risk either. At any rate, considering the way the government has dealt with the military and veterans in the past, I wouldn't bet on them getting what they deserve either-more like a royal shaft if you know what I mean.
"At the end of the day whether it is a stock, bond, or t-bill.. It’s all a risk. Since you are depending on someone else (not yourself) to generate the wealth.”
Even when you depend on yourself to generate wealth, you are at risk. Several thoughts come to mind. If you perform a service, or sell a product you made, and send the bill, the money you earned today will likely be worth less tomorrow, and certainly worth less when the default occurs.
Indeed the person who owes you this money is in fact considered debtor, and you are the creditor. We already have the precedent to just shrug and say creditors don't have to be paid first.
Now let's suppose that to avoid this risk, you collect immediately at the point of sale or the point of service. Then what? If you have any money left over after expenses to live on, then what will you do? Invest it in the safest thing you can? You just said there is no where to invest the dollars that has no risk. How are you to preserve that wealth?
Suppose you just have a little farm(just big enough to supply needs for your own family), and try to live as independently as possible, grow your own food, raise a few chickens and/or livestock, grow some grain to feed them etc. etc.
You still have a risk, because when default comes, you have a very real risk that you will not have the amount of dollars to pay your property taxes due to the highly inflated property values. And/or the government “helps” with one of their actions that really only makes things worse.
I don't think it is possible in the current environment to produce wealth that is not at risk whether you are depending on yourself or trying to save a little of your pay for a rainy day and/or retirement. I truly feel sorry for everyone - not just the auto-workers.
In fact, the only entity that appears to have come through unscathed is Goldman Sachs, and some high ranking Dems involved with Fannie/Freddie debacle. (Apparently, George Soros made out pretty well too). Bottom line, the government should not be picking the winners and losers by choosing which companies will be exempt from consequences and laws.
I also think it is important for workers (us little people)to be able to save(invest) a little money for yearly expenses, rainy day floods, tornado, future illness and/or disability. Whatever risks those investment choices have, one should not also have the risk that the government will step in and ignore longstanding laws.
Having survived Carter's great inflation and the misery index, I truly dread what the government and the Federal Reserve has in store for hardworking Americans going forward.
If the Tea Party will back a reasonable Candidate I will vote for that person over McConnell. Frankly ANY politician that’s been in Washington D.C. Longer than two election cycles needs to be moved along.
Your whole post is spot on.
As for what happens on d-day? We will have a very weak dollar. That’s ok. In my lifetime Russia had a very weak Ruble. Brazil had a very weak Real. Both bounced back.
When you mentioned Goldman Sachs it reminded me of their current Enron ways. Google: Goldman Sachs aluminum Detroit.
Wherever there is a scheme or a bubble, you can usually find Goldman Sachs. Ever notice how so many of our Bureaucrats from both parties all come from Goldman Sachs?
There is a long history of debacles in the USA, but somehow Goldman always seems to come out on top.
>he devil is in the details of the cuts. If the cuts started immediately and sufficiently
Oh PLEASE. this is EXACTLY what I meant by “cuts.”
There are no “details” to cuts.
When you tell your teenage daughter to cut her phone usage or pay for it, you don’t want to hear a bunch of childlike nonsense about what the definition of a “cut” is.
Enuff freakin said.
Ok thank you.
I think it’s a terrible miscalculation on his part. Sounds too much like an all out cave to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.