- This topic has 8 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Lots of noise about a government default. Moody’s thinks that if the U. S. Government defaults for just a week, it will cause a loss of 1.5 million jobs.
Biden is citing the 14th Amendment, which has a single sentence on the public debt. A Stanford law professor basically said you can’t lean on that for unlimited borrowing. Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe changed his mind, and now thinks a Democratic president can borrow without limit.
How damage from a US debt default could cascade across the global economy | AP News
On a side note, the Mississippi legislature voted to allow full and immediate expensing of capital equipment rather than amortize the expense over a period of years. This is critical, goes the argument, as America continues to re-shore supply chain elements. They think it will boost GDP by 2.5%, wages by 5% and manufacturing employment by 10%.
Mississippi’s New Tax Model Can Work for America | National Review
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
-
-
I’m confused. I thought the bill passed by the house raised the debt limit by an additional $1.5 trillion. Doesn’t the increase, honor all debt accumulated to date? Can you explain how that is economic terrorism?
I think the bill restricts/rolls back future spending and cancels unspent appropriations from the past. Am I wrong? Or are you again posting mindless talking points?
You can of course disagree with an effort to reduce spending in the future. You could argue that tax increases are the preferred approach for limiting deficit spending going forward. (But you of course appreciate that neither side has the votes to change fiscal policy through regular order.) But arguing that a policy choice going forward is economic terrorism…come on man. You’re all in on the notion that past policy choices are sacrosanct, never ever to be reviewed. Let’s go back to the good old days of separate but equal?
Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever and a minute more;
Good fortune seems to you have sung, to live and love way past long
-
-
NO MALARKEY
-
There you go again, believing what politicians say? You ever hear the old one, once burnt, twice shy? You think it might apply to political speech? (That saying is an unqualified statement that applies to the bull shit from both sides of the aisle?)
Trump walked on the position you’ve highlighted during his CNN Town Hall appearance, openly…unequivocally, no? Asked why his position has changed on policy course corrections during debt ceiling negotiations…he answered simply…”I’m no longer president”. Until now did you think his political speech was/is somehow different?
Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever and a minute more;
Good fortune seems to you have sung, to live and love way past long
-
-
Economic terrorism by Republicans. Spend money then refuse to pay the bills.
Here’s the chart comparing Bush’s addition to the U. S. National Debt with that of six of the first eight years of Obama’s addition to the USND. I’ll add the remaining two years.
Bush added $4,350.7 trillion to the national debt. Obama added $9,548.3 trillion. So…I think you misspelled “D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-S” as the driver of borrow-and-spend economic terrorism.
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by .
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by
-
Matt Gaetz saying the quiet part out loud:
Gaetz says most in GOP ‘don’t feel like we should negotiate with our hostage’
NO MALARKEY
-
[quote quote=7265]Matt Gaetz saying the quiet part out loud:
Gaetz says most in GOP ‘don’t feel like we should negotiate with our hostage’
Your point? Is this materially different than Obama’s “Elections have consequences”?
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.