Weighing in on the Debt Ceiling

[zephyp]

Charlie "I'm Not a Crook" Rangel finally weighs in on the debt limit. His big question: WWJD - What would Jesus do?

Well Mr. Rangel, I am certain Jesus would start by running you out of the building along with several of your dear colleagues who like to use His name in vain...you, sir are a hypocrite of the 9th order...Charlie, Jesse, JJ Jr, Sheila, and Al are destined to be the final downfall of the black people here in the US. Pharisees and Saducees you are, each and every one...and your buddy Van Jones is just a plain ole pinko commie...you couple that with obama and holder and its a wonder the black citizens arent rioting in the streets to have all of your sorry butts drawn, quartered, tarred, feathered, and hung at the city limits of DC on the PG county side...with garbage like you all in leadership positions I honestly feel ashamed for my black friends and co-workers....a simple disgrace...my advice for you Charlie: sit down and shut up or simply slither off into a dark hole...

http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/ ... bt-ceiling

[dorminWS]

I saw Gov. Huckabee asked WWJD if he were Rangle this morning on Fox & Friends. "Huck" promply belted out 3 or 4 bibical passages illustrating his answer, which was, "JESUS WOULD PAY HIS TAXES AND NOT BORROW MORE THAN HE COULD PAY BACK."

'Nuff said.

[jim100]

I saw Gov. Huckabee asked WWJD if he were Rangle this morning on Fox & Friends. "Huck" promply belted out 3 or 4 bibical passages illustrating his answer, which was, "JESUS WOULD PAY HIS TAXES AND NOT BORROW MORE THAN HE COULD PAY BACK."

'Nuff said.

Interesting that you say that if Christ were here today he would pay taxes to the corrupt and degenerate federal and state governments. Especially considering that the Bible says that when the government's of men become corrupt and stop listening to God and His word we as believers are not obligated to pay taxes to support those government's and are infact suppossed to oppose those corrupt government's.

[WRW]

I saw Gov. Huckabee asked WWJD if he were Rangle this morning on Fox & Friends. "Huck" promply belted out 3 or 4 bibical passages illustrating his answer, which was, "JESUS WOULD PAY HIS TAXES AND NOT BORROW MORE THAN HE COULD PAY BACK."

'Nuff said.

Another way to look at it is: How much of what we wish to fund is lost to the interest generated by said debt?

[zephyp]

Interesting that you say that if Christ were here today he would pay taxes to the corrupt and degenerate federal and state governments. Especially considering that the Bible says that when the government's of men become corrupt and stop listening to God and His word we as believers are not obligated to pay taxes to support those government's and are infact suppossed to oppose those corrupt government's.

Scripture cite please...

[jim100]

Sorry for the long delay in posting.

Here is your scripture reference.

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God:the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefor resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.Romans 12:1-2
Now we understand that God almighty is the ultimate King, the Highest authority, the Lawgiver, and that none none can supersede His Word. Now since he is the Highest authority it stands to reason that all lawful authority is derived from Him, yes? Yes it is, He ordained the family, the church, and the state. Now since he created and ordained all of those things then doesn't it stand to reason that they all must obey Him right? Of course they must obey Him because it is from Him and only Him that they have their lawful authority. But you might say, what about what the verse says "For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. the verse says all powers doesn't it? No it doesn't because if it did then you might as well give in to total governmental tyranny and control of every area of your life. And you might as well throw out the rest of the Bible as well, see the three Hebrew children that wouldn't bow the golden idol. Gideon and all the old testament Prophets, Rahab, Moses rejected the glory of being second to only Pharoh of Egypt and went to the wilderness. David, the twelve disciples, Paul, Christ himself, all the early Christians who wouldn't burn the pinch of incense to Caesar, even the Founding fathers that you all laud so much were fighting against a government that was a tame cat compared with what is here today. Then what does the verse say then? You might be asking. It is talking about Lawful righteous government. Government that obeys what God said in His word. Government that carries out his will as laid out in the Bible and when you then disobey that righteous government then you shall receive damnation. Now can any of you say with any stretch of imagination that the government that is here today is a just and righteous one? Anyone?.......Didn't think so. So why should we feel obligated to obey these unjust and evil governments? Why would God tell His people to submit to such things? The answer is He wouldn't. He didn't tell us to submit to murderers or thieves or blasphemers or homosexuals did he? He told us to resist these things with every fiber of our being. Even giving money people that support theses thing is against God and His word because is promoting and propagating sin. Even if the people that do these thing wear badges and uniforms, doesn't make a difference in God's eyes does it? For God is no respecter of persons is he?

[zephyp]

Thanks Jim !

[Yarddawg]

+1 Jim, this is why I am currently boycotting Home Depot. They are openly supporting gay rights. Lowes, however, is staying neutral on the issue.

[dorminWS]

I did not make a note of the several bibical quotations Huckabee reeled off. Sorry.

Now, back to the debt ceiling..................................
This feller Tanner (article posted below) has the proper perspective, I think.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

What the Debt Ceiling Really Means
by Michael D. Tanner
Michael D. Tanner, a Cato Institute senior fellow, is the author of Leviathan on the Right: How
Big-Government Conservatism Brought Down the Republican Revolution.
Added to cato.org on July 11, 2011
This article appeared in The Politico on July 11, 2011.
The clock is slowly ticking toward Aug. 2, the date on which the U.S. faces "fiscal Armageddon" —
according to the Obama administration — unless Congress agrees to raise the debt ceiling. But would we?
The Obama administration, as well as much of the media and many economists, tend to equate failure to raise the debt limit with default. That's not precisely true.
The Treasury Department estimates that the federal government will collect a bit more than $203 billion in taxes during August — roughly $36 billion just in the first three days. But, during August,
the federal government is expected to spend $307 billion. That is why we have a problem.
If the government is not able to borrow more money after Aug. 2, spending will have to be reduced to the amount of revenue that the government has. That would require roughly a 44 percent cut in federal spending.
This will almost certainly hurt. But it's not the same as default. During August, interest payments on the federal debt will total roughly $29 billion, meaning that there will be sufficient revenue to meet our obligations to creditors. If the Obama administration is truly worried that we might not do so, they could always support legislation by Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Penn.) that would require the Treasury Department to pay our creditors first.
In addition, some $467 billion in government bonds is expected to come due during August, and will have to be rolled over. Though this rollover requires Treasury to enter the debt markets to purchase new securities, it is not technically "new" debt, and so does not run afoul of the debt limit.
The concern is that the U.S. would end up having to pay higher interest rates on this rolled over debt. That's not a trivial concern: A 1 percent increase in interest rates could cost taxpayers more than $100 billion per year. Still, we should keep that in perspective — it's less than the amount that the government expects to borrow this month. And that is sort of worst case scenario. In 1979, the federal government actually did briefly default on its debt as the result of a debt ceiling impasse (as well as technical problems). That resulted in just a 60-basis-point increase in interest rates.
If we are really worried about a hike in interest rates, what about the hike we can expect if we fail to get federal borrowing under control? Both our deficit and total liabilities are already higher as a
percentage of gross domestic product than Greece — or any of the other failing welfare states of Europe.
Despite this, creditors have been willing to lend us money at very low interest rates, simply because they trust the U.S. economy over the long-term. If we don't get our budgetary house in order, however, that won't be the case forever. Eventually, we will have to hike interest rates to ensure that the Chinese and others keep buying our bonds.
Former Federal Reserve governor Lawrence Lindsey estimates that if interest rates simply return to their historic average, it is likely to cost taxpayers $420 billion in higher payments in 2014, and $700
billion by 2020. The $100 billion or so that we might have to pay if we miss the debt ceiling looks good by comparison.
And what about that 44 percent cut in spending? That would require the federal government to cut spending all the way back to what it spent in 2003 — a year not notable for mass starvation and economic collapse. In fact, the revenue we will collect in August would more than cover Social Security payments, Medicare and military salaries, in addition to interest payments on the debt.
Obviously, the longer the impasse goes on, the more the inability to borrow will hurt. We will face a super version of the government shutdowns that we've endured before. But, eventually, the debt ceiling is going to be increased and government operations will return to more or less normal.
The real fiscal Armageddon that this country faces comes not from a delay in raising the debt ceiling, but from out-of-control federal spending and government debt.
If a little pain now helps solve that problem for the long term, it may well be worth it.

[OakRidgeStars]

[zephyp]

The republicans are screwing the pooch on this one. Back when the demonRats had control they didnt negotiate. The republicans need to learn a lesson from that or they are going to get the boot in 2012. If I were Speaker Bonehead I would tell obama "My way or no way...I won."

[Kreutz]

The republicans are screwing the pooch on this one. Back when the demonRats had control they didnt negotiate. The republicans need to learn a lesson from that or they are going to get the boot in 2012. If I were Speaker Bonehead I would tell obama "My way or no way...I won."

And in the real world, the old folks (who will be harmed the most in all this) who vote in droves hand the House back to the Democrats-like they did last time the GOP pulled this crap in the 90's. I hope the GOP sticks to their guns.

Fun fact: If we default we actually lose more $ than we save. Even the slightest rise in the interest rate we pay, given the huge amount of debt-would be ruinous.

[gunderwood]

Interesting that you say that if Christ were here today he would pay taxes to the corrupt and degenerate federal and state governments. Especially considering that the Bible says that when the government's of men become corrupt and stop listening to God and His word we as believers are not obligated to pay taxes to support those government's and are infact suppossed to oppose those corrupt government's.

Scripture cite please...

There's all kind of analysis by most branches of Christianity. E.g. American Revolution and the Scottish Revolution (Presbyterian). It's not something that the modern Church has taught in recent memory...outside of the very theological and well read.

[mamabearCali]

Sorry for the long delay in posting.

Here is your scripture reference.

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God:the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefor resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.Romans 12:1-2
Now we understand that God almighty is the ultimate King, the Highest authority, the Lawgiver, and that none none can supersede His Word. Now since he is the Highest authority it stands to reason that all lawful authority is derived from Him, yes? Yes it is, He ordained the family, the church, and the state. Now since he created and ordained all of those things then doesn't it stand to reason that they all must obey Him right? Of course they must obey Him because it is from Him and only Him that they have their lawful authority. But you might say, what about what the verse says "For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. the verse says all powers doesn't it? No it doesn't because if it did then you might as well give in to total governmental tyranny and control of every area of your life. And you might as well throw out the rest of the Bible as well, see the three Hebrew children that wouldn't bow the golden idol. Gideon and all the old testament Prophets, Rahab, Moses rejected the glory of being second to only Pharoh of Egypt and went to the wilderness. David, the twelve disciples, Paul, Christ himself, all the early Christians who wouldn't burn the pinch of incense to Caesar, even the Founding fathers that you all laud so much were fighting against a government that was a tame cat compared with what is here today. Then what does the verse say then? You might be asking. It is talking about Lawful righteous government. Government that obeys what God said in His word. Government that carries out his will as laid out in the Bible and when you then disobey that righteous government then you shall receive damnation. Now can any of you say with any stretch of imagination that the government that is here today is a just and righteous one? Anyone?.......Didn't think so. So why should we feel obligated to obey these unjust and evil governments? Why would God tell His people to submit to such things? The answer is He wouldn't. He didn't tell us to submit to murderers or thieves or blasphemers or homosexuals did he? He told us to resist these things with every fiber of our being. Even giving money people that support theses thing is against God and His word because is promoting and propagating sin. Even if the people that do these thing wear badges and uniforms, doesn't make a difference in God's eyes does it? For God is no respecter of persons is he?

Woohoo! Wonderful theology there. As I understand authority we are to obey those in authority over us so long as those decrees do not violate God's law. When we are faced with the choice of either obeying God or man, we must obey God. It is why public funding of abortion through tax dollars is such a hot issue for many people--if we believe that God's word tells us not to kill babies in the womb, then funding abortions through our tax dollars becomes highly problematic. Not trying to start a debate here, just giving an example of where the rubber hits the road in our society.

[grumpyMSG]

I have refrained from weighing in on this topic long enough. I wish the Republicans would use a decent strategy to beat the Democrats in the scare tactics/ arguments they will be using. Instead of looking at the Federal budget as one giant pie. They should break it into three smaller pies. One the discretionary spending (contains Defense and most Federal programs), the second being Social Security and the third being Medicare. Since each program is supposed to be funded by payroll deductions and is listed separately on pay stubs, each should be dealt with by themselves.

Since technically there is a Social Security trust fund (filled with IOUs from the Federal government) and it is operating at about break even right now (the high unemployment has reduced income to close to outgoing payments) because every body's paycheck continues to have Social Security taken out and the program is not in deficit, the threat to not pay Social Security recipients should be argued against vigorously for that reason alone. If they want to kick Social Security down the road until after they resolve the discretionary spending discussion, that would be reasonable. Given that the Medicare trust fund (info from : http://www.kff.org/medicare/upload/7305-05.pdf) is in a similar situation to Social Security, it has problems coming down the road, not right today.

That leaves the majority of our problems with spending squarely in the discretionary spending. For those looking for the argument that 1/2 of American households don't pay any Federal income tax this article from a little over a year ago offers a good explanation: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nearly-ha ... 3.html?x=0 (Yahoo and the Associated Press are right wing organizations). Looking at the Gallup poll on the deficit: http://www.gallup.com/poll/148472/defic ... hikes.aspx half of Americans want the focus to be on spending cuts, while only 1 in 9 want the problem to be resolved with tax increases. About on third of Americans want both cuts and higher taxes. The big questions on that are: Are they only for raising taxes on the "Evil Rich"? Are they for raising taxes on everybody by reducing the standard deduction and child tax credits so that less than half the country get by without paying income taxes?

[jim100]

Interesting that you say that if Christ were here today he would pay taxes to the corrupt and degenerate federal and state governments. Especially considering that the Bible says that when the government's of men become corrupt and stop listening to God and His word we as believers are not obligated to pay taxes to support those government's and are infact suppossed to oppose those corrupt government's.

Scripture cite please...

There's all kind of analysis by most branches of Christianity. E.g. American Revolution and the Scottish Revolution (Presbyterian). It's not something that the modern Church has taught in recent memory...outside of the very theological and well read.

It's not very complicated is it? It boils down to who will you serve? Mans government or God's. the choice is up to you.

[jim100]

Sorry for the long delay in posting.

Here is your scripture reference.

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God:the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefor resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.Romans 12:1-2
Now we understand that God almighty is the ultimate King, the Highest authority, the Lawgiver, and that none none can supersede His Word. Now since he is the Highest authority it stands to reason that all lawful authority is derived from Him, yes? Yes it is, He ordained the family, the church, and the state. Now since he created and ordained all of those things then doesn't it stand to reason that they all must obey Him right? Of course they must obey Him because it is from Him and only Him that they have their lawful authority. But you might say, what about what the verse says "For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. the verse says all powers doesn't it? No it doesn't because if it did then you might as well give in to total governmental tyranny and control of every area of your life. And you might as well throw out the rest of the Bible as well, see the three Hebrew children that wouldn't bow the golden idol. Gideon and all the old testament Prophets, Rahab, Moses rejected the glory of being second to only Pharoh of Egypt and went to the wilderness. David, the twelve disciples, Paul, Christ himself, all the early Christians who wouldn't burn the pinch of incense to Caesar, even the Founding fathers that you all laud so much were fighting against a government that was a tame cat compared with what is here today. Then what does the verse say then? You might be asking. It is talking about Lawful righteous government. Government that obeys what God said in His word. Government that carries out his will as laid out in the Bible and when you then disobey that righteous government then you shall receive damnation. Now can any of you say with any stretch of imagination that the government that is here today is a just and righteous one? Anyone?.......Didn't think so. So why should we feel obligated to obey these unjust and evil governments? Why would God tell His people to submit to such things? The answer is He wouldn't. He didn't tell us to submit to murderers or thieves or blasphemers or homosexuals did he? He told us to resist these things with every fiber of our being. Even giving money people that support theses thing is against God and His word because is promoting and propagating sin. Even if the people that do these thing wear badges and uniforms, doesn't make a difference in God's eyes does it? For God is no respecter of persons is he?

Woohoo! Wonderful theology there. As I understand authority we are to obey those in authority over us so long as those decrees do not violate God's law. When we are faced with the choice of either obeying God or man, we must obey God. It is why public funding of abortion through tax dollars is such a hot issue for many people--if we believe that God's word tells us not to kill babies in the womb, then funding abortions through our tax dollars becomes highly problematic. Not trying to start a debate here, just giving an example of where the rubber hits the road in our society.

Simple isn't it?

[Chasbo00]

Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes I've heard in all this drama about the debt ceiling:

"I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election."

[gunderwood]

There's all kind of analysis by most branches of Christianity. E.g. American Revolution and the Scottish Revolution (Presbyterian). It's not something that the modern Church has taught in recent memory...outside of the very theological and well read.

It's not very complicated is it? It boils down to who will you serve? Mans government or God's. the choice is up to you.

Exactly. However...

In theory it's pretty simple, but in practice it's a bit more difficult. The concept or principle is the same, but things get muddy because of the sinfulness of all men. I.e. this side of heaven there will never be a perfect government...yes, not even the Constitution is perfect in design or implementation. So in practice the question becomes, how much is too much...aka when is the system not able to be restored anymore?

It's not that we should give up or not strive to right injustice and abolish corruption, but rather when does it change from the general sinfulness of men (where we should work within the system) and when does it become systematic such that only doing away with the system is capable of fixing things. That's much harder to get right and to get agreement on.