Incorrect, sir.

First, I think it’s a typo, because Republicans ARE the party of defrauding and that’s incontrovertible and undeniable by anyone but bob.

There’s enough Republicans in office that put their politics above country that default is a real possibility. Fortunately they now PLAN to resume talks (but only if no Republican gets upset and balks).
Democrats aren’t playing any game. They should be absolutely refusing to even discuss negotiating over paying our bills and refusing to bankrupt America, but instead are accepting the blackmail scheme and are negotiating away rights and programs to the terrorists holding a gun to the economy’s head.
This only guarantees they will do the exact same thing every year. Any compromise at all is capitulation to economic terrorism, which invites more.

We have NEVER been anywhere near this position. We have “negotiations” over the debt ceiling, but have never gone more than a few days until the responsible limit for delay. We are now at the point where, if we don’t get a plan both sides agree on, get it out of committee, get a full house vote scheduled and taken, move it to the senate for debate, get it approved (hopefully with no changes at all or it returns to the house), get a senate vote scheduled and taken and passed, send it to Biden for a signature, then implement it….all by next Wednesday or we default. (Edit: now consider part of the Republican demands are their as yet unwritten NEW spending cut bill be passed BEFORE that entire process even starts).
We have never been within four months of this point, and there’s been some amazing money juggling and many projects “postponed” (cancelled) that had won hard fought congressional approval and funding just to stretch our ability to pay debts this far.

We hit our borrowing/debt limit in January, what’s normally considered the “due date”. In the past, negotiations have never come closer than in 2011 when it got to only two days until the debt limit was reached, and it cost well over a billion dollars in higher interest rates alone. We are now over 4 months past that point today, with absolutely no plan on how to move forwards.

This is not normal, has not happened every 4 years, and in fact has never once happened in our history. I expect our national “credit rating” to slip even if we pull off a Hail Mary, which is looking less likely daily. We’ve already lost hundreds of millions in lost international investments because who wants to invest in a country trying to bankrupt itself?

Particularly since the debt limit is set by the government on the government. It isn't as though it is even one part of the government asking another for a limit increase, it is all internal to congress. They set the budget, they set the taxes, and they set the debt limit. It is 100% up to them what they want to do and they could simply not have a debt limit, as many other countries do.

Here's a much better video explaining it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIbkoop4AYE

Congratulations! Your comment on "Yeah, I would like to raise my debt limit." has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

"Yeah, I would like to raise my debt limit." has been added as a related post - related requested by ChaosEngine on that post.

The Debt Limit Explained - CGPGrey has been added as a related post - related requested by ChaosEngine.

@st0nedeye, @TheFreak and @VoodooV are right.
Fuck this video so very much.

Watch this.
*related=http://videosift.com/video/The-Debt-Limit-Explained-CGPGrey

Fucking learn. Seriously, it is unfathomable to me that so many more people OUTSIDE the USA understand the debt limit better than it's own goddamn citizens.

Seriously, what does it take to get people to get it through their thick heads that the debt limit has nothing to do with new spending and again, only Congress can spend, not the President.

I'm sure whoever came up with the term "debt limit" knew damn well that they would fool stupid people into thinking this was about new spending. It's a horribly inaccurate term.

Like @TheFreak said, manipulation of the ignorant.

And gee, which party exploits this ignorance the most. Which party recently shut down the gov't over this ignorance. hrm.

Government finances are NOT the same as a family's finances...get it through your head. Wish it were, when a family comes on hard times, they at least consider getting another job (more revenue) they don't get obsessed with only cutting. Kids wouldn't have proper food, clothes and shelter were that the case and we stopped considering that acceptable a long time ago. There are some things you don't cut.

What's the "family finance" equivalent to the defense budget eh? Because I know that's the first thing that goes through my head when money is tight that I need to make sure I have enough weapons to slaughter my neighbors with...more than the entire neighborhood combined.

Fuck this video. Repeat; FUCK THIS VIDEO.

This country needs less ignorance, not more. It pisses me off to no end, that a sizable chunk of this country somehow thinks that not raising the debt limit is a viable thing to do. This video does nothing but play into that.

All raising the "debt limit" does is allow the treasury to cover the money that congress has ALREADY spent.

An accurate allegory would be to compare the "debt limit" to paying your credit card bill at the end of the month, because, bitch, you already spent that money.
Not paying your credit card bill isn't going to help your finances, it IS going to ruin your credit.

You want lower debt, fine. Raise taxes or don't spend so much in spending authorizations. But not paying the debts you already agreed to? Fucking stupid.

No one really believes that the GOP will let the country default on the debt. This is all political theater. The debt limit will likely be raised. (But who knows for sure?) It could happen in theory that a group in the GOP lets it happen. Either way the US cannot pay on its debts. It can either default (not pay), or it can borrow more, but that is not paying its debts but increasing them. Those are the two options. It cannot/will not pay off the debt. No one even claims it can at this point.


"And while Wall Street is sanguine, big banks like Morgan Stanley and Citigroup are still working out contingency plans [in case of default] that involve redoubling efforts to keep clients calm and are selling government bonds — a sign that confidence in Washington has waned."

And if/when bond buyers stop buying bonds, that means "game" over.

The rich pay a higher percentage, and more taxes overall than the poor. Why do you think anyone is saying otherwise. And that's absolutely how it should be, for the good of everyone, rich included.

It's perfectly sensible to talk about why some people don't pay any taxes at all. I'm not even debating that. But the rich should still pay more, regardless. The US has been one of the strongest economies for most of the 20th and 21st centuries with a progressive income tax, and it's been a heck of a lot more progressive than it is now, and we were still very prosperous.

Showing fraud in some programs doesn't mean the program should be abolished. It can be reformed as well. There are plenty of ways to do that. We didn't abolish welfare in the 1990s. We reformed it. And no, it's not true that private businesses will always create the jobs when the economy is down. History has proven quite the opposite. Why would a business invest to make more goods and services if there's no market for it. A downturn in the economy breeds more economic decline. It's called a business cycle, and it's a natural occurrence. If you were a business owner, generally speaking, if you know less people out there have the money to buy your goods and services, would you increase production and hire more workers? Of course not. Does the average person put more money into the stock market or take money out when the market tanks? Takes money out, which drains money for investing. This is basic micro and macroeconomics.

Some force has to run counter to the natural tendencies of the market to force demand to increase, and of course this virtually always requires running a deficit. This is why slogans like "the gov't should be run like a business" are simplistic and wrong. The gov't should in those situations create jobs through various programs, thereby increasing income for the lower classes, which creates spending and demand, which then causes businesses to increase production, hire more workers, and that gets the economy back on track. You can site case study after case study in our history we've done this, and it worked. We ended the Great Depression via defense spending in the form of WWII in record levels as the most obvious exaggerated example. That historically was qm's worst nightmare - record deficits in raw amount at the time, and still to this day historic record deficits as a percentage of GDP during WWII, followed by a tax raise on the richest Americans to over 90%. And what calamity befell the US because of those policies? We ended the Great Depression, became an economic Superpower, and Americans enjoyed record prosperity it and the world had never seen before.

This is historical fact that simply can't be denied.

Here's what happened - Democrats deficit spent as they were supposed to (which is exactly what the GOP would have done had they been in power, because it was started by George W. Bush), which stopped the economic free fall. Moody's didn't downgrade the US debt. It was S&P. They sited math about the alarming deficits which contained a $2 trillion mistake on their part. They also sited political instability as the GOP was risking default to get their policies in place, which btw still include massive deficits.

The GOP couldn't stop the Democrats from spending all that money?! Laughable. The GOP started the freakin' bailouts and stimulus! What did the GOP do the last time there was a recession after 9/11? Deficit spent, then continued to deficit spend when the economy was strong. Dude, seriously, you have no factual basis for that kind of claim whatsoever.

>> ^quantumushroom:

this is what we've been trying to tell you QM, the system doesn't work when only a few contribute...the system works when ALL contribute based on what they can afford.
I totally agree, so why does the bottom 50% of Americans pay NO income tax? The wealthy already pay a disproportionately high percentage of all taxes and I have yet to find a liberalsifter who admits this.
I well understand that Scrooge McDuck won't miss a few more shovelfuls of gold coins swiped by federal bulldozers, but lets review reality:
1) The "extra" money attained by "soaking" Scrooge and Rich Uncle Pennybags (from the Monopoly game) will be pi$$ed away, like the 60 billion dollars EVERY YEAR lost to fraud, waste and abuse in Medicaid/Medicare. The federal mafia is composed of sh1tty stewards of our money.
2) The Hawaiian Dunce has spent 3 trillion in 3 years with little or nothing to show for it. So what magical number of dollars is going to make everything all right? A quadrillion?
3) When the socialists raise taxes, the wealthy of 2011 have their accountant press a few buttons on their computating machines, sending their $$$ overseas, invested in more stable markets. Apparently many already have, probably the moment they knew Obama was elected.
4) Liberal say, "Rich man not know difference he still rich." But there's now less money to invest and less money to create jobs. Now some liberalsifter will say, "This graph indicates that the rich don't create jobs with their ill-gotten gains."
BUT, if you're honest with yourselves, you'll know that one million dollars has a much better chance of creating jobs in the hands of entrepreneurs and investors than the government "Department of Creating Jobs" which probably spends that much just on office furniture.
5) The debt limit 'debate' is total BS, always has been. Here is what happened: taxocrats burned through tax money at an alarming rate and there weren't enough elected Republicans to stop them. THAT'S why Moody's got scared and US was downgraded. Republicans can't communicate for sh1t anyway, and so the socialists and their media lapdogs managed to blame the right for this mess.
6) Warren Buffoon likes to be liked, I get that, but he should still STFU and make a real gesture. Giving a symbolic billion dollars to the federal mafia should do it. He won't miss it.

this is what we've been trying to tell you QM, the system doesn't work when only a few contribute...the system works when ALL contribute based on what they can afford.

I totally agree, so why does the bottom 50% of Americans pay NO income tax? The wealthy already pay a disproportionately high percentage of all taxes and I have yet to find a liberalsifter who admits this.

I well understand that Scrooge McDuck won't miss a few more shovelfuls of gold coins swiped by federal bulldozers, but lets review reality:

1) The "extra" money attained by "soaking" Scrooge and Rich Uncle Pennybags (from the Monopoly game) will be pi$$ed away, like the 60 billion dollars EVERY YEAR lost to fraud, waste and abuse in Medicaid/Medicare. The federal mafia is composed of sh1tty stewards of our money.

2) The Hawaiian Dunce has spent 3 trillion in 3 years with little or nothing to show for it. So what magical number of dollars is going to make everything all right? A quadrillion?

3) When the socialists raise taxes, the wealthy of 2011 have their accountant press a few buttons on their computating machines, sending their $$$ overseas, invested in more stable markets. Apparently many already have, probably the moment they knew Obama was elected.

4) Liberal say, "Rich man not know difference he still rich." But there's now less money to invest and less money to create jobs. Now some liberalsifter will say, "This graph indicates that the rich don't create jobs with their ill-gotten gains."

BUT, if you're honest with yourselves, you'll know that one million dollars has a much better chance of creating jobs in the hands of entrepreneurs and investors than the government "Department of Creating Jobs" which probably spends that much just on office furniture.

5) The debt limit 'debate' is total BS, always has been. Here is what happened: taxocrats burned through tax money at an alarming rate and there weren't enough elected Republicans to stop them. THAT'S why Moody's got scared and US was downgraded. Republicans can't communicate for sh1t anyway, and so the socialists and their media lapdogs managed to blame the right for this mess.

6) Warren Buffoon likes to be liked, I get that, but he should still STFU and make a real gesture. Giving a symbolic billion dollars to the federal mafia should do it. He won't miss it.

this is what we've been trying to tell you QM, the system doesn't work when only a few contribute...the system works when ALL contribute based on what they can afford. By definition, the rich can afford to lose more to taxes and still continue to be richer than any of us will dream of.

We can't sustain our system without a progressive tax system. Fair tax is a scam designed to offload the tax burden away from the rich, anything BUT fair.

If corporations are people, then so is gov't. by the people for the people...not just select people.

And yes, I'm willing to make some massive cuts..but cuts alone can't do it. Even Reps know this but they are playing politics as usual. They knew damn well they were going to raise the debt limit...they HAD to, but they played a game of chicken with the american economy in order to suck Grover Norquist's cock....Hope you're proud of yourself. Voters will certainly remember this in 2012

Did I just upvote a comment by Bob Knight? I hope your sentiment is bipartison.

The "debt ceiling crisis" was a self inflicted wound. This vote, which has been routine and generally unpolitical, was indeed used, badly I might add, as a political hostage. The many republicans, who in banana republic style advocated a US default on our legitamate active debts are directly responsible for the credit downgrade by S&P. Lest we forget who they are, from TPM:

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), May 17, 2011: "You want to make sure that the bondholder has confidence that the government's going to be able to pay them.... That's what I'm hearing from most people, which is if a bondholder misses a payment for a day or two or three or four what is more important that you're putting the government in a materially better position to be able to pay their bonds later on."

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), May 18, 2011: "What I think is that the markets are looking to see credible progress on changing the fiscal trajectory in Washington. The markets are not fooled by some date imposed to say that that is the trigger for the collapse. I think the markets are looking to see that there is real reform."

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), May 19, 2011: "The government is not to be trusted with more of your money, so I will refuse to allow them to borrow more. Now is it a good idea to default? No! But this is a false claim being promoted by big-government advocates. We can simply spend what we take in!"

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), June 24, 2011 on administration warnings of "catastrophic consequences" of not raising debt limit: "I don't believe them, it's not true."

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), May 18, 2011: "This problem is so urgent that there is -- an alternative school of thought has emerged recently," Toomey said. "The most high-profile advocate for this was Stanley Druckenmiller ... one of the world's most successful hedge-fund managers, extraordinarily wealthy from his knowledge of the markets, a big money manager now, and a big holder of Treasury securities -- and he has said that he would actually accept even a delay in interest payments on the Treasuries that he holds. And he would prefer that if it meant that the Congress would right this ship."

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), July 13, 2011: "To get a balanced budget amendment in this environment...we'd have to make the serious, credible, earnest threat that if you want to raise [the debt ceiling] and you want to have any Republicans voting for raising it, you're going to have to assist us: You give us 20 votes to adopt the balanced budget amendment in the Senate and we'll make sure you get the votes you need to raise the debt limit."

but... but... he's basically right, no? The Republicans did use extortion in order to pass the debt limit deal, and look now - the U.S. is pretty much in deeper shit than ever... all because the Tea party would do anything to get Obama off. But please, continue... we are entertained oversees!

>> ^Grimm:

Honorable mention should also go to the bimbo at the end. "maybe a little number movin around..."


No no no no no. Get your quote right.

"...maybe a couple of number movin' around... (might be able to help this debt limit thing)."

You can tell after Fox guy asks the global warming question Bill Nye realizes the error in using his I'm-talking-to-worthwhile-adults voice and switches to his I'm-teaching-third-graders voice.