What do you think of the debt crisis?

I don't believe the U.S. will ever default on its debts. I think it's smoke and mirrors - when a government says "look over here," we should look over there.

It's all a political game. I'm thinking Term Limits could be the solution to all the Drama.

http://www.mydesert.com/article/2011...text|Frontpage

Written by
DAVID ESPO
The Associated Press

page three of three

The debt limit is not the problem, I don't know why people are focusing on it.

The DEBT is the problem, and the only way you can tackle the debt is by reducing expenditure and increasing income.

During harsh economic times, the people cannot afford to be taxed even more heavily than they are, and the Obama proposition of Robinhood economics, while appealing to uneducated poor voters, simply cannot feasibly work. For starters not near enough revenue can be generated that way as there aren't enough of them and they are already carrying almost all of income tax revenue (nearly half of all US households paid no income tax whatsoever), and it will impact jobs as you cannot burden them much heavier than in other developed countries as they are upwardly mobile and will simply move assets if persecuted (think of "Detroit white-flight" on a national scale where the money and with it jobs simply moves). So the solution is simple, reduce government size and overhead and unnecessary expenditures. Pulling back the troops from Iraq and Afghanistan will save a huge portion of our budget, as lets face it, we are never going to have clear victory conditions or 100% stability in the region. And we need to insist on getting our oil from Iraq as agreed, and anything beyond that is moot. We also do not need to be sending aid to Pakistan and the like, and certainly the largest US foreign aid recipient Israel does not need our money as they are a modern industrialized nation with a per capita on par with many European nations and there is absolutely no obvious return on investment, and if anything it antagonizes extremists in the middle-east. All the little special interest groups and nanny programs also need to be drastically cut back, and we need to see massive layoffs in government which has not only NOT reduced in size with the declining economy but in fact has increased by over 10%!

And COMPROMISE is NOT the solution, as we have seen how Republicans and Democrats compromise. They all have very large campaign contributors that get them and their party into office at each election, and they expect a return on their investment. So the COMPROMISE that Republicans and Democrats typically agree on is to ensure that ALL the special interest groups of both Republicans and and Democrats get their hands in the pie, at great expense to the tax payer, and ultimately having to borrow money to accomplish it.

If you allow congress to borrow money, they have and they will every single time without exception. Do not increase the tax burden on the people and reduce spending drastically and we will see the debt come under control.

Simply put, Run the Country as you would a Viable Business.

That is not the issue, the issue is that the only reason our large debt is sustainable is because by and large the US (oil) dollar is the dominant trading currency.

The feds have been devaluing the dollar to decrease the burden of the debt, as quite simply a weaker dollar is worth less and the debt and interest of lesser impact. However, this has the negative impact of people losing faith in the currency for trading and converting their wealth into either other currencies or gold for example (notice how every time we think gold is at an all time high the administration does something stupid and it goes up even higher?).

So more and more people are realizing that the US dollar is an overpriced debt heavy currency that is looking less and less appealing than the more stable Euro, and the repercussions of such a switch are dire for the US QoL.

So... the OP wasn't asking for our opinions? Then why did you give yours? I think the "issue" is clearly stated in the title and first post. Maybe you should start another thread about your issues.

I've been entertained by the political theatrics of the entire situation. Raising the debt limit has nothing to do with anything you plan to spend in the future, only to cover your debt already owed. By not raising it, it's like telling your bank that you decided not to pay your mortgage this month. Any argument against raising it is entirely fiscally irresponsible.

Some members of the GOP are clouding the situation by demanding that this is used as a forum to reduce future spending. If they were to get their way, the U.S. defaults on their debt, and our nations credit rating drops, what will actually happen to our country? The stock market would take a nose dive, all of the millionaires that they are protecting by not raising their taxes would lose far more money than they would be from a tax increase, and the country would probably fall into a depression, causing the middle class to fall further behind and the lower class probably land in the streets.

By all means Obama needs to just ignore the debate, sign the order and be done with it. You can't risk the economy of the U.S. based on a group of politicians grandstanding on an unrelated principle. It boggles my mind how stupid some politicians are these days.

And if we want to debate our debt, that is another thread......

Huh? I think you misunderstood, I was saying that few are concerned with the US defaulting on its debts and declaring bankruptcy, but many are concerned that the US "oil-dollar" may be dropped from its current position as world currency. That is the threat of the debt crisis, not defaulting.
The debt crisis and the debt are not related issues? How can they be separated? *scratching head*

We are focusing on the debt ceiling because it is/was the subject of this thread.


My opinion about the thread topic was "not the issue"? Why, because you want to talk about debt in general instead of the ceiling?


I wasn't worrying about the U.S. defaulting. What's your point?


Who said they are not related issues? The ceiling issue is a part of the whole debt mess. You can't just dismiss it as the subject of a thread and say, "This is what this thread really should be about." Start another thread.

You seem to be getting aggitated and misinterpreting what I'm saying, I assume because of the messenger and not the message, heh. I am discussing the debt-ceiling when pointing out that its a non-issue. The debt ceiling is going to be raised, I can assure you this with every fiber of my being. I'll volunteer for a self-ban and make our next youtube video of me eating my shirt if it is not.

It would be completely irresponsible though IMO to keep signing off on raising the ceiling without including a debt reduction strategy in the bill, so Republicans should be applauded for taking a stand and demanding cuts. Would you raise your credit card limit over and over without some kind of plan in place and measures taken to demonstrate you plan on reducing your debt? Obama was demanding a raised ceiling and a blank check, and the American people just can't afford to write any more of those.

Actually you called my post a non-issue (by quoting it directly) but that's fine you meant the topic.

So where were all these republicans when Reagan raised it 18 times and Bush raised it 7 times? And not only did Bush authorize a higher ceiling, he cut revenues into out country. That's like saying I'll raise my credit card limit and quit my job to take a lower paying one.

WHERE WERE THE REPUBLICANS BACK THEN?

Yup - keep bashing Obama for this.....

From what I've read and heard, it seems Obama is responsible for everything that has happened for the last 20+ years. Amazing isn't it that he could have such far-reaching powers even back then?

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/c...015244838.html
"Congressional leaders reach agreement to raise the debt ceiling"

I read this article this morning and just had more question marks above my head.

Honestly, I don't know what is going on. I watch CNN, BBC, read the news, and try to keep up but I can't seem to get at the heart of the matter.

All I can say with assurance is that we had multiple wars we could not afford.

@Ducman69 - Huh?

Personally, the Euro is not what I would consider "stable."
I was in Germany last year as an exchange student and because of Greece's and Italy's money troubles (among other crises that occurred in 2010), the Euro went from ~$1.48 to ~$1.35 in the course of a few weeks. Needless to say, I was not pleased with this drastic shift.

Considering that the Euro is based on the economies of 17+ countries... yes, it is valued higher than the USD but the stable currency would be the GBP!

Check out this chart of the Euro's value over the course of the past ten years.
http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=EUR&to=USD

This is the chart for the GBP:
It is consistently over ~$1.40 over the last ten years.
http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?fr...o=USD&view=10Y

You can also check out the other currencies! I love this site. I think it's pretty interesting.

Um also about the "American quality of life" point you made...
The more I see of the world, the more I know we have it good here even if it's not perfect.

At least the bums in my neighborhood have clothes and places to find shelter/food and opportunities to turn their lives around. Poverty is not great but when I see poverty in the USA versus other countries of the world where the wealth distribution is more severe, there is no comparison.

I'm hopeful for the future.

I'm not an economist, but as I understand it, its not so much about how specific point value of the currency measures (a Yen is worth like a penny after all, but you'll often hear it compared as strong against the dollar) but what is backing that currency.

It used to be that currency was physically backed by gold, but now that we have "imaginary" currency, its backed by the perceived economic stability, strategic resources, and fiscal responsibility of the backing nation.

For example, is it coincidence that when Saddam with the second largest oil reserve in the world insisted that they trade in Euros that the US seemed itching for an excuse for action, potentially for the perceived threat of OPEC nations all following suit? And now that Iran is doing the same thing and threatening to trade in the Euro, the US seems poised for a shift in theater, which is IMO the main reason that we haven't returned our troops back home. As they said in Dune, "He who controls the spice controls the universe!" People just forget that its not just the flow of oil, but the circulation of petrodollars that is at stake. I simply disagree on the notion that the US has the right or is benefiting in the long-term from such strong-arm foreign policy, and would be better served by simply improving its economic well being and reducing spending to control the debt and thus restore confidence and value as the largest economy in the world. Unfortunately, the military industrial complex is a hungry machine that tends to get what it wants if strong leadership isn't willing to stand firm and reign it in which so far the Bush and Obama administration have demonstrated they are incapable or unwilling to do.

I believe I mentioned the consistent performance of the GBP in the past ten years versus the Euro (it being higher valued than the dollar is another plus but I don't understand why you are hanging on the fact that a JPY is "worth like a penny." East Asian moneys are counted in ten thousands, not hundreds like USD. )

Don't know where you are going with this at all...
Most nations have that responsibility as none of the major currencies are backed by gold.

I don't see a problem with trading in Euros seeing how it is circulated, accepted, and officially used in many more countries than US dollars are (but I can understand why this would hurt the USA.)
Perhaps you could pull up your reading where you got this "excuse for action." I've never read this before and I'm quite curious.

Also I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say in the later half of your spirited post except that you place the majority of the blame on our past two presidents. Sorry!

Hear! Hear!

I just can't get motivated enough about the mechanics of the whole thing to comment, but I fully, totally and completely ditto with this.

Well, because the "value" as a number quantity of the GBP is somewhat irrelevant was the point, and as you agree with our "pretend money" it is essentially about the power of the country backing the currency and the GBP has little backing it compared to the USD or Euro. Don't get me wrong, as an individual nation the UK has performed well compared to others in Europe and is well off in GDP/PPP etc, but it doesn't have the weight behind it like the United States or European Union which share similar population and economic strength in size and power projection (although militarily obviously the US has the bigger stick behind it). Singapore has a strong and stable currency too and they are a great economic power for their size, but as an extreme example its still just a tiny island with a limited population. As for a source, jeez that's like asking for a single source for my opinion on the current administration. I would recommend googling "Petrodollar Iraq" or "USD vs Euro" for more or less unlimited debate regarding currency warfare and how it influences foreign policy. It is a very big deal to US foreign policy when Russia/Iraq/Iran are talking about trading in Euros and not just a matter of personal preference as it had direct impact on economies. For the latter half, I was simply explaining why I think we have so many Americans fighting and dying in the middle east and why I disagree with that from a moral and economic standpoint, and would like to see strong new leadership that can change this trend of perpetual warfare and how that relates to our national debt.

Well, it was intentional stalling until the last possible minute to see who would flinch first. Obama wanted a debt ceiling increase with a blank check. Congress wanted a debt ceiling increase with a promise of real cuts. So the debt ceiling was obviously going to be raised, but the deadline was needed as a means to put pressure on the executive to sign the cuts congress had agreed upon.

If I had a long history of just asking for my credit to be increased every time I maxed out my credit card, at some point its probably a good idea to stop and require that you demonstrate and implement a plan to stop spending so much money. That is what this was all ultimately about the way I understood it.

I'm convinced that everyone working in Congress and in the White House is an embicile (Republicans, Democrats, Tea Party, Libertarians, and others). The reason elitism has been so prevalent in government since the dawn of civilization is because the "upper crust" believes that only they have the knowledge and skills to properly govern others. More and more I don't see it in any of our politicians. I doubt any of them could run a lemonade stand.

If you are paying out more than you are taking in then common sense would dictate you find way to cut out some expenses or find a way to bring in more money. However, politicians don't operate with any semblance of common sense. How does adding nine hundred billion to the debt ceiling while "promising" to make nine hundred billion in spending cuts over the next ten years solve anything? This is like me asking my credit card companies for a crdit increase every time I max my cards out because I can't pay my bills. The country needs more revenue but I can't support an increase in taxes on any level because these people can't be trusted to spend the money properly.

Wake me up when they get serious about making spending cuts of multi-trillions of dollars.

I didn't hear that one, but I did see a speech that McCain gave where he called the Tea Party members "bizzaro".

And "Hobbits".
McCain Calls Tea Party 'Hobbits'

Didn't the Hobbits eventually win?

Yes - they can be a determined little bunch, in spite of their furry feet.......

That is the easiest way to determine if someone is rational or not.

If you can't ask someone to list five major screw ups of the Republican and Democrat party, you're dealing with someone that has a religious loyalty and self-identity with either party and you'll have about as much headway speaking rationally to them as you would trying to discuss contradictions in theology. They have chosen their champion, and elevate them further by vilifying their opponents.

In any case, I have been reading about the "compromise" that was met between congress and the executive, and it was nothing but a face saving measure for both sides.

The president wasn't given his blank check, but congress wasn't given their cuts, instead what we got was the status quo in that cuts only really came from projected increases. With the debt at this point clearly out of control, and investors losing confidence in the dollar and thus American economy, we've now seen the stock market, along with my investments, tank.

Faaaaantastic. Way to go Washington! I am such an idiot for not investing in gold like my friends did... I just kept thinking its going to get better, gold is already high don't be a fool, they can't screw this up worse.... Ugh.

Personally. I do not get the debit crisis... I don't understand what do they mean by all of this stuff.