![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
dwer.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsSo right now, the GOP is attempting to shove the US over the cliff of default by refusing to increase the debt limit without massive spending cuts.
Funny, they didn't seem to complain about such things before.
At the beginning of the Bush presidency, the United States debt limit was $5.95 trillion. Despite promises that he would pay off the debt in 10 years, Bush increased the debt to $9.815 trillion by the end of his term, with plenty of help from the four Republicans currently holding Congressional leadership positions: Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl. ThinkProgress compiled a breakdown of the five debt limit increases that took place during the Bush presidency and how the four Republican leaders voted:
June 2002: Congress approves a $450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $6.4 trillion. McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote “yea”, Kyl votes “nay.”
May 2003: Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $7.384 trillion. All four approve.
November 2004: Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.1 trillion. All four approve.
March 2006: Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.965 trillion. All four approve.
September 2007: Congress approves an $850 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $9.815 trillion. All four approve.
Now, I suppose you can make an argument for not increasing the debt limit, although I'm unlikely to agree with you. However, doesn't it bother our conservative friends on this board that this is -clearly- an example of the GOP doing something simply to cause Obama to fail, rather than any actual principles they might allegedly have?
Without raising the debt limit, the US will start to default on debt. That will devalue the dollar, crush confidence in the US both within and outside the country, and therefore impedes our leadership in the world when we're still involved in two wars, have bases around the world, and are participating in more than one "peace-keeping" mission via the UN or NATO. Whether or not those are reasonable things for the US to be doing, we're -already- doing them, and it seems to me that defaulting in the middle of these activities won't be very productive. Will the US be able to sign and ratify treaties? Economic agreements? Will foreign companies continue to invest?
(specific data culled from Think Progress.)
Funny, they didn't seem to complain about such things before.
At the beginning of the Bush presidency, the United States debt limit was $5.95 trillion. Despite promises that he would pay off the debt in 10 years, Bush increased the debt to $9.815 trillion by the end of his term, with plenty of help from the four Republicans currently holding Congressional leadership positions: Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl. ThinkProgress compiled a breakdown of the five debt limit increases that took place during the Bush presidency and how the four Republican leaders voted:
June 2002: Congress approves a $450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $6.4 trillion. McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote “yea”, Kyl votes “nay.”
May 2003: Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $7.384 trillion. All four approve.
November 2004: Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.1 trillion. All four approve.
March 2006: Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.965 trillion. All four approve.
September 2007: Congress approves an $850 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $9.815 trillion. All four approve.
Now, I suppose you can make an argument for not increasing the debt limit, although I'm unlikely to agree with you. However, doesn't it bother our conservative friends on this board that this is -clearly- an example of the GOP doing something simply to cause Obama to fail, rather than any actual principles they might allegedly have?
Without raising the debt limit, the US will start to default on debt. That will devalue the dollar, crush confidence in the US both within and outside the country, and therefore impedes our leadership in the world when we're still involved in two wars, have bases around the world, and are participating in more than one "peace-keeping" mission via the UN or NATO. Whether or not those are reasonable things for the US to be doing, we're -already- doing them, and it seems to me that defaulting in the middle of these activities won't be very productive. Will the US be able to sign and ratify treaties? Economic agreements? Will foreign companies continue to invest?
(specific data culled from Think Progress.)
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 21:34 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 21:40 (UTC)"Fucking budgets, how do they work?"
"Debt spending.
It's all around you...
and you don't even know it."
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 21:45 (UTC)http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Bushs_fuzzy_math_masked_true_cost_1216.html
For 2009, the administration cited "uncertainty" in Iraq, and excluded full war-funding costs from its annual Defense budget which will force Obama's hand in 2009.
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 21:49 (UTC)could.
The CSBA's report, using data provided primarily by the Defense Department and the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. spent $904 billion on the wars thus far, in 2008 dollars.
Now you're providing more sources that support my claim. You realize this, right? Also:
The CSBA's assessment comes in below some of the highest estimates for the wars' costs. Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz and Harvard economist Laura Bilmes estimated Iraq alone would cost $3 trillion when factoring costs beyond the battlefield, such as veterans health benefits and disability pay.
Emphasis mine. "Would" being a descriptor of future, not current.
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 21:50 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 21:54 (UTC)This is your argument? If it is not, what is your argument. In detail. With numbers, preferably from the budget.
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 21:56 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 21:58 (UTC)Remember - the executive does not hold the pursestrings. All those dollars had to have been approved by Congress in some form, so you should be able to add up all the appropriations and all the budget numbers and come to your number.
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 23:19 (UTC)Or are you actually claiming that our public debt is actually more than $1T higher than what we think it is? Are you claiming that the gov't is cooking the books and not reporting expenditures?
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 02:47 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 02:50 (UTC)Seriously, we get it, you don't understand the difference between public debt and budget deficits.
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 06:43 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 16:58 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 17:01 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 17:05 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 22:57 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 02:46 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 02:52 (UTC)He's citing costs due to the war in total including military benefits due directly to the war. I read the summary and I got that.
I know, I'm expecting you to understand what you're posting, what the fuck is my problem?
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 02:59 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 03:04 (UTC)If I expected a total cost of 3 billion including bribes and hookers and then someone claims I spent 3 billion dollars... well the bribes and hookers must have been paid.
No, you're just grabbing numbers and not understanding what any of them mean or how they relate.
Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 04:20 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 13:24 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 16:58 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 1/7/11 22:52 (UTC)Re: uh, okay then
Date: 2/7/11 01:56 (UTC)