Reasoned Answers, Please: What Happens If US Defaults?

[bluehenbillk]

Last 2 posts hit it on the head. We're in too deep to just cut our way out of it. Yes, we have to make serious cuts & yes I agree 100% on a balanced budget amendment but you need extra reveue (read: tax increases) as well. If you can't see that you're either just not rational or a douchebag, take your pick.


The bigger problem is Washington has long been bought off. There are way too many members of congress that are in all reality puppets that bow to what special interests & lobbyists tell them what to do. If they'd just grow a freakin' sack & vote with their heads on what is right - then we wouldn't have this damn problem.

Seriously have made calls to my broker to pull all my $$ in an IRA & invest it all in Chinese stocks & the yuan. I don't trust these idiots for a second & don't wanna see my 401k cut by a third or worse again.

[Ivytalk]

I've always been skeptical about a balanced budget amendment because it may prove to be a fiscal straitjacket in times of genuine emergency, like wars. In any event, I agree that the Right Honorable Members should stitch on a pair and get past this. There would seem to be enough "tax expenditures" to go after without touching rates, and there must be some fat in the military somewhere. That said, it would help if Obama's proposals didn't have so many "untouchables" like Obamacare and so much vagueness regarding entitlements.

[89Hen]

Hey! You stole my avatar.

[OSBF]

I'm sick of the liberal democrats with their "not on the back of the poor"...the poor don't pay taxes, they just take (remember, 49% aof all Americans ultimately pay no taxes at the end of the year)

lie
lie
lie

kindly please see paragraph 8 in the following:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/ ... reeloaders" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

10%

The number is 10%

[bluehenbillk]

Hey! You stole my avatar.

Yep it looked cool & every time I've seen something I'd like I can never get it to fit under the limits. Thanks for doing all the work for me.

[BDKJMU]

I've always been skeptical about a balanced budget amendment because it may prove to be a fiscal straitjacket in times of genuine emergency, like wars. In any event, I agree that the Right Honorable Members should stitch on a pair and get past this. There would seem to be enough "tax expenditures" to go after without touching rates, and there must be some fat in the military somewhere. That said, it would help if Obama's proposals didn't have so many "untouchables" like Obamacare and so much vagueness regarding entitlements.

There could be one exception written in, in the event Congress passed a declaration of war.

[Cap'n Cat]

I'm going fishing at the Boundary Waters tomorrow. May swim across the border and build a cabin in Canada.

[Col Hogan]

I'm sick of the liberal democrats with their "not on the back of the poor"...the poor don't pay taxes, they just take (remember, 49% aof all Americans ultimately pay no taxes at the end of the year)

lie
lie
lie

kindly please see paragraph 8 in the following:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/ ... reeloaders" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

10%

The number is 10%

Check out the thread title...

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE U.S. DEFAULTS...

Now, find me one post in this thread about state or local taxes...

Your post supports my claim...

What we have here is another MENSA FAIL!!!!!!

[OSBF]

lie
lie
lie

kindly please see paragraph 8 in the following:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/ ... reeloaders" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

10%

The number is 10%

Check out the thread title...

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE U.S. DEFAULTS...

Now, find me one post in this thread about state or local taxes...

Your post supports my claim...

What we have here is another MENSA FAIL!!!!!!

You said 49% of Americans PAY NO TAXES.

That's a DIRECT quote from you.

As the artical points out, that is a lie.

The number is 10%.

[Rob Iola]

Check out the thread title...

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE U.S. DEFAULTS...

Now, find me one post in this thread about state or local taxes...

Your post supports my claim...

What we have here is another MENSA FAIL!!!!!!

You said 49% of Americans PAY NO TAXES.

That's a DIRECT quote from you.

As the artical points out, that is a lie.

The number is 10%.

Interesting comparison - followed your New Republic link - the 49% figure (actually 47% according to the article) is from the Brookings Institute, while the 10% figure is from Jonathan Chait. The primary distinction is between federal income tax liability (47% will have none) and net federal taxes paid (10% will pay none). The linked article supports both figures, although the bias is towards the 10% figure.

[JohnStOnge]

There is a fundamental, systemic problem that has its origin at the point at which FDR did his thing. It's the idea that the Federal Government should be responsible for ensuring "Social Security." "Social Security" is the name of a particular program but I'm talking about it in broader terms. The idea that the Federal Government is responsible for ensuring individual well being...for providing "safety nets" to make sure everybody has their basic needs met, is why we are in this situation.

It doesn't matter if it's Obama as President or anybody else. Until the American People decide to get off of the "Social Security" (in the broader sense) addiction the problem will not be solved. The country will continue towards ruin.

[Col Hogan]

You said 49% of Americans PAY NO TAXES.

That's a DIRECT quote from you.

As the artical points out, that is a lie.

The number is 10%.

Interesting comparison - followed your New Republic link - the 49% figure (actually 47% according to the article) is from the Brookings Institute, while the 10% figure is from Jonathan Chait. The primary distinction is between federal income tax liability (47% will have none) and net federal taxes paid (10% will pay none). The linked article supports both figures, although the bias is towards the 10% figure.

And I will offer my daughter and son-in-law as prime examples of the 47% (OK, not 49%)

New teachers, they make enough money to buy a house this past January...but when they filed their taxes the past few years, they qualified for earned income credit...therefore, their tax return was higher than the amount they paid into the system...

So they paid no taxes...the government paid them...

Thus they have no financial equity in our government...

[JohnStOnge]

You said 49% of Americans PAY NO TAXES.

That's a DIRECT quote from you.

As the artical points out, that is a lie.

The number is 10%.

I don't see why that is so important. The point is that the majority of the US population pay way less than an equal share of the tax burden in this country. They effectively support more and more government spending by virtue of how they vote but they are insulated from feeling the cost of what it takes to sustain what they are supporting. They just keep going back to the well of "the rich."

[houndawg]

If the national debt and interest on it continue to skyrocket, what will happen will be far worse than a default from not raising the debt ceiling.

The question should be,
"Reasoned Answers, Please: What Happens If the US doesn't drastically cut spending now and reaches a point where it can no longer pay the interest on the debt along with all its other obligations?"

Our creditors are in deep Kimchi?

[houndawg]

The Dems lost the House for a reason.

They need to stop putting significant tax hikes on the table. They know that the GOP side is not going to go for it, and that is why they tried it, so they could say the GOP is walking away.They have not passed a budget in what? Three years? Not going to fool the independent voters on this one.

They might THINK that the GOP will take the blame for a default, but they need to think again. All they are doing now is trying to position themselves to look like the good guys in the event of a no-deal, because they do not have a budget plan.

Last time the GOP g tried this game it was the end of Newt Gingrich's political career.

[JohnStOnge]

Last time the GOP g tried this game it was the end of Newt Gingrich's political career

Just depends on whether or not one wants to do the right thing or maintain political power. The GOP is right. It's time to quit going to the "taxing the rich" well. If this beast keeps growing a point will come where we could take all "the rich" have it and won't be sustained. It's time to kill the beast.

[houndawg]

Republicans voted to raise the debt ceiling 7 times under Bush. The last three Republican administrations grew the debt by an average of 12%. Republicans are deficit hawks when they can hang it on the Dems. But they're really no different when it comes to spending. They're playing politics and doing it quite well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_d ... tial_terms" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And the democrats in the current administration blah blah blah...

Each side is as bad as the other...I'm sick of the Republican house members playing this deadly game of chicken...if they were my kids I'd slap them silly...

I'm sick of the liberal democrats with their "not on the back of the poor"...the poor don't pay taxes, they just take (remember, 49% aof all Americans ultimately pay no taxes at the end of the year)

I'm sick of the special interests and their radio ads here in DC...saying cut spending...but don't cut my program...

I agree with Cap'n Cat...

We have fvcked our way into a bad corner.

About time we get out...otherwise, I gotta buy a lot more beans and bullets before the fecal matter hits the overhead oscillating machine...

Jesus, Colonel, what an effing ingrate.

Sure the poor don't pay taxes, but the rich don't fight our wars either.

You don't think that's a fair trade?

[Ivytalk]

The Dems lost the House for a reason.

They need to stop putting significant tax hikes on the table. They know that the GOP side is not going to go for it, and that is why they tried it, so they could say the GOP is walking away.They have not passed a budget in what? Three years? Not going to fool the independent voters on this one.

They might THINK that the GOP will take the blame for a default, but they need to think again. All they are doing now is trying to position themselves to look like the good guys in the event of a no-deal, because they do not have a budget plan.

Last time the GOP g tried this game it was the end of Newt Gingrich's political career.

But it launched his media career! And Obummer's only "budget plan" lost 97-0 in the Senate!

[houndawg]

Last time the GOP g tried this game it was the end of Newt Gingrich's political career.

But it launched his media career! And Obummer's only "budget plan" lost 97-0 in the Senate!

He better stick with that, he can't even find a staff that takes him seriously.

[houndawg]

Last time the GOP g tried this game it was the end of Newt Gingrich's political career

Just depends on whether or not one wants to do the right thing or maintain political power. The GOP is right. It's time to quit going to the "taxing the rich" well. If this beast keeps growing a point will come where we could take all "the rich" have it and won't be sustained. It's time to kill the beast.

We can't, John, the rich have all the money. You aren't seriously suggesting that we tax people that don't have any money are you? Back when we had a thriving middle class we could spread the pain, but it ain't like that no more.

[kalm]

Just depends on whether or not one wants to do the right thing or maintain political power. The GOP is right. It's time to quit going to the "taxing the rich" well. If this beast keeps growing a point will come where we could take all "the rich" have it and won't be sustained. It's time to kill the beast.

We can't, John, the rich have all the money. You aren't seriously suggesting that we tax people that don't have any money are you? Back when we had a thriving middle class we could spread the pain, but it ain't like that no more.

No shit.

Call me when the rich and corporations are willing to be weened from the teat as well.

[BDKJMU]

We can't, John, the rich have all the money. You aren't seriously suggesting that we tax people that don't have any money are you? Back when we had a thriving middle class we could spread the pain, but it ain't like that no more.

No ****.

Call me when the rich and corporations are willing to be weened from the teat as well.

Typical donk talking point.

Paying zero in fed income taxes, be it an individual or corp, no matter the income, isn't on the teat unless they get direct payments from the fed on top of that that that gives them more back than you paid in.
Paying a very low % in fed income taxes, be it an individual or corp, no matter the income, isn't on the teat unless you get more from the fed in direct payments that you paid in.

Being on the govt teat is getting more in direct payments from the fed than you paid in in income taxes. Very few "rich" and corporations are on the govt teat.

If a corp made say 100 million and paid only 10 million or even zero in fed income taxes they're not on the govt tit unless they got more $ back on top of that.

Your not on the teat unless you get more in direct payments from the fed than you pay in in income taxes?

[kalm]

No ****.

Call me when the rich and corporations are willing to be weened from the teat as well.

Typical donk talking point.

Paying zero in fed income taxes, be it an individual or corp, no matter the income, isn't on the teat unless they get direct payments from the fed on top of that that that gives them more back than you paid in.
Paying a very low % in fed income taxes, be it an individual or corp, no matter the income, isn't on the teat unless you get more from the fed in direct payments that you paid in.

Being on the govt teat is getting more in direct payments from the fed than you paid in in income taxes. Very few "rich" and corporations are on the govt teat.

If a corp made say 100 million and paid only 10 million or even zero in fed income taxes they're not on the govt tit unless they got more $ back on top of that.

Your not on the teat unless you get more in direct payments from the fed than you pay in in income taxes?

Typical conk misunderstanding.

Everyone is on the teat and some some pay into more than others. The really clever ones are those who socialize the risks and manipulate the system through campaign finance. But they too, are still on the teat.

[CID1990]

Worldwide economic shockwave and collapse or just a bunch of SMFH's and another day in paradise?

Discuss.

Pot would immediately be legalized for the tax revenue, and a pack of MJ cigarettes will cost you $50, b!tch.

[JohnStOnge]

We can't, John, the rich have all the money. You aren't seriously suggesting that we tax people that don't have any money are you? Back when we had a thriving middle class we could spread the pain, but it ain't like that no more.

I won't do it right now but I've done it before and the idea that the "middle class" has less resources now than it had 10, 20, 30, 40 and so on years ago is a myth. That's if you define the "middle class" in some reasonable way. Say you define the "middle class" as the middle 60 percent of households in terms of income. That middle 60 percent now has a higher average income, as does every quintile within it, than it did back in 1979 or 1980 in inflation adjusted terms.

Besides, the point I was making in the post to which you were responding is that we will reach a point such that, even if we take everything the "rich" make each year, we won't be able to make ends meet. We may not be able to tax people that don't have any money. But we CAN change our paradigm with respect to government and decide that we are going to move towards having government spend maybe half of what it currently spends.

And, yes, that is possible if we ditch the idea that government is responsible for ensuring the well being of each individual and managing us like we're a giant herd of cattle. Like even stuff like the EPA. We don't NEED the EPA to be telling Baton Rouge, Louisiana (for instance) what its ozone level should be. We don't NEED for the Federal government to own most of the land in a number of western States. There are MANY things we don't NEED for the Federal government to be doing.