Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-03-2007, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,169 posts, read 24,345,087 times
Reputation: 15291

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerlily View Post
According to Greenspan (I have the book) budget discipline "gave up the ghost" on September 30th, 2002 when Congress allowed the anti deficit law to expire. Greenspan warned congress "if we do not preserve the budet rules and reaffirm our commitment to fiscal responsibility, years of hard effort will be squandered. ... "History suggests that an abandonment of fiscal discipline will eventually push up interest rates, crowd out capital spending , lower productivity ..." Congress did not listen to Greenspan.

The PP poster mentioned Greenspan would vote Republican. On Sixty Minutes he said "I tend to vote Republican". When he was interviewed by Terri Gross on NPR he said, "I may not vote at all."
After talking to Terri, I probably wouldn't, either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-03-2007, 07:52 PM
 
1,155 posts, read 1,840,604 times
Reputation: 176
Greenspan Says "Republicans Lost Their Way"

yes, they have. Big time. This is why I'll more than likely turn in my republican badge and become an independent before next year's election.

GO RON GO!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2007, 08:01 PM
 
1,408 posts, read 4,864,408 times
Reputation: 486
Goodnight Greenspan. Enjoy your retirement! Buh-bye...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2007, 08:13 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,489,966 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
haha, do you not realise you cant increase the debt limit, without changing budgets.. How else are you going to make payments on that debt. You dont just borrow money and then not pay it back, and you surely dont vote to increase the limit unless your planning to use it.. Perhapse for "healthcare" proposals or $5,000 bribes for votes for Hillary for every kid who's born..
I'm afraid you're not actually up on the process. The statutory debt limit is just that. An arbitrary number above which the executive is not authorized to carry outstanding public debt. There is no direct connection to any budget at all.

Since we are basically only adding to the debt (at least these days), debt that is maturing is either rolled over, or a new bond is sold/auctioned to raise the funds to pay off the old. The reason that increases in the debt ceiling are periodically necessary is that government operations run in the red (almost) every day. If the debt ceiling is reached, government operations must come to a halt. No one wants that to happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2007, 08:19 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,169 posts, read 24,345,087 times
Reputation: 15291
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
I'm afraid you're not actually up on the process. The statutory debt limit is just that. An arbitrary number above which the executive is not authorized to carry outstanding public debt. There is no direct connection to any budget at all.

Since we are basically only adding to the debt (at least these days), debt that is maturing is either rolled over, or a new bond is sold/auctioned to raise the funds to pay off the old. The reason that increases in the debt ceiling are periodically necessary is that government operations run in the red (almost) every day. If the debt ceiling is reached, government operations must come to a halt. No one wants that to happen.
Don't be so sure.

Lots of Ron Paul folks around here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2007, 09:47 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,151,352 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
I'm afraid you're not actually up on the process. The statutory debt limit is just that. An arbitrary number above which the executive is not authorized to carry outstanding public debt. There is no direct connection to any budget at all.

Since we are basically only adding to the debt (at least these days), debt that is maturing is either rolled over, or a new bond is sold/auctioned to raise the funds to pay off the old. The reason that increases in the debt ceiling are periodically necessary is that government operations run in the red (almost) every day. If the debt ceiling is reached, government operations must come to a halt. No one wants that to happen.
All of the debt being rolled over is at a higher interest rate then previously created causing higher liabilities.

Furthermore, I'd LOVE the government operations to come to a hault, its happened before, I didnt notice, most people didnt. Even state budgets on occasion press State offices and operations to close down.. GREAT.. The less operations open, the less they are wasting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2007, 09:18 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,489,966 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
All of the debt being rolled over is at a higher interest rate then previously created causing higher liabilities.
Depends on the original issue date and on the trend in ever-changing interest rates since that time. Some roll-overs are at higher rates and some are at lower rates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Furthermore, I'd LOVE the government operations to come to a hault, its happened before, I didnt notice, most people didnt.
Well, then here's an update...during the first six-day shutdown in November 1995...

-- You paid $400,000,000 to federal workers for doing nothing.
-- $400,000,000 in federal revenues was lost as IRS enforcement agents were told to stay home.
-- 400,000 people were denied enrollment in and coverage under Medicare for a week.
-- 112,000 applications for Social Security benefits went untouched for a week.
-- 80,000 passports were not issued or renewed. Passengers were unable to travel.
-- 2,000,000 people were denied access to National Parks.
-- 10,000 FHA-backed mortgages were not approved.
-- GAO estimated real costs to taxpayers of the shutdown: $200 million per day in 1995 dollars.

Within a month, Republicans intent on slashing Medicare and Medicaid, shut the government down again...this time for 21 days instead of 6...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2007, 09:43 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,151,352 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
Depends on the original issue date and on the trend in ever-changing interest rates since that time. Some roll-overs are at higher rates and some are at lower rates.


Well, then here's an update...during the first six-day shutdown in November 1995...

-- You paid $400,000,000 to federal workers for doing nothing.
-- $400,000,000 in federal revenues was lost as IRS enforcement agents were told to stay home.
-- 400,000 people were denied enrollment in and coverage under Medicare for a week.
-- 112,000 applications for Social Security benefits went untouched for a week.
-- 80,000 passports were not issued or renewed. Passengers were unable to travel.
-- 2,000,000 people were denied access to National Parks.
-- 10,000 FHA-backed mortgages were not approved.
-- GAO estimated real costs to taxpayers of the shutdown: $200 million per day in 1995 dollars.

Within a month, Republicans intent on slashing Medicare and Medicaid, shut the government down again...this time for 21 days instead of 6...
Can you tell me where you got that statistic because according to what I seen, "Although the exact number is unknown, from 20,000 to 26,000 local federal employees are believed to have been locked out of their offices since Tuesday afternoon because of the budget deadlock in Washington. "

At your $400M price tag that means these employees, who didnt work for 6 days, made $3333.33 per day EACH

SHUT DOWN - DAY 6 A PINCH FOR PEOPLE, BUT NOT A HARD HIT FOR REGION - SO FAR (broken link)

Furthermore, why again are the republicans to blame? Clinton was president.. a Democrat, and while he doesnt control the budget.. he is the leader and as we all know with the Iraqi war.. those up top are the blame..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2007, 09:46 PM
 
Location: Sacramento
14,044 posts, read 27,231,902 times
Reputation: 7373
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Furthermore, it doesnt look like they receive payment, per this website. (and we all know websites are 100% accurate.. )
SHUT DOWN - DAY 6 A PINCH FOR PEOPLE, BUT NOT A HARD HIT FOR REGION - SO FAR (broken link)

Furthermore, why again are the republicans to blame? Clinton was president.. a Democrat, and while he doesnt control the budget.. he is the leader and as we all know with the Iraqi war.. those up top are the blame..
I can address the payment issue during the shutdown. I was one of the folks locked out, and I was ultimately paid for the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2007, 05:03 AM
 
Location: Tolland County- Northeastern CT
4,462 posts, read 8,030,048 times
Reputation: 1237
It is easy for Dr. Greenspan to blame the republicans or any other political party for this mess. And too blame specific world wide changes (the fall of Communism) etc for asset bubbles in 1999-2000 and again in 2005 with housing.

However was it not Greenspan that lowered real interest rates to near zero after the IT crash?? Was it Greenspan who agreed with Bush's tax cuts that wiped out the surplus??

And now Greenspan's successor, Bernanke is following the same script- with easy money to bail out the bad investments of many- while those of us who save and stay out of debt are penalized?

Greenspan is a phoney who has created this mess- and Ben Bernanke has followed in his footsteps (But with Bernanke- his length as Fed Chairman is likely to be far shorter)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top