GOP pretend fiscal restraint, and fucking the US economy and 401K's

[Brisketexan 105,139]

35 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

You may be correct, but it really doesn’t matter whether this SC will uphold it not with respect to whether Biden should invoke the 14th.  He needs to invoke it because it completely counters the eventual GQP argument that this is Biden’s fault and that they “tried to negotiate but he refused”, which is exactly what they will argue.  If Biden invokes the 14th, and the SC strikes it down, based presumably on GQPs arguments against this last ditch effort to save our economy, then the GQP owns it, and even our salt of the earth simpleton fellow citizens will mostly see that after months and months of coverage and suspense.  

This.  "Shoot the hostage that is the United States of America.  Do it, you terrorist fucksticks.  I fucking dare you."

And here's the thing: maybe they will.  I think it's a 50/50 proposition because, again, the GQP is at its heart a terrorist organization.  But in the long run, the GQP committing suicide in the process of devastating the economy may be the brutal chemo we need to go through to get through the cancer that is the current GQP.

[Smax 3,800]

35 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

 and even our salt of the earth simpleton fellow citizens will mostly see that after months and months of coverage and suspense.  

 

they may see it but they wont care because defaulting is "owning the libs" and that is all that matters now, the economy be damned. Mccarthy, The sporkfooted ditch pig and ged granny will get on tv/twitter and blame this on Biden not wanting to cut spending/the dems are evil, hey look lgbtq is targeting kids and the mouthbreathers will continue to eat their shit up because in their mind they are "winning"

This whole thing disgust me and it doesn't look to get better anytime in the near future

[Biff Tannen 45,685]

It’s so annoying that they have somehow conflated the debt ceiling with the budget. They are two entirely separate things, but Rs know their voters are too stupid to realize it. 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19,101]

Fitch talking about downgrading the US credit rating.  Fuck the GQP.

[Nivek 16,930]

At this point if the CIC ordered the military to give the Republican Party the Knight's Templar treatment, I would support it.  

[HamsterHookah 112]

11 hours ago, Js1 said:

The Freedom Caucus is already making the rounds bitching, so there's likely a deal with enough Dem support to cut them out. Neither side will get everything they want, but we will not default.  Not a single chance. 

I hope you are right, for economy sake.

I pulled all my money out of markets and parked it in the bank a few weeks ago just to be safe until we figure this out. Yea, I missed the Nvidia run-up, but I've also read the stock and markets could take anywhere from a 10-40% haircut overnight if this thing happens.

Be safe out there, playas.

Edited May 26, 2023 by HamsterHookah

[Willfully Horn 8,017]

5 hours ago, HamsterHookah said:

I hope you are right, for economy sake.

I pulled all my money out of markets and parked it in the bank a few weeks ago just to be safe until we figure this out. Yea, I missed the Nvidia run-up, but I've also read the stock and markets could take anywhere from a 10-40% haircut overnight if this thing happens.

Be safe out there, playas.

Might be wrong, having spent a worrying night drinking instead of working, but don’t you vote R? If so, fuck you. And, if so, I hope whatever you do with those funds turns to dust.

I didn’t sell. Mainly because I believe those assets are meant to be passed down to my children, and, on that time frame, the market is historically the right place to be. Unless everything goes tits up. Up like the proffered  breast at the conclusion of “Grapes of Wrath.” Up in the air like the deposits in a bank when the federal government can no longer be trusted to underwrite bank deposits. That is the other reason I didn’t sell. I support the USA, and won’t be the guy who profits from the misery of others. Who somehow wanted things to burn to the ground. 

Unless the fascists lock me up, I will make money the same way I always have, I will get by. 

I half heard a report about the details of a rumored deal. No cuts to the military. No cuts to corporate welfare, whether it is subsidies to big agriculture, big pharma, or big oil. Proof the Ds are right of center, and are willing to tell their most progressive members to pound sand. That infuriates me. Otoh, the parties ought be willing to compromise, when the nation demands they do. A notion as quixotic as myself, sadly. One party sees compromise as either weakness, or a sin. Again, fuck the toddlers who support that pov with their vote.

Certainly there are people who watch most of the political circus with disdain. Welcome to the party, fuckers. I suppose you know your wise choices weren’t as wise and solid as you believed. Many of you folks, seemingly insulated, will be fucked by your voting record. We just might learn what worth remains, when the flames burn everything they can.

I am ready, if there is blood on the streets, to buy property. I hear two homesteads escape notice.

[Dnaguy 11,964]

17 hours ago, CTC2 said:

What infuriates me about the democrats is that they can be so stupid sometimes. They should have raised the debt ceiling during the lame duck session and told the Freedom Caucus to go fuck themselves. 
Republicans are terrible but my team get run over by them constantly. 

This.

Democrats always seem to take two hittable strikes, get behind the count, and then have to make defensive swings on marginal pitches to try and stay alive.

Or to mix sports metaphors and make this extra Surly:

Democrats always seem to throw the bubble screen on the 1st two plays of a series, and then have to run a draw and hope a back makes 3 guys miss or the defense completely breaks down. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

19 hours ago, Js1 said:

Neither side will get everything they want, but we will not default.

I mean, that's kind of how it's supposed to work.

[Js1 85,336]

4 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I mean, that's kind of how it's supposed to work.

The freedom caucus and the WHY NOT DONE crowd don’t understand that

Edited May 26, 2023 by Js1

[hornmpa96 2,618]

18 hours ago, CTC2 said:

What infuriates me about the democrats is that they can be so stupid sometimes. They should have raised the debt ceiling during the lame duck session and told the Freedom Caucus to go fuck themselves. 
Republicans are terrible but my team get run over by them constantly. 

Are we sure they had the votes? Would Manchin and Sinema gone along? Was this subject to the 60 vote threshold in the Senate?

[David Dennison 18,860]

33 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

Are we sure they had the votes? Would Manchin and Sinema gone along? Was this subject to the 60 vote threshold in the Senate?

It probably would have been better to negotiate with Democrats than Republicans.

Edited May 26, 2023 by David Dennison

[CTC2 2,797]

37 minutes ago, hornmpa96 said:

Are we sure they had the votes? Would Manchin and Sinema gone along? Was this subject to the 60 vote threshold in the Senate?

It would have been subject to the 60 but most of the reading I’ve done suggests it could have been done through reconciliation thus solving that problem. 
 

[G650 14,256]

10 hours ago, HamsterHookah said:

I pulled all my money out of markets and parked it in the bank a few weeks ago just to be safe until we figure this out.

lolwut

[Js1 85,336]

Deal close

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/26/debt-ceiling-deal-developments.html

Some IRS money from the IRA pulled back. Which would then be used to cover cuts to domestic programs, so basically negating them 

Two year deal so wouldn’t be a 2024 issue 

Quote

But on its face, the bargain could offer both parties a win. Republicans could claim, correctly, that they had secured a cut in baseline government spending for fiscal year 2024. Democrats, likewise, could say they preserved the vast majority of domestic programs at funding levels either equal to or just below their current ones.

 

[Bullneck 19,090]

On 5/24/2023 at 11:19 AM, horn4life said:

Well here we are again. Another completely and totally disingenuous manufactured crisis, created by the same folks that ALWAYS add debt at a faster pace than their Democratic Satans.  But the main thing about these manufactured debt crises is that the GOP does not give a shit about damaging the economy when there is a Democratic President.  Republican President means borrow like crazy to pretend that massive tax cuts for mostly the wealthy do not have any impact on the deficit.  Only spending from Democrats needs to be offset, tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires never, ever, ever need to be addressed by balances in spending.  That is ONLY when there is a Democratic President.

OF course how do you negotiate with a person who cannot deliver the votes?  McCarthy simply pretends the GOP will pass something reasonable, but the reality is they will not.  If the economy goes into the shitter and it's a Dem Pres? Who gives a fuck.  So here we are, gonna need to scrub off a 700-1000 points off the dow.  And simply because the GOP cannot bring a budget to the floor that will do anything except let folks know that the GOP is full of shit.

So here we are.  The same folks that don't give a damn about debt, pretending they care about the debt.  This biggest difference this time is there is a large contingency of the GOP that will never vote for any compromise of any sort.  So the Dems negotiate with the GOP, who cannot deliver.  Then the GOP negotiates with itself and comes back to the table to renegotiate.  Then return the GOP again negotiates with itself, then again returns to negotiate with Biden.  What good is negotiating with somebody who 1) can't actually negotiate, beacuse 2) they can't deliver the votes on anything that has a potential for actual passage 3) In the end it will again be the Dems that have to save McCarthy, because 4) he can't do anything but whine and complain since he cannot deliver the votes.

It really does suck having one of the parties being basically a group of children who honestly can't compromise and can't deliver votes.  

You'd think that at some point the Donor Class will think, "Hmmm, maybe will cost me some money, more than I can recoup in the fire sale of assets that will come.  Let me call the Reps I own and tell them to tone it down a bit."

[Bullneck 19,090]

10 hours ago, HamsterHookah said:

I pulled all my money out of markets and parked it in the bank a few weeks ago just to be safe until we figure this out.

All $200?

['stache 21,815]

23 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

There's conflicting rules of construction (one that basically says "including" doesn't imply a limitation to what it states, and one that provides for the exact opposite, because the law is fake), but the actual language refers to paying for both (1) pensions and (2) bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion. I think it'd be pretty hard to make a good case that "including" as used there was meant to be limiting, because those two aren't really at all similar.

Also, there's no reason POTUS can't say "SCOTUS thinks it means X, but I think it means Y, and I have a Constitutional duty to follow the Constitution as I understand it."

If the “well regulated militia” clause is the second amendment can be written out as a limitation, so can any interpretation here, and I think it’s a much better argument under the 14th. This scotus of course would never be consistent but it it came down to their wealthy right wing puppet masters losing money, they’ll let it go this time around.

[horn4life 3,760]

3 hours ago, Dnaguy said:

This.

Democrats always seem to take two hittable strikes, get behind the count, and then have to make defensive swings on marginal pitches to try and stay alive.

Or to mix sports metaphors and make this extra Surly:

Democrats always seem to throw the bubble screen on the 1st two plays of a series, and then have to run a draw and hope a back makes 3 guys miss or the defense completely breaks down. 

Don't disagree, but that's what you get when you actually have a diverse caucus.  When you can get everyone to walk in goose step... err lock step as the GOP does it's an advantage.  It's also an advantage for the political party that is willing to not give a shit about retirees, the military, 401K's, or the health of the US economy. It's like the baby and Solomon, the GOP is willing to at least make a few deep cuts to the baby. Just to see what happens?  The Dems? Actually give a shit about people and the US economy, and the GOP sees that as something to take advantage of because for the GOP tanking the economy is something always worth risking when there is a Dem president.

I guess the only thing to think about now is how many Dems is it going to take to help McCarthy across the finish line?  If the Dems were Pubs they would simply refuse to vote for the extension and risk tanking the US economy.  They could win, but at what risk? The GOP doesn't care about people, so they don't see the risk.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

On 5/24/2023 at 11:23 AM, horn4life said:

I wish that some reporter would simply ask. "You say the deficit spending is bad. Why then do Republicans never offset their deficit increasing tax cuts with spending reductions?"

McCarthy would look like a deer in the headlights.

Now now, you aren't giving the Republicans credit for trying to offset the billionaire tax break by royally fucking the rest of us with SALT limitations, standard deduction shenanigans and re-configuring the tax bracket alignments.  How dare you.

[Dnaguy 11,964]

3 hours ago, horn4life said:

Don't disagree, but that's what you get when you actually have a diverse caucus.  When you can get everyone to walk in goose step... err lock step as the GOP does it's an advantage.  It's also an advantage for the political party that is willing to not give a shit about retirees, the military, 401K's, or the health of the US economy. It's like the baby and Solomon, the GOP is willing to at least make a few deep cuts to the baby. Just to see what happens?  The Dems? Actually give a shit about people and the US economy, and the GOP sees that as something to take advantage of because for the GOP tanking the economy is something always worth risking when there is a Dem president.

I guess the only thing to think about now is how many Dems is it going to take to help McCarthy across the finish line?  If the Dems were Pubs they would simply refuse to vote for the extension and risk tanking the US economy.  They could win, but at what risk? The GOP doesn't care about people, so they don't see the risk.

 

A party that espouses that the government they participate in is inherently evil or bad really has no where to go.

The Reagon revolution that's metastasized into the tea party and then full stage IV MAGA either has to be cured or its going to kill the USA.

Republicans want small government. Not efficient government. That means they need to let limbs, extremities, and some organ systems die. Regardless of actual real outcomes to everyday people or the world order as a whole.

They mask this with cultural issue buffoonery.

But don't fooled. 

This ends in authoritarianism, a failed state, a combo of the two, or a surviving democracy. That's only a 1 in 4 chance of anything good!

 

[Horn Dog 9,855]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/05/26/gop-debt-ceiling-leverage/
 

Spoiler

It’s time for some debt ceiling game theory. Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen has said the government will be unable to pay all its bills absent an increase in its $31.4 trillion borrowing limit as soon as next week, though no one can be sure when the so-called X-date will actually arrive. When, if ever, will the political incentives of the White House and the House Republican caucus align enough for a deal to be struck? The rules of this high-stakes game might be wackier than either side has appreciated. Consider two possible features of debt ceiling brinkmanship: First, Republican political leverage will increase as the X-date draws closer. The administration has committed itself to a position that reaching the date without a deal would be financially catastrophic, while Republicans are more skeptical. That means Democrats will feel more pressure to make a deal. But if the X-date is reached without a deal, the balance of power could shift. Suddenly, the administration will be in the driver’s seat — deciding, to the best of its legal and technological abilities, how to run the government without enough money to meet its obligations. In a post-X-date world, the executive branch will get new powers by default (no pun intended) and could use them to squeeze Republicans politically. Start with Republicans’ growing advantage. In a CNN poll, 60 percent of respondents said they wanted spending cuts attached to a debt ceiling increase — the basic House GOP demand that President Biden initially rejected — while a Fox News poll found that Biden would take slightly more political blame for a default.
But the GOP advantage goes deeper than polling. The first rule of brinkmanship is that credibility matters. In a standoff, the party that is more willing (or perceived as more willing) to do what it is threatening to do has the advantage. Republicans are — probably rightly — perceived as more willing to tolerate the risk that comes from encountering the X-date. Without the ability to borrow more, the government would have about 75 percent of the revenue it needs to cover its obligations at current rates. As a Wall Street Journal op-ed argued, the Treasury could then prioritize certain payments over others, and would have at least some legal basis for doing so. Discriminating between millions of payments would be a massive logistical challenge, but the government would have no choice but to try. Paying interest on the debt would presumably take first priority, with defense and entitlement obligations close behind. Republicans might be calculating that, just as in a government shutdown, primarily discretionary spending would be delayed after X-date. Guess what: Nondefense discretionary spending is precisely the part of the budget the House GOP wants Biden to agree to cut. The Treasury has refused to countenance this idea. Yellen told Congress in March, “Not paying any of our bills is default.” Maybe markets would see it that way immediately, but maybe not. If House Republicans doubt that the X-date would bring catastrophe, at least for their priorities, they would be more willing to hold out for a deal after the date has passed.

But at that point — assuming the world financial system is still standing — the political balance would start to shift. The Bipartisan Policy Center warns that Treasury prioritization after the X-date would involve “forcing executive branch officials to pick winners and losers,” or paying some government invoices and delaying others. Another way of putting this is that Congress will have, in effect, ceded to Biden officials emergency control over parts of the federal budget. The administration’s current political strategy is based on the idea that such a contingency is unthinkable. But “Dark Brandon” — the affectionate nickname bestowed by the president’s supporters when he appears politically ruthless and effective — would be mulling ways to exploit it. Targeting budget cuts for political messaging advantage is an old executive-branch trick. After the X-date, the administration could coordinate its attacks on Republicans with its budgetary decisions. For example, the Treasury could determine — based, of course, on the best legal guidance and economic analysis — that a number of contracts in swing districts represented by Republicans simply must be delayed for the sake of the government’s solvency. The goal would be to either move overall public opinion against the GOP, or else put enough constituent pressure on specific Republican members that they need a deal to stop the pain. Republicans are emboldened in part because they think the X-date would not be the crisis that Democrats say. But if Republicans are right and there is no immediate catastrophe, then the administration could start to “pick winners and losers” as negotiations continue. The executive branch will have a source of initiative unavailable to the congressional GOP.
These two features of the standoff — strong Republican leverage before the X-date, and increasing Democratic leverage afterward — could create incentives for a just-in-time deal. But any deal before the X-date is likely to be quite favorable to the GOP and painful if not humiliating for Biden. If a Democratic-friendly deal is possible, it probably involves the administration’s breaching the debt ceiling that Yellen has insisted is inviolate, and gambling on recovering its leverage in the economic and legal suspended animation that would come after.

 Dark Brandon needs to surgically skull fuck the MAGA districts.  Oh your representative wants a default?  Ok, NO funding for the welfare states for anything until this is resolved!  Also, since we don’t have enough money, Brandon needs to declare an emergency action to triple IRS enforcement agents to collect every fucking nickel from corporations and billionaires.  

Edited May 27, 2023 by Horn Dog

[horn4life 3,760]

I can't wait to see what sort of silliness the Republicans put forth in the budget they are fucking terrified to put down on paper.  

I think the best way to skull fuck the GOP is once we get past this issue, start attacking the GOP on their lack of a budget (solely with GOP votes) nor a bipartisan border bill to address the crisis they keep screaming about.  Then go out to Republican districts and ask over and over again why is it the poorest and middle class that always bear the burden of tax cuts for millionaires? Why?

Attack the GOP and ask, "Why does the GOP never, ever offset their millionaire tax cuts with spending cuts?  Because the only time you have seen ANY fiscal restraint from the GOP is right after they add trillions to the deficit with tax cuts?  And it's always the middle class that has to pay the bill...

I hope Biden really goes on offense after this fake crisis passes.

[Pancho 44,803]

He needs to be punched in the balls and face

 

[Bullneck 19,090]

5 minutes ago, Pancho said:

He needs to be punched in the balls and face

 

He sounds bitter.  He disappointed MTJ and compromised and didn't crash the economy.  

Edited May 28, 2023 by Bullneck

[HamsterHookah 112]

28 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

He sounds bitter.  He disappointed MTJ and compromised and didn't crash the economy.  

But the Republic rejoices, n'ertheless.

[StassneyHorn 6,575]

What’s your tax bill going to look like with you selling to cash? 

[Pancho 44,803]

Welp

 

[cactusflinthead 27,598]

I'd appreciate it if y'all held off on dunking on Kev until this thing passes. 

Ain't nobody listening to old frumpy Frum

 

[elfenix 34,240]

"According to McCarthy there are no new taxes and the bill includes “historic reductions in spending, consequential reforms that will lift people out of poverty and into the workforce.”"

"Working poor? Never heard of her"
--Kevin McCarthy, probably

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/may/28/biden-debt-ceiling-deal-mccarthy

[David Dennison 18,860]

22 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Welp

 

All they need is 218 votes.

[cactusflinthead 27,598]

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by cactusflinthead

[Gengs1 2,583]

2 hours ago, Pancho said:

He needs to be punched in the balls and face

 

I don’t think this deal means anything to the crazies and they won’t honor it, they gonna need a few swing towards the dems to make it happen 

[cactusflinthead 27,598]

 

[WhatTheBuck 28,781]

7 hours ago, Pancho said:

He needs to be punched in the balls and face

 

He has no balls. 

[HamsterHookah 112]

19 hours ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

It’s $10bn

[Js1 85,336]

10 minutes ago, HamsterHookah said:

It’s $10bn

Not in this bill. 

It’s $1.4bn cut. That’s it. Probably won’t be an actual budget anyhow either, just CRs

[HamsterHookah 112]

6 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Not in this bill. 

It’s $1.4bn cut. That’s it. Probably won’t be an actual budget anyhow either, just CRs

Ah weird what I read was that there was a $10bn cut from the budget of $80bn to beef up auditors. 

[HamsterHookah 112]

Reading more into it:

“The deal would shift $10 billion each in fiscal years 2024 and 2025 in funding away the Internal Revenue Service, but officials believe the IRS can make due in the near term since they were funded over a 10-year period. They may need to seek more funding from Congress for future years, one of the officials said.

The text of the House of Representatives legislation released on Sunday showed the deal would take back just $1 billion from the IRS, but the White House agreed to the additional cuts as part of the appropriations process that will take place over the next two years.”

So really sounds like more of a gentleman’s agreement after that first milly? Not sure how all that works, but all’s well that ends well.

[cactusflinthead 27,598]

 

[HamsterHookah 112]

The republicans are looking at it all wrong; anything—even if it’s nominal— is a win. The debt limit expiration fell into your lap, so anything gained while avoiding a financial catastrophe should be celebrated.

[cactusflinthead 27,598]

But, that's not how they feel. Because that's what is important to those that have already said they won't vote for it. Do they feel good because they owned the libs? Are the libs angry and hurt? Are there lib tears and do they perceive a sense of cruelty inflicted upon the chosen targets?

Did they hurt the right people and are they hollering about it? That's all that matters. Fiscal responsibility be damned. Owning the libs and feeling a sense of power to exert your will to inflict pain is the goal.

Edited May 29, 2023 by cactusflinthead

[Bullneck 19,090]

On 5/28/2023 at 12:24 AM, Pancho said:

Welp

 

You can see that coming.  Biden negotiated in good faith.  McCarthy probably tried but he's the kid in the Jack & the Beanstalk story.  

The real fun begins tomorrow when McCarthy gets lowered into the shark tank.

[Bullneck 19,090]

On 5/28/2023 at 12:48 AM, David Dennison said:

All they need is 218 votes.

If all the Dems voted they would need, what, 5 Repubs to cross the line?  There should be enough of them in districts Biden won who will go along.  

(^^ basically a summary of the George Takei tweet that Cactusflinthead posted).

 

 

 

Edited May 29, 2023 by Bullneck

[Js1 85,336]

27 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

You can see that coming.  Biden negotiated in good faith.  McCarthy probably tried but he's the kid in the Jack & the Beanstalk story.  

The real fun begins tomorrow when McCarthy gets lowered into the shark tank.

They probably have 60-75 no votes. They can whine and bitch but 150 GOP + the Dems pass it easily 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,512]

I would only worry about the deal losing in the House if these gop reps force a new vote on McCarthy.  Any one of them can require a new speaker vote. If they don’t do that but keep whining about the deal, they are doing all of this for show.

if Chip Roy really wanted to kill this deal, he and other reps would call for a new Speaker vote and refuse to “re-elect” McCarthy. 

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13,585]

1 hour ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

Switching Mad Mode from MAGA Most Major Mad to MAGA Most Major Mega-Mad. Ths means war. Again.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,870]

so Biden still has the 14th in his back pocket, right?

[Michael Knight 12,977]

This show started as a satire and became a documentary

 

 

[SydneyCarton 48,106]

3 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I would only worry about the deal losing in the House if these gop reps force a new vote on McCarthy.  Any one of them can require a new speaker vote. If they don’t do that but keep whining about the deal, they are doing all of this for show.

if Chip Roy really wanted to kill this deal, he and other reps would call for a new Speaker vote and refuse to “re-elect” McCarthy. 

The dems will make sure McCarthy keeps his gavel.