pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Geithner: Lift Debt Limit to Infinity...
#1
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/treasury...t-infinity


(CNSNews.com) - Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Friday that Congress should stop placing legal limits on the amount of money the government can borrow and effectively lift the debt limit to infinity.

On Bloomberg TV, “Political Capital” host Al Hunt asked Geithner if he believes “we ought to just eliminate the debt ceiling.”

“Oh, absolutely,” Geithner said.

“You do? Will you propose that?” Hunt asked.

“Well, this is something only Congress can solve,” Geithner said. “Congress put it on itself. We've had 100 years of experience with it, and I think only once--last summer--did people decide to use it to threaten default on the American credit for the first time in history as a tool for political advantage. And that’s not a tenable strategy.”

Hunt then asked: “Is now the time to eliminate it?”

“It would have been time a long time ago to eliminate it,” Geithner said. “The sooner the better.”

Geithner’s Treasury Department quietly warned at the end of October that the Treasury would reach current legal limit on the federal government's debt by about the end of the year.

In August 2011, President Barack Obama and Congress agreed to lift the legal debt limit by another $2.4 trillion--allowing the government to borrow up to $16.394 trillion. However, as of the close of business on Thursday, the Treasury had only $154.3 billion of that $2.4 trillion in new borrowing authority left.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said last week that the Senate stands ready to increase the debt limit by another $2.4 trillion. “If it has to be raised, we’ll raise it,” Reid said.
"In 4 more OMao years you won't like how America looks....I guarantee it."
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.” -- Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#2
Why am I not surprised that "Taxes are tough" Timmy would back something like that. As far as Harry is concerned, fortunately for us all spending must be initiated in the House.
[Image: member955.png]
USAF (1976 -1986) NRA, GOA Anim_sniper2
"The problems we face today are there because the people who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living." Dan Cofall
Reply
#3
You know damn well that they will just keep raising it and raising it. Whether or not they actually call it infinity, it will keep getting raised. Balance the budget, lol. That'll be the day.
tcc722, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#4
Budget? What's that?
"In 4 more OMao years you won't like how America looks....I guarantee it."
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.” -- Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#5
why not? why take the time to even debate it when the cowardly republicans (who control the house, mind you) cave into it every single time it comes up.
[Image: quotes.php]
Reply
#6
andrewjs18;44002 Wrote:why not? why take the time to even debate it when the cowardly republicans (who control the house, mind you) cave into it every single time it comes up.

It's about self-interest, that's why not.

Let's look at it bluntly, the American public will not always place appropriate blame in situations of financial crisis and whether we like it or not if the country is going to go through any sort of recession it matters who looks to be at fault for it. If the country defaults who will be blamed?

The President? The Senate? The House? Well, all three share fault but what you'll have is eager leadership in both the executive branch and the senate looking to scapegoat the House Republicans especially since any measure extending the debt ceiling is most likely to fail there.

Do you think leadership in the executive branch or the Senate is unaware of this? I think they know it well, which is exactly why they aren't compromising at all on their demands. The cards are in their hands; the aces are up their sleeves.

The House can put on a show of defiance, but only a show. Republican leadership is aware of the fact that they have to come out of this without the blame for economic downfall on their hands. If they stand firm then they ultimately take all the blame and loose dearly.

Look at Paul Volcker, for instance, a Fed Chairman willing to fall on his own sword politically to get things done. Unlike our rock-bottom rate Fed Chairmen who are wildly popular with both parties (remember that both Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and Mitt Romney sang the praises of current Fed leadership) Volcker was willing to take the hard but necessary approach of forcing a rise in interest rates.

Right now the invisible hand of the market wants higher interest rates, United States monetary policy keeps rates absolutely as low as possible, but current spending policies can only coincide with low rates if the debt ceiling keeps rising. An interest-rate reset is going to hurt a lot of people quickly even if it means a better long-term economic outlook. Who will the millions affected blame if interest rates jump up like they truly ought to? Well, whoever can be effectively scapegoated for it, and that's the House Republicans.

So is it cowardly to not take that blame even if the hard reality must eventually hit? Perhaps, but it is also completely understandable. Humans, naturally, are self-interested. Altruism is not the normal routine of humanity, self-protection is. So House Republicans will keep raising the debt ceiling so long as the blame is likely to fall on them if they do not, but they'll raise hell about having to do so.

Anyone running for congress on the platform that 'the U.S. should default' is likely to lose in a landslide and that's because people aren't stupid. Voters know that they hate the current state of affairs but that they also don't want to feel the full brunt of an immediate and shocking market correction. If you want to fix the spending and the debt problems the only sell-able solution is a long-term one, not a short-term and painful fix. House leadership knows that, in my opinion, but I think they have a rather difficult time getting that to happen right now.
IronSight, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#7
I get what your saying, but to me it's just a waste of damn time...especially when regardless of what the republicans say, they do the exact opposite.

of course I'm opposed to the government spending more money than they take in because it's just economically stupid...I just don't like republican grandstanding.

IronSight;44007 Wrote:
andrewjs18;44002 Wrote:why not? why take the time to even debate it when the cowardly republicans (who control the house, mind you) cave into it every single time it comes up.

It's about self-interest, that's why not.

Let's look at it bluntly, the American public will not always place appropriate blame in situations of financial crisis and whether we like it or not if the country is going to go through any sort of recession it matters who looks to be at fault for it. If the country defaults who will be blamed?

The President? The Senate? The House? Well, all three share fault but what you'll have is eager leadership in both the executive branch and the senate looking to scapegoat the House Republicans especially since any measure extending the debt ceiling is most likely to fail there.

Do you think leadership in the executive branch or the Senate is unaware of this? I think they know it well, which is exactly why they aren't compromising at all on their demands. The cards are in their hands; the aces are up their sleeves.

The House can put on a show of defiance, but only a show. Republican leadership is aware of the fact that they have to come out of this without the blame for economic downfall on their hands. If they stand firm then they ultimately take all the blame and loose dearly.

Look at Paul Volcker, for instance, a Fed Chairman willing to fall on his own sword politically to get things done. Unlike our rock-bottom rate Fed Chairmen who are wildly popular with both parties (remember that both Barack Obama, George W. Bush, and Mitt Romney sang the praises of current Fed leadership) Volcker was willing to take the hard but necessary approach of forcing a rise in interest rates.

Right now the invisible hand of the market wants higher interest rates, United States monetary policy keeps rates absolutely as low as possible, but current spending policies can only coincide with low rates if the debt ceiling keeps rising. An interest-rate reset is going to hurt a lot of people quickly even if it means a better long-term economic outlook. Who will the millions affected blame if interest rates jump up like they truly ought to? Well, whoever can be effectively scapegoated for it, and that's the House Republicans.

So is it cowardly to not take that blame even if the hard reality must eventually hit? Perhaps, but it is also completely understandable. Humans, naturally, are self-interested. Altruism is not the normal routine of humanity, self-protection is. So House Republicans will keep raising the debt ceiling so long as the blame is likely to fall on them if they do not, but they'll raise hell about having to do so.

Anyone running for congress on the platform that 'the U.S. should default' is likely to lose in a landslide and that's because people aren't stupid. Voters know that they hate the current state of affairs but that they also don't want to feel the full brunt of an immediate and shocking market correction. If you want to fix the spending and the debt problems the only sell-able solution is a long-term one, not a short-term and painful fix. House leadership knows that, in my opinion, but I think they have a rather difficult time getting that to happen right now.
[Image: quotes.php]
Reply
#8
Why not progressively lower the debt ceiling in such a way to force the .gov to cut spending without while allowing the U.S. to function without defaulting?
Reply
#9
rmagill;44024 Wrote:Why not progressively lower the debt ceiling in such a way to force the .gov to cut spending without while allowing the U.S. to function without defaulting?

You are obviously mistaking the Regime as one wanting to fix the problems. Accelerating it is their goal.
"In 4 more OMao years you won't like how America looks....I guarantee it."
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.” -- Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#10
Pocketprotector;44061 Wrote:
rmagill;44024 Wrote:Why not progressively lower the debt ceiling in such a way to force the .gov to cut spending without while allowing the U.S. to function without defaulting?

You are obviously mistaking the Regime as one wanting to fix the problems. Accelerating it is their goal.

Smile That was meant as a rhetorical question, and I do tend to agree with
you.
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  How appropriate: Debt Up $6.66 Trillion Under Obama Pocketprotector 5 805 02-17-2014, 05:06 AM
Last Post: DeadEye
  U.S. Adds Two Times More Debt than Economic Output in Last 2 Years Pocketprotector 2 499 10-11-2013, 02:00 AM
Last Post: ExcelToExcel
  70 Straight Days: Treasury Says Debt Stuck kadar 2 655 07-30-2013, 06:59 PM
Last Post: LostCyborg
  Washington Hits the $16.7 Trillion Debt Ceiling with $300 Billion in New Debt middlefinger 1 660 05-19-2013, 10:23 PM
Last Post: spblademaker
  Maxine Waters And Keith Ellison Outraged By Sight Of Debt Clock On Capitol Hill… middlefinger 8 812 02-27-2013, 11:19 AM
Last Post: middlefinger



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.