*GASP* NATIONAL POLITICS POST!
posted by anonymouscoward at 06:05 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
Yes, AC...but he didn't post it in the POLITICS section; he posted it in the NEWS section. He's in compliance.
Historymike, maybe our foreign friends will rescue us from our debts as the U.S. has "rescued" Third World countries with no American interests *sarcasm*
NOTHING surprises me anymore...
posted by MrsPhoenix at 06:14 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
I thought it was a 2-week hiatus. Jr, feel free to delete this thread if it were permanent.
Mrs. Phoenix is right, though - I was looking at this as a news story rather than a "blame Bush" or "blame the tax-and-spend Dems." As far as I am concerned, BOTH parties share the blame for sinking us further into debt.
We are seemingly incapable at the legislative level of matching revenues and expenses. With the exception of a period in the late 1990s, the nation has been on a 25-year orgy of debt accumulation.
posted by historymike at 06:35 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
EXACTLY!
historymike et.al., maybe you can help me out with some research...at some point, the American dollar had the backing of gold and silver, correct?
Is this still true? Or is the American dollar, "legal tender for all debts, public and private, nothing more than a promissory note?
posted by MrsPhoenix at 06:44 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
The debt's gone up by 3 trillion since Dubya took office, and as your graph shows, it was going DOWN during the Clinton years.
I'll shut up now.
Is this still true? Or is the American dollar, "legal tender for all debts, public and private, nothing more than a promissory note?
Once upon a time there was in fact a gold standard, where you could go demand a certain amount of gold and get it.
There was also a silver standard, where you could go demand silver and get it.
Now there is no standard at all, and the Government doesn't even honor any gold or silver certificates you may have sitting around. Those are now exactly like any other currency bill in circulation.
posted by anonymouscoward at 07:17 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
Nixon removed us from both the gold standard and fixed-value dollars in 1971-72, although the Bretton-Woods hobbled along for a few more years (this was the post-WWII agreement to negotiate currency values).
Since the 1980s almost all world currencies have been free-floating, which pleases currency speculators, but opens currencies (especially those without huge foreign reserves) up to roller-coaster rides. The economies of many nations have been wrecked by the sudden flight of capital (think Indonesia and Thailand in 1997-98 and Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay in 2000-2003).
Free-floating currencies create the illusion of market forces, but bring in a different type of financial instability.
Our economy is still the world's largest, which somewhat insulates us from the effects of capital flight, but thirty years down the road the US economy might be much more prone to such fluxes.
IF the world holds onto its obsession with free capital and IMF hegemony.
posted by historymike at 07:38 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
Nixon had to do away with the Brettonwoods Standard. There was a massive run on our currency.
Roosevelt took us off the Gold Standard. Nixon took us off the Brettonwoods Standard.
posted by MemyselfandI at 09:30 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
In today's news, President Bush is proposing legislation to give him line-item veto power. This would certainly help reduce wasteful spending. This legislation is even supported by John Kerry!
This is the second attempt at a line item veto, with the first proposal by President Clinton being ruled unconstitutional.
Hopefully this bill will be better written, and have better odds with a couple of new Supreme Court Justices.
posted by lloyd at 09:36 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
Bush with line-item-veto power. I know what will happen. He'll cross out the lines that prohibit torture, put any sort of restriction on his supreme authority as chief executive (as he sees it), and otherwise X-out anything he doesn't agree with. Then he'll write in what he wants on the signing statement and say that it is the absolute law (but doesn't apply to him).
posted by anonymouscoward at 11:08 P.M. EST on Mon Mar 06, 2006 #
Sounds good a/c!
posted by lloyd at 09:35 A.M. EST on Tue Mar 07, 2006 #
Raise the debt limit. Now there's a real Republican plan.
Who voted for this moron, anyway?
posted by aldringham at 10:10 A.M. EST on Tue Mar 07, 2006 #
"Who voted for this moron, anyway?"
Why, over half of the voters did. Are you starting to understand the scope of the problem, now?
Raising the debt limit is not just a Republican plan. Overspending and living deeply in debt is strongly bipartisan.
posted by GuestZero at 02:17 P.M. EST on Tue Mar 07, 2006 #
"Overspending and living deeply in debt is strongly bipartisan."
Yep, way too much blame for just one party here.
What we need is a full-blown recession, to make everyone wake up and live within their means.
But then, we would quickly realize just how little of this here country we still own, thanks to foreigners buying up our debt.
Not THAT is a sobering realization...
posted by Hooda_Thunkit at 11:30 A.M. EST on Wed Mar 08, 2006 #
Overspending and living deeply in debt is strongly bipartisan.
Thou needst to take a look at:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm
posted by anonymouscoward at 12:33 P.M. EST on Wed Mar 08, 2006 #
From the Washington Post today:
The Treasury Department has started drawing from the civil service pension fund to avoid hitting the $8.2 trillion national debt limit. The move to tap the pension fund follows last month's decision to suspend investments in a retirement savings plan held by government employees...Once Congress raises the debt limit, the Treasury will "restore all due interest and principal" to the pension fund as soon as possible, [John] Snow said.
Well, at least we won't be in default any time soon.
posted by historymike at 01:07 P.M. EST on Wed Mar 08, 2006 #
We are down to less than seven days before the US debt limit is reached.
posted by historymike at 11:38 A.M. EST on Tue Mar 14, 2006 #
I really can't believe that the Fed's are pulling a TPS. "Spending is out of control - hey rather than controlling the spending- howzabout we just move the numbers to accomodate?" (TPS version, we can't account for 19 million dollars - we'd better ask for more tax money)
Natural economics dictate when you run out of money you prohibit spending.
Obviously by the comments the media has elected (er...selected) to show to us, all involved are concerned about moving this debt ceiling.
If this does get moved, we'll be handing a new level of debt to our kids.
This a step like letting Congress access Social Security money. This is a decision like making the short term welfare programs permanent. This is a HUGE step. Pray they decide not to raise the ceiling. There's no going back if we don't curtail the national debt in the near future.
Additionally how does it feel to know that if some of these other countries call in our debt - we'll have to trade American land for it in lieu of cash?
posted by katie82640 at 01:31 P.M. EST on Tue Mar 14, 2006 #
Well, we can all breathe easier. The Senate voted to raise the debt ceiling today.
Let's let our grandkids worry about stuff like that, eh?
:-}
posted by historymike at 01:42 P.M. EST on Thu Mar 16, 2006 #
HM, was that ever in doubt? The Congress always votes to raise the debt ceiling.
As for the grandkids, I doubt that. Today's working man is already worrying about it, as about $300 billion of the federal budget is needed each year to service this debt. This is how a nation spends itself poor.
posted by GuestZero at 03:09 P.M. EST on Thu Mar 16, 2006 #
Syndicate ToledoTalk
