Does anyone know?

Hitting the debt limits means we can't borrow more money. All this fear mongering about default, or not being able to spend money is bullshit.

 

Usually, any loss in credit rating for anyone, means higher borrowing rates. The USA will be no different. But that likely depends on who's doing the lending.

 

Bold claim. That I how ever do not agree with. What supporting evidence do you have?

 

You got that right. And the media should be ashamed for playing along.

 

It's a good question without a definitive answer. Back in 2011 S&P was the only agency to officially downgrade the US's debt to AA+. It has never changed it back to AAA. If all the agencies drop the rating this time around and we continue to have instances when the Crazy holds a gun to our collective heads it might increase rates on bonds by .25 or .50 basis points. That translates to billions in interest payments over time. But by far the bigger impact on rates is where the Fed sets them relative to inflation and or the need for stimulus.

 

Oh God! ALL of it! Accomplishments, titles, their speeches, interviews,...

Sorta like asking for "supporting evidence" that Abraham Lincoln is more honest than George Santos

 

If Biden wanted to go down in history has a decent president, he would break with his party, agree to spending restraint and get the debt ceiling raised as part of the bargain.

What are the Democrats going to do? Block the deal in the Senate? Not likely because then all the blame would be on them.

And as for Biden, why does he want four more years of this job at his age? With no brain can this really be an ego trip? The Democrats can't do any more than refuse to nominate him for a second term.

 

Why are you concerned about the cost of interest for the debt? In your world all you do have the government sell bonds to the Federal Reserve. You can increase the money supply to infinity, and nothing will happen in the world of Modern Monetary Theory. The progressive intellectuals have told the system is foolproof. The amount money the government spends does not matter in the world of woke.

The only thing you guys are fussing about it a limit on how much your party gets to spend. Your party wants to spend to infinity and beyond.

 

It worked for Reagan.
I believe he still holds the record for increasing the deficits and debts out of all the peacetime presidents.

 

There will be no default. That is just fear mongering. The U.S. deserves to have its credit rating reduced.

 

the wonderful world of woke? where is that? disney world?

"debt does not matter. reagan proved that" r cheney

you don't know much about modern monetary theory, do you?

 

So being able to read a teleprompter is a huge accomplishment for you. The man was not intelligent enough to talk to reporters with out word being shown to him. He simply never answered any questions from the press. Much like the brain dead child sniffer we have now. Try again.

 

BREAKING NEWS--
Word is that the White House & the Speaker have reached a tentative agreement, to take care of the Debt ceiling issue, for the next two years. The one concession I heard that McCarthy got, was the removal of a lot from what had been planned to go to new IRS agents. This reduction in funds, however, can be applied elsewhere.

Apparently, McCarthy is willing to get this through, relying on Democrats, if not all his Party supports it. But who knows, maybe they were more bark than bite, and this will satisfy them. I guess we'll see, if they try to remove Kevin from the Speakership.

Hardly: it is the Republicans, exclusively, who have been talking about not coming to an agreement. The Democratic response has been in complete unison, that defaulting is not an option.

So, you criticize Democrats, for taking Republicans at their word?...Yeah, I guess you do kind of have a point. Nevertheless, as poor as Republican credibility is, they still have the power to make good on their threats, that if Biden didn't meet their demands, there would be no agreement. So how is anyone supposed to trust, that Republicans will ultimately do the responsible thing? That is quite a leap of faith, as well.

 

I see no reports anywhere of a deal - for now seems like fake news

edit - yep fake news

 

Just because there isn't yet an article written, doesn't make it "fake news." All I was doing was sharing what an MSNBC host was reporting, had been leaked from someone on the inside. I obviously can't verify it-- at this point, it is still an unconfirmed report; I just thought people would be interested in hearing about this possibility.

 

But the ONLY reason it happened, was because of the Republican Tea Party members in Congress. So your charge is ridiculous projection.

Actually, Obama had been willing to honestly negotiate with Boehner, and agreed to give in to Republican demands, moreso than they had ever been likely to see; an historic, grand bargain, and a huge victory for conservatives-- except that Boehner couldn't sell to his screwball Tea Partiers, that getting 80% of what is on your dream list, in politics, is a huge win. For them, it was 100% or nothing. So they got nothing. "Obatard," indeed. TeaTards, is more like it.

 

Why do so many believe a further destruction of Congress is a good thing? Let's say he capitulates then what? A very small minority in only the House will have in the views of the public forced him to give in to their passing laws without the support of two branches of the government and the US population.
If he stupidly commits this malicious error then you can bet that the next Republican president with a Democrat House will see a 3000 page bill with all the Democrats desires in it when the debt goes up.
The Republicans in Congress, if they are serious about this, will have eliminated Congress as a bicameral body ever, the opposition might as well go home.

My bet is they capitulate in the end "for the good of the country" and them go screaming to their gullible base about how hard they tried. I just hope that some day they'll go back to being the government and quit being actors in a play.

 

He may not but I do and it is a misguided anti capitalist economic disaster. We are proving that every day.

 

"misguided?" do the math. mmt follows directly from keynes general theory.
"anti capitalist?" not hardly.

"economic disaster? mmt did not cost the taxpayers $2T in2221or2009. that was old fashioned capitalism and repub "2 santa claus" implemented by fraud

are you sure you understand mmt?

hmmmm, i'd like to link bill black of kcu, but you may prefer forbes ,,,,

What Is Modern Monetary Theory? (forbes.com)

and i'll put this here for me to read later.

Modern Monetary Theory, explained - Vox

 

What is the error if the Democrats cut or slow down spending?

I guess this is the fundamental difference. You side thinks that all government spending and the growth of it is good, except for national defense. Our side thinks that spending has gotten out of control with massive amounts of waste and corruption. Funding this requires an unsustainable increase in the debt and potentially dangerous increases in the money supply. The result from that is excessive inflation, which is painful to get under control. The late 1970s and the early years of the Reagan administration, with Paul Volcker as the boogie man, were the most recent examples.

 

Republicans have never, ever, cut the budget. They talk a lot but in the end they always spend more. Even budgets Clinton presented Republican congresses had spending added to them and yet he still ran a positive budget in the end.

I say again, if the Republicans are serious, present a budget with zero pork.

 

I agree that both parties spend too much and that many Republicans present nothing but a facade with respect to spending reform. The trouble is Covid broke the flood gates with the trillion dollar spending bills, and many in Congress think that it is healthy and good public policy or at least consistent with their ideological goals. It isn’t good policy, and it’s not sustainable.

Asking Republicans to present a spending plan with “zero pork” is a bridge too far. I don’t think that’s been done in the history of the country, but asking for spending restraint isn’t too much to ask.

 

The ability to buy more votes.

 

And the buck stops WHERE We have learned that no matter who is President "When whatever happens" it's always the last guys fault, the left has made that perfectly clear

 

Social security checks are certain to continue being sent, but it might have a big impact on interest rates.