Why are Republicans expected to just cave on the debt ceiling?

It's absolutely true.

The GOP's Clean House bill is marvelous in it's spotlessness. If the Dem Senate wants a different bill, why don't they pass it? Does the Dem Senate seem a little disorganized?

It seems like Americans are getting tired of Biden/Dems and all this reckless spending and shrinking paychecks for us. We've been tightening our belts for 24 straight months thanks to the shrinking paychecks from Biden/Dems reckless spending, and they are refusing to even tighten a little bit, in exchange for a One. Five Trillion dollar debt ceiling hike? And the Dem Senate is so disorganized that they can't pass any bill, at all?

Do you ever fear that Dems have ceased to function?

To give you a sense of just how bad it is for Dems: 'Brutal' Poll Reveals the Truth About Joe Biden

'The latest poll from the Washington Post and ABC News sent shockwaves through America’s media commentariat over the weekend, with numbers that are absolutely dire for President Biden. “This poll is just brutal”, announced former Democratic spokesperson turned ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos. He’s correct: with approval ratings at just 36 percent, and lagging far behind Donald Trump and Ron DeSantis in potential general election matchups, the voting numbers are terrible. But the personal ratings are somehow even worse than that — 68 percent of those polled, including 48 percent of Democrats, believe Biden is too old for another term. And just 32 percent think he has the mental acuity to serve as president — including 69 percent of Independents.'

Meanwhile, the House GOP has their clean bill all passed to raise the debt ceiling by $1.5T along with some small sensible steps to lead the Federal Government toward returning to living withing our means.

 

It's not clear that they can pass anything.

I'm at a complete loss as to why you would make a claim like that.


Revenue since the election of Reagan and beyond. We as a people have never given the Federal government more than we give them now. They need to learn to live within our means, just like everyone of us do.

Everything has been paid for. What is going to be trimmed in exchange for the ONE.FIVE TRILLION DOLLAR debt ceiling increase, is planned future spending. It may not even be actual decreases, but it might just be less of an increase than originally planned.

Biden/Dems are not in a great position with the American People:

'The numbers jarred Stephanopoulos and commentators across the spectrum. But they’re also a wake-up call for the media about their limitations in selling certain ideas to the American public, well after they’ve seen enough evidence to the contrary.'

You guys really need to take another look at RFK. He's the real deal and he has drawing power across the entire spectrum; Right/Left/Middle, GOP/Dems/Indies.

 

Why don’t both sides campaign on fiscal responsibility?

Examples;

1994 mid term elections; Republicans have in fact accelerated Clinton’s projection of a balanced budget.

Obama’s pledge to cut Bush’s $1.4Trillion deficit in half before the end of his first term……I knew it would eventually be cut in half.

And now, tonight’s joke

Trump in 2016; “I will eliminate the debt in 8 years”

 

The fact that he is competitive right now is really quite something. Could he really take over Biden?

 

Reagan tried to cut spending along with his major tax cuts, but got sandbagged by Tip O'Neil. However, there is a fair amount of truth in what you say like as McConnell famously said you do not lose votes by spending money.

 

A condition they do not insist on when a Repub is in the WH.

 

Here is your answer: Reagan TRIED to cut spending, but he DID cut taxes. If spending would have been a priority, he would have TRIED to cut taxes, but WOULD HAVE cut spending.

Why: Because he knew that cutting spending would have lowered GDP growth -- not good for getting re-elected.

 

Ridiculous. Reagan made the absurd campaign promise that he could increase defense spending, cut taxes, and balance the budget. But he had no idea how. John Stockman, Reagan's OMB head, famously recalled an anecdote that occurred during a budget meeting with Ron. One during which Stockman outlined the spending cuts necessary to fulfill Reagan's promise. It was during that meeting when he realized Reagan had no clue as to the severity of the cuts to social safety net spending necessary to balance the budget. Your attempt to scapegoat Tip is revisionist history. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1981/12/the-education-of-david-stockman/305760/

 

The party out of power always use the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip in hopes of getting something they can’t through normal, regular congressional legislative actions. Most of the time it doesn’t work, but sometimes it does. Both parties do this. Here are the senate votes from the Bush and Obama administrations.


BUSH THE 2ND TENURE

Year

2003 Democrats for 3 against 45 Republicans for 50 against 1

2004 Democrats for 2 against 46 Republicans for 50 against 1

2006 Democrats for 0 against 44 Republicans for 52 against 3


OBAMA PRESIDENCY

2009 Democrats for 59 against 0 Republicans for 1Republicans against 40

2010 Democrats for 60 against 0 Republicans for 0 Republicans against 40

2012 Democrats for 52 against 3 Republicans for 1Republicans against 45

2013 Democrats for 54 against 0 Republicans for 18 Republicans against 27


Notice how a change in the presidency and political party change how each party supports or opposes raising the debt ceiling. Far as I know there wasn’t any votes taken during the 4 years of Trump.


So a debate, brinkmanship, etc. over the debt ceiling is normal. Only who get hyperbolic about it spreading their doom and gloom chances, depending who which party holds the presidency.

 

LOL. Thanks for the chuckle.

 

Or the democrats won't take up a house bill that extends the debt ceilings. We can't get spending reductions because both parties view spending as their power base because it is intended to buy votes. We have a serious problem.

 

I really dislike dealing with arguments that have nothing to do with what I posted. But here goes. I said liberals support more government while conservatives support more freedom. I didn't say anything about spending. I didn't say anything about political parties. Government has been overspending since the Jackson administration. That includes a lot of both political parties. Please stop doing this.

 

I don't know the answer but I will give you a guess. I assume that they want to cut taxes to appeal to their voters for political reasons. They continue to spend because they view it as their basis of power for collecting future votes. It is putting personal interests ahead of those of the country. It is the normal endemic corruption in congress. What's your guess?

 

This is not true as I have said repeatedly. They did not borrow the money. They intended to borrow the money assuming the debt ceiling would be raised since they didn't yet have the borrowing power. That is the issue we face. We overspend to an astonishing degree.

 

It's not a guess, I showed the math before, many times, including in this thread:

"Let's look at 2019 numbers, before covid, just so the numbers can't be blamed on the pandemic: US GDP $21 trillion. US deficit: $1 trillion (roughly). That's 4.8% of GDP. GDP growth was 2.9 %. That means GDP growth would have been NEGATIVE without government deficit spending."

Do you think the voters would elect a president who would promise them low GDP growth and, possibly a recession, for the purpose of reducing the deficit? Would you?

The truth is that we blame the politicians, but it is us, the voters, who elect these same type of politicians over and over again, because the vast majority of voters cannot do, or do not want to do the math. It's easy to say "cut spending", if one hasn't done the math. But, that's where we are at. Voters want to cut spending, but they do not want to take cuts to their own government benefits, or cuts to the GDP. In other words, they want their cake and eat it too. Politicians comply because they HAVE to, otherwise they will be thrown out of office.

As I said above, I wish the GOP and Dems could work on a pact: No new spending in the next 10 years, and no tax cuts. That includes military, social programs, SS etc. That would be the responsible thing to do, slowly reduce the deficit without upsetting the apple cart. What do you think would happen? Would retirees just take a stagnant SS check without punishing these politicians at the ballot box? And that goes for EVERY part of the federal budget, SOMEBODY will be negatively affected when the spending is cut.

 

When is the last Republican President who served under this sort of inflationary spiral?

 

Is inflation what you think McCarthy's reckless gambit is about? Then you are mistaken. Or he is.

 

Of course. Government has no business being a part of the mathematics of economy in the first place. We should go back to GNP. Government is a drain on the economy not a contributor to it.

Sure but that doesn't change the situation. We still have to deal with congressional corruption.

Not good enough. We need less government, not the same bloated amount.

 

Sure but that doesn't change the situation. We still have to deal with congressional corruption.
We need less government, not the same bloated amount. Incidentally you didn't answer my question.

 

Now, the time as come to educate several members on this site.

Indisputable fact; In 1997, Congress nearly balanced the budget……Deficit; $22 billion

FY1997 Receipts as a percentage of GDP; 18.7%

Note; at 18.7%, we certainly didn’t have a revenue problem

FY1997 Outlays as a percentage of GDP; 18.9%

Note; at 18.9%, we certainly didn’t have a spending problem

___________

TRUMP’s percentages

FY2019 Receipts as a percentage of GDP; 16.4%

Note; Back then, and at 16.4%, Republicans were citing; “We don’t have a revenue problem”

False!

FY2019 Outlays as a percentage of GDP; 21%

Note; Back then, and at 21%, Republicans were citing; “We have a spending problem”

True, considering the fact that Gingrich & Co.’s 18.9% was fiscally responsible.

Question; In 2019, what would have been the deficit had Congress reduced its spending to a fiscally responsible 18.9% of GDP?

The MATH;

Outlays at 18.9% - Receipts at 16.4% = 2.5%

2019 Real GDP; $19 Trillion X 2.5% = a deficit of $475 billion

—————

BIDEN’s percentages

FY2022 Receipts as a percentage of GDP; 19.6%

Note; Mainly due to excessive government spending, and excessive corporate profits/“inflation” in quotation.

Note; We currently don’t have a revenue problem considering the fact that Gingrich & Co.’s 1997 Receipts amounted to 18.7% of GDP

FY2022 Outlays as a percentage of GDP; 25.1%

Note; We certainly have a spending problem

Source; OMB Historical Tables

 

Spending and gov't go hand in hand.

And we have 2 parties running the country. What libs want or what conservatives want hardly matters. They have hardly any say.

 

I don't know if he is the real deal.
As an Indie, and from glancing quickly at news stories on him, he's a believer in too many conspiracy theories. Especially those related to the recent pandemic.

But, he might be of interest if he isn't really out there in conspiracy theory land. If he ever become relevant enough to take a deeper look at.

 

Correct. When a R is in the WH, spending has been some of the highest.

See trumps 1st budget with R congress.

 

Now, let’s get serious…..

What happened to the Common Sense Conservatives?

For example;

Back in December 2017, the common sense conservatives wanted to finance the tax cuts by cutting/eliminating several tax loopholes.

Myself, I also wanted to eliminate the mortgage interests deduction.

National Association of Realtor’s rationale; “The mortgage interest deduction has long increased our homeownership rate, thus, good for our economy”


My rationale; Wait a minute…..Canada doesn’t have a mortgage interest deduction, and their homeownership rate has long been higher than the U.S.????????

Note; My daughter, a nurse, is married to a Canadian health professional, and both resides in Vancouver.

Household income; $240,000
$1.4 million mortgage, ZERO government subsidies

Also, since we’ve significantly increased the Standard Deduction, high income earners have mainly itemized the mortgage interest deduction.

IMO, eliminate the mortgage interest deduction, or replace it with something else.

 

In Dec 2015, common sense Liberals wanted to finance a $305 billion infrastructure bill by raising revenue….if my memory serves me right, Obama wanted to repatriate X billions to offset the cost;

Republicans refused to raise revenue, and preferred borrowing money.