[Cyncceply]

Progressives don't really want to "grow" the economy they want to reshape it into the proper model where the cities blossom into a managed utopia where the 50% employed ride bikes to work and are happy to pay 50% or higher in overall taxation so government agencies can meet the daily needs of their fellow man, where all agree to the proper thoughts and the president shits vanilla ice-cream that smells of cinnamon.

Talk about a straw man.

[hellencomstar]

Whats comical is the "progressives" only plan to pull entitlements back from the brink is to grow the economy, but then propose every anti- growth taxation, regulation, and spending policy under the sun.

Good grief! Business and finance have been deregulated exponentially in the past 30 years! Hell, some of you act like we are more regulated today, than less. That just isn't the truth.

So you wanta give tax breaks to investors, so they can invest in China or India, or some other cheap labor, worker abusing envirionment? Geesh!

Look around you! This economic model has changed, and what worked in the past, is a non starter today. It is called Globalization. But you would not have an argument if you recognized the facts, so ignore em, and carry on!

[18holesin]

When has capitalism ever worked? Capitalism is a failed system because there are no checks and balances to the power of the corporation. Corporations just grow ever so much more powerful each and every day.

Capitalism has never failed. The only failure is when government steps in and tries to regulate it and tax it.

Where as socialism has a proven record of failures, every nation that used it has failed. Sure there are some pros to socialism, but they quickly put a strain on the majority in financials. You simply can not (no matter what it is) have your cake and eat it too. There is always a failure in some form or fashion.

[MasdMnPa]

Progressives don't really want to "grow" the economy they want to reshape it into the proper model where the cities blossom into a managed utopia where the 50% employed ride bikes to work and are happy to pay 50% or higher in overall taxation so government agencies can meet the daily needs of their fellow man, where all agree to the proper thoughts and the president shits vanilla ice-cream that smells of cinnamon.

Yeah, progressives don't want to grow the economy, which is why they only want to repeat what the great generation did to get itself out of an economic slump, which is invest in American workers.

It's an insult to my grandparents generation that we aren't taking from them what worked so well and helped create the most prosperous era in American history.

[TCjwwhcY]

The vote was a stunt pulled by Republicans in an attempt to get Democrats on the record as being for raising the debt ceiling without any cuts to offset it, despite the fact that House Speaker Boehner has already said that the House must vote to raise the debt ceiling or else the country would face a devastating effect that would ripple around the world should the US tell the world that it will default on it's loans.

Republicans wish to use this vote as a bargaining chip in the effort to get Democrats to help them erase their shame, which was the vote to abolish Medicare as we know it. Since that vote, Republicans have been found out and their constituents are angry, and so the only way to get this issue to go away is to try to force the Democrats to also vote to cut Medicare so that the issue can't be used by Democrats in next year's election.

The debt ceiling will be raised and Boehner and company will vote in favor of doing it on it's own. They don't have any bargaining chips here, and risk facing the wrath of everyone should they decide to let the country default on it's obligations.

All that Democrats need to do is stand up for Medicare and seniors, and that's not hard for them to do, since 80% of the public does not want Medicare to be cut at all.

Republicans know the shit's going to hit the fan with the teabaggers when they have to take the vote for it, so they're doing their best to weasel out of taking responsibility by trying to get the Democrats to give them cover for the most boneheaded vote they've taken in a long time. If we can get the Dems to vote on cutting Medicare too, they can't use it against us next year is their thinking. Pretty simple.

Republicans are fucked on this one, because their constituents are already mad at them for the Ryan vote, and now the teabagger base of crazies who've taken over the party will go crazy on their own once the debt ceiling is raised by Boehner. And it will be raised even if Boehner has to go out there and cry to get it done, just the way he did on his plea for the TARP vote.

Democrats just have to sit back and watch things unfold. Some of them will vote for it, some against, but in the end, Republicans must vote to do it, and that's just the way it is, and Democrats don't have to give on anything because in the end, the responsibility falls on John Boehner and the Republicans who control the House to either raise the debt limit or send the country into default. Democrats know how to claim defeat out of the jaws of victory, but this one is a great big gimme, and there is no pressure on them to give in on the Republican Mediscare scam.

Could not have said it better myself. Unfortunately I don't think the Dems have the spine to call the GOP bluff. They will give the GOP something but hopefully nothing that can be considered a victory in GOP and Tea Party circles.

BTW you don't have capitalism in America. The GOP has assured that all the money is flowing nicely to the richest few who have taken advantage of an unregulated economy. That kind of system will eventually collapse. BTW the Bush tax cuts were designed to expire on their own because of the effect they would have on the deficit. This was known by the people who wrote the bill.

[Vemnagelignc]

Yeah, progressives don't want to grow the economy, which is why they only want to repeat what the great generation did to get itself out of an economic slump, which is invest in American workers.

It's an insult to my grandparents generation that we aren't taking from them what worked so well and helped create the most prosperous era in American history.

Well then, you will be glad to know the Arabs are working on it.

Be patient, fascist empires are not built in a day.

[dayclaccikere]

Boehner can't raise the debt ceiling until the last minute or he'll face a teabagger revolt.
So, nothing will happen until the market panics and starts to signal a disaster, and then both sides will have the cover to make a deal.
Unfortunately, that will probably add a few hundred basis points to the interest rates for a few years, which really isn't that helpful.

[duminyricky]

Yeah, progressives don't want to grow the economy, which is why they only want to repeat what the great generation did to get itself out of an economic slump, which is invest in American workers.

It's an insult to my grandparents generation that we aren't taking from them what worked so well and helped create the most prosperous era in American history.

You want another World War to devastate Europe so that we can be the go to guys to help them rebuild?

Seems a little selfish to me.

[duminyricky]

Boehner can't raise the debt ceiling until the last minute or he'll face a teabagger revolt.
So, nothing will happen until the market panics and starts to signal a disaster, and then both sides will have the cover to make a deal.
Unfortunately, that will probably add a few hundred basis points to the interest rates for a few years, which really isn't that helpful.

As opposed to interest rates of almost zero which are drastically distorting various markets, the harm of which you can't understand.

[dayclaccikere]

As opposed to interest rates of almost zero which are drastically distorting various markets, the harm of which you can't understand.

So having a lower credit rating, and paying higher interest rates, for every dollar based loan, will help the economy.

I can't wait for you to explain that one........

[Vemnagelignc]

Good grief! Business and finance have been deregulated exponentially in the past 30 years! Hell, some of you act like we are more regulated today, than less. That just isn't the truth.

Businesses certainly are regulated more today, by environmental red tape alone.

And as for the financial sector, I don't think it's changed so much as the number of people who are vulnerable to its shenanigans has increased dramatically.

Of course, government mandated, politically correct lending made a giant mess of things.

So you wanta give tax breaks to investors, so they can invest in China or India, or some other cheap labor, worker abusing envirionment? Geesh!

Look around you! This economic model has changed, and what worked in the past, is a non starter today. It is called Globalization. But you would not have an argument if you recognized the facts, so ignore em, and carry on!

Yes, the world has changed. The developing world has developed, and we need to be able to compete with them. The sooner the labor cartels figure that out the better.

[Vemnagelignc]

So having a lower credit rating, and paying higher interest rates, for every dollar based loan, will help the economy.

I can't wait for you to explain that one........

Banks can't make new loans if they are unable to raise money off those they have already lent to.

[WFSdZuP3]

Banks can't make new loans if they are unable to raise money off those they have already lent to.

That is a pretty common-sense observation; however, in the current Great Recession the Federal Reserve has made many billions of dollars available to member banks virtually interest free as a way of getting the economy moving.

Alas, the banks have used this free cash to "strengthen reserves" (i.e. sit on it) and lend it to large corporation which have used the money to repurchase their own stock.

There is no point in cluck-clucking about what has happened. It is the "free market" at work doing what it does best: generating ROI (return on investment, aka "profit").

The problem is that the goal of the "free market" and the needs of American society at this critical point are painfully divergent. The society needs job creation, wage increases, and increased circulation. A hundred years ago, increasing ROI would produce those social benefits as well. Today, however, the two sets of goals have become de-linked, not by greed or nefarious intent but by the nature of the new world economy, a fact that the Republican Party doesn't seem to grasp or pretends not to know.

The Big Government which conservatives hate so came into being as a necessary counter-weight to Big Business, whose explosive growth in the industrial economy following the Civil War transformed not only the economy but the society.

The idea that a "free market" could not only regulate itself but provide maximum social benefit comes from the earlier era of Adam Smith when the economy was Mercantile and essentially agricultural. Small government was inadequate for an industrial economy a century ago. It is a catastrophy in the in post-industrial global economy in which American society exists today.

[Unlopssesuj]

Talk about a straw man.

That's not a strawman it's a biased observation based on what lot's of progressives and lefties have said in many threads here on uspol.

[Unlopssesuj]

Yeah, progressives don't want to grow the economy, which is why they only want to repeat what the great generation did to get itself out of an economic slump, which is invest in American workers.

It's an insult to my grandparents generation that we aren't taking from them what worked so well and helped create the most prosperous era in American history.

So where are those factory jobs that helped the most prosperous generation in America? The one that prospered becasue pretty much every other industrial state of size on the planet had been knocked to it's knees in WW2? The one that beloved their tyrant so much they decided to pass laws to keep another tyrant from coming to power?

What worked for them was working. Having a place to work and working hard. Too many politicians have been happy to be bribed to have those places to work shipped overseas for decades.

Borrowing more money will not be the solution itself as I'd hope you'd readily agree. We need serious investment in productive and even profitable fields. To build up the American worker we're going to have to invoke one of the policies progressives and all sorts of political wanks have decried for decades...."protectionism". For what we must do is protect U.S. industries, protect our resources for our domestic exploitation (and not the inevitable fire sale that is looming), protect our children and get our population working and protect our future.

[duminyricky]

So having a lower credit rating, and paying higher interest rates, for every dollar based loan, will help the economy.

I can't wait for you to explain that one........

I didn't say anything (nor did you in your earlier post) about a lower credit rating. That is never a good thing. Of course, borrowing more than one can afford to repay can also lower one's credit rating.

What I said is that interest rates near zero are drastically distorting various markets, the harm of which you can't understand. Like clockwork, you showed your lack of understanding with your ignorant little post.

Interest rates in a free market are basically the price of capital. When capital is scarce, the price (interest rates) goes up. This entices people to forgo current consumption in favor of earning a return on their capital via savings, and making borrowing more expensive. Conversely, as savings increase, the supply of capital increases, thus driving its price (interest rates) down. This, in turn, encourages current consumption by making returns on savings less attractive, and borrowing less expensive.

Ever afraid of the natural business cycle, and the slowing economy that it necessarily entails on the downside of that cycle, the government / fed has created a Frankenstein's Monster of economic distortions. Over consumption and mis-allocation of capital have become the norm. But as the most recent bubbles have popped, not even dropping interest rates to near zero could revive demand for consumption.

Only time will tell what even greater monster they are creating by holding rates near zero and flooding the world with fiat "money".

[dayclaccikere]

When have a command economy ever worked?

During WWII the US had a command economy, to a lesser extent during the Korean and Vietnam Wars.

[Vemnagelignc]

That is a pretty common-sense observation; however, in the current Great Recession the Federal Reserve has made many billions of dollars available to member banks virtually interest free as a way of getting the economy moving.

Yup, each truckload of paper worth less than the last. And everything in the real economy cost more.

Alas, the banks have used this free cash to "strengthen reserves" (i.e. sit on it) and lend it to large corporation which have used the money to repurchase their own stock.

They were very nearly bleed dry by politically correct lending, a policy that is still in force by the way.

There is no point in cluck-clucking about what has happened. It is the "free market" at work doing what it does best: generating ROI (return on investment, aka "profit").

Yes, they exist to enrich their stockholders. Also known as anyone with a 401K.

The problem is that the goal of the "free market" and the needs of American society at this critical point are painfully divergent. The society needs job creation, wage increases, and increased circulation. A hundred years ago, increasing ROI would produce those social benefits as well. Today, however, the two sets of goals have become de-linked, not by greed or nefarious intent but by the nature of the new world economy, a fact that the Republican Party doesn't seem to grasp or pretends not to know.

Thats what happens when the Labor Cartels stubbornly refusing to engage in the free market, their customers have vote with their wallets.

The Big Government which conservatives hate so came into being as a necessary counter-weight to Big Business, whose explosive growth in the industrial economy following the Civil War transformed not only the economy but the society.

There was a time when basic health and safety required government oversight. It's all about being a parasite now.

The idea that a "free market" could not only regulate itself but provide maximum social benefit comes from the earlier era of Adam Smith when the economy was Mercantile and essentially agricultural. Small government was inadequate for an industrial economy a century ago. It is a catastrophe in the in post-industrial global economy in which American society exists today.

It largely a matter of technological progress. There was a time when industry required a massive infrastructure. That will soon change.

[Unlopssesuj]

During WWII the US had a command economy, to a lesser extent during the Korean and Vietnam Wars.

Hmmm, wasn't there a huge poor underclass (sometimes defined by ethnicity) in those days?

[drmarshallusa]

I heard on talk radio last night that they were voting and thus far, it is a no-go.
Rumor has it that the democratic party was split down the middle, half voted "NO".
I can't wait for the official release but it sounds like some Dems in the office do have a brain.

ahoy Headbanger,

i have one question, matey;

if th US defaults on its mighty debt, how will this affect job creation in our great land?

- MeadHallPirate