patrick.net

Vicente says

Social Security is fully funded by payroll taxes.

Defense? Haven't seen Iraq and Afghanistan line items on my payroll stub.

Someone needs to remind the remedial Civics students that are running the country right now, about this fact!

Vicente says

Nobody has answered my question.

Has a country defaulted that was the global reserve currency?

“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

I think they all did in one form or another, typically by devaluation. The History Of The World’s “Reserve” Currency: From Ancient Greece To Today pretty much sums it up. All reserve currencies end badly.

IMF calls for dollar alternative suggests that the uberwealthy already have an exit strategy.

we won't default. Because if they simply refuse to raise the debt limit, that will trigger cuts and that will balance the budget.

All they have to do is literally not raise the debt limit. Of course knowing washington they will probably try to find a way to raise their spending binge spree.

shrekgrinch says

It does prove that all those assholes who don't pay income taxes are getting a free ride for our nation's defense, though. Thanks for pointing that out.

This sums up the Tea Party philosophy:
Under 18 and not working? Asshole.
Disabled vet? Asshole.
Fixed income retiree? Asshole.

The Tea Party is fueled by hatred of our fellow Americans. They target the weakest in society because they are selfish cowards. I support raising taxes on those of us who can afford it. The real Assholes are the people who hate our fellow Americans. Greed and Hate are destroying America. We will overcome because God is on our side.

SoCal Renter says

This sums up the Tea Party philosophy:
Under 18 and not working? Asshole.
Disabled vet? Asshole.
Fixed income retiree? Asshole.

you are overexaggerating and blowing it out of proportion. I understand you are upset at his comments, but going into bipolar mode isn't a good counter.

EncinoMan says

SoCal Renter says

This sums up the Tea Party philosophy:

Under 18 and not working? Asshole.

Disabled vet? Asshole.
Fixed income retiree? Asshole.

you are overexaggerating and blowing it out of proportion. I understand you are upset at his comments, but going into bipolar mode isn't a good counter.

Ha! Shrekgrinch's comments never upset me, they amuse me. He (and now you) admit the Tea Party is fueled by Hate for America.

It's time to Impeach the Tea Party for Treason and High Crimes.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_072811/content/01125106.guest.html

solver says

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_072811/content/01125106.guest.html

Wow that is rich.

Teabaggers not wanting to swallow the Boner Bill, is all really a Democrat plot that only they recognize.

Vicente says

Teabaggers not wanting to swallow the Boner Bill, is all really a Democrat plot that only they recognize.

Information is information, despite the source. I'm neither on the Left, or the Right. Constitutionalism is the name of the game for me. Both parties have decent ideas, but are equally corrupt and that's no matter how you spell it out. They both play into the same corruption that keeps the people controlled and impoverished, or better yet impoverished for easier control.

My rights are my rights as much as they are any other American citizens. If they take away our rights, they take away our liberties and our freedoms.

We should've been paid back some of our own money. Hell, it would have gone to a better cause. Can you imagine every senior citizen with a 10k bonus check for the end of year and on top of their meager monthly check? Those that gave would get back. Instead the greedy mongrols got it and we got jack shit.

I love this graph:

http://digg.com/news/politics/infographic_where_america_spent_all_of_its_money

It says it all.

I also wish we'd all stop finger pointing. We know the good, the bad and the ugly of every rulers rule. We now need to start standing up for our Constitutional Rights and take back our country from the oppressors. We need to vote someone in who is willing to fight for the peoples rights and not for personal agendas of themselves and others.

solver says

We need to vote someone in who is willing to fight for the peoples rights and not for personal agendas of themselves and others.

The someone being? Perhaps you mean someoneS unless you are under the illusion one Jimmy Stewart can really stop that corrupt bill and protect the Scouts.

I doubt the seniors will be targeted first.

They're the most reliable voting segment, soon, they're going to be the largest segment of voters, and they're old enough to have the wisdom - and grouchiness - not to give up their paid for annuity.

Trust me on this, they'll screw Gen X first and hardest - smallest population cohort.

solver says

We now need to start standing up for our Constitutional Rights and take back our country from the oppressors.

What specific constitutional rights have been violated and how?

the primary issue is this

when you pay perpetual interest on perpetually increasing debt to bondholders, you are incentivizing non productivity,

the more you pay the more nonproductive people are lounging around enjoying the fruits of your labor instead of reinvesting it to create real wealth, its reinvested to get more debt, and more undeserved spoils

right now there is a debt grab on, people are lining up to buy us debt because they know there is no significant return in stocks or business, and there is no significant return in stocks or business because the wealth is being sucked up by bondholders
thus the cycle reinforces itself till implosion in either the currency value (inflation) or default (deflation(destroyed bondholder debt)

now look at Argentina charts you will see the massive growth returning immediately after default, go here to see all the charts and data on Argentina
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/data-all-countries.aspx

the us being a reserve currency is hardly relevant, even now institutions are ending their acceptance of US bonds as collateral, so its going to happen either way (its happening right now) the outcome of such an event is uncertain, but it certainly wont take anything from us that was deserved in the first place, more likely it hurts banks more than citizens, in fact it probably helps citizens to not be the reserve currency , because it allows the currency to fluctuate to increase employment, as a reserve currency our dollar gets pegged and stuck unfairly putting people out of work.

and finally whats with all this default talk, if they dont raise the debt ceiling they dont have to default they have more than enough income to pay interest many times over,, the only thing that will be defaulting are social programs unfortunately, so by this logical extension republicans have the ultimate power card, they can literally get anything they want or much more than they want in spending reduction, in fact they can force a balanced budget just by refusing to raise it if they want, and obama will have to figure out if he wants to make a balanced budget with interest payments or without interest payments,

let me just wrap this up that it is highly ironic that liberals dont want to default when that would be the thing that helps the poor and hurts the rich more than anything else, and republicans(some) do want to default and that will hurt the rich terribly and help the poor....? seems counter intuitive, but thats what will happen.

notice in the chart the increased trajectory of economic activity in real prices

surfingerman says

let me just wrap this up that it is highly ironic that liberals dont want to default when that would be the thing that helps the poor and hurts the rich more than anything else, and republicans(some) do want to default and that will hurt the rich terribly and help the poor....? seems counter intuitive, but thats what will happen.

An excellent argument can be made that we don't know what will happen. Also, I would say that all true conservatives are against default, and many of those called liberals these days are just moderate conservatives. Conservative in many ways, including the sense that they try not to be TOTALLY owned by corporate or wall street masters.

It's really unfair to say conservative versus liberal here with the default versus don't default argument.

Basically one has to be an extremist right winger, and provably stupid to want to default. I'm not saying that I can prove defaulting is stupid. I'm saying I challenge you to find a proponent of defaulting who you can prove is intelligent (by past accomplishments, or universities, colleges, or law school attended etc.)

prove is intelligent (by past accomplishments, or universities, colleges, or law school attended etc.)

now thats funny

So you agree that there is nobody with any intellectual credibility advocating default ?

I get that you probably didn't get my point (so many around here are logically impaired). I'm not saying that going to an Ivy league school proves someone is intelligent. Or that one can not be intelligent without going to a great school. I'm saying it's noteworthy that you won't find EVEN ONE person with a noteworthy academic background advocating defaulting.

surfingerman says

now thats funny

Way easier to just say it's funny than it is to prove me wrong. I'm looking into the background of teabagger electees. Not too impressed so far.

in the game of power a smart person wont oppose the ruling power's wishes, any smart person knows well enough not to suggest ideas that would harm those in power openly, even i am not that stupid

do you know how you get to the top of university's, how you get to the top of a business or how to get to the top of politics, you dont get their by being super intelligent, you get their by being intelligent to play the game of power, if you tried to suggest any radical ideas that upset the power structure in any of those three universitys politics business, you will find your career short

I just have a serious issue with your framing it that:

"Liberals don't want to default."

You're implying that we are in a "should we default or not moment," with the liberals ironically against, and some "conservatives" for.

I don't see it that way at all. It's more about certain low life types acting in bad faith, holding the economy hostage to get what they want. If some day in the future, "liberals" use such tactics to push through a socialist agenda, I guarantee a lot the dim bulb loons will be out in the street with their guns screaming bloody murder.

I don't think its a question of "Why shouldn't we default", its a matter of when. I came accross a fact that virtually no country has ever recovered from a debt to GDP ratio of 150% or more. The theory goes that we are already past that if you include the trillions in loans the Fed has made in recent years in the official public debt of 14.3 trillion.

I suspect some in congress believe this to be the case. Its the only way to explain why they would block the debt cieling increase.

No, seniors will not be targeted simply because Obama no longer needs votes when he has dictatorial power -- he is getting it, but just now he is arrogant because he is not getting his dictates accepted and he still needs votes in Congress if not in the County.

A dictatorship STARTS with voters in a democracy asking for and getting something for nothing -- welfare, but soon the dictatorship does NOT need votes and that is the direction we are going.

It is probably both too early and too late to use guns, but when a majority quits, the economy dies and the dictator withers away replaced by barbarism unless some group of honest people take charge like a benign monarchy, but a democracy will always vote for free stuff and every democracy has died. We are near death, India soon behind us -- no other democracies around now, maybe Israel,,,

No, seniors will not be targeted simply because Obama no longer needs votes when he has dictatorial power -- he is getting it, but just now he is arrogant because he is not getting his dictates accepted and he still needs votes in Congress if not in the County.

this is crazy nonsense

A dictatorship STARTS with voters in a democracy asking for and getting something for nothing -- welfare, but soon the dictatorship does NOT need votes and that is the direction we are going.

no, but it can happen that way, anyway i fear you are grossly misinformed the US is probably the farthest thing from a dictatorship possibly imaginable, if anything it would be more oligarchical

It is probably both too early and too late to use guns, but when a majority quits, the economy dies and the dictator withers away replaced by barbarism unless some group of honest people take charge like a benign monarchy, but a democracy will always vote for free stuff and every democracy has died. We are near death, India soon behind us -- no other democracies around now, maybe Israel,,,

i cant even comprehend what you wrote

surfingerman says

now look at Argentina charts you will see the massive growth returning immediately after default, go here to see all the charts and data on Argentina
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/data-all-countries.aspx

Some people think it could happen again:

http://www.profi-forex.us/news/entry4000001230.html

Argentina has a ton of natural resources, and we've had quite a commodities boom in the last decade. Their GDP in 2010 was barely above GDP in 1999, and that's with a ton of inflation since then.

Interesting fact from the site you sent: "Domestic instability and global trends, however, contributed to Argentina's decline from its noteworthy position as the world's 10th wealthiest nation per capita in 1913 to the world's 47th wealthiest in 2008."

Argentina has a ton of natural resources, and we've had quite a commodities boom in the last decade.

excellent point, you cannot discount the effect natural resources has on economic activity, particularly in small countries their economic success / failure may be more a consequence of commodity prices than real structural efficiency within the economy, im sure this positively boosted Argentina's growth if they are a net exporter of raw resources

Their GDP in 2010 was barely above GDP in 1999, and that's with a ton of inflation since then.

im not sure where you got this info, the charts i read showed economic activity in real prices, is much greater than 1999 approaching 40%.

Interesting fact from the site you sent: "Domestic instability and global trends, however, contributed to Argentina's decline from its noteworthy position as the world's 10th wealthiest nation per capita in 1913 to the world's 47th wealthiest in 2008."

yes Argentina had alot of economic ties / relationships in Europe more than many other latin countries, im sure they benefited from their contact ect, in this day and age our economics is characterized by the struggle of the third world countries to rise up and compete with 1st world nations for labor and wages, the free flow of information makes it more possible to compete, im afraid the US will be in stagnation for a long time its going to be hard to grow in the face of such ravenous job demand from much cheaper countries, however de-pegging the dollar, or shedding our reserve currency status would lead to much higher real price economic activity in the US and much higher employment, aka people would be producing more and getting more for their dollar, although making imports more expensive,

the other poster who said loosing reserve currency status would do more for being green is absolutely correct, subsidizing green technology with the current dollar is like trying to piss down your leg to stay warm, we are spending more on preventative medicine than it will ever save us, the best way to be green is to devalue the dollar, that will force recycling, low waste vehicles and manufacturing ect, and also create new jobs, and raise the standard of living for the poor, although it will weaken the US power, and threaten our position as a world power, something i think is welcome anyway

thunderlips11 says

I doubt the seniors will be targeted first.

They're the most reliable voting segment, soon, they're going to be the largest segment of voters, and they're old enough to have the wisdom - and grouchiness - not to give up their paid for annuity.

In a real bind, the govt. thinks not who and how will vote a year or two from now. Rather, who will riot tomorrow. That's how it was in other countries, at least.

Bla, bla, bla. I could care less about the BS. Cold hard financial facts. People handling assets and financial transactions could care less about the BS coming out of some persons mouth.

Plain fact is someone trying to screw me with BS games is going to loose. Because I stick to the numbers and the deals. That goes for the so-called financial news cheaters. That spew out useless and meaningless to me crap every single day. That is for their benifit only, although they make it seem like its to mine. Also political gaming. Hey have fun, cheaters. It's your choice.

I'm in this game for myself. Not the finance con's that are run every day. Or the political gaming which everyone is getting so tired of. Do us a favor, skip elections. Do what you want. We really don't want to hear about it.

As people get some sense. They start to skip on the ridiculous loans and loan terms they were conned into. Home prices are falling to where you can get a house for song and mostly saved cash. Then you will be able to own it within a couple of years. Without slaving in a job and for the mortgage. Then you can say screw you Massah. I got my own. Don't need you or the BS. Freedom from financial slavery and wage slavery. Then we don't have to listen up. Every time they call us to watch and listen to their con's and BS. Free at last.

why shouldn't we simply make cuts? Noone can tell me with a straight face that a creditor thinks it is totally great and peachy to pay credit cards with more credit cards (knowing that some day those payments won't be possible).

You try to pull that off with your credit card company. Tell them you'd like to make a payment by charging their credit card. They'll go ape shit. So this whole pretense of "we shouldn't default" is nothing more than BS to me.

Cut the spending and lets get on a sustainable path.

EncinoMan says

Cut the spending and lets get on a sustainable path.

Sure, let's go "balanced" and pay off that deficit starting Monday.

Let's repossess the scooters and cut off Social Security. Watch the red states squeal like piggies as military bases and jobs and welfare evaporate. Enact GOTP Death Panels so Boehner can decide if your Grandma gets her medication or not. Or maybe we could just have like The Running Man where contestants run a gauntlet and the lucky survivor gets their dialysis.

On Tuesday:

Vincente nothing extreme like that will happen, and you know it.

ArtimusMaxtor says

Plain fact is someone trying to screw me with BS games is going to loose.

Yes anyone doing that is a looser.

corntrollio says

Interesting fact from the site you sent: "Domestic instability and global trends, however, contributed to Argentina's decline from its noteworthy position as the world's 10th wealthiest nation per capita in 1913 to the world's 47th wealthiest in 2008."

Oh bs. Argentina, like so many other countries in history, was wealthy once for a while because of a technology advance and one time circumstances.

The spanish left cattle on the plains in the 1600 and 1700's. The plains of Argentine are a natural breeding ground and the cattle multiplied like crazy. No one could do anything with the cattle because there were no local markets for them in Argentina. The cattle were actually a problem. Then there was the invention of reefer ships in the late 1800''s opening up world wide markets for the meat from these huge formerly useless herds of cattle. Argentina boomed until other countries starting raising large numbers of cattle for consumption on the world markets also. This took quite a bit of time since creating large herds of cattle can't be done overnight, letting Argentina become very wealthy for several decades. Instead of letting markets take their natural course and competing head to head in the world markets Argentina tried to politically maintain their standard of living. Subsidies, duties, land reform, all the usual suspects promoted by self promoting power seeking politicians.

It didn't work, it never works, it will never work. It's an old story that has been seen time and time again throughout history. Argentina had their shot in the sun and they blew it. No one elects politicians that truthfully say "Your standard of living is going to decrease because other countries are now producing x,y,z cheaper than we can". Now Argentine is just another third world basket case and always will be unless the entire political system there changes radically.

While this idea has some merit if it were to be implemented correctly, it might not work to the US advantage in a globalized world. Our government has stacked the deck against the average American through legislation and a default would be like throwing open the gates for foreign investors to sack and pillage in the chaos. When the dust settled, and growth returned, the Americans who endured would be living and working like the Chinese worker and that same worker's employer would be reaping the benefits from our labor force. The American middle class would never recover and we'd end up like Mexico, an oligarchy supported by an international elite who own most of our resources and industries, and extract that wealth for themselves.

Done right, with the government protecting us from starvation, exposure, etc. and exploitation from international interests, it could work, but not with things the way they are currently.

yup as i forecast default is not and never will be an option, the answer is to make super complicated legislation that is too confusing to make anyone angry because they dont understand it, game set match

There are lots of different arguements above. No matter what has been said, "default and wipe debt clean" should never be allowed. If you borrow and overspend, you must pay it back. This include the strategic default and walk away from the mortgage debt of a house.

That said, nothing is able to stop America from defaulting, or any one from walking away from a mortgage. I can walk away and move to Vancouver, for example.

MoneySheep says

No matter what has been said, "default and wipe debt clean" should never be allowed.

No thanks! Oligarchy, aristocracy love that idea. Free peoples prefer the idea of risk management. As in finance has contracts and part of the assumption is walkaways are factored in.

bob2356 says

Oh bs. Argentina, like so many other countries in history, was wealthy once for a while because of a technology advance and one time circumstances.

I'm confused. The quote was that instability ("Now Argentine is just another third world basket case and always will be unless the entire political system there changes radically.") and global trends ("Argentina boomed until other countries starting raising large numbers of cattle for consumption on the world markets also.") made it drop in ranking, and you agree. Why did you say BS?

FortWayne says

why shouldn't we simply make cuts? Noone can tell me with a straight face that a creditor thinks it is totally great and peachy to pay credit cards with more credit cards (knowing that some day those payments won't be possible).

What do you propose cutting first? That's the question -- I don't think anyone disagrees that we need some cuts. The question is where to start, and there are many factors to consider.

surfingerman says

im not sure where you got this info, the charts i read showed economic activity in real prices, is much greater than 1999 approaching 40%.

The website that you sent gave GDP in USD: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/argentina/gdp

1999 is just under 300 and 2010 is 308. That's nominal, not real, and with the massive inflation in Argentina, real would be a lot lower, no? In local currency, of course, you would probably see a different answer.