So we hit the debt limit...

[MadImmortalMan]

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, informed fellow House Republicans on Thursday that the chances of congressional leaders and President Obama reaching a tentative debt-ceiling deal within 48 hours are "maybe 50-50."

That prognosis from Boehner was relayed by several House Republicans as they left a morning briefing with the speaker -- and later confirmed by a GOP leadership aide. Boehner and other Republican and Democratic congressional leaders are set to continue negotiations at the White House on Thursday on a deal to raise the nation's $14.3 trillion debt ceiling.

"I get the impression that it's better than 50-50," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. "It will be agreed upon in the next 48 hours; if not, it won't be for a long time."

In a separate interview, freshman Rep. Billy Long, R-Mo., also said that he came away from the meeting believing a deal in the next 48 hours is "50-50."

But if not, he said, there was a sense that negotiations could come unglued. "It will get done quickly, or not for a long time," said Long.

They and other Republicans, such as Rep. Vern Buchanan, R-Fla., and Trent Franks, R-Ariz., said few specifics were unveiled to them during the conference meeting, although they said Boehner did reiterate that Republicans "aren't interested in raising taxes."

Franks, who is one of the most conservative members of the House, said that he understands the squeeze in which Boehner finds himself, having to negotiate such a deal with the president and Democratic leaders while also having to contend with the demands inside his conference.

But Franks said it is his understanding there are clear indications a proposed deal was in the works, and that "I got the sense that, this July 18 work period [recess], that members should carefully consider their scheduling for signs of flexibility."

[Razgovory]

I guess those Tea Party types will be well served by buying all that gold after all.

[DGuller]

Edit: Oh, and Sanders is crazy to expect 50% of the deficit reduction to come from increasing revenues. Might as well write him off right now.

Why is he crazy?  Revenues as percentage of GDP are at the lowest level in 40 years.  That might have at least something to do with the deficits, you would think.  However, it seems like everybody bought the Republican line hook and sinker that it's the spending that's totally out of control.

[grumbler]

Is there any movement in the US to make your budgetary process work better.

I am not sure what this means.  What in the budgetary process seems broken to you?

[MadImmortalMan]

Edit: Oh, and Sanders is crazy to expect 50% of the deficit reduction to come from increasing revenues. Might as well write him off right now.

Why is he crazy?  Revenues as percentage of GDP are at the lowest level in 40 years.  That might have at least something to do with the deficits, you would think.  However, it seems like everybody bought the Republican line hook and sinker that it's the spending that's totally out of control.

It's nothing to do with whether it's a good idea and everything to do with what could actually pass the Congress.

[crazy canuck]

Is there any movement in the US to make your budgetary process work better.

I am not sure what this means.  What in the budgetary process seems broken to you?

More to the point, what isnt broken.

[grumbler]

Why is he crazy?  Revenues as percentage of GDP are at the lowest level in 40 years.  That might have at least something to do with the deficits, you would think.  However, it seems like everybody bought the Republican line hook and sinker that it's the spending that's totally out of control.

But unemployment is at or near its 40-year high as well.  The Republicans fear that, if they allow revenue to revert to its historical levels, unemployment rates will follow.

[grumbler]

More to the point, what isnt broken.

I was pretty sure you had no point, but thanks for confirming it. 

[DGuller]

Why is he crazy?  Revenues as percentage of GDP are at the lowest level in 40 years.  That might have at least something to do with the deficits, you would think.  However, it seems like everybody bought the Republican line hook and sinker that it's the spending that's totally out of control.

But unemployment is at or near its 40-year high as well.  The Republicans fear that, if they allow revenue to revert to its historical levels, unemployment rates will follow.

[crazy canuck]

More to the point, what isnt broken.

I was pretty sure you had no point, but thanks for confirming it. 

Only someone living under a rock would conclude your system is perfectly fine.  How is it that the worlds most wealthy country cant even figure out how to avoid the possibility that it might not be able to pay its debts?  Until now everyone believed that the chance of the US ever defaulting on their loans was 0 but thanks to your messed up system that can no longer be said with as much certainty.

So rather than playing games, answer the question.  Is there any chance your system will be improved.  If your politicians take the same view as you then I take it the answer is no you think you are perfectly fine as you are.

[MadImmortalMan]

Edit: Oh, and Sanders is crazy to expect 50% of the deficit reduction to come from increasing revenues. Might as well write him off right now.

Why is he crazy?  Revenues as percentage of GDP are at the lowest level in 40 years.  That might have at least something to do with the deficits, you would think.  However, it seems like everybody bought the Republican line hook and sinker that it's the spending that's totally out of control.

It's nothing to do with whether it's a good idea and everything to do with what could actually pass the Congress.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/why-the-g-o-p-cannot-compromise/

[Razgovory]

You know, this would be fucking hilarious if it weren't so serious.  Or at least if it weren't about to happen to us.  I can't believe we have people who are willing to tank the US economy if they don't get their way on a budget.  I'm not exactly sure even why they are actually doing it.  I don't buy the concern about the debt.  They didn't care about it the debt and deficit 10 years ago, what suddenly made them see things differently?  I suspect that as soon as Republican President is a elected, they'll forget all about this debt and deficit talk.  I mean, they've done that twice in the last thirty years.  What indicator is there that they won't do it again?

[MadImmortalMan]

You know, this would be fucking hilarious if it weren't so serious.  Or at least if it weren't about to happen to us.  I can't believe we have people who are willing to tank the US economy if they don't get their way on a budget.  I'm not exactly sure even why they are actually doing it.  I don't buy the concern about the debt.  They didn't care about it the debt and deficit 10 years ago, what suddenly made them see things differently.  I suspect that as soon as Republican President is a elected, they'll forget all about this debt and deficit talk.  I mean, they've done that twice in the last thirty years.  What indicator is there that they won't do it again?

Easy. We keep electing Democrats for President. 

[The Minsky Moment]

Is there any movement in the US to make your budgetary process work better.

The budgetary process isn't really the problem; the problem is that the political system as a whole is designed to require political compromise.  That is fine in concept but breaks down if there are enough individual officeholders for whom compromise is anathema.

[grumbler]

Only someone living under a rock would conclude your system is perfectly fine.  How is it that the worlds most wealthy country cant even figure out how to avoid the possibility that it might not be able to pay its debts? 

I am not sure what "your system" means in this context.  I asked you what you thought was broken in the budgetary process, and your answer seems to be "stuff."  There can be no debate when you won't even make a point except "some stuff doesn't work" without making it at all clear what it is in the budgetary process (which is the issue you raised) that you think does not work.

Until now everyone believed that the chance of the US ever defaulting on their loans was 0 but thanks to your messed up system that can no longer be said with as much certainty.

That isn't the fault of the budgetary process.  It is the fault of the two-party system with parties that cannot compromise.

So rather than playing games, answer the question.

You cannot have my line!    What in the budgetary process do you think is broken?

Is there any chance your system will be improved.

The budgetary process?  Not much.  I thnk earmarks may be permanently trimmed back or eliminated, but I think that is about it.  The President will continue to submit budget requests, the authorization and appropriations committees will continue to work pretty much exactly as they do, and the floor proceedings and conference committees don't seem to be at all controversial, except for the earmarks issue.

If your politicians take the same view as you then I take it the answer is no you think you are perfectly fine as you are.

I am pretty sure that my politicians see things the way I do.  If your politicians are as unable to answer questions are you are, my politicians won't be able to understand what the fuck your politicians' point is, either.