The Return to the Debt Limit Apocolypse Thread

[The Minsky Moment]

I just figured it was absurdist poetry, in the tradition of Ogden Nash.

[The Minsky Moment]

Gotta love the ability to blow up a procedural process on basic governmental accounting

It's not really even that.  It's an oddball, vestigial legislative artifact left over from a WW1-era bond drive.

[The Brain]

I just figured it was absurdist poetry, in the tradition of Ogden Nash.

It's Pluto.

[Strix]

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can't pay its own bills. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit.

So which payments do you want the US to default on?

We know it won't be Medicaid. 

[derspiess]

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can't pay its own bills. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit.

So which payments do you want the US to default on?

Go back to 2006 and ask Obama! 

You guys are awesome.

[DGuller]

There is a bit of a difference between piling on debt during the height of the boom, and during very weak economy.  Not that I agree with Obama in 2006, but the context is important.

[derspiess]

There is a bit of a difference between piling on debt during the height of the boom, and during very weak economy.  Not that I agree with Obama in 2006, but the context is important.

Still gotcha on that one  

[Valmy]

Score!

[DGuller]

There is a bit of a difference between piling on debt during the height of the boom, and during very weak economy.  Not that I agree with Obama in 2006, but the context is important.

Still gotcha on that one  

Not really.  Obviously I didn't recognize Obama's words, otherwise I would know what you were up to.  However, same words and actions can be adequate in one context, and retarded in another context.  You implicitly put the words of 2006 into the context of 2013, and that's what I reacted to.  Your gotcha relies on the context being irrelevant.

In 2006, we could've conceivably had surplus without destroying the economy.  We couldn't achieve that by turning on a dime, so denying the debt ceiling increase was not the way to achieve that, but the argument against debt piling on was strong.  In 2013, only retards and nuts think that we can have a budget surplus.

[Scipio]

Yesterday, the Heritage Foundation sent out a morning alert claiming that default is a "red herring":

The U.S. is not going to default on its interest payments, Foster said, and "this assurance rests not on congressional action to raise the debt ceiling, but on the simple fact that the Treasury has far more than enough funds to pay all interest as it comes due."

(the source here is "JD Foster, PhD") 

This is wrong, as pointed out in my OP here.  It ignores the fact that interest payments are very lumpy and there are individual days where interest payment obligations far exceed the government's daily cash inflow.

Unfortunately there are probably some influential people in DC who actually read Heritage stuff and are under the horrible misconception that their "analyses" have some kind of rigor or credibility.

When I was in law school I was on the editorial board of the Journal of National Security Law.  We received one submission from a Heritage fellow that was so incoherent, so lacking in quality writing, and so devoid of citation that we just rejected it.  It was fucking offal.

Ever since then, I can't take them seriously.

[The Brain]

Actually, offal isn't half bad. But I understand your point.

[derspiess]

There is a bit of a difference between piling on debt during the height of the boom, and during very weak economy.  Not that I agree with Obama in 2006, but the context is important.

Still gotcha on that one  

Not really.  Obviously I didn't recognize Obama's words, otherwise I would know what you were up to.  However, same words and actions can be adequate in one context, and retarded in another context.  You implicitly put the words of 2006 into the context of 2013, and that's what I reacted to.  Your gotcha relies on the context being irrelevant.

In 2006, we could've conceivably had surplus without destroying the economy.  We couldn't achieve that by turning on a dime, so denying the debt ceiling increase was not the way to achieve that, but the argument against debt piling on was strong.  In 2013, only retards and nuts think that we can have a budget surplus.

Yeah, keep talkin' 

[Scipio]

Actually, offal isn't half bad. But I understand your point.

Offal can be good to eat, but it's shitty policy.

[derspiess]

Offal is unfit for human consumption.  But I'm glad they put it on the traditional Argentine asado-- I can go for the good cuts of steak while others are distracted by the sweetbread and that nasty braided small intestine.

[Ed Anger]

Offal is unfit for human consumption.  But I'm glad they put it on the traditional Argentine asado-- I can go for the good cuts of steak while others are distracted by the sweetbread and that nasty braided small intestine.

Ugh, Foreigners.