The game of Default Chicken ends, for now.

[God Emperor Baldur]

We know they won't do it because the blame will fall on them if the government shuts down.

[Bortelex]

Senator Armstrong

Project 429

Economic collapse? The government shutting down would be the best thing for the economy in centuries.

If by that you mean fling the world into economic depression and probably end nations, then yeah.

If the temporary shutting down of one nation's government has that much of an effect on the world economy then isn't that a reason to reduce that nation's debt and the role of that nation's government in the economy?

Senator Armstrong

Government finances are not even close to the same thing as individual finances.

How exactly are they different? As far as I can tell the only difference is a matter of magnitude.

[X of Castigation]

Bortelex

Senator Armstrong

Government finances are not even close to the same thing as individual finances.

How exactly are they different? As far as I can tell the only difference is a matter of magnitude.

Well for one, much of he US debt is owed to... itself. For two, the US will never, ever, default (unless they choose to, ie debt ceiling). Foreign nations with ownership of US debt will never call it in because that would be economic suicide. The US is, and probably will remain for some time, the economic centre of the world.

[Michael Noire]

obama care is bad for the economy. for those of you who are isolated from the front lines, you have no idea, but its a disaster. I watch person after person get their hours slashed because of it. people getting laid off across the country, businesses going under, and that's not even counting the other obama fiasco related to guns.

obama has a** raped the economy since he went into office. only delusional ******** think otherwise.

[God Emperor Baldur]

Michael Noire

obama care is bad for the economy. for those of you who are isolated from the front lines, you have no idea, but its a disaster. I watch person after person get their hours slashed because of it. people getting laid off across the country, businesses going under, and that's not even counting the other obama fiasco related to guns.

obama has a** raped the economy since he went into office. only delusional ******** think otherwise.

Source

[azulmagia]

Lord Akhenaton

We know they won't do it because the blame will fall on them if the government shuts down.

You're assuming that they CARE.

Also, take a looky at this:

Quote:

House Republicans plan to demand major perks for coal companies and Wall Street banks, alongside healthcare and social service cuts and a one-year delay in the implementation of Obamacare, in exchange for raising the debt ceiling until the end of 2014, according to a source close to the House GOP leadership.

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats have repeatedly stated that they will not negotiate over raising the debt limit, saying they will not make a political football of the U.S. government's creditworthiness.

The Republican plan, which would also constitute a significant overhaul of the environmental and financial regulatory system, would cut pensions for Federal employees and raise taxes on immigrant families with parents who do not have a Social Security number. The document claims $7 billion in savings from restricting the child tax credit to immigrants who do have a number, and up to $84 billion from "reform" to the Federal Employee Retirement System.

The plan would increase Medicare means testing, and would eliminate social service block grants and a fund for preventative healthcare in the Affordable Care Act that conservatives have characterized as a "slush fund." Block grants are a capped entitlement program given to states to help fund services like daycare, transportation and home-delivered meals. The Prevention and Public Health Fund has included funds for training primary care doctors and supporting healthy corner stores.

Coal and oil companies would benefit from provisions to expand offshore drilling and drilling on federal lands. The proposal blocks the federal government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions and coal ash, and would give Congress the power to veto any "major" regulation issued by a federal agency (because an affirmative vote would be required, Congress could void new rules simply through inaction).

In addition, the document claims $23 billion in budget savings from a provision to "Eliminate Dodd-Frank Bailout Fund." The money, however, is not legally permitted to support collapsing banks. Dodd-Frank established the fund to allow regulators to pay some creditors of large banks when they fail, in order to prevent a domino of failures akin to what occurred in 2008 when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy. Absent the fund, the government would have no effective way of limiting the economic damage from a bank's failure, increasing the likelihood that a bailout would be necessary.

(link)

Keep on reading at least to the Greg Sargent snippet:

Greg Sargent

Here’s my worry: By laying out a truly insane list of demands, Republicans could perversely succeed in reframing this battle — at least in the eyes of some in the Beltway press — as a standard Washington confrontation in which both sides are making demands and the impasse is the result of each side’s refusal to meet somewhere in the middle. You could easily see a scenario in which Republicans “agree” to drop some of their demands and argue they are trying to compromise, with some commentators then wondering aloud why the White House is refusing to negotiate in kind.

So let’s say it again: This is not a standard Washington negotiation, in which each side is demanding concessions from the other. Democrats are not asking Republicans to make any concessions. They are asking Republicans to join them in not destroying the U.S. economy. House Republican leaders — who have themselves conceded not raising the debt limit would jeopardize the full faith and credit of the U.S. government — are asking Democrats to make a series of concessions in exchange for not unleashing widespread economic havoc that will hurt all of us. But agreeing not to destroy the economy doesn’t count as a concession on the part of Republicans, and no one should expect it to be rewarded with anything in return. Just because Republicans are trying to frame this as a conventional negotiation doesn’t mean folks have to play along with it.

You know, given what the Republicans are demanding, it's better to just mint the trillion dollar platinum coin than meet them. Even letting the government default would be better.

[God Emperor Baldur]

azulmagia

Lord Akhenaton

We know they won't do it because the blame will fall on them if the government shuts down.

You're assuming that they CARE.

Also, take a looky at this:

Quote:

House Republicans plan to demand major perks for coal companies and Wall Street banks, alongside healthcare and social service cuts and a one-year delay in the implementation of Obamacare, in exchange for raising the debt ceiling until the end of 2014, according to a source close to the House GOP leadership.

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats have repeatedly stated that they will not negotiate over raising the debt limit, saying they will not make a political football of the U.S. government's creditworthiness.

The Republican plan, which would also constitute a significant overhaul of the environmental and financial regulatory system, would cut pensions for Federal employees and raise taxes on immigrant families with parents who do not have a Social Security number. The document claims $7 billion in savings from restricting the child tax credit to immigrants who do have a number, and up to $84 billion from "reform" to the Federal Employee Retirement System.

The plan would increase Medicare means testing, and would eliminate social service block grants and a fund for preventative healthcare in the Affordable Care Act that conservatives have characterized as a "slush fund." Block grants are a capped entitlement program given to states to help fund services like daycare, transportation and home-delivered meals. The Prevention and Public Health Fund has included funds for training primary care doctors and supporting healthy corner stores.

Coal and oil companies would benefit from provisions to expand offshore drilling and drilling on federal lands. The proposal blocks the federal government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions and coal ash, and would give Congress the power to veto any "major" regulation issued by a federal agency (because an affirmative vote would be required, Congress could void new rules simply through inaction).

In addition, the document claims $23 billion in budget savings from a provision to "Eliminate Dodd-Frank Bailout Fund." The money, however, is not legally permitted to support collapsing banks. Dodd-Frank established the fund to allow regulators to pay some creditors of large banks when they fail, in order to prevent a domino of failures akin to what occurred in 2008 when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy. Absent the fund, the government would have no effective way of limiting the economic damage from a bank's failure, increasing the likelihood that a bailout would be necessary.

(link)

Keep on reading at least to the Greg Sargent snippet:

Greg Sargent

Here’s my worry: By laying out a truly insane list of demands, Republicans could perversely succeed in reframing this battle — at least in the eyes of some in the Beltway press — as a standard Washington confrontation in which both sides are making demands and the impasse is the result of each side’s refusal to meet somewhere in the middle. You could easily see a scenario in which Republicans “agree” to drop some of their demands and argue they are trying to compromise, with some commentators then wondering aloud why the White House is refusing to negotiate in kind.

So let’s say it again: This is not a standard Washington negotiation, in which each side is demanding concessions from the other. Democrats are not asking Republicans to make any concessions. They are asking Republicans to join them in not destroying the U.S. economy. House Republican leaders — who have themselves conceded not raising the debt limit would jeopardize the full faith and credit of the U.S. government — are asking Democrats to make a series of concessions in exchange for not unleashing widespread economic havoc that will hurt all of us. But agreeing not to destroy the economy doesn’t count as a concession on the part of Republicans, and no one should expect it to be rewarded with anything in return. Just because Republicans are trying to frame this as a conventional negotiation doesn’t mean folks have to play along with it.

You know, given what the Republicans are demanding, it's better to just mint the trillion dollar platinum coin than meet them. Even letting the government default would be better.

You're forgetting that Obama is here to stay whereas the house is always at risk of losing elections. Even if Obama gets blamed for this, he wouldn't care. So a default would fall on the GOP and in a hard way.

[Wendigo]

Michael Noire

businesses going under,

This happens to 95% of businesses in their first five years; what has causally linked the particular businesses of which you are speaking to any particular event, law or program?

[azulmagia]

Lord Akhenaton

azulmagia

Lord Akhenaton

We know they won't do it because the blame will fall on them if the government shuts down.

You're assuming that they CARE.

Also, take a looky at this:

Quote:

House Republicans plan to demand major perks for coal companies and Wall Street banks, alongside healthcare and social service cuts and a one-year delay in the implementation of Obamacare, in exchange for raising the debt ceiling until the end of 2014, according to a source close to the House GOP leadership.

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats have repeatedly stated that they will not negotiate over raising the debt limit, saying they will not make a political football of the U.S. government's creditworthiness.

The Republican plan, which would also constitute a significant overhaul of the environmental and financial regulatory system, would cut pensions for Federal employees and raise taxes on immigrant families with parents who do not have a Social Security number. The document claims $7 billion in savings from restricting the child tax credit to immigrants who do have a number, and up to $84 billion from "reform" to the Federal Employee Retirement System.

The plan would increase Medicare means testing, and would eliminate social service block grants and a fund for preventative healthcare in the Affordable Care Act that conservatives have characterized as a "slush fund." Block grants are a capped entitlement program given to states to help fund services like daycare, transportation and home-delivered meals. The Prevention and Public Health Fund has included funds for training primary care doctors and supporting healthy corner stores.

Coal and oil companies would benefit from provisions to expand offshore drilling and drilling on federal lands. The proposal blocks the federal government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions and coal ash, and would give Congress the power to veto any "major" regulation issued by a federal agency (because an affirmative vote would be required, Congress could void new rules simply through inaction).

In addition, the document claims $23 billion in budget savings from a provision to "Eliminate Dodd-Frank Bailout Fund." The money, however, is not legally permitted to support collapsing banks. Dodd-Frank established the fund to allow regulators to pay some creditors of large banks when they fail, in order to prevent a domino of failures akin to what occurred in 2008 when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy. Absent the fund, the government would have no effective way of limiting the economic damage from a bank's failure, increasing the likelihood that a bailout would be necessary.

(link)

Keep on reading at least to the Greg Sargent snippet:

Greg Sargent

Here’s my worry: By laying out a truly insane list of demands, Republicans could perversely succeed in reframing this battle — at least in the eyes of some in the Beltway press — as a standard Washington confrontation in which both sides are making demands and the impasse is the result of each side’s refusal to meet somewhere in the middle. You could easily see a scenario in which Republicans “agree” to drop some of their demands and argue they are trying to compromise, with some commentators then wondering aloud why the White House is refusing to negotiate in kind.

So let’s say it again: This is not a standard Washington negotiation, in which each side is demanding concessions from the other. Democrats are not asking Republicans to make any concessions. They are asking Republicans to join them in not destroying the U.S. economy. House Republican leaders — who have themselves conceded not raising the debt limit would jeopardize the full faith and credit of the U.S. government — are asking Democrats to make a series of concessions in exchange for not unleashing widespread economic havoc that will hurt all of us. But agreeing not to destroy the economy doesn’t count as a concession on the part of Republicans, and no one should expect it to be rewarded with anything in return. Just because Republicans are trying to frame this as a conventional negotiation doesn’t mean folks have to play along with it.

You know, given what the Republicans are demanding, it's better to just mint the trillion dollar platinum coin than meet them. Even letting the government default would be better.

You're forgetting that Obama is here to stay whereas the house is always at risk of losing elections. Even if Obama gets blamed for this, he wouldn't care. So a default would fall on the GOP and in a hard way.

Let me just ask you a simple question.

How many times in the recent past have the GOP done something that - theoretically - should have hurt them hard, but when it actually happened, it was no more than a flesh wound?

[God Emperor Baldur]

azulmagia

Lord Akhenaton

azulmagia

Lord Akhenaton

We know they won't do it because the blame will fall on them if the government shuts down.

You're assuming that they CARE.

Also, take a looky at this:

Quote:

House Republicans plan to demand major perks for coal companies and Wall Street banks, alongside healthcare and social service cuts and a one-year delay in the implementation of Obamacare, in exchange for raising the debt ceiling until the end of 2014, according to a source close to the House GOP leadership.

President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats have repeatedly stated that they will not negotiate over raising the debt limit, saying they will not make a political football of the U.S. government's creditworthiness.

The Republican plan, which would also constitute a significant overhaul of the environmental and financial regulatory system, would cut pensions for Federal employees and raise taxes on immigrant families with parents who do not have a Social Security number. The document claims $7 billion in savings from restricting the child tax credit to immigrants who do have a number, and up to $84 billion from "reform" to the Federal Employee Retirement System.

The plan would increase Medicare means testing, and would eliminate social service block grants and a fund for preventative healthcare in the Affordable Care Act that conservatives have characterized as a "slush fund." Block grants are a capped entitlement program given to states to help fund services like daycare, transportation and home-delivered meals. The Prevention and Public Health Fund has included funds for training primary care doctors and supporting healthy corner stores.

Coal and oil companies would benefit from provisions to expand offshore drilling and drilling on federal lands. The proposal blocks the federal government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions and coal ash, and would give Congress the power to veto any "major" regulation issued by a federal agency (because an affirmative vote would be required, Congress could void new rules simply through inaction).

In addition, the document claims $23 billion in budget savings from a provision to "Eliminate Dodd-Frank Bailout Fund." The money, however, is not legally permitted to support collapsing banks. Dodd-Frank established the fund to allow regulators to pay some creditors of large banks when they fail, in order to prevent a domino of failures akin to what occurred in 2008 when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy. Absent the fund, the government would have no effective way of limiting the economic damage from a bank's failure, increasing the likelihood that a bailout would be necessary.

(link)

Keep on reading at least to the Greg Sargent snippet:

Greg Sargent

Here’s my worry: By laying out a truly insane list of demands, Republicans could perversely succeed in reframing this battle — at least in the eyes of some in the Beltway press — as a standard Washington confrontation in which both sides are making demands and the impasse is the result of each side’s refusal to meet somewhere in the middle. You could easily see a scenario in which Republicans “agree” to drop some of their demands and argue they are trying to compromise, with some commentators then wondering aloud why the White House is refusing to negotiate in kind.

So let’s say it again: This is not a standard Washington negotiation, in which each side is demanding concessions from the other. Democrats are not asking Republicans to make any concessions. They are asking Republicans to join them in not destroying the U.S. economy. House Republican leaders — who have themselves conceded not raising the debt limit would jeopardize the full faith and credit of the U.S. government — are asking Democrats to make a series of concessions in exchange for not unleashing widespread economic havoc that will hurt all of us. But agreeing not to destroy the economy doesn’t count as a concession on the part of Republicans, and no one should expect it to be rewarded with anything in return. Just because Republicans are trying to frame this as a conventional negotiation doesn’t mean folks have to play along with it.

You know, given what the Republicans are demanding, it's better to just mint the trillion dollar platinum coin than meet them. Even letting the government default would be better.

You're forgetting that Obama is here to stay whereas the house is always at risk of losing elections. Even if Obama gets blamed for this, he wouldn't care. So a default would fall on the GOP and in a hard way.

Let me just ask you a simple question.

How many times in the recent past have the GOP done something that - theoretically - should have hurt them hard, but when it actually happened, it was no more than a flesh wound?

Either way, it won't hurt Obama, so it puts the GOP at a nothing to gain situation.

[N3bu]

I almost want to see Obama call the bluff and watch Republicans take the dive. Not out of any desire for a recession, but to watch the fallout is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

[Wendigo]

N3bu

I almost want to see Obama call the bluff and watch Republicans take the dive. Not out of any desire for a recession, but to watch the fallout is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

I do want to see it - I literally do want to see it happen, so that we can get it down in the books what happens when you play with these things.

[N3bu]

Wendigo

N3bu

I almost want to see Obama call the bluff and watch Republicans take the dive. Not out of any desire for a recession, but to watch the fallout is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

I do want to see it - I literally do want to see it happen, so that we can get it down in the books what happens when you play with these things.

Yeah.

I guess there's also a sick sense of "I told you so" meets "This is what happens when you buy Republican Bullshit"

[Project 429]

Lord Akhenaton

Michael Noire

obama care is bad for the economy. for those of you who are isolated from the front lines, you have no idea, but its a disaster. I watch person after person get their hours slashed because of it. people getting laid off across the country, businesses going under, and that's not even counting the other obama fiasco related to guns.

obama has a** raped the economy since he went into office. only delusional ******** think otherwise.

Source

I don't think you've been paying much attention to the economy if you haven't noticed a trend of hours being slashed all across the country. Even the Call Centers dedicated to explaining Obamacare have... hilariously... only hired part time workers.

You shouldn't even have to ask for a source, this is what we call intuitive knowledge. Typically, a source is needed when facts come out that run contrary to intuitive knowledge. Yes, Obamacare costs people money. A lot of money. Do you think you could provide a service on a national level and have it somehow... magically lower the price? If you raising demand without increasing supply...

[N3bu]

Project 429

Do you think you could provide a service on a national level and have it somehow... magically lower the price? If you raising demand without increasing supply...

Insurance, man. The more people involved the less rates rise due to Insurance companies averaging out premiums of low risks against high risks. Add in the nature of preventative care and its generally found that if you can get people more involved in cheaper access to regular check-ups with GPs and the national expenditure in health overall goes down in the long run, since the more expensive health care options at the hospital can be avoided more often.

That's the primary goal and benefit behind any scheme designed to make health care more accessible. I'd bet healthcare costs in the US would drop if firstly, Medical Insurance could apply Nationally instead of at the State Level and Secondly it encouraged regular check-ups with your GP.