I don't think that the "No's" understand fully what will happen if they don't. I loathe the fact that it has gotten this bad, but this has been a joint effort from both sides of the aisle.
The days of pointing and blaming have to end and true reductions (not reforms) must begin.
All forms of government at all levels have hit the tipping point. We are at the point of diminishing returns; the spending at the pubic sector can't continue to increase while the private sector decreases.
So, Congress votes to spend more money than they have but then decides to put on a political show by not borrowing the money.
How would this work in a real household?
There is only one option, cut everything and raise taxes on everyone. There was a bi-partisan plan put together that everyone seems to want to ignore because, its too painful. I choose the pain.
The government debt should be handled just like the debt in a typical household. When four of your credit cards are maxed out, tap into cards five and six. Make the minimum payments on the first four, from a cash advance on number five, and hope a windfall is in your future. I've done it in the distant past, it worked and I don't have to do it anymore in the present.
Amen Charlie, Amen! There is really no other way to get us out of the mess we are in! The finger pointing MUST STOP, we all have to have a little pain now to avoid worse pain later.
The answer is to raise the taxes on incomes individual over $250,000 and eliminate tax breaks on corporate profits, pull our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan and cut foreign aid for military hardware that inevitably is used against us. The idea that cutting social programs, money for infrastructure, education, so the greedy .00001% who created the mess can keep on keeping on is b.s., we have been sold out by the pols in both parties who champion the causes of the wealthy and corporate interests at the expense of the middle class who actually created the wealth they enjoy squandering.
Political people are too interested in their “career” instead of doing what needs to be done. There is no way this problem is going to be fixed watching the polls. They all need to come to terms with finding a new job outside the world of politics and take a suicide run at this problem.
If making more money means paying more taxes, what is the problem? Stay poor and your tax burden will evaporate. But, I've never really been able to embrace being poor or to feel any empathy for the greed that comes with being rich. When you are dead your children will buy heroin with your ill gotten gains. Now that's Karma.
Edmund, I have no problem with raising taxes on the rich or corporations but, you got to know there just isn't enough there without taxing the rest of us as well. It's pretty clear that the public will not stand for cuts to Social Security and Medicare. That means we are all going to have to pay up as well as wait a little longer before we can collect.
I think it's naive of anyone to think that this government will ever get smaller or less expensive. Since 1900 the system has only increased in cost (except for a super small decrease after WWI and WWII).
It's even more naive to think that if you just tax a certain group of people more, that will solve the problem. If you stole all the wealth from the wealthiest group of people it wouldn't come close to reducing the deficit, let alone balancing the budget.
So just keep voting for the lesser of two evils whether its the red team or the blue team and your need for a these leaders will just continue to produce the same failed programs and policies.
I voted "NO" the quicker the government shuts down the quicker it can start over.
Terry, I would cash in my savings bonds but when the paper dollar becomes worthless it will be six of one and a half a dozen of the other. That means for all of you guys too. Please keep that in mind and think about "The Grapes of Wrath 2." Coming to a City near you, probably the one you live in, if the minority of Republicans prevail.
I agree with Charlie. A tax increase that everyone has to pay gives everyone an interest in what is going on. But the tax increase should be less than the cuts and the money from the increase has to be locked into paying the debt, not off setting the cuts.
From my mother's arsenal of phrases, one to benefit those who think defaulting has curative properties: "Don't cut off your nose to spite your face." The banks that fund these excursions and anyone who submits a signature without wherewithal to back it up- they are to blame. Shuttering government offices to underscore dissatisfaction with economic policy will only exacerbate a bad situation. ...Akin to the kid banging his head on the wall because Mom wouldn't acquiesce to fetch another cookie.
John exactly. The cuts should be deep and painful, with everything on the chopping block. You also can’t dig out of this hole without shared sacrifice.
There is this notion that if government “only trimmed the fat or pork” the budget would be balanced. Well one man’s pork, is another’s sacred cow. People need to feel the increase in taxes and have a real good taste of what a loss of services means. There is this idea that you can get anything from the government without paying. That someone else should foot the bill, like that rich guy. I got news for you, it’s your sacred cow that is busting our nation’s budget and its going to take a lot of pain to get out.
As for Social Security, the premiums just went up. Time to pay up. People need to know what it’s going to cost and we need to move on it right now.
Fascinating that we have both parties being represented on this thread and they are now in agreement that the only way out of this mess is to use innocent people's labor to pay for it.I will speak for myself,since I have been consistent it not supporting many of these failed,unnecessary and expensive programs e.g. Wars,700 military bases in 130 countries,TSA,Patriot Act(neither GW's or BO's version),the war on drugs and so on, that both of the D's and the R's have rallied behind only when their team is in power.
Feel free to take responsibility for your actions and finance them. Stop using other peoples money to fix the mistakes that were made.
VOTED NO...Shut It all down for A year or so and let's take care of the U.S. citizens...NOBODY IN ~ NOBODY OUT..
PLEASE SAVE OUR ECONOMY my trusted leaders In D.C....
Same ole'~Same ole' Is not working
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~And that's my 3 cents~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let me understand this. I'm not taking sides just asking a question.
If we shut down the government for a year, then will it be a case of only those who are fit will survive?
Yes, Social Security and Medicare may be sacred cows to those who benefit from them.
But what happens to the people in their 70s, 80s, and 90s while you are celebrating your "win" to shut down the government?
Shutting down the government, for a year, will deny them affordable hospital care; medical care; and the programs that help them live from day to day. That is a form of death panel.
Will shutting down the government for a year decrease the surplus population? After living through the depression years, the war years, working their entire lives, raising families, paying taxes, and supporting their community, how much of "pain" should they share?
Just asking.
If we don't do something, It will not only shut down our government, or end our economy, it could potentially endager our nation.
Don't believe me? Shut down all aspects of government including defense. Loans default, the major lenders call in notes (i.e China). Oops! No one's home, we're "reseting"! They send troops, but no worries our military will protect us...oh wait no they won't.
That scenario is a stupid as the notion of a complete shutdown.
I agree that we need to spend less time policing the world and more time fixing ourselves.
I agree that the middle class has gotten railroaded, but a straight raise on taxes to the rich will not solve all of the problems. By the way when did making $250K make you rich? In NJ if you don't make $150K, you're struggling...so?
No, it's time to stop these pathetic politics and do what needs to be done. Cut down on everything. I mean everything. Is that a hatchet job? Yep, but the time for the scalpel is over...well actually it never happened.
Put the angry sentiment away and let's get someone in office that actually understands what's going on.
Phil has it right. I'm not ready to live in a world full of chaos so, I can blindly support someone's anarchists theory. If you believe your not part of the problem, try not driving to work on a road or live without the protection those troops provide you. Or better yet try supporting yourself the day after our economy collapses.
Some seem to forget war was brought to us, we didnt go looking for it.
Slow news day, and I had to spend a good deal of my day taking care of the business side of the business, so I'm glad I gave you all something to discuss amongst yourselves.
Here's an idea I've been kicking around my brain, so I'll throw it out here and let it get kicked some more. Apparently The Federal National Mortgage Association or Fannie Mae owns 153,000 unoccupied foreclosed houses. They are spending around 35 million per year to maintain those houses because they are not selling so well. That's us taxpayers BTW. http://www.npr.org/2011/07/07/137647997/the-cost-of-owning-150-000-fore…
The federal government is going to have to make a decision about whether to dump some money into Fannie Mae or sell the whole package to someone for pennies on the dollar very soon. Why not contract local property management companies to facilitate long term leases on these houses? Say 7 to 10 years with an option to buy it exercisable from the mid-point onward. Make the rent/lease payments adjustable every 2 years to coincide with an average of similar property rents in the area, that way it doesn't muck up the rental market. Especially if an area becomes popular and rents go up. The contract should be renewed by competitive bidding every 3 years, and a limit put on how many units a particular company can manage to discourage monopolies, and to spread the work around. The sale price would be agreed upon at inception so as not to muck up property values 5-10 years down the road. Fannie Mae begins to see revenue again, the housing market can begin to stabilize, the houses aren't just hanging around empty inviting crime and/or arson, The taxpayers aren't paying to maintain them only to sell at a loss. It would need to made that Fannie Mae pays the locality and school district the normal property taxes so the locals will receive revenue they are not getting now. More people will be in their house longer term which helps build community. And jobs will be created for the property managers ( inspectors, collecting money, book keeping etc). After a few years of getting these slug houses off the market, maybe new home construction could start to recover, more jobs created. Now I'm no lover of big government programs, but desperate times call for desperate actions. This idea won't solve the deficit by itself of course, but if we can put together enough small plans, it could add up. Is this a good idea/ Anyone?
Alright Charlie and John are in agreement, the only way out is to have everyone pay for their failed programs and policies. Whats my fair share, I'll write a check just this one time, I'm not bailing you out next time.
I hope you both had a wonderful 4th of July I know I celebrated a wonderful Independence day
Your assuming that the people you rent these units out to have a job. This may not be the case and they will end up as section 8 housing which the taxpayer is paying for anyway.
The idea has merit, but the devil is in the details.
My remark about giving property back to those foreclosed on was somewhat facetious and largely provocative. Underlying the sarcasm is the notion that these properties were better off occupied than foreclosed. The fact that we as taxpayers suffer because of the wanton practices of banks and the daft consequences of tossing families out of their homes needs to be addressed. The popular response to the home loan debacle seems to be placing blame on the people who secured the loan. They may have made a poor choice, but they were not acting criminally (albeit impractically). Yet we rally around the financial institution and rubber-stamp the evictions- then worry what to do with the unoccupied properties that are now costing us tax dollars to maintain and shedding tax revenue while idle. What were they costing us when they were occupied? It all seems rather ignoble and wrong-headed to me.
You're right tp my assumption is that the lessees would have jobs and the devil certainly is in the details. I didn't think about the section 8 issue. I don't have any experience in rental management,which is why I just tossed it out here. I'm not overly interested in the reason why there are so many foreclosed homes, CM. That has been beat to death. I'm sure every situation is unique. It's unfortunate that we are in this position as a nation. I'm not any happier than you are or anyone should be that a few profit greatly from this mess and the majority took a beating one way or another. I'm just trying to think of ways to help get things back on track. For what it's worth.
I don't think that the "No's"
I don't think that the "No's" understand fully what will happen if they don't. I loathe the fact that it has gotten this bad, but this has been a joint effort from both sides of the aisle.
The days of pointing and blaming have to end and true reductions (not reforms) must begin.
All forms of government at
All forms of government at all levels have hit the tipping point. We are at the point of diminishing returns; the spending at the pubic sector can't continue to increase while the private sector decreases.
So, Congress votes to spend
So, Congress votes to spend more money than they have but then decides to put on a political show by not borrowing the money.
How would this work in a real household?
There is only one option, cut everything and raise taxes on everyone. There was a bi-partisan plan put together that everyone seems to want to ignore because, its too painful. I choose the pain.
The government debt should be
The government debt should be handled just like the debt in a typical household. When four of your credit cards are maxed out, tap into cards five and six. Make the minimum payments on the first four, from a cash advance on number five, and hope a windfall is in your future. I've done it in the distant past, it worked and I don't have to do it anymore in the present.
Amen Charlie, Amen! There
Amen Charlie, Amen! There is really no other way to get us out of the mess we are in! The finger pointing MUST STOP, we all have to have a little pain now to avoid worse pain later.
The answer is to raise the
The answer is to raise the taxes on incomes individual over $250,000 and eliminate tax breaks on corporate profits, pull our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan and cut foreign aid for military hardware that inevitably is used against us. The idea that cutting social programs, money for infrastructure, education, so the greedy .00001% who created the mess can keep on keeping on is b.s., we have been sold out by the pols in both parties who champion the causes of the wealthy and corporate interests at the expense of the middle class who actually created the wealth they enjoy squandering.
Political people are too
Political people are too interested in their “career” instead of doing what needs to be done. There is no way this problem is going to be fixed watching the polls. They all need to come to terms with finding a new job outside the world of politics and take a suicide run at this problem.
If making more money means
If making more money means paying more taxes, what is the problem? Stay poor and your tax burden will evaporate. But, I've never really been able to embrace being poor or to feel any empathy for the greed that comes with being rich. When you are dead your children will buy heroin with your ill gotten gains. Now that's Karma.
Edmund, I have no problem
Edmund, I have no problem with raising taxes on the rich or corporations but, you got to know there just isn't enough there without taxing the rest of us as well. It's pretty clear that the public will not stand for cuts to Social Security and Medicare. That means we are all going to have to pay up as well as wait a little longer before we can collect.
I think it's naive of anyone
I think it's naive of anyone to think that this government will ever get smaller or less expensive. Since 1900 the system has only increased in cost (except for a super small decrease after WWI and WWII).
It's even more naive to think that if you just tax a certain group of people more, that will solve the problem. If you stole all the wealth from the wealthiest group of people it wouldn't come close to reducing the deficit, let alone balancing the budget.
So just keep voting for the lesser of two evils whether its the red team or the blue team and your need for a these leaders will just continue to produce the same failed programs and policies.
I voted "NO" the quicker the government shuts down the quicker it can start over.
Terry, I would cash in my
Terry, I would cash in my savings bonds but when the paper dollar becomes worthless it will be six of one and a half a dozen of the other. That means for all of you guys too. Please keep that in mind and think about "The Grapes of Wrath 2." Coming to a City near you, probably the one you live in, if the minority of Republicans prevail.
I agree with Charlie. A tax
I agree with Charlie. A tax increase that everyone has to pay gives everyone an interest in what is going on. But the tax increase should be less than the cuts and the money from the increase has to be locked into paying the debt, not off setting the cuts.
From my mother's arsenal of
From my mother's arsenal of phrases, one to benefit those who think defaulting has curative properties: "Don't cut off your nose to spite your face." The banks that fund these excursions and anyone who submits a signature without wherewithal to back it up- they are to blame. Shuttering government offices to underscore dissatisfaction with economic policy will only exacerbate a bad situation. ...Akin to the kid banging his head on the wall because Mom wouldn't acquiesce to fetch another cookie.
http://curiouscapitalist.blog
http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2011/07/05/debt-ceiling-could-r…
Isn't it about time we have a President who understands economics? The Harvard MBA sure didn't and neither does his successor.
http://dailycaller.com/2011/0
http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/25/government-yard-sale-could-help-bring…
John exactly. The cuts should
John exactly. The cuts should be deep and painful, with everything on the chopping block. You also can’t dig out of this hole without shared sacrifice.
There is this notion that if government “only trimmed the fat or pork” the budget would be balanced. Well one man’s pork, is another’s sacred cow. People need to feel the increase in taxes and have a real good taste of what a loss of services means. There is this idea that you can get anything from the government without paying. That someone else should foot the bill, like that rich guy. I got news for you, it’s your sacred cow that is busting our nation’s budget and its going to take a lot of pain to get out.
As for Social Security, the premiums just went up. Time to pay up. People need to know what it’s going to cost and we need to move on it right now.
Fascinating that we have both
Fascinating that we have both parties being represented on this thread and they are now in agreement that the only way out of this mess is to use innocent people's labor to pay for it.I will speak for myself,since I have been consistent it not supporting many of these failed,unnecessary and expensive programs e.g. Wars,700 military bases in 130 countries,TSA,Patriot Act(neither GW's or BO's version),the war on drugs and so on, that both of the D's and the R's have rallied behind only when their team is in power.
Feel free to take responsibility for your actions and finance them. Stop using other peoples money to fix the mistakes that were made.
Well said Terry, both sides
Well said Terry, both sides have sold working people out and look to continue they won't be satisfied until they cause a total econominc collapse.
VOTED NO...Shut It all down
VOTED NO...Shut It all down for A year or so and let's take care of the U.S. citizens...NOBODY IN ~ NOBODY OUT..
PLEASE SAVE OUR ECONOMY my trusted leaders In D.C....
Same ole'~Same ole' Is not working
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~And that's my 3 cents~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let me understand this. I'm
Let me understand this. I'm not taking sides just asking a question.
If we shut down the government for a year, then will it be a case of only those who are fit will survive?
Yes, Social Security and Medicare may be sacred cows to those who benefit from them.
But what happens to the people in their 70s, 80s, and 90s while you are celebrating your "win" to shut down the government?
Shutting down the government, for a year, will deny them affordable hospital care; medical care; and the programs that help them live from day to day. That is a form of death panel.
Will shutting down the government for a year decrease the surplus population? After living through the depression years, the war years, working their entire lives, raising families, paying taxes, and supporting their community, how much of "pain" should they share?
Just asking.
Ron Paul all the way.
Ron Paul all the way.
Here's where anger overcomes
Here's where anger overcomes reason...again.
If we don't do something, It will not only shut down our government, or end our economy, it could potentially endager our nation.
Don't believe me? Shut down all aspects of government including defense. Loans default, the major lenders call in notes (i.e China). Oops! No one's home, we're "reseting"! They send troops, but no worries our military will protect us...oh wait no they won't.
That scenario is a stupid as the notion of a complete shutdown.
I agree that we need to spend less time policing the world and more time fixing ourselves.
I agree that the middle class has gotten railroaded, but a straight raise on taxes to the rich will not solve all of the problems. By the way when did making $250K make you rich? In NJ if you don't make $150K, you're struggling...so?
No, it's time to stop these pathetic politics and do what needs to be done. Cut down on everything. I mean everything. Is that a hatchet job? Yep, but the time for the scalpel is over...well actually it never happened.
Put the angry sentiment away and let's get someone in office that actually understands what's going on.
Ron Paul.
Question: Why have a
Question: Why have a so-called "limit" when congress simply continues to raise it whenever they want???
Set the "limit" 125.6 quadrillion and then they won't waste time posturing for this for at least 150 years. Or maybe 4 years if he's re-elected.
Phil has it right. I'm not
Phil has it right. I'm not ready to live in a world full of chaos so, I can blindly support someone's anarchists theory. If you believe your not part of the problem, try not driving to work on a road or live without the protection those troops provide you. Or better yet try supporting yourself the day after our economy collapses.
Some seem to forget war was brought to us, we didnt go looking for it.
Slow news day, and I had to
Slow news day, and I had to spend a good deal of my day taking care of the business side of the business, so I'm glad I gave you all something to discuss amongst yourselves.
Charlie, we didn't go looking for Iraq?
Thank you Howard for
Thank you Howard for providing a bit of entertainment in what might have been a slow and boring day.....
Here's an idea I've been
Here's an idea I've been kicking around my brain, so I'll throw it out here and let it get kicked some more. Apparently The Federal National Mortgage Association or Fannie Mae owns 153,000 unoccupied foreclosed houses. They are spending around 35 million per year to maintain those houses because they are not selling so well. That's us taxpayers BTW.
http://www.npr.org/2011/07/07/137647997/the-cost-of-owning-150-000-fore…
The federal government is going to have to make a decision about whether to dump some money into Fannie Mae or sell the whole package to someone for pennies on the dollar very soon. Why not contract local property management companies to facilitate long term leases on these houses? Say 7 to 10 years with an option to buy it exercisable from the mid-point onward. Make the rent/lease payments adjustable every 2 years to coincide with an average of similar property rents in the area, that way it doesn't muck up the rental market. Especially if an area becomes popular and rents go up. The contract should be renewed by competitive bidding every 3 years, and a limit put on how many units a particular company can manage to discourage monopolies, and to spread the work around. The sale price would be agreed upon at inception so as not to muck up property values 5-10 years down the road. Fannie Mae begins to see revenue again, the housing market can begin to stabilize, the houses aren't just hanging around empty inviting crime and/or arson, The taxpayers aren't paying to maintain them only to sell at a loss. It would need to made that Fannie Mae pays the locality and school district the normal property taxes so the locals will receive revenue they are not getting now. More people will be in their house longer term which helps build community. And jobs will be created for the property managers ( inspectors, collecting money, book keeping etc). After a few years of getting these slug houses off the market, maybe new home construction could start to recover, more jobs created. Now I'm no lover of big government programs, but desperate times call for desperate actions. This idea won't solve the deficit by itself of course, but if we can put together enough small plans, it could add up. Is this a good idea/ Anyone?
Why not give them back to the
Why not give them back to the people foreclosed on?!
Alright Charlie and John are
Alright Charlie and John are in agreement, the only way out is to have everyone pay for their failed programs and policies. Whats my fair share, I'll write a check just this one time, I'm not bailing you out next time.
I hope you both had a wonderful 4th of July I know I celebrated a wonderful Independence day
CM, Maybe some people could
CM, Maybe some people could refinance now, but since many borrows never could not afford them in the first place, you would have to be very careful.
Dave's idea of renting them out is not bad with the option of sale also. It also helps gets Fannie Mae out of the housing business over the long run.
Your assuming that the people
Your assuming that the people you rent these units out to have a job. This may not be the case and they will end up as section 8 housing which the taxpayer is paying for anyway.
The idea has merit, but the devil is in the details.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/minnesota-government-shutdown-…
My remark about giving property back to those foreclosed on was somewhat facetious and largely provocative. Underlying the sarcasm is the notion that these properties were better off occupied than foreclosed. The fact that we as taxpayers suffer because of the wanton practices of banks and the daft consequences of tossing families out of their homes needs to be addressed. The popular response to the home loan debacle seems to be placing blame on the people who secured the loan. They may have made a poor choice, but they were not acting criminally (albeit impractically). Yet we rally around the financial institution and rubber-stamp the evictions- then worry what to do with the unoccupied properties that are now costing us tax dollars to maintain and shedding tax revenue while idle. What were they costing us when they were occupied? It all seems rather ignoble and wrong-headed to me.
You're right tp my assumption
You're right tp my assumption is that the lessees would have jobs and the devil certainly is in the details. I didn't think about the section 8 issue. I don't have any experience in rental management,which is why I just tossed it out here. I'm not overly interested in the reason why there are so many foreclosed homes, CM. That has been beat to death. I'm sure every situation is unique. It's unfortunate that we are in this position as a nation. I'm not any happier than you are or anyone should be that a few profit greatly from this mess and the majority took a beating one way or another. I'm just trying to think of ways to help get things back on track. For what it's worth.
Terry, good to hear we are
Terry, good to hear we are all in agreement. I'm sure the president and his new BFF Mr. Boehner will be forwarding the bill in the next few days. :-)
Good to hear about your holiday, mine was great as well.
...Not faulting your idea,
...Not faulting your idea, Dave; the fault lies in the path that led to the problem.
Didn't think that at all C M.
Didn't think that at all C M. I agree, which is why this country needs better directors. I think you agree with that as well.
I wonder if Boehner cried
I wonder if Boehner cried when he crushed the ball? If he crushed it.