right wing cons threaten to default on national debt

It's the teabag cons that are holding America hostage, with the threat of shutting down the government unless the president and the senate gives into their demands. Even the traditional cons know this is political harikari for the GOP. This shutdown will end gridlock in the 2014 election. The fat lady is singing, "Turn out the lights, the party's over." to the cons.

 

(side note) I'm going into farming and I want to get paid for NOT growing crops. In fact there are dozens and dozens of crops I'm not going to grow. Man!! The money should start rollin' in!!. ( do I have to actually have some land? Bummer if I do.)

Carry on.

 

If a shut-down or a default occurs, it will be the fault of either the Democrat led Senate refusing to send a bill to the President, or the President refusing to sign a bill without increasing spending on his ObamaScare.
Using Left wing rationalization, American taxpayers currently are being extorted by a small majority of the Senate, with backing of the President.

 

I see it just the opposite way.

If the President does give in, it sets a bad precedent that the debt ceiling issue/debate moments, can be used as leverage every single time on other issues in the future.

Also Barack Obama won the last Presidential election (electoral college vote AND popular vote) and that election was held AFTER the Affordable Care Act passed was became law.

If the majority of Americans really didn't like Obamacare, you would think they'd vote for Romney who claimed on his campaign that he'd repeal it on day one.

 

First off, I don't believe the last election was won by Obama based on the single issue of ObamaScare, but many different issues. Second, the House is where the people are most widely represented, and should be more aware of their constituents demands as to how they are being represented in the Federal government.

That said, the House is NOT refusing to raise the debt ceiling, but instead trying to get a budget passed which will not require a massive increase in the debt ceiling. The Democrat led Senate, which used to represent the States who were once taxed based on their population proportion of the total population, and the President who is supposed to administer the government are unconditionally demanding that not only the debt ceiling be raised, but spending also increased in a way which will never be containable.

If that continues to be the case, a shut-down, while undesirable may be in our best long term interest.

 

You have to have some land to begin with. Usually 30+ tillable acres is what you need. They plant say 90 bushel an acre and claim they planted 120 and get paid the difference in a 'supposed' loan that you never have to pay back get one every year.
Most have sold out, But only their crop/corn for high dollar at the ethanol plants, Or the government. They don't ask too many questions when they set the price and its high enough you can pad you're yield.
If you claim the back land, It better be tilled/planted incase of inspection. There are a couple, But no true way to tell you planted 120 vs. the true 90. Dry it blew away, Wet it washed away, Decent season blame the deer and bugs that ate the crop.
To each their own, I have watched/worked it once, I know what goes on when it comes to big ranches and loopholes.

 

Scratch you could always try internal farming, like in the basement! This crop you will want to grow. doubt though this would earn you any government checks.

 

No, but it would earn me some FUN!!

 

I LOVE THE SHUT DOWN. What is a non essential employee? Is the jihadist in chief essential? If you owned a business ; would non essential employees be on your payroll?

 

Ideally, yes. But only if the revenue was there. Although I guess it would depend on what you would consider to be non essential.

 

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4031454

Just one of the many consequences of a government shutdown.

Sex crimes and probably other types of crime that fall into federal jurisdiction aren't being investigated to their normal levels of scrutiny and evidence is probably being lost. How could they be investigated well if their staff levels are cut?


Welcome to the beginnings of anarchy guys, its what some of you wanted, and feel that playing power rangers with the guns you own will be enough protection.

 

Did everyone freak out so bad the dozen or so other times the 'government shut down?' I don't remember anarchy taking over

 

Actually , yes. The previous one made Newt the villian. LOL. A guy I went to high school with was a guard at the Smithsonian. Doing $70k plus yearly. He had to chill out for , I think 12 days and was pissed. As I recall , he was a Paul Blart type weighing about 300#'s. Right, non-essential.

 

"chaos" not "anarchy" and who wants chaos??

 

Are you saying Obama will send home the essential workers rather than the non-essential workers? And the government is not being shut down, simply slowed down a little. Tax revenues continue to come in and bills continue to be paid, and perhaps an effort to find and eliminate some waste and fraud should be exercised to make up any difference between the revenues collected and bills to be paid.

The beginnings of anarchy? I think not.

 

Well that's partially true; that the IRS isn't completely shutdown.

However they do have a significant reduction in their workforce-enough to function-but that does mean more workload for each worker left on the job.

That's where the cost savings don't really happen for the nation at the budget level, and tourism suffers.

As do some criminal investigations, like plane crash forensics crews, inquiries into rape reports.

It's only been 2 days, so not everyone feels the impact. But if this goes on long enough people will feel it.

The Stock Market already went down 50 points, and at one point in the day was down 80 points, that impacts people.

 

I clearly get the impression reid , san fran nan and even oby want everything done in a hurry. Remember pass it first then learn about it ? Whaaaaaat? Ahem , this is pretty much the same deal. Few days. Back to normal. SNAFU. Ah, thing is , step back. Is anything about the current regime even remotely Constitutional? Oddly, oby was a professor of Constitutional Law. Ironic? Not really ; giving him all the expertise at slice and dice EO's. Wanna live in europe? Take a few days to think it over ; are subsidies available through the regime for french classes?

 

I do wonder and question the constitutionality of some national security laws.

But on the other things, yes I think they are constitutional, the courts obviously said that specifically Obamacare was Constitutional otherwise they would've struck it down.

Honestly if I were the Republicans, I'd ask for cuts to Social Security, and/or Tweaks in the Farm Bill instead of Obamacare, both of are big spending programs no more or less than Obamacare, so why not change the deal?

---

The problem is the message this sends to Republicans, is that if the Democrats (and Obama) give in to what the Republicans are calling a "Compromise" it'll continue the pattern of short-term budget fixes that don't fix a long term problem, and slow down economic recovery efforts due to a lack of LONG TERM (annual budgets) policy.

If I were a government employee, I wouldn't feel free to spend $ into the economy if I were always looking out for my job and a confident cash flow from a steady job.

That said I think there needs to be some policy changes in the standard of employees that go to work for the government, but that's a tweak, not a throw the whole system out philosophy.

 

Social security AND Medicare are TRUE entitlement programs, which recipients have paid into in order to receive the benefits they were promised. If government cannot run programs which are funded totally by the recipients, why should/would we expect them to do a better job of funding a program, ObamaScare, which would be funded by only a portion of those who would be recipients?

The Farm Bill includes food stamp spending, and I agree that cuts should be applied in many other budget items, but also with the total elimination of ObamaScare. The Federal government needs to change the environment into one in which employers will begin to create jobs for the unemployed and NOT just spend money it does not have as a means of showing economic growth when all that does is diminish the value of our currency and raise the cost of living, which in addition increases the costs of funding each of the welfare programs and making even more people eligible to access them.