>

Why don't Republicans cancel PPP loans like they are doing to student loan relief. That's a spending cut right? 
Also, cutting spending does not help with raising the debt ceiling. That's like saying we need to talk about cutting our spending next month before I pay this month's bill. No, bro you pay your bill then talk spending cuts.
Interestingly, it wasn't a problem at all under Trump and they raised it without any discussion. >

It's funny how that works....
It's almost as if the the Debt Ceiling is an artificially created political football to allow people to score points well after the actual decisions and laws have been made . >

The most egregious of that was when I read about how at the end of January 2021 all the deaths from here on out are on Biden.  It had been a week.
That's when it all made sense.  So what you're saying is Biden is at fault for the tax cuts made by the Republicans that haven't been repealed despite the deficit (that went way up under Trump) going down under Biden? >

This is how they kill social security by threatening default on our debts. This makes me want to scream at my idiot Republican parents. These people are evil. >

I'm sure the answer to all our problems is a couple more tax cuts for the rich.  The money will surely trickle back down into the economy!  /s >

...this time. (as if they haven't been ringing this bell for decades with the same flaccid  results) >

Whats crazy, in emerging markets tax cuts and credits are sometimes key to success. Look at rare metal mining and exploration and even Tesla the car company. When used properly they can quickly propel an entire industry years ahead. 
They see this and they think, HEY, cut our taxes and the same thing will occur even when the circumstances arent even close for your backwater business or city center shop and thus why it never "trickles" down. >

They do not think shit. 
Republicans do not think. 
They are malice incarnate and only hurt. >

You are under estimating an opponent. They have a far better long game than democratic strategist. They have an ever shrinking voting block yet have state legislative control in many states, have gubernatorial control in parity with democrats, and have secured a super majority in the Supreme Court. They are far from stupid. They are an adversary without the qualms of fighting fair, zealous base that will vote/jump when told, and an excellent long term plan to negate their dwindling influence ideologically/shrinking numbers. >

Their only long game is to take away peoples rights, lower taxes for the wealthy and corporations. They want to take away benefits from working people and ruin the environment for the almighty dollar. They love to infuse hate in their practices which is a turnoff to most Americans. That is why their base is shrinking. I have to disagree that they are not stupid. Many of them exhibit stupidity all the day long! Many of them actually think that everyone who does not think like them are stupid. >


That is why their base is shrinking.

Their base is shrinking because the former outrageously largest demographic (baby boomers) are reaching the ends of their lifespans, and they didn't sell themselves nearly as well to gen X or millennials.  They're seeing some growth among gen Z/zoomers/whatever you want to call the post millennial generation, but that mostly just ones who are white+male (and thus being told they are the cause of all the world's problems by progressives) or are extremely wealthy (and thus benefit from GOP financial policy). 
In other words, history moves forward one casket at a time. >


hey're seeing some growth among gen Z/zoomers/whatever you want to call the post millennial generation

Another point worth mentioning, those conservatives tend to be far more economically conservative than they are socially conservative (when compared to past generations), so a lot of the "culture war" bullshit that the Republican Party leans so hard on isn't going to sell as well once the Boomers die off enough to lose political relevance. >

I enjoyed the part of the interview when Jake asked Comer why he didn't ask for the Mar a Lago visitor logs after requesting the visitor logs for Biden's home and Comer replied with "Whatabout China donating to UPenn and the Biden center?!" >

I love all the "what about China" stuff.
1) it doesn't change the current topic. Just distracts. It's not relevant.
2) if we REALLY want to play that game:
a reminder that Trump had tons of business interests in China, including all of Ivanka's stuff
A reminder of Trump's dealings with OTHER countries, including Russia and Saudi Arabia. >

Just ask about trumps bank accounts I’m china while president. They’ve been made public >

Yeah he donates his salary but then will risk it all doing corrupt stuff for money ......with our enemy no less.
I think I'm starting to understand.
$1.6 million in legal pay he donates to various govt depts in need so he can risk flushing his life away for a $1 million corruption account with CHina.
Is this a turn based game? Guess it has to be. How many dice? Like Dungeons and Dragons? I'll play but I want to be a Norwegian Mining Magnate.
I love fantasy too. >

What are you talking about? You know in the released tax returns it showed he didn’t donate his salary. There’s also proof of his foreign bank accounts. Here’s the thing, you don’t actually read the facts. You just listen to what Jim Jordan and co falsely state. Want me to send you the links to the actual documents? Or is that going to be “fake news.” You need seriously mental health help, I truly feel bad for your family that they have to deal with your insane ass >

Or just increase taxes on the top 3% >

Something I find very annoying is that people stop paying into social society once their income for the year hits a certain point.  If anything, I feel like the tax should go up once you hit a certain level. >

In some countries, they do this. After making like 5 million a year, it caps at like 80% taxed after that. No one pays for healthcare or college, and they have a well equipped police force and low crime rates and tend to be happier places to live in general.  I'm just saying. >

You might be onto something... >

No one needs personal wealth in the billions. Okay companies are worth money, you own the company, THAT DORSNT COUNT AS YOUR WEALTH, unless you liquidate, which you would lose 80% ofthat. A great method to keep bosses caring about the company surviving and not just selling or squeezing for profit for investors. >


No one needs personal wealth in the billions.

But how else will I know I'm better than everyone? >

If the U.S. were to default, it would have catastrophic results to the global economy. Stocks would crash, countries would not trust the United States knowing that politics could decide whether they repay their debts or not.
And these are already paid for debts. These are not new debts. 
Not to even mention that Biden has brought down the deficit by 2 Trillion or something since Trump raised it. >

But what if a bunch of elected officials want to act like children and throw a tantrum?  What about their rights?  You're going to put the entire global economy ahead of them? >

Your username answers your question 😅 >

My lifetime has been filled with one tax cut for the rich after another. If we want to be serious about “fiscal responsibility,” it’s well past time to focus on the revenue side of the issue for once. >

They'd try to jack taxes on the poor. >

The tax system in this country has always been a scam on the poor and middle class. >

This is a totally fabricated crisis that only exists because of political games. We already agreed to spend the money and we already promised to pay it. None of the “piggy bank” economic down home kitchen table stuff applies to this scenario. This is like you signed a contract to pay for something and then you just don’t. >

The Constitution specifically says that the public debt must be paid. Not could, or should, or may. It says it MUST be paid. >

It actually just says public debts are valid and shall not be questioned. A debt that a bankrupt person owes is still a valid debt, but there is (due to bankruptcy) a valid legal excuse for not paying it. 
And you can bet SCOTUS will make that distinction. >

How about we pull a Trump and ignore that and let it work its way through the courts for a year or so. >

Because the difference is the same court that allows Trump’s bullshit will issue preliminary injunctions to prevent the Dems from going forward paying the debt while the case goes through the courts. Just like they issued preliminarily injunctions to prevent the student debt relief from going into effect while that works it’s way through the courts. >

How about that annual 1 trillion dollar military budget? >

Woah woah! What are you? Some kind of commie??? /s >

They are going after social welfare again. But they're just fine with billionaire welfare. It's all about funneling money to their wealthy donors while weighing down the middle class with the burden of paying for it. >

Don't forget their passion for red state welfare as well. >

And welfare for their geriatric boomer base. 
All these cuts to Medicare aren't going to touch anyone over 60. Nonono, they will destroy benefits for young people so they will never get a cent after spending 10% of their paychecks on boomer welfare for decades. >

old people got a decrease in medicare premium and they now only have to pay $35 for one month of insulin. 
socialism for their voters, fuck all for anyone else >

Cool, how much military spending does he propose we cut? >

If it didn’t pass they’d raise it. Have for years and years before. Money isn’t real to them, the debt itself is unattainable in any manner of lessening.  Military is able to use billions and not even report what it’s used for or ever any type of audit. This a game. >

Reminder this is about paying money already spent. >

For 70 years...
October 10, 1952, Harry Truman said this:
 
Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.
Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called social security.
Socialism is what they called farm price supports.
Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.
Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.
Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.
When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan "Down With Socialism" on the banner of his "great crusade," that is really not what he means at all.
What he really means is "Down with Progress--down with Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal," and "down with Harry Truman's fair Deal." That's all he means. >

No problem, cut all federal spending going to red states. >

Yet they won't come off their pay or bonuses. They want to come after Social Security. Fuckin clowns. >

Republicans always want spending cuts.  Usually to Medicare and Social Security.  If we didn't have a robust Democrat party for the last 30 years, republicans would have already sacked both programs.  So all you elderly folks on Medicare and Social Security (like me) need to ask yourselves why you keep voting republican.  Hell, just throw your wallet at them why don't you...... >

They keep voting republican because even though they might lose SS, the GQP will keep the scary brown people away >

Political spin. This dipshit thinks cuts will solve the problem overnight, to the wrong programs >

This was the same party that literally just voted to add $114 billion to the federal deficit by axing the funding expansion of the IRS. >

Another Republican demands less government, less democracy. Every story is the same - Republicans are waging war on the United States, it's citizens, the Constitution and democracy itself. They attack all the pillars of democracy: public education, independent journalism, human rights, safe elections, equality and justice. Every story is the same. All good people are called to rise up and promote democracy in your house and defend it in your community. Rise up! >

Let's start with cutting their salaries to 0 sounds good everyone? >

The House just gave themselves a $34,000 raise. So now they want to cut social security and Medicare that everyone has been paying into all their working lives. 
I started at age 14 working at a 7-11 in Cypress CA. >

Their salary increases should require a unanimous vote, and should be tied to the federal minimum wage. >

Better yet, tied to the middle income of their state. >

I debated between median income and federal minimum wage. Either would be great. >

The good news is that those permanent tax cuts are really working out well for the corporations. Let's all pat ourselves on the back. >

Ummm, Republicans, can you remind me which President ran the largest budget deficit ever??? More than TWICE the next two highest deficits? Oh, and which president that followed him cut that deficit in half??
GOP out here projecting their sins on other people again. >

Reverse the tax cuts for corporations and wealthy, that would be a good start. >

We can start by removing 2 Supreme Court justices … Biden gets to pick which ones. >

How about cutting some of the funds going from blue states to Kentucky >

Yeah let me guess without reading the article. All the spending for people in need is on the table. All the spending for corporate welfare and the military industrial complex is untouchable. Same story different actors. >

From Biden's Press Conference, Oct 21, 2022:
"Today, my administration announced that this year the deficit fell by $1.4 trillion — the largest one-year drop in American history — $1.4 trillion decline in the deficit."
Biden and Democrats were already reducing the debt created by the Trump administration and their give aways.
We can not allow Republicans to control the narrative. >

deficit and debt are not the same thing.  deficit spending is spending excess of revenue.Reducing it means that we are still creating debt, as we are spending money we still do not have, we are just not increasing our debt as much or as fast as before.
So, yes, what Biden and the Democrats are doing is good, but it still isn't reducing the debt. We have to stop deficit spending completely so we can start paying down the debt.  It's no different than citizens living outside their means and charging everything to maintain that lifestyle.. aka creating debt. >

For some reason, I can’t remember them doing this when Trump was president. >

Ok let's repeal the Trump tax cuts for the super wealthy. Biggest wasteful welfare program on the books! >

Ok fine. Let's start with defense. >

Agreed, the DoD just failed an audit in which they lost 2.2 trillion dollars >

I vote we solve the debt crisis by having no state can get more in federal funding than they produce in federal taxes.  Then maybe in five years the red welfare states will be willing to have a more reasoned and nuanced conversation. >

Just because a state gets more in federal funding than they pay in taxes, doesnt mean its welfare.
That money is often grants for research and other things that directly benefit the other states.
Federal funding covers a ton of stuff. >

I am not saying its a rational position, I am saying its an irrational position to take for awhile to get the jack-assery to settle out in the red states. >

Tax the rich please >


WASHINGTON, Jan 15 (Reuters) - House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer said on Sunday he hoped a U.S. debt default could be avoided but put the onus on Democrats to agree to spending cuts being pushed by his fellow Republicans.
"We hope that this is avoided. We hope that the Senate, House - Democrats and Republicans - will agree to spending cuts. Look, this has to stop. We cannot continue to operate with these types of deficits," Comer said in an interview with CNN.
Republicans now in control of the House of Representatives have threatened to use the debt ceiling as leverage to demand spending cuts from Democrats, who control the U.S. Senate, and the Biden administration.
This has raised concerns in Washington and on Wall Street about a bruising fight over the debt ceiling this year that could be at least as disruptive as the protracted battle of 2011, which prompted a brief downgrade of the U.S. credit rating and years of forced domestic and military spending cuts.
"So Republicans were elected with a mandate from the American people in the midterm elections. We campaigned on the fact that we were going to be serious about spending cuts," Comer said in an interview with CNN's "State of the Union."
"So the Senate is going to have to recognize the fact that we're not going to budge until we see meaningful reform with respect to spending."
U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said on Friday the United States will likely hit the $31.4 trillion statutory debt limit on Jan. 19, forcing the Treasury to start extraordinary cash management measures that can likely prevent default until early June.
Congress created the debt ceiling in 1917 to give the government greater borrowing flexibility, and must approve each increase to ensure that the United States meets its debt obligations and avoids a catastrophic default.