Skip to main content

Harry Reid and John Boehner

With even Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi embracing austerity and "shared sacrifice," the battle of trying to focus on jobs and the economy over the deficit seems to have been lost, despite the obvious and often stated desires of the American people.

Cue Adam Serwer, writing at Plum Line:

David Dayen writes that the International Monetary Fund estimates that fiscal contraction—which both plans would do—could increase unemployment.

Think about that for a second. At a time when unemployment is hovering close to ten percent, both major parties in Washington are proposing legislation that could increase joblessness instead of lessening it.

From the point of view of helping the economy recover, this is idiotic. For Republicans, of course, increased unemployment and lower GDP increase the possibility of Obama being a one term president. The reason few people are stating the obvious—that there’s something oddly masochistic about harming the economy at time when so many are unemployed—is that both sides are pushing plans that could damage the recovery.[...]

With both parties competing for the mantle of austerity, they’re acting a bit like two crazed medeival doctors leeching a patient who’s already suffering from catastrophic blood loss.

Let's unpack that a little. In the IMF reference, Dayen is linking to this post from Suzy Khimm, in which she writes:

[A]uthorities such as the International Monetary Fund have dismissed (pdf) the idea that austerity measures would help an economy such as the United States’ in the short term, pointing out that few cases exist where sharp cuts led to fast growth in countries where employment was robust, interest rates were high (so the monetary authorities could compensate for the cuts), and exports were strong—conditions that don’t apply to the United States. More normally, they concluded, “a fiscal consolidation equal to 1 percent of GDP typically reduces GDP by about 0.5 percent within two years and raises the unemployment rate by about 0.3 percentage point.”

Even the IMF say austerity won't work for the United States. Yet here we are, on this path to increase the unemployment rate and make the worst economic situation the nation has faced since the Great Depression even more painful. Welcome to our own lost decade. Let's just hope it only lasts ten years.

Originally posted to Joan McCarter on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 12:10 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  WILL hurt the recovery (25+ / 0-)

    Not could.  

    'Stupid Hooverism'!

    The darkness drops again but now I know That twenty centuries of stony sleep Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born? William Butler Yeats

    by deepsouthdoug on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 12:13:55 PM PDT

    •  So which will hurt the recovery worse, (0+ / 0-)

      Reid's austerity, or a bagger--induced actual default?  

      I get that we don't want either, but since we aren't gonna get what we want, then we want the lesser evil ... don't we?

      "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

      by lgmcp on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:05:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Another false choice.. (4+ / 0-)

        You settle for the lesser evil.  We're going down one way or another, thanks to Obama and the Dems.   And if I'm going down, I rather take them with me.     Call their bluff, let them default.

        What we need is a Democrat in the White House.

        by dkmich on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:10:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's always weird to me (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JC from IA

          when people reserve far more venom for their unsatisfactory allies than they do for their sworn enemies.

          "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

          by lgmcp on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:12:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You know the enemy IS an enemy (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            democracy inaction, dkmich

            so you know where you are with one. But false friends can never be trusted about anything, because you never know when they will betray you.

            If it's
            Not your body
            Then it's
            Not your choice
            AND it's
            None of your damn business!

            by TheOtherMaven on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:22:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  My sworn enemies (3+ / 0-)

            are politicians that are pursuing an austerity agenda when the economic climate demands exactly the opposite.  My sworn enemies are politicians that enable the continued rightward shift of our nation's politics.  My sworn enemies are politicians that think it's okay to even think about touching Medicare and/or Social Security under the rubric of reducing the deficit.  My sworn enemies are politicians that have created this fake crisis and are holding the world economy hostage with their petulant austerity demands and the politicians that enable them by going along with the whole ruse instead of calling it out for exactly what it is.  My sworn enemies are politicians that don't believe that the way this should be dealt with is a clean vote on the debt ceiling as has been done the hundred or so times it's been done in the past and that the deficit shouldn't be tied to it at all.  My sworn enemies are politicians that claim to represent my party but can't seem to stop themselves from undermining it and that give away their political capital without getting or even asking for anything in return, which is what got this whole "crisis" rolling in the first place.  My sworn enemies are politicians that claim to represent my party but that are further damaging the country, the government and the party by adding to the voter apathy that says that both parties in Washington are bad; neither is trying to solve our problems (JOBS!) so what difference does voting make?

            So right now, almost everyone in Washington including the president and far too many congressional Dems are my sworn enemies and I, for one, will pull no punches (nor "venom").  What's weird to me is when those that apologize for it all still call themselves "progressive" with a straight face.

            Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

            by democracy inaction on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:46:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  enemies are enemies... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            As OPOL put it, "I would rather get stabbed in the chest by my enemy than get stabbed in the back by my friend."  I think that clearly explains the animosity earned.

            What we need is a Democrat in the White House.

            by dkmich on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:49:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  HAS hurt the economy (8+ / 0-)

      Speak to anyone in Wisconsin, Ohio, New Jersey, Florida, or Michigan and ask them if it's working. If Wisconsin is "open for business" why do I see so many of them closing?

      Battleground Wisconsin: Fascism has come to America

      by jhecht on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:08:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Just watching Shock Doctrine on Sundance, (5+ / 0-)

      right now.  Looks like we're in for a manufactured chaos and the idea "laying around" is austerity.  Damn them.

      Plutocracy (noun) Greek ploutokratia, from ploutos wealth; 1) government by the wealthy; 2) 21st c. U.S.A.; 3) 22nd c. The World

      by bkamr on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:14:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  And Remember (8+ / 0-)

    Obama truned down a clean bill more than once.  Gosh, what a great negotiator he is.

    Folks, this could only happen in the Twilight Zone.

  •  We are governed by crazies and cowards (15+ / 0-)

    who are told what the "truth" is by pundits who are trained only in conventional wisdom.

    The fact that conventional wisdom has been wrong 95% of the time is contrary to actual wisdom will never be acknowledged by anyone in DC or the pundit class.

    I was Rambo in the disco/ I was shootin' to the beat/ When they burned me in effigy My vacation was complete. Neil Young

    by Mike S on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 12:18:50 PM PDT

  •  This is about politics, not economics. (15+ / 0-)

    The White House believes this is the horse that gets them across the line first in 2012, so they're riding it for all its worth.

    The actual impact to Americans isn't a serious consideration.

    The real enemy of the good is not the perfect, but the mediocre.

    by Orange County Liberal on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 12:24:14 PM PDT

  •  Yup (7+ / 0-)

    any reduction in government spending is contractionary.  Any increase is stimulative.  Some differences in the multiplier effect (higher multipliers when the money is given to the poor who will spend it, less when it is given to the rich or corporations).

    This does lead to some weird shit though.  Ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would be very contractionary, unless that money was respent on other stuff.

    Finally, this all shouldn't come as a real surprise.  Even Europe, who actually are socialists in many respects, are doing the austerity thing.  Krugman has been beating his head against a wall about it, to no real effect.  For that matter, even FDR fell pray to this in 1937, going austerity too early.

    Lets just hope that folks change course before they go to complete shit again.

    "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

    by Empty Vessel on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 12:26:26 PM PDT

    •  Austerity is a dirty term except when it (6+ / 0-)

      comes to alcohol, tobacco, firearms, calories, and maybe a few other things.

      But I have to say this: It's been two or more years since the recession was officially declared 'over' which was clearly premature AND the Keynesian pump-priming that was critical to avoid austerity was inept and/or merely insufficient.

      Given those facts, it's hard to stop the austerity wing from looking and sounding relatively convincing, wrong though they are.

      From Neocon to sane- thanks to Obama- and Kos.

      by satrap on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 12:33:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  based upon the 3M empty houses, I'd say +10 years (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CincyCapelll, RichM

    and that's without an Austerity kick to the head.

    Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
    I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
    -Spike Milligan

    by polecat on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 12:28:51 PM PDT

  •  What austerity? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, lgmcp

    Neither bill cuts more than $25 billion in 2012; all these hypothetical 'cuts' are back-loaded into a hypothetical 10-year budget.

    It's not even certain that Congress will honor the chump-change these bills call for in the budget due in September.


    Budget surpluses are permissible - prescribed! - by Keynesian theory in a heated economy, aren't they? It may be foolish to try today to predict whether it will be 2017 or 2019 when they are appropriate, but 'austerity' has its place in even liberal theory. Don't we 'brag' on Clinton's balanced budgets?

    •  Austerity doesn't mean what you think it means (0+ / 0-)

      "Two things that were left out of the bill of rights: the right to leave and the right to change one's mind" --Veronika, in Eustache's La Maman et la putain

      by ed k on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:36:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  not like Clinton, zero-interest environment (0+ / 0-)

      Yes, long-term, the Clinton budget and tax rates are the way to go.

      But Clinton's recession was very different, because the Fed Reserve didn't lower rates to zero there. Any austerity from the tax hikes could be offset by lower interest rates.

      That's not possible now because interest rates are zero.

      Besides, no one (except the CPC) is suggesting following Clinton's successful strategy because no one (except the CPC) is suggesting returning to the Clinton tax rates.

    •  "austere" (0+ / 0-)
      1. harsh in manner; stern in appearance; forbidding.
      2. severe in disciplining or retraining oneself; morally strict.
      3. grave; somber; serious.
      4. severely simple; without ornament: austere writing.
      5. rough to the taste; sour or harsh in flavor.


      1. austere quality; severity of manner, life, etc.

      The American College Dictionary

  •  Could? Would.... (0+ / 0-)

    FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

    by Roger Fox on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 12:33:19 PM PDT

  •  Priceman had an excellant diary today on this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  WILL hurt, not 'could' (0+ / 0-)

    It's Hooverism all over again. We're going right back into deep recession, maybe even depression.

  •  If Boehner can't whip enough votes, today? (0+ / 0-)

    Does he resign?

    His debt extension bill's chance of passing is looking pretty shaky.

    I could be bye, bye, Boner time.

  •  All of these asses are going to throw (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    valadon, The Nose

    this country into a freaking depression and for what?    A manufactured crisis so they could rip off poor people, seniors, and kids.   Christ - if this is leadership, no wonder  the USA is Walmarts R Us.   With :better" Democrats like Obama,   who needs Boehner.

    What we need is a Democrat in the White House.

    by dkmich on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:05:38 PM PDT

  •  Movement Conservatism (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    has won our national policy argument, and it's won by default.

    I could handle the dark days to come a little easier if I had known with all of my heart that Movement Conservatism had faced a real fight for the future.

    Instead, non-Movement Conservatives are watching the only political party that can counter it and roll it back agree to implement it at a more humane rate that the crack cocaine of shock doctrine cramdowns, the era Russians got post 1991.

    It's going to be even harder than it has been (in the post-Contract on America DLC-Third Way era) to govern as a Democrat for years to come.

  •  %s/Could/Will eom (0+ / 0-)

    [F]undamentalists pretty much fall under the same banner ie. "we cant control our junk" - LaFeminista

    by RichM on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:08:38 PM PDT

  •  Wrong Way Republicans defy History's Lessons (5+ / 0-)

    Top tax rates under President Wilson's second term  80%.

    Top tax rates under F. Roosevelt, Truman and Eisenhower = 90%.

    Top tax rates under Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter = 70%.

    Average Tariff rates 1946 to 1970 = 6%, 1975 to 1995 = 3%, 2000 to Now  = 1.3%

    America had the Greatest Middle Class and Infrastructure prosperity in our history with 70%+ top tax rates and tariffs above 5% to protect American jobs.

    Tax cuts don't create jobs, high top tax rates do.

    With high top tax rates, rather than paying the top tax rate the wealthy would reinvest in plants, equipment, salaries or charities.

    With the Republican tax cuts, it creates a wealth bubble and a budget deficit and the wealthy don't invest in a bad economy, the wealthy buy the national debt, US

    Treasuries, created by the tax cuts and compound our budget problems by making interest on the national debt, now 250 billion a year for the INTEREST TAX on our

    National Debt.

    Repeal of the Bush Tax cuts for EVERYONE = 4 Trillion over 10 years.

    Repeal of the Reagan Tax Cuts for the top 2% = 4 Trillion over 10 years.

    Raise Average Tariff rates back to pre 1980 levels, from 1.3% to 5%, and bring back American Middle Class jobs.

    To Rebuild the American Middle Class Dream we must Repeal the Republican Tax Cut Scheme!

  •  Cut. cut, cut,cut!!! Not one fucking word about (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose


    Get ready for the next Depression---And likely a new president.

    •  and tbags are never even asked to explain or (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Nose

      justify why the loopholes shouldn't be closed, or why the rich are protected.  It doesn't even come up for discussion and longer!    I, for one, would like to hear these baggers try to justify why they want to make the poor and working Americans suffer.  Why baggers are willing to protect corporations and the oligarchs, and not the poor, sodden idiots who voted them into office.  They completely escape this line of questioning by the msm and on the floor here today.  

      "Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost." - Ronald Reagan - 1980

      by livjack on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:28:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  loophole can mean tax expenditure (0+ / 0-)

        Estimates Of Federal Tax Expenditures For Fiscal Years 2010-2014

        The biggest "tax expenditure" is the lack of taxation on employer provided health insurance.

        This is provided to help subsidize the sick. If made to pay tax on something the healthy aren't getting, the healthy might say the hell with employer health insurance benefits, we'd prefer cash instead.

        The second biggest is the mortgage interest deduction.

        This is provided to make income taxation work. It is hard to collect $10,000 in back taxes from somebody with a car with negative equity and second-hand furniture not worth hauling away.

        The third biggest I think is the lack of capital gains taxes on the stepped up basis of estates.

        This may be done on a moral no true gain basis. Unless you live in a glamorous major metropolitan area, your house will normally not gain much in the way of real value.  The house I live in cost $42,000 to build in 1978. It is worth roughly about $115,000 now. Inflation is up about three-fold.

        For stocks, the rich might pass them on when the shares are battered down instead of at death.

        Another reason may be is that people might stop work earlier in life to ensure a lower tax bracket for the capital gains. My mother worked until about two months before she died.

        The third may be that heirs might be sold options at market value when assets are bought. The option to buy the $42,000 house at $43,000 might be sold for a nominal $10 amount to the prospective heirs.


      •  Imagine if there was a 95% (0+ / 0-)

        estate tax.

        A rich person might wish to take extreme measures to avoid this extremely high tax rate.

        These measures might include moving from the highly carcinogenic cities.

        The rich might take their businesses with them.

        If you own a house, this means buying another one at top-dollar from Mr. Rich or his fellow travellers.

        And don't forget to buy an electric car to replaced the old carcinogenic beast. Mr. Rich and his fellow travelers don't want to breath your gasoline-sourced carcinogens.

        The rich might also decide to have an MRI every two weeks to try to catch a cancer early and postpone death to a more friendly administration.

        To spend $100,000/year on MRIs can be a money saving strategy with high estate taxes.

  •  40 Year Right Wing Media Strategy (3+ / 0-)

    This is a do or die payoff moment for the right wing.

    There have been right wing efforts for something like 40 years to buy up or influence the media, to create a talk radio presence that is ubiquitous across the land, and set up a system of think tanks.  Millions and millions have been poured into this by oil interests and other special interests.  

    If this effort fails to achieve the desired effect, which is to win the White House and Congress back, it may break the fever.

    If it succeeds, look for things to get a whole lot worse.

    A whole lot.

    hope that the idiots who have no constructive and creative solutions but only look to tear down will not win the day.

    by Stuart Heady on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:17:25 PM PDT

  •  when is boneheads bill up for vote? (0+ / 0-)

    did it happen alreadt, did I miss the crazy?

  •  Recovery ?!?!? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    southof, Lightbulb, wsexson

    What recovery?

    27% people underwater with mortgages.
    10% reported unemployment - closer to 15%.

    Gawd, what humour.

  •  ARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHH!!!!! n/t (0+ / 0-)

    Arrrr, the laws of science be a harsh mistress. -Bender B. Rodriguez

    by democracy inaction on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:21:22 PM PDT

  •  why (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose, OLinda

    why do we keep playing solely on the right-wing home field?

  •  Both Bills are a disaster and the democratic (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Williston Barrett

    Party is in for a shock next year. Not only will Obama lose but they will be destroyed in the senate and any hope of winning the house seems gone now. We had 'em, Democrats were winning the debate when Ryan released is horrible plan to destroy Medicare. But Obama who thinks he's smarter than the whole world threw that advantage away. Truly disgusting.

  •  the IMF should stop being such whiny babies (0+ / 0-)

    those brats should either suck it up and come down hard for austerity, or shut up and let the grownups figure it out.

    Politics is not arithmetic. It's chemistry.

    by tamandua on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:24:59 PM PDT

  •  Well, I've been questioning the wisdom of cutting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Nose

    government spending of any kind, for over a year now.  There are countless reasons to think that it's too early in the recovery to do so.

    So, the devil is in the details as far as back-loading and triggers, more so perhaps than even the total amount of cuts being proposed.

    But, now that the TeaBaggers have succeeded in making the debt ceiling the issue that it is, the bond rating agencies have decided that they want to lower the rating on US bonds no matter what.  They no longer trust our political will to pay our debts.  And, to justify doing so, what better way than to buy in to the austerity theme?  It has been ready-made for them.

    So, as I said many months ago, the TeaBaggers have already cost the US billions; it only remains to be seen how many billions and for how long.

    At this juncture, my guess would be tens of billions, and for at least a decade.

    •  As much as I usually disagree with you, (0+ / 0-)

      you are correct in your analysis of the pitfalls of reducing spending. I know that we disagree on the culpability the President has played in this.

      •  Well, there's culpability, and there's recognizing (0+ / 0-)

        the contemporary political reality and trying to deal with it in the best possible way.

        It does the country no good if nothing gets done.  It does the country no good if too many of the wrong things get done.  Yet the voters, unwittingly or otherwise, set up a situation in 2010 where both of those are real possibilities.

        The President's only play here is to try to get as little damage done as possible while mollifying the bond markets to the extent possible.  And, he is working with a House of Representatives which has a large faction seemingly totally oblivious to voters or their own reelection prospects.  Their fealty is to their dogma only.

        So, it is increasingly difficult for the President to rally voter sentiment to his favor, because the people mucking things up really don't care what the voters think if it runs counter to their dogma.

        Now, exactly how do you think the President should proceed under these circumstances, and why do you think it would work?

        •  demand a clean bill, vow to veto anything else. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          The House refuses to play, and we go into default. As the economy tanks, blame the House reps. Loudly, daily.

          Eventually we get a clean bill, and as an added bonus, the R party is finally done for.

          We have a President who only believes in 'what is possible', when we need a visionary capable of seeing what is necessary.

          How far to the right do the Dems have to move before you stop calling them Dems?

          by Diebold Hacker on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 03:13:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And, if no "clean" bill is forthcoming, (0+ / 0-)

            are you prepared for the consequences of a default?  

            That would make you nothing more than a TeaBagger yourself, it seems to me.

            •  See now you go off the deep end again. (0+ / 0-)

              Had you demanded that the President insist on a clean bill to begin with we wouldn't be in this debacle. But you would rather blame those that are critical of his mistakes.

            •  THAT is pretty funny. (0+ / 0-)

              Yeah, that's me--Teabagger to the core.  (snicker)

              But to answer your question, yes, I am prepared to let the terrorists shoot the hostages.  It is the only way to prevent future hostage-taking. Negotiating with terrorists is always a lose-lose proposition. Even if not-negotiating means hostages get killed.

              But alas, as I noted before (and as you confirm), the Dems will simply cave in, surrender everything the Repugs want, then wave the blue pennant and cheer how they "saved us from disaster" by surrendering--thereby enabling yet another round of hostage-taking so we can surrender yet again later. It will never end. Ever.

        •  The best possible way would have been (0+ / 0-)

          the President pushing for a clean debt ceiling vote. He is the one that insisted on tying deficit reduction to the vote. It was a political blunder.

        •  let the terrorists shoot the hostages. (0+ / 0-)

          Force them to put their gonads where their mouth is, and let them take proud ownership of everything that happens after that. Just like we SHOULD have done with the "government shutdown crisis" a while back. It's time to stop insulating the ideological nutters from reality, and let reality kick them (and the rest of us) squarely in the head.

          The Senate should pass a clean bill raising the debt limit---then dare the Repugs to continue to defy it.  Double dare them.  Triple dare them. Put up or shut up.

          But of course we won't----we'll surrender absolutely everything to the hostage-takers, thereby setting up and enabling the next round of hostage-taking.

          It will never end.

          •  Another TeaBagger heard from: (0+ / 0-)

            "FUCK the consequences of the resulting default, it will be worth it if my team wins!"

            •  It's not about "teams" (0+ / 0-)

    's about facing the reality that the American people are idiots, who are further dumbed-down by the MSM into believing that less guvmint=more jobs and higher wages. The only way to "settle" this once and for all is to call the wingnut's bluff, and let their idealogy fall flat on it's face. Obama needs to accept the idea that the American people think they know what's good for them, and deserve to get it good and hard until they learn their lesson.

              •  I quite agree. (0+ / 0-)

                The longer we keep insulating the nutters from the real-world effects of their nuttiness, the longer we will have to keep dealing with the nutters.

                Let them have their nuttiness.  Let them choke on it.

                Let them shut down the entire US government.  Let them go on TV and proudly declare "We've always wanted no government on our backs.  Now we have achieved our goal.  Hooray for us."

                Let them face the consequences.

            •  my team is not in the fight (shrug) (0+ / 0-)

              But I learned when I was five that giving your lunch money to the schoolyard bully every time he demands it, is no way to stop the bullying. It simply encourages the bully to keep taking your lunch money.

              The only way to stop the bully and keep your lunch money is to punch the bully in the fucking mouth.

              It's time we punched the bully in the fucking mouth, instead of handing over our lunch money yet again.

  •  This is the Essential Point: Austerity will be bad (0+ / 0-)

    no matter whose essentially misguided austerity plan is passed.

    This must be repeated over and over and over and over and over again in the hope that someone in power will actually listen.

    "Two things that were left out of the bill of rights: the right to leave and the right to change one's mind" --Veronika, in Eustache's La Maman et la putain

    by ed k on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:29:51 PM PDT

  •  They are lying. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Shared sacrifice is a myth. It won't be brutally painful for the rich and/or the powerful. It will be be hard on everyone else.
    It will be brutal for people at the bottom.

    I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel. - M Angelou

    by Lightbulb on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:30:42 PM PDT

  •  IMF=Cheese Eating Surrender monkeys (0+ / 0-)

    In the teabaggar world view

    Washington, D.C., Mar 25, 2009 - In response to suggestions by China, Russia, and other countries around the world calling on the International Monetary Fund to explore a multi-national currency, U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-6) has introduced a resolution that would bar the dollar from being replaced by any foreign currency.

    “Yesterday, during a Financial Services Committee hearing, I asked Secretary Geithner if he would denounce efforts to move towards a global currency and he answered unequivocally that he would," said Bachmann. "And President Obama gave the nation the same assurances. But just a day later, Secretary Geithner has left the option on the table. I want to know which it is. The American people deserve to know."

    Asked today about a currency proposal from China at a Council on Foreign Relations event, Secretary Geithner stated he was open to supporting it. Despite attempts to clarify his remarks later in the day, the unguarded initial response calls into question his true intentions.

    Although Title 31, Sec. 5103 USC prohibits foreign currency from being recognized in the U.S., the President has the power to engage foreign governments in treaties, and the President is principally responsible for the interpretations and implementation of those treaties according to the Constitution. As a result, legislation prohibiting the President and Treasury from issuing or agreeing that the U.S. will adopt an international currency would need to come in the form of a Constitutional Amendment differentiating a treaty used to implement an international currency in the U.S. from other types of treaty agreements.

    We agree our hair is on fire, we disagree with Paul Ryan's plan to use a sledgehammer to put out the fire

    by JML9999 on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 02:32:32 PM PDT

  •  Why is IMF changing now? (0+ / 0-)

    The IMF has spent the last 4 decades cramming austerity measures down the throats of every country they touch. They're still at it in Europe. As far as I know Argentina is the only one brave enough to speak the truth: this is exactly the opposite of what we need, so no thanks, we don't need your money that badly.

    And now suddenly the IMF discovers that forcing austerity on an already-weak economy is a really really bad idea?

  •  "could hurt"? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    tighten your seat belts it's going to be a rough ride.

    I am pretty convinced that there will be a default on past debts rung up by Bush junta because the Republicans think it will be a slap down to Obama and will increase their chances for control in 2012.

    What is equally clear is that no one really knows exactly what the impact is going to be.  As with the CDS and sub-prime mortgage collapse showed, there was a lot of collateral damage, unexpected linkages that were exposed when the house of cards began to fall.

    Default on US debt, the down grading of T-Bill ratings will have similar, and greater, repurcussions.  Interest rates will most certainly have to go up, probably significantly.  Border line corporations will fail.  Inflation will increae.  Gold prices will rise.  Corporations will retrench - layoffs and outsourcing increasing.

    We are moving toward a black hole of uncertainty.

    Don't kid yourself - a failure to pay for already spent debts will HURT.  and hurt plenty bad.

    Through a looking glass darkly.

  •  Screw this bullshit (0+ / 0-)

    It's simple - get ready to use some variant on executive privilege with 14th amendment as the basis.  Truman used it, so should Obama.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

    by noofsh on Thu Jul 28, 2011 at 05:12:06 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site