OBAMA: GOP Would Rather Destroy Economy Than "Ask Anything Of Corp Jet Owners-Oil/Gas Co" &The Rich

[kpete]

Source: Think Progress

OBAMA: HOUSE GOP WOULD RATHER DESTROY THE U.S. ECONOMY THAN “ASK ANYTHING OF CORPORATE JET OWNERS, OIL & GAS COMPANIES” AND THE RICH |

Last night, House Speaker John Boehner bailed on negotiations with President Obama on a debt ceiling deal. In a hastily-arranged news conference, Obama angrily explained the problem:

“If you do not have any revenues, if you have no revenues at all, what that means is more of a burden on seniors, more drastic cuts to education, more drastic cuts to research, bigger cuts to services for the middle class. It doesn’t ask anything of corporate jet owners, oil and gas companies, and people like me, who’ve done very well.” Republicans, he said, were demanding “a package that would effectively require massive cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and domestic spending, while not asking anything from the wealthiest of this country.”

“If that’s their only answer it’s going to be pretty difficult to figure out where to go.”

Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/07/23/277297/gop-destroy-the-economy-oil-companie/

[leveymg]

1. If it's gotta be a war, I prefer the kind most of the American people can win - a class "war".

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rucky]

4. All he had to do is insist on an up/down vote.

Just like all we had to do to let the Bush tax cuts expire was absolutely nothing.

Just because the GOP wants to make things unnecessarily complicated doesn't mean we have to go along with it.

I was unemployed when the tax-cuts votes went down, and would have been willing to "sacrifice". You don't negotiate with hostage takers when they have a track record of negotiating in bad faith.

[KittyWampus]

8. You conveniently forget Unemployment Benefits in that Bush tax cut issue. Why is that?

That means you are speaking in half truths.

Oh, at the end you insert those Unemployment Benefits as an almost afterthought.

Just because you personally were willing to sacrifice doesn't mean millions of others collecting those benefits had that luxury.

And it's hypocritical to the extreme to say you would sacrifice your Unemployment Benefits yet howl at the prospect of an adjustment to COLA as a sacrifice (not that I endorse that).

[rucky]

11. Nope, but thanks for playing.

When I finish my temp job, I'll be out of benefits. There's no luxury here.

What I take issue with - which is constitent in both cases (the debt ceiling and the tax cuts) is that we accept the premise that the tax cuts MUST be passed with unemployment extensions, or that the debt ceiling MUST be passed with entitlement reform AND the budget.

The minority will continue to use this strategy to gain leverage for as long as we let them. So why do we let them? Call their bluff on the debt ceiling, just like we should've called their bluff with the tax cuts.

I can say I was willing to sacrifice on unemployment because: a) it probably wouldn't have happened; b) if it did, the GOP would be toast by now.

So when are you going to stop being an enabler?

[kelly1mm]

20. Unfortunately, in a game of chicken, the crazies usually win. nt

[rucky]

19. BTW, how can you "stick something in as an afterthought" in a three-line post?

I must've struck some other kind of nerve.

[KittyWampus]

22. No rucky, it means you have compartmentalized the issues when they are entwined.

[rucky]

23. Artificially entwined.

Which has been my point all along.

[KittyWampus]

7. WRONG. This is a Democratic POTUS bringing the fight to the Republicans' own field and winning.

He exposed the Lie that Republicans care about bringing down the deficit.

Welcome to DU.

Hope you do more than criticize Democrats while you are here.

[TheWraith]

29. Exactly. Obama is exploiting perhaps the one proper Rovian tactic.

You don't attack the enemy where he's weak. You attack him where he's strong. The Republicans are being publicly shown off as arrogant obstructionists who don't care about anything except protecting the wealthy.

[rucky]

3. I still don't know the real answer, so I'll ask here:

Is the threat of the economy being destroyed real or just a fear tactic to regain leverage?

Because it's my understanding that if we default in this game of chicken, yes it'll be bad - but we still have some options about how bad it will be for whom. We could welch on seniors and choose to pay Wall Street and foreign investors instead. Or we could pay our seniors first, then let Wall Street feel the brunt of the consequences. And I'm not entirely sure they'd be hurt that bad, anyways. Seems like higher interest in bonds would be good for them.

So the choice to me is this: Sacrifice now so we don't have to maybe possibly suffer more in the future, or call the GOP's bluff and insist on a stand-alone debt-ceiling vote.

[Demeter]

5. My Opinion?

Everyone will be hurt--but those with the most to lose (the Obscenely Wealthy and the economically defunct, like the elderly and disabled) will not be able to recover.

Personally, I can think of much better ways to equalize wealth distribution than by destroying all the paper assets. But the resistance of the Obscenely Wealthy and their mercenaries was too great to overcome. So we will see a lot of time wasted, a lot of people dead or hurt, and at least one generation, more likely two at a minimum, blighted.

[rucky]

6. But it wouldn't be a full default, would it?

The debt still has a ceiling, it's just not as high as it needs to be. So we can still fulfill most of our obligations. That doesn't sound like a full meltdown to me. It sounds more like a situation that many of us have to manage in our personal finances. We rob Peter to pay Paul until more cash comes in. Wall Street could be Peter and retirees can be Paul just as easily as the other way around. In that situation, I understand that it's up to the President to set the priorities. He seems to be choosing to default retirees - or at least pretending to. He's also pretending he wouldn't have a choice in the matter.

[KittyWampus]

9. After a default, interest rates would skyrocket. We're already paying what- 40 cents on a dollar?

With that perspective- Banks lending to the USA stand to benefit from a default in those higher interest rates.

[rucky]

15. How much will they go up?

I've heard 2 or 3 points. And they're artificially low now, so I guess that would be "skyrocketing" in comparison, but in the big picture, they've been way higher before without hyperinflation fears.

[humblebum]

17. Some think the country could go into a full blown depression and

there is no reason to doubt that considering the the state of the present economy.

[rucky]

18. There's plenty reason to doubt it.

Fears of hyperinflation have led to draconian economic measures like the ones being proposed. We've seen this movie before in Chile, Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Poland, USA-2008, Greece, etc, etc and in NO case did it lead to anything that benefitted anyone's quality of life but the wealthy. We already know the outcome of giving into the fear, and I'm inclined to take the chances of not giving in.

[KittyWampus]

21. 2 or 3 point is small but compounds quickly. When you're talking trillions it's a lot.

[Muddy Waters Guitars]

34. Yeah, international trust in US Treasury Bills would plummet

Our T-Bills are supposed to be the "safe haven" when other investments are shaky- low-yield but secure. Investors have maintained this trust in us in the past, because they've trusted our government to act rationally and practically, rather than be beholden to fanatics or ideological extremism. The Tea Party, of course, has broken this pattern, following a dangerous ideology with the same kind of zeal that the Red Guards, Brownshirts and Soviet true-believers did. That's where the USA really is threatened, with other countries coming to doubt the fundamental soundness of our democratic form of government itself.

Ironically, the big beneficiaries would be the EU members. Although Greece, Ireland and Portugal have gotten themselves into trouble, they're tiny and peripheral parts of the overall economy. Germany in contrast, is rock-solid as far as minimizing its debt and reliably paying it back. It's about the only region that could offer something of an alternative for large-scale Treasury purchases- gold just isn't an option anymore, it's already at record highs, and a default in the US would cause enough economic problems to send the price of oil plunging. Many countries (e.g. oil-rich states) have been buying up the debt of Greece, Portugal and Ireland not because they particularly want to, but because they need the Eurozone as a back-up market in case the US system utterly tanks. Which, if the Tea Party has its way, would be the case.

[Demeter]

10. You forget the anxiety of the marketplace

and the tyranny of the ratings agencies, and the tightly-coupled global financial network. After a couple of hours, it wouldn't matter if it wasn't a "full default".

[rucky]

12. Why do the ratings agencies even have an ounce of credibility?

If investors wanted AAA bond ratings, they'd pay S&P to rate them so.

[Demeter]

13. It doesn't matter why

What matters is what is.

[rucky]

16. True dat.

perception trumps reality in that world. So we'll always be at the mercy of their neuroses for as long as we let ourselves.

[Muddy Waters Guitars]

36. They don't have much credibility, but the dysfunction of the US governing system is still apparent

The ratings agencies lost their credibility fully with the AAA ratings on the toxic derivatives, but it was in decline even before when the same ratings agencies gave high ratings to Enron (utterly failing to note their corruption), while giving ridiculously low ratings to economies in e.g. Japan (which has a real economy and grows wealth).

Still, it's not hard to see how broken the US system has become, when Republican fanatics and extremists are in a position to cause such damage to the US economy simply by acting like idiots.

The rest of the world now has fundamental doubts about the very viability of the US political system itself. This isn't something we've encountered since the US Civil War, and unless the electorate wises up and tosses the GOP out, the very survival of the country itself could be in peril from this.

[99 Percent Sure]

26. Yes, they're Robbing Peter to pay Paul and gypping them both...

Look, I agree that they should not be playing all-inclusive with the debt ceiling, the budget, and "fixing" entitlements. I also believe that on their own, the Rs couldn't get away with what they're doing without Dems being their enablers.

We've seen it over and over again from the Clinton admin to the present as the Dems cower, barely whimpering while Rs spin preposterous, bankrupt ways of preserving the wealthy at the expense of the now-decimated middle class and barely working poor.

When the Dems had congressional majority, they did barely NOTHING for the unemployed and didn't even mention jobs creation.

There should have been some sort of federally-created jobs program in the 2009 ARRA. Because there wasn't and because our congress persons chose to "save" the banks and Wall Street Instead to the tune of at least a trillion bucks, unemployment/underemployment continues to worsen with no end in sight.

I'll say it again, the Dems are either cowering or enabling, but they ain't working for the people either.

Unfortunately, although I understand and agree to an extent with the president's positions on tackling entitlements, his concessions trouble me at this time because raising the debt ceiling, balancing the budget and revamping entitlements do not naturally go hand in hand.

We're being played by both sides of the aisle, while China owns us.

So I guess I somewhat agree with rucky. :hurts:

[humblebum]

14. It's important to remember that over 200 members of Congress signed a pledge to Grover Norquist

that they would never vote to raise taxes, under any circumstances - EVER. Its pretty obvious where their first loyalties are. If they allow the country to default, some might consider that to be treasonous. The number is actually well over 200. That is very significant and shows that the legislative process has been compromised. The Congress' first responsibility is to THE PEOPLE, not to Grover Norquist!

[Lorien]

32. Obama should be telling the people this. nt

[Muddy Waters Guitars]

35. Definitely, it's not easy with this sort of media

The fragmentation of the media and more importantly, the corporate control in the hands of people like Murdoch has made it more difficult to grab hold of the bully pulpit, though it wasn't easy for FDR or Lincoln either. Still, cases like that press conference are just what we need- a genuine, progressive Obama utterly furious at the boot-licking, America-hating GOP, with plenty of specifics.

[Zorro]

24. The threat of a financial "Armageddon" will not dissuade Republicans

They embrace the concept of Armageddon.

They want Armageddon to happen to fulfill the prophetic vision.

[StarsInHerHair]

25. the GOP wants to cut down America so the .1% get ALL the money

[99 Percent Sure]

27. And there's no one to stop them. eom

[StarsInHerHair]

37. I disagree

[Fire Walk With Me]

28. “If that’s their only answer it’s going to be pretty difficult to figure out where to go.”

I can tell you where they can go.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Muddy Waters Guitars]

33. He kinda does

It's called rope-a-dope- handing the GOP a nice thick reel of rope to hang themselves. They rejected such a supposedly "sweetheart deal" that even arch-conservatives like David Brooks are declaring the GOP unfit to govern. And now, by showing that the Republicans have no interest in genuinely solving this crisis, he's backed them into a deadly corner of their own making. The American public now sees how extremist the Republicans have become- same thing Lincoln pulled off 150 years ago.

[Lorien]

31. He could ask Biden to pull a Cheney and threaten every chairmanship and

committee post each and every repug has. Strong arm them, as Cheney did the Dems and moderate repugs. Besides, repugs respect a "tough guy"; what they don't respect is calm diplomacy and thoughtful, reasoned debate.