Debt ceiling drama already here (deal allegedly reached)

From what I am hearing what they are focusing on now is pretty narrow and not really large cuts. At the end of the day, Republicans control the house, and will have control of the budget in a few months anyway. If the deal calls for modest cuts, they are probably ones that happens in a few months anyway.

Republicans can claim they made cuts and in reality Democrats didn’t really give up much of anything.

 

It’s really very simple. When did we have a potential default when Republican was in the White House? The answer is never. Because large increases in the debt don’t matter when a Republican is President. We only have this when there is a Republican controlled chamber of Congress and a Democrat in the White House. Deadbeats don’t pay their bills or say, “I will pay you if…” and announce conditions.

 

Deadbeats. And if they can hurt poor people, it’s all good for them if it suppresses votes. Their right wing religious base must skip that part of the Bible that addresses the treatment of the poor.

 

Which part? This is just one of those rhetorical posts meant to try and harass Christians. Let me let you in on a secret. We expect it and it doesn’t phase us. Christianity is not your enemy. We have two main charges “Love God and Love your neighbor”. You’ll notice it never says to “Accept anything your neighbor does or doesn’t do”. We do live by a moral code. Admittedly that fluctuates within our faith. The point is that it’s not Christianity you did repulsive its morality.

 

No. It’s not an attack on Christianity. Where did I mention Christians or Christianity? It’s criticism of people who are self righteous about (for example) their anti gay views, but more than happy to cut aid to poor people. The Bible isn’t a tool to be used to single out people for mistreatment. And it very clearly requires society to set aside portions of their fields (for example) for the poor.

 

Why do we have a debt ceiling? Pardon my ignorance, but I heard someone on the news today say that a while back the Democrats had a chance to do away with the debt ceiling, but those Democratic Party saboteurs or Republican moles Manchin and Sinema opposed it. It was also observed that other countries don't operate this way. I guess it's just more American exceptionalism.

 

Will the alphabet agencies still work and get paid in a shutdown? Just wondering.

 

During a default, brought about by members of Congress, the first people to get paid, and to keep getting paid, will be members of Congress.

 

They should all be the first people NOT to get paid. Thanks for your response, croc.

 

a default is not the same thing as a government shutdown. So they will continue to go to work and will get paid although paychecks might be delayed.

 

How is this not part of this process? How does the government stay open with no money to fund it?

 

They have money, just not enough to pay for everything.

 

A shutdown impacts govt employees. Sometimes it means they miss a check. No sympathy for politicians missing a “paycheck”, but for regular workers who are temporarily laid off or for those “essential” workers it is pretty shitty for them to keep working and miss 1 or 2 checks, even knowing they get made whole at the end. It would be laughable in the private sector to think of an employer missing a paycheck and be like “just keep working, maybe you’ll get paid next month guys”. It’s bs, and the stunt usually ends up costing the govt money.

A “default” doesn’t just mean workers miss a check, it means bondholders don’t get paid per the terms of their contract. Bondholders that are everything from banks, to individual investors, to retirement and pension plans. A default to payments on those means you see some of them start to collapse and risks an economic collapse ala 2008 financial crisis if not much worse. It is, for lack of a better word, insane to threaten default as leverage.

 

In a default does Homeland Security and fbi folks still get paid??

Just curious as I was told that by a friend who didn't care about a default saying his son who works for Homeland would still get paid. Of course the friend is a SS recipient.

 

Even with prior shutdowns there were missed paychecks for DHS (and other “essential” employees, including military). But i’m pretty sure they were made whole, so for most it was probably more of a nuisance but they knew they’d ultimately be paid by law. Not great for those with tight budgets though.

A default is far riskier since you aren’t talking about just stiffing govt employees, you are stiffing the entire private economy that holds bonds for their supposed safety. A true default would be total chaos. Obviously the markets aren’t really buying it. But let’s say they went all the way with this stunt (like the McCarthy team walked out right before default was imminent), you’d immediately trigger the circuit breaker in the markets and probably take days of chaos before you could even Re-open, and by then you’d be seeing a financial crisis with bank runs, 401k fund collapses, investment firm collapses. The whole nine yards.

 

Yea, I know all the financial implications to the economy....unfortunately. I was just wondering if certain federal agencies got excluded as my friend said. Didn't make sense to me, but not all makes sense these days.

 

In a true default SS would be wiped. Your friend is, sadly, an idiot.

Reminds of old farts on the golf course I overheard talking trash about a civil war from back around ‘20 election (the old we have more guns than “them” talking point). I assume these morons still thought they’d have their regular Saturday tee times to shoot the breeze in between civil war battles.

 

He is oblivious at times, esp on financial matters but is a nice guy otherwise.
Again tho that didn't answer my question re Homeland Security/FBI if gov shuts down.

 

They did NOT get paid during shutdown, “essential” workers were expected to keep working even as paychecks were skipped. But when shutdown ended they were paid back pay.

I assume a “default” would be the same, in theory at least. The question is what destruction occurs to financial markets. How much more expensive borrowing in future would be, etc.