politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: VIDEO: No help for huricane victims unless Debt Ceiling is Raised - Paul Ryan (R)
Source:
LIVE SATELLITE NEWS
URL Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfjWIpnfjgQ
Published: Sep 6, 2017
Author: Paul Ryan (R)
Post Date: 2017-09-06 17:51:26 by Hondo68
Keywords: None
Views: 3905
Comments: 15
Poster Comment: The worst argument for raising the debt ceiling, ever! He completely ignores State, Local, charities, and private, rescue and aid efforts. What a steaming load of crapola.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: hondo68 (#0)
He doesn't run any of those. He does control the House and its basic spending bill for FEMA and SBA. And he has to deal soon with the debt ceiling, one way or the other. He wants to raise it, Liberty Caucus members want to leave it but cut spending sharply. Chances are, they'll raise the debt limit and provide disaster relief after the Senate triples the price with add-on pork spending of all kinds.
He wants federal funding to rescue his dream students and provide them with sanctuary, until he pushes through amnesty after the 2020 election!
Your post makes no sense.
Sure it does. He raises the debt ceiling to provide hurricane relief, and procedes to rescues all of the illegal alien dream students floating around, and pushes through DACA legislation providing them with sanctuary status, then pushes through amnesty after the 2020 elections. What don't you understand? The only part that's speculation is that he'll wait until after 2020 to make the amnesty push. The whole story is idiotic to begin with. The House, which Ryan is Speaker of, today passed a clean Hurrican Harvey relief bill of $7.85 billion. All about Hurrican Harvey damage and restoration, nothing else. That is exactly what Ryan did, nothing more, nothing less. No amnesties, no pork, no debt ceiling increases. It's the Senate that will make mischief by adding in the debt ceiling stuff and throwing in tons of rancid pork. And evening the score with Texas legislators who voted down the porkfest for Hurricane Sandy a few years back. Ryan is not the villain here. But I don't give a rat's ass what you actually think since you don't seem to know anything about what is actually going on anyway. Maybe you should stick to posting humorous graphics if you can't follow the news with any comprehension.
Ryan is talking about hurricane Harvey and also Irma which is about to hit Florida, he says so. Let that sink in for a moment. There's no specific bill to cover Irma, but Ryan wants to raise the debt ceiling to cover it, and everything else that the gov spends money on. Ryan IS a villain, you can count on him to push for evil whatever the issue. He's strongly implying that anyone opposed to a debt ceiling increase, want's people to DIE! After Trump gave them a kick in the balls. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/us/politics/house-vote-harvey-aid-debt-ceiling.html By Peter Baker, Thomas Kaplan And Michael D. Shear, Sept. 6, 2017 New York Times
Mr. Trump not only accepted the spending-and-debt plan advanced by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York and Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leaders, but also aligned himself with them on immigration. The Hillary presidency seems to be going along smoothly. What could possibly go wrong. Who's this "Mr. Trump" guy, one of Hillary's flunkies? It seems like only yesterday that we had a President Trump. How soon the losers are forgotten. Actually, Trump kicked them in the balls by trying to hatch a deal with Schumer and Pelosi. That is unlikely to work well for Trump or anyone else.
"Chances"???? That is the surest bet since someone bet someone else they would get wet if they jumped into a lake. "Pork" is what keeps the large criminal class we call "politicians" in thousand dollar suits and limos. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
That's what Congress does!
Never let a good crisis go to waste. That's the politicians' mantra
Yeah, what wuz I thinkin'? The initial Sandy relief bill was around $8-$9 billion. This one for TX/LA is $7.5B or so. This pays for FEMA efforts and a smallish ($500M) SBA loan package. The real pork will get larded on in the full reconstruction bill. For Sandy, it was over $100 billion. I expect the same for TX/LA and for whichever states get hit by this oncoming hurricane. It's the big reconstruction bill that will be the porkfest in the Senate.
Sure. But now follow the money. The government creates $100 in new assets (by borrowing the money, thereby creating $100 billion in new securities in the form of bonds). People spend $100 billion to buy the bonds, so the government gets its $100 billion. It maybe has to pay $2.5 billion per year in interest, maybe less. If the interest rate about matches inflation then it's a wash. If the inflation rate exceeds the interest rate then the debt becomes a good deal for the government. Now then, the holder has an asset he can sell, and traders can buy and sell them many times, generating new money on every trade, and capital gains taxes, and transaction fees for the broker-dealers. Meanwhile, the government takes that $100 million and pays it to contractors, who probably make a 15% profit and end up paying a third of that back in taxes, so $5 million comes back to the treasury in taxes. The contractors spend the money creating profits down the line. $85 million of it gets spent as salary and for equipment and supplies, and salary and purchases are all income to somebody else, taxed somewhere between 20% and 39.6%. So AT LEAST $20 million MORE comes back to the treasury on the taxes of the first line of expenditure of that $100 million, from its recipients and their expenditures. Those employees and provisioners then spend the money, etc. In the US, the current velocity of money is approxmately 1.46 times on an annualized basis. So, if we assume that the money is spent at that rate, that means that $100 million is taxed 1.46 times, each time at the average federal, state and local tax rate as it is income to somebody. If the average tax rate is 25%, that means that the $100 million distributed is the equivalent of $146 million, taxed at 25%. The treasury recaptures $36.5 million of this expenditure. Which means that in less than three years the treasury has completely recouped that spent money, and every year after that it makes money on this money creation, as it continues to circle about the economy. This does not take into consideration the capital gains taxes on the trading of the treasury bills, or the taxation on the interest on US treasuries. So $100 billion is borrowed and lent out, at a cost of perhaps $2.5 billion per year in interest. The $100 billion generates $36.5 billion per year in taxes (assuming that the velocity of money remains at 1.46x. In the third year, the government has made money by borrowing it. Its return on investment is positive. Note that this is true of money spent on food stamps, on education, on gay pride parades - doesn't matter. When the government spends money, that money comes back to the government in taxes. When the government creates new securities by borrowing, it generates income for itself. If you wanted to completely untax the economy, you could, and just CREATE money to pay the government's expenses. Of course, if you did that, the money would inflate, probably pretty badly. Truth is, there is only so much money that can be put to work providing goods and services at any given time - people only need so much food, so much housing, so much entertainment. You can increase the economy - by giving money to the poor (a guaranteed income will pay for itself in short order, just as Social Security increased the size of the American economy. Social Security generates $1.5 trillion in economic output every year. It costs the federal government about $910 billion per year. Right there we see the effect of velocity on the economy. Social Security generates a NET INCREASE in the US economy of over $600 billion per year. In other words, the actual cost of Social Security in one year to the economy is only a third of the outlays...and taxation takes back 80% of that. This is why wooden-headed analysis of the "cost" of government programs is so dishonest. Social Security massively INCREASES the gross national wealth of the United States. Do away with it less than a trillion in expenses, and you'll cause a half-trillion dollar bigger crater than you saved. Social Security makes independent economic agents out of people who otherwise would be in homeless shelters or spare bedrooms spending nothing. Welfare does that too. When we say that it "costs us billions", that is not really true. With taxation and economic expansion, it pretty much costs us nothing. The ISSUE is not economic. That's fake. The ISSUE is ideological, psychological. And too many conservatives don't know that, so they put themselves in the same position as Mr. White has placed himself regarding that nurse. They think statically, they don't think dynamically, they don't understand the concept of velocity and multi-level taxation, they don't understand underlying asset growth. They don't understand that when people become too poor, they cease to be economic multipliers - they cease to spend money, which then generates more money, and instead just directly consume resources, on a subsistence level. This seems "right" to the ignorant, but it results in a North Korean style economy as opposed to an American one. The Soviet Union did not fail because they looked after their workers. Germany and Japan look after their workers, and in the US we look after the better off workers. The USSR failed because they overstretched themselves military, invaded a country that cost them too much flesh and bones, and the people saw no hope for themselves, and nothing but corruption and hardship forever. But even then there was no revolution. What happened, specifically, was that the hard core conservative elements, the militarists, used military power to take over the nation from Gorbachev, and the nation as a whole refused to obey the military. The soldiers themselves would not obey orders to kill the people, and the generals found themeslves in uniforms, with nobody willing to execute their orders. Gorbachev was brought back in, blinking like an owl, but the people who had just defied the military command structure were now themselves in command of loyal troops and people - the Yeltsins and the Putins of the world, and they had no intention of simply giving back power to a broken system they didn't run. So everything changed in a fortnight. The USSR defaulted on its internal debts, everything was rewritten, and the wealth and power of the nation was redistributed by the elite officials with intelligence power. And that was that. House of cards came down. This was not a currency crisis. It was not a debt crisis. It was a hard power crisis in which old men wanted something they could not define...something...conservative (within the context of their system). They relied upon their legal authority, their uniform and ribbons and prestige. And found that nobody would follow them. And that was that. Bottom line: all that pork doesn't really hurt the economy at all. Probably helps it. What it hurts is public virtue and trust in government. Once that was broken, even Soviet generals could not keep command of their own people. THAT's what we want to avoid. We're not going to be going bankrupt.
Of course, if you did that, the money would inflate, probably pretty badly. But that is what we do. Look at the consumer price index. It is a system of welfare for the rich. In particular, Wall Street via the Fed. Should the government really be considered the ultimate insurance company? I would say no. In the modern era, we have gone increasingly in that direction and I don't think it has worked well for the economy. Why not just print money and subsidize everyone then? You already know why. Look at the ongoing problems with 0bamaCare and multiply it many times.
He completely ignores State, Local, charities, and private, rescue and aid efforts.
#2. To: Tooconservative, *The Two Parties ARE the Same* (#1)
#3. To: hondo68 (#2)
#4. To: Tooconservative, *Border Invasion* (#3)
(Edited)
Your post makes no sense.
#5. To: hondo68 (#4)
#6. To: Tooconservative, fiscal conservatives want people to die (#5)
(Edited)
can't follow the news with any comprehension
It' a very sleezy tactic, as demonstrated below by Elizabeth Warren.
#7. To: Tooconservative, hondo68 (#5)
The House, which Ryan is Speaker of, today passed a clean Hurrican Harvey relief bill of $7.85 billion.
Trump Bypasses Republicans to Strike Deal on Debt Limit and Harvey Aid
#8. To: nolu chan, Mr. Trump (#7)
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/us/politics/house-vote-harvey-aid-debt-ceiling.html
#9. To: nolu chan (#7)
After Trump gave them a kick in the balls.
#10. To: Tooconservative (#1)
Chances are, they'll raise the debt limit and provide disaster relief after the Senate triples the price with add-on pork spending of all kinds.
#11. To: Tooconservative (#1)
Chances are, they'll raise the debt limit and provide disaster relief after the Senate triples the price with add-on pork spending of all kinds.
#12. To: hondo68 (#0)
The worst argument for raising the debt ceiling, ever!
#13. To: Vicomte13 (#11)
That's what Congress does!
#14. To: Tooconservative (#13)
(Edited)
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
If you wanted to completely untax the economy, you could, and just CREATE money to pay the government's expenses.
Social Security makes independent economic agents out of people who otherwise would be in homeless shelters or spare bedrooms spending nothing.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]