TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#42551: Dec 4th 2012 at 10:27:23 AM

[up][up][up][up] Nah. Some are Communists in foxholes.

edited 4th Dec '12 10:31:17 AM by deathpigeon

DeMarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#42552: Dec 4th 2012 at 10:39:18 AM

The basic problem is that neither the "Grand Bargain" nor the "Fiscal Cliff" are real solutions to anything. Both harm the economy while failing to eliminate the deficit. Of the two, the Fiscal Cliff is worse. It cuts more from government spending in the short term while raising less revenue in the long run (because it's short term- it's a one time only change that will raise $3 trillion at most). Obama's version of the Grand Bargain is targeting $4 trillion over about ten years, with spending cuts to revenue increase ratio varying from 2.5-1 to 4-1 depending on which version it is. One study I saw (Bloomberg) estimates that we actually need 6-9 trillion. Meanwhile, neither plan does anything to address job growth, or the spiraling cost of healthcare. What we really need is another stimulus package, a way to rein in healthcare, and deficit reduction plan that spreads the pain out over about 20 years.

Given that no one in Washington has put such a plan on the table, the question is do we hope for a fiscal cliff, expecting that a second recession will finally force politicians to address real reform, or do we hope for a Grand Bargain, since that will do less immediate economic damage giving us more time to fix things?

edited 4th Dec '12 10:48:48 AM by DeMarquis

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
deathpigeon Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: One True Dodecahedron
#42553: Dec 4th 2012 at 10:46:16 AM

...You got your numbers right. The Grand Bargain cuts 3 trillion dollars, mainly focused on welfare, while the Fiscal Cliff cuts only 1.2 trillion dollars which is spread out across the board. The Grand Bargain ends up saving us 4 trillion dollars, 3 trillion in spending reduction and 1 trillion in tax increases.

DeMarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#42554: Dec 4th 2012 at 10:49:30 AM

Eh, trillion, billion, what the difference?

No, actually, thanks for catching that. Have corrected "billion" to "trillion".

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#42555: Dec 4th 2012 at 11:46:46 AM

Again, for what feels like the dozenth time, the Fiscal cliff is not actually a cliff. It's more like a slight ditch. It doesn't take effect all at once, and if we go over it the Democrats will have a much stronger bargaining position. Which means if the GOP doesn't take a deal now, they'll find themselves in the ditch.

So yeah, at this point it looks like going over the "cliff" is a better strategy than the Grand Bargain that no one is making.

GameGuruGG Vampire Hunter from Castlevania (Before Recorded History)
Vampire Hunter
#42556: Dec 4th 2012 at 11:59:11 AM

Which, of course, also explains why the GOP are hyping up the Fiscal Cliff like it's the end of the world, since they are trying their damn best to convince the people that the Democrats are being unreasonable when it was really the Republicans who are.

They will accept the "Grand" Bargain at the last moment and then justify it to their voters by saying that they didn't want to go over the "dreaded" fiscal cliff and that the Democrats forced them to accept their deal.

edited 4th Dec '12 12:05:02 PM by GameGuruGG

Wizard Needs Food Badly
shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#42557: Dec 4th 2012 at 12:01:57 PM

Of course, the Fiscal Cliff wouldn't even exist if the GOP wasn't being unreasonable in the first place.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#42558: Dec 4th 2012 at 12:27:10 PM

Which, of course, also explains why the GOP are hyping up the Fiscal Cliff like it's the end of the world, since they are trying their damn best to convince the people that the Democrats are being unreasonable when it was really the Republicans who are.
This. Watch the language of Boehner and McConnell. Their press releases of late have served no purpose but to describe the Republican position as "reasonable" and "compromising" in hopes that people come to believe it is so.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#42559: Dec 4th 2012 at 12:29:56 PM

Ok, so among the proposed items:

  • Cut excess spending
  • Increase taxes a bit
  • Increase debt
  • Close tax loopholes

Anything I've missed?

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#42560: Dec 4th 2012 at 12:34:15 PM

One major correction: debt is not an input to that system but a consequence. Debt is what you get when expenditures exceed revenues over time. We've repeatedly said why it is not bad in and of itself, but the fact that people consider it so is part of the comprehension problem.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#42561: Dec 4th 2012 at 12:41:23 PM

Well, the insistence on this current cap on debt is like treating it as one of the conditions you can select, the other conditions being what other options you would consider if you select it.

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#42562: Dec 4th 2012 at 12:44:17 PM

Selecting to not raise the debt ceiling without actually balancing the federal budget is something of a Divide by Zero fiscally speaking. It might even be unconstitutional under the "full faith and credit" clause.

From a financial perspective, it's roughly akin to a homeowner with unlimited cash abruptly choosing to stop paying his mortgage, only in this case it's the largest debtor in the world. To deliberately default on the federal debt would crash the global economy. The Great Depression would be a fond memory by comparison. The prepper thread would be a good place to hang out.

A part of me hopes (as I did in 2011) that the Republicans play that game to its ultimate conclusion so that we do have a constitutional crisis and get this thing settled once and for all.

edited 4th Dec '12 12:56:56 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
NoName999 Since: May, 2011
#42563: Dec 4th 2012 at 1:22:53 PM

  • ignore post*

edited 4th Dec '12 1:23:31 PM by NoName999

Jhimmibhob Since: Dec, 2010
#42564: Dec 4th 2012 at 1:31:03 PM

[up][up]"Settled" in what way, precisely?

Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#42565: Dec 4th 2012 at 1:40:19 PM

I would prefer that the debt ceiling be declared unconstitutional. This way Congress must pass a budget in order to constrain spending. I think it has an excellent chance of getting overturned, since Congress is not authorized by the Constitution to deliberately cause the U.S. to default.

edited 4th Dec '12 1:41:13 PM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
shimaspawn from Here and Now Since: May, 2010 Relationship Status: In your bunk
#42566: Dec 4th 2012 at 1:52:11 PM

The Republicans are the only reason the country even lost it's AAA credit rating after all by even hesitating to raise the debt ceiling. That's a huge blow that didn't need to happen with a clear group to blame. The people who lowered the credit rating said why they did.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
#42567: Dec 4th 2012 at 2:51:59 PM

Under what part of the constitution would you overthrow the debt ceiling?

<><
TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#42568: Dec 4th 2012 at 3:03:28 PM

The constitution explicit says the US pays its debts.

tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#42569: Dec 4th 2012 at 3:21:21 PM

[up][up] Article 1; Section 8; Line 1

Emphasis mine:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.

[down] Are you in Joking Mode? Cause you're confusing me.

This part specifically can be used as a major part of getting the debt-ceiling declared unconstitutional.

edited 4th Dec '12 3:31:43 PM by tclittle

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#42570: Dec 4th 2012 at 3:26:50 PM

No no no, Fighteer is talking about how it's unconstitutional to NOT pay our debt-not how Fighteer has the ability TO pay our debts.

Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#42571: Dec 4th 2012 at 3:44:21 PM

This UN Treaty failing is just depressing.

People really think the UN is trying to take over our "sovereignty" with...GIVING THE DISABLED AID.

I just...ugh.

edited 4th Dec '12 3:48:53 PM by Thorn14

Zephid Since: Jan, 2001
#42572: Dec 4th 2012 at 3:49:06 PM

Reagan was bad for the country, if only because this is his legacy. He left behind a party incapable of seeing taxation in a rational way.

Reagan himself wasn't fiscally irresponsible, and supply-side economics made sense when the top marginal rate was 70%+. However, Keynesian economics is the proven theory for recession and depression, and we have one of two political parties completely in denial about this.

I found this to be a good read along the lines above.

[up] To be fair, the New World Order is most likely to take over using handouts. Every respectable person knows that.

edited 4th Dec '12 3:50:10 PM by Zephid

I wrote about a fish turning into the moon.
Thorn14 Gunpla is amazing! Since: Aug, 2010
Gunpla is amazing!
#42573: Dec 4th 2012 at 3:50:03 PM

Reagan would have been seen as too liberal for modern day GOP.

DeMarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#42574: Dec 4th 2012 at 4:15:48 PM

The fiscal cliff isn't really a cliff, but if we settled for that there is a very good chance it would cause a second recession.

The national debt, in and of itself does not harm us, but if it grows too large it will begin to harm the economy, and interfere with the delivery of services.

These things are overhyped, but they are still concerns.

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#42575: Dec 4th 2012 at 4:16:38 PM

Why is the new world order such a bad thing in the first place? A singular government is far more efficient than the 150+ we have now. Now obviously this only applies if it's democratically elected.

[up]They are bad but not immediately so. Right now we need to focus on unemployment and workers being paid too low. If we fix that most of the other problems can be solved easily.

edited 4th Dec '12 4:17:51 PM by Kostya


Total posts: 417,856
Top