Liberals Should Be Madder At Debt Limit Increases Than Conservatives

by lewwaters

Bottom line, Democrat or Republican, wrong is wrong and continually giving yourself permission to borrow more, never paying the debt down, is wrong. We taxpayers, Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Anarchists, Minarchists, even those who don’t give a hoot about politics are on the hook for Trillions of dollars in debt.

It has to stop and yes, it’s not going to be pretty, but we have to begin actually getting out from under this ever increasing debt.

All of the money going out in interest payments should be going into the country’s infrastructure, Veterans Benefits, necessary entitlement programs and yes, we may disagree on just which ones are really necessary. But, paying all of that interest to foreign investors, nations or even domestic investors amounts to nothing more than fattening the coffers of those wealthy who own our debt at the expense of struggling taxpayers.

The left continually condemns the wealthy, calls on them to “share in the sacrifice” and “pay their fair share,” yet the left also approves of giving them even more of our tax dollars in the form of interest payments on the debt by supporting yet another increase to the debt limit?

It doesn’t make sense that the left isn’t demanding even louder than we are for this madness to stop.

12 Comments to “Liberals Should Be Madder At Debt Limit Increases Than Conservatives”

  1. Yelling “Debt Ceiling” is like yelling “Fire” in a crowded theater – someone should go to jail for doing it. It means nothing; it is out-of-context; it is an anachronism from the Gold Standard days. The ignorance of everyone involved simply makes me sad and pessimistic. Here’s what we should be talking about:

    http://www.martinhash.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=604

  2. Martin, while I agree that the trade deficit is also a problem, we see $110,536,850,221.63 in Monthly Interest on the Public Debt.

    Click to access ir_congressbo.pdf

    http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

    That’s not trade, it’s not stimulus, it’s not entitlements and it’s not infrastructure, it’s money thrown away that we receive nothing in return for.

    Yes, it is money owed and has to be paid, but we cannot continue throwing away such amounts in hopes of borrowing more.

    We must rebuild our manufacturing base and that means labor will have to make some sacrifices too.

    We cannot trade if we have nothing to trade with.

  3. Lew, the National Debt makes me uncomfortable too. Its exponential growth is what has everyone alarmed, but there is NO WAY we can pay it off now anyway. As for our manufacturing base, workforce, etc., those things are cyclic and symptomatic of external pressures:
    http://www.martinhash.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=506

    I appologize for my links, but I’ve written on all this stuff before.

  4. No apology needed for the links, Martin, they add to the conversation.

    We cannot survive with “NO WAY to pay off the debt.” We HAVE TO pay off the debt, no matter how long it takes.

    That’s why I say spending MUST be curtailed where it can be. Sacrifices will have to be made across the board and some may have to lose funding completely.

    How do we just refuse to pay those nations we have borrowed from and expect free trade in return?

    As for the cyclical nature of manufacturing, that is also why I keep posting on oil. We have it, a lot of it, we need it, we need the jobs and those jobs can spread out over time.

    Yes, we can use alternative energy sources too, but as they are built, perfected and improved to make them more reliable, we need oil for many needs, not just energy.

    This has been let go on far too long and now, we are in a deep pickle.

  5. I don’t mean to be apocalyptic but an economic crash is inevitable, followed by inflation – which will pay off the debt. Inflation also redistributes wealth at both ends of the spectrum: those that survive on the dole at one end, and those that loan money on the other. The Middle Class actually “benefits,” (bad choice of words but true.)

    The question isn’t “if” – it’s “when” and “how long?”

  6. Maybe I’m overly optimistic, but I just can’t help feeling there is a slim chance to avoid that.

    The question I’m left with is will they actually do it?

    I have my doubts.

  7. Lew — Libbers aren’t that smart…

  8. True Fred. If they were, they’d see the hypocrisy in this call.

  9. I don’t know what your intent in showing us that McCain dislikes the Tea Party folks is, Pat, but isn’t he one who has spent several years in D.C. and part and parcel of those who got us into this predicament?

    Perhaps you could explain your intent.

  10. I have to say I think John is a byproduct of a different era and may be its time for him to also go the way of other older senators of a bygone era and replaced with other representation from Arizona.

    And now I am seeing the turnover of the Vietnam era at the federal to my generation.

    I agree with Lew, its time to look at all options including Veterans, Social Security and Defense cuts also if necessary to payoff this debt.

  11. It’s pretty pathetic whan anyone waves wacko John McCain in any Conservative’s face. It’s an act of sheer desperation.

Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.