[Cog]

Since there has not been an announced deal between the Republicans and Democrats to raise the debt ceiling and decrease the deficit, this is your chance to make your bold predictions of what will happen. After August 2nd, we can see how much of a economic Nostradamus you are.

My prediction is as follows:

The debt ceiling will be raised by August 2nd. There will be no substantial cuts($400-500 billion range) for next year. Any promised cuts will be down the road in the out years but never materialize. But there will be tax increases for the next fiscal year.

I'm going to predict that if there are cuts in this deal, they will be very nebulous and hard numbers will be hard to come by. But we will know for sure what tax revenues are expected and who is going to get hit by them.

The Republicans will basically cave on the issue since they know substantial cuts to spending will result in the loss of jobs and a lowering of GDP. All this posturing they have done so far will be for naught. The vote on the Republican side will be close but at the end of the day, Obama will be pleased with the result.

[Oakley]

I agree with you, Cog. It will be smoke and mirrors because 99% of the politicians are politicians because they have a fundamental belief in the value and efficacy of government, the bigger the better. As Ron Paul has said, those on the left love entitlements, and those on the right love war.

Half the time, when politicians say they are cutting spending, what they do first is propose a huge budget, and then tell you they are cutting spending, when in fact spending goes up, just not as quickly as they originally proposed in the budget. These are sociopaths, after all, and lies are the stock and trade of their their profession.

All the while the public lines up to support the version of the government they like the best, militarism or welfare, and vote accordingly. As power ebbs and flows between the groups first we get more of one, and then more of the other.

It is all going to end badly, when finally the financial system collapses into rubble and we tear at one another in a violent orgy of anger and retribution. I doubt that those in power in the US will walk away as peacefully as did those in power when the USSR ended in the 1990's in a similar financial collapse; masters are usually reticent to free their slaves.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Oakley', ' ')As Ron Paul has said, those on the left love entitlements, and those on the right love war.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', 'B')TW, can any Americans explain:

if you give the gumbint $ for a Treasury bond, you are entitled to get paid back with interest.
If you give the gubmint $ in contributions to the SS fund, your hoped for payback is an "entitlement".)

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', 'T')he Republicans will basically cave on the issue since they know substantial cuts to spending will result in the loss of jobs and a lowering of GDP. All this posturing they have done so far will be for naught. The vote on the Republican side will be close but at the end of the day, Obama will be pleased with the result.

[Nefarious]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'i')f you give the gumbint $ for a Treasury bond, you are entitled to get paid back with interest.

[Livewire713]

Many of the Tea Party Republicans including Michele Bachmann don't want to raise the debt ceiling no matter what kind of deal is being offered. I say the debt ceiling will be raised but will it be before we lose our AAA rating.

[Oakley]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', '
')
BTW, can any Americans explain:

if you give the gumbint $ for a Treasury bond, you are entitled to get paid back with interest.
If you give the gubmint $ in contributions to the SS fund, your hoped for payback is an "entitlement".

(You might say the SS fund is a fraud, but isn't it invested in the Treasury?)

[careinke]

I predict that a deal will NOT be done, we will default, and a worldwide financial Armageddon will ensue.

Phew, got that out of the way. Since my predictions are never correct, I wanted to make sure I had this one covered. Your welcome everyone.

[prajeshbhat]

Who is more dangerous for USA- Republicans or Democrats. I say democrats. Because the conservatives have already done all the damage they could possibly do. They have been saying all along openly that we are rich people, we only favor rich people, we don't really care for the poor, if you are a failure that's because you are not good enough and you were never meant to be, so let the rich rule and leave them alone because they are the only ones creating any real wealth.
The real problem are the neo-liberals. They started showing up around the 90's. President Obama is their descendent. Far from their socialist standing up for the little guy roots, these people are overwhelmingly pro-big banks. They have a blind faith in the ability to create money out of thin air(and also renewable energy out of thin air). Just take a look at the top contributers of President Obama's campaign:-

University of California $1,642,735
Goldman Sachs $1,012,841
Harvard University $862,604
Microsoft Corp $852,167
Google Inc $814,540
JPMorgan Chase & Co $807,799
Citigroup Inc $736,771
Time Warner $623,118
Sidley Austin LLP $600,298
Stanford University $595,716
National Amusements Inc $563,548
WilmerHale Llp $549,918
Skadden, Arps et al $543,539
Columbia University $536,202
UBS AG $532,674
IBM Corp $532,372
General Electric $528,180
US Government $517,908????
Morgan Stanley $512,232
Latham & Watkins $502,045

The liberals, blacks, gays progressives who believe that this government will protect them from the vicious heartless rich people ought to think again.

[Keith_McClary]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Nefarious', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')he retired in 1939, having paid just three years of payroll taxes. She received monthly Social Security checks until her death in 1975 at age 100. By the time of her death, Fuller had collected $22,888.92 from Social Security monthly benefits, compared to her contributions of $24.75 to the system.

[AgentR11]

Hope I'm wrong... but. My bet is they punt.

The house passes a bland, blank debt limit increase that punts passed 2013; then leaves.
I was so hoping this could get fixed while the fixing won't kill us.

[mad_marten]

Yeah, I go for last minute punt after, rating downgrade.

Although, I believe some teapartiers want a default

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Oakley', 'T')he Treasury bonds are held by banks and other powerful people and institutions which are the beneficiaries of government grants of privilege. Social Security is owed..

[Nefarious]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Keith_McClary', 'W')ow, that's $52.98 a month! Good thing for her she didn't drop dead at age 65 - then she would have been down $24.75 on the deal.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Nefarious', 'I')f you only get paid out what you paid in it isn't a ponzi scheme.

[Nefarious]

I hate going off topic on such a new thread,

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t's almost always run a surplus

[prajeshbhat]

Apropos to my previous comment, here are the top campaign contributors to John McCain's campaign:-

Merrill Lynch $298,413
Citigroup Inc $269,251
Morgan Stanley $233,272
Goldman Sachs $208,395
JPMorgan Chase & Co $179,975
AT&T Inc $174,487
Blank Rome LLP $150,426
Credit Suisse Group $150,025
Greenberg Traurig LLP $146,787
UBS AG $140,165
PricewaterhouseCoopers $140,120
US Government $137,617
Bank of America $129,475
Wachovia Corp $122,846
Lehman Brothers $117,500
FedEx Corp $113,453
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $104,250
US Army $103,613
Bear Stearns $99,300
Pinnacle West Capital $97,700

Turns out it doesn't matter who loses, goldman,JP and Citi always win.

[Quinny]

Doesn't this just underline the fact that the illusion of democracy is simply seen as 'bread & circus' by TBTB.

[prajeshbhat]

Why all this hullabaloo about the debt ceiling. Hasn't it already been raised 70 times. May be America can give Ron Paul a shot. Everything else has been tried. The American standard of living can fall in two ways. One is through high unemployment, falling property values and share prices etc. Or through devaluation of currency. The government probably prefers the second because that way the losses could be distributed across the board. But peak oil means that both could happen at the same time. Keynesian methods worked in the 40's because back then increasing the productivity of farms and factories was very easy (thanks to cheap oil). Don't think it'll work this time.