Obama can cite the 14th Amendment of the Constitution

Sinsay

Well-Known Member
which says "the validity of the public debt … shall not be questioned," said Rep. James Clyburn, DS. ...

Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on ,even impose on themselves,for their own advantage Thomas Jefferson

Thoses solders are die`in for something but it aint freedom :(
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
“Section 8 of the Constituti*on gives Congress sole power to borrow money. The President can argue all he wants, along with all the Democrat Senators and Representa*tives, that the 14th Amendment says all debts shall be honored (meaning paid). However, unless Congress approves it, the President can not borrow any money to pay those debts. This means he will be forced to cut spending in other areas in order to honor the debt. All you people saying that the Republican*s are not upholding the Constituti*on, because of what the 14th Amendment says, need to read the entire Constituti*on.”

Pulled this off another site, pretty much sums up the reality of the situation. I'd love for the Congress to force the Dems into a balanced budget amendment, there are almost enough Repubs who don't care about reelection and might actually honor why they were sent to Washington and force the issue. It may seem radical, but nowhere as radical as how we view this administrations policies of the last three years. Not even close.
 

SlicePro

Member
“Section 8 of the Constituti*on gives Congress sole power to borrow money. The President can argue all he wants, along with all the Democrat Senators and Representa*tives, that the 14th Amendment says all debts shall be honored (meaning paid). However, unless Congress approves it, the President can not borrow any money to pay those debts. This means he will be forced to cut spending in other areas in order to honor the debt. All you people saying that the Republican*s are not upholding the Constituti*on, because of what the 14th Amendment says, need to read the entire Constituti*on.”

Pulled this off another site, pretty much sums up the reality of the situation. I'd love for the Congress to force the Dems into a balanced budget amendment, there are almost enough Repubs who don't care about reelection and might actually honor why they were sent to Washington and force the issue. It may seem radical, but nowhere as radical as how we view this administrations policies of the last three years. Not even close.
WE? Who the hell are you speaking for, your fellow Klan members in the backwoods of Alabama?
 

Luger187

Well-Known Member
“Section 8 of the Constituti*on gives Congress sole power to borrow money. The President can argue all he wants, along with all the Democrat Senators and Representa*tives, that the 14th Amendment says all debts shall be honored (meaning paid). However, unless Congress approves it, the President can not borrow any money to pay those debts. This means he will be forced to cut spending in other areas in order to honor the debt. All you people saying that the Republican*s are not upholding the Constituti*on, because of what the 14th Amendment says, need to read the entire Constituti*on.”

Pulled this off another site, pretty much sums up the reality of the situation. I'd love for the Congress to force the Dems into a balanced budget amendment, there are almost enough Repubs who don't care about reelection and might actually honor why they were sent to Washington and force the issue. It may seem radical, but nowhere as radical as how we view this administrations policies of the last three years. Not even close.
maybe we should cut all that money we spend on corporations

edit: sorry i meant job creators
 

WillyBagseed

Active Member
Another way is Congress gave the treasury the power to make coin if it is platinum. He can have 2 platinum coins worth 1 trillion ea made and deposited with the Fed then pay bills against worth of coins... fixed. Sounds crazy eh? Look it up. A little-known statute gives the secretary of the Treasury the authority to issue platinum coins in any denomination.

Section 8 also makes the FED illegal.

Balanced budget amendment is fine until you add the super majority crap to it. People expect, want things for free... WTF pay your taxes.

Yes they could be put to much better use but if you want schools, LEO, fire departments etc..... you need to STFU and pay.

I see "We the People" and "For the Common Good" in the Constitution but nowhere do I see " Me the People" or "For the Corporations Good"

Corporations are not people and money is not speech, I do not care what the Supreme court says. Also, look up the powers of the US Supreme court in the Constitution, nowhere does it say they have the power to determine what is and is not "Constitutional".
 

mame

Well-Known Member
A Balanced Budget Amendment is among the worst ideas I've ever heard come out of Washington... Think about it kids... Every time the economy goes into a recession the government increases spending because of unemployment insurance, food stamps, etc and loses revenue because people are out of a job... A balanced budget amendment would FORCE austerity measures EVERY economic downturn - whether it is necesarry or not - while also effectively banning the use of any deficit spending, which means no stimulus... It'd be an economic disaster. The Republicans likely know this, but they know the voters dont and are taking advantage of it because they know the Democrats would never let a Balanced budget amendment pass... the whole thing is political theater designed to win Republican votes.
 

Luger187

Well-Known Member
i suppose it would be a bit too much to expect a certain amount of austerity even in the best of times.
mame is saying thats not the way to fix a recession. when the economy is good, people dont need as much entitlement program funds. they have a job and make their own money, and also pay taxes. so yeah austerity can be implemented in a good economy.

taking food stamps and medicare away from poor people that cant survive without it is a terrible idea
 

hazyintentions

Well-Known Member
A Balanced Budget Amendment is among the worst ideas I've ever heard come out of Washington... Think about it kids... Every time the economy goes into a recession the government increases spending because of unemployment insurance, food stamps, etc and loses revenue because people are out of a job... A balanced budget amendment would FORCE austerity measures EVERY economic downturn - whether it is necesarry or not - while also effectively banning the use of any deficit spending, which means no stimulus... It'd be an economic disaster. The Republicans likely know this, but they know the voters dont and are taking advantage of it because they know the Democrats would never let a Balanced budget amendment pass... the whole thing is political theater designed to win Republican votes.
Are you leading to that acceptance that the government should bail the people out?! The government should pump money out for the hope of diminishing returns?

No comment..
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
A Balanced Budget Amendment is among the worst ideas I've ever heard come out of Washington... Think about it kids... Every time the economy goes into a recession the government increases spending because of unemployment insurance, food stamps, etc and loses revenue because people are out of a job... A balanced budget amendment would FORCE austerity measures EVERY economic downturn - whether it is necesarry or not - while also effectively banning the use of any deficit spending, which means no stimulus... It'd be an economic disaster. The Republicans likely know this, but they know the voters dont and are taking advantage of it because they know the Democrats would never let a Balanced budget amendment pass... the whole thing is political theater designed to win Republican votes.
We can't have that, that would force people to be responsible, to save for a rainy day and to make due with what they have been given.

Everyone hates responsible people, the country runs much better when no one really gives a shit.

If the Government would just sell 330 trillion $ worth of Treasuries to the fed at .03% interest and then turn around and issue every single man, woman and child a check for $1 Million each with the stipulation that the money would have to be paid back by the time you got to 62 years of age and at 1% ionterest that would solve all problems instantly. We would all live the high life and not even need to work anymore. Just invest most of the cash into high yielding equities and live off the Dividends. Highest standard of living in the world, we would all live in mansions and drive Lamborghinis. No unemployment, we would hire Mexico to do all the work at rock bottom wages. That would benefit Mexico too, what with that country enjoying full employment also. Utopia!!!!

Better yet, just drop free cash from helicopters!! Ben Bernanke knows something about that, in fact the helicopter drop is his idea. Brilliant!!
 

mame

Well-Known Member
What you guys are talking about isn't just about personal responsibility blah blah blah... A balanced budget Amendment ensures economic ruin, there's just no other way to say it. There is no workaround. There is no way to avoid "Fear mongering"... The passage of a balanced budget amendment is on par with electing Sarah Palin as POTUS... It's just a bad idea.

I mean, Luger hit it on the head; Austerity can be done in normal times and it wont hurt an economy too terribly but Austerity in the face of economic downturn makes the downturn WORSE. ND, don't play dumb - you know full well the economic ramifications this Ham-fisted bill would have... If you think the government is too big, cool; But to support a bill that completely destroys the U.S. economy is, well... destructive... And for what? To serve your idealogical agenda of "starving the beast"?
 

mame

Well-Known Member
Seriously, I'm appalled that a balanced budget amendment is even up for debate... It's that terrible.
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
"It is the people who constitute the basis of Government credit. Why then cannot the people have benefit of their own gilt-edge credit by receiving non-interest bearing currency-instead of bankers receiving the benefit of the people's credit in interest-bearing bonds. If the United States Government will adopt this policy of increasing its national wealth without contributing to the interest collector-for the whole national debt is made up on interest charges-then you will see an era of progress and prosperity in this country such as could never have come otherwise." -- Thomas A. Edison
 

undertheice

Well-Known Member
mame is saying that's not the way to fix a recession. when the economy is good, people don't need as much entitlement program funds. they have a job and make their own money, and also pay taxes. so yeah austerity can be implemented in a good economy.

taking food stamps and medicare away from poor people that can't survive without it is a terrible idea
i know exactly what mame is saying and it smacks of the same thinking that keeps getting us into the same trouble over and over again. we only think about the budget once things have gotten out of control. in the good times we dole out entitlements hand over fist. everyone gets a slice of the pie that only some have created and we get used to the state's largesse. when we find ourselves in trouble and need to cut back, no one is willing to give up those things they weren't paying for in the first place. when the pool of taxpayers starts to shrink, we merely demand more of those still able to produce.

the idea that government should be on a permanent austerity program seems completely foreign to the statist mind. that it grows by leaps and bounds seems perfectly natural to them, that society become responsible for the welfare of a larger and larger segment of the population seems only proper and it certainly enhances the popularity of the ruling elite. the very concept of "bare bones" entitlements is avoided at all costs and we become dependent in our excess. the price we pay for our dependence is a bloated bureaucracy and a complacent population.

it's easy to say that austerity can be implemented in a good economy, but it never is. thousands of do-gooders point to large profits and demand that society as a whole profit as well from such good fortune. when the inevitable downturn hits, the waste of excessive and redundant social programs, of unearned comforts and slipshod responsibility never goes away. its cost is merely shouldered by a smaller and smaller segment of society. the pains of failure are are avoided, but its more deadly consequences are merely postponed.
 

mame

Well-Known Member
it's easy to say that austerity can be implemented in a good economy, but it never is.
Uhm... The Clinton era?

The statists are out to get you though, the libertarian magic dust will save us all... If only the government got the fuck out of the way! Right?
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
“There is no means of avoiding a final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved.” – Ludwig von Mises


The final collapse of our credit expansion boom approaches. We have a choice over the next week. We could voluntarily abandon further credit expansion by voting for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution or we can raise the debt ceiling, pretend to cut spending far in the future, and allow our currency system to experience a catastrophic final collapse.

We’ll take what’s behind door #2 Johnny. The vested interests in Washington DC and Wall Street only care about power and wealth. They will never abandon credit expansion. It’s their drug. They must have it. They are addicted to it. They will keep injecting it into our system until they overdose America.

The mainstream media acts as if not raising the debt ceiling by next Tuesday will result in America defaulting. This is a crock. America chose to proceed on a path to default decades ago. We are just finally reaching our destination. Below are the choices we made as a people and a country to default on our obligations and eventually destroy our country:

The enactment of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution in 1913 allowing the government to impose a tax on your income, thereby opening Pandora’s Box to a 60,000 page tax code and allowing politicians to sell their votes to the highest bidder.

The signing into law of the Federal Reserve Act by Woodrow Wilson in 1913, transferring control of our currency system to Wall Street banks. The man made inflation created by the Federal Reserve has reduced the purchasing power of the USD by 97% since 1913 and has allowed politicians to promise $100 trillion of benefits to Americans, that can never be delivered.

The Social Security Act signed into law by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1935, supposedly to help widows and orphans, morphed into a giant ponzi scheme used by politicians to make Americans think it was a retirement plan and the money was in a lockbox. The scam continues, but ponzi schemes always collapse.

Fannie Mae was created in 1938 as a government agency and Freddie Mac was created in 1970 as a quasi-government agency. By promoting home ownership and subsidizing loans to people who should have never gotten loans these agencies caused hundreds of billions in mal-investment. As tools of politicians, they were used to push social agendas. The result will be in excess of $300 billion in losses to the American taxpayer.

The Korean War set a precedent where the President did not need to seek Congress to declare war as required under the Constitution. This has allowed the President the freedom to fight undeclared wars around the world for decades, while spending trillions, with no approval from Congress.

LBJ’s Great Society programs such as Medicare and Medicaid were sold to Americans as cost saving programs that would improve healthcare for all Americans. We now spend 17% of our GDP on healthcare and these two programs have an unfunded liability of almost $100 trillion.

Nixon closing the gold window in 1971 removed all restraint on the Federal Reserve, banks and politicians. With a fiat currency backed by nothing but promises, it was only a matter of time before the greed and corruption of bankers and politicians overcame any self imposed fiscal responsibility. The result has been the National Debt going from $400 billion in 1971 to $14.4 trillion today, a 3,600% increase in 40 years. Meanwhile, GDP only increased 1,350% over this same time frame.

The embrace of consumer debt by the Baby Boom generation beginning in 1980 created an atmosphere of living for today and not worrying about the future. This attitude has left 50% of all the households in the country with a net worth of $70,000 or below.

The repeal of the Glass Steagall Act in 1999 unleashed the hounds of hell upon America, as the soulless blood sucking vampires on Wall Street proceeded to rape and pillage the American economy with their financial derivatives of mass destruction and marketing of debt to the clueless masses. The housing bust and impoverishment of the middle class can be laid at the feet of these evil greedy bastards.

Bush’s unpaid for wars of choice, his reckless tax cuts, and his foolish expansion of a bankrupt Medicare program in the midst of two wars turbo charged the country on its path to default.

By bailing out Wall Street on the backs of the middle class in 2008/2009, the politicians in this country showed their hand. They will protect their fellow power brokers and contributors and throw the American people under the bus. Wall Street controls Congress.

The Keynesian schemes rolled out by Obama and his minions have just added trillions of debt while depressing the economic system and doing nothing to help the average person. The Fed created inflation has inflamed revolution through out the world and further impoverished the middle class who need to eat and fill up their cars.

In the midst of a Depression Obama chose to create a brand new healthcare bureaucracy, add 30 million people into the government controlled system, and commit the US taxpayer to trillions of future healthcare costs.

As you can see, next Tuesday means nothing. The debt ceiling means nothing. We chose to default as a nation many years ago. The destination was certain, only the timing was in question. Time to step on the gas.


“Credit expansion is not a nostrum to make people happy. The boom it engenders must inevitably lead to a debacle and unhappiness.” – Ludwig von Mises

original article
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
If only the government got the fuck out of the way! Right?
I know it was sarcastic, but that was one of the most intelligent statements you've ever made.

And are you really arguing for Stimulus...still?...Really?

All it did was delay the inevitable and make the impending collapse worse. And now we're looking at a debt hovering around 21 to 24 trillion in the next ten years, I guess there is no amount of debt that can trigger your self preservation instincts. You libs are more than happy to sink the ship as long as everyone goes down together.

Let's not give Clinton ANY credit for the 90's shall we. He opposed the balanced budget to the point of a government shutdown, before he caved to the Republicans. He was wrong, just as you're wrong now, as all progressives have been wrong for 80 years.

Every social program has become just as bloated and destructive as the opponents at the time of their passing said they would become. Progressives, Dem or Repub, don't give a shit about consequences, they just want what they want.
 

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Uhm... The Clinton era?

The statists are out to get you though, the libertarian magic dust will save us all... If only the government got the fuck out of the way! Right?
did the size of our bloated bureaucracy decrease? of course not. is sometime slows, but it never gets any smaller. every one of your academically backed solutions demands the constant growth of that one institution that creates nothing, government. you propose increasing entitlements, increasing our debt load and constantly putting more pressure on the private sector industries that have created all this wealth in the first place. yes, the statists are out to get us. in their simplistic naivete, they place more and more emphasis on the one segment of our society that is completely incapable of supporting itself. the end result of all these occasionally well intentioned schemes is a society that exists to serve the state and a state that doles out the people's wealth at its none-to-well intended discretion. you do realize it should be the other way around, don't you?

there is no fairy dust and all these assholes that seek to demean the philosophy of individualism with the childish tactic of mockery should probably just get out of the way. the concept of doing away with government altogether is, of course, not feasible. such an anarchistic society is a fantasy, but the constant growth of government certainly isn't feasible either.
 

mame

Well-Known Member
did the size of our bloated bureaucracy decrease? of course not. is sometime slows, but it never gets any smaller. every one of your academically backed solutions demands the constant growth of that one institution that creates nothing, government. you propose increasing entitlements, increasing our debt load and constantly putting more pressure on the private sector industries that have created all this wealth in the first place. yes, the statists are out to get us. in their simplistic naivete, they place more and more emphasis on the one segment of our society that is completely incapable of supporting itself. the end result of all these occasionally well intentioned schemes is a society that exists to serve the state and a state that doles out the people's wealth at its none-to-well intended discretion. you do realize it should be the other way around, don't you?

there is no fairy dust and all these assholes that seek to demean the philosophy of individualism with the childish tactic of mockery should probably just get out of the way. the concept of doing away with government altogether is, of course, not feasible. such an anarchistic society is a fantasy, but the constant growth of government certainly isn't feasible either.
Where is this pressure on the private sector? Certainly not on interest rates... Wages? Not likely. too much employee benefits? Tell me, in all of your wisdom do you even know how to tell the difference between a supply side crunch and a slump driven by depressed demand? You subscribe to the "demand doesn't matter... Supply will create it's own demand" dont you? You believe that everytime recession hits it means that it was the governments fault and that they should get out of the way? While that may have been true in the mid-late 70's, todays downturn is a whole different animal; I would suggest you read some textbooks, but I'm well aware of the conservative dogma towards acadamia... Whatever.

You talk down on "bending the curve" because the "bloated beareucracy" never "gets smaller"... Tell me, if there are 10 people and 3 of them work for the government one year and the next there are 20 total people and 4 of them work for the government is that not a decrease in the size of government compared to the overall population? That's how government cuts back. I know... It's a travesty! But it's actually much more economically responsible whether you admit it or not.
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
The economy is headed for collapse. Whether it is next week or next year. Sometimes you need to amputate a limb to save the patient. Intentional brush fires are set to clear out the build up of combustable growth and in doing so, prevents catastrophic fires. Old buildings are brought down to make way for new construction. Power grids, under extreme conditions, are allowed to fail, so as to make it easier to pick up the pieces later and get the power flowing again. Bad teeth are pulled, instead of waiting for them to drop out on their own. Invasive surgeries are performed to remove tissue that endangers the patient.
Adding to the debt, minuscule cuts in spending, years down the road and trying to tame the beast while allowing it to continue to grow is tantamount to a doctor, whose treatment of a patient is not working, so he prescribes more of the same.
It may be better to let the pressure off now than to wait until later when the results may be even worse.
 
Top