Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Adenoid_Hynkel

(14,093 posts)
Mon Nov 19, 2012, 09:21 PM Nov 2012

Treasury Secretary Calls For Abolishing The Debt Ceiling

Source: Think Progress

Early next year, the U.S. is on pace to once again hit its debt ceiling, the statutory borrowing limit imposed by Congress. When the U.S. neared its debt limit in 2011, House Republicans took it hostage, demanding spending cuts and forcing the first credit downgrade in U.S. history due to their intransigence on taxes.

That the U.S. faces periodic standoffs over the debt ceiling is a problem entirely of Congress’ own creation. The debt ceiling didn’t even exist until 1917, and serves little practical purpose. During an interview on Bloomberg Television, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner acknowledged as much, saying that the U.S. should abolish the debt ceiling entirely:

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the U.S. “absolutely” should get rid of the debt ceiling as soon as possible.

“It would have been time a long time ago to eliminate it,” Geithner told Bloomberg TV on Friday. “The sooner the better.”


Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/11/19/1212691/geithner-abolish-debt-ceiling/
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Treasury Secretary Calls For Abolishing The Debt Ceiling (Original Post) Adenoid_Hynkel Nov 2012 OP
Oh that will make heads explode.... Sekhmets Daughter Nov 2012 #1
It is not unlimited, if the funds are already authorized by congress and signed into law by the Pres Carnage251 Nov 2012 #2
Wouldn't the removal of a debt limit Sekhmets Daughter Nov 2012 #5
The two branches would have to come into agreement on how much funding is authorized Carnage251 Nov 2012 #7
One would hope... Sekhmets Daughter Nov 2012 #8
Yes, it makes no sense to authorize the budget, obligate/commit the funds AnnaLee Nov 2012 #3
about fucking time bossy22 Nov 2012 #4
Why Dig a Deeper Hole? Macoy51 Nov 2012 #6

Sekhmets Daughter

(7,515 posts)
1. Oh that will make heads explode....
Mon Nov 19, 2012, 09:25 PM
Nov 2012

Including mine....As republicans always abuse the debt more than Dems. Can you imagine if Georgie had had unlimited funds, how many wars he might have started....

Carnage251

(562 posts)
2. It is not unlimited, if the funds are already authorized by congress and signed into law by the Pres
Mon Nov 19, 2012, 09:31 PM
Nov 2012

War funding is included in spending bills, there was a fight over Iraq war spending when Dems took back congress.

Sekhmets Daughter

(7,515 posts)
5. Wouldn't the removal of a debt limit
Tue Nov 20, 2012, 09:12 AM
Nov 2012

make it that much easier to get as much war funding as a president would want? No debt limit could lead to no spending limit couldn't it?

Carnage251

(562 posts)
7. The two branches would have to come into agreement on how much funding is authorized
Tue Nov 20, 2012, 11:06 AM
Nov 2012

The debt ceiling limits how much we can borrow, with it or without it there are amounts that both parties don't want to exceed.

AnnaLee

(1,040 posts)
3. Yes, it makes no sense to authorize the budget, obligate/commit the funds
Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:26 PM
Nov 2012

and then say Oops, went over the debt ceiling. Raising the ceiling to at least the level of the budget (plus other internal transfers) should be implicit in passing the budget/authorizing in the first place. And yes, continuing resolution is authorized.

The debt ceiling is a political ploy that hurts the country. It has no fiscal value even if people think it does.

bossy22

(3,547 posts)
4. about fucking time
Mon Nov 19, 2012, 10:27 PM
Nov 2012

the debt ceiling limit is silly and detrimental. It allows such things as what happened last year to happen.

 

Macoy51

(239 posts)
6. Why Dig a Deeper Hole?
Tue Nov 20, 2012, 11:01 AM
Nov 2012

The more we go in to debt, the harder it will be for our descendants pay our bills. The longer we wait to solve our debit problem, the more it is going to hurt. Anyone remember the Gramm-Rudman Act in the mid 80’s? If congress would have followed through, we would have had a bad time economically for a few years and now we would have had a balanced budget.

Instead, our leaders just kick the can down the road, and when the end finally comes, it is going to be real ugly.



Macoy

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Treasury Secretary Calls ...