Happy Default Day America!

[JohnQPublic]

Breaking: Boehner Walks Away From White House Debt Limit Negotiations (http://www.zerohedge.com/article/breaking-boehner-walks-away-white-house-debt-limit-negotiations)


Submitted by Tyler Durden (http://www.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden) on 07/22/2011 18:08 -0400
Obama stormed away from Republican negotiations on the debt ceiling, it is now Boehner's turn. Per Obama's live speech which is currently ongoing, John Boehner has broken away discussions with the president. Obama's response is to demand a meeting with Bohner, Pelosi and McConnell at 11 am tomorrow to explain to the president how it is possible that America will be in non-selective default in as little as ten days: "I want them here tomorrow at 11am...we have run out of time." Readers can watch the live webcast here (http://on.cnn.com/cnndcl1) or below.

Boehner's "Dear Calleague" Letter (http://www.scribd.com/doc/60673572/boehner-07-22-2011)

[osoab]

I listened to most of Obummer. 6:30pm Fri presser? Seriously.

He almost flubbed and called tv show hosts as tv shcmucks. If I get a vid, I swear that is what I hear.

Oh yeah, "the American people just want things to be fair."

He will take an extension till 2013.

[palani]

Foreplay....D.C. style

[Joe King]

Well Palani, like any guy knows, you gotta have that first if you want to get the good stuff. lol

[ximmy]

"the president is emphatic that taxes have to be raised"

[Ponce]

I know what the last line in this book will be....so.......who cares.......Humty USA Dumpy is already broken in pieces and not all the kings men will be able to put it back together again........if anything, they will make him into powder.

[osoab]

From c-span.

The blip I heard was edited out. It was about 10:15 in.

The guy is whining through this whole thing. Press was pretty much sucking him through the questions. Pulled out the adjustments would have to be made in regards to the bennie checks.

Speaker Boehner Drops Out of Debt Talks (http://www.c-span.org/Events/Speaker-Boehner-Drops-Out-of-Debt-Talks/10737423029-7/)


House Speaker John Boehner called President Obama Friday evening to tell him he is dropping out of the debt talks. He wrote a letter to his Republican colleagues that says, "we couldn’t connect." In the letter, Speaker Boehner said a deal must "implement the principles" of "Cut, Cap and Balance," not increase taxes, and make “fundamental changes” to entitlements. “For these reasons, I have decided to end discussions with the White House,” Boehner wrote to his colleagues.



In a hastily arranged news conference, President Obama said, "It is hard to understand why Speaker Boehner would walk away from this deal." He said the package consisted of $1 trillion of tax revenue but it mostly was made up of spending cuts in defense and domestic spending as well as $650 billion of savings in entitlements. "This was an extraordinarily fair deal," President Obama said.


President Obama called Congressional leaders to the White House tomorrow morning at 11 am. He said they are supposed to come with ideas how to move forward and that his only demand is that the debt ceiling be lifted to last through 2012.


Earlier today, the Senate voted to table - or discard – the “Cut, Cap and Balance Act.” A simple majority was needed to halt proceedings on the measure, which would raise the debt ceiling and move to add a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and the Senate barely reached that threshold with a vote of 51-46. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said the bill is “over, it’s done, it’s dead.”
Speaker Boehner spent the day fighting back media reports that he and President Obama are close to a deal. At a Friday morning news conference, Boehner said, “There was no agreement and… frankly [we are] not close to an agreement.”


White House talks with Congressional leaders resumed mid-week after a hiatus as President Obama’s hopes for a deficit reduction deal alongside an increase to the debt ceiling resurfaced after the bipartisan “Gang of Six” Senators released an outline to raise $1 trillion in revenue and cut $3 trillion in spending over the next ten years.


A meeting with Senators Reid and McConnell and the “Gang of Six” took place this morning, and President Obama spoke at a town hall at the University of Maryland, just outside Washington, D.C. this morning.


Unclear if it is still an option, Senators Reid and McConnell have drafted what is widely considered a back-up plan, which would give the President unilateral authority to lift the debt ceiling in three different stages. Should it come to fruition, the Reid-McConnell plan is likely to include spending cuts worth up to $1.5 trillion.


Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner imposed the early August deadline as the last day the U.S. can pay all of its bills without Congress lifting the debt ceiling.


This morning, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) joined the Washington Journal to discuss the debt limit negotiations, “Cut, Cap and Balance Act” and the plan by the “Gang of Six” plan. Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY) also was a guest on the program.

[osoab]

Paraphrasing.

"We have 100's of businesses, and if those 70 million checks don't go out, there will be a lot of hurt.

[Hatha Sunahara]

"the president is emphatic that taxes have to be raised"

What I find interesting is the ambiguity of the whole discussion. I, who am not superwealthy, assume that this means taxes have to be raised for rich people. I assume this because I see how the widening income distribution gap is destroying the country. At the same time, I am aware that the super-wealthy people assume Obama means raising taxes for the middle class--people like myself. They assume this because they believe they have a divine right to not pay taxes.

There is also an argument being made that 'raising taxes' will destroy jobs. That assumes the rich people will move offshore and take their businesses with them. They have already done that.

The people believe the government is supposed to protect them from the elite, while the eilte make sure that the government protects them from the people. That is what we are watching play out now.


Hatha

[Book]

The people believe the government is supposed to protect them from the elite, while the elite make sure that the government protects them from the people. That is what we are watching play out now.

Hatha

http://www.flypaperblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/obama-smoking-young-6.jpg

He knows he will have life-time Secret Service protection while making some real money giving million dollar speeches after he is out of office.

:) be playin' golf with Tiger Woods in 2013 with a secret service caddy

[Joe King]

What I find interesting is the ambiguity of the whole discussion. I, who am not superwealthy, assume that this means taxes have to be raised for rich people. I assume this because I see how the widening income distribution gap is destroying the country. At the same time, I am aware that the super-wealthy people assume Obama means raising taxes for the middle class--people like myself. They assume this because they believe they have a divine right to not pay taxes. What we need are apportioned taxes. That way everybody pays the same $ amount. That'd be problem solved. Then it'd be time for a holiday by the lake to enjoy life again.
Because gov would then be reduced to it's proper size.
ie the size of a flea on a dogs ass.



There is also an argument being made that 'raising taxes' will destroy jobs. That assumes the rich people will move offshore and take their businesses with them. They have already done that.

The people believe the government is supposed to protect them from the elite, while the eilte make sure that the government protects them from the people. That is what we are watching play out now.
Hatha. What you're talking about is class warfare. Same what's always been going on. ie pit American against American so we're all too divided to pay enough attention to the corruption gov thrives upon.

[Libertytree]

This is much bigger than just class warfare and there is no doubt it is and has been used for millenia. The raising of taxes on anyone is ultimately counter productive, though I will say up front that mega corps need their loopholes closed that allows them to pay 0%. If I'm a small/medium businessman and I figure out that I can close part of my operations, reduce work force etc..to drop my top tax bracket status then that's what I'd do. Look out for #1 and say sorry to the working people, blame it on CONgress and the prez, of course the politicians will cry evil biz as the problem at the same time.

What we need are NO income taxes!

[midnight rambler]

What we need are NO income taxes!

As long as the Fed exists there will always be personal income taxes. That's just the way it works.

[palani]

As long as the Fed exists ...

De non apparentibus et non existntibus eadem est ratio. The reason is the same respecting things which do not appear, and those which do not exist.


R.E.M.

Consider this
Consider this, the hint of the century
Consider this, the slip
That brought me to my knees, failed
What if all these fantasies come
Flailing aground
Now I've said too much

I thought that I heard you laughing
I thought that I heard you sing
I think I thought I saw you try

[Horn]

"the president is emphatic that taxes have to be raised"

Kinda defeatist when Government entities are the only persons with income.

[Joe King]

What we need are NO income taxes!


As long as the Fed exists there will always be personal income taxes. That's just the way it works.

Yep. It's how they "mop up" the excess "money" they've created as a means to control inflation.

[palani]

Yep. It's how they "mop up" the excess "money" they've created as a means to control inflation.

Except it is not "them" that create money. It is you. Every time you sign something you have created something of value and that something is what creates the money backing it. The function of the banks and government agencies is to restrain you a little on your asset creation activities. If you didn't have these restraints you would flood the market with these paper assets and de-value the currency.

[Joe King]

Except it is not "them" that create money. It is you. Every time you sign something you have created something of value and that something is what creates the money backing it. The function of the banks and government agencies is to restrain you a little on your asset creation activities. If you didn't have these restraints you would flood the market with these paper assets and de-value the currency.Then apparently I was in fact correct. The "they've" stands. lol
...and no matter who else actually created what there is, the excess still has to be "mopped up", lest there be far too much price inflation too quickly.

Could you imagine what the inflation rate would become if everyone had approx an extra 50% more "money" to spend?

The economy would have blown up a long time ago.

[palani]

The economy would have blown up a long time ago. "The economy" belongs to the government. If the government wanted it to blow up or shrink to the size of a pin ... it is their entity to control as they will.

[Joe King]

It might be theirs, but as you pointed out, they expect us to help them by signing things in the way you previously mentioned.

If, at the time of their signing, people actually realized what you meant in your previous post it would sort of make them an accomplice, no?

[palani]

It might be theirs, but as you pointed out, they expect us to help them by signing things in the way you previously mentioned.

If, at the time of their signing, people actually realized what you meant in your previous post it would sort of make them an accomplice, no?

Accomplice, hell. It makes them principal in a clear-cut case of fraud (I should say major misrepresentation of a material fact ... bankruptcy ... use of the "f" word is frowned upon because it clearly has negative connotations )

[Joe King]

So what happens when too many of those "principals" sign so often that they end up creating excess "money" in said economy?

[palani]

So what happens when too many of those "principals" sign so often that they end up creating excess "money" in said economy?

Your signature creates the money but does not create the interest to repay the money that was created (aka usury). Said usury must come from other places or people. This was perhaps the only weak link in the scam. The usury is going to be the cause of the collapse of the entire system as corporations fight for the last free dollars still in circulation.

[Joe King]

Right. I understand all that.
The point I was getting at is that however it's created, if there's too much of it it fuels price inflation.
So one way of controlling it is by "mopping up" some of the excess via taxation.
The fed is the janitor and the IRS his mop.

[gunDriller]

Federal Reserve

can go Fvck itself 3 times

Fort Knox gold manure


^ it's my Haiku for the day

[palani]

So one way of controlling it is by "mopping up" some of the excess via taxation.

Another way of mopping up is the amount of usury charged for performing money creation services. A 20% business loan wipes out a lot of excess quickly. A 3% business loan takes a while longer to draw down the "economy".

'Course when all else fails you can get people sick and then charge quite a lot to "cure" them. But then this only works when the physician has a business manager to buffer his exposure to the patient. That hypocratic oath (or is it hypocritic oath?) tends to get in the way of commerce.

Or you might even invent a subject like climate change (except those pesky old dictionaries will tell you that climate is a function of the angle between a ray of the sun and the earths surface ... nothing at all to do with CO2) and invent a reason to drive up one of the basics of the "economy" ... fuel.

[Olmstein]

De non apparentibus et non existntibus eadem est ratio. The reason is the same respecting things which do not appear, and those which do not exist.


R.E.M.

Consider this
Consider this, the hint of the century
Consider this, the slip
That brought me to my knees, failed
What if all these fantasies come
Flailing aground
Now I've said too much

I thought that I heard you laughing
I thought that I heard you sing
I think I thought I saw you try

I would nominate this for post of the month if we did that kind of silly BS here. Seriously, Latin and REM in the same post. Fantastic!


About the relationship between the Federal Reserve Bank and the federal income tax, the best description I have seen is as follows:

Say you are playing tug-o-war with a puppy, using a sock as the rope. As long as you pull on the sock, the puppy will pull back as hard as it can, but once you let go, the puppy quickly loses interest in pulling on the sock. In this example, you are the puppy, the sock is the FRN, and the government (the IRS) is pulling the other end of the sock (the FRN). What the income tax does is create demand for the FRN. Without income taxes, people would be free to barter, or use local currencies, or precious metals to exchange for goods and services.

[Book]

Without income taxes, people would be free to barter, or use local currencies, or precious metals to exchange for goods and services.



Without the Social Security Number they could not track these transactions.

[Libertytree]

Without the Social Security Number they could not track these transactions.

They can't track them anyway, it's called the black market.

[po boy]

They can't track them anyway, it's called the black market.

AKA the "free market"

[Olmstein]

Anybody watching the HNIC address the nation now?

Crybaby Boehner is giving the rebuttal from the RINOs.

Idiots, all of them.

[Joe King]

He was just tryin' to make hisself appear to be like us little people.

[Horn]

Boehner controls the nation's money supply, I can't believe how wrong I've been all this time...