My God, you are an idiot.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I thought it was specific to Hitler. I lost one?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I thought it was specific to Hitler. I lost one?

Looking to take a dive to distract from your idiocy?

Tell us, again, Grandpa Hank, about the time the Dems didn't pass a budget for three years. Please! Please!

Come on, Clubby, more bedtime stories.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Looking to take a dive to distract from your idiocy?

Tell us, again, Grandpa Hank, about the time the Dems didn't pass a budget for three years. Please! Please!

Come on, Clubby, more bedtime stories.

I didn't say that. I said you blab about shit you're ignorant about. Of course, your options may be limited.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Adder

You are still hanging on that line? No they didn't. They leveraged it to an attempt at political advantage. They steadfastly said no to Obama's offer to address our long term issues.

Maybe both are at fault, but one side wanted to talk about our real issues, and the other said, "oh, fuck, wait, no, we can't do that because you might get reelected."

I didn't say that Obama didn't offer. I said the Ds were unwilling. I don't think they had the votes, just like I don't think Boehner had the votes, for the "grand bargain."

I say this in all seriousness, and not as a mere slight: you need a broader base of news sources. This is bullshit, and I can't believe you are saying it. It. Is. Just. Factually. Wrong. Wrong I tell you.

Back atcha.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The 2010 budget was passed in Spring, 2009, before the fiscal year began, by the Democratic house and senate. Here's a news report on it. The 2011 Budget was proposed by Obama in Feburary, 2011, but not passed until December, 2011, three months into the fiscal year. Here's the law.

Are you really trying to argue that a CR is a passing a budget?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

I didn't say that Obama didn't offer. I said the Ds were unwilling.

Yes, and you say this based on nothing. What those who were paying attention heard from the Dems was, "we aren't going to touch entitlements without revenues." Note that's entirely different from the R line of "no revenues." Note that one position is the kind of thing you say in a negotiation that indicates that compromise is possible.

Perhaps you mean to dismiss the Dem position as meaningless, because we should all just accept the Tea Party position as immutable, so the Dems were being equally irresponsible by not conceding even more. If so, that's crazy talk.

ETA: And I guess you are now admitting that at least one Dem wasn't "guilty of a no-negotiation stance on entitlements." Equivalence indeed.

EATA: Also note that one position is "let's do two things that will help" while the other is "we can't do one of the thing that would help."

I don't think they had the votes, just like I don't think Boehner had the votes, for the "grand bargain."

We will never know, because Boehner didn't try.

Personally, I think they probably could have gotten the votes, mostly from the Dems, but we are both guessing.

Except that I think you keep using very strange language. The whole point is neither the Dems nor Boehner having "the votes" on their own.

Back atcha.

Right. I need more news sources because my understanding of how things went down is comically one-sided and counter-factual. Uh huh.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

The response to S&P's downgrading was a sell-off in equities and a massive rally in U.S. Treasuries. Not clear if most political commentators understand this.

eta David Frum:

Markets are saying: We fear recession and deflation. Washington consensus: now is the time to fight debt and inflation.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Are you really trying to argue that a CR is a passing a budget?

So your concern is that last December's and this April's votes revolved around full year continuing resolutions rather than formal appropriations acts (though we've got some of those for various agencies over the period)? See both Speakers; you've got a government running on the allocated cash and votes that got you by both houses.

Now that we've focused on that as a linquistic problem you've got, I'm still curious as to how you think Obama' 2012 budget proposal increased the deficit, or how the Dems refused to negotiate on entitlement reform when it was in Obama's 2012 budget and also explicitly on the title as part of the $4 trillion grand deal.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

...

.... The Ds are guilty of a no-negotiation stance on entitlements. ....

I thought it might be useful to remind you of what you said. This is a lie.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The response to S&P's downgrading was a sell-off in equities and a massive rally in U.S. Treasuries. Not clear if most political commentators understand this.

eta David Frum:

Markets are saying: We fear recession and deflation. Washington consensus: now is the time to fight debt and inflation.

Is Frum becoming our touchstone? He just tweeted that he hopes journalists understand that the soaring bond market is bigger than the falling stock market.

Hmmm. I may have to rethink this Ty@50 stuff, now that we're all Frumites it appears. See what happens when one conservative actually thinks a bit rather than just doing the off-the-cuff-asshat thing.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

See what happens when one conservative actually thinks a bit rather than just doing the off-the-cuff-asshat thing.

You mean off the talking points, not the cuff, right?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The response to S&P's downgrading was a sell-off in equities and a massive rally in U.S. Treasuries. Not clear if most political commentators understand this.

eta David Frum:

Markets are saying: We fear recession and deflation. Washington consensus: now is the time to fight debt and inflation.

You still misapprehend how Keynesian stimulus works. It's nothing but a loan to fill in lack of demand. It cannot persist indefinitely, and does not of itself create sustainable growth. It merely replaces what it lost until what it lost re-emerges in the private sector.

I agree with an initial Keynesian response to any recession. It should always be the first step. But when you build that bridge and find no private sector growth waiting on the other side, you can't just keep building indefinitely. Eventually, and a lot sooner than you think, you trend into banana republic territory.

ETA: What will get us out of this is the same thing that historically has followed global downturns: War. The likelihood of this increased even more than usual by the fact that our current cuts into deep slashing of defense budgets. That sector has no intention of contracting. Ever.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The response to S&P's downgrading was a sell-off in equities and a massive rally in U.S. Treasuries. Not clear if most political commentators understand this.

eta David Frum:

Markets are saying: We fear recession and deflation. Washington consensus: now is the time to fight debt and inflation.

Honest question: does anyone who actually knows anything about finance actually care what S&P says?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?

Honest question: does anyone who actually knows anything about finance actually care what S&P says?

The 1600 people on the JP Morgan call today? The investors who sold even of S&P's parent to drop it 9% today?

I don't necessarily think that means they give credence to what S&P says, but they do care.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You still misapprehend how Keynesian stimulus works. It's nothing but a loan to fill in lack of demand. It cannot persist indefinitely, and does not of itself create sustainable growth. It merely replaces what it lost until what it lost re-emerges in the private sector.

I agree with an initial Keynesian response to any recession. It should always be the first step. But when you build that bridge and find no private sector growth waiting on the other side, you can't just keep building indefinitely. Eventually, and a lot sooner than you think, you trend into banana republic territory.

ETA: What will get us out of this is the same thing that historically has followed global downturns: War. The likelihood of this increased even more than usual by the fact that our current cuts into deep slashing of defense budgets. That sector has no intention of contracting. Ever.

It's interesting to watch you grow ever more paranoid.