Why does Donald Trump want to abolish the debt ceiling?
- Thread starter ResidentAlien
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
You could make a universal tool out of it.
The [insert politician name here] wants to rack up as much debt as he wants to do things he thinks will make him a great [insert title here]....
The difference is where the spending goes and where the cuts will come from- or additional revenues... maybe we could make the government sell some of that 4+trillion dollars worth of gold they have sitting around to buy back some of these useless dollars.
There's just two things I'm curious about.
If the government can just print out more money and make the money already in my wallet have less value, as they can and recently have, why do they even care about a debt ceiling? Money is an abstract concept in more ways than one.
If the government can make the value of the national debt less by printing out more money, how are we still getting people to loan us money? Surely the people doing the loaning can see this too. I certainly wouldn't want to loan anybody anything if they could do that.
If the government can just print out more money and make the money already in my wallet have less value, as they can and recently have, why do they even care about a debt ceiling? Money is an abstract concept in more ways than one.
If the government can make the value of the national debt less by printing out more money, how are we still getting people to loan us money? Surely the people doing the loaning can see this too. I certainly wouldn't want to loan anybody anything if they could do that.
They don't for the most part. They care about what the other party is going to do with the money.
Treasury bonds pose less risk than some other investments; they adjust the going bond rates and even if inflation beats your bond-rate, you still lose less value than what you would have lost with the money under the mattress.
I cannot imagine that getting into law or even enough of Congress to agree to this- that's crazy.
There's an argument that Congressmen should get more money so that the lobby money is less tempting... an increase, Idk about 40%, but an increase might be justified if Congress actually got something good done.
This is what I'm disagreeing with, not you... That's like paying criminals to not rob you....
That's why I said with the condition that they actually got something good done. If America prospers, I don't have a problem with the rulers prospering as well. Right now, I can't say I'd be happy with it.
Congress should get the same pay increases SS retirees get.
If 40% is good for congress then SS retirees should get the same.
There's another section of this bill to expand SS which is essentially "double dipping" . Those working for the RR or Government Service that do not pay and have not paid into SS are going to get benefits under this bill. Which is horrible to say the least. It's double dipping into a pension program they haven't paid into.
Intentionally bankrupting it.
This is dumb stuff.
Just pay those who have paid into SS 120 quarters their 40% pay raise and stop monkeying around. Retirees usually have minimal pensions to begin with. Inflation and taxes have eaten them alive these past couple of years. They generally don't have mortgages or car payments but do buy groceries, health care (medicines) and energy which have risen the most of anything.
This is just ridiculousness in the extreme here. 30-40 years of paying into the system just to get robbed by the government.....
Perhaps his plan is to do such a good job (in reality, reversing decades worth of organised treason and corruption) as people all over the world will ask him to remain in power?
My view is that this wasn't always widely known, so there was considered a limit to "ensure inflation wasn't excessive". Now most everyone knows that the government can just print money out of thin air, there's a race to the end, and huge ceilings (or even no ceiling) are proposed to reach this point of hyperinflation faster and make the most out of the fiat dollars before they lose their value.
Or, just make a law limiting the amount ANY lobbyist can "donate" in a calendar year.
Anybody caught violating those rules gets booted out.... whether you are a lobbyist, or a crooked politician taking more money than allowed by law.
These criminal actions have been winked at for decades... it's time to put a stop to the ability to buy politicians.
Personally, I have a problem thinking that Congress people "need" more money. The House was not supposed to be a career... it was supposed to be a temporary position held by regular folks that get elected, represent their district for one or two terms, then go back home and resume their normal place in society. If the "pay" was not so tempting, that in itself would enforce term limits.