Everyone say "default" on the count of 3

[Forever_frost]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/10/15/Exclusive-Rep-DeSantis-Obama-s-threats-at-ridiculous-veto-of-my-Vitter-s-congressional-Obamacare-subsidy-ban-purely-political

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) told Breitbart News on Tuesday evening that President Barack Obama’s threat to veto an amendment that he and Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) have developed that would eliminate the Obamacare subsidies for members of Congress, their staffers, and administration officials and staffers is a purely political move.

When Breitbart News asked DeSantis about Obama’s veto threat, he replied: “That’s just unbelievable.”

“The whole issue is as we approach this Oct. 17 day [the supposed debt ceiling deadline], which isn’t the real day—I think we all know it’s past that—but as we get there, the president has taken this weird position of trying to rattle the markets. Normally, presidents would say ‘hey, we’re going to pay our debts come hell or high water. I want Congress to do ‘x’ but let me tell you I’ll do everything in my power [to pay our debts].’"

"That’s not what this president is doing," DeSantis noted. "He’s actually saying that we won’t pay some of these debts potentially. So it’s odd.”

Politico reported on Tuesday evening: “President Barack Obama told House Democratic leaders Tuesday that he would veto debt-ceiling legislation if it includes a provision pushed by Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and House GOP leaders that would cut health subsidies for congressional and senior executive branch officials, according to sources familiar with the discussion at a private White House meeting. The version of the provision included in a bill the House is slated to consider Tuesday night would eliminate employer contributions for lawmakers' and Hill staffers' health insurance purchases, and require the president, vice president and political appointees to enter into Obamacare exchanges without a tax subsidy.”

Politico added that Obama was “unprompted” on the issue and brought up the amendment’s language on his own.

DeSantis said it is hard for him to understand what is going on in President Obama’s head when it comes to these negotiations and that the president is not acting in good faith.

“Kind of getting into his mind about what he wants to do should we reach that point is difficult for me but I think it’s going to be an untenable position to say you’re vetoing a short-term debt extension because the subsidies for members of Congress are revoked," he said." I think if he ended up precipitating economic problems as a result of that, I think that would be a decision that would rank in the annals of history as one of the biggest miscalculations."

"But I think he sees it as he just wants to do whatever he can to blame Republicans," DeSantis explained. "If bad things happen, and if Republicans take the blame, I think he’s fine with that. That’s unfortunate, but I do think that’s where he’s at right now. But that would just be a ridiculous veto if he were to veto that because of the subsidy ban.”

DeSantis said the reason why he, Vitter, and other congressional conservatives are fighting to revoke special treatment for members of government is because they believe all Americans should be treated the same, regardless of their political connections.

“This idea with what OPM tried to pull with members of Congress and staff, I mean, the law is clear,” DeSantis said. “They need to go to exchanges. There is absolutely zero subsidies in the law. Democrats pressured Obama to issue these subsidies through OPM. He ordered them to do it. This is just an easy issue for us to take head on."

"This isn’t the only I’ve said we should do. I’ve been in the mix with all the stuff we’ve done from the beginning," he continued. "We did do the Vitter language on one of the Continuing Resolutions we sent over with the individual mandate delay. All the Democrats in the Senate voted no on that and I think that’s going to come back to haunt them and it already is in some of these Senate races. So I’m glad it’s there.”
“Now, initially, the proposal from leadership was only members and the president and vice president but no staff,” DeSantis said. “Basically, that’s kind of splitting the baby because the OPM subsidy is illegal for both Congress and staff. It’s just not in the statute. There was a lot of pushback in conference where they said if we are going to go that route, we need to overturn the OPM rule entirely and put the president and vice president into the exchanges.”

DeSantis said he thinks fighting this battle is a political winner for conservatives and Republicans, and he plans to continue doing battling.

“For me, why I think this particular type of thing is useful is because what you’re seeing with Obamacare is you have this big gargantuan law imposing all these burdens on society,” DeSantis said. “But for those people that are politically connected--employers, unions, members of Congress--they’re granted relief, carve-outs or waivers from the provisions. The problem with that is one, it’s not fair and it’s not what our constitutional system is supposed to allow but it actually makes it more difficult going forward to actually repeal Obamacare if you have people who are politically connected who can kind of evade the negative effects of it."

"If people throughout society feel this stuff uniformly, then I think it increases the chances that we’re going to see Obamacare relief for society as a whole. I wanted to see that from the beginning with what we were doing trying to defund Obamacare," he explained. "But at a minimum, you can’t have a two-tiered system in which Obamacare burdens average Americans and the kind of political elite and business elite are able to get their waivers. We know this is going to continue going forward under this law.”

[Captain Crawfish]

Default will not happen.

[Denny]

Why does everyone think there will be a default if these jackasses don't come to an agreement?

[Shaggin Wagon]

I don't even know what would happen if we did? I think it all just bullshit.

[Captain Crawfish]

I don't even know what would happen if we did? I think it all just bullshit.

People lose trust when you default. Fitch would downgrade our credit no one would buy our debt. Remember the people causing this also have brokerage accts.

[Forever_frost]

People lose trust when you default. Fitch would downgrade our credit no one would buy our debt. Remember the people causing this also have brokerage accts.

They are talking today about reducing our credit rating again. Obama's been a hell of a president. Two credit rating reductions, 8 trillion in spending and borderline revolution

[slow99]

We aren't going to default. Study the overnight repo market.
(I was a lot more confident that we wouldn't a few days ago, I have to admit.)

[GhostTX]

We ain't going to default. Tax revenue it still coming in to the Fed.

Obama's saying anything and everything to induce fear so that he gets his way.

On the House floor on Monday, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) argued that President Barack Obama’s activities during the government shutdown over Obamacare are a sign to him that Obama would act nefariously to attack the full faith and credit of the United States of America by taking the country into a default in a debt ceiling crisis if the president does not get everything he wants in negotiations.

“Given the ruthless and vindictive way the shutdown has been handled, I now believe that this president would willfully act to destroy the full faith and credit of the United States unless the Congress acquiesces to all of his demands, at least as long as he sees political advantage in doing so,” McClintock said in a speech on the floor of the House of Representatives. “If the Republicans acquiesce, immediate crisis will quickly vanish, credit markets will calm and public life will return to other matters. But a fundamental element of our Constitution will have been destroyed. The power of the purse will have shifted from the representatives of the people to the executive. The executive bureaucracies will be freed to churn out ever more outlandish regulations with no effective congressional review or check through the purse. A perilous era will have begun in which the president sets spending levels and vetoes any bill falling short of his demands. Whenever a deadline approaches, one house can simply refuse to negotiate with the other until Congress is faced with the Hobson’s choice of a shutdown or a default. The nation’s spending will again dangerously accelerate. The deficit will rapidly widen. And the economic prosperity of the nation will continue to slowly bleed away.”

McClintock said that while the current impasse began “over a collapsing health program,” Obamacare, “it’s now taken on the dimensions of a constitutional crisis.”

“Yesterday in Washington, a group of America’s veterans rose up to take a stand against these unconstitutional usurpations,” McClintock added. “I believe the salvation of our nation now ultimately depends on the American people joining them.”

McClintock argued that the debt ceiling “exists” for a “simple reason.” He said it is there “to ensure that public debt isn’t recklessly piled up without Congress periodically acknowledging it and addressing the spending patterns that are causing it,”

“If the debt limit increase is supposed to be automatic as the president suggests, then there’s really no purpose to it,” he said.

McClintock explained that unlike any of Obama’s predecessors, if Congress does not “unconditionally” raise the debt ceiling, the United States will default on its debt obligations. But McClintock pointed to how the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has “consistently held” that the Secretary of the Treasury, who currently is Jack Lew, a position that reports to the president, has “’the authority to choose the order in which to pay obligations of the United States’ and to protect the nation’s credit. Such authority is inherent in the 1789 act that established the Treasury Department and entrusted it with ‘the management of the revenue’ and ‘the support of the public credit.’”

McClintock said that given that the nation’s revenues are “more than 10 times our debt payments,” for the Treasury Department and Obama White House to pay “the debt first to prevent a sovereign default is well within the financial ability of the federal government.”

“Indeed, it is a fiscal imperative,” he said, before noting House-passed legislation that would require the payment of the national debt in the case of the lack of a deal over raising the debt ceiling. That measure, McClintock said, “languishes” in the Democratic-controlled Senate under the threat of a veto from President Obama.

“Protecting the sovereign credit by prioritizing payments would mean delaying paying other bills,” McClintock said. “That is also untenable, unthinkable and something much-to-be-avoided. But it would not imperil the nation’s sovereign credit. Only the president can do that.”

McClintock noted how House GOP leadership offered to President Obama a no-strings-attached “clean” 60-day debt ceiling increase, and how Obama refused the offer. He also noted how Senate Republicans offered a six-month clean debt ceiling increase, and how Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid refused that.

“What the president threatens to do would be catastrophic and unprecedented,” McClintock said. “The full faith and credit of the United States is what gives markets the confidence to loan money to the federal government. Even the threat of default, exactly the kind the president is now making, could have dire consequences to a nation that now owes more than its entire economy produces in a year.”

McClintock said that, moving forward, establishment Republicans need to fix their “miscalculations on two key assumptions.”

“First, that the Democrats would negotiate the issues that divide our country; they have not,” McClintock said of such GOP establishment’s false assumptions in these negotiations. “Second, the Democrats would seek to minimize the suffering caused by the impasse; they have not.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/10/14/Congressman-Nation-on-verge-of-perilous-era-hurtling-toward-constitutional-crisis-if-GOP-caves-on-debt-ceiling

[Shaggin Wagon]

People lose trust when you default. Fitch would downgrade our credit no one would buy our debt. Remember the people causing this also have brokerage accts.

Fuck what we owe, the countries we give money to can pay or assume our debt as far as I'm concerned. I'd like to not to be a world savior, downgrade us and let some other country save the word. I wish we would introvert and cut the world off. If someone attacks us, nuke them then forget about them. I don't understand economics or politics, but this would work for me.

[Forever_frost]

Oh we have the money to pay it but the boy king wants his way and he's already shown he has no problem with funding his pet projects while hurting Americans.

[slow99]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/richardfinger/2013/10/04/the-u-s-debt-ceiling-fallacy-agreement-or-not-there-will-be-no-default/

[slow99]

...

Since my last update, published on October 3rd, a combination of better than expected tax receipts and a modestly higher balance of “extraordinary measures” available suggest that the Treasury will have sufficient cash on hand to pay bills through the end of October. This pushes the “drop-dead date” out about a week from where we had previously spotted it.

Treasury Secretary Lew has sent several notes to Congress indicating that Treasury will run out of borrowing authority by October 17th and that they will only have $30 bln in cash on hand at the end of that day. Compared with Lew’s expectations, our forecasts for Treasury cash balances suggest that Treasury will either have about $10 bln more headroom under the debt limit or cash on hand by that date (it makes no difference which), depending on bill auction sizes between now and then. It is important to remember that the day that Treasury runs out of borrowing authority is NOT the same as the day when Treasury runs out of cash or potentially defaults. Maturing Treasurys create room under the debt limit, so even if the debt limit prevents Treasury from issuing new debt that raises cash, it does not prevent Treasury from conducting auctions that refund maturing debt. They can simply scale the size of the auctions down to the amount of debt that matures on the settlement date.

Given the revised outlook for Treasury cash flows, we do not see significant risk that Treasury runs out of cash before the end of October. This view may change over the next few days, given the fact that daily tax receipts tend to be volatile and that cash balances are projected to be on the light side from October 24th through the end of the month. We will continue to provide updates as new information comes in for as long as it takes Congress to raise the debt limit. At this point, it does not appear that much momentum is building for a compromise on funding the government or raising the debt limit so this could still be an issue by the end of the month.

If the debt ceiling is not raised following the mid-October coupon auction settlement, it is possible that there would be disruptions to the regular auction calendar.

[YALE]

I know a lot of people write, "treasuries," as, "Treasurys," but I don't like it.

[slow99]

I know a lot of people write, "treasuries," as, "Treasurys," but I don't like it.

You screw up far too frequently to be that picky.

[YALE]

You screw up far too frequently to be that picky.

I'm not getting paid by Forbes to post on here.