Comments about ‘President Obama: Debt limit fight imperils elderly's checks’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Jan. 14 2013 10:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Bountiful, UT

I see the President is in full campaign-mode again. I have a question for him.

Is not now the time for his administration and the Congress to seriously consider implementing the recommendations of his own empanelled Bowles-Simpson Commission to get our financial ship pointed in the direction where the USA economy will not become the next Greece?

Tooele, UT

Re: "Obama demands quick action to raise debt limit"

Yeah -- it's clear how uncomfortable he is with the concept of a bloated federal government living within its means. He wants more borrowing authority immediately!

Borrowing 40 cents of every dollar he spends is just not enough, anymore!

Salt Lake City, UT

I've see how these "quick action" deals work. Had a co-worker who was always telling admin she had to submit something today and needed them to sign off on it NOW! They did, and she was the only one in the organization who was able to obtain a 50% increase in salary, a gorified title to go along with it, money to squander (two file cabinets full of worthless items which were donated to shelters), etc. Quite comical to watch the admin keep wondering why this was all done and couldn't do anything about it because it was signed off. They eventually wised up and she's been demoted -- but not her salary. Quess they can't do anything about that. She makes about $10000 more than me, and I've been here 15 years longer.

Salt Lake City, Utah

so you do realize that raising the debt ceiling does not actually do anything but allow us to pay our existing bills right? It does not authorize any new spending. Would you go to a restaurant and eat then refuse to pay because you want to reduce your eating out next time?

Mcallen, TX

Quit sending our tax money to the Muslim Brotherhood, and how about cutting some of your vacation expenses?

Bountiful, UT


Not so fast. If the debt ceiling is not raised, what it would actually do is prevent ADDITIONAL borrowing to occur in order to preserve the current spending rates, which are currently resulting in a yearly accrual of $1.1 trillion dollar deficits. Not raising the debt ceiling by Congress is the equivalent of the currently implemented (and delayed by two months) sequester whereby spending cuts will automatically occur if no action is taken to implement needed spending cuts.

The only difference between the sequester and not raising the debt ceiling is this: Not increasing the debt ceiling will result in more draconian automatic spending cuts. Approximately 40% of current government spending would cease to be funded and that amount of work, goods, or services rendered to the Government would have to stop.

But please do not assume that I think this would be a smart thing to do.

Tooele, UT

Re: "Would you go to a restaurant and eat then refuse to pay because you want to reduce your eating out next time?"

Liberal sophistry.

Liberal bleating that it's too late to discuss deranged profligacy must be discounted for the blather it really is.

In a sane world, the debt ceiling debate would focus on where the President should be forced to sequester funds appropriated in one area, applying the savings to another, more important obligation. He has the tools available -- cancellation of contracts, furlough of employees, discontinuation of bloated federal programs -- to accomplish sufficient cuts to avoid default.

It's his choice. We all know he'll choose deranged constituency-buying over sanity, but it IS his choice.

It's only in liberal bizarro world that these specious arguments are made -- sometimes even believed -- to the effect that we can never look back or reconsider really bad decisions.

Or that the President's choice of ever more deranged spending and debt is somehow reasonable.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments