The Democrat Utopia

[Archy1221]

12 minutes ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

 

Garland didn't go through. Remember?

 

 

Ya, I kinda said that.  He was never on the SC 

[Archy1221]

23 minutes ago, commando said:

is mitch still determined to have the united states default on the debt?    is that something any politician should do if they were in power?

Can’t the Dems do this through reconciliation? 

24 minutes ago, commando said:

is mitch still determined to have the united states default on the debt?    is that something any politician should do if they were in power?

And what does that have to do with the current discussion?

[Dr. Strangelove]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

Can’t the Dems do this through reconciliation? 

And what does that have to do with the current discussion?

I mean, sure. But he could also allow Democrats to vote on it through a simple majority via unanimous consent. 

 

But he's willing to allow an economic catastrophe happen - just like after 2008 - because he knows voters like you aren't going to punish them for it. 

 

I mean, it's an easy choice on his part. America faces a recession, hundreds of billions will be spent on higher interest spending, tens of millions will be unemployed along with who knows what else. But the GOP wins a few more house seats and maybe they get to nominate an extra judge or two later this decade. Easy choice.

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

ut he's willing to allow an economic catastrophe happen - just like after 2008 - because he knows voters like you aren't going to punish them for it. 

What do you mean like after 2008?

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

 

I mean, it's an easy choice on his part. America faces a recession, hundreds of billions will be spent on higher interest spending, tens of millions will be unemployed along with who knows what else. But the GOP wins a few more house seats and maybe they get to nominate an extra judge or two later this decade. Easy choice.

Has the government ever not raised the debt ceiling?  I mean come on.  It always gets raised.  Sometimes the government workers get a few weeks paid vacation before it gets raised but it ALWAYS gets raised.  So the rest of what you said has no merit.  

[Dr. Strangelove]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

What do you mean like after 2008?

The Republican Party intentionally withheld stimulus spending under Obama in response to the 2008 Financial Crisis because it was politically expedient to do so. 

 

And the debt ceiling does always get raised, however this time seems more serious than most. I trust your voting patterns will change in the unlikely chance it does not, as it should be pretty obvious who is at fault here. 

[Archy1221]

42 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

The Republican Party intentionally withheld stimulus spending under Obama in response to the 2008 Financial Crisis because it was politically expedient to do so. 

 

And the debt ceiling does always get raised, however this time seems more serious than most. I trust your voting patterns will change in the unlikely chance it does not, as it should be pretty obvious who is at fault here. 

Well, whoever is in charge of all three branches of government is probably the one at fault.  

[Archy1221]

44 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

The Republican Party intentionally withheld stimulus spending under Obama in response to the 2008 Financial Crisis because it was politically expedient to do so. 

Do you mind linking to articles showing this.  Not sure what year you are speaking of not which stimulus package 

[DevoHusker]

53 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

The Republican Party intentionally withheld stimulus spending under Obama in response to the 2008 Financial Crisis because it was politically expedient to do so. 

 

And the debt ceiling does always get raised, however this time seems more serious than most. I trust your voting patterns will change in the unlikely chance it does not, as it should be pretty obvious who is at fault here. 

It passed anyway. If this is what you refer to. The link points out that this package likely led to Ds losing seats in 2010.

(Wiki I know...others had a pay wall)

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009

 

[knapplc]

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

16 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Do you mind linking to articles showing this.  Not sure what year you are speaking of not which stimulus package 

There are quite a few articles on this topic. Several Keynesian economists have written about this. Most Keynesians are left leaning, of course, but they're proven correct when it comes to how to respond to recessions: the government needs to spend money. 

 

But this article sums it up: 

 

https://www.epi.org/blog/congressional-republicans-smothered-rapid-economic-recovery/

 

After taking the house in 2010, Republicans backed by the 'tea party' tied spending cuts to government funding and debt ceiling legislation. I do think it's debatable on if Republicans intentionally were motivated to sabatoage the economy or if they simply used the wind of austerity to win elections.

 

What isn't debatable is how insanely bad of an idea it was. The lessons learned from this are precisely why Republicans approved trillions in stimulus spending last year under Trump. The reason they didn't start pushing for spending cuts is because policy makers know that government spending helps economies and spending cuts hurt it.

[Archy1221]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

The lessons learned from this are precisely why Republicans approved trillions in stimulus spending last year under Trump.

You are forgetting to mention the federal government literally forced business’s to close.  Forced them to not have any revenue coming in to pay bills.  I would expect compensation for forced closures wouldn’t you?  Comparing 2020 to 2008 doesn’t work. 
 

you still haven’t shown any articles on Republicans sabotaging the stimulus spending.  That article dealt with paygo I believe, not spending already approved stimulus funds 

[Dr. Strangelove]

58 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

You are forgetting to mention the federal government literally forced business’s to close.  Forced them to not have any revenue coming in to pay bills.  I would expect compensation for forced closures wouldn’t you?  Comparing 2020 to 2008 doesn’t work. 
 

you still haven’t shown any articles on Republicans sabotaging the stimulus spending.  That article dealt with paygo I believe, not spending already approved stimulus funds 

The 2020 response by loaning money to businesses (PPP loans) is a unique feature of the crisis. What isn't unique was the strategy to helicopter money to people in times of economic crisis.

 

Helecoptering money is not a new economic idea. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_money) Multiple stimulus checks, ongoing child tax credits, etc. are all part of a government stimulus strategy of helecoptering money to people. The same thing was advocated for by economists in response to the 2008 financial crisis but it didn't happen. 

 

That article talked about the Budget Control Act of 2011, which Republicans negotiated spending cuts and sequesters in exchange for raising the debt ceiling and funding the Government. The exact opposite of what should've happened and what Republicans did in response to 2020.

[Archy1221]

9 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

The 2020 response by loaning money to businesses (PPP loans) is a unique feature of the crisis. What isn't unique was the strategy to helicopter money to people in times of economic crisis.

 

Helecoptering money is not a new economic idea. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicopter_money) Multiple stimulus checks, ongoing child tax credits, etc. are all part of a government stimulus strategy of helecoptering money to people. The same thing was advocated for by economists in response to the 2008 financial crisis but it didn't happen. 

 

That article talked about the Budget Control Act of 2011, which Republicans negotiated spending cuts and sequesters in exchange for raising the debt ceiling and funding the Government. The exact opposite of what should've happened and what Republicans did in response to 2020.

When do we get the articles talking about what you initially stated? That R’s sabatoged the Stimulus spending in order to win seats?  
 

2020—if the country was forced into lockdown, wouldn’t you expect the government to provide the needed funding.  That is different than not allowing companies that are run terribly to fail by bailing them out without much consequence to curbing that same behavior in the future  

[knapplc]

41 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

The same thing was advocated for by economists in response to the 2008 financial crisis but it didn't happen.

 

Purposefully, so that the narrative later could be that it was the "slowest recovery in history" or whatever the Republican line was for a while.