Geithner Predicts Double-Dip if Congress Fails to Lift Debt Ceiling

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Denny Crane

It's not even loaded!
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
73,114
Likes
10,945
Points
113
http://nationaljournal.com/economy/...-congress-fails-to-lift-debt-ceiling-20110514

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said if Congress fails to lift the debt ceiling and the U.S. defaults on its obligations “this abrupt contraction would likely push us into a double dip recession,” painting the most explicitly dire prediction to date of the consequences of inaction.

In a heavily-anticipated response to Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., who asked Geithner to document the economic and fiscal impacts of failing to lift the statutory debt limit, the Treasury secretary detailed a chain reaction that would cripple the economy, costing jobs and income.

“A default would inflict catastrophic far-reaching damage on our nation’s economy, significantly reducing growth and increasing unemployment,” said Geithner in the letter to Bennet which was dated May 13. “Even a short-term default could cause irrevocable damage to the economy."
 
So..... don't default. What a moron and fearmonger.
 
Hehe. Double-Dip.

He says that like it's a bad thing.

Was up in Portland Thursday so I had to pick up 4 lbs of Double-Dipped Chocolate Covered Malt Balls from WINCO.

When we get a WINCO here in Beautiful Central Oregon my Utopia will be complete.
 
He'll probably meet the same fate as this guy:

[video=youtube;tQChlzMZAvg]
 
The idea of "let's just keep blindly raising the debt ceiling like it will never end" will have a more catastrophic end, IMHO, that stopping this madness now.
 
The idea of "let's just keep blindly raising the debt ceiling like it will never end" will have a more catastrophic end, IMHO, that stopping this madness now.

Until the Repubs are willing to tax rich people proportionately to what they drain from the economy, and stop subsidizing the military industrialists, this country will continue to spiral down the drain.

Greed is a corrosive character, and absolute greed corrodes absolutely.
 
It's better to subsidize old people who don't do anything except collect a check b/c they didn't want to save for their retirement and medical care. Or serve their country in a way they'd get those benefits from a grateful nation. Like, you know, finding and killing bin Laden and acting as the Global Force for Good and the strategic deterrent force for the West.
 
We have to have radical tax changes, shrink government, make serious changes to social services and end many entitlement programs.
 
It's better to subsidize old people who don't do anything except collect a check b/c they didn't want to save for their retirement and medical care. Or serve their country in a way they'd get those benefits from a grateful nation. Like, you know, finding and killing bin Laden and acting as the Global Force for Good and the strategic deterrent force for the West.

Well, if you people in the military really had America's best interests at heart, you'd quit wasting time on terrorists and start using all those guns to kill old people here at home.

If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Be part of the solution. Machine-gun a granny today.

barfo
 
Well, if you people in the military really had America's best interests at heart, you'd quit wasting time on terrorists and start using all those guns to kill old people here at home.

If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Be part of the solution. Machine-gun a granny today.

barfo

Out of curiosity... how old are you?
 
Well, if you people in the military really had America's best interests at heart, you'd quit wasting time on terrorists and start using all those guns to kill old people here at home.

If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. Be part of the solution. Machine-gun a granny today.

barfo

Thats a stupid idea. The old people have already used up almost all the natural resources and tax subsidized programs they will use in their lifetime. Killing them now won't save hardly any of those sunk costs.

We need to go after the children and babies. Kill them now before they use up any scarce resources.
 
though if the Death Squads are anything like the DMV, he's got a long way to go until his number is called.

Pullin' for you, barfo!
 
though if the Death Squads are anything like the DMV, he's got a long way to go until his number is called.

Pullin' for you, barfo!

He can call and set up an appointment, tho.
 
What the Obama Administration is really trying to avoid is the deep cuts necessary if we don't raise the debt limit and we have to live within our means. Right now we borrow $0.41 for every dollar of spending. It's a double-edged sword.

First, we've raised the funding of discretionary government spending by 28% under President Obama. As well, there are more people and more funds going out the door because of unemployment insurance, Medicaid, Food Stamps, etc. We're also beginning to see the Baby Boomers retire, which is a generational problem we had 30 years to prepare for and failed. However, that's just the expense picture.

Second, the lingering recession has dramatically lowered receipts to the government.

In the end, it's a simple formula: Expenses up; revenues down = Big deficits. The solution is to massively cut the size and scope of government, including entitlements for people under 55. While doing that, we need to change course on the government attitude toward the private sector. We need to give them certaintly and align incentives to invest rather than hoard cash.
 
Expenses up; revenues down = Big deficits. The solution is to massively cut the size and scope of government, including entitlements for people under 55. While doing that, we need to change course on the government attitude toward the private sector. We need to give them certaintly and align incentives to invest rather than hoard cash.

And also to increase revenue, no?
 
And also to increase revenue, no?

Temporarily, reducing the size and scope of government would decrease the GDP, but long-term it would be a huge boon to the economy. It's akin to starting a workout regimen. At first, you feel tired and lethargic, but soon you get stronger and gain more endurance.
 
Sure... Greece is booming right now. Dancing in the streets.
 
Sure... Greece is booming right now. Dancing in the streets.

Many of the people who are bitching about the cuts in Greece are the same ones who have been dramatically overcompensated by the state for years and decades. I don't blame them for being upset about changes, but it doesn't mean that they understand what's best for the country.

Ed O.
 
Are you Republicans finally appreciating the Clinton surplus you destroyed in 2001? Why do I think that if this country gets a surplus again, you will again jump in like thieves and give it to the rich in another 10-year tax cut?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top