4 ms·

This illustrates one of the risks of hostage-taking and the mistaken assumption of Republican leadership that the "hostage" (their words, not mine) wouldn't be

by credo 15y ago

This illustrates one of the risks of hostage-taking and the mistaken assumption of Republican leadership that the "hostage" (their words, not mine) wouldn't be harmed see quote from Senate minority leader below From http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-debt-deal-the-triumph-of-the-old-washington/2011/08/02/gIQARSFfqI_story_1.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-debt-deal-the-triu... But at the Capitol, behind the four doors and the three receptionists and the police guard, McConnell said he could imagine doing this again. "I think some of our members may have thought the default issue was a hostage you might take a chance at shooting," he said. "Most of us didn’t think that. What we did learn is this - it’s a hostage that’s worth ransoming. And it focuses the Congress on something that must be done." [edit]: Interesting to see all the downvotes, but my comment had a direct quote from the GOP senate leader. Can anyone explain why they downvoted it. As for temphn's point below. Has any Nobel laureate defended the "hostage taking" ? Congress already controls both spending and taxation. So they can start fixing the deficit problem by cutting down on pork, cutting tax loopholes etc. Threatening to force a default is not the answer.

temphn 15y ago
The question is whether you believe the issue would have become an issue even if the Republicans hadn't raised it now. Many people look at this as an intervention; if the US is addicted to oil, we are even more addicted to borrowing. I suppose it really comes down to whether you find multiplier/countercyclical spending arguments persuasive or not; Nobel Laureates come down on both sides.
- Pewpewarrows 15y ago
  The Republicans raising the issue was good and healthy for us. The clusterfuck that emerged in the months afterwards because of them refusing to pass any bill that didn't fall neatly into their little new imaginary rules was the problem.

by credo 15y ago

temphn 15y ago

The question is whether you believe the issue would have become an issue even if the Republicans hadn't raised it now. Many people look at this as an intervention; if the US is addicted to oil, we are even more addicted to borrowing. I suppose it really comes down to whether you find multiplier/countercyclical spending arguments persuasive or not; Nobel Laureates come down on both sides.

Pewpewarrows 15y ago
The Republicans raising the issue was good and healthy for us. The clusterfuck that emerged in the months afterwards because of them refusing to pass any bill that didn't fall neatly into their little new imaginary rules was the problem.