7 ms·

> it’s not “every couple of years” "Since 1960, Congress has raised, extended, or revised the debt limit 78 separate times, of which 49 were under Republican p

> it’s not “every couple of years” "Since 1960, Congress has raised, extended, or revised the debt limit 78 separate times, of which 49 were under Republican presidents and 29 were under Democratic presidents, according to the Department of Treasury. In each of those instances, Congress took action on the debt limit before the nation defaulted."[0] > Democrats must stop compromising with people that blatantly do not operate in good faith. I wouldn't want any politician (regardless of party allegiance) to agree on any spending if there is not also an agreement on how to finance such spending. If companies or individuals were to run their own finances like politicians run government finances, they'd go bankrupt and/or land in jail pretty quickly. Why should our elected representatives (yes, all of them!) not have to worry about this stuff? [0] https://time.com/6281003/debt-ceiling-history/ https://time.com/6281003/debt-ceiling-history/

CaptainMarvel 3y ago
Thank you for the additional facts, I was only looking at the most recent 25 years and "debt ceiling crises" on Wikipedia.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jrockway 3y ago
> I wouldn't want any politician (regardless of party allegiance) to agree on any spending if there is not also an agreement on how to finance such spending. In the case of the debt ceiling spats, Congress has literally already authorized the money to be spent. The debt ceiling prevents the executive branch from borrowing money to spend according to Congress's wishes. That's why everyone thinks it's weird.
- logifail 3y ago
  > Congress has literally already authorized the money to be spent If you were a business or a family, you'd talk about how you plan to agree to finance any serious purchase before (or at the very least in parallel ) with agreeing the purchase itself.
  - lesuorac 3y ago
    Sure but that's apples to oranges. Congress authorizes say 10T to spend. Over the next years the president spends 7T and then the coffers run empty and says hey I need more money to do what you told me to do! And then congress raises the debt ceiling and borrows to cover that 3T. Which of course differs from your example in that when you go to buy say a car you also agree to borrow the money (or not). Congress only makes just-in-time decisions. I also don't think its true that as a business you'd have made that decision. Do you consult the CFO every time you use the corporate card?
    - logifail 3y ago
      > Congress authorizes say 10T to spend. Over the next years the president spends 7T and then the coffers run empty I'm not sure what to understand by politicians "agreeing 10T of spending" if everyone involved knows the financing has a hard stop at 7T. That's not agreeing 10T, that's agreeing 7T. Plus a 3T wishlist.
      - lesuorac 3y ago
        > if everyone involved knows the financing has a hard stop at 7T. Well, technically they don't know there is a hard stop at 7T. Since revenue (taxes) and expenditures are very separate things it could've been at 8T or say 11T but if it was at 11T we'd have a surplus and so this conversation would've never happened. When you pass a bill requiring the president to do something there is no requirement to justify how anything the bill will be paid for. Similarly, you can pass a bill adjusting the tax code without explaining where the additional revenue will go to or in the case of a decrease what programs will be removed. --- Business works very similar to this as well. Divisions are given budgets to spend but those budgets aren't in lock-step with revenue.
        logifail 3y ago
        > When you pass a bill requiring the president to do something there is no requirement to justify how anything the bill will be paid for. It could well be that pretty much everyone outside the USA is reading that description - and indeed the rest of this thread - and thinking "sorry, but in this instance the US system is broken". > Business works very similar to this as well. Divisions are given budgets to spend but those budgets aren't in lock-step with revenue. Umm, if revenue falls during a financial period, would corporate budgets not be adjusted? A division claiming "you handed us the budget, we're damn well going to spend it to the last cent, up to the CFO to figure out how to finance it" isn't exactly best practice.
PopAlongKid 3y ago
The reference to "every couple of years" was not to routine, non-dramatic votes. It was clearly about only "brinkmanship around the debt ceiling", which as stated only tends to happen with Republican majority in one or both parts of Congress and Democratic president.
kelthan 3y ago
The debt ceiling "crisis" is a completely manufactured political cliff. It serves no purpose other than to be used as a wedge during political debates. When Congress passes a bill for anything that requires spending, the time to debate that spending is before the bill is passed. Once that bill passes and is signed into law, then US government is now responsible to cover that cost. The debate about the debt ceiling is all about one party saying that they don't want to pay for the spending that has already been debated, approved, and signed into law. This is akin to going to an expensive restaurant, ordering the food, enjoying dinner, and then when the bill arrives, saying "Oh, I won't spend that much on dinner!". That's not the way the world works. If you can't afford the food, the time to make that decision is when you are making your restaurant choice, or when you are ordering, not after the bill arrives.
cmh89 3y ago
>If companies or individuals were to run their own finances like politicians run government finances, they'd go bankrupt and/or land in jail pretty quickly. Amazingly, the government is structured differently than your family's finances! I'm all for fiscal responsibility and would love to see the US slash it's corporate welfare budget, but the government is not a family and shouldn't be run like one.
- kelthan 3y ago
  Government spending and business/personal finance management are two completely different things. While lots of people like to equate them, they are fundamentally very different.

CaptainMarvel 3y ago

Thank you for the additional facts, I was only looking at the most recent 25 years and "debt ceiling crises" on Wikipedia.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

jrockway 3y ago

> I wouldn't want any politician (regardless of party allegiance) to agree on any spending if there is not also an agreement on how to finance such spending. In the case of the debt ceiling spats, Congress has literally already authorized the money to be spent. The debt ceiling prevents the executive branch from borrowing money to spend according to Congress's wishes. That's why everyone thinks it's weird.

logifail 3y ago
> Congress has literally already authorized the money to be spent If you were a business or a family, you'd talk about how you plan to agree to finance any serious purchase before (or at the very least in parallel ) with agreeing the purchase itself.
- lesuorac 3y ago
  Sure but that's apples to oranges. Congress authorizes say 10T to spend. Over the next years the president spends 7T and then the coffers run empty and says hey I need more money to do what you told me to do! And then congress raises the debt ceiling and borrows to cover that 3T. Which of course differs from your example in that when you go to buy say a car you also agree to borrow the money (or not). Congress only makes just-in-time decisions. I also don't think its true that as a business you'd have made that decision. Do you consult the CFO every time you use the corporate card?
  - logifail 3y ago
    > Congress authorizes say 10T to spend. Over the next years the president spends 7T and then the coffers run empty I'm not sure what to understand by politicians "agreeing 10T of spending" if everyone involved knows the financing has a hard stop at 7T. That's not agreeing 10T, that's agreeing 7T. Plus a 3T wishlist.
    - lesuorac 3y ago
      > if everyone involved knows the financing has a hard stop at 7T. Well, technically they don't know there is a hard stop at 7T. Since revenue (taxes) and expenditures are very separate things it could've been at 8T or say 11T but if it was at 11T we'd have a surplus and so this conversation would've never happened. When you pass a bill requiring the president to do something there is no requirement to justify how anything the bill will be paid for. Similarly, you can pass a bill adjusting the tax code without explaining where the additional revenue will go to or in the case of a decrease what programs will be removed. --- Business works very similar to this as well. Divisions are given budgets to spend but those budgets aren't in lock-step with revenue.
      - logifail 3y ago
        > When you pass a bill requiring the president to do something there is no requirement to justify how anything the bill will be paid for. It could well be that pretty much everyone outside the USA is reading that description - and indeed the rest of this thread - and thinking "sorry, but in this instance the US system is broken". > Business works very similar to this as well. Divisions are given budgets to spend but those budgets aren't in lock-step with revenue. Umm, if revenue falls during a financial period, would corporate budgets not be adjusted? A division claiming "you handed us the budget, we're damn well going to spend it to the last cent, up to the CFO to figure out how to finance it" isn't exactly best practice.

PopAlongKid 3y ago

The reference to "every couple of years" was not to routine, non-dramatic votes. It was clearly about only "brinkmanship around the debt ceiling", which as stated only tends to happen with Republican majority in one or both parts of Congress and Democratic president.

kelthan 3y ago

The debt ceiling "crisis" is a completely manufactured political cliff. It serves no purpose other than to be used as a wedge during political debates. When Congress passes a bill for anything that requires spending, the time to debate that spending is before the bill is passed. Once that bill passes and is signed into law, then US government is now responsible to cover that cost. The debate about the debt ceiling is all about one party saying that they don't want to pay for the spending that has already been debated, approved, and signed into law. This is akin to going to an expensive restaurant, ordering the food, enjoying dinner, and then when the bill arrives, saying "Oh, I won't spend that much on dinner!". That's not the way the world works. If you can't afford the food, the time to make that decision is when you are making your restaurant choice, or when you are ordering, not after the bill arrives.

cmh89 3y ago

>If companies or individuals were to run their own finances like politicians run government finances, they'd go bankrupt and/or land in jail pretty quickly. Amazingly, the government is structured differently than your family's finances! I'm all for fiscal responsibility and would love to see the US slash it's corporate welfare budget, but the government is not a family and shouldn't be run like one.

kelthan 3y ago
Government spending and business/personal finance management are two completely different things. While lots of people like to equate them, they are fundamentally very different.