[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

It is NOT "hours before default", the US isn't defaulting on anything. We'd no longer be taking on new debt. The blatant media lies about this are what's driving people ****ing crazy.

Whether hours or days, we're cutting it really close. Nobody is sure exactly what will happen after tomorrow, but we do know some things:

Some market observers have suggested that the government might have enough money to pay its bills for several days, noting that it must make a $12 billion Social Security payment on Oct. 23 and a $6 billion interest payment on the public debt on Oct. 31. On Nov. 1, the government must spend $58 billion for Medicare and Social Security payments, military salaries and other expenses, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center, a research group based in Washington.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/17/us...re-not.html?hp


Shouldn't this be good enough?

[Shaddim]

I'm not buying it, a NPO ran by fiscal liberals and moderates, largely beholding to the DNC, would say anything to continue to receive funds from them. All this clamor is more like a heroin addict raging for "just a little more" so they can buy their next fix. This is as good a time as any for DC to learn to live within its means. No more credit, no more temporary extensions.

Obama was claiming that they've balanced the national budget, well it's time to prove it. My old man wouldn't give me a cash loan to buy a car, he told me I had to work for it, it's time for DC to do the same.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Obama was claiming that they've balanced the national budget

A quick google didn't find this. Source?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I'm not buying it, a NPO ran by fiscal liberals and moderates, largely beholding to the DNC, would say anything to continue to receive funds from them. All this clamor is more like a heroin addict raging for "just a little more" so they can buy their next fix. This is as good a time as any for DC to learn to live within its means. No more credit, no more temporary extensions.

Obama was claiming that they've balanced the national budget, well it's time to prove it. My old man wouldn't give me a cash loan to buy a car, he told me I had to work for it, it's time for DC to do the same.

I dig your outside-the-box thinking and interest in challenging the status quo, but doing so when your house is on fire, or there is a significant chance it will soon be on fire is not the best time for this. There were years in which our politicians could have strived towards these goals and others, but right now we unfortunately need more time.

[besson3c]

Again, I have to reiterate, maybe instead of trying to repeal Obamacare for the 40th time the House Republicans should have tried something else in an attempt to be productive? It's not like there wasn't ample opportunity to do stuff, so I have a hard time feeling empathetic towards the "when are we going to talk about spending?" cries.

[Shaddim]

But the deficit is shrinking, they have charts and graphs and stuff. Time for them to put their money where their mouth is and close that, comparatively, small gap ($642B). Time to brew some coffee, burn some midnight oil, and find a way. Close most US bases overseas, cut new defense projects, suspend alternative energy research for a year, stop all foreign aid, and discontinue all corporate and business subsidies ("corporate welfare"). That's $700B, right there.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I dig your outside-the-box thinking and interest in challenging the status quo, but doing so when your house is on fire, or there is a significant chance it will soon be on fire is not the best time for this. There were years in which our politicians could have strived towards these goals and others, but right now we unfortunately need more time.

It's the only time to do it, because it's the only time they will. We're China's #1 customer, they'll defer our payment until we get this fixed. In fact, they've been telling us to do it for years now. They can't foreclose, they'll still get their money, including interest, but 100% convinced that, until there's pressure applied, the bleeding won't stop.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

But the deficit is shrinking, they have charts and graphs and stuff. Time for them to put their money where their mouth is and close that, comparatively, small gap ($642B). Time to brew some coffee, burn some midnight oil, and find a way. Close most US bases overseas, cut new defense projects, suspend alternative energy research for a year, stop all foreign aid, and discontinue all corporate and business subsidies. That's $700B, right there.

Why wasn't this done in years past rather than waiting to do this now? There is no time to research the cost and ramifications of these cuts cold turkey, what it might involve to reboot these in the future, etc. There is no need to improvise like this, we could agree to reopen the government, and then once it has been reopen agree to do these very things.

[Shaddim]

Hell, I'm even taking the lion's share of that out of the traditionally conservative portion of the pie, I didn't even mention the ACA, welfare, or Fannie and Freddie. It's time, hell, it's way past time. If Obama, the Senate, or anyone else cries, let them. He wants to cruise out at the end of his second term? **** that. Time to roll up those sleeves and stop taking vacations.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

It's the only time to do it, because it's the only time they will. We're China's #1 customer, they'll defer our payment until we get this fixed. In fact, they've been telling us to do it for years now. They can't foreclose, they'll still get their money, including interest, but 100% convinced that, until there's pressure applied, the bleeding won't stop.

In addition to stitching an open wound it also needs time to heal. You can't declare an ailment healed just with emergency stitches (which may simply be treating symptoms rather than the root cause), these things need time to diagnose, treat, and need time to heal, and I'm not making a reference to Bush here, I'm just making the point that you can't stop on a dime.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why wasn't this done in years past rather than waiting to do this now? There is no time to research the cost and ramifications of these cuts cold turkey, what it might involve to reboot these in the future, etc. There is no need to improvise like this, we could agree to reopen the government, and then once it has been reopen agree to do these very things.

No, like an addict, because they are credit addicts, this is the only way it will work. I'm convinced of it. I've helped to clean up enough druggies, this isn't any different at all.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Hell, I'm even taking the lion's share of that out of the traditionally conservative portion of the pie, I didn't even mention the ACA, welfare, or Fannie and Freddie. It's time, hell, it's way past time. If Obama, the Senate, or anyone else cries, let them. He wants to cruise out at the end of his second term? **** that. Time to roll up those sleeves and stop taking vacations.

Why would you accuse Obama wanting to cruise out his second term when it was the House Republicans that wasted so much time by trying to repeal the ACA 40 times?

I agree with your tactics here of working with attainable goals, I just don't understand why you would direct your ire at Obama here when it seems pretty clear that the House Republicans have been the ones with issues with setting realistic goals. I would never say that Obama is blameless and I'm not trying to shift all of the heat away from him here even, but I don't think we can begin to accomplish these things with this sort of misdirected energy.

Either we try to wipe the slate clean and stop blaming entities, or we diagnose the current problem fairly and accurately.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

In addition to stitching an open wound it also needs time to heal. You can't declare an ailment healed just with emergency stitches (which may simply be treating symptoms rather than the root cause), these things need time to diagnose, treat, and need time to heal, and I'm not making a reference to Bush here, I'm just making the point that you can't stop on a dime.

Of course it won't be "on a dime", like ripping off a bandage, this will sting. I'd personally lose an ass load of money (on paper) from market corrections, but in the long run it would be worth it. Things aren't going to magically get better, addicts don't plan for rehab. Next year is going to look worse than today, and we'll be even deeper in that hole. It's time.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Why would you accuse Obama wanting to cruise out his second term when it was the House Republicans that wasted so much time by trying to repeal the ACA 40 times?

I agree with your tactics here of working with attainable goals, I just don't understand why you would direct your ire at Obama here when it seems pretty clear that the House Republicans have been the ones with issues with setting realistic goals. I would never say that Obama is blameless and I'm not trying to shift all of the heat away from him here even, but I don't think we can begin to accomplish these things with this sort of misdirected energy.

Either we try to wipe the slate clean and stop blaming entities, or we diagnose the current problem fairly and accurately.

**** Obama, forget I said that (even if it is true and he's slacking like a mother****er), I don't care. It's time, it'll hurt, but we need to do it.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

**** Obama, forget I said that (even if it is true and he's slacking like a mother****er), I don't care. It's time, it'll hurt, but we need to do it.

Since you don't accept those charts and graphs you posted, which charts and graphs would you deem accurate so that if we were to do what you're advocating here, we can measure the result and agree upon their conclusions?

[Shaddim]

We'll work with those charts, if Obama and the CBO like them, why not? From there, we can see how it works out.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

We'll work with those charts, if Obama and the CBO like them, why not? From there, we can see how it works out.

Cool... Well, if the debt peaked at 10% of GDP, and by 2015 it will be down to 2%, couldn't you say that we've already ripped off the bandaid, and that your main concern is that this number isn't dropping fast enough?

[Shaddim]

Then there's no better time than the present to see this through. I just got off the phone with my congressman, (R) Phil Roe (a member of the Tea Party caucus), and essentially told him what I said here. He agreed and enthusiastically thanked me for the moral support. No, I don't completely trust him, after all, he is a politician, but I can hope that he stays the course.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Then there's no better time than the present to see this through. I just got off the phone with my congressman, (R) Phil Roe (a member of the Tea Party caucus), and essentially told him what I said here. He agreed and enthusiastically thanked me for the moral support. No, I don't completely trust him, after all, he is a politician, but I can hope that he stays the course.

I don't get it then, if you have no disagreement with what I've said, we're already doing what you at least want us to be doing. Were you in favor of the government shutdown?

[Shaddim]

Because I don't trust them to do what they say they'll do as long as they're on the credit "teet", if their numbers aren't cooked, then this won't be nearly as bad as they're crying about.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Because I don't trust them to do what they say they'll do as long as they're on the credit "teet", if their numbers aren't cooked, then this won't be nearly as bad as they're crying about.

I see, so your distrust is in them seeing this through to the end, rather than declaring the problem solved prematurely?

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Look who finally decided to comment. Your absence in this thread has been noteworthy.

Half of me thinks this is just theatre, so it pisses me off and there's really nothing to say.

The other half thinks certain users will try and crush any commentary I make under a wall of text. I don't like wall of text, so it pisses me off and there's really nothing to say.


Note, I like said users, but I also like users who (paraphrasing Mark Twain) "take the time to write a short post".

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by subego 

Half of me thinks this is just theatre, so it pisses me off and there's really nothing to say.

The other half thinks certain users will try and crush any commentary I make under a wall of text. I don't like wall of text, so it pisses me off and there's really nothing to say.


Note, I like said users, but I also like users who (paraphrasing Mark Twain) "take the time to write a short post".

So you don't miss Abe?

[subego]

Did he do overly long posts? He did long OPs, but he seemed to like the quick hit as much as anyone.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Half of me thinks this is just theatre, so it pisses me off and there's really nothing to say.

The other half thinks certain users will try and crush any commentary I make under a wall of text. I don't like wall of text, so it pisses me off and there's really nothing to say.


Note, I like said users, but I also like users who (paraphrasing Mark Twain) "take the time to write a short post".

By refusing to comment in fear of reply you're letting them win! Take a page from BadKosh's book.

[subego]

That's precisely how I view it. Wall of text wins.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

It is NOT "hours before default", the US isn't defaulting on anything. We'd no longer be taking on new debt. The blatant media lies about this are what's driving people ****ing crazy.

Is it lies, or a poor understanding of probability?

Humans suck at probability. How long have humans gambled for money? How long did it take to develop probability theory, which has direct applications to gambling?

I'd say at the worst, there was about a 30% chance we would have defaulted.

I guarantee you, very few people felt this way. One group was "OMG, we're gonna default" (100% chance), the other group was "no way we'll default" (0% chance).

Both were wrong, neither were lying. Ignorance isn't lying.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

That's precisely how I view it. Wall of text wins.

Well, I lament you feeling you can't post your views just because you feel obligated to reply to a wall of text.

[subego]

I ultimately put stuff up with the intent of getting challenged, so how it will be challenged factors in.

It took me awhile to come up with "here is a simple (short) analogy, what's wrong with it?"

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by subego 

I ultimately put stuff up with the intent of getting challenged, so how it will be challenged factors in.

It took me awhile to come up with "here is a simple (short) analogy, what's wrong with it?"

From the Wikipedia:

Analogy (from Greek ἀναλογία, analogia, "proportion"[1][2]) is a cognitive process of transferring information or meaning from a particular subject (the analogue or source) to another particular subject (the target), or a linguistic expression corresponding to such a process. In a narrower sense, analogy is an inference or an argument from one particular to another particular, as opposed to deduction, induction, and abduction, where at least one of the premises or the conclusion is general. The word analogy can also refer to the relation between the source and the target themselves, which is often, though not necessarily, a similarity, as in the biological notion of analogy.


Niels Bohr's model of the atom made an analogy between the atom and the solar system.
Analogy plays a significant role in problem solving such as, decision making, perception, memory, creativity, emotion, explanation and communication. It lies behind basic tasks such as the identification of places, objects and people, for example, in face perception and facial recognition systems. It has been argued that analogy is "the core of cognition".[3] Specific analogical language comprises exemplification, comparisons, metaphors, similes, allegories, and parables, but not metonymy. Phrases like and so on, and the like, as if, and the very word like also rely on an analogical understanding by the receiver of a message including them. Analogy is important not only in ordinary language and common sense (where proverbs and idioms give many examples of its application) but also in science, philosophy and the humanities. The concepts of association, comparison, correspondence, mathematical and morphological homology, homomorphism, iconicity, isomorphism, metaphor, resemblance, and similarity are closely related to analogy. In cognitive linguistics, the notion of conceptual metaphor may be equivalent to that of analogy.
Analogy has been studied and discussed since classical antiquity by philosophers, scientists and lawyers. The last few decades have shown a renewed interest in analogy, most notably in cognitive science.

[subego]

I've still got some Kibo shit somewhere if you really don't want to **** around.

[besson3c]

It looks like the shutdown might be over now, the Republicans gaining very little.

[The Final Dakar]

Word is Boehner will put the Senate deal to a vote. So basically a bunch of people got furloughed for nothing. But we get to do this all over again in December or January or March (depending on whether we're talking budget or debt ceiling. Good times!

[OAW]

Many of our good friends on the right are still getting caught up in technicalities about what is or is not "default". Some have convinced themselves that as long as Treasury bond holders are paid on time there is no default. Now let's put aside the technical realities that government payment systems aren't designed to "prioritize" payments like that and just pretend that they could as the Tea Party crowd so often does. Even if there is no "technical" default on the obligations to Treasury bond holders … there is a default on other federal government creditors. The US federal government is the #1 purchaser of goods and services on the planet. Its suppliers have their suppliers who have their suppliers, etc., etc. To stiff them would have a disastrous ripple effect in the PRIVATE sector. Which is not so separate and distinct from the public sector as many conservatives would like to believe.

But let's break this down to a household budget level to make things even more plain. You may be on time every month with your credit card payment. So you are not in "default" there. But mess around and and make a late payment on your car note or your student loan. Guess what happens when VISA finds out when they see your latest credit report? They raise your interest rates because you aren't fulfilling ALL your obligations. And in the case of the federal government a rise in the interest rate it pays to Treasury bond holders can cost the nation BILLIONS. Which is especially stupid when missing a payment isn't due to "inability to pay" but instead is due to right-wing nut jobs with anachronistic religious issues with BIRTH CONTROL.

Sorry. But this ain't rocket science. And it's certainly not something one should have to explain to elected members of Congress. But as I've come to recognize as I continue to travel around the sun … common sense isn't always that common.

OAW

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

What did the Democrats manipulate? They wanted a clean CR. That's the status quo; No present there.

Now I see why it's possible subego is afraid I'll respond-bomb his post. Let me try again.

A "clean" CR is a writ of carte blanche. We cover former botched budget processes with "clean" CRs and then we raise the debt ceiling. Later, we patch up botched CRs with new CRs and raise the debt ceiling. And then we bandaid the patches on the botched CRs and raise the debt ceiling. We're now at a point where the interest on the US debt alone is the sixth largest budget item. That's the status quo. IMO, a problematic status quo. The ACA is among the most significant pieces of legislation in US history and now enjoys the dedication of an overwhelming majority of Democrats in Washington. In Biden's words; "this is a big f'n deal". The ACA was the present. Congressional Democrats manipulated a budget reconciliation process to pass an otherwise filibuster-defeated health care reform bill. I said from the beginning; consider this entire issue in light of Newton's third law. At what point is it okay to challenge the status quo? Since the Budget process only addresses a third of the budget and is entirely broken anyway, there is no other -- serious way to talk about spending in the status quo. I mean, where you'd really try to do something other than token compromise votes on slowly decreasing the rates of increase.

Of course the ACA and related provisions are going to be challenged though I must say its architects delaying key provisions of it only emboldened the opposition. If nothing else, you should be glad you're not hearing all the tired complaints about Medicare and Medicaid.

Blah, blah, blah, the House Republicans are so noble because they're using the system as intended. Let's be real here: This is a last gasp to kill something they've tried and failed miserably to do countless times over.

I can't possibly know if these people are noble or sinister. IMO, that's not a sane way to analyze human nature or politics. The system was designed with checks and balances, yes.

This isn't about spending. If it was they wouldn't be trying to repeal or delay all the ways ACA is funded.

The system is set up in such a way as to naturally encourage those who feel they need insurance, but it does not encourage the very demographic it's counting on for funding the others' needs. IMO, this is not a sound funding principle and concerns about spending are legitimate.

P.S.The senate passed a budget back in March. So a good time to talk about spending would have been the past 6 months, instead of blocking a request for conference 19 times.

Does this piece include the customary first meeting necessary to select conferees and develop the framework for the conference to avoid clogging the House floor with disagreements from a failed conference? I'm not going to agree to meet my brother at Starbucks to discuss giving him a bag of $100 bills and neither did Senate Democrats who would not agree to a framework for conference with the Republicans.

I love when Dems actually grow a spine they're seen as ruthless and evil. I can't even imagine the uproar if Democrats shutdown the govt over DOMA or gun control. Let's look at the reality here:

Good idea. DOMA and gun control ranked so far down on the Democratic wish list that one simply moved through the development of mankind and the other one is not all that damned popular with Democrats. That's the reality.

The House used their position of power and threatened to shutdown the government if certain demands weren't met. The Democrats didn't fold and now you portray them as having bloodlust because...? Last time I checked they wanted a clean CR and the House still can't agree on that.

At some point here within the next couple of days, you'll begin to appreciate some of the goodies Democrats were able to eek out of this Senate deal getting ready to pass the House tonight. This only makes the Republican move more asinine. Yeah, Democrats smelled blood and they got a little. I'm not saying that's evil, that's politics. But I'm not going to pretend it's somehow more noble to subvert the government to get the legislation you want than it is to shut it down over legislation you don't. Newton's third law. This is the cost of trying to do really big, contentious things. One of the many reasons I appreciate less politicians in my life.

Also, I'm not sure in what world the Democrats are holding the government hostage when by your own admission its the House that has the power because they hold the purse strings.

Since when does the hostage-taker have the purse strings?

...but its still not worth shutting down the government over it, right?

You're asking me to predict the future. I'm against the shut down, but hindsight is 20/20.

[OAW]

Tonight's vote is a demonstration that some people have to have their noses rubbed in sh*t in order for them to believe it truly does stink.

OAW

[Shaddim]

No, the vote proves that banks and foreign investors own the USA, not the people. Obama's a credit crackhead, not much else to say, really.

[turtle777]

Nothing has been f$&@ing fixed.

It's like Groundhog Day.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

No, the vote proves that banks and foreign investors own the USA, not the people. Obama's a credit crackhead, not much else to say, really.

Wait, I thought you said that you had no problem with the charts and graphs that showed that the debt rate as a percentage of GDP has been lowered 8%? Your primary beef as that it hasn't been lowered faster/more?

[Shaddim]

No, my beef is that it could very well be bullshit, and now we're another $300B in the hole. With a government that now knows that if it whines loudly enough, it doesn't have to fix anything, it can just kick the issue on down the road and let another generation try to fix it, only by then it'll potentially be 10x worse than it is now.

[subego]

Couldn't the Republicans solve this issue by fielding some candidates who don't suck?

As evidence the current crop of Republicans suck, may I present exhibit A: the Republicans getting themselves stomped by Democrats.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

No, my beef is that it could very well be bullshit, and now we're another $300B in the hole. With a government that now knows that if it whines loudly enough, it doesn't have to fix anything, it can just kick the issue on down the road and let another generation try to fix it, only by then it'll potentially be 10x worse than it is now.

If you were Obama, how would you attempt to compromise with the House Republicans without simply giving them whatever it is that they want at all times?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by subego 

Couldn't the Republicans solve this issue by fielding some candidates who don't suck?

As evidence the current crop of Republicans suck, may I present exhibit A: the Republicans getting themselves stomped by Democrats.

^ This! I can't tell you how long I've been decrying Republicans' woeful PR performance. This was my problem with Bush et al. and it remains a problem for the party. Until they can learn to more effectively communicate directly with the American people, they will continue to get bested.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Nothing has been f$&@ing fixed.

It's like Groundhog Day.

-t

Only in Groundhog Day every day started with a zero sum, there was equal potential each day and Phil was learning from his mistakes and eventually became a better person. In our scenario, we're getting deeper in debt and crushing the children of the middle and lower classes under our fiscal mistakes.

I'm insulated. So is my family; my children, my children's children, and potentially even beyond that. This hurts the most vulnerable of us the worst, cuts off their opportunities, burdens them from cradle to the grave, all so we can have a little more now, politicians brown-nosing for votes, rather than wait until we right the ship. I suppose I could be like others in my tax bracket, but I'm not, I care, and it's like watching a car crash in slow motion and I can't do anything to stop it.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

If you were Obama, how would you attempt to compromise with the House Republicans without simply giving them whatever it is that they want at all times?

I'd need to get in and talk with them, be frank, and list options like I did above, working to narrow the current $700B /yr gap. Record everything in the talks, with their knowledge, and then broadcast it all on C-Span every night, warts and all. Use my VP (I'd have one a damned sight better than Biden) and SoS to handle foreign policy, and non-economic matters, until the HoR, Senate, and I are done. "Get comfy guys, we're going to be spending a lot of time together. I hope you like playing Rook."

[turtle777]

Can we all agree that what Washington is doing will one day result in total disaster.
It doesn't matter what party kicks the can, they both do.

This path is wholly unsustainable.

We have been growing debt at double the growth rate than our GDP for the past 50 years.
This will end at some point, it's a mathematical certainty.

Let's also be clear: as long as we grow debt faster than GDP, our situation is getting WORSE.
There is nothing that gets fixed by just waiting it out, as long as your debt grows fasther than GDP.
This is completely independent of what party is in charge.

In short: we are (or better will be) f*cked some point down the road. It will be epic.
And it doesn't take a genius to see how this will result in revolutions and wars.

-t

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Can we all agree that what Washington is doing will one day result in total disaster.
It doesn't matter what party kicks the can, they both do.

This path is wholly unsustainable.

We have been growing debt at double the growth rate than our GDP for the past 50 years.
This will end at some point, it's a mathematical certainty.

Let's also be clear: as long as we grow debt faster than GDP, our situation is getting WORSE.
There is nothing that gets fixed by just waiting it out, as long as your debt grows fasther than GDP.
This is completely independent of what party is in charge.

You're missing one piece of the puzzle; you've described the problem but you never referenced the solution. GDP and government aren't independent, so you can't simply shrink the government to control the ratio of GDP:GOV. The solution (pursued by parties numbering somewhere between 1.0 and 2.0), is to somehow by hook or by crook spur the GDP to rise, rather than the GOV to decline, in order to change that ratio you brought up for the better. The only idea anyone has to do this (through policy) is by seeding it with GOV resources. The strategy is to worsen the GDP:GOV ratio in the short term, but in so doing stimulate the GDP over the GOV in the long term. Yes, everyone agrees that the ratio itself is unsustainable. What they disagree on is how many steps backward we can take in the short term in pursuit of more steps forward in the long term. It's not entirely illogical to argue that even if we can't afford more steps backward in the short term, we have no alternative but to try them anyway because the long term goal of reviving the concept of "american industries" is paramount. If you subscribe to the counter-argument that the fabled "american industry" can arise without government design (gasp), then the "wait it out" shoe is now on your foot

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I'd need to get in and talk with them, be frank, and list options like I did above, working to narrow the current $700B /yr gap. Record everything in the talks, with their knowledge, and then broadcast it all on C-Span every night, warts and all. Use my VP (I'd have one a damned sight better than Biden) and SoS to handle foreign policy, and non-economic matters, until the HoR, Senate, and I are done. "Get comfy guys, we're going to be spending a lot of time together. I hope you like playing Rook."

That's solid, but at the end of all of this your policy changes are still going to need votes to pass. If the Republicans can't even agree amongst themselves which battles to wage, and if some politicians from both sides are dead set on voting for whatever hurts the other party regardless of whether this is actually constructive to putting America in a better place, what then?

To me it's an impossible situation, and will be an impossible situation for whomever is president until politicians are not beholden to lobbyists and will not accept their bribes. What do we do, call them out and shame them until they are out of office?

It's almost like we need to be able to vote out politicians at any time, and need special investigators tracing their money trail.

[Shaddim]

That's why we write the budget together, in the meetings, with video, and when we're done they sign it. If they back out on the vote after all of that, that's their ass and the people will see it. There isn't enough transparency to make legislators culpable and keep them honest, there are too many shady, backroom deals going on. I want it all recorded, I want them to be held accountable. If they work pork projects outside of official chambers, they're out on their ass, censured from their caucus and the budget process entirely.

[turtle777]

You are right, I didn't offer a solution. There is no simple one.

Of course, GDP growth is what everyone wants, but it has proven something that is hard to achieve via politics.

Worse, GDP has become a highly managed number. A lot of the government debt gets spend on things that count towards GDP. We are completely kidding ourselves that there has been *ANY* GDP growth in the last 5 years. If you removed all the "assistance", funded by debt, GDP growth would be negative.

-t