Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RMF who wrote (55099)	10/11/2013 11:19:40 AM
From: average joe	2 Recommendations Recommended By Thehammer TimF Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Obama's Dangerous Claim to Executive Power By Betsy McCaughey The Affordable Care Act is a law that passed the House. It passed the Senate; the Supreme Court ruled it constitutional. ... and it is settled," said Obama. Not so. The health program the president is imposing on us is not the Affordable Care Act. The president has dismembered and mangled it. Gone is the employer mandate, the cap on out of pocket expenses, income verification and over half the deadlines specified in the law. The president delayed or did away with these features without asking Congress. Illegally. Then, he added 1, 472 waivers and connived a subsidy for members of Congress that no one else in American earning $174,000 a year could get. The Supreme Court has ruled twice that presidents cannot delay, amend and repeal parts of laws. "It has not been done in the past, and we're not going to start doing it now," said Obama, explaining why he will not negotiate with House Republicans over raising the debt ceiling. The truth is presidents have often had to make concessions to get the debt ceiling raised. In 1995, Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich tried to extract major spending reforms from President Bill Clinton. The two sides sparred for more than a week past the "deadline" for a hike. That is what the framers intended. "That's not how our constitutional system is designed," the president said disingenuously. The designer himself, James Madison, explained in Federalist 58 that the president must come to Congress as a supplicant to borrow, tax or spend. That dependence on Congress is "the most effectual tool to remedy" any grievance the people could have against their president. That brings us to the nefarious proposal taking shape on Capitol Hill. Senate Democrats reportedly will offer a bill shifting to the president the discretion to raise the debt ceiling any time through 2014, except if two-thirds of each house of Congress vote to disapprove. This device, first tried in the Budget Control Act of 2011, weasels around the U. S. Constitution's system of checks and balances and substantially enlarges executive power. Who is Obama, the 44th president, to demand more borrowing latitude than his 43 predecessors? As Madison warned in Federalist 62, "an elective despot is not what we fought for." Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York, founder of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and the author of "Beating Obamacare."

To: RMF who wrote (55099)	10/11/2013 12:09:36 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

"they simultaneously issue and sell new bonds" So, you don't think the fact that the country wouldn't have enough cash to pay all its normal bills wouldn't affect that? No. There's no reason it should. And it can cut spending and reduce those "normal bills" like most people want the government to do. You don't think the Chinese or Japanese might decide NOT to just rollover all their short or long term paper? If they don't, then other buyers would have to step in and doubtless that would necessitate a rise in interest rates. That can happen regardless of the debt limit. And frankly, cutting our excessive spending would make Treasury bonds a safer investment. Also, if we were in the situation of even a "technical" default interest rates would spike at least a little bit and that would cause current bonds to depreciate in value. Yes. And that can happen even without a default. Probably will. The Chinese don't like holding depreciating assets...and nobody else does either.... Of course. But buyers have to invest in something. If they're not going to buy US Treasury debt, what will they buy that is safer? The lack of better and safer alternative investments may be the major reason anyone buys Treasury debt.