Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Reed defends debt ceiling ‘no’ vote

October 20, 2013

By A.J. RAO Special to the OBSERVER Although Washington, D.....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(42)

PhilJulian

Oct-21-13 10:50 PM

How can they justify back pay for federal workers that were not on the job? If your company closed down would you be able to collect back pay? Now they want to reduce benefits for social security and medicare but I hear very little about reducing foreign aid to countries that are using us as their piggy bank. They want to reduce entitlements but they had no trouble finding $12-15 billion per month to fund wars in the middle east, wars that were based on lies. The fact is that our federal government "stinks" and everyone knows it.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Oct-21-13 4:23 PM

Marcia, I would agree with you on that but here is what CNBC is saying:

Some fortunate federal employees will likely get paid twice for not working this month. Several states are expected to allow federal workers who collected unemployment insurance during the government shutdown to keep both those benefits and the back pay they're set to receive, according to the Labor Department.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marcia

Oct-21-13 2:53 PM

localresident, Standard and Poor's calcuated that the cost of the shutdown was $24billion. Not fiscally responsible. www-dot-money.cnn-dot-com/2013/10/16/news/economy/shutdown-economic-impact/

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marcia

Oct-21-13 2:52 PM

stangv8, anyone who collects unemployment but then gets paid will have to pay it back. That is how unemployment laws work. They can garnish wages and income tax returns to get it.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Oct-21-13 8:58 AM

Judeye, so what you're telling us is the move that shut down the government was not funding Obamacare? Well, you're absolutely correct in that. Was it the Republicans who were upset over not funding Obamacare or Harry Reid and Obama who refused to budge? You know it was Obama and the Senate Democrats who shut things down but but you're so brainwashed by the party line you won't admit it.

Also, come to find out that those 800,000 furloughed workers are not only going to be back pay but many of them, depending on the state they live in, will be collecting unemployment. Talk about being in a privileged class.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Oct-21-13 7:03 AM

localresident...they have been unable to calculate the full cost of the shutdown.

The greatest cost though will be paying the 800,000 federal workers who were furloughed and yet will be paid for not working. The National Parks lost about $450,000 A DAY in revenue. “There will also be some impact from lost private-sector jobs tied to the shutdown, as well as a loss of consumer and business confidence resulting from the debt-ceiling showdown.”(NT TIMES) Private businesses like commercial fisher people who were unable to obtain fishing licenses lost much money as well. The cost is mounting and we will not know for several months how great of an economic impact it will have on our economy. We do know the impact it has on business and consumer confidence and our reputation as an economic leader in the world.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Oct-21-13 6:54 AM

joew..exactly...unless I want to have it repossessed and our credit rating go down.

Yes Joe, we would have to pay it, sell the car, or default on the loan.

Congress authorized this spending. The budget, which was NEVER IN DISPUTE (something that seems lost in this discussion) was agreed upon. The Dems gave them everything they wanted in that budget.

The issue was ONLY on Obamacare. NOT THE BUDGET.

Rep Reed KNOWS THIS. The move to shutdown the government and then not to raise our debt ceiling was over one issue: Affordable Care Act.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Oct-20-13 9:46 PM

Judeye, in this area, we're MUCH better off buying moving vans for people in firemom's position, as WNY is very near falling into the crevasse of No Return. Increasingly, the only jobs left of value here are those of the public variety, and unless you're a teacher, fireman, or politician, you're probably going to be pumping gas for a living. It'll boil down to that in the coming years.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Oct-20-13 9:42 PM

"The shutdown he and the tea party supported cost our country $24 Billion"

I'm curious. Did this shutdown really COST $24 billion, or the ability of the government to ADD $24 billion onto the amount of debt? Totally different answers.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Oct-20-13 9:37 PM

Stang, your 2nd to last post is what the "spenders" in this forum are thinking. Thye'll be gone, and by then so what? F U.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Oct-20-13 9:34 PM

The shutdown is exactly what this country needs to wake up from its slumber that it can keep on spending beyond reproach without repercussion. the level that this administration is throwing money out the window is beyond alarming. Whee! Let's keep printing money that has no value! Let's spend money on programs that have negative ROI! Let's fund projects that have no logical value whatsoever! Awesome! Have a buddy that needs a job? Let's find him one in the government!...or is that just a local thing?....

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Oct-20-13 8:23 PM

Let me see if I got this right Judeye? You and your husband go out and purchase the new Mercedes and then when you don't have the money to make the payment(which you knew before hand you wouldn't have)you borrow some money to make the payment right? Is that how it works?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Oct-20-13 6:39 PM

The debt ceiling is to pay for what Congress ALREADY has authorized.

It is paying our bills that Congress already authorized, just like the bill that helps firemom and her family.

Programs like that are extremely successful. I know, that is exactly the type of work I did for several decades. Retraining is what we should be doing as a Nation big time to help get more of our workers back to work. Jobs Bill..when did they vote on that??

Bottom line, Rep Reed votes resulted in the shutdown of our Country. His vote not to increase the debt ceiling almost caused us to go into default..or at the very least...make people go without, like Firemom, other vets, seniors, the disabled, etc. People were hurt by the shutdown. We all were burdened with the 24 BILLION dollars that it cost.

All for what? Because they could not wait to use regular means to change a law they do not like? Make NO sense to me..nor to the wide majority of other Americans.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Oct-20-13 6:24 PM

Steiner..thanks..you really know how to make me laugh...right out loud. Cant wait to share this latest rant.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Oct-20-13 6:18 PM

Marcia again you exhibit a total lack of understanding. Why could the President not give the same 1 year exemption to individuals as he did with business? If he had there would have been no curtailment of certain programs.There was not a shutdown of the government,only about 18%.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Oct-20-13 5:29 PM

NOT AT ALL, Firemom. At least your husband is trying to get back to work by taking advantage of programs that are intended to do exactly that! He's not just sitting around and letting the govt support him and his family indefinitely. NO ONE is against helping those who are willing to help themself. It's the leeches (in some cases generations of families) who are perfectly content with surviving on public assistance and have no intentions of earning their own way. And to be honest w/you, the liberal way in which the system currently operates, why should they.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Firemom

Oct-20-13 4:37 PM

I've read all the comments offer the following: my husband lost his job this past spring, but as a veteran, he earned the benefit to get re-educated so he can get back to work and help support our family. We depend on the VRAP funds to help pay for school and living expenses. These funds were in jeopardy thru this shutdown and, in fact, are scheduled to end in March 2014 unless Congress votes on the current bill to continue the program to its projected capacity. Are some of you telling me that you consider this to be "entitlements" and that we should not take advantage of an EARNED BENEFIT? We're tax-paying, responsible citizens who are struggling; we're not on welfare, don't get SNAP, not on Medicaid-yet you would deny us the right to an earned benefit? The shutdown was the wrong way to achieve a goal-even Reed admits that it was the wrong strategy. Every bill/law/program that Congress passes is hated by some and loved by others. Change is needed; denying earned fu

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Oct-20-13 4:08 PM

Why high capacity handguns & rifles?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Oct-20-13 4:05 PM

joew, I think the following answers your question.

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” Alexis de Tocqueville

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over lousy fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship Alexander Frazier Tyler

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marcia

Oct-20-13 4:05 PM

Reed is a hypocrite. The shutdown he and the tea party supported cost our country $24 Billion. Please explain how that is fiscally responsible? They knew they would never get rid of the ACA so this was political theater meant to raise money for Ted Cruz's politcal coffers. How they can pretend to be patriots when they are willing to hurt our economy?

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Oct-20-13 3:59 PM

For the life of me stang I do not understand this tax and spend mindset!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Oct-20-13 2:50 PM

Steiner, you realize that by 2025, a good majority of those who have no problem with the increased spending will long be gone from this earth? What do they care what happens fifteen years in the future. All that matters is we get ours now and to Hades with what our children have to endure. Greece is small potatoes compared what’s going to happen when we have an economic collapse.

You want to know what it might be like if/when we have an economic collapse. There’s an article written by a man who experienced Argentina’s economic collapse about a dozen years ago. It’s titled “Lessons from Argentina's economic collapse”. Read it and see what people had to do in order to survive. If that ever happens here, you’re going to wish you had high capacity handguns and rifles

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

stangv8

Oct-20-13 2:50 PM

Judeye said: When was the last time you over spent on your credit card. Then the bill comes and you say..hey I spent too much..so I am NOT going to pay this bill. That is the analogy.

We had the money to pay the bills. Billions come in daily to the treasury in the form of taxes. What we didn't have was money to increase our spending more. Judeye, it wasn't the case of not having the money to pay the credit card, it was the case of adding more to the credit card.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Oct-20-13 1:56 PM

You are kidding right Judeye,this is not the issue? What pray tell is the issue? I suppose you mean that we go ahead and pay the current due amount but then go ahead and spend more the next month right? Yikes,pretty scary that analogy you put forth. We need to decrease spending and increase revenues,(taxes)that is your solution?

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Oct-20-13 1:18 PM

joew..No I do not

However, this is NOT the issue. These were already spent..ie they were bills not future spending.

When was the last time you over spent on your credit card. Then the bill comes and you say..hey I spent too much..so I am NOT going to pay this bill. That is the analogy.

Yes we need to make cuts in spending..AND..increase revenues. We need to do both.

Let us hope the budget committee will do just that.

Refusing a bill that has come due is NOT fiscally responsible behavior. Nor is shutting down our government. Which if Rep Reed thought was a bad idea from the beginning..why did he not say so on the floor of the house when it was presented..and why did he continue to vote for it?

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 42 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web