Bidenomics

The situation stupid Tommie-poo is bleating about was caused by the assholes he keeps voting for.

Democrats are the ones who want unlimited deficits which Fitchbhas has said  (and is highlighted) is the problem. Nowhere did Fitchbsay the Republicans are the problem. 

if liberals can't understand that, then they have a reading problem. 

I am done   

After reading the conflicting arguments in this thread, the ONLY inferred solutions involve the complete obliteration of the opposition. That's what it all says...and because of reality it won't work, fellas. Both parties are responsible..both sides / parties have to take tiny miniscule baby steps in addressing an incremental fix. Sounds reasonable (or not)..but how do we approach it? Just kill the other side? Nobody truly looks good in orange.

If we're to believe market and governmental figures that federal debt to GDP ratios are 130+% currently, that represents a large red flag and a large indicative WTF? Average US citizens and / or businesses would have to file for various forms of bankruptcy in that situation. The govt (all sides) spends too much, wastes too much, and it's own coffers and size just continues to swell daily ( granted, thats a typical R/ conservative attitude on its face). In real life, the current US government is literally broke/ destitute from a money management standpoint. The citizens can't get away with it..why should the government?

I'll just suggest that one possible starting point is term limit legislation for elected congressional members. Don't laugh / drool / ejaculate. The likelihood of that happening is zero because of the legislative participants; this argument/ discussion has been around for decades and nothing has changed. In order to accomplish some form of term limits, the House and Senate members essentially poop in their own oatmeal  protecting their self-enrichment despite the established fact that 7 or 8 of ten US voters favor introduction of TL in some form. What happened to all that government "of, by, and for the people" historical mantra? It's bullshit in today's reality, sadly. 

The last time the US govt had a budget surplus was in 2001, under Clinton and an R - controlled Senate and House ( even though at that same time the national debt did in fact  increase).They somehow found a way to compromise as a representative governing body "of, by, and for the people"; then Bush 2 showed up and raided the coffers and..from there we just sailed down a perpetually increasing fiscal / monetary slide to hell. Does it bother you as a tax payer? Are these people responsible..or not?

Term limits..that's one prescription favored by taxpayers Tell me why not? You can use all the standard con arguments against it...but it won't sway the consensus of the voting citizenry .

How many times have the Repugs voted to raise the debt ceiling, sTuPiD tOm?

Like hell Tom is done. That would be great, but he'll be back bleating about this same topic very soon, with his cherry-picked fictional "statistics."

First of all: term limits, though ostensibly attractive, are in reality useless. One party or the other will just generate a clone of whatever politician is getting past his sell-by date. Heck, the Republipigs have some guy named Razzamatazzy or something like that who is styling himself as a much younger but otherwise stone cold duplicate of Trump--just in case.

One thing I find annoying is that the kerfuffles about debt limits deficits blah blah blah ignore two simple realties:

1) Government spending MUST increase on an absolute basis, just to keep up with the needs of an increasing AND aging population. (That population ages less quickly if we admit more FEELTHY IMMERGENTS.) So bleating about "record spending" is just a tactic to gin up the goobers and obscures the real issue, which of course, is the idea.

2) Debt is NOT an inherently bad or eeeeeeevil thing. Debt can be used to finance endeavors that cannot be even started otherwise. And don't forget that the true cost of debt isn't interest; it's interest minus inflation. So given that a LOT of US government debt carries an interest cost BELOW inflation, that's a great deal for us!

So let's for one moment admit that we're not going to fix all these problems very soon, especially since we can't even agree on how serious those problems are. How 'bout we do this, at least? The US is able to carry all this debt because it is (still) the number-one debtor, ratings-wise, in the world. Thus, interest costs are low. How can we fuck that up? By hinting to the world that we might not pay our debts after all. Enter the RepubliQ with their virtue signaling, culture wars, insurrection(s), and cherry on sundae drum roll please, trying to blackmail the government and threatening a shutdown every goddamn year the budget has to be reconciled.

So though you say it won't work, still, the solution that suggests itself is to march all the Republicans out of the Capitol in chains and into a giant woodchipper waiting on the front steps. You see...this is a problem that they have zero interest in fixing because its existence gives them leverage. No matter how much harm it causes. Charles, your gang is willing to drag the country down with them. I hope that it costs them big time.

Considering your initial sentence above, you don't think term limits are an answer. Seventy - eighty % of the citizenry disagrees with you ( including a majority..roughly 6-7/ out of ten.. from  the side you affiliate yourself with). I guess all those people are stupid..based on your analysis wording.

You have no solutions..you just continue to berate your opponents. That's gotten us absolutely nowhere to date.

I dont understand what term limits does to reduce special interest corruption in Congress.   Is a freshman congressman less influenced by the dark money that funded his campaign vs a 20 year veteran whose campaign is funded by the same people?

We're the only large industrialized democracy that has ruled money is free speech.  Our politicians spend the overwhelming majority of their time raising money.   Because they have to.

Publicly funded campaigns and the erradication of "pacs" will do a helluva lot more to bring good faith government than term limits.

I gave a solution. However, "kill all Republicans" is perhaps impractical. I've got it! Why don't you figure out a way to persuade your gang to actually cooperate with the "other side" instead of constantly trying to score points with the base?

Actually, I do think that probably 98% of the people asked that question didn't consider their answer for more than a second or two before answering...and it's one of those "sounds good" questions that naturally eleicits a "yeah, sure" answer. How do you feel about bunnies? A majority said they like them! Whee! What I said (if I have to repeat it) is that it's not a solution--not if the politicians ousted by term limits are replaced by identical politicians. Do I favor term limits in general? Yes. Do I think they would be a solution to our fiscal problems? Fuck, no. Ya get da distinction yet?

And frankly, yes, at least 80% of the population is pretty fucking stupid. Yes, on both sides.

I do have a solution that doesn't involve bloodshed. Consider every obligation already in existence to be sacrosanct--untouchable. A promise that must be kept. Then calculate the cost of meeting those obligations. Next, calculate revenue targets necesssary to pay those obligations+fund existing programs+service existing debt.

If revenue falls short of needs, then borrow to make up the difference. Make that borrowing mandatory. Then, in following years, legislation can be drafted to increase revenues (taxation and such) AND/OR decrease expenditures. But here's the thing: treat the existing situation as a fait accompli. Don't sit there and babble about whether or not we should pay the bills. Just fucking pay them. It's backwards, stupid, unproductive, and deeply unsettling to even HINT that the Accounts Payable department is, rather than paying the bills, ripping up some of them and throwing them away.

But that's exactly what the RepubliQ are doing. Thus, my woodchipper solution.

Surprisingly, I agree that the election funding machine and process is rife with real and potential corruption; money and power retention are the primary bases for corruption processes to form and propagate. Addressing what you brought up is a critical part of the follow up after term limit legislation is enacted. In many tentacled ways, these separate influences are intertwined ..and perhaps inseparable  IMO, both are two potential solutions towards a fix. I don't know how we limit potential corruption for the average human soul, though...and fallibility.