US Government Shutdown? Not any more!

[Divair]

What the hell just happened. The Senate voted unanimously? That must be some kind of record.

Well, that was a surprise. I was expecting it to be narrow approval of cloture, in the low to mid sixties, maybe high sixties if reid was lucky. But 100 votes? This is better than anyone in the world expected, and I applaud Senate Republicans, and Democrats who face tough reelection battles, for accepting ObamaCare as the law of the land.

I'm trying to understand how there's such a huge gap between Senate and House Republicans..

[Regnum Dominae]

And the Senate has voted down the AHCA defunding measure.

And guess how many yays it got?

Go on, guess. Say the number to yourself before opening the spoiler below.

If you guess ZERO yays? You were right. Even TED CRUZ voted nay.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/25/politics/ ... index.html

Some faith in humanity has been restored!

That's a relief.

Tomorrow: Tea Party calls Cruz a socialist and a RINO.

[Greed and Death]

Well, that was a surprise. I was expecting it to be narrow approval of cloture, in the low to mid sixties, maybe high sixties if reid was lucky. But 100 votes? This is better than anyone in the world expected, and I applaud Senate Republicans, and Democrats who face tough reelection battles, for accepting ObamaCare as the law of the land.

I'm trying to understand how there's such a huge gap between Senate and House Republicans..

It is because Senators view themselves as possible Presidential Candidates. Representatives view themselves as possible Governor candidates.

The former requires more appearance of the ability to compromise, the later benefits from shows of partisanship.

[Divair]

I'm trying to understand how there's such a huge gap between Senate and House Republicans..

It is because Senators view themselves as possible Presidential Candidates. Representatives view themselves as possible Governor candidates.

The former requires more appearance of the ability to compromise, the later benefits from shows of partisanship.

Interesting.

[Sibirsky]

Since the debt ceiling and the shutdown are monetarily farcical anyway, just mint about 20 trillion dollar coins and tell the Republicans to sit on it and spin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/opini ... azies.html

That's the stupidest thing ever. Money out of thin air, debases the currency. Inflation would skyrocket.

[Salandriagado]

Since the debt ceiling and the shutdown are monetarily farcical anyway, just mint about 20 trillion dollar coins and tell the Republicans to sit on it and spin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/opini ... azies.html

That's the stupidest thing ever. Money out of thin air, debases the currency. Inflation would skyrocket.

Only if you issue them.

[Sibirsky]

That's the stupidest thing ever. Money out of thin air, debases the currency. Inflation would skyrocket.

Only if you issue them.

If they mint a coin as a work around the debt ceiling, deposit it with the Fed, who would credit the Treasury with the amount, and the Treasury carried on operations, the monetary base would be expanded.

Which is inflationary.

Econ 101.

[Uieurnthlaal]

Well, that was a surprise. I was expecting it to be narrow approval of cloture, in the low to mid sixties, maybe high sixties if reid was lucky. But 100 votes? This is better than anyone in the world expected, and I applaud Senate Republicans, and Democrats who face tough reelection battles, for accepting ObamaCare as the law of the land.

I'm trying to understand how there's such a huge gap between Senate and House Republicans..

A combination of redistricting and an increasingly polarized public.

[Uieurnthlaal]

Since the debt ceiling and the shutdown are monetarily farcical anyway, just mint about 20 trillion dollar coins and tell the Republicans to sit on it and spin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/opini ... azies.html

That's the stupidest thing ever. Money out of thin air, debases the currency. Inflation would skyrocket.

You know, literacy is a very useful skill.

In case you’re wondering, no, this wouldn’t be an inflationary exercise in printing money. Aside from the fact that printing money isn’t inflationary under current conditions, the Fed could and would offset the Treasury’s cash withdrawals by selling other assets or borrowing more from banks, so that in reality the U.S. government as a whole (which includes the Fed) would continue to engage in normal borrowing. Basically, this would just be an accounting trick, but that’s a good thing. The debt ceiling is a case of accounting nonsense gone malignant; using an accounting trick to negate it is entirely appropriate.

[Salandriagado]

Only if you issue them.

If they mint a coin as a work around the debt ceiling, deposit it with the Fed, who would credit the Treasury with the amount, and the Treasury carried on operations, the monetary base would be expanded.

Which is inflationary.

Econ 101.

No, the active monetary base would be unchanged. Because the coins would never be issued.

[Downeistan]

Only if you issue them.

If they mint a coin as a work around the debt ceiling, deposit it with the Fed, who would credit the Treasury with the amount, and the Treasury carried on operations, the monetary base would be expanded.

Which is inflationary.

Econ 101.

http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2013 ... ion-trade/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-1 ... es-us.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-575 ... lion-coin/

[Uieurnthlaal]

If they mint a coin as a work around the debt ceiling, deposit it with the Fed, who would credit the Treasury with the amount, and the Treasury carried on operations, the monetary base would be expanded.

Which is inflationary.

Econ 101.

http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2013 ... ion-trade/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-1 ... es-us.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-575 ... lion-coin/

There's really no need to add the extra articles, when Sib's claim was proven wrong at the beginning of the very article he/she is purportedly disproving.

[Downeistan]

http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2013 ... ion-trade/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-1 ... es-us.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-575 ... lion-coin/

There's really no need to add the extra articles, when Sib's claim was proven wrong at the beginning of the very article he/she is purportedly disproving.

True enough, probably didn't need to pile on.

[Trotskylvania]

and I would prefer this go on long enough that even essential services are cut.

Under any government shutdown, all essential services remain. Even if a shutdown goes on for a year or more, all essential services are still there, because they are part of mandatory spending - spending that is on autopilot until the end of time unless congress votes to amend it. The services that are cut or furloughed during a shutdown are all within discretionary spending - spending that must be re-approved each and every fiscal year.

Most essential services are within discretionary spending.

Mandatory spending is things like Social Security, Medicare, paying the government's creditors.

[Salandriagado]

Since the debt ceiling and the shutdown are monetarily farcical anyway, just mint about 20 trillion dollar coins and tell the Republicans to sit on it and spin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/opini ... azies.html

There's even plenty of decent events coming up soon - the 100th anniversary of the completion of the Panama Canal is in a couple of weeks, and this year is the 100th anniversary of the 16th amendment, which would be strangely appropriate.

[Sibirsky]

That's the stupidest thing ever. Money out of thin air, debases the currency. Inflation would skyrocket.

You know, literacy is a very useful skill.

In case you’re wondering, no, this wouldn’t be an inflationary exercise in printing money. Aside from the fact that printing money isn’t inflationary under current conditions, the Fed could and would offset the Treasury’s cash withdrawals by selling other assets or borrowing more from banks, so that in reality the U.S. government as a whole (which includes the Fed) would continue to engage in normal borrowing. Basically, this would just be an accounting trick, but that’s a good thing. The debt ceiling is a case of accounting nonsense gone malignant; using an accounting trick to negate it is entirely appropriate.

Your "source" is someone who thinks an alien invasion would be economically beneficial, and someone who called on the Fed to create the housing bubble as a way to stimulate growth.

Taking advice from him is suicidal.

[Farnhamia]

Well, that was a surprise. I was expecting it to be narrow approval of cloture, in the low to mid sixties, maybe high sixties if reid was lucky. But 100 votes? This is better than anyone in the world expected, and I applaud Senate Republicans, and Democrats who face tough reelection battles, for accepting ObamaCare as the law of the land.

I'm trying to understand how there's such a huge gap between Senate and House Republicans..

As the zombies say, Brains ... This puts McConnell in the thick of it, though. He's facing a Tea Party primary challenge that just will not go away. This vote is ammunition for his foes. Of course, in 13 months, many things can be forgotten.

[Sibirsky]

If they mint a coin as a work around the debt ceiling, deposit it with the Fed, who would credit the Treasury with the amount, and the Treasury carried on operations, the monetary base would be expanded.

Which is inflationary.

Econ 101.

No, the active monetary base would be unchanged. Because the coins would never be issued.

The coins would be at the Fed, and the Fed would credit the Treasury with their nominal amount. The monetary base would be expanded.

[Salandriagado]

No, the active monetary base would be unchanged. Because the coins would never be issued.

The coins would be at the Fed, and the Fed would credit the Treasury with their nominal amount. The monetary base would be expanded.

No, it wouldn't, because the Treasury would never spend that money, merely use it as a buffer to borrow against. Seriously, this is literally exactly the same as raising the debt ceiling, except that it doesn't need congress.

[Sibirsky]

If they mint a coin as a work around the debt ceiling, deposit it with the Fed, who would credit the Treasury with the amount, and the Treasury carried on operations, the monetary base would be expanded.

Which is inflationary.

Econ 101.

http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2013 ... ion-trade/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-1 ... es-us.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-575 ... lion-coin/

2nd link.

Just minting the coin and leaving it in a vault in the Treasury would not cause inflation. The federal government could even spend the coin without necessarily causing inflation by transferring it to the Federal Reserve, crediting it as bank reserves, and then raising reserve requirements by an equivalent amount.

Yes, all we need is even less private sector credit. That will go well.

[Serrland]

I'm trying to understand how there's such a huge gap between Senate and House Republicans..

As the zombies say, Brains ... This puts McConnell in the thick of it, though. He's facing a Tea Party primary challenge that just will not go away. This vote is ammunition for his foes. Of course, in 13 months, many things can be forgotten.

I don't think it puts him in the thick of it. This was just a procedural vote, not a vote on the spending plan. Reid probably won't do that until the weekend. It's the next vote that will matter. Voting to open the bill =/= endorsement of the bill.

[Sibirsky]

http://www.economonitor.com/lrwray/2013 ... ion-trade/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-1 ... es-us.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-575 ... lion-coin/

There's really no need to add the extra articles, when Sib's claim was proven wrong at the beginning of the very article he/she is purportedly disproving.

No, it was not. Your source is garbage.

[Sibirsky]

The coins would be at the Fed, and the Fed would credit the Treasury with their nominal amount. The monetary base would be expanded.

No, it wouldn't, because the Treasury would never spend that money, merely use it as a buffer to borrow against. Seriously, this is literally exactly the same as raising the debt ceiling, except that it doesn't need congress.

And what would it do with the borrowed money?

[Salandriagado]

No, it wouldn't, because the Treasury would never spend that money, merely use it as a buffer to borrow against. Seriously, this is literally exactly the same as raising the debt ceiling, except that it doesn't need congress.

And what would it do with the borrowed money?

Exactly the same as it would do had it borrowed that money by raising the debt ceiling: pay for things that Congress has already voted to fund.

[Sibirsky]

And what would it do with the borrowed money?

Exactly the same as it would do had it borrowed that money by raising the debt ceiling: pay for things that Congress has already voted to fund.

So, spend it?

That would create inflation. As already quoted from someone else's link, to limit inflation they would have increase reserve requirements, tightening credit.

That would indeed, limit inflation. It would also limit private borrowing.