Republican Debt-Ceiling Battle Cost The U.S. Government $1.3 Billion: Study

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Free Thinker, Jul 24, 2012.

  1. Here's something for Congress to maybe think about the next time it decides to have a big, stupid argument about the debt ceiling: These big, stupid arguments, while entertaining, cost a lot of money.

    How much money? The 2011 argument about the debt ceiling--the most recent battle--cost the U.S. government about $1.3 billion in extra borrowing costs, according to a new study by the Government Accountability Office, the nonpartisan congressional watchdog.

    And that's just the costs that the GAO bothered to count. There are also probably extra borrowing costs that the government is still paying this year and in future years because of the debt-ceiling debacle, but the GAO's computer was too tired and/or depressed to try to figure those out.

    "Many of the Treasury securities issued during the 2011 debt limit event period will remain outstanding for years to come," the GAO said. "Accordingly, the multiyear increase in borrowing costs arising from the event is greater than the additional borrowing costs during fiscal 2011 alone."
    Wait, there's more: The Treasury Department had to spend much of the year scrambling to raise cash to keep the government functioning while congressional Republicans held the debt-ceiling hostage.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-gongloff/federal-debt-ceiling_b_1695876.html
     
  2. Yannis

    Yannis

    So, this ridiculous liberal rag, looking (no doubt in an impartial way) at the situation, where Obama was begging for more money to spend (waste) like a drug addict begs for more money to blow, decided that the only part of Congress that curerntly has any brains and self control is to blame... Of course, it's all as expected from this (did I mention that?) ridiculous liberal rag. Oh well :D
     
  3. you arent too bright are you? you only comprehend what your indoctrination allows you to.
    the liberal rag is only reporting on what " a new study by the Government Accountability Office," found.

    "If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence." -Bertrand Russell
     
  4. Yannis

    Yannis

    Don't be ridiculous. The whole article was a preamble to this, totally unfair and untrue blame-ascribing statement:

    "Wait, there's more: The Treasury Department had to spend much of the year scrambling to raise cash to keep the government functioning while congressional Republicans held the debt-ceiling hostage. "

    How about something like "while congressional Democrats and the White House held the debt-ceiling hostage..."?

    If you want to pretend to be fair, do a better job in the future.
     
  5. are you that dense? because it was the republicans who were playing games with the debt limit.
     
  6. Yannis

    Yannis

    BS as usual.

    Obama and the Dems were asking for more money to spend as opposed to making do with the $trillions they already had at their disposal.

    How do sane people run their life? If they want to buy something new, they give up another plan to buy something they don't need as much. Plain and simple.
     
  7. sane? revisionism from people like you gets a little tiring. you make shit up as you go. you are well aware that obama offered a clean debt limit extension but the republicans refused. they even tried to claim that a default would not matter.
     
  8. On the evidence, he is. Breathtakingly stupid would cover it.
     
  9. They learned from one of their historical leaders that the bigger lie, told often enuf.......
     
  10. Ricter

    Ricter

    Not true. They wanted to raise the debt ceiling.
     
    #10     Jul 24, 2012