Another Boehnheaded move?
"House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) pushed back this week against White House demands for no-frills legislation on raising the federal borrowing cap and instead called for another round of spending cuts beyond the sequester as part of any agreement to raise the debt limit."
This has gone far beyond comical, to the absurd.
Can't spend more unless they agree to spend less? (In THEIR semantics anyway? Let's take to calling 'em semantricks?) In other words, if we're gonna leverage more fiat, we have to reduce our fiat. Got that?
WhatEVER!
They should all just go home, and take their idea of fiat with them. No one will notice anything except less hot air and more common sense.
And in case there was any confusion about the confusion ...
"GOP aides said the speaker was affirming the “Boehner rule,” a framework he set in the last Congress that required spending cuts to match any debt limit increase. But Boehner also focused on a long-term approach to spending reductions, suggesting Republicans also will seek an overhaul of entitlement programs as part of any fiscal talks."
Can someone please ask these Boehnheads to at least define their terms?
What constitutes "spending" to them?
What constitutes "debt" to them?
Why are their spending cuts equivalent (in their minds) to increases in "debt?"
A dictionary of Boehner terms is called for. Fiat currency operations aren't rocket science, but apparently, they do involve Boehn-surgery.
ps: Isn't a sovereign country with it's own currency entitled to exercise fiat? What else are citizens supposed to do? Sit and twiddle their thumbs - between no-child-left-with-a-job tests? Is that how we'll maintain our Output Gap?
We've arrived back at the politicians calling card: "...Have Fiat, Won't Use It..."
No comments:
Post a Comment