Thankfully leaders of both parties seem to understand that the limit must be raised, but the fact that it is being entertained as a political ball seems dangerous. I think it's just another sign of how much volatile rhetoric has poisoned US governance. I would like to think that this letter was sent with the intent to make this impression, rather than to provide political cover... IMHO, if political cover is needed to increase the debt limit. The situation in the US is precarious.
depends But by mid OCT all can kicking is done and we will have defaulted on our debts and the world will collapse.
This does not sound right. I wonder has there been once that American government lowers the debt limit? I think the consensus is that the national deficit should be 3% of GDP, I guess as long as the economy keeps growing, the deficit should keep growing? I really wonder this 3% Chinese economy is running a surplus right now, they do need to increase the spending on social welfare. Meanwhile, the heat of Chinese housing market is worrisome, that's why they are trying to increase their reserve to prepare for the burst of the bubbles and fight inflation.
Is that true? I wouldn't doubt it. I am just baffled that talk has been entertained about 'not raising the debt ceiling'. -That there are points to be scored here. Even those that like to think of themselves as 'fiscal conservatives' must know that it is dangerous to confuse the public on this issue. Doing so could see them running against opponents that will pledge not to raise it. I'd think it would be a lose-lose situation for both parties to give this legs.
Senator X knows that it must be, will be raised but in the mean time he gets a bit of attention. Been listening to a lot of Council of Foreign Relations stuff. An overwhelming number of speakers seem to think that the greatest security challenge for the united states is our fiscal mismanagement, while this letter is just part of the debt ritual tough is probably what we are going to need to get, and soon.