Sammy – Forget it, it’s over your head.

3. They probably have trillion-dollar coins in Zimbabwe.

Krugman is ahead of his time.

Comment by Amphipolis (d3e04f) — 1/11/2013 @ 8:58 am

I don’t believe so. I did find a one billion Zim dollar bill being used as a bookmark in the library of a guest house I was staying at in Harare in 2009.

My favorite Krugman beat-down:

President Of Estonia Slams Paul Krugman: ‘Smug, Overbearing & Patronizing’

“We’re just dumb & silly East Europeans. Unenlightened. Someday we too will understand,” he tweeted. “Guess a Nobel in trade means you can pontificate on fiscal matters & declare my country a “wasteland”. Must be a Princeton vs Columbia thing.”

Estonia, which in 2011 became the latest country to join the eurozone, has been heralded by some as an austerity success story. That year, it clocked a faster economic growth pace than any other country in the European Union, at 7.6 percent. Estonia is also the only EU member with a budget surplus, and had the lowest public debt in 2011 — 6 percent of GDP. Fitch affirmed its A+ credit rating last week.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/14/krugman-knows-the-jig-is-up

If anyone but Schlong has their way its disaster.

Even Fwench Fitch says Pwesident Downgrade is playing on penalty time.

Sammy – What is the difference between why Bush needed to have the debt ceiling raised and why Obama needs to have it raised?

There isn’t any difference. Obama is not claiming there is any difference. He’s just putting his earlier vote into the memory hole.

I suppose he could say that was a protest vote, and he know he would lose. Or that Bush was being really irresponsible in planning government financing and he is not, because, er, – hes cutting the military budget drastically!!

Look, he’s doing almost nothing in Mali, letting France and assorted African countries do almost all the work.

But Obama is playing politics here, or otherwise he wouldn’t rule out the platinum coin(s)

I described the situation in comments 96 and 99 here.

Obama wants to force the Republican members of the House of Representatives to vote for tax increases (or the Speaker to let a coalition consisting mostly of Democrats vote it through)

Obama will not negotiate with regard to the debt ceiling, but he will sign any debt ceiling that passes Congress, even one for a week or a month, but he will negotiate separately on taxes and spending.

Now

1) The Republican House wants to reduce projected spending by $1 for every $1 increase in the debt limit.

2) President Obama wants every dollar of spending cuts to be matched by one dollar of tax increases.

and

3) The Republicans want to match any tax increase with a tax cut somewhere else, and otherwise no new taxes.

They are therefore at an impasse unless you can think of something that the Republicans will call a spending cut and Obama will call a tax increase, or something that the Republicans will say is tax neutral and Obama will call a tax increase. (higher penalties for paying taxes late?)

If nothing happens, which is where we are headed, and the debt limit does not get raised, perhaps after the can has been kicked down the road once or twice, he’s threatening to give the Republicans such immediate spending cuts, like delaying Social Security checks, that he hopes they’ll scream uncle after they hear from their constituents, because he’ll place the blame squarely on them.

But he will never agree to more moderate planned spending cuts unless balanced by a equivalent amount of tax increases.

And then he will take credit for anything that does not affect the average voter negatively, and for any benefits, and he will give the Republicans “credit” for anything that impacts average people adversely.

narciso linked to an article noting that Obama does not have to delay Social Security checks.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01/15/ap-fact-checks-obamas-claim-that-social-security-checks-veterans-benefits-will-be-delayed-if-debt-limit-isnt-raised/

Sammy – The two phrases at the beginning of your comment. Duh!