Seeking Alpha

U.S. has less than three weeks to increase debt cap

  • The U.S. may have only until February 27 to raise the debt ceiling before the government risks running out of cash and defaulting, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew has told House Speaker John Boehner.
  • Lew's comments came as the debt-cap suspension expired on Friday. The Treasury has started to take extraordinary measures to extend its runway for as long as possible.
  • Lew estimated that the U.S. would have $50B cash on hand on February 27, an amount that "would be exhausted quickly."
  • As of Wednesday, U.S. debt subject to the limit was $17.23T, an increase of $535B in the 3½ months since the the cap was suspended.
  • House Republicans have said they want concessions from the Democrats to increase the ceiling, although the GOP hasn't been able to agree on what exactly it wants.
Comments (51)
  • Gosho
    , contributor
    Comments (57) | Send Message
     
    Oooo, not again....How many dumb politicans are there in this country?Can't you solve this problem already?I am tired of your s*it!!!
    9 Feb, 03:52 AM Reply Like
  • David Johnston
    , contributor
    Comments (17) | Send Message
     
    536.
    9 Feb, 01:45 PM Reply Like
  • The Long Tail of Finance
    , contributor
    Comments (775) | Send Message
     
    Could we not simply adjust the debt ceiling at the same time we pass the spending legislation, so that the two are in synch? Why are the two treated separately? Has Congress not learned anything?
    9 Feb, 04:56 PM Reply Like
  • canb888
    , contributor
    Comments (313) | Send Message
     
    I thought you meant deficit of $535B in 3.5 months but found out it's just a coincident in the numbers. That's spending over $5,000,000,000 per day more than taxes collected or a deficit of more than $3.5 million per second for 24/7 non-stop. Anyone believe real unemployment is 6.6%? Where is the "cut deficit in half" and all the candidate's promises?
    9 Feb, 06:05 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    If you like your deficit you can (and will) keep it.

     

    Period

     

    .http://bit.ly/5BsyVl
    9 Feb, 06:23 PM Reply Like
  • Uncle Pie
    , contributor
    Comments (3116) | Send Message
     
    Is it not truly pathetic that the Treasury Secretary of the United States has to publicly beg for money every couple of months? Please, sir, may I have more? What a stupid way to run a country! As the largest debtor nation on the planet, we could at least PRETEND we have our act together!

     

    Long GLD
    9 Feb, 08:11 AM Reply Like
  • TAS
    , contributor
    Comments (2263) | Send Message
     
    Amusing is how the argument is framed. Here we are, with our debt in the trillions, a tepid White House no growth (unemployment is now cause to be categorized as a "liberating event") agenda, the mints' printing presses running white hot 24/7.....and we kick those who want to snap us back to reality in the groin. Through our history, the attempts at creating prosperity in an artificial way have failed- only to be salvaged by a war.

     

    Reading David Kennedy's Pulitzer Prize-winning FREEDOM FROM FEAR is instructive on this matter. Using common sense is another tool.
    9 Feb, 09:25 AM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    Why not cut spending? That will eliminate the need for a phony "debt ceiling".

     

    Shave a few hundred billion from war, corporate subsidies and union boss payoffs and the budget problems go away instantly.
    9 Feb, 10:28 AM Reply Like
  • Buddy Canuspare
    , contributor
    Comments (398) | Send Message
     
    DeepValueLover,
    Sounds good to me - but then again, I don't work for a defense contractor or a corporation on the receiving end of a subsidy, nor am I in a union. But what about the companies I've invested in (like COP, XOM, F, SWHC to name a few). What would happen to their value - and thus mine? If I'm worth less, I pay less tax, and that helps solve the budget problems in what way?
    9 Feb, 02:50 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    That sounds more like increasing taxes, not cutting spending.
    9 Feb, 02:54 PM Reply Like
  • EK1949
    , contributor
    Comments (1580) | Send Message
     
    "That sounds more like increasing taxes, not cutting spending"

     

    Both take money out of the economy by different means, just as tax cuts and spending increases add money to it. I can think of reasons for preferring this cut to that one or this increase to another, but they are effectively the same thing when distribution is taken into account. A spending cut is a tax increase, and a tax increase is a spending cut. That's why the economy reacts to these changes the way it does.
    When the economy sees more money from a tax cut it reacts the same way as it does to a spending increase with the same distributional character. In reality the distribution will tend to be different and economic stimulus is often more effective from spending than tax cuts because cuts in recent decades have gone largely to high earner savings. A tax cut aimed at spending, like the payroll tax cut that was rescinded, is very effective stimulus, as effective if not more than any spending increase would be, which explains why it was such an unbelievably stupid thing to get rid of it.
    9 Feb, 07:02 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    EK,

     

    I was mostly taking issue with the thought of "corporate subsidies" as cutting spending. "Corporate subsidies" are nothing more than less onerous tax treatment of corporate profits said corporation generated. To remove a "corporate subsidy" is a veiled way of saying "increasing their taxes" - it is NOT cutting spending in any way, shape or form.
    9 Feb, 07:08 PM Reply Like
  • Darren McCammon
    , contributor
    Comments (1274) | Send Message
     
    why not eliminate the subsidies going to deepvaluelover. I hear he is getting something like a 67% subsidy (only paying 33% in taxes).
    9 Feb, 09:01 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    True - he should kick it up a little and join most tax-paying Americans by paying 40-50% of their income in income tax, property tax, sales tax, and the cadre of misc. fees and surcharges.
    9 Feb, 09:20 PM Reply Like
  • EK1949
    , contributor
    Comments (1580) | Send Message
     
    John, I don't think the desirability of this cut or that increase plays any role in whether cuts are cuts or not. Calling it a subsidy doesn't change it. Maybe it's a bad choice, but it's a tax increase whether you call it a subsidy or not.

     

    Budget balancers use tax increases and spending cuts to do their dastardly deeds. Why would they if it wasn't that both tax increases and spending cuts do the same thing? It makes no sense otherwise. Both take money out of the economy, both can be thinly disguised as the other because they are essentially the same operation.
    9 Feb, 10:54 PM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    If you tie your personal worth to the worth of a corporation then that is a personal problem.

     

    Our budget problems are solved by spending only what comes in as tax revenue...not a penny more outside of a national or regional emergency.
    10 Feb, 10:15 AM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    If you and I are forced to hand over our hard won cash to Archer Daniels Midland but then, all of a sudden, we are allowed by our politicians to keep that money for our families instead then how is that not a cut in spending by Federal politicians?
    10 Feb, 10:19 AM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    Salary is not a government expense (unless one is a federal or other government employee or contractor).
    Try again.
    10 Feb, 10:21 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    DVL,
    "forced to hand over our hard won cash to Archer Daniels Midland"
    Your "corporate subsidy" is nothing more than letting (ADM) keep more of their "hard won cash". "Our families" did not work for the money - (ADM) did.
    10 Feb, 10:56 AM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    JohnBinTN:

     

    You are wrong:

     

    http://bit.ly/1kvVXHt
    10 Feb, 11:13 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    That they have government contracts makes me "wrong"? I don't follow your logic.
    10 Feb, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    Who pays for those contracts?
    10 Feb, 11:23 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    The taxpayers do. Still don't follow... Someone would be awarded the contracts one way or another. Should (ADM) do the work the government contracted them for for free? Absent (ADM) securing the contracts, would "Our families" then step up to the plate and do the work required by the government?

     

    Face it - you just want (ADM) to pay more in taxes.
    10 Feb, 11:30 AM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    Companies don't pay taxes.

     

    They collect them, and add the cost into the price of what they sell.

     

    Libtards cannot ever understand that.
    10 Feb, 11:41 AM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    No, JohnBinTN, I want taxpayers to pay tax to go toward fixing our national fiscal mess...not toward contracts to ADM or any other multi-billion dollar corporation.
    My country is important to me...ADM's tax burden is not.

     

    If you feel that ADM's $660,000,000 in net income for 2013 is not enough then you are free to cut them a check from your personal checkbook.
    10 Feb, 11:42 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    No, I'm not going to cut them a check, much like you're not going to cut a check to the US government to assist in fixing the "national fiscal mess" (you are free to do that, too).

     

    Because they made money in 2013 is no reason to expect them to share that money with me. They secured contracts for work that the US government wanted done. If you feel the work that they contracted for did not warrant taxpayer funds, complain about that. Don't complain about a company trying to maximize profits.
    10 Feb, 05:12 PM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    Actually, if I don't cut the U.S. government a check then I go to jail. And that thing you say I should complain about?...That is EXACTLY what I've been saying all along.

     

    Have you been reading this thread at all or are you not following what I've written?
    10 Feb, 05:14 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    So are you now saying (ADM) does not pay tax? They do, and much more than you do.

     

    If what you're saying is that the US government should not contract out work to anyone, I'm fine with that. They have their paws in too much stuff that they shouldn't be involved with.

     

    If, however, you're saying (ADM) (or any corp) should pay more taxes, I disagree vehemently. I will also never agree that a tax increase should be considered "cutting spending".
    10 Feb, 05:22 PM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    JohnBinTN:

     

    Either you are messing with me or you are having trouble reading.

     

    I have never called for a tax increase on any corporation. I have never said that ADM doesn't pay taxes.

     

    Where are you getting this stuff from?
    10 Feb, 05:55 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    We may be on different pages in the same book, I dunno. Your initial comment in the thread referred to "cutting spending", and in the next sentence mentioned shaving billions from "corporate subsidies".

     

    If you did not mean increasing corporate taxes, then my apologies. But to me, removing a "corporate subsidy" is nothing more than an increase in the amount of tax they pay.

     

    As someone else pointed out, any corporate tax increase is passed on directly to the consumer of their product or service. That, in essence, is why I took umbrage with the "corporate subsidy" term.
    10 Feb, 06:09 PM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/LSIlqL

     

    :::“corporate welfare” is defined as any federal spending program that provides payments or unique benefits and advantages to specific companies or industries.:::

     

    I don't see how ending this practice is a tax increase unless you mean that when the taxpayer candy store is closed then the corporations will have to fend for themselves and that will be a tax on them.

     

    If that is what you mean then we disagree.
    11 Feb, 04:49 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    DVL,

     

    We had a misunderstanding on what was being classified as a "corporate subsidy". I agree wholeheartedly that any government payment to a corporation that is not compensation for actual work done to accomplish a specific task should be eliminated.
    11 Feb, 05:01 PM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    OK
    11 Feb, 05:10 PM Reply Like
  • bobxburnham
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    This charade every few months is an indication of how bad this country's government is.
    Those that have the power to work on adjusting the budget to prevent this crisis is known as the do nothing Congress.
    They blame the president for this condition. How stupid. It is a sure result that our country has been weakened because those in Congress hate the President. Last time I saw this kind of tug of wills was in third grade!
    9 Feb, 02:52 PM Reply Like
  • Jake2992
    , contributor
    Comments (831) | Send Message
     
    This wouldn't be a problem if our corporate media actually did its job and called a spade a spade. This isn't a problem with our "politicians", this is a problem with SOME politicians. Republicans in the House are the root cause of these dangerous stand offs.
    9 Feb, 02:56 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3333) | Send Message
     
    2992

     

    Yes,

     

    Ignore the debt, and maybe it will go away.

     

    Nevermind that pesky "sustainability" thing.
    9 Feb, 04:28 PM Reply Like
  • canb888
    , contributor
    Comments (313) | Send Message
     
    The Santa is black. Spending spree continues like an addiction.
    9 Feb, 06:11 PM Reply Like
  • TAS
    , contributor
    Comments (2263) | Send Message
     
    After reading the above, I'd love to be on the opposite sides of trades with Jake.
    It would be great fun to make $$ hand over fist.
    :)
    9 Feb, 04:14 PM Reply Like
  • AllStreets
    , contributor
    Comments (1083) | Send Message
     
    The debt ceiling is the dumbest, most useless and dangerous law in the country, and must be repealed. It serves no purpose whatsoever, since it can't be constitutionally broken, only amended, and in 2011 we found out it will be used by stupid, traitorous politicians to attempt political blackmail. Since its inception is has been used as a mere theatrical prop so politicians could give speeches in Congress denouncing deficits to impress their constituents and donors, deficits which they probably helped to create in order to give their donors big tax cuts and pork barrel subsidies and government contracts. But, since 2011 at least, we have discovered that this useless debt ceiling law it is also a potential instrument for counterproductive political intrigue and blackmail, and a source of damage to the reputation of reliability of the US in the eyes of all investors and all countries both friends and enemies.
    Obama should inform Congress and the citizenry that no concessions will be discussed and that, if necessary, he will use his Economic Emergency Powers to ignore the limit it in any case, and there will be no default under any circumstances.
    The debt ceiling should never be violated since it would disrupt the finances of the US and financial institutions all over the world. The Constitution specifies that "the validity of the debt shall not be questioned" yet we hear citizens and politicians question it every day, to no practical end, and with at least some damage to the psyche of the citizenry and world respect. Now we have politicians who took an oath to uphold the Constitution who would threaten to allow default unless they get their pet and petty programs approved. Threatening a default is essentially a violation of the Constitution, and considering the damage that would be caused, is a traitorous terroristic threat, but actually allowing default would be treason.
    If Congress wants to eliminate deficits now or forever, it can do so with its budgets via tax increases and/or spending cuts. The budget that Congress just passed contains continuation of deficits which increase debt beyond the ceiling and that's their bill which for which they must allow and enable payment. In any case there are many economic circumstances when a deficit is desirable, even necessary for the good of the economy including businesses and individuals alike. Have those who favor a balanced budget amendment (a big mistake) considered the many adverse consequences to the financial system if no new US Treasury securities were ever issued again and all existing ones were retired.
    9 Feb, 05:03 PM Reply Like
  • Topcat
    , contributor
    Comments (435) | Send Message
     
    Not to worry. Boehner just needs a vote with some Dem cuts in it for red meat to the far wingnuts/TPers to show he is doing his best. But Dems and Obama (rightly) are demanding a clean bill for this (as they should - budget and debt issues are addressed during the BUDGET cycle (and the agreement just recently completed for 2014). Boehner will do a clean bill after throwing up his hands later this week. Stock market knows this so I don't think any affect on the market this week.
    9 Feb, 05:27 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3810) | Send Message
     
    In that case, he should use his pen and his phone and raise the debt ceiling to 100 trillion dollars, with an auto-renewal of an additional $100T every time it hits a century benchmark.. It will get there eventually, anyways. We don't need no stinking fiscal prudence.
    9 Feb, 05:37 PM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    How come people who worry that constant deficit spending may, perhaps, be detrimental to the nation are called "wing-nuts" and "teabaggers"?

     

    Have you ever gone to your local Department of Motor Vehicles and said to yourself, "what an efficient, well run operation...I hope I can give them more of my salary because I can't think of a better use of the funds than here"?

     

    There is a logical reason why "wing-nuts" and "teabaggers" wish to limit the size and scope of the Central Bureaucracy...and it ain't a "hatred" for America.
    10 Feb, 10:44 AM Reply Like
  • Newbie trader
    , contributor
    Comments (194) | Send Message
     
    @Deep
    I believe it's the lesser of the two evils. Not raising the debt ceiling means a crashing stock market, and the government has already spent so much money that high inflation is guaranteed. Those nuts start do that, everyone is guaranteed to lose, that why those teabaggers must be stopped. XD

     

    Well, you might say, but this is unsustainable. Well...we know but we are betting on innovation on the same magnitude as the industrial revolution or the internet to save us. It's better than to just fold right? I think Obama was betting on renewable energy... it could still work out?
    10 Feb, 11:09 AM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    The job of the President of the United States is NOT to bet MY money on his pet projects...whether is it "democracy in the Middle East" or "solar power plants and wind farms".
    10 Feb, 11:16 AM Reply Like
  • Newbie trader
    , contributor
    Comments (194) | Send Message
     
    @Deep
    Welcome to America! XD
    or the America that we know. Ever since the beginning of America, we have had pork barrel projects, Marshall plan, cold war, police actions, war in Iraq. I think when you compare those stuff with Obama-care and his little solar project, Obama's projects are pretty good, at least they are infrastructure spending like Johnson's great society program. The most important aspect is that those dollars are spent in America for Americans. I don't care what those Hippies have to say about LBJ, and I don't get a rat's arse what the teabaggars think, both of them are alright in my book. XD
    12 Feb, 05:05 PM Reply Like
  • DeepValueLover
    , contributor
    Comments (8661) | Send Message
     
    Again, I want my tax money to go towards repairing our broken finances...not ANY politicians "pet project". I don't care what "America" has done in the past...mistakes made for decades don't make the mistakes any better. It is about 2014 and onward.
    12 Feb, 10:14 PM Reply Like
  • thefuture007
    , contributor
    Comments (33) | Send Message
     
    Love all the Tper's/wing nuts comments from Liberal whacko's.The problem is overspending,that is due to Democrats refusal to CUT programs to their constituents,including the recently passed " FARM BILL" whereby 80% goes to FOOD STAMPS,of which Illegals get some SNAP money if/Since they have a child born here.The Tper's trying to save this Country vs Democrats trying to Dismantle it.!!! How's the CBO Estimate go again,oh yeah Millions will work PT Jobs due to the Mandates vs Allowing Capitalism to determine things such as " Minimum WAGE " & Healthcare...nope thats more Democratic Socialism.Sad so many voted in a Socialist as president and want to " Change" things,yet Bash anyone who is against their Agenda.Hope the 11 Million Illegal immigrant Criminals don't become citizens,then that jobs thing your whinning about only gonna get worse but then again you Libs Flip-Flop on almost everything Rational that would stop the Fleecing of Americans in favor of Votes.You have heard of the Federal Reserve and it's mandate's..increase jobs & Inflation ,a main reason why increasing the Min. wage will do nothing to help people but drive Prices higher,thus that raise just means more TAXES for the Government but you people think bigger Government and higher taxes is a good thing vs Cutting spending and allowing Capitalism to determine Wages,Prices, Healthcare offerings to workers.Someday they will sell FNM/FRE and the housing market will correct 15-30%.The QE/Tapering doesn't end until those two entities are sold, ala ESt $1.4 Trillion on their books,you think someone gonna buy that knowing an Increase in Interest rates would make it hard to Finance new Loans.?etc.Sorry that is the real reason Tapering won't end soon,unfortunately.The jobs problem is waiting on the Illegals issue to playout,which hopefully the Tper's/Republicans get Liberals/Democrats to think alot more Rationally about how that will affect Employment of Millions of AMERICANS and not push to Decriminalize 11 million of them,thus affecting the employment availability of LEGAL Americans,in favor of possible votes.Happy Trails
    9 Feb, 06:46 PM Reply Like
  • jeezuz30
    , contributor
    Comments (378) | Send Message
     
    3 weeks? Sounds like the perfect time frame for the VIX to settle down, S%P to reach another all time high, and the loudmouths and pundits on CNBC etc to use this as an excuse for the next sell off.

     

    Scaring the mom and pop investors out of their money 3-5% at a time!
    9 Feb, 08:06 PM Reply Like
  • sl100
    , contributor
    Comments (112) | Send Message
     
    they will increase it, just do little drama for the public and international buyers of treasury. They are just addicted to debt. We always have a buyer of treasury no matter what the feds will soak up whatever the treasury issues. We cannot afford to default, how can one default if they can print unlimit amounts. Folks the paper is getting worthless every passing day and the only people who are getting rewarding are the bad guys who leverage and borrow insane amount to speculate and do mal investments. The saver are big looser in this game. This is why the system is decaying.
    9 Feb, 08:32 PM Reply Like
  • tunaman4u2
    , contributor
    Comments (3072) | Send Message
     
    Since bad news is good again... we should rally 500 on an impasse
    9 Feb, 10:02 PM Reply Like
  • Island_Dweller
    , contributor
    Comments (395) | Send Message
     
    If you are distracted by getting caught up in political moral high ground debates, along with blind loyalty to a country that has more problems than any one man, committee, or organization can fix - you will miss opportunities.

     

    Investing is not about who's right, and who's wrong. It's the search for value. When news hits the wires with another "crisis" such as this one, the first question you need to ask is how can I profit off of this. The sheep will look to 24 hour cable news to search for answers when the truth is right in front of your face, people just don't want to admit it. It's not sexy, it's not controversial, and it doesn't get anyone's attention.

     

    If you want to make this a better country, pay off your debt, sell all your assets, give the money to families/ charities truly in need, grow your own vegetables, and educate the youth about the need to care for one another, the neighborhood, and support your local community. See how against our nature that is?
    9 Feb, 10:02 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector