AP-GfK Poll: People divided on looming debt crisis

finance.yahoo.com ^ | 07/27/2011 | Calvin Woodward

[ThinkingBuddha]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- It might be time for another midnight ride by Paul Revere, this time warning "the creditors are coming."

Americans seem not to have awakened to the fast-looming debt crisis that could summon a new recession, imperil their stock market investments and shatter faith in the world's most powerful economy. Those are among the implications, both sudden and long-lasting, expected to unfold if the U.S. defaults on debt payments for the first time in history.

Facing an August deadline for raising the country's borrowing limit or setting loose the consequences, politicians and economists are plenty alarmed. The people? Apparently not so much.

They're divided on whether to raise the limit, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that found 41 percent opposed to the idea and 38 percent in favor.

People aren't exactly blase. A narrow majority in the poll expects an economic crisis to ensue if the U.S., maxed out on its borrowing capacity, starts missing interest payments to creditors. But even among that group, 37 percent say no dice to raising the limit.

[Doogle]

yeah divided, the people who understand we can’t do it...and those who don’t understand anything.

[bill1952]

Americans seem not to have awakened to the fast-looming debt crisis that could summon a new recession, imperil their stock market investments and shatter faith in the world's most powerful economy.

Carefully crafted BS. - This is nothing more than a frantic, sky is falling, alarm to increase taxes and spending.

decrease SPENDING - CUT GOVERNMENT

[kittymyrib]

There is plenty of tax revenue coming in to pay our debt payments, huge as they are. However, the real culprit is that Pelosi, Reid and BO started funding for ObamaCare at the beginning of this year, along with such “investments” as increasing Pell grants 400% and continuing to subsidize health and pension benefits for their union cronies.

Last month, Obama held the checks for the military hostage until Boehner caved and was left with an embarrassingly small fig leaf of “cuts” to justify the budget extension.

This time, Obama will send letters to all Social Security recipients saying they will not get their checks because the Republicans won’t raise the debt limit, but SS payments could also be covered by incoming revenue.Republicans should counter by saying that if SS payments do not go out, NO FEDERAL EMPLOYEE PAY CHECKS WILL GO OUT, that includes all three branches of the government and all agencies within the states and territories. Now THAT would be cutting spending, big time.

We would be far better off with no government than the government we now have, whose main objective is to buy votes of the non-producers in our country with money extorted by the IRS from producing citizens.

[KansasGirl]

Propaganda much, AP? The U.S. gov’t brings in more than enough tax revenue to keep making the interest payments on the national debt. They will have to cut spending though, which is exactly what Americans want. Our Gov’t needs to start living within it’s means!

[pburgh01]

Research Calvin Woodward the articles author, the guy is a joke and is kinda famous around the Internet and in journalistic circles as an Obama sycophant, the worst of the worst. His claim to fame was a now infamous “Fact Check” he did on an Obama speech where he got busted for not actually doing ANY research, he just flat made it up to make Obama look good.

[David]

The essential point is this--failure to increase the borrowing limit does not by itself constitute a default or result directly in any default on any financial commitment, whether the commitment is a debt or simply a social promise to make payments.

As several point out above, tax revenues are sufficient to pay all current financial obligations on debt--interest; refund principal; etc.

Payments on debt obligations can be made with sufficient cash flow left to pay: Social Security; Medicare doctor and other medical amounts; Medicade; and compensation for Military. There would be cash flow left over after all of these amounts.

From my own perspective, if I were in Congress, I believe I would vote against raising the debt ceiling no matter what spending cuts were associated with proposal's to increase. The legal debt ceiling is a far more effective limit on unrealistic obligations than any other kind of legislation would be.

DeMint is fine but a Constitutional Balanced Budget amendment is not as good a limit on federal spending as the current lid. There will, of necessity be national defense or national security exceptions that will permit Congress to get around the limitations. Artificial legislative debt limitations are just not an effective remedy.

[tcrlaf]

As I tried to explain, and warn about on Friday, the new media meme is going to be “REVENUE CRISIS!!!”.

This was already circulating on the usual suspect media websites like Daily Kos on Friday, and as we can see, AP dutifully picked it up today.

WE all know it’s a spending problem, not a revenues problem, but the sheeple, easily swayed by media propoganda in the new “information!” age, don’t.

And it will be combined with a whole lot more of the “EAT THE RICH!” rhetoric to sell it, but it will be the Middle Class that take it in the shorts, AS USUAL...