Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY Unconstitutional


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY Unconstitutional Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY Uncon... - 5/8/2023 7:35:57 PM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline 		I have been saying this for years. The entire "Debt Ceiling DIsapproval Process" outlined in Section 301 is so obviously unconstituional. I am shocked that no one ever took it to the Supreme Court. People pther than myself are finally saying it.

Section 4 of the 14th Ammendment clearly says:
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. 

"SHA:LL NOT BE QUESTIONED"

Nothing could be more definitive of QUESTIONING the validity of the public debt than a Debt Ceiling Disapproval Process.

It is a very clearly unconstituional law that needs to be repealed immediately.
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/8/2023 9:18:10 PM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11227
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: offline
Raising the debt ceiling isn't about paying debts or obligations, it's about creating NEW debt

Leftists want a censorship king who can spend more money on "green" boondoggles for their investor friends with the wave of a hand than has ever existed on all of the Earth

Then they pretend that the cause of Bidennflation is a mystery

And if trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars isn't enough to pay the interest on the debt, maybe creating more debt isn't the greatest idea you ever had

It's all about intentionally destroying America. That's literally the plan.











< Message edited by BoscoX -- 5/8/2023 9:30:10 PM >

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to MasterJaguar01)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/8/2023 9:33:21 PM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
Raising the debt ceiling isn't about paying debts or obligations, it's about creating NEW debt



That is 100% wrong. You could not be more wrong than that statement. It is about as wrong as possible.

You are confusing actual public debt with legislative spending.

The debt ceiling is about the ability of the US Treasury to borrow more money to pay the bills it ALREADY has.

I think the problem is most of the low informations misunderstand this issue as you do.


(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/8/2023 10:58:37 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3659
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: online 		Ok, so VISA has given us a credit card, which we maxed out. But we have to pay what we've spent, PLUS the interest owed now. Pretty much exactly like we agreed to do when we applied for that credit card in the first place.

Raising the debt limit just lets us pay the interest owed on what we've had to borrow for the budget.

We still get to have the budget fight for next year, but this year's fight was already done, last year.

The GOP is acting like the Dems found some cute shoes on sale or some shit.

(in reply to MasterJaguar01)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/9/2023 6:19:56 AM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Ok, so VISA has given us a credit card, which we maxed out. But we have to pay what we've spent, PLUS the interest owed now. Pretty much exactly like we agreed to do when we applied for that credit card in the first place.

Raising the debt limit just lets us pay the interest owed on what we've had to borrow for the budget.

We still get to have the budget fight for next year, but this year's fight was already done, last year.

The GOP is acting like the Dems found some cute shoes on sale or some shit.


The maxed out VISA card is a great metaphor.

Unfortunately, my good friend BoscoX is under the erroneous impression that the debt ceiling is not about paying the bills from charges on the already maxed out credit card, but rather new legislation committing future spending.

This is a common misunderstanding among right wing news consumers. By design.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/9/2023 11:26:55 PM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11227
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
Raising the debt ceiling isn't about paying debts or obligations, it's about creating NEW debt



That is 100% wrong. You could not be more wrong than that statement. It is about as wrong as possible.

You are confusing actual public debt with legislative spending.

The debt ceiling is about the ability of the US Treasury to borrow more money to pay the bills it ALREADY has.

I think the problem is most of the low informations misunderstand this issue as you do.




"No new debt" the cult members scream

Meanwhile in the real world....

quote:

‘Over Our Dead Bodies’: Backlash Builds Against $3 Trillion Clean-Energy Push

Ballooning size of wind and solar projects draws local ire as they march closer to populated areas

https://www.wsj.com/articles/inflation-reduction-act-backlash-clean-energy-wind-solar-f3d4d900


One example of billions. New debts as far as the eye can see

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to MasterJaguar01)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/10/2023 6:10:56 AM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX
Raising the debt ceiling isn't about paying debts or obligations, it's about creating NEW debt



That is 100% wrong. You could not be more wrong than that statement. It is about as wrong as possible.

You are confusing actual public debt with legislative spending.

The debt ceiling is about the ability of the US Treasury to borrow more money to pay the bills it ALREADY has.

I think the problem is most of the low informations misunderstand this issue as you do.




"No new debt" the cult members scream

Meanwhile in the real world....

quote:

‘Over Our Dead Bodies’: Backlash Builds Against $3 Trillion Clean-Energy Push

Ballooning size of wind and solar projects draws local ire as they march closer to populated areas

https://www.wsj.com/articles/inflation-reduction-act-backlash-clean-energy-wind-solar-f3d4d900


One example of billions. New debts as far as the eye can see



I have not researched this issue well enough to know whether or not this investment is a good idea.

If you want to start a thread on it, we can debate it. I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

However, this thread is about the constitutionality (Or complete lack thereof) of Section 301 of the Budget Control Act.

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/10/2023 6:20:01 AM   
JVoV


Posts: 3659
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: online 		Biden seems to think the 14th Amendment may help? It would go to the courts, probably, so might not help in time.

This is the problem though. When something is unconstitutional, the other party needs to take it to court immediately, not just wait for it to be a problem. that's why we have a damn Constitution in the first place.

< Message edited by JVoV -- 5/10/2023 6:26:57 AM >

(in reply to MasterJaguar01)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/10/2023 7:01:32 AM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Biden seems to think the 14th Amendment may help? It would go to the courts, probably, so might not help in time.

This is the problem though. When something is unconstitutional, the other party needs to take it to court immediately, not just wait for it to be a problem. that's why we have a damn Constitution in the first place.


That is my point. It should have been challenged the day it was passed.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/10/2023 9:46:31 AM   
JVoV


Posts: 3659
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: online 		Well, it wasn't. So now we're here again. This government shutdown thing is dangerous, and the House knows it. Maybe that's their point though...

(in reply to MasterJaguar01)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/10/2023 7:12:58 PM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Well, it wasn't. So now we're here again. This government shutdown thing is dangerous, and the House knows it. Maybe that's their point though...


Someone needs to challenge this law in the Supreme Court, and get it struck down immediately. With a Republican President, Democrats and Republicans vote together to raise the debt ceiling. If a Democrat is President, these same Republicans are all of a sudden concerned about spending, and fail to tell their lemming supporters that the debt ceiling is about debt mostly racked up by the previous Republican President, so all the low information voters who don't understand how the debt ceiling works will support them. Of course there threats of shutting down the government tank the economy, which they want to happen so they can blame the Democratic President.

< Message edited by MasterJaguar01 -- 5/10/2023 7:14:32 PM >

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/12/2023 5:55:06 PM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV

Well, it wasn't. So now we're here again. This government shutdown thing is dangerous, and the House knows it. Maybe that's their point though...



The deadline is approaching. We shall see what happens. I hope Biden tells McCarthy to fuck off and directs the treasury to pay our bills.

(in reply to MasterJaguar01)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/13/2023 9:32:04 AM   
RealDominantLover


Posts: 28
Joined: 2/28/2023
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


Raising the debt ceiling isn't about paying debts or obligations, it's about creating NEW debt

Leftists want a censorship king who can spend more money on "green" boondoggles for their investor friends with the wave of a hand than has ever existed on all of the Earth

Then they pretend that the cause of Bidennflation is a mystery

And if trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars isn't enough to pay the interest on the debt, maybe creating more debt isn't the greatest idea you ever had

It's all about intentionally destroying America. That's literally the plan.



And here I thought nobody could be that obtuse. Partisanship reveals one's knowledge or...lack of it.

Inflation is no mystery to a non-partisan when trump begged the Saudis [OPEC] to cut production and mainly so the Kochs could profit from their shitty, muddy, wretched oil pumped to Houston for export profits and IIRC...tax free profits.




(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/13/2023 10:36:55 AM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RealDominantLover
when trump begged the Saudis [OPEC] to cut production


Please cite proof of this. I have never heard this before. I DO however have proof of Trump begging OPEC to INCREASE production.

(in reply to RealDominantLover)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY U... - 5/13/2023 10:45:57 AM   
MasterJaguar01


Posts: 2340
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline 		If I were President at this moment, I would issue an Executive Order directing the Treasury to honor all US debt, and by any means available to them (e.g. Selling US Bonds, or other borrowing, etc.

I then would write a letter to Kevin McCarthy saying basically

"I will sit down with all interested parties to come up with a plan to properly manage our budget and at the same time spur growth.

I will not do it, while our full faith and credit is at risk. You can take your "debt ceiling" (run up by the President whose rectum your tongue is in) and put it in your own rectum. It is unconstitutional and a clear violation of Section 4 of the 14th amendment of the Constitution."

OK needs some wordsmithing.

(in reply to MasterJaguar01)
Profile   Post #: 15
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Section 301 of the Buidget Control Act is CLEARLY Unconstitutional Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.160