Artful Dodger:

> Obama is worse than Bush and plans to make even MORE debt. It has to end.

The truth is that the government has lost sight of the intended purpose of the debt ceiling. From what I read some time ago, before the Civil War the American government was free of debt. When the Civil War broke out the government started incurring debt and then in 1913 (or was it 1915) the debt was spiraling out of control. The debt ceiling was introduced to stop the government from spending more than it should. For the next 6 to 7 decades the debt remained in check because every time the ceiling had to be raised the government had to fight hard to have bills and appropriations approved.

The change came in the 1980s. The Regan administration followed economic policies which used public money for the benefit of private enterprises and for a massive buildup of military spending. Ronal Regan gave tax cuts to the rich, and raised the debt ceiling on 18 different occasions to compensate for the shortfall in government revenue. Presidents that followed him realized that raising the debt ceiling was a way to keep funding programs and giving tax cuts. The programs and tax cuts were used for political purposes in order to score votes at election time.

The problem is that it became too easy to raise the debt ceiling while removing accountability for spending. Both parties engaged in this because it was a way to score big votes as well as ensuring that special interests and campaign donors got what they wanted. The wars have not helped matters because instead of reducing the military budget at the end of the Cold War, that budget has increased tremendously.

The problem now is that the government is refusing to do what the IMF does when it lends money to countries that have bad economies. The IMF imposes austerity measures to combat massive spending. That means cutting popular programs, getting rid of tax breaks, and reducing the size of the government work force.

If the American government were to introduce austerity measures, the first thing to go would be tax breaks. Second, there would be a tax increase across the board. Third, a lot of government employees would lose their jobs. Fourth, companies that export jobs out of the country would be put in a difficult taxation position in order to force them to bring jobs back.

These measures would be unpopular. Those corporation that have grown spoiled by tax breaks would lose and their campaign contributions would dry up. Manufacturers taking jobs overseas would be forced to manufacture more expensively inside the USA. The government would have to cut many expensive programs, and the first ones to go would be the most expensive programs in the military and national security areas.

Neither one of the two parties wants to acknowledge the tough solutions. Instead they are using the debt problem to blame each other and try to gain points with voters for next year's election. None of the politicians has the courage to admit that austerity measures will bring back a surplus that would allow the government to pay its debts. The military would also have to be streamlined to work more efficiently so as to ensure security at a much lower cost.

It is very difficult because if one adds household debt (mortgages, loans, credit cards, etc.) and public fiscal debt then the economy is under serious threat. The only solution is to bring back manufacturing to the USA and that will take a politician with the courage to stand up to corporations and say "if you want a tax break, you have to bring jobs back to our country". So far I have not seen a single politican take a courageous stand like that.