Pat Oliphant by Pat Oliphant

Pat Oliphant

Comments (28) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    The patriotic Republicans are just itching for the chance to damage the full faith and credit of the United States.
    -
    The same ones who raised the debt limit 17 times during the Bush administration.
    -
    These are also the same Republicans who voted for the Iraq invasion, the Bush tax cuts (both), the Bush stimulus, Medicare part D, agriculture price supports for ADM and the other family farms, all kinds of secret earmarks, and tons of weapons the pentagon didn’t even want.
    -
    But, they really, really, really, really, really, want to cut spending. Really.

  2. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @braindead08

    The double bonus stupidity is that the GOP passed Medicare Part D, but prevented Medicare from negotiating prices the way that private insurers do.

    http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2012/sep/04/tammy-baldwin/uncle-sam-barred-bargaining-medicare-drug-prices-s/

  3. watmiwori

    watmiwori said, about 1 year ago

    The Schlachtkacker in Congress will make sure THEY get paid while they keep the gov’t shut dow, even if nobody else
    is!

  4. Stipple

    Stipple said, about 1 year ago

    So far this has been almost amusing if not one of the 800.000 sent home.

    But the budget ceiling for debts incurred is important.
    Antics as have been going on will not be tolerated. Drastic measures may have to be taken, but America will not drag the whole would down because of a few idiots.

  5. watmiwori

    watmiwori said, about 1 year ago

    Why not? We did it in 1929 — albeit with a much larger set of
    idiots and orse hales!

  6. BillH77

    BillH77 said, about 1 year ago

    If any of the posters on this page every think the present 17,000,000,000,000 of debt will be paid they are either stupid or mere fools.

    Also, the debt is increasing a lot faster than GDP. We crossed that dangerous line years past.

    Most of the posters on this board have not had a finance class much less know the problems of fiat currency. Fine, so be it. But raising the credit ceiling higher does not take care of two problems:

    1. the present monitization of the debt.
    2. no growth in the GDP

    Yes, America does deserve to lose its “credit card”. When a government spends $1.75 dollars for every dollar of revenue then that generation does not deserve any credit.

  7. Enoki

    Enoki said, about 1 year ago

    And the President will give them a stern look and tell them whatever is on the Teleprompter.

  8. Kit Walker

    Kit Walker GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @BillH77

    BillH77, Ms Ima, and Enoki: I wondered when y’all would finally punch in. And with nothing, apparently. I can’t believe y’all chose to support this crisis so wholeheartedly, while the GOP in congress drags the country – including you – deeper and deeper into financial ruin. Tea Party idealism will send this country into another Depression unless the GOP finally panics and moves to marginalize the terrorists in their own party.

  9. Zipi

    Zipi said, about 1 year ago

    Why pay to raise the ceiling when you can simply lower the lift? Now I know that the Gimmies on the Left can’t understand that because they believe in paying for votes but conservatives know that you have to live within your means and are trying to reverse the free spending course we are now on but the Harry and Barry clown act is too busy destroying America to give a hoot.

  10. Kip W

    Kip W said, about 1 year ago

    It’s important to live within your means if and only if there’s a Democrat in office. That’s Republican Econ 101. Also 102 through 999.

  11. echoraven

    echoraven said, about 1 year ago

    @Kip W

    Sooooo are you saying that we SHOULDN’T live within our means at any time?

  12. Godfreydaniel

    Godfreydaniel said, about 1 year ago

    Raising the debt ceiling is a matter of honorably agreeing to pay the debts we’ve already incurred (with both parties at fault over the decades). Not paying them can’t possibly be described as “conservative.”

  13. comicfan 244

    comicfan 244 said, about 1 year ago

    Remember, everyone. You have the best Congress MONEY can buy. Remember, too, that only a fraction of you VOTED in the LAST ELECTION! Now. If YOU really want change: Get your neighbor and yourself to the Voter Booth next election. Who are your neighbors? Everyone else but you.

  14. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, about 1 year ago

    @ypoons7666

    Well stated. It is disheartening that, although the least-capable, least-well-educated adult must learn quickly that you can’t spend more than you make without ending up in trouble, our educated and privileged members of Congress seem as though they haven’t ever learned Econ 101. Pitiful.

    And it’s our fault for returning them to Congress. We can communicate with our “representatives” all we want; many of them are unwilling to waste their time paying attention. Our recourse is the voting booth. I can only hope we voters will throw the bums out as soon as we can.

    Thanks for your summary of economic truth, and your evaluation of the perpetrators of our current troubles.

  15. martens misses all her friends

    martens misses all her friends GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    @I Play One On TV

    I disagree with you on this subject. First, do you really think that Econ 101 prepares you for making informed decisions about complex economic questions? An example, Kahneman and Tsirsky proposed the project theory to understand certain classes of economic decisions. As Kahneman himself has pointed out, this theory is not taught in Econ 101 because the basic level is not sufficient to understand how to apply it. You might as well claim that Bio 101 is enough for you to understand the implications of complex medical decisions, but I am sure you would not claim that. Also, the factors that are applicable to a nuclear family economically are not the same as those that apply to a nation. Again, just for one example, please compare the time line of a family (say, 20-40 yrs) with that of a nation (multiple generations). By applying the standards of family to nation you are making a major error both in magnitude, purpose and capabilities. Please rethink your considerations in this light.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (13).