GOP senators disavow Trump on debt ceiling, signaling growing rift

[corbe]

GOP senators disavow Trump on debt ceiling, signaling growing rift

BY ALEXANDER BOLTON - 05/12/23 6:00 AM ET

Senate Republicans are disavowing former President Trump’s call to let the federal government default on its debts unless President Biden agrees to “massive” spending cuts, dismissing Trump’s suggestion as something far too risky to seriously consider. 

The cold reception to Trump’s bold statement is the latest sign of the widening rift between Trump and his party’s Washington establishment.

While Trump maintains strong influence in the House, where he helped Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) nail down enough votes to be elected Speaker, it’s a different story in the Senate. 

GOP senators largely ignored Trump’s participation in a CNN’s town hall Wednesday and later dismissed the former president’s claim that failing to raise the debt ceiling by next month’s deadline might not be a big deal. 

<..snip..>

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4000704-senate-republicans-push-back-trumps-default/

[Kamaji]

Trump is, unfortunately, still stuck in the world of his own real estate investment partnerships, where defaulting on debt, and going into bankruptcy, is a perfectly acceptable business result.  Doesn't quite apply to sovereign debt.

[corbe]

   FTA:

While Trump maintains strong influence in the House, where he helped Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) nail down enough votes to be elected Speaker, it’s a different story in the Senate.

   This is BS.  Had Trumpers had their way, McCarthy would have been elected on the FIRST vote, warts and all!

[DefiantMassRINO]

The Debt Ceiling conundrum is meant to be an opportunity to squeeze some spending cuts concessions from profligate Federal spenders.

Defaulting on debt would be disatrous for the economy, the financial markets, and the dollar as a currency, but, the US Federal Government's current fiscal trajectory is reducing the standard of living and the quality of life for poor and working Americans.

Officials and experts are perplexed by the low labor participation rate ... it's because working for a paycheck is no longer a sufficient positive value proposition to make it worth the effort.  You're broke if you don't work.  You're still broke if you work just one job.  You need a second job to pay the cost of commuting to the first job.  The pay from first job pays taxes.  The check from the thrid jobs pays some of the bills.  Is it better to be broke not working, or to be broke working three jobs?