Weekdays at 12noon on 770 AM: The Truth
 Michael Medved

Paying Bills with Borrowed Money

January 22, 2013 @ 1:30 pm

President Obama insists Republicans must allow government to borrow more money so "America can pay its bills." But Senator Marco Rubio insists "if you need to borrow even more just to pay your bills, then you're headed for financial disaster." Senator Rubio is right, of course: the phrase "paying your bills" usually means paying down debt, not recklessly adding to it.

The president says that blocking an increase in the debt ceiling is like refusing to pay for a restaurant meal after you've eaten it. Actually, it's more like taking away a teenager's credit card after he's shown he has no real intention of even paying down the bills he already placed on the account. No one wants economic turbulence or potential default, but linking debt ceiling increases to sweeping spending cuts is both appropriate and necessary.

More Michael Medved

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (32)


  • Add A Comment

  • Paul Kersey wrote...
    No, It's more like
    January 22, 2013 1:01 pm
    Grandpa and Grandma inviting their grandchildren out to dinner, ordering the most expensive dish on the menu, and then sticking the grandkids with the bill.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    If We Had a Republican President
    January 22, 2013 1:17 pm
    There would be no argument from Rubio et al about raising the debt ceiling. "Deficits don't matter. Reagan proved that."
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    drool the fool-most if not all fiscal conservatives did not like the spending of Bush-check the historical record and u will see many dems voted for Bush's spending programs
    January 23, 2013 11:50 am
    many of us see thru the partisan politics and want to solve problems.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • FormerMarineSgt wrote...
    Boze - your hatred betrays you.
    January 22, 2013 2:07 pm
    First of all, IF you are talking about the debt ceiling, it's nothing more than paying the bills that CONGRESS authorized to spend money for. Yes - even your beloved Republicans authorized the spending. IF the republicans were actually that truthful on thier participation, we'd not be having this discussion. Second, Obama is talking debt reduction. Not the radical 'cuts only' method that the tea party fanatics are demanding, but he is talking debt reduction. So let's actually catch up to where the real world is at instead of continuing your false reality bubble.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • maplefish wrote...
    Obama talking debt reduction
    January 23, 2013 12:57 pm
    HAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha....man you are stupid. Obama will increase the deficit to $20 TRILLION by 2016. His moron minion that run the Senate haven't passed a budget the entire time he's been in office....
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    Well Mr. Medved
    January 22, 2013 3:01 pm
    Sometimes you have to use that credit card to pay the bill for the services already rendered don't you think. Now, I still feel that the president should compromise and cut spending SUBSTANTIALLY if he wants to control the debt, there is no way around it, congress should increase the debt ceiling to cover the bill just like anybody else would do and the President and the Democrats should be open to cutting the spending problem to include the military.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • wsualumn wrote...
    Strange That The GOP
    January 22, 2013 6:41 pm
    Wasn't asking or demanding this same sort of thing when we were going to war with no payment plan and doing Medicine For Seniors with no payment plan. I can't argue that we need to cut spending, but I find it rather amusing that The GOP Has all of a sudden become fiscally conservative since Obama took office. I also highly doubt that they would raise serious concerns when Romney would ask for the debt ceiling to be increased. Face it, they are both guilty of this game.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    Tea Party concepts are bad?
    January 22, 2013 7:00 pm
    Can anyone explain to me this concept that it seems we're all being conditioned to accept: "Cutting spending to live within our intake is harmful" ? And what will be the financial result when the entity that hogs up 25% of our GDP goes into default?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • FormerMarineSgt wrote...
    @cigarillo....
    January 23, 2013 11:23 am
    "Tea Party concepts are bad?" No - most of the Tea Party concepts aren't bad in reality. The problem is the absolutism and extremism that they carry out thier desired goals. They have taken 'my way or the highway' to an extreme that I don't recall seeing much of in my life. Even me, who is often accused of being a 'dirty liberal' or leftie by the extremists on here can see this and I actually appreciate and agree with many of the Tea Party concepts. I just strongly disagree with the methodology and the extremist absolutism that they are using to achieve thier goals.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Sarge
    January 24, 2013 12:42 pm
    I don't think there's anything extreme about strict adherence the philosophy of "living within your means". No one would disagree that deviating from that is a bad thing and enough deviation can lead to trouble. I understand the concept of the economy staying afloat by the government pumping money, albeit it hollow, into it, and the ensuing recession that will occur from tightening the purse strings. But is that worse than the collapse that will occur from too large a part of the GDP going into default?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    messiah101
    January 23, 2013 10:19 am
    And what was the debt under President Reagan?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Clearwater3 wrote...
    The number isn't really that important...
    January 24, 2013 10:29 am
    ...what is important is the debt as a percentage of GDP. Under Reagan/Bush, that went from about 30% to around 70%. Under Clinton, the number again fell to below 50%, and then climbed under Bush 2 to nearly 90%. It has continued to climb under Obama, but much of that is a result of adding the previously unaccounted cost of the war in Iraq.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    "then you're headed for financial disaster"
    January 23, 2013 5:42 pm
    Headed for? FFS!... Do you need a picture?

    http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/InflationChart.png

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }