We all know how the political elite deceive with their coded language in purveying a message. For example, how ‘Compromise’ actually means ‘Caving’, and with the current political alignments, it’s usually directed towards conservatives/Republicans caving to the statist will of the Democrat majority. So as we’re in the throes of the debt debate, and reaching that 11th hour mark, perhaps it’s time to remind ourselves of these terms as they’re bantered about, and what’s actually meant when they’re used…
Investment = Spending
Specifically, spending as government sees fit, when private business and working Americans supply the real source of economic growth.
Revenues = Taxes
Democrats use ‘revenues’ to describe a core liberal concept of raising taxes; yet, use ‘taxes’ when discussing the conservative concept of lowering taxes, or cuts, which they then despise.
Downgrade ≠ Default
Although generally viewed negatively, ‘Downgrade’ is speculative among credit rating services. ‘Default’ is dependent on the government’s ability, or decision, to pay the interest on the debt with existing tax revenues (which it’s currently capable of, despite the President’s rhetoric, with enough left over for beneficiary payments to boot).
Balance = tax hikes with the promise of ‘serious’ spending cuts
Similar to ‘compromise’, but distracting from the actual balance that should be pursued: if raising the debt ceiling is desired at all, which is debatable, then addressing the systemic cause of what’s brought us to the precipice must be addressed first, as it's long overdue (borrowing and spending, and borrowing more to spend more).
Shared sacrifice = taxpayers taking the hit for Washington’s tax spenders
Growing the government slower, while professing to ‘tax the rich’ or demanding that 'millionaires and billionaires' pay ‘their fair share’, except for all those wealthy politicians, their crony corporatists and the gambit of dependent statist supporters. More class warfare rhetoric that amounts to the taxpayer carrying the brunt of any tax burden, despite degree of wealth.
Full Faith and Credit ≠ full faith and credit
The "Full Faith and Credit" clause in Article 4 Section 1 of the Constitution, as applied towards "public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings" between the States, is different from the modernized 'full faith and credit' term expressing the government's guarantee in backing our monetary system. Although the context is different between the two, a similar application is being utilized, which is probably why this is more readily accepted: public provisions entrusted and attributed to the states versus a monetary system entrusted and attributed to the federal government.
