Suspend the Debt Ceiling or Shutdown the Government.

[HighStepper]

Trump separately told ABC News that "there won't be anything approved unless the debt ceiling is done with," indicating any spending deal to prevent a shutdown must address the debt limit.

"If we don't get it, then we're going to have a shutdown, but it'll be a Biden shutdown, because shutdowns only [injure] the person who's president," he told ABC News.

"Congress must get rid of, or extend out to, perhaps, 2029, the ridiculous Debt Ceiling. Without this, we should never make a deal. Remember, the pressure is on whoever is president," he wrote on Truth Social. Link
Interesting how Trump is not even president yet, however, he and Elon Musk are the key drivers of what happens in the legislature.

[HighStepper]

The government funding stopgap passed the House on a 366-34-1 vote. All Democrats except one — Rep. Jasmine Crockett (Texas), who voted present — voted yes. On the Republican side, 170 voted yes and 34 opposed the measure.The plan does not include a measure to increase the debt ceiling. Link

The legislation now heads to the Senate which must pass it before 12:01 a.m. to avert a shutdown. Link

[bats]

Trump separately told ABC News that "there won't be anything approved unless the debt ceiling is done with," indicating any spending deal to prevent a shutdown must address the debt limit.

"If we don't get it, then we're going to have a shutdown, but it'll be a Biden shutdown, because shutdowns only [injure] the person who's president," he told ABC News.

"Congress must get rid of, or extend out to, perhaps, 2029, the ridiculous Debt Ceiling. Without this, we should never make a deal. Remember, the pressure is on whoever is president," he wrote on Truth Social. Link
Interesting how Trump is not even president yet, however, he and Elon Musk are the key drivers of what happens in the legislature.

So, despite Trump and Musk's bluster, it does not appear there will be a shutdown, even though the newly agreed-upon bill does not address the debt ceiling.

Here's how the AP characterized the "new" bill:

It's essentially the same deal that flopped the night before in a spectacular setback — opposed by most Democrats and some of the most conservative Republicans — minus Trump's debt ceiling demand.

As someone said, elect a clown, and you can expect a circus.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-government-shutdown-deadline-speaker-johnson-budget-da117337aa0c0adab34a5626bb5816af

[dogwalker]

Is the thread subject being asked as a question to members, but lacking the question mark?

If so, I would choose to raise the debt ceiling.  I feel a government shut down would not be good.  Thankfully neither happened this time and it's all go, uhhhh, until March.

By the way, contrary to what news media would like many to think because they throw around words like debt ceiling without explaining exactly what it really means, debt ceiling in the recent news does not refer to the total national debt.  (Lately there seems to be little limit to that!)  It refers to money allocated in the last annual budget which was approved months ago.  My understanding is the debt ceiling (per budget) is more relevant for the next fiscal year budget and yeh Trump may want to spend a lot in the future but why let that hold up the current budget which is already approved?  So in this case I actually agree with Trump that it is a bit of an antiquated feature.  With each budget Congress can decide whether to spend more at that time and not impose limits on a future budget when no one knows what may be required in the future.  Yeh spending should be limited but limiting it in advance does not quite seem like the best approach to me.  When the future arrives deal with it then.

What I do not understand and perhaps I may do some investigation about it someone here can explain it: why  was it claimed raising the debt ceiling would "endanger Social Security and Medicare" as the news media phrased it.  Naively I would think raising a debt limit could allow more money to be spent which could then allow more to (potentially) be spent on Social Security and Medicare.  I'm missing something.

[thaikhan]

Is the thread subject being asked as a question to members, but lacking the question mark?

If so, I would choose to raise the debt ceiling.  I feel a government shut down would not be good.  Thankfully neither happened this time and it's all go, uhhhh, until March.

By the way, contrary to what news media would like many to think because they throw around words like debt ceiling without explaining exactly what it really means, debt ceiling in the recent news does not refer to the total national debt.  (Lately there seems to be little limit to that!)  It refers to money allocated in the last annual budget which was approved months ago.  My understanding is the debt ceiling (per budget) is more relevant for the next fiscal year budget and yeh Trump may want to spend a lot in the future but why let that hold up the current budget which is already approved?  So in this case I actually agree with Trump that it is a bit of an antiquated feature.  With each budget Congress can decide whether to spend more at that time and not impose limits on a future budget when no one knows what may be required in the future.  Yeh spending should be limited but limiting it in advance does not quite seem like the best approach to me.  When the future arrives deal with it then.

What I do not understand and perhaps I may do some investigation about it someone here can explain it: why  was it claimed raising the debt ceiling would "endanger Social Security and Medicare" as the news media phrased it.  Naively I would think raising a debt limit could allow more money to be spent which could then allow more to (potentially) be spent on Social Security and Medicare.  I'm missing something.

Some people just like hearing the sound of their own voice and then scream and cry to dismiss what everyone says. In order to appease people like this, you can't just repeat what they said, you have to aviso record what they said and play it back to them so that they can hear the sound of their own voice

[Zep]

Thanks to fiscally responsible Congressmen, the debt ceiling was not raised into the far future.  We need the debt ceiling fight to ensure we check ourselves as a nation, and not spend recklessly. 

Trump want's no checks on his plans to increase spending dramatically while at the same time cutting taxes for the wealthy.  He knows that the national debt will skyrocket, but he considers that someone else's problem down the road.  Similar to his failed business adventures, Trump wants to spend spend spend without constraints. If his business (US Economy) goes belly up, he'll move on with cash in his pockets as will the rest of the billionaires in America and we will be left holding the empty bag. 

[bats]

By the way, contrary to what news media would like many to think because they throw around words like debt ceiling without explaining exactly what it really means, debt ceiling in the recent news does not refer to the total national debt.  (Lately there seems to be little limit to that!)  It refers to money allocated in the last annual budget which was approved months ago.  My understanding is the debt ceiling (per budget) is more relevant for the next fiscal year budget and yeh Trump may want to spend a lot in the future but why let that hold up the current budget which is already approved?  So in this case I actually agree with Trump that it is a bit of an antiquated feature.  With each budget Congress can decide whether to spend more at that time and not impose limits on a future budget when no one knows what may be required in the future.  Yeh spending should be limited but limiting it in advance does not quite seem like the best approach to me.  When the future arrives deal with it then.

What I do not understand and perhaps I may do some investigation about it someone here can explain it: why  was it claimed raising the debt ceiling would "endanger Social Security and Medicare" as the news media phrased it.  Naively I would think raising a debt limit could allow more money to be spent which could then allow more to (potentially) be spent on Social Security and Medicare.  I'm missing something.

The debt ceiling is a limit on the cumulative amount of federal debt. I think you're suggesting that Congress tends to suspend it or increase it only on a short-term basis. So, yes, in a practical sense, it has become a short-term issue.

Ironically, when the debt limit was first instituted in 1917, it was part of a law that made it easier for the government to borrow money so we could pay the bills of World War I.

People say that raising the debt ceiling could endanger Social Security and Medicare because, they theorize, the more debt we accumulate, the less flexibility we'll have to meet the massive obligations under those programs. As you've also suggested, however, the debt ceiling isn't a way to control spending.