Hey, moron, reread my post.
As I pointed out, almost everything the government pays out is 'debt' in one form or another, as in, things it owes people by law. You managed to complete ignore the entire fucking post, and have started yammering about the 14th amendment yet.
The 14th amendment requires that we pay all debt. (Well, not really, but, as I said, I won't argue that.) I will, again, point out as part of the debt we have to pay it gives examples of pensions and bounties. It does not say we have to repay 'bonds', it says we have to repay 'debts'. All of them. Bonds, pensions, bounties, back pay, social security, medicare owed to doctors, all debts.
You, while yammering that we have to repay all debts, have managed to completely fucking ignore is that almost everything is debt.
All those things are, equally, debt, and they have to be paid on time. By law. (And, you assert, by the constitution, to which I say 'Whatever.')
We cannot decide not to pay social security debts because we have bond repayment debts coming up tomorrow. (In fact, under your logic, it would be unconstitutional to try to do that.)
The laws about automatic spending can not be constitutional if the congress does not appropriate funding for it. Otherwise during a budget impass, none of the government would shut down at all.
This is a large part of why, under the budget shutdown, only 13% of the spending stopped, you idiot. Thank you for pretty much proving my point.
You seem to think the government is somehow deciding to spend money in real time, that it pays money and gets things in return.
Uh, no. Like all businesses, it hires people and they work for free for two week (Or however long) and then they get paid. Those people are owed their wages. Those wages are debts the government owes them.
Likewise, the government does not go out and buy bridges. It enters a contract with a company to build a bridge, and then when the bridge is done, the government owes that money.
(I won't argue social security in this post, because that is much more complicated, but people really are owed social security benefits under the law. But even without social security, we're still screwed.)
If we stop raising the debt ceiling, we still owe all that money, and, as you keep insisting, government debts shall not be questioned.
You can yammer about 'Not creating debt' all you want, but the fact is the government has billions and billions of outstanding debt that isn't bonds, right now, already existing, and the government must pay them, which means at some point, many debts payment are going to be missed, including bond repayment.
This is even accepting the dubious preposition it is legal for the president to 'choose' not to make new debt in violation of the laws saying he has to. The constitution says all debts are valid, but it does not logically follow from that 'And thus if the president thinks the government won't pay debts when they come up, he has the power to ignore current law and not create them.'! There's nothing in that amendment about the government not having the power to create debt, or the president to override the creation of debt.
But even in that rather surreal world which gives the president nearly unlimited power, the US would slide over a frozen debt ceiling almost immediately due to fucking payroll, even if the president instantly laid everyone off in violation of the law. (Because, duh, even laid off people get paid for the time they already put in.)
If the debt limit wasn'T increased, it would be a duty of the president to chose which spending continued within the bounds of the capabilities of what is availible.
No, it's not. It's the duty of the president to do what the laws and constitution say.
In the actual world, if Congress has allocated $40 million for a library in Dover, the president (That is, the executive branch, presumably not him personally.) is required by law to actually hire people to build it, even if we're near the debt limit. And when it is built, the executive is required by law (And, you assert, by the constitution) to pay the debt incurred by that. Even if the very next day there are bonds maturing that must be paid.
Not raising the debt ceiling creates some conflicting laws, but a) none of those conflict are in 'creating debt', he has to continue to do that exactly as much as the law requires, and b) if the president is able to follow any of them (For example, if $40 million in revenues) have just come in, he's required to actually follow the fucking law and spend the money. Regardless of whether or not it would have been better to save the money for tomorrow.