-
Downgraded to AA+
Posted by Unknown Member on August 5, 2011 at 7:09 pmYou can thank your dirtbag politicians for this one.
kayla.meyer_144 replied 3 years, 4 months ago 8 Members · 71 Replies -
71 Replies
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 5, 2011 at 8:15 pmThanks [link=http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/08/05/why-the-sp-downgrade-was-delayed/]TEABAGGERS[/link] –
Firstly, talk of debt-to-GDP ratios and the like is a distraction. You can gussy up your downgrade rationale with as many numbers as you like, but at heart its a political decision, not an econometric one.
Secondly, the US does not deserve a triple-A rating, and the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with its debt ratios. Americas ability to pay is neither here nor there: the problem is its willingness to pay. And theres a serious constituency of powerful people in Congress who are perfectly willing and even eager to drive the US into default. The Tea Party is fully cognizant that it has been given a bazooka, and its just itching to pull the trigger. Theres no good reason to believe that wont happen at some point.
And here, straight from the S&P release-
Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 5, 2011 at 8:44 pmNobody,
You’re dishonest.
Here are additional details to balance your BS.
From Standard & Poors:
Standard & Poor’s takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue
measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate
for putting the U.S.’s finances on a sustainable footing.When comparing the U.S. to sovereigns with ‘AAA’ long-term ratings that
we view as relevant peers–Canada, France, Germany, and the U.K.–we also
observe, based on our base case scenarios for each, that the trajectory of the
U.S.’s net public debt is diverging from the others. Including the U.S., we
estimate that these five sovereigns will have net general government debt to
GDP ratios this year ranging from 34% (Canada) to 80% (the U.K.), with the
U.S. debt burden at 74%. By 2015, we project that their net public debt to GDP
ratios will range between 30% (lowest, Canada) and 83% (highest, France), with
the U.S. debt burden at 79%. However, in contrast with the U.S., we project
that the net public debt burdens of these other sovereigns will begin to
decline, either before or by 2015.The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate
fiscal scenario illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently
assume could lead us to lower the long-term rating again.RVU,
This may have happened on Obama’s watch and although he certainly ignored this mess, he is not the only guilty party. Reagan, Bush Sr and Jr, Clinton and Congress all played a role in running up this massive debt.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 2:13 amWHo cares?
Japan lost AAA status ten years ago, and they’re still doing fine.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 5:52 amPut all the spin on it you wish. We are in deep canine feces. Can’t blame this one on Bush. Who can the ‘bamer blame now ? I know, Polesi, Reed, Frank, Chuck, and himself.
-
ORIGINAL: SadRad
WHo cares?
Japan lost AAA status ten years ago, and they’re still doing fine.
Actually, you are probably right on.
There are not a lot of choices around for people around the world to flee to safety. Germany? Not with the EU crumbling. China? No one, even the Chinese, know what their debt is worth.
So the irony is that this probably doesn’t change much, simply because the rest of the world sucks too.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 8:11 am
Yes, Republicans deserve blame as well. But please, any one of you saying only one side or another deserves blame for this is an ignorant hack.
Maybe we should all call ourselves “moderates” yet regurgitate GOP talking points?
-
-
-
-
ORIGINAL: nobody2008
Thanks [link=http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/08/05/why-the-sp-downgrade-was-delayed/]TEABAGGERS[/link] –
Firstly, talk of debt-to-GDP ratios and the like is a distraction. You can gussy up your downgrade rationale with as many numbers as you like, but at heart its a political decision, not an econometric one.
Secondly, the US does not deserve a triple-A rating, and the reason has nothing whatsoever to do with its debt ratios. Americas ability to pay is neither here nor there: the problem is its willingness to pay. And theres a serious constituency of powerful people in Congress who are perfectly willing and even eager to drive the US into default. The Tea Party is fully cognizant that it has been given a bazooka, and its just itching to pull the trigger. Theres no good reason to believe that wont happen at some point.
And here, straight from the S&P release-
Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.
You could confiscate the entire incomes of all the ‘millionaires and billionaires’ making more than $200k per year and it would add up to maybe 1/2 of our deficit this year. You could cut the entire defense budget and that would add up to roughly the same. We need to cut whole departments at this point, and social service spending needs to be drastically altered. Block grants for medicaid, major alterations in medicare, etc. These programs are swallowing the federal budget and no reasonable level of taxation will correct that.
Here are a few things that would help job growth —
1) freeze the regulatory environment
2) repeal Obamacare and institute step-by-step health financing reforms in a graded fashion
3) significantly cut the corporate tax rate
4) provide deep targeted tax breaks for small businesses, particularly technology / manufacturing companies that utilize US manufacturing resources. This is the only place job growth is going to come from.There is a fundamental misunderstanding or misrepresentation of tax policy by this administration. The accelerated depreciation for corporate jets was a targeted subsidy for the aviation manufacturing sector, for better or worse. Eliminating this is actually in whole or part a $3 billion tax on the guys making the airplanes, who are not rich. Likewise, all sorts of ‘luxury’ taxes like those on yachts only served to hurt the associated sectors of the US manufacturing industry. If I make boats, I am already ‘taxing’ the rich the way they choose to be taxed. If the government steps in with additional taxes, all it does is makes me less competitive and hurts my bottom line. I lay off workers, none of whom are rich. The rich spend their money elsewhere. It is a complex ecology. Changes rarely have the intended consequences, which is why knee-jerk policies designed to make the rich ‘pay their fair share’ usually just end up hurting working folks. Liberals rarely understand this because you have to be a fiscal conservative at heart to run a successful business; that is, a business that creates jobs and products and adds net value to the economy.
Ultimately, though, nobody in this administration has any business experience, and it shows. It really isn’t a Republican or Democrat thing fundamentally. It is an incompetence issue. Obama literally thinks the government creates jobs. The business community is going to sit on its hands until this guy is out of office and the bizarre, spiraling, and unknowable regulatory and tax policy environment he created are flushed down the drain of history.
-
-
It’s official-Obama is a dilettante as president. This is on Obama’s watch, 2 1/2 years into his presidency. I dont think rating boards downgraded the quality of our bonds/country on Mr. Bush’s, Reagan’s, Nixon’s or any other republican boogeyman libs can cite. Embarrassing. Pathetic.
Mr. President- Hope you enjoy the weather on Martha’s Vineyard and frolic with your limo lib friends this weekend!!![/align]
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 7:45 am
ORIGINAL: RVU
It’s official-Obama is a dilettante as president. This is on Obama’s watch, 2 1/2 years into his presidency. I dont think rating boards downgraded the quality of our bonds/country on Mr. Bush’s, Reagan’s, Nixon’s or any other republican boogeyman libs can cite. Embarrassing. Pathetic.
Mr. President- Hope you enjoy the weather on Martha’s Vineyard and frolic with your limo lib friends this weekend!!![/align]
Hah. As if McConnell, Boehner, and Bachman had nothing to do with this.
-
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 6:48 ampresident holds multi-million dollar gala birthday party while the jobs and economy of our nation fall apart.
we might as well make him a monarch the way he behaves. when he recovers from his party hangover, he will say the only way out of this is to tax the rich.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 7:35 amThe public and market watchers are blaming the GOP. Sounds about right to me. I’d add blame to the Dems and Obama for being wishy washy and not leaning on the baggers during the “debate”. Now they risk pissing off the liberal base, such that it is, needed for electioneering.
-
ORIGINAL: nobody2008
The public and market watchers are blaming the GOP. Sounds about right to me. I’d add blame to the Dems and Obama for being wishy washy and not leaning on the baggers during the “debate”. Now they risk pissing off the liberal base, such that it is, needed for electioneering.
S&P blames everyone for their OWN downgrade. But I know facts do not effect you.
Everyone had to do with this. Reagan. Clinton (housing standards laxity) Bush for the tax cuts and wars. And Obama for not having a clue that this was coming. Remember…Obama proposed a budget that would have blown this deficit to kingdom come JUST MONTHS AGO…proving he is a follower, not a leader.
Frankly, the irony for those attacking the Tea Party is that we had the discussion only because of them. Without them, Obama would have been completely blindsided. He NEVER talked about the deficit reduction before the Tea Party won last year.
Yes, Republicans deserve blame as well. But please, any one of you saying only one side or another deserves blame for this is an ignorant hack.
-
ORIGINAL: MISTRAD
Frankly, the irony for those attacking the Tea Party is that we had the discussion only because of them. Without them, Obama would have been completely blindsided. He NEVER talked about the deficit reduction before the Tea Party won last year.
You’re correct in your assertion here, and it needs to be heard more. Most of the democrats are unreformed and unapologetic spenders, in particular the ‘progressive caucus’. When a political movement confronts the danger posed by the progressive caucus and their unwavering mandate of ever-expanding government, there is friction. It doesnt change the fact that under Obama, America’s government is now for the first time in a non-WWII time economy spending greater than 25% GDP, ongoing into the foreseeable future.
I hope that all politicians from every party get the message now NOT to look to government to spend, spend spend like the 111th congress did. We dont need spritzed up airport fronts , walkways or lounges, 10s of billions in tax breaks to green technologies that are tragically inefficient or just plain do not work, buoy just about every union legacy benefit around, expanded entitlements as Obamacare, and a forward military force in every continent.
Obama would have never stopped the 111th congresses gluttony. Never. Now with the downgrade, I guess Obama can now have a press conference with a large “mission accomplished” banner behind him.
Never has there been such an condescending ideologue as President. At least Carter had the ability to be reflective and at times humble about his failures.
[/align]
-
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 8:31 am
ORIGINAL: nobody2008
The public and market watchers are blaming the GOP.
You must be high as a kite.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 8:33 am
ORIGINAL: BarelyPassed
ORIGINAL: nobody2008
The public and market watchers are blaming the GOP.
You must be high as a kite.
No, I read the S&P release. Wasn’t high at that moment. Or this one.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 9:27 am
ORIGINAL: nobody2008
No, I read the S&P release. Wasn’t high at that moment. Or this one.
If you had truly read the S&P release, you would have seen these comments:
[size=”3″]The downgrade reflects our opinion that [b]the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to [b]falls short of [/b][b]what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s [/b][b]medium-term debt dynamics.[/b][/b]
More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that [b]the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions [b]have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.[/b][/b]
[b]We could lower the [/b][b]long-term rating to ‘AA’ within the next two years if we see that less [/b][b]reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new [/b][b]fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government [/b][/size][b][size=”3″]debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case[/size].[/b]
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 9:30 amYour second paragraph doesn’t exactly shore up your point.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 11:13 amThere are also these comments, which seem to point to the influence of Tea Party political posturing and opportunism on both the GOP’s position and the tenor of the debate (i.e. if the ceiling had simply been raised as a matter of course the way it has been in the past, no alarm would have been registered by S&P)
“We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that [b]the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling [/b]and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process,”
The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America’s governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy….. Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on more comprehensive measures. [b]It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options. [/b]
Of course, there are others who believe that basically this was really just retribution by a rating agency for having been spanked by the administration for the ’08 collapse — appropriately, but ever since, their bitterness has been seeking an outlet.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 12:12 pmBoth the House of Representatives Cut / Cap & Balance bill and the Ryan Plan would have prevented the downgrade. S&P was clear that they wanted to see spending reductions of at least $4T. The Senate Democrats chose to refuse any meaningful spending cuts … so the downgrade is what they got from the apolitical rating houses. This is exactly what the Tea Party warned would happen. Don’t blame the messenger, blame the protagonists of the runaway spending.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 8:49 pm
ORIGINAL: aldadoc
Both the House of Representatives Cut / Cap & Balance bill and the Ryan Plan would have prevented the downgrade. S&P was clear that they wanted to see spending reductions of at least $4T. The Senate Democrats chose to refuse any meaningful spending cuts … so the downgrade is what they got from the apolitical rating houses. This is exactly what the Tea Party warned would happen. Don’t blame the messenger, blame the protagonists of the runaway spending.
This is the only high person around here. The CCB bill was pure fantasy land fairy dust stupid. And it wasted time and distracted from things that might avert the downgrade. I’m glad alda will stand up and count himself among the know nothing do nothing fools who forced America into this mess. Nice work, dummy.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 10:53 pmHopefully this seals Obama’s fate as a one termer – he is a terrible leader.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 11:10 pmNobody – I hate to tell you I told-you-so, but I did. This scenario was telegraphed from a long way back. Anyone who had their eyes (and their minds) open could see the downgrade coming. CCB and/or the Ryan plan would have prevented the downgrade, but like an alcoholic or a drug addict, the big spender first needs to come to terms with the problem, before he’ll seek help. I’m sure that in short time order we will be seriously discussing CCB again as a serious consideration, either with or without a Democrat Senate. The liberal Tax and Spend agenda is dead on arrival, so give up the ghost. Keynes, Trotsky, Samuelson and their ilk will be relegated to the pile of irrelevance for another 25 years.
This is not just my opinion. Here’s what the world thinks:
[i]”The decision by credit agency Standard and Poors to downgrade Americas AAA credit rating for the first time in 70 years is a massive blow to the credibility of the Obama administration, and a damning indictment of its handling of the economy. No doubt the White House will pathetically try to blame the Bush Administration, Republicans in Congress, and of course its favourite target, the Tea Party, for the move by S&P. But without a shadow of a doubt, responsibility for the countrys financial mess and staggering levels of debt lie with the current US president and his administration. They have been in charge of running the economy for over 30 months, during which time the United States has witnessed an unprecedented increase in government spending and borrowing.”[/i]
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100099762/americas-debt-downgrade-is-a-damning-indictment-of-president-obamas-big-government-disaster/Putin: Americans “living like parasites off the global economy and their monopoly of the dollar”
http://www.blanchardonline.com/investing-news-blog/econ.php?article=3031China bluntly tells US to end its “addiction” to debt.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia-pacific/china-bluntly-tells-us-to-end-its-addiction-to-debts/2011/08/06/gIQABGJ9xI_story.html -
Doesn’t seem like most of you actually read the S&P report, but only news reports. You should…
-
Nice Alda, I am glad you find the views of Putin (did you look into his soul?) and China to be worthy for this discussion. Fine lets let them shape our policy although i think they both have the host parasite relationship backward
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 7, 2011 at 6:40 pmFunny
The original poster a few weeks ago was saying default didn’t matter, is now angry at politicians for letting our debt get downgraded
I don’t get it. Did you get your talking points mixed up?
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 7, 2011 at 8:41 pm
ORIGINAL: kpack123
Funny
The original poster a few weeks ago was saying default didn’t matter, is now angry at politicians for letting our debt get downgraded
I don’t get it. Did you get your talking points mixed up?
I have consistently argued that the debt has gotten out of control. Spending needs to be cut. Taxes will then have to be raised as well (once Congress shows that it’s capable of cutting spending).
Your claim (along with Obozo, Reid, Pelosi, Turbo TaxCheat, mass media) of default was nothing more than scare tactics. There was NO real threat of immediate default. Fools like you just don’t believe in cutting entitlement spending. If the debt ceiling hadn’t been raised, the debt obligations would still have gotten paid but Congress would have been FORCED to cut spending.
That farce of a debt ceiling agreement did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to address the underlying problem: the DEBT.
This downgrade had nothing to do with the debt ceiling itself. If you even bother to read (if you know how), you’ll find that this was nothing more than a warning shot from S&P to get the politicians to get serious.
If you can’t understand that difference, I seriously wonder how you made it into radiology (perhaps it was much easier back in the day) and I feel sorry for your patients.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 7, 2011 at 11:53 pm
ORIGINAL: BarelyPassed
If you can’t understand that difference, I seriously wonder how you made it into radiology (perhaps it was much easier back in the day) and I feel sorry for your patients.
that’s a pretty cheap ad hominem
-
I love the definition of political leadership.
Go back to 2010. Look at how our leaders would have us go forward.
Liberals lead by Obama said we should have a blank check raising of the debt ceiling, without any cuts.
Tea Partiers proposed heavy cuts.
The liberal plan would have led to a downgrade. The Tea Party plan would have avoided it.
We are where we are, but let us be clear….Democrat leadership, if unopposed, would have lead us to this same result.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 6:29 amMistrad
You are again mischaracterizing this debate for political reasons
Here is what happened
The democrats wanted some tax increases and little or no cuts to entitlements
The tea party republicans wanted no tax increase no tax increase no tax increase and spending cuts
The ratings agency saw through the disingenuous nature of each party and doubts the ability of the current idealogs on each side to get anything done so they downgraded us
It’s that simple
What eventually needs to happen and will happen is the deems will win on tax increases the republicans will win on entitlement cuts
Everything else is spin
-
Tell me, kpack…what was Obama’s deficit reduction plan at the time of his state of the union? That is not a mischaracterization.
You lead going into the future…not dragged by the other party. It really IS simple. If Obama had led the debate 6 months ago, I wouldn’t be surprised if we did get some tax increases along the lines of Simpson Bowles…which I supported. Obama instead led from behind, or whatever the White House called it, and got railroaded.
Simply put…Obama’s plan at the state of the union would have put us in a WORSE position than we are in today. That is a fact. Your spin can deny it all you want.
Now, should Republicans have accepted tax increases? I would have accepted the $800B-$1 Trillion number. But we never knew what was in that plan. Actually, even TODAY we don’t know what was in that plan. So it is spin to say you know what was in it, when you don’t.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 7:20 amMISTRAD makes the same basic mistake as the talking heads on TV – mistaking the “debt ceiling” for the budget. Two different things.
And BarelyPassed once again shows the extremist wingers here whine about civility but dish out ad hom when they get cornered. Boo frickin’ hoo.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 7:24 amThe corporate tax rate in the US is 39.5%. The corporate tax rate in other AAA rated countries averages 27.5%. This is how they attract business/growth. We should look at growing out of our debt, rather than taxing ourselves out of debt. The effect of repealing the Bush/Obama tax cuts on the upper tax brackets pales in comparison to the multiplier effect of robust growth. Our current GDP growth is an anemic 0.9%. We should be focused on GDP expansion.
The Democrats pooh pooh the the effect of the regulatory strangle hold they have placed on the economy, but it is significant. Talk to any CEO and you will hear the same concerns. The way forward must include a repeal of Obamacare, immediate clarification, streamlining and/or partial repeal of the financial regulation bill, a huge rollback of the EPA, signing the trade agreements with Korea, Colombia etc., opening up drilling in the Gulf and in ANWAR, a moratorium on the new coal plant restrictions, lowering the corporate tax rate, allowing a one-time corporate exemption/amnesty to bring capital back to the US, sending a strong action signal to the markets that we are serious about spending cuts such as adopting CC&B. Stop the excessive partisan speechefying about taxing the wealthy, it is demoralizingly hollow and divisive.
Short of doing all of this, we can look forward to continued sluggish growth and another credit rating cut, until the Democrats are thrown out of the White House and Senate.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 7:34 amDecrease COLA for Social Security recipients. Raise full retirement age to 70.
Enact the Ryan plan for Medicare.
Make an estate tax at 15% for estates above 10 million
Increase taxes on personal AGR above 1 million to 39.6% so that it will pass Congress.
Cut the mortgage tax deduction.
Decrease the corporate tax rate.The Democrats already got their tax increase with Obamacare.
-
[link=https://kvia.com/news/business-technology/cnn-business-consumer/2021/07/13/americas-deep-political-fissures-could-cost-the-country-its-perfect-credit-rating/]https://kvia.com/news/bus…perfect-credit-rating/[/link]
Fitch warns that it could downgrade US credit rating if our democracy continues its decline:
In light of developments since the last review and future risks, a deterioration in governance represents a further risk to the rating, Fitch Ratings said in the report.
Although Fitch reaffirmed Americas AAA credit rating, it said that could change due to rising debt levels and the state of politics in the worlds largest economy.
The failure of the former president to concede the election and the events surrounding the certification of the results of the presidential election in Congress in January have no parallels in other very highly rated sovereigns, the report said.
-
another good example of politicians just fudging everything up.
-
The question should be “which politicians?” because the answer is that we have the example of the country being all fudged up by the voters, as if there is no difference between them.
What I am struck by is the level of many of the 10 y/o old arguments in this thread. “Parochial” is giving many of these arguments a lift and compliment.
The worst thing is that is is not accurate to say things haven’t changed because they have. The present reality is much worse and has zero to do with Fitch, it has to do with a selective bunch of politicians and voters. And considering Fitch’s worries at the time, their predictions of doom about the increased debt ceiling weren’t exactly prescient. -
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 6:21 amThe downgrade had everything to do with the debate over the debt ceiling. So again I’m not sure which taking points you are getting confused. You first state default doesn’t matter and you are mad at everyone because our debt got downgraded by one level
Well rockafeller uhmmmmm if we defaulted their would have been a much larger downgrade.
You made comments also about how you feel sorry for my patients. Well a radiologist must not have tunnel vision and a good radiologist can see the forest from the trees
I suggest you rethink your calling
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 8:00 am
ORIGINAL: kpack123
The downgrade had everything to do with the debate over the debt ceiling. So again I’m not sure which taking points you are getting confused. You first state default doesn’t matter and you are mad at everyone because our debt got downgraded by one level
I know you’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer so let me detail it step by step.
1. S & P warned of a downgrade earlier in the year.
2. S & P warned again when debate started that they need to see AT LEAST 4 trillion in deficit reduction.
3. The jokers in Washington ignored the raters, bickered for months and managed to get only 2 trillion.
4. S & P downgraded and issued another warning for future downgrade.
Even a clean raise of the ceiling to 25 trillion wouldn’t have prevented this.
Again, let me spell it out for you since I know it’s tough for you to process. It’s the DEBT, not the debt ceiling. Who’s missing the trees for the forest now?
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 8:56 am[b]Again, let me spell it out for you since I know it’s tough for you to process. It’s the DEBT, not the debt ceiling. Who’s missing the trees for the forest now?[/b]
I know in your mind you think you are the smartest tool in the shed but you are not
It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
See what I mean you can’t distinguish the forest from the trees. -
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 8:59 am
ORIGINAL: kpack123
[b]Again, let me spell it out for you since I know it’s tough for you to process. It’s the DEBT, not the debt ceiling. Who’s missing the trees for the forest now?[/b]
I know in your mind you think you are the smartest tool in the shed but you are not
It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
See what I mean you can’t distinguish the forest from the trees.
Ahh but I’ve already discussed this issue as well.
Ability to service the debt are based on debt outstanding, interest rate and revenues.
Debt is skyrocketing.
Interest rates remain relatively fixed.
Revenues have been declining.Again, you do the math. If simple arithmetic is too difficult for you, perhaps one of your techs can help.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 9:26 amI need to keep things simple because I am not as smart as you think you are so again
[b]It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
[/b]
[b]
[b]It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
[/b]
[b]
[b]It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
[/b]
[b]
[b]It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
[/b]
[b]
[b]It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
[/b]
[b]
[b]It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
[/b]
[b]
[b]It is not the debt it is the ability to manage the debt
[/b]
[/b][/b][/b][/b][/b][/b] -
Kpack is right…it is the ability to manage the debt.
Obama has not shown any ability to manage the debt, as his state of the union speech shows. In fact, he was blind to the debt all together. Until the Tea Party raised it as an issue, it was not on Obama’s radar AT ALL. And Democrats are even worse, with many arguing when the debt ceiling was passed that a clean debt ceiling increase would be better, because they believed there was no debt problem at all.
So kpack is right. But it only indicts Obama’s incompetence as a leader even more.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 9:42 am
ORIGINAL: MISTRAD
Kpack is right…it is the ability to manage the debt.
Ability to manage the debt is dependent on
1) debt oustanding
2) interest rate
3) revenuesWhen revenues and interest rates are flat, and the debt skyrockets, the interest expenses also skyrocket. The interest eats a bigger chunk of your budget.
Your ability to service that debt diminishes as the debt and interest mount and compound. This is why people with big credit card balances get killed.
why is that so difficult to understand?
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 9:47 am[b]So kpack is right. But it only indicts Obama’s incompetence as a leader even more.[/b]
[b][/b]
I’d lump both parties in there as well as Obama
I think the dems need to give on entitlements and the republicans need to give on taxes for high income earners. If congress would have done this we would not have been downgraded
We were downgraded because the rating agency doesn’t think we have a plan in place to actually confront the realities of our economic future. Everyone in the world knows that our political system has been hijacked by extremist from each side and they don’t think we can work together to get anything done.
We have met the enemy and it is us. -
The GOP passed a bill which would have avoided this.
Show me any written plan that Dems would have accomplished the same.
Democrats did not even believe there was a debt crisis last year.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 9:53 am[b]The GOP passed a bill which would have avoided this. [/b]
[b][/b]
But it didn’t get passed by congress so it doesn’t matter
You are chest thumping when you need to compromise.
This is not about winning an argument. It is about getting together and solving a crisis.
As I said We have met the enemy and it is us.
[b][/b]
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 10:03 am
ORIGINAL: kpack123[b][/b]
[b][/b]
I’d lump both parties in there as well as ObamaI think the dems need to give on entitlements and the republicans need to give on taxes for high income earners. If congress would have done this we would not have been downgraded
We were downgraded because the rating agency doesn’t think we have a plan in place to actually confront the realities of our economic future. Everyone in the world knows that our political system has been hijacked by extremist from each side and they don’t think we can work together to get anything done.
We have met the enemy and it is us.
omg
i actually agree with kpack on this one.
the world must be coming to an end.
-
I don’t think I am chest thumping. I would have voted for Bowles Simpson.
It is unfortunate the President didn’t support his own commission.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 10:30 am
ORIGINAL: MISTRAD
I don’t think I am chest thumping. I would have voted for Bowles Simpson.
It is unfortunate the President didn’t support his own commission.
Bowles Simpson would have been a good step. At least the commission recognized the scope of the problem.
Unfortunately, special interests killed the recommendations on arrival. This includes Obama, Republicans and Democrats alike. Can’t blame Obama alone.
I’m very glad for the SP downgrade. It’s been a long time coming. At least finally someone is forcing Washington to focus on controlling the debt (Debt = 100% of GDP, deficit 10% of GDP).
-
Totally agree with that. I wish we could have avoided the downgrade, but frankly, nothing is going to convince people that spending is the problem faster than this downgrade.
-
But according to the tea party downgrade didn’t matter in fact several posters here made the same pronouncement. It was the whole reason why “default” didn’t matter. Now that it has happened Repubs are changing their tune
-
Again, you make the mistake of showing the Tea Party as a unified voice…they are nothing of the sort. Everything time you do that, you simply show your ignorance.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 2:39 pm
ORIGINAL: Thor
But according to the tea party downgrade didn’t matter in fact several posters here made the same pronouncement. It was the whole reason why “default” didn’t matter. Now that it has happened Repubs are changing their tune
Of course default matters. On the other hand, the threats of “default” (note the quotation marks because we still have adequate funds to pay those debt obligations even if the ceiling wasn’t raised) by the liberals are nothing more than a scare tactic.
This downgrade normally would matter a great deal. But the bond market seems to have digested this news in stride. Given the dire situation in Europe, there’s a flight to quality, in this case, US treasury. Our debt may not be as highly-rated as before but it still sucks less than the rest of the world.
Keep up with this shenanigan of massive deficit spending and watch the interest rates really rise.
-
Exactly right, BP. Stocks got crushed…but treasuries, which should have logically gotten buried, actually held their own. The market is looking at the terrible economy a lot more than the downgrade, it appears.
Let us now downplay how bad the downgrade is…but the economy still overshadows everything.
-
“Again, you make the mistake of showing the Tea Party as a unified voice…they are nothing of the sort.”
Then why you speak of them as a singular group. I love how people fit the tea party to support whatever they believe at the moment. As a group the tea party with their agitating has driven the economy to the brink, risked and damaged our credit rating and forced a bad debt deal when they could have had 4 trillion in debt reduction. They are a bunch of Grover Norquist sycophants who then try to use the title to appear more enlightened only to claim they are something else every time their destructive nature on the economy is called out. Shed spending and jobs seems to be the only unifying principal maybe with a little trickle down voodoo sprinkled in. They believe in the antithesis of growth and are the stooges of the corporate plutocracy driven by Freedom Works and the Koch bros who have an agenda far different than what the “tea party” thinks. Never have so many acted against their self interest or the country’s interest; yet happily their ranks are at 18% and falling. Hopefully this is the end of their bankrupt ideology. It is no accident that the economy began its downfall when these knuckleheads started spouting off -
The same way I lump Democrats into one group, and you point out that many disagree with Obama….they are still one group. Are a married couple no longer married because they don’t agree on everything?
Give me a break.
As for financial interests, we would have avoided this downgrade if we had listened purely to the tea part. And we would STILL have had the downgrade if we would have listened to Democrats.
Democrats are the ones that have done more to damage our self interests more than anyone.
As for knuckleheads and economic downfall…every time Obama speaks the market drops. Today it was by a measly 200 points. Knucklehead in chief, indeed.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 4:54 pm
ORIGINAL: MISTRAD
Democrats are the ones that have done more to damage our self interests more than anyone.
Republicans are just as guilty. This has been going on for decades under the stewardship of both Democrats and Republicans.
As I’ve said all along, the politicians, elite and well-connected always benefit at the expense of the disappearing middle class.
On a tangent —
One good thing about today: the filth buried under the banks’ TARP are beginning to rot through.
-
No, BP, you are right in general. Republicans definitely did more than their share to get us into this mess. I just think that people need to wake up to the debt as a REAL problem.
Good point about the banks. I think for the most part many of our TARP investments have been sold, which is a good thing.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 4:48 pmThor,
You really like using the tea party movement as your scapegoat.
Were they responsible for the dot-bomb bubble?
Were they responsible for the ensuing recession when that bubble popped?
Were they responsible for loose lending policies used to escape that bubble and the attendant real estate bubble?
Were they responsible for the ensuing recession when said bubble popped?
Were they responsible for subsequent stimuli (ZIRP/QE/dollar devaluation) and the commodity bubble?
Were they responsible for papering over the rotting bank assets a la TARP?
Were they responsible for massive government deficit spending to bail out various entities?BTW, are you at UCSF? LOL
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 7:09 pmI seem to remember the original starter of this thread said a few weeks ago that default didnt matter. In fact it was said by the same individual that even if we defaulted we would still pay our bills and if we didn’t it would be obamas fault
You can’t have it both way here. You preached to all of us a few weeks ago that default did matter and that threatsvof a default didn’t even matter
Well the markets are falling off a cliff because of a perceived possibility of default down the road
You are not that smart
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 8, 2011 at 7:12 pm
ORIGINAL: kpack123
I seem to remember the original starter of this thread said a few weeks ago that default didnt matter. In fact it was said by the same individual that even if we defaulted we would still pay our bills and if we didn’t it would be obamas fault
You can’t have it both way here. You preached to all of us a few weeks ago that default did matter and that threatsvof a default didn’t even matter
Well the markets are falling off a cliff because of a perceived possibility of default down the road
You are not that smart
Show where I said default didn’t matter. Your definition of “default” is where Obama and Congress doesn’t cut spending. Sorry, that doesn’t fly.
And how is it possible to default and still pay all the bills? Your logic is lousy at best.
The markets are falling off a cliff because valuations have been built on a house of cards.
No, I’m not that smart. But even on a bad day where I’m half doped up and half drunk, I’m still smarter than you. Seriously, dude, next time you read studies, ask your techs for some help.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 9, 2011 at 5:23 am[b]But even on a bad day where I’m half doped up and half drunk, I’m still smarter than you.[/b]
That comment pretty much says everything anyone needs to know about you.
Delusional, loudmouth and not that bright.
-
ORIGINAL: kpack123
[b]But even on a bad day where I’m half doped up and half drunk, I’m still smarter than you.[/b]
That comment pretty much says everything anyone needs to know about you.
Delusional, loudmouth and not that bright.
Unfortunately that can be said about most of us on here.
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 18, 2011 at 6:26 am
ORIGINAL: Frumious
NJ downgraded to AA- from AA by Fitch.
Not surprising. What I’m surprised by is that it took this long and states like CA haven’t been downgraded.
And France.
-
Illinois should be on junk status. California close to it.
-
-
-
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 12:43 pm
ORIGINAL: itchn2help
There are also these comments, which seem to point to the influence of Tea Party political posturing and opportunism on both the GOP’s position and the tenor of the debate (i.e. if the ceiling had simply been raised as a matter of course the way it has been in the past, no alarm would have been registered by S&P)
You’re trying to pin this on the Tea Party?
What it boils down to is a massive, uncontrolled debt. The US got downgraded because of our spiraling debt. DEBT. Familiarize yourself with that word.
At least the Tea Party raised more awareness of that problem.
You jokers got what you wanted: a raise in the debt ceiling. Why did we still get downgraded? What’s that again?
DEBT.
-
Wrong again. All the rating agencies care about is ability to pay, just like the credit cards. It was being brought to the brink of not paying obligations that is what move ratings and certainly more than the debt number. If a clean debt ceiling was passed back in May, there is no way this happens.
Which would you rather have someone with lots of debt and pays every month or someone with little debt but never pays? Think about it.
Besides Barely why should you care, the raters are just another glorified group of banksters….-
[link=http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/a_timeline_of_events031362.php]http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/a_timeline_of_events031362.php[/link]
And Bruce what do you think happened to the money spent on Obama’s birthday (even if overly ostentatious)? Would it have been better if he spent nothing?? -
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 3:29 pm
ORIGINAL: Thor
[link=http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/a_timeline_of_events031362.php]http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/a_timeline_of_events031362.php[/link]
And Bruce what do you think happened to the money spent on Obama’s birthday (even if overly ostentatious)? Would it have been better if he spent nothing??
if you count the people who have given up looking for work, over 20% of americans don’t have jobs while the president throws himself a million-dollar birthday party.
the level of opulence he surrounds himself with is insulting to the level of poverty he is presiding over and at a total disconnect with the “common man” he seems to aspire to compare himself to.
we aren’t some third world country where us common citizens push handcarts through the streets while the generalissimo lives in a golden palace… -
Unknown Member
Deleted UserAugust 6, 2011 at 7:36 pm
ORIGINAL: Thor
Wrong again. All the rating agencies care about is ability to pay, just like the credit cards. It was being brought to the brink of not paying obligations that is what move ratings and certainly more than the debt number. If a clean debt ceiling was passed back in May, there is no way this happens.
Which would you rather have someone with lots of debt and pays every month or someone with little debt but never pays? Think about it.
Besides Barely why should you care, the raters are just another glorified group of banksters….
*sigh*
Ability to pay depends on payment requirements (debt burden, interest rates) and revenues. Interest rates remain relatively fixed. Debt burden skyrockets while revenues have been dropping. You do the math.
If a clean raise in the debt ceiling is the only important factor, then you guys essentially got it. Why the ratings downgrade afterwards? Is it because the politicians didn’t cut at least 4 trillion in spending as the raters had hoped to see?
No, raters are not glorified banksters. They’re corrupt and are in cahoots with banksters (and governments). They’re rotten, but nowhere near as rotten.
Why do I care? It’s about time someone got the attention of the politicians. If anything, the ratings downgrade is a bit late.
Our current deficits are unsustainable. I’d rather take my lumps now than pass it onto my children.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-