Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So your idea of "self analysis and critical thinking" is to watch Neil Cavutos? Well here's mine:
"We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the
prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling 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. We also believe that the fiscal
consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week
falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the
general government debt burden by the middle of the decade."
http://www.standardandpoors.com/ser...lobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8
YOUR A FUCKING IDIOT. I watched the head of S&P just say he warned congress and the president and they ignored him. So your long diatribe is pointless. It's obvious.
CUT THE FUCKING SPENDING STUPID.
Do you fucking read? My "diatribe" is a quote from S&P's downgrade justification. You are unworthy of further debate.
YOUR A FUCKING IDIOT. I watched the head of S&P just say he warned congress and the president and they ignored him. So your long diatribe is pointless. It's obvious.
CUT THE FUCKING SPENDING STUPID.
Do you fucking read? My "diatribe" is a quote from S&P's downgrade justification. You are unworthy of further debate.
You quote an article that has been taken out of context by half the posters on this site. I got it straight from the mouth of the man that made the decision fool.
Debate this:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNmdLHM9deQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player]‪August 6, 2011 11:51 AM‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]
You quote an article that has been taken out of context by half the posters on this site. I got it straight from the mouth of the man that made the decision fool.
Debate this:
‪August 6, 2011 11:51 AM‬‏ - YouTube
And he went on to say that Simpson Bowls and Ryans budget plan could have averted this. Of course you left that out because Obama and the democrats tabled those ideas.You quote an article that has been taken out of context by half the posters on this site. I got it straight from the mouth of the man that made the decision fool.
Debate this:
‪August 6, 2011 11:51 AM‬‏ - YouTube
So when you hear him say:
"The political settings we don't think are as strong as some of the strongest sovereigns that we rate. The most recent evidence for that is the debate we had over raising the debt ceiling and the U.S. government coming within a day of having cash management problems."
I suppose your self-analysis and critical thinking leads you to conclude "holding the debt ceiling hostage was a great idea!"
Sounds almost like:
"We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling 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 Left has increased spending to 25% of GDP
historically it is around 19-20%
We have a spending problem
Gov't spending is like an addiction and the downgrade is the first "intervention" for it
Yours would be a stronger argument if democrats were going to have a rainy day fund. They tried to block those cuts because they wanted to spend every dime.The Left has increased spending to 25% of GDP
historically it is around 19-20%
We have a spending problem
Gov't spending is like an addiction and the downgrade is the first "intervention" for it
The right has reduced tax revenue by 30% since 2000. In 2000, revenue was 20.5% of GDP; this year it is 14.4% of GDP. The ideology that believes tax cuts increase revenue regardless of what level has been proven to be a fallacy, one the right cannot come to grips with.
The difference between you and I is that I can acknowledge that spending is also a problem, and it is just as much of a problem as the loss in revenue is. The problem is that those like you believe that spending is the only problem even with the facts proving otherwise are staring you smack in the face.
HmmmmmmmCBS has both bullet points of S & P's statement, as well as the text of statement here:
S & P statement on U.S. debt downgrade - CBS News
Gramps wins this one, Salt was just going for spin.
We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling 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.
And he went on to say that Simpson Bowls and Ryans budget plan could have averted this. Of course you left that out because Obama and the democrats tabled those ideas.
And he went on to say that Simpson Bowls and Ryans budget plan could have averted this. Of course you left that out because Obama and the democrats tabled those ideas.
"And"? So you're conceding the point that led to your "YOUR [sic] A FUCKING IDIOT" vitriol aimed at Salt Jones?
Although you raise an interesting question: why did Paul Ryan vote against Bowles-Simpson? It would've saved us all!
