So the same Conservatives who wanted us to default...

[Zander]

I am sick of people calling the current tax rates "the bush tax cuts". They are the Obama tax rates. He extended them. His party controlled the House and Senate when he did it. If these tax rates are so evil, why did Obama extend them?

 

[Dr Grump]

This whole thread is partisan hackery and why Empire America will be no more. The lefties and righties are too concerned about the win to actually try and fix things...

 

[Zander]

This whole thread is partisan hackery and why Empire America will be no more. The lefties and righties are too concerned about the win to actually try and fix things...

No. We are defeating the left. We are going to take back our country and put it back on a sound fiscal path. Government is not your mommy. Personal responsibility is making a comeback.

 

[Dr Grump]

This whole thread is partisan hackery and why Empire America will be no more. The lefties and righties are too concerned about the win to actually try and fix things...

No. We are defeating the left. We are going to take back our country and put it back on a sound fiscal path. Government is not your mommy. Personal responsibility is making a comeback.

Unrestrained capitalism is what caused this problem in the first place. You need to cut spending (defense anybody??) but you also need to regulate the Wall St speculators...

 

[The_GiantNoodle]

are now acting as if the credit downgrade is a disaster,

and it's Obama's fault?

Seriously? Did they really think default would not also lead to a credit downgrade??

Didn't they think that default would be no big deal? That we'd just pay the interest and everything would be fine??

Dont you know? Everything GOOD is due to Republicans and everyting NEGATIVE is Obamas fault.

Its frustrating. I like many conservative stances but these dumb ass Hannity want-to-bes make it sooooooo hard to like conservatives.

 

[Oldstyle]

I never said they "wanted" a default as in they had nefarious intent. I said that not voting to raise the debt ceiling was a vote for default.

There were numerous issues that led to the downgrade. to include political bickering. It's disingenuous to act as if the issue was simply a matter of not cutting enough (though that was also part of it).

Either way, as the compromise was an 11th hour attempt at preventing default and downgrade, voting against it was a vote for an economic hit.

Bachmann knew that. She just made a political vote that enabled her to sit back and say "I told you so". As if she had a workable alternative that had a snowball's chance in hell of passing.

Even other Teapartiers, like Alan West, came to the senses on the issue and realized that they had to compromise.

It's absurd. Bachmann is still a backbencher in the house. She's an irrelevant minority that acts out of pure political self interest. She always has.

Though, considering her blank check vote for the Bush administration's imperial foreign policy, I am glad she found her fiscal responsibility.

Bachmann calls for deeper cuts and votes against the compromise.

Standard & Poors tells us they're looking for 4 trillion in cuts or our bond rating will be in danger of being downgraded and when we cut less than 2 trillion they do downgrade us.

So explain to me why Bachmann calling for deeper cuts was "political"? If you follow that logic then S & P's downgrade must be "political" as well. The truth is that Bachmann's resistance to the compromise and S&P's downgrade are both based on the same glaringly obvious fact...we are spending way too much money and need to fix our government.

Bachmann voted against her party because she had that luxury. She knew it wouldn't change the outcome, so she got ot make a purely political vote. "Deeper cuts" was a non-starter just as was "repealing the Bush tax breaks".

She staked her position on being an obstructionist simply because it was politically expedient.

BTW, S&P cited five reasons for the downgrade. Chief among them was the political atmosphere in Washington. They also cited that the Bush era tax credits weren't repealed. Saying this came about simply because we didn't cut enough is simply wrong.

Standard & Poors did NOT say they were downgrading us because the Bush tax cuts weren't repealed. They downgraded us because we didn't address the deficit crisis sufficiently. They don't actually seem to care HOW we cut the deficit...only that we made a good faith effort to do so. They don't care if we address the debt crisis just by raising taxes on everyone across the board OR by just cutting spending, or having a combination of the two. What they CARED about was us doing next to nothing to address the deficit while we once again raised the debt limit. They wanted 4 trillion in debt reduction...they got less than two. They told us they might lower our rating unless we addressed the problem and we failed to do so.

What we have here are two issues...

One issue is that we didn't do anything to address the real problem with the deficit...unfunded entitlements. Those were made untouchable by the Progressives.

The other issue is employment. Sure we "could" satisfy the bond rating agencies by raising taxes as part of a deficit reduction plan but as most economists not working for this White House will tell you...raising taxes in a weak economy is a recipe for bringing that economy to a screeching halt. President Obama finally figured that out before the last election when his Democratic support for tax increases for people making over $200,000 per year evaporated. It wasn't Republican roadblocks that stopped them from letting the Bush tax cuts expire...it was Democrats that knew what that would mean economically and wanted no part of it.

 

[Neotrotsky]

This whole thread is partisan hackery and why Empire America will be no more. The lefties and righties are too concerned about the win to actually try and fix things...

No. We are defeating the left. We are going to take back our country and put it back on a sound fiscal path. Government is not your mommy. Personal responsibility is making a comeback.

Unrestrained capitalism is what caused this problem in the first place. You need to cut spending (defense anybody??) but you also need to regulate the Wall St speculators...

Unrestrained?
Give me a break

Maybe in the local barber shop
But with the major business, no way


Our system has been for decades a crony capitalist system that depends on large business and gov't working together to promote their individual goals.

Profit for companies and power/money for politicians

 

[The_GiantNoodle]

This whole thread is partisan hackery and why Empire America will be no more. The lefties and righties are too concerned about the win to actually try and fix things...

No. We are defeating the left. We are going to take back our country and put it back on a sound fiscal path. Government is not your mommy. Personal responsibility is making a comeback.

You know there are good things on BOTH sides of the aisle. If people could pull themselves from the propaganda pushers for a while and think for themselves MAYBE this Nation will survive and even thrive.

 

[The_GiantNoodle]

Unrestrained?
Give me a break

Maybe in the local barber shop
But with the major business, no way


Our system has been for decades a crony capitalist system that depends on large business and gov't working together to promote their individual goals.

Profit for companies and power/money for politicians

Actually small and midsized business are the heros of the economy. Alas the lobbyists and large campaign contributors are the ones buying our politicians on both sides of the aisle.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Unrestrained?
Give me a break

Maybe in the local barber shop
But with the major business, no way


Our system has been for decades a crony capitalist system that depends on large business and gov't working together to promote their individual goals.

Profit for companies and power/money for politicians

Actually small and midsized business are the heros of the economy. Alas the lobbyists and large campaign contributors are the ones buying our politicians on both sides of the aisle.

True enough, they also create most of the jobs

I know you don't agree
But our gov't should be promoting the environment for true competition
not be acting as some feudal lord handing out "gifts"

 

[Modbert]

Boehner himself said he got 98% of what he wanted and he was happy. Yet somehow this is all Obama's fault.

 

[Modbert]

Also, for those who don't know what's going on at home:

If we didn't raise the debt ceiling, our credit rating would have been lowered. S&P threatened to lower it to a D. So while yes, our credit rating did go down, it would have been a lot worse if we didn't raise the debt ceiling.

 

[Zander]

Also, for those who don't know what's going on at home:

If we didn't raise the debt ceiling, our credit rating would have been lowered. S&P threatened to lower it to a D. So while yes, our credit rating did go down, it would have been a lot worse if we didn't raise the debt ceiling.

Link?

 

[geauxtohell]

Standard & Poors did NOT say they were downgrading us because the Bush tax cuts weren't repealed. They downgraded us because we didn't address the deficit crisis sufficiently. They don't actually seem to care HOW we cut the deficit...only that we made a good faith effort to do so. They don't care if we address the debt crisis just by raising taxes on everyone across the board OR by just cutting spending, or having a combination of the two. What they CARED about was us doing next to nothing to address the deficit while we once again raised the debt limit. They wanted 4 trillion in debt reduction...they got less than two. They told us they might lower our rating unless we addressed the problem and we failed to do so.

What we have here are two issues...

One issue is that we didn't do anything to address the real problem with the deficit...unfunded entitlements. Those were made untouchable by the Progressives.

The other issue is employment. Sure we "could" satisfy the bond rating agencies by raising taxes as part of a deficit reduction plan but as most economists not working for this White House will tell you...raising taxes in a weak economy is a recipe for bringing that economy to a screeching halt. President Obama finally figured that out before the last election when his Democratic support for tax increases for people making over $200,000 per year evaporated. It wasn't Republican roadblocks that stopped them from letting the Bush tax cuts expire...it was Democrats that knew what that would mean economically and wanted no part of it.

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......

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. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our
view, the differences between political parties have proven to be
extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting
agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program
that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently.......

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. It appears that for now, new revenues have
dropped down on the menu of policy options. In addition, the plan envisions
only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements,
the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key
to long-term fiscal sustainability.

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.

The act calls for as much as $2.4 trillion of reductions in expenditure
growth over the 10 years through 2021. These cuts will be implemented in two
steps: the $917 billion agreed to initially, followed by an additional $1.5
trillion that the newly formed Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit
Reduction is supposed to recommend by November 2011. The act contains no
measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee
could recommend them.

http://www.standardandpoors.com/ser...lobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8

As noted. It was that the cuts weren't deep enough and their is no serious consideration of raising additional revenue (through taxes).

As much as the Tea Party tries to claim that this is completely due to the fact that the cuts were half of what S&P wanted to see, that's only one piece of the puzzle.

In reality, the largest factor was that Washington is so septic that it almost allowed the U.S. to default, and despite the morons that insist we wouldn't go into default by not raising the debt ceiling, S&P is not so sure:

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.

 

[Modbert]

Link?

S&P Would Lower U.S. Credit Rating to D on Failure to Increase Debt Limit - Bloomberg

Standard & Poor’s would cut the U.S. credit rating to its lowest level and Moody’s Investors Service said it will probably reduce its ranking if the government fails to increase the debt limit, leading to a default.

S&P would lower its sovereign top-level AAA ranking to D, the last rung on its scale if the U.S. can’t pay its debt, John Chambers, chairman of the company’s sovereign rating committee, said today. Moody’s said it would probably assign a position in the Aa range, or within three steps of its highest level

“If any government doesn’t pay its debt on time, the rating of that government goes to D,” Chambers said today in an interview with Erik Schatzker on Bloomberg Television’s “Inside Track”. “Having said that, we think the government will raise the debt ceiling. They’ve raised it 78 times more or less since 1960, often at the last moment, and we think that will be the case this time.”

 

[Trajan]

This whole thread is partisan hackery and why Empire America will be no more. The lefties and righties are too concerned about the win to actually try and fix things...

No. We are defeating the left. We are going to take back our country and put it back on a sound fiscal path. Government is not your mommy. Personal responsibility is making a comeback.

Unrestrained capitalism is what caused this problem in the first place. You need to cut spending (defense anybody??) but you also need to regulate the Wall St speculators...

I agree that glass-steagell certainly helped a great deal in adding fuel to the fire, BUT I notice you didn't mention gov.....?

defense has been cut gump, troops, planes, carrier grps etc. I don't see any entitlement cuts?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Link?

S&P Would Lower U.S. Credit Rating to D on Failure to Increase Debt Limit - Bloomberg

Standard & Poor’s would cut the U.S. credit rating to its lowest level and Moody’s Investors Service said it will probably reduce its ranking if the government fails to increase the debt limit, leading to a default.

S&P would lower its sovereign top-level AAA ranking to D, the last rung on its scale if the U.S. can’t pay its debt, John Chambers, chairman of the company’s sovereign rating committee, said today. Moody’s said it would probably assign a position in the Aa range, or within three steps of its highest level

“If any government doesn’t pay its debt on time, the rating of that government goes to D,” Chambers said today in an interview with Erik Schatzker on Bloomberg Television’s “Inside Track”. “Having said that, we think the government will raise the debt ceiling. They’ve raised it 78 times more or less since 1960, often at the last moment, and we think that will be the case this time.”

Not to split hairs,

but you implied it would lower to D if not raised immediately
His statement does have the qualifier "If any government doesn't pay its debt on time..."

Technically, the debts still could have been paid without raising the debt ceiling
It would not have been pretty; but it could have been done.


I had no problem with raising the debt ceiling.
I am only making a point on the statement

 

[geauxtohell]

Link?

S&P Would Lower U.S. Credit Rating to D on Failure to Increase Debt Limit - Bloomberg

“If any government doesn’t pay its debt on time, the rating of that government goes to D,” Chambers said today in an interview with Erik Schatzker on Bloomberg Television’s “Inside Track”. “Having said that, we think the government will raise the debt ceiling. They’ve raised it 78 times more or less since 1960, often at the last moment, and we think that will be the case this time.”

Not to split hairs,

but you implied it would lower to D if not raised immediately
His statement does have the qualifier "If any government doesn't pay its debt on time..."

Technically, the debts still could have been paid without raising the debt ceiling
It would not have been pretty; but it could have been done.


I had no problem with raising the debt ceiling.
I am only making a point on the statement

Have you read the actual report. It's only 8 pages. You can find it at my link. In the report, there is little doubt that failing to raise the debt ceiling would have been disastrous and lead to default.

 

[Neotrotsky]

S&P Would Lower U.S. Credit Rating to D on Failure to Increase Debt Limit - Bloomberg

Not to split hairs,

but you implied it would lower to D if not raised immediately
His statement does have the qualifier "If any government doesn't pay its debt on time..."

Technically, the debts still could have been paid without raising the debt ceiling
It would not have been pretty; but it could have been done.


I had no problem with raising the debt ceiling.
I am only making a point on the statement

Have you read the actual report. It's only 8 pages. You can find it at my link. In the report, there is little doubt that failing to raise the debt ceiling would have been disastrous and lead to default.

perhaps
but that is not what this is about


My point still stands
Did I miss the part where he said it would "immediately and automatically lower it to D"
only on the condition of not raising the debt ceiling ?


Again, I believe we should have raised the debt ceiling
and I agree it would have been ugly had we not

this is about the statement itself only
nothing else

the original poster statement should have said
more of

"If we didn't raise the debt ceiling and defaulted on our debts, S&P threatened to lower it to a D" instead of

"If we didn't raise the debt ceiling, our credit rating would have been lowered. S&P threatened to lower it to a D"
implies an automatic and immediate action.

 

[Oldstyle]

This downgrade isn't about the debt ceiling

This downgrade is about Standards & Poor believing that the current leaders of the United States of America do not have enough political courage to take the necessary steps to lower the deficit.

It's time to cut the bullshit, folks. We know the Federal Government is a bloated, inefficient entity that is wasting money like no other organization in the history of mankind. Instead of playing the "blame game" and trying to make political hay by accusing others of hating old people or the poor simply because they make straight forward suggestions on how to reform S.S. or Medicare it's time we really addressed the core problem. We need to drastically shrink the size of government in this country. We either do so...or the behemoth we have created will literally eat us out of house and home.