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.
S&P's biggest problem with us is that they don't think we have a plan to address entitlement spending and THAT is the single biggest driver of future deficits.
aH THE WHAT IF ARGUMENT, THAT MUST ASSUME NO OTHER MEASURES WOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN. Greenspan said quite clearly we could just print money.
That worked well for the Weimar Republic. Tell me, do you gripe about inflation too?
All that aside, I notice no one wants to address the disastrous game of financial chicken that the TP caucus wanted us to undertake.
The point is your premise is built on what ifs.
aH THE WHAT IF ARGUMENT, THAT MUST ASSUME NO OTHER MEASURES WOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN. Greenspan said quite clearly we could just print money.
That worked well for the Weimar Republic. Tell me, do you gripe about inflation too?
All that aside, I notice no one wants to address the disastrous game of financial chicken that the TP caucus wanted us to undertake.
Just curious, Geaux...if the Tea Party's calls for fiscal sanity is tantamount to "financial chicken"...then how would you describe the failure of Democrats to address unfunded entitlement spending that is projected to be 300% of our GDP in twenty years?
That worked well for the Weimar Republic. Tell me, do you gripe about inflation too?
All that aside, I notice no one wants to address the disastrous game of financial chicken that the TP caucus wanted us to undertake.
The point is your premise is built on what ifs.
Of course, and the hypocrisy of the TP in hiding behind the fact that they didn't get their way. If the S&P downgraded us because we even reached a crisis on the debt ceiling, then how bad would it have been if we wouldn't have raised it?
Now tell me why the TP has any moral high ground on this issue?
That worked well for the Weimar Republic. Tell me, do you gripe about inflation too?
All that aside, I notice no one wants to address the disastrous game of financial chicken that the TP caucus wanted us to undertake.
Just curious, Geaux...if the Tea Party's calls for fiscal sanity is tantamount to "financial chicken"...then how would you describe the failure of Democrats to address unfunded entitlement spending that is projected to be 300% of our GDP in twenty years?
"Fiscal sanity" is a broad term and no single entity (to include the TP) owns it. It would have been fiscally insane to not raise the debt ceiling. The report notes that. We were taken off of credit watch because the debt ceiling was raised. How bad would it have been if August 2nd lapsed without a deal? I think the President knew how bad it was, and that is why he signed a deal that was lopsided in the GOP's favor ("98% of what we wanted!"). Allowing the us to potentially default (which is what I call financial chicken) is not fiscal sanity.
There is more than one path to fiscal sanity.
Since you don't want to address the OP, then I'll extend you the courtesy of answering your questions. We are going to have to figure out a way to pay for our entitlements or simply end them if we can't do that. That's a large issue that the American people need to be given the option to weigh in on. It's not something that needs to be done during an 11th hour Hail Mary bill that is trying to keep us solvent.
Furthermore, both parties have their problems on this. What do you think about the GOPs penchant to fight two wars on credit and loan from other countries as opposed to simply paying for them upfront? Yeah, that goes into the deficit too.
The debt crisis was precipitated by the failure of Democrats to accept basically the same bill six months earlier. That is fact. Also, when progress was starting to be made the week before the deadline, Obama suddenly wants MORE tax increases. Again, a Democratic failure of epic proportion.
The debt crisis was precipitated by the failure of Democrats to accept basically the same bill six months earlier. That is fact. Also, when progress was starting to be made the week before the deadline, Obama suddenly wants MORE tax increases. Again, a Democratic failure of epic proportion.
Why should they have accepted that bill 6 months ago, when they had a better one in the works? Basically the TPers held the country hostage to a poice of paper they signed and settled for ~1 trillion in cuts only, when the could have had 3-4 by simply agreeing to the closing of about 1 trillion in loopholes. What were those supposed tax increases, anyway? Sounds like you're playing with words at the country's expense!!!
The greatest irony of the aftermath of the debt downgrade is that the Tea Party, and most notably Michele Bachmann, have claimed political victory on the matter. To listen to Congress Woman Bachmann, the downgrade was the result of "not cutting enough" and steadfastly refused to vote to raise debt ceiling. That's about 20% right. Upon reading the S&P report, it's clear that allowing August 2nd to pass without raising the debt would have led to a larger downgrade and unlike spending cuts (which can be further addressed at a later date), the debt ceiling had a hard deadline and once that boat sailed, it would have been too late to fix the mess.
The S&P indicated in their report that the largest reason for the downgrade was the fact that there was even a debate about raising the debt ceiling before the deadline and that their fears that it wouldn't be raised in the future due to political brinksmanship.
As much as they would like to claim otherwise, the Teaparty certainly doesn't have any high ground on the issue. No so ironically, if the teaparty had gotten their way and not raised the debt ceiling, the downgrades would have been much worse.
We have taken the ratings off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by delays to raising the government's debt ceiling. In addition, we believe that the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course of U.S. fiscal policy for the next few years.
Pushing Rope: Standard and Poors Places United States on Credit Watch
Not raising the debt ceiling would have been a frigging disaster. We don't have to debate it, S&P lays it out in plain English. It's futile to debate whether we would have really defaulted if the debt ceiling wouldn't have been raised. S&P and other credit agencies are in the business of predicting adverse events before they happen. They don't take a "wait and see" attitude on the matter. Not raising the debt ceiling is a sign of bad faith (like not paying off your credit card minimum).
The compromise was far from perfect, but it got us off credit watch.
More from the article:
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.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/af2c4fac-bfc2-11e0-90d5-00144feabdc0.pdf
In other words, the absurd "self inflicted wound" that was the debt ceiling "crisis" is exactly what led to this. The problem is that the Tea Party doesn't compromise, and Washington is built on compromise. Even when their own party brokered a deal that gave them "98% of what they wanted"* many of them (with some notable exceptions - thank you Allen West) still voted against it, to include Michele Bachmann, who wants to run the entire country.
The compromise wasn't perfect, but it likely staved off a financial meltdown. The TP ironically gets to sit back and throw stones because they didn't get their own way. If they had, we would be in an economic disaster right now.
As it stands, S&P is the only credit firm that handed us a minor downgrade and that was controversial unto itself with many analysts calling "foul". Moody's reaffirmed the AAA rating, and Fitch* just reaffirmed it as well after giving it a second look.
U.S. Sovereign Debt Rating Is Affirmed by Fitch at AAA; Outlook Is Stable - Bloomberg
We can only speculate what would have happened if the TP caucus was more sufficient and able to stymie the process. The American people aren't ignorant of this either. There is a reason the TP has falling in the polls since August 2nd. So the compromise wasn't perfect, but it was a last minute deal that averted a larger crisis.
The Tea Party hasn't proven that it possesses the adult leadership necessary to work across the aisle to take the measures necessary to right our financial ship. Tell me again why these people need to be given the keys to the kingdom?
*
Read more: Obama Announces Debt-Reduction Deal Approved by Senate, House Leaders - FoxNews.comHouse Speaker John Boehner told his Republican caucus on a Sunday night conference call that the deal isn't done yet. But Boehner said it does not violate GOP principles.
"We got 98 percent of what we wanted," he said adding that the framework cuts more spending than it raises the debt limit. It also caps future spending to limits in the growth of government."
PAYGO!!!...What the hell ever happened to SanFranNan's precious PAYGO?!?!?!The debt crisis was precipitated by the failure of Democrats to accept basically the same bill six months earlier. That is fact. Also, when progress was starting to be made the week before the deadline, Obama suddenly wants MORE tax increases. Again, a Democratic failure of epic proportion.
PAYGO!!!...What the hell ever happened to SanFranNan's precious PAYGO?!?!?!The debt crisis was precipitated by the failure of Democrats to accept basically the same bill six months earlier. That is fact. Also, when progress was starting to be made the week before the deadline, Obama suddenly wants MORE tax increases. Again, a Democratic failure of epic proportion.
Republicans got rid of it so George W. Bush could give the rich what they needed most.
Mo' Money.
Ifs funny how you liberals like to blame the Tea Party for taking it to the last minute, when Dems at any time could of agreed to some real cuts.
It never even enters your partisan mind that Democrats share in the blame for the stalemate. They have proven that they are not willing to make any cuts, with or without tax increases.
The Democrat position was 'Raise taxes or else we default'.
PAYGO!!!...What the hell ever happened to SanFranNan's precious PAYGO?!?!?!The debt crisis was precipitated by the failure of Democrats to accept basically the same bill six months earlier. That is fact. Also, when progress was starting to be made the week before the deadline, Obama suddenly wants MORE tax increases. Again, a Democratic failure of epic proportion.
Republicans got rid of it so George W. Bush could give the rich what they needed most.
Mo' Money.
PAYGO!!!...What the hell ever happened to SanFranNan's precious PAYGO?!?!?!
Republicans got rid of it so George W. Bush could give the rich what they needed most.
Mo' Money.
VS The dem plan of how to make mo money without using YO money.
Ifs funny how you liberals like to blame the Tea Party for taking it to the last minute, when Dems at any time could of agreed to some real cuts.
It never even enters your partisan mind that Democrats share in the blame for the stalemate. They have proven that they are not willing to make any cuts, with or without tax increases.
The Democrat position was 'Raise taxes or else we default'.
Economics 101.
Taking money out of a fragile economy does what?
A. Creates wonderous new opportunities that the private sector will just jump on and instantly start creating jobs.
B. Creates a cyclical effect when lay offs take place as a result, because in an economy thats Consumer based, people actually have to have money to use to by stuff. If stuff doesn't get bought then the Consumer based economy collapses.
Republicans got rid of it so George W. Bush could give the rich what they needed most.
Mo' Money.
VS The dem plan of how to make mo money without using YO money.
Which is the answer to what?
The poster asked what happened to Paygo.
The answer is the Republicans got rid of it. Why?
Tax cuts would not have been possible.
The point is your premise is built on what ifs.
Of course, and the hypocrisy of the TP in hiding behind the fact that they didn't get their way. If the S&P downgraded us because we even reached a crisis on the debt ceiling, then how bad would it have been if we wouldn't have raised it?
Now tell me why the TP has any moral high ground on this issue?
What? They wanted cuts and a sound plan moving forward. Hiding is not how I would describe it. Now the president is on the trail using tid bits from them.
I find your position a bit strange.
PAYGO!!!...What the hell ever happened to SanFranNan's precious PAYGO?!?!?!
Republicans got rid of it so George W. Bush could give the rich what they needed most.
Mo' Money.
Of which Dems promised to go by PAYGO in 2007. Of course that lasted about 10 mintues.
Of course, and the hypocrisy of the TP in hiding behind the fact that they didn't get their way. If the S&P downgraded us because we even reached a crisis on the debt ceiling, then how bad would it have been if we wouldn't have raised it?
Now tell me why the TP has any moral high ground on this issue?
What? They wanted cuts and a sound plan moving forward. Hiding is not how I would describe it. Now the president is on the trail using tid bits from them.
I find your position a bit strange.
They also didn't want to raise the debt ceiling. That would have been a disaster.
