the text of S&Ps statement, they blame republicans

So here's what everyone knows and what business owners have always known.

If you are working through a debt problem, you need to do two things if at all possible: Cut spending and raise revenues (Yes, that's what you call raising taxes - gasp!).

The Dems have been willing to cut some spending that will make little or no difference in our debt.
The Republicans have been willing to cut some spending that will make little or no difference in our debt.
The GOP has presented a plan that is worthless.
The Dems have presented no plan at all.
Both sides just passed a defense budget that increases spending in the one area where we really had a lot of room to move.
So BOTH sides are full of sh*t, when it comes to reducing spending in any real way.

But S&P did make it clear that while both sides are willing to do almost nothing about spending, the GOP refusal to INCREASE TAXES, was the leading factor in their downgrade. Oh well, crap. I'm sure the Right will find a way to spin this back on Obama. The president sucks. No doubt about it. But this one isn't his alone or even his primarily.
No one likes taxes. I've never lived in a country where people said "Hooray for taxes!". But they are how a government gets its money. Yes there is waste and yes we can all stomp our little feeties over the waste. Boo hoo. For now, BOTH sides need to man up and do things they don't like.
"leading factor"?

Nope.
 
So here's what everyone knows and what business owners have always known.

If you are working through a debt problem, you need to do two things if at all possible: Cut spending and raise revenues (Yes, that's what you call raising taxes - gasp!).

The Dems have been willing to cut some spending that will make little or no difference in our debt.
The Republicans have been willing to cut some spending that will make little or no difference in our debt.
The GOP has presented a plan that is worthless.
The Dems have presented no plan at all.
Both sides just passed a defense budget that increases spending in the one area where we really had a lot of room to move.
So BOTH sides are full of sh*t, when it comes to reducing spending in any real way.

But S&P did make it clear that while both sides are willing to do almost nothing about spending, the GOP refusal to INCREASE TAXES, was the leading factor in their downgrade. Oh well, crap. I'm sure the Right will find a way to spin this back on Obama. The president sucks. No doubt about it. But this one isn't his alone or even his primarily.
No one likes taxes. I've never lived in a country where people said "Hooray for taxes!". But they are how a government gets its money. Yes there is waste and yes we can all stomp our little feeties over the waste. Boo hoo. For now, BOTH sides need to man up and do things they don't like.
"leading factor"?

Nope.

Okay. Let's water it down for those who can't bear not to place every bit of blame possible on Obama / Dems: A factor then. Would you deny that? Maybe that sentence was like a really big long typo?
 
Now that I agree with. We were not going to default. But that is because the assholes in DC were playing games. They were bound and determined to raise the debt ceiling hours before default. There was no threat.

As for progressives and stopping their handouts: well, not that they would, but if they can make it seem like that is what Conservatives and Republicans want to do then the Democrats and Progressives reap the benefits.

Immie

Don't get me wrong - I have no problem with "safety nets" as limited programs... However, today these programs are being severely abused. We shouldn't have 35 year old grandmothers and third generation welfare recipients.

The government shouldn't be paying scientists to promote "global warming."

The government shouldn't be granting money to anyone, and quite frankly if they insist on grants those receiving them names should be published online and the people should have privy as to what they're doing for those grants.

As a libertarian thats opposed to the majority of government actions is that not too much to ask??

Well speaking as one who has found himself in a long term unemployment situation... yes Virginia, age discrimination is a fact... I have to say that I have always believed that government should not allow its citizens to starve. Then again, they should not be buying them brand new refrigerators, cars, computers etc. etc. etc. either. I'm not opposed to things like Welfare although I think Welfare needs major overhauls and should become a tool to put people to work rather than a reason not to work. And for the record, I am not on Welfare... but I am beginning to fear the possibility. My retirement plan is quickly disintegrating.

Oh and further for the record, I do not consider myself progressive in the least. I look more at myself as a compassionate conservative, but Bush, quite frankly made that term out to be a joke.

However, you are right, in times like this the government needs to bite the bullet and make some drastic cuts. They had damned well better do something or what we will end up with is major economic collapse in the likes that will make the Carter years seem like a walk in the park.

Immie

The reason why many older folks are out of work is because of the WOTC (work opportunity tax credit).

Which supports the hiring of those under 24, minorities, and females (despite the fact they're a majority) and felons.

Democrats have a big problem with the white male..... Apparently we have done something they don't like.

That bullshit bias bullshit was the product of the progressives.

That is the progressives playing games and attempting to dictate outcome.

Then they get bent when I call them authoritarians.
 
I started to type a lengthy response about why the claim in the OP is dirty horse manure...but I decided not to waste my time with a lost cause. Enjoy the company of your fellow dung beetles!
 
That's okay, but if you have a link to those agencies it might help everyone see what you meant.

I asked why you thought what you did. I did not say you were wrong. I agree in some respects, but I have not done the research as to whether or not today is more strict (growth wise) than under Eisenhower, but now I see more about what you meant. Definitely the anti-business philosophy of our current "leaders" is IMHO hurting our growth.

Immie

The DOJ , FDA and EPA........

LOL,

I thought you were going to pull out a link of the massive governmental department boondoggles! I thought maybe you were like TDM and didn't know how to open up a separate tab so that you could link to the site without posting first and then editing your post.

Forgive me for that! :lol:

Immie

There is more than just that - the ATF is another one.
 
Don't get me wrong - I have no problem with "safety nets" as limited programs... However, today these programs are being severely abused. We shouldn't have 35 year old grandmothers and third generation welfare recipients.

The government shouldn't be paying scientists to promote "global warming."

The government shouldn't be granting money to anyone, and quite frankly if they insist on grants those receiving them names should be published online and the people should have privy as to what they're doing for those grants.

As a libertarian thats opposed to the majority of government actions is that not too much to ask??

Well speaking as one who has found himself in a long term unemployment situation... yes Virginia, age discrimination is a fact... I have to say that I have always believed that government should not allow its citizens to starve. Then again, they should not be buying them brand new refrigerators, cars, computers etc. etc. etc. either. I'm not opposed to things like Welfare although I think Welfare needs major overhauls and should become a tool to put people to work rather than a reason not to work. And for the record, I am not on Welfare... but I am beginning to fear the possibility. My retirement plan is quickly disintegrating.

Oh and further for the record, I do not consider myself progressive in the least. I look more at myself as a compassionate conservative, but Bush, quite frankly made that term out to be a joke.

However, you are right, in times like this the government needs to bite the bullet and make some drastic cuts. They had damned well better do something or what we will end up with is major economic collapse in the likes that will make the Carter years seem like a walk in the park.

Immie

The reason why many older folks are out of work is because of the WOTC (work opportunity tax credit).

Which supports the hiring of those under 24, minorities, and females (despite the fact they're a majority) and felons.

Democrats have a big problem with the white male..... Apparently we have done something they don't like.

That bullshit bias bullshit was the product of the progressives.

That is the progressives playing games and attempting to dictate outcome.

Then they get bent when I call them authoritarians.

"Apparently we have done something they don't like."

You mean like grow up and mellow out? ;)

Immie
 
That is a quote, fire up some of those brain cells in between your ears.
Problem is you have a history of posting one little piece of an article to support your views. when looking at the whole article usually proves how wrong you are. If you can't stop lying shut up.
 
That is a quote, fire up some of those brain cells in between your ears.
Problem is you have a history of posting one little piece of an article to support your views. when looking at the whole article usually proves how wrong you are. If you can't stop lying shut up.
When asked about her intellect, TM said that she has no "brain cells in between" her ears.

It's a DIRECT quote, so it has to be true. Right? ;)
 
For the nitwit that started this thread, S&P did not only blame Republicans. They blamed Congress in general. Yes, they mentioned Republicans by name as they rightly should have in reference to the revenue raising issue. I, too, think Republicans are wrong on this small part of the issue

However that one sentence you pull out of the middle of the article is only part of the reason for the downgrade. Here let me point out the full reason for the downgrade and something else that you totally ignore in your partisan half-truths (emphasis added):

The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.

More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions 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.

Fiscal Irresponsibility is the problem. All around fiscal irresponsibility

You will note that they say Congress (which is made up of Republicans and Democrats) and the Administration (which is completely Democrat). Current "American Policy making" also lies under the control of the Democrats as they control the executive branch and the Senate.

You, TDM, hand pick one sentence out of the entire story taken out of context and assign a meaning to it in your title other than what it actually meant simply to further your agenda of dividing this nation.

Without a doubt Republicans are partially responsible for the downgrade. They share responsibility with the Democrats.

And by the way, to everyone else, this downgrade is not a major catastrophe. It is a statement by a well respected institution that grades credit worthiness of creditors stating that they see a problem with American politics and its economy. Nothing more than that. What I want to know is what the hell took them so long? With the increase in debt that happened two years ago after the stimulus plan followed shortly by the health care fiasco, they should have been squawking then. In reality, they should have been squawking no later than when we went into Iraq and Afghanistan without means to fund those wars.

S&P is right to downgrade America's creditworthiness. If they want to remain a reliable institution, they have no choice.

I have not read all of this but here is something that some of you should actually read and consider. It talks about what credit ratings are, how they are determined and the different ratings themselves:

http://www2.standardandpoors.com/spf/pdf/media/GuidetoCreditRatingsCriteria.pdf

And maybe look at the different ratings? AA is the second highest rating and they rated the US as AA+. So what they are saying is that America is still a damned good credit risk but they are not as confident as they once were.

Since most of you seem unable to understand what happened with the downgrade, let me point you away from the Huffington Post and to S&P itself. There appear to be some good articles on the U.S. debt crisis right there. No, I have not read them:

Standard & Poor's - Understanding Ratings

Republican partisans are saying this is a historic event and likening it to major disasters because it is the first time the US has been downgraded and they lay all the blame at the President's feet and claim that for this reason we should elect someone different (a Republican of course) next year. Guess what guys, This downgrade has very little to do with the President's abilities, very little. The blame goes to both parties for their insipid bickering and their unwillingness to become fiscally responsible.

For the record, based upon what S&P said about the potential of further downgrading, I would urge you all to be prepared for the inevitable. The idiots that run this country are not yet going to change their ways. You should expect further downgrading in the years to come regardless of who controls the White House in 2013.

My question is: is it unreasonable to expect a BBB rating in the future?

Immie
 
Last edited:
Only if we dont raise taxes to cover our debt while we trim the budget in a smart way.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top