• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

United States loses its AAA Credit rating from S & P

Status
Not open for further replies.
upsideguy said:
No, the problem is that we are running big deficits. You fix the deficit by some combination of increasing revenues and decreasing expenses. The single largest contributor to the deficit is the economic slowdown (it took $400B out of government receipts). The problem with cutting expenditures is that is is counter-productive to near-term economic growth (it actually promotes recession by contracting the economy). The problem with Washington is that they refused to even consider tax increases, which was (is) the easiest and least recession promoting way to reduce deficit.
Click to expand...

The best way--most politically profitable way--to increase revenue, is to let people get back to work and stop killing businesses with all the bull**** regulations.
 
winston53660 said:
21.3 isn't better than 22?
Click to expand...

Not included is that when you raise taxes on a group, you usually get changes in financial behavior by that group. Why aren't you suggesting raising taxes again on the Middle Class ? Suspending the Bush Tax Cuts on the middle class. That'll get you $3 trillion :) In 10 years !! Then we're down to 18.3 trillion !! Whoooo Hoooo, eh ?

We have to many people on the gubmit teat. Its a spending problem libs.
 
Thunder said:
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.
Click to expand...


Lets not forget this part...which I think they put first because its the bigger issue.............Obama is gonna own this you can bet on that...and we will all have to pay for this thanks to Obama...
 
Despite only 20% of American's identifying themselves as liberal, the radical left has seized control of the democrat party. So a major problem in American politics is that one of our two political parties has been hijacked by liberals and kook socialists (i.e., the 1960's hippies are now running the democrat party).
 
Eighty Deuce said:
Not included is that when you raise taxes on a group, you usually get changes in financial behavior by that group. Why aren't you suggesting raising taxes again on the Middle Class ? Suspending the Bush Tax Cuts on the middle class. That'll get you $3 trillion :) In 10 years !! Then we're down to 18.3 trillion !! Whoooo Hoooo, eh ?

We have to many people on the gubmit teat. Its a spending problem libs.
Click to expand...

I bet Obama wouldn't have been so quick to inact the drilling moratorium--killing billions in new revenue--if he was legally forced to cut spending with the decreased revenue and had to cut off a few of the trough-heads.
 
Bigkat80 said:
Lets not forget this part...which I think they put first because its the bigger issue.............Obama is gonna own this you can bet on that...and we will all have to pay for this thanks to Obama...
Click to expand...

Oh, lawd! Not an LSU fan.
 
Lol at the small, insignificant liberal cult this message board continuess to evolve into. Really, you are honestly trying to blame this on tea partiers and Republicans who are trying to cut the cancer out of this problem, which is gluttonous spending alone?

This president could not possibly have effed this country up more in two years than he has. EVERYTHING has gotten worse.

It truly is pathetic. The S&P agrees obviously.

You people are dangerous.
 
upsideguy said:
No, the problem is that we are running big deficits. You fix the deficit by some combination of increasing revenues and decreasing expenses. The single largest contributor to the deficit is the economic slowdown (it took $400B out of government receipts). The problem with cutting expenditures is that is is counter-productive to near-term economic growth (it actually promotes recession by contracting the economy). The problem with Washington is that they refused to even consider tax increases, which was (is) the easiest and least recession promoting way to reduce deficit.
Click to expand...

I agree, the 47% of the work force that pays no federal income taxes need to pay their fair share. Moreover, the earned income tax credit needs to be eliminated.
 
We need a Congress, backed by an American public, with a conviction to make the cuts. The Current Congress, while better than the last, is still short of those required numbers. 2012 holds promise that we can make the needed changes. Sorry libs, but that means more Tea Party backed folks, which seems a lock at this point.

And Obama thrown out on his ass. The country will not be mended so long as he is in the WH.

If its any consolation, McCain would not have fixed this mess, although he would have delayed it a bit.
 
Erod said:
Lol at the small, insignificant liberal cult this message board continuess to evolve into. Really, you are honestly trying to blame this on tea partiers and Republicans who are trying to cut the cancer out of this problem, which is gluttonous spending alone?

This president could not possibly have effed this country up more in two years than he has. EVERYTHING has gotten worse.

It truly is pathetic. The S&P agrees obviously.

You people are dangerous.
Click to expand...

LOL! I'm fairly new here, but I've noticed this and that the liberal cult does most of their posting during the day....you know, while normal Americans are working.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
We need a Congress, backed by an American public, with a conviction to make the cuts. The Current Congress, while better than the last, is still short of those required numbers. 2012 holds promise that we can make the needed changes. Sorry libs, but that means more Tea Party backed folks, which seems a lock at this point.

If its any consolation, McCain would not have fixed this mess, although he would have delayed it a bit.
Click to expand...

And Obama thrown out on his ass. The country will not be mended so long as he is in the WH.

Agreed. McCain would have been Bush's 3rd term and the nail in the coffin of the republican party.
 
Alright kiddies, let's get real. The downgrade was caused by the republican's taking the country hostage over the debt limit ... PERIOD. Anyone who is remotely in touch with reality understands that this was insanity, and anyone with a foot on planet earth understands that the deficit situation can only realistically be addressed wtih a combination of spending cuts and revenu hikes. S&P's move was first and foremost a recognition of the fact that one of our two parties has completely lost its fu*king mind, thereby effectively turning the the most powerful nation on earth, the richest nation on earth, the biggest economy on earth, into a half-retarded basket case.

Carry on.
 
AdamT said:
Alright kiddies, let's get real. The downgrade was caused by the republican's taking the country hostage over the debt limit ... PERIOD. Anyone who is remotely in touch with reality understands that this was insanity, and anyone with a foot on planet earth understands that the deficit situation can only realistically be addressed wtih a combination of spending cuts and revenu hikes. S&P's move was first and foremost a recognition of the fact that one of our two parties has completely lost its fu*king mind, thereby effectively turning the the most powerful nation on earth, the richest nation on earth, the biggest economy on earth, into a half-retarded basket case.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

so if the house went along with Geithner's request for a clean debt limit would have been fine with S&P. Not sure if you are lying or just uninformed.
 
AdamT said:
Alright kiddies, let's get real. The downgrade was caused by the republican's taking the country hostage over the debt limit ... PERIOD. Anyone who is remotely in touch with reality understands that this was insanity, and anyone with a foot on planet earth understands that the deficit situation can only realistically be addressed wtih a combination of spending cuts and revenu hikes. S&P's move was first and foremost a recognition of the fact that one of our two parties has completely lost its fu*king mind, thereby effectively turning the the most powerful nation on earth, the richest nation on earth, the biggest economy on earth, into a half-retarded basket case.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

I reckon, in hindsight, Obama killing all those jobs was a bad idea.

It was the private sector, not the government, that made this the richest nation on earth. The Democrats got in the way of that and, well, here we are.
 
washunut said:
so if the house went along with Geithner's request for a clean debt limit would have been fine with S&P. Not sure if you are lying or just uninformed.
Click to expand...

That is a helluva toss up, huh?
 
apdst said:
I reckon, in hindsight, Obama killing all those jobs was a bad idea.

It was the private sector, not the government, that made this the richest nation on earth. The Democrats got in the way of that and, well, here we are.
Click to expand...

Seems like the U.S. and much of the developed world is in a real trickbox right now. We are so dependent on government spending that the short term will mean contraction if we reduce spending. If we do not reduce spending, interest expense will be the single biggest expense, not sustainable. Not an easy answer to work our way out of this without the economy cratering.
 
LibLoather said:
100% correct, but by the end of his first term Obama will have increased the national debt by $5,000,000,000,000 which is a stunning rate of deficit spending. I believe Bush's largest annual deficit was $280B while Obama's is $1.6T; it's like comparing apples and oranges.

Obama is an utter disaster on every economic metric, as we knew he would be; what did liberals and the ignorant average America Idol voter expect? This clown never operated anything close to a for profit business; he's the least qualified man in virtually any room he enters, yet he's president of the United States. :shocked2:
Click to expand...

The problem with Regressives is they have no command of the facts..... "I believe Bush's largest annual deficit was $280B..." Wrong.... not even close, but it is a nice fantasy for you.

http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

Sorry, Bush NEVER had a deficit as low as $280B. He was handed a running budget with small deficits ($100ish B), but then proceeded to start wars and pay for those wars with tax cuts. His first deficit was $420B... and thereafter he never had a deficit below $500B. He then handed over a deficit of $1.1 T to his successor. So, he started with very small deficits and ended with huge deficits. You can blame Obama for not fixing the mess that was handed to him, that is fair, but the mess was handed to him.

Moreover, the debt run-up under Obama to date is closer to $2.5T, though it probably will be close to $5T in the 4 years. Again, you can blame if for not fixing the mess (and that is a credible position to take), but its not apples and oranges, its more like trying to charge the closer with the loss when the starting pitcher gave the other team a 10-run lead.

You are entitled to your fantasies, but that is a different website. Here, bring your facts (and support them) or don't post....
 
Last edited:
washunut said:
so if the house went along with Geithner's request for a clean debt limit would have been fine with S&P. Not sure if you are lying or just uninformed.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think that is absolutely the case. If Congress had properly treated the debt ceiling as a housekeeping matter, as in all times past, and both sides gave indications that they would work together to address long-term deficits, this would not have happened.

The ratings agencies made it perfectly clear that taking the decision down to the wire would be a significant factor in their decision. So what happened? Congress took it as close to the wire as they possibly could.
 
washunut said:
Seems like the U.S. and much of the developed world is in a real trickbox right now. We are so dependent on government spending that the short term will mean contraction if we reduce spending. If we do not reduce spending, interest expense will be the single biggest expense, not sustainable. Not an easy answer to work our way out of this without the economy cratering.
Click to expand...

Looks like all those regulations on businesses will have to suspended for a while.
 
AdamT said:
Yes, I think that is absolutely the case. If Congress had properly treated the debt ceiling as a housekeeping matter, as in all times past, and both sides gave indications that they would work together to address long-term deficits, this would not have happened.

The ratings agencies made it perfectly clear that taking the decision down to the wire would be a significant factor in their decision. So what happened? Congress took it as close to the wire as they possibly could.
Click to expand...

Like when Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling?
 
AdamT said:
Yes, I think that is absolutely the case. If Congress had properly treated the debt ceiling as a housekeeping matter, as in all times past, and both sides gave indications that they would work together to address long-term deficits, this would not have happened.

The ratings agencies made it perfectly clear that taking the decision down to the wire would be a significant factor in their decision. So what happened? Congress took it as close to the wire as they possibly could.
Click to expand...

then you are living in a fantasy world. Geithner again said he wanted a debt ceiling with no spending cuts attached. Then shortly after he and Obama put together a budget that would have continued the mess for another 10 years. If I remember correctly, the one document Obama published that actually had numbers was defeated 0-97. He couldn't even get the socialist Bernie sanders to vote for his joke of a budget.

Well since we do not want to take things to the brink will your man Reid pass a budget before the Sept 31 deadline. If not start working on your excuses of how the tea party did not allow him to pass a budget the last three years.
 
washunut said:
then you are living in a fantasy world. Geithner again said he wanted a debt ceiling with no spending cuts attached. Then shortly after he and Obama put together a budget that would have continued the mess for another 10 years. If I remember correctly, the one document Obama published that actually had numbers was defeated 0-97. He couldn't even get the socialist Bernie sanders to vote for his joke of a budget.

Well since we do not want to take things to the brink will your man Reid pass a budget before the Sept 31 deadline. If not start working on your excuses of how the tea party did not allow him to pass a budget the last three years.
Click to expand...

There was never any reason to couple the debt ceiling (paying for past spending) with deficit reduction talks. That was purely a republican maneuver to manufacture a crisis and thus once again subvert the democratic process. Republicans played chicken with the economy and the economy just got sideswiped as a result.
 
apdst said:
Looks like all those regulations on businesses will have to suspended for a while.
Click to expand...

Never happen. Obama will talk about jobs through emergency spending then continue to not allow drilling in the gulf. How about his action against Boeing the largest exporter in the U.S.

As you see from reading posts on this site. Most people know little about economics. They still have their kneepads with the slogan " change you can believe in " tucked under their pillow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom