- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 133,631
- Reaction score
- 30,937
- Location
- Bagdad, La.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Spits the poster who thinks the Great Depression didn't end until sometime after 1945. :roll:
It didn't...:rofl
Spits the poster who thinks the Great Depression didn't end until sometime after 1945. :roll:
The downgrade came as a result of uncertainty that would could successfully attack our debt problem because the Democrats and Republicans can't work together on the issue. That was the goal of Republican party of "no." They brought the government to a complete standstill with their "my way or the highway" approach. The president, being the leader of the nation, gets the blame. They got what they wanted.Obama hurt himself because of his policies and his spending.
I like what you had to say; could you elaborate on this point a bit more?
Of course it didn't ... but you think it did. :lamoSpits the poster who thinks the Great Depression didn't end until sometime after 1945. :roll:
It didn't...:rofl
Of course it didn't ... but you think it did. :lamo
Let me remind you what you said since you already seem to have forgotten ...Glad you agree. How does it feel to be as knowledgeable as me?
It's not a strawman because I did not attribute the argument to you or anyone (at least not currently, it would be the argument in the long term from the left as they would refuse to admit failure when Clinton era levels proved to not be enough).
Clinton era rates on the "rich" are not going to be able to finance the looming deficits in SS and Medicare. You are delusional, uninformed or lying if you suggest it will.
That is incorrect. Grossly so. Repeal of all the Bush Tax Cuts, if they did not change spending behavior one iota, would yield about $340 billion per year. Well less than 3% of current GDP. Our current Federal Spending is projected at about 25.5% of GDP, and climbing. Historic Federal spending is closer to 19-20% of GDP. Full implementation of Clinton taxes, which were on the boom-time dot-com bubble, would not close half the gap as compared to historic averages. Not to mention that such implementation would drive down GDP, and revenue, and possibly produce no net increase at all in revenue.
We have a spending problem.
Here ya go ... here's a link to contact the Encyclopædia Britannica ...Which is true. It did not end until the war ended.
Correcting idiocy is sniping? I'm not sniping ... I'm educating. :2wave:Now, can you add anything to the thread, or are you just a snipe ?
Let me remind you what you said since you already seem to have forgotten ...
I don't agree with that at all."Actually, it was the tax cuts after WW2 that did it." ~ apdst
You really have no idea what you are talking about do you?
Unemployment
Unemployment leveled off before America entered the war. The government was paying contractors price plus profit which helped hiring and productivity. These are facts. This doesn't mean the New Deal was the greatest thing since sliced bread. It created some more problems, namely worker riots. However Keynesian economics did work. Government spent money on factories and contractors and they hired people and increased American productivity.
Everybody was in the army, or working in a defense factory. Doesn't mean that the depression was over, since the private sector hadn't recovered.
Everybody was in the army, or working in a defense factory. Doesn't mean that the depression was over, since the private sector hadn't recovered.
Here, seems like you need this too ...And, you would be wrong. The United States was staring bankruptcy in the face, until after 1945. There's no way the depression was over, with bankruptcy right around the corner.
The recession ended when the economy started expanding in 1939. It's not debatable.
Everybody was in the army, or working in a defense factory. Doesn't mean that the depression was over, since the private sector hadn't recovered.
Riiight, because growth every year but one is failure. By the way, the deeper the hole, the longer it takes to climb out of it.If Keynesian economics had worked, the depression wouldn't have lasted as long as it did.
The hell it ain't! :lamo
They lowered it because congress didnt go far enough to shore up its finances. This is 100% on the fault of the Tea Party and Republicans. They needed to raise taxes on the wealthy and didnt. Now we have this!!!!!!!!!!! :soap
The political dysfunctionality that was displayed in abundance ahead of the debt ceiling agreement played a role in the downgrade. In part, S&P declared:
...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.
Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
Standard & Poor's Downgrades US Credit Rating From AAA to AA+ - ABC News
Aside from political dysfunctionality, the long-term sustainable growth rate is probably lower than the 3% figure that has been cited widely on account of a variety of structural issues. If, in fact, that is the case, then tax revenues will grow more slowly than anticipated over the medium-term and beyond, making it even more difficult for the nation to address its long-term imbalances.
Finally, IMO, the U.S. would do well to conclude a credible fiscal consolidation agreement over the next year, preferably prior to the election. If that doesn't happen, S&P will likely carry through with another downgrade. Once downgrades begin to occur, the pace of such downgrades can accelerate if meaningful progress toward addressing fiscal imbalances isn't demonstrated. Ratings downgrades can increase interest rates, making the fiscal challenges even greater. Hence, a vicious self-reinforcing cycle can take hold.
So they basically gave our government too much credit, and thought they were capable of solving the debt ceiling crisis in a timely, professional manner. This is embarrassing. I hope the government gets their act together as a result of this.
Nothing says our government is broken like this...
I don't even know what to say...
It's just going to be an interesting Monday to see the pundits try to spin it, and they probably will try.
The downgrade came as a result of uncertainty that would could successfully attack our debt problem because the Democrats and Republicans can't work together on the issue. That was the goal of Republican party of "no." They brought the government to a complete standstill with their "my way or the highway" approach. The president, being the leader of the nation, gets the blame. They got what they wanted.
Eliminating the Bush tax cuts would raise an additional $4 trillion over the next decase, which was the targeted amount of overall deficit reduction targeted in the debt ceiling "negotiations."
But you are right -- I was mistaken; eliminating the cuts now would not buy itself flatten the debt curve. I was thinking of a study that analyzed the situation under the assumption that the tax cuts had never been implemented. In that scenario -- even with the wars and the financial meltdown -- the debt would still be quite manageable.
When unemployment falls to those levels.... the depression was over. According to the National Bureau of Economic Analysis, the actual recession was over as of June 1938. Hopefully this is not too complicated.