The Upside of the Downgrade
The good news — and yes, this part really is good news — is that Standard & Poor’s has finally reduced the spending bacchanal of the U.S. government to a sound bite that anyone can understand: S&P has downgraded America’s sovereign credit rating.
There are plenty of nuances, to be sure. Not everyone agrees with S&P. The U.S. Treasury is attacking S&P’s arithmetic, and haggling over the impact of two trillion dollars, here or there, give or take. Analysts are explaining that S&P did not downgrade America’s short-term credit rating. It’s just long-term U.S. credit, which, after 70 years on its AAA pedestal, has now been knocked down to AA+. There’s lots of debate over just how much difference S&P’s rating downgrade will make to the markets, because mighty though S&P may be, its influence is a function of its ability to accurately assess things already going on. In other words, shooting the messenger, as the White House apparently hoped to do, does not change the reality the messenger was trying to convey.
Nor has S&P stumbled upon extraordinary information of which the world was unaware. The problem is not S&P. The problem is U.S. government spending and borrowing so profligate that American debt now tops annual GDP. The deeper problem, driving all this, is that American politics has become a realm in which the response to every difficulty of the human condition is for government to amass more power and dole out more money. The presumption of the U.S. government by now is that Americans cannot be trusted to arrange for their own medical care, pay for their own tuition, save for their old age, or “create or save” their own jobs. Big Brother will do that for them, even if the resulting rise of the dole and erosion of the private sector means 9.1% unemployment, almost 50 million Americans using food stamps, a stalled economy, soaring public debt, and now, a long-term credit rating lower than that of Australia, Hong Kong or France.
All the debate and Tea-Partying to date has made some difference. But it has not yet prevailed to change the profligate and power-hungry dynamic in Washington.There have been plenty of wake-up calls these past few years, but too often they have been smothered by Washington’s vast political fog. Among ordinary Americans, who has time to keep track of the trillions spent, the endless expanding government programs, or the to-and-fro over deficits variously projected over the next decade?
The virtue of the S&P downgrade is that it serves as a simple bottom line. For a long, long time, the U.S. government earned itself a triple-A credit rating. It’s gone. Downgraded. Maybe, just maybe, that’s exactly the sound bite Americans need to hear, to concentrate voters’ minds on how to get that AAA rating back.
Maybe, just maybe, that’s exactly the sound bite Americans need to hear, to concentrate voters’ minds on how to get that AAA rating back.
The trouble is, some people are convinced the “how” is to raise taxes. Perhaps Obama will explain it all in a speech.
No speech needed. It’s really simple: Obama proposed major cuts along with the closing of tax loopholes. Boehner brought it back to his reps, and the Tea Partyers said No, all or nothing. End of story. End of AAA rating.
Joe, Boehner brought that deal back ($800B revenue) and sold it; Obama then called him and renegged. Then Boehner made a deal with Reid, which Obama torpedoed. The House passed TWO specific Bills; “Cut, Cap And Balance” was favored by 62% of the public (a BBA is favored by 72&) and was designated by S&P as the ONLY proposal which would satisfy minimum requirements of a real $4T debt reduction. The Dems blocked even any public debate on that or “Boehner 2.” Obama, Reid, Schumer, et al offered NOTHING SPECIFIC! Kool-Aide gives indigestion.
Can we change his name to ObamAA+ ?
Oh wait, it’s Bush’s fault.
Great Point. Let this be heard around the world, especially all over the USA. Anyone with a brain in their head will understand the ill effects of the drop.
ALMOST 50 MILLION Americans on food stamps. there may very well be 50 million people on food stamps. but they are not all American. just go observ the check out lanes at walmart and look at the mexicans paying with wellfare cards,(food stamps)
Your take on news of downgrade bears no resemblance to interview I heard late last evening on CNN with Standard & Poor person responsible for that downgrade!
Here’s what he said in order — I wrote it down — when asked why the downgrade:
1. The political “brinkmanship” shenanigans in our political system over raising the debt ceiling after 60 such actions had been taken without such actions. (Justifies the Democrats criticism of making this into a spectacle by Republicans)
2. Inadequacy of final agreement. (Justifies Republican dissatisfaction with end result as inadequate)
3. When asked what WOULD have satisfied the S& P, he said
THE BOWLES-SIMPSON AGREEMENT REACHED BY GANG OF SIX!!!
So much for Tea Party insistence that no revenues be included.
Fact is, the major polls (even before S & P downgrade) were something like 70% unhappy with Republicans/tea party behavior and around 40% unhappy with Obama for his handling of this whole mess.
I urge all readers of this blog — when something big like this happens, check out response by Fox, MSNBC AND finally CNN. You will find that CNN does the FOUNDATIONAL/TRADITIONAL coverage. How come guy at S&P was only interviewed (far as I know) by CNN?? Ask yourself, who better to hear from??
Fine beyond that to go to all the claque of Republican candidates (as Fox did) or all the economics advisors MSNBC called on for comment. But they both (far as I know) missed the key person. Was interesting to hear response from presidential candidates–acting exactly as they have done in past: Bachmann came out with sure-of-herself advice to everybody including firing the Treasury Secretary (how ignorance can fuel certitude!!!), and Romney didn’t appear — just sent some bland comment instead. He should NOT be your candidate. I don’t intend to vote Republican BUT Romney is really a zero.
As might be expected Trump was as wildly opinionated as Bachmann, but I do think he knows more about the global financial world than she does. He believes Republicans lost Democrats won outcome of brinkmanship.
Personally, I think Democrats lost on results, but Republicans WILL LOSE over time as responsible for it all.
Thank you for the informaion you have provided.
But, if in fact, S&P downgraded on the basis of the necessary political process of a democracy, then they are not a “stable” credit evaluator, but one player every bit as irresponsible as those who voted for the huge blood sucking programs that necessitate a rising debt.
The “Process” is none of of S&P’s damn business.
The “Process” is the means by which a real Republic conducts its business.
By criticizing the “Process”, S&P betray that they are part of the problem.
There never was a threat of default: there was, and is, only a threat to the size of government as hard choices would have to be made on the day that the money runs out.
That day will come sooner if the “Process” does not involve a hard line by one side as to reducing the size of government.
Government will NOT be reduced in size, as long as it is fed; hence the folly of feeding it via more revenue.
Cut ! Cut! Cut! is the only answer, as the economists at S&P SHOULD know, because higher taxes produce diminishing revenue as the Laffler Curve (and real life evidence) demonstrates.
Okay, lets “cut…cut…cut” as you suggest.
Precisely, cut what?
Precisely, what are the ‘real’ consequences for each cut?
Will these “cuts’ and their consequences reconstitute the nations economy and jobs? If you believe so, how will it?
Gee, I thought the guy was on Neil Cavuto too. My bad. But really, a shameless plug for CNN? And your predictions/opinions of political outcome are pretty much meaningless too. But thanks for sharing.
Yes, he was on with Neil Cavuto this morning.
Point #1 may have been brought up, but no serious ratings expert would use that as a justification. That was probably brought up by the interviewer, showing bias against the Republicans. CNN is well known for asking leading questions to put the Republicans in a bad light. CNN is very biased, which I suspect is why you favor them.
Sure, increasing taxes will increase revenue, just as firing 50% of the Federal government workforce will. Increasing taxes, especially during a recession, will increase unemployment levels and further reduce economic activity. Then there’s always the suspicion that the politicians, especially the Democrats, will not have the discipline to use the tax increase revenue to pay down the debt and revert to a balanced budget. Put simply, I don’t trust the Democrats. They are always too willing to spend money on some program or other “for the children”, using their Keynesian economic theory for justification, that we can spend and borrow ourselves into prosperity. Ever listen to Nancy Pelosi and her “for the children” ramblings? Sickening.
you mentioned the “THE BOWLES-SIMPSON AGREEMENT REACHED BY GANG OF SIX!!!”
Simpson Boles was a bipartisan commission enpaneled by President Obama to find a solution to our debt problem. What did the President do with the findings of this commission? Nothing, he put their recommmendations into a drawer. Likewise Rep. Ryan presented a budget and the House passed it (something the Democrats haven’t done in two years). What did our glorious leader do? He accused the Republicans of throwing Granny of a cliff. A demagogue does what a demagogue does.
Bowles took the task seriously and, reportedly, was very ticked at being ignored after the months of work.
Simpson yesterday said, for some reason, that Barry was clever to ignore the commissions findings and recommendations.
Either way, Obama’s style of governance can be described as setting up commissions to study “things”, and then more often than not completely ignoring the findings if he doesn’t like them.
And one of the findings of Bowles/Simpson was that the federal government needed to hugely rein in its spending.
It amazes me that anyone with normal intellect could possibly put all the blame on Republicans, when Democrats have controlled congress during most of the poor decisions that led to this downgrade. It is obvious that you have been listening to CNN, which is NOT “foundational” or “traditional” in any manner. CNN commentators/reports have been caught lying too many times to count. They even have a nice habit of ignoring portions of their own polls if they are negative towards Obama. That is unethical.
Instead of blaming people based on ignorant journalist and their one-sided questioning…why don’t you learn to research the facts on your own? You would be very surprised by your findings.
As for the S&P – they cannot downgrade because they don’t like how a country gets to it’s decisions. They would have to downgrade many countries – as Parliaments argue vigorously and loudly in Britain, France, etc. That is an immature comment and makes me question the reporter and S&P representative.
The call for Geithner to resign should have been made years ago. He is and always has been about as clueless as a child when it comes to economics. He is a joke to real economists around the world (duh!). You do realize he has NO actual experience in real world markets? It’s all academic. That is why we are in so much trouble. When you put people in power with no real life experience, what do you expect will happen? They don’t understand that theories are just that…theories. Real life is much more complex and EXPERIENCE is the key factor in appropriate leadership.
That’s the crux of our problems. We put children in charge of the grownup world. Children with extremely limited book knowledge and NO experience.
aurora 1920,
CNN ran with the story that Jared Loughner was motivated by Sarah Palin and right wing rhetoric and ideas.
It is now obvious that he was motivated by voices in his head and Devil worship. He is a mentally ill person that performed occult rituals in his backyard.
This is absolutely inexcusable and destroyed CNNs credibility with me. They are not honest people. They may get most of their facts right most of time, as is the pattern with most liars.
Can you find one example of such grossly distorted smear merchant journalism by Fox?
If the the gang of six agreement was so great, and it probably was, why didn’t O go along? O is a zero.
Another point, referring to an increase in tax rates as “revenues” is another example of the dishonest rhetoric of the left. There is no guarantee that raising tax rates will produce more revenue. Tax hikes should be not referred to as “revenues”. They are a choker on our economy that hurt the middle and lower class much more than the upper class.
3. When asked what WOULD have satisfied the S& P, he said
THE BOWLES-SIMPSON AGREEMENT REACHED BY GANG OF SIX!!!
So much for Tea Party insistence that no revenues be included.
100% of the earnings of Barack’s billion/millionaires (apparently million/billionaires are persons and/or businesses earning over $250,000) could be confiscated by the Obama régime and the so called “revenues” collected wouldn’t begin to assuage the $4 billion/day run up under this guy, far, far (far!) more than any president in the history of the nation.
Barack whines incessantly about tax breaks for corporate jets, which if that alleged “loophole” were closed would bring in $4 billion over 10 years.
That would pay Barry’s debt for 1 day.
I haven’t watched CNN since the station was clearly implicated (admitted to it) in suppressing stories of Saddam’s atrocities so it could retain favor with Saddam.
Last time I skated by, Wolf Blitzer was rhapsodizing about Fidel Castro being about to speak. And I mean rhapsodizing, nearly panting.
Aurora1920: you depress me. You are trotting out the liberal response- it is the fault of the tea party, conservatives and republicans (not the same thing but I doubt you see a distinction). And of course liberal policies had nothing to do with the mess. Obama is of course blameless (blaming him for anything is racist anyway right?). So the progressive position is what it always is: A. assign blame. and B. Propose more spending and taxes as a solution. Of course more taxes and more spending, dont’ work in the real world (- a world that doesn’t really exist to CNN, NYT, and your other favorite lefty media outlets)and therefore will make things worse as they always do. The lib solution? repeat steps A and B.
The ‘progressives’ have nothing and have had nothing for a long long time. Tax, spend and blame is ALL they’ve got. When liberals get free reign, we get Detroit or Philly or Chicago or Newark. That is America’s future under the Democrats. And if Obama and his cohorts succeed in transforming what is left of the US into Detroit, it will of course be someone elses fault. Liberalism is boring, utterly predictable and doesn’t work, no matter how many Ivy league twits insist it does. So let me ask Mr. 1920, what is your plan to fix this after you have assigned blame? More taxes, regulations, and redistribution?
Call me crazy, but I don’t think it will work. What else you got?
Bowles-Simpson= blame and attack Social Security. S & P doesn’t care where the money comes from.
Republicans and Democrats won’t make any discretionary cuts because main recipients of the dough plow it back into political campaign accounts.
So attack Social Security. Same game.
The only thing different is this time is the lunacy of those who believed Bush Debts would cure themselves…still believe it. Resist change! Attack entitlements! Save the Bush Zardoz religion that deficits don’t matter if incurred initially be “supply side” tax cuts! Never mention global warming money or farm supports of defense of etc. if it takes the eye of entitlements!
Bowles commission was a ringer to give Obama space to seize more Social securiy to finance the deficit. Heck, he openly stated he was aiming to cut medicare to pay for Obamacare transfers to private insurers to subsidize more health insurance!
Aurora, you still don’t get it and I’m afraid won’t until the well runs completely dry. Did you miss the most important statement of the entire story?
Ms. Rosett is exactly correct in her assessment.
You and millions who think like you are the biggest part of the problem.
Tex, you just don’t understand liberal logic.
If the well runs dry, it’s the well’s fault.
Generally speaking those who advocate tax hikes aren’t the ones that the hikes fall on. I say tax every registered democrat at 70% for every dollar of revenue earned over minimum wage. Democrats like spending and they like taxes. Let them pay for their spending.In the meantime, write the check. The government takes donations.
So…the S&P guy made some remarks in a brief interview, responding to questions that were put to him. Based on a short discussion/ answers, you have jumped to the following conclusions:
When asked what might have worked, S&P guy suggested Bowles -Simpson agreement, so you concluded that the Tea Party was wrong. Yet, perhaps because you were so busy taking notes, you did not hear him say, ” I mean you could envision other recommendations, but that would have been a start.”
Indeed, some of us can imagine endless possible permutations that might have solved the problem, and none of them include raising taxes.
Then, as if to mock your note-taking skills, he said,
“It’s one that centers on entitlements and its entitlement reform or having matching revenues to pay for those entitlements; that’s at the crux of the matter.”
So, Chambers says it is centered on entitlements, and that the US must reform or have “matching revenues to pay for those entitlements”, and your conclusion is tax increases, which means the Tea Party is wrong. However, it is just as reasonable to make revenues “match” the entitlements by lowering the entitlements to match the revenue.
You also concluded that because S&P guy stated that he didn’t like the bickerring, seeing as how the debt ceiling had been raised over 60 times previously, that it was the fault of Republicans. Yet, it takes two to bicker, and it takes at least two to engage in brinksmanship. In your mind, only the Republicans were playing games. Obama provided no leadership on the issue for many months, even though he knew this was coming. Perhaps our President deliberately created the “brinksmanship” in an attempt to score a political victory. Nahh, he doesn’t play politics. He brings us all together.
Again, busy as you were with the taking of copious notes, you probably missed S&P guy’s comment about who deserved the blame:
COOPER: Already on Twitter, other places, Republicans and Democrats are pointing their fingers at each other, at President Obama, at Congress. Do you blame one side more than the other?
CHAMBERS: No, I think that there’s plenty of blame to go around.
This is pretty indicative of how the liberal mind works, so I must conclude you are a liberal (Also, you were watching CNN…)
But then, I didn’t take notes. I just did a copy/paste of the transcript.
This is a good thing.
That it took something this severe to wake Americans up is not that good of a thing.
And that I suspect we’re not finished being unpleasantly awakened to the fact that America is a good thing and socialism is a bad thing, is not a good thing.
The good thing is, of course, this can still be repaired.
While those of us who were awake could see this coming from our porches I’m not yet convinced that other Americans have awoken from the Icabod Crane sleep they slipped into.
I will take the Bush economy to the Recovery summer anytime.
Absolutely! To all these people who have said that Bush is equally to blame in this ridiculous spending I have responded: “OK – just for fun – I will let you have that! In fact, I am willing to give Obama a complete spending mulligan, a complete “get out of jail free card”. Let’s just return to those astronomical 2008 Bush era spending levels, consider them a hard cap, and work from there to reduce spending to levels that Obama would find acceptable”. Of course (once the numbers come onto the table) that is rejected out of hand BECAUSE returning to Bush spending levels from Obama spending levels is considered a draconian cut. They would like to have it both ways.
And President Obama is saying, “What? What’s a credit rating? What does a low credit rating mean?” You see, he apparently has never had to be bothered about that, since being part of the Chicago/Democratic machine means never having to worry about from where that next job or buyoff is coming.
“….What does a low credit rating mean?”
Someone should educate him that “It means your interest rates are going up, Stupid. You’ll have less money to spend”. What an idiot. The Chinese are salivating at the thought.
The Chinese are putting on a bluff. A drop in their exports to the U.S. would put tens of millions out of work and onto the streets – a frightening thought to China’s inner ruling circle.
When considering anything the Chinese say publicly, you can usually bet the opposite and come out ahead. The Chinese economy, in reality, probably has more in common with the housing bubble cluster—k than it does with reality.
Some Chinese reality!
Whether the global economnies of today are at peak or minimized, Walmart, K-Mart, Target, Pennys, Sears, Dillards, Macys, Home Depot, Lowes, etc., their customers and their counterparts around the globe and their customers are supporting the Chinese economy not in a small way but a signficant way.
China isn’t the only one sharing in this reality. This reality is maybe why corporate and individuals American wealth holders are investing in China and other such emerging economies. Many individuals may well be ignorant of the fact they’re investing outside of their retail shopping, but rest assurd they are in huge cumulative volume.
If this doesn’t result in some effective changes – and QUICKLY – then I suggest that it is time for those states that did not vote for Obama to secede from those states that did, and leave THEM holding the entire bag.
Or maybe the counties that did not go for Obama should secede from those that did.
Either way, the Obozo voters, in effect, stole our credit card, ran up debts that we have no hope of paying back, and ruined our credit rating.
Hope and Change..
I won, you loose..
And you know what..?
You ain’t seen nothing yet..
Just wait until those.. my followers..
Reelect me next year!
S&P has downgraded America’s sovereign credit rating. The big question is, is anybody listing out there and can the American public tear itself away from it’s TV shows long enough to do something about it? You know, America, it doesn’t help to sit there and moan and whine AFTER the fact when things go bad here. You’ve got to start doing something about it now. Join a Tea Party, contact your local representatives, organize people in your own area to vote out politicians that not only got us into this mess, but refuse to vote for any other politician that will not balance our budget and reduce government spending. There is a lot you can do and the time to do it is NOW. These are the only weapons the Constitution gives us. Use them, before we lose them.
This document is a “pro-Obama raise taxes” support the Administration. With the Fed buying 90% of our debt we are printing money now.
Freezing the Federal budget “saves” $340 billion immediately by wiping out the 8% baseline. Freezing at 2008 level actually saves $800 billion of which $400 plus are real savings.
yes …now maybe the liberals can see that socialism is a failed system. AGAIN !
The Obama regime doesn’t care what the S&P long-term rating is. Obama thinks that the USA is evil and deserves whatever misfortunes befall it. Anyway, he’ll just blame the tea party and the “bitter clingers” and, of course, George Bush.
We are, however, seeing something historic in all this. For the first time, we are watching a US President deliberately transforming this country into a nation much less than it was when he took office and doing it deliberately.
Rosett: “The problem is U.S. government spending and borrowing so profligate that American debt now tops annual GDP.”
That’s not quite what S&P said. From their report:
“Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.
“Our revised upside scenario–which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the outlook on the ‘AA+’ long-term rating being revised to stable–retains these same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario, we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.”
http://tinyurl.com/4yc9tty
S&P is NOT saying that the problem is entirely spending. They’re saying the problem is spending that is way out of line when compared with revenues.
S&P clearly believes that BOTH spending cuts AND tax increases will be needed. And what’s bothering them is the gridlock that prevent the Dems from reforming soaring spending AND the GOP’s resistance to letting the Bush tax cuts lapse even in part.
Yes we need additional taxes to help reduce the debt and deficit. What we don’t need is to raise taxes on the 53% of us who already pay 100% of all federal income taxes. What needs to be done is to lower the overall rate and increase the tax base to 90%+ of all American workers. Democrats constantly gnash and wail about fairness, well how is it fair that nearly half the working population are freeloading off the rest of us. The progressive income tax is immoral. More importantly is to dramatically reduce the size and scope of the federal government. There is no reason, for example, that we need a federally run retirement (SSI) program for people who are willing and able to plan for their own retirement. The same applies to health care. Stop creating massive programs for otherwise self-sufficient people. All the government, and I’d argue that it is a state and not federal responsibility, should manage is a real safety net to prevent destitution. However, for Liberal politicians the goal is socialism ,redistribution, and control. They would rather we all be poor than some be rich while others are poor.
“In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario, we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.”
These fools still believe that tax-rate hikes increase revenue, when history demonstrates clearly they do not. Thus do they endorse Simpson-Bowles. In another portion, they reinforced this with the term “revenue increases, implying tax hikes. The boys at S&P support Democrats with their campaign contributions. They think like big government guys. Fools.
Do you really trust the Democrats and Obama to use whatever money comes in from tax hikes to pay down the debt? They believe in Keynesian economics that government spending is what will lead to a healthy economy. Why do you think they are constantly resisting GOP demand to cut spending and not raise taxes? The Democrats believe that they can spend and borrow their way to prosperity. Ludicrous. Raising taxes will give them more to spend.
Well then, let the first step in increasing revenues be the revocation of 401(c)(3) status for NGOs. Then we’ll see what else is necessary.
I find this analysis disingenuous, and I smell a rat. Why would the S&P recommend increasing tax rates at the outset of what may be anything from a slowdown to a full blown depression? Increasing tax rates has the same stimulative effect on the economy that pulling a heavy trailer does on your cars gas mileage, i.e. none. And all non-Kenesian economists must know this. So since jacking up tax rates depresses the economy and ultimately leads to loss of revenue, why would the S&P recommend this? The central aim is the reduction of debt, and this is anathema to that. It sounds like political arm twisting from the white house to me. In fact, as far as I can tell, the S&P have only to make their assessment, and that assessment seems to be that the US has too much debt, and no one has the political will (Obama and dems) or the wherewithal (Repubs and tea party members)to do anything about it.Obama will try to raise taxes and do nothing to reduce spending, all while blaming everyone and everything except the inane people and policies that got us into this mess. Obama would love to declare a fatwa on the S&P,(you shouldn’t embarass the king), so I either smell clueless Keynesians at S&P or more likely, a sop for the whitehouse’s upcoming tax and blame assualt, which will get started as soon as Barack and guypal Reggie get back from their much needed R&R.
“S&P is NOT saying that the problem is entirely spending. They’re saying the problem is spending that is way out of line when compared with revenues.”
Oh. It is the income that is the problem. For instance, if a household has income of $50k, but rings up $200k in credit card debt, the solution is get more income. Well, that is one solution, but wouldn’t the cleanest, simplest solution just be to stop spending so much?
Also, at least in the case of the wild-spending household, they are not racking up the debt of all of their neighbors and their neighbors’ children.
The argument for tax increases on the wealthy is not about fairness– it is about envy. If liberals really wanted fairness, we would not have a situation where half of all Americans pay no income tax at all. That is where we should begin the discussion on fairness.
Folks of intellect who perpetuate an analogy of household fiscal manaqement to that of the government are being incredibly………!
NO legislative(d) laws dictate a private households revenue, spending or DEBT liabilities.
The problem is, that the people and their special interest groups have dictated upon the government the same irresponsible fiscal practices they run their own private households by. Live beyond your means and run up ‘credit debts’ for all the perks in life and who cares about paying for anything.
The social security funds have long been used by the people and their special interest groups as the endless bounty to fund their nonsense….rob now and ignore paying the incurred debt.
If the people and their special interest groups were responsible folks they would have long ago rejected employer based health care and in the alternative, been the innovators of fisacl efficient co-op programs designed to foster the creation of new regional consumer-governed, private, nonprofit health insurance issuers to cover health care inclusive of Medicare and Medicaid. But NO…shove it off on employers and the government and don’t worry about any costs, political corruption or debt incurred.
The people and their special interest groups demanded the government be run as they inneficiently and irresponsibly run their private households and now of course, they don’t want to pay their incurred debt.
The government is of the people…by the people!
Obama isn’t responsible for what has ailed the nation leading to its current crisis….just the uncontrollable consequences in a short moment of time!
All the ‘blame’ is nothing more than people creating a diversion away from their own contributing faults.
Your argument about the household is nitpickingly absurd.
So, too, is your delusion that Obama has nothing to do with the situation at hand. Of course it is all the fault of everybody who came before him, and he is just another liberal victim, brutalized by the “system” that others put in place.
Yes, “We The People” have been derelict in our responsibilities for a long time (See “How Obama Got Elected”). That shirking of responsibility, compounded by Obama’s horrific waste and fraud spending, rewarding unions with untold billions of dollars, corruption on a scale that has never been witnessed in this country, and regulations by the hundreds and soon thousands that are strangling our economy– that is what brought rise to the conscience of our nation and the “special interest” group that you loathe so irrationally. Yes, the one group that is attempting to return to constitutional government– The Tea Party– is the one you rail at all day and night.
Sometime. people are wise enough to reflect on what has occurred, and see the errors of their ways. Maybe some in the Tea Party were irresponsible in the past. Now, they have learned, where you and Obama can only say, “What about Bush?”
Obama is blameless. Of course. It cannot be his fault that he has only followed the same path as the fools before him, even while he pushes the accelerator to the floor. (Bad analogy? Government doesn’t actually have an accelerator?)
And again you miss the central point! The analogy of government fiscal policy to a households fiscal management is simplicity run amuck.
Nobody has “learned’ anything until they recognize the root causation of the problems and then setforth some plan of redress accordingly. The blame game is simply a character flaw and ‘blame’ never solves a problem!
As to Bush. Bush never created the economic firestorm that ultimatley crashed down upon the latter years of his administration. However, the Bush administration reacted as most would when confronted with a fire…storm, they put the water to it! Hopefully, you get the gist of the analogy!
Obama never created the firsestorm that ultimately crashed down on the Bush administration and that continued to burn in full rage, into the Obama administration. However, following the Bush administration, the Obama administration continued to attack the fire with more water.
Now, folks can rightfully and adversarily monday morning quarterback as to the effectiveness issues of pouring more water on the fire. Obama didn’t act in a vacuum! Obama acted with the consultation of economic experts from across the political spectrum here at home and abroad.
It would seem most logically to me that, should one feel it beneficial to play the blame game, that they might direct such blame towards the experts advise that the President relied upon.
The Tea Party folks supposition that Obama came to the office of the president with the intent to destroy America’s economy, its once economic standing and the USD as the worlds predominate currency is pure hogwash. It defies any rational logic, given the similar global economic circumstances of today. Everybody but a few ‘emerging’ economic powers are in the same failed boat.
Less time blaming and assassinating Obama personally for problems created over several decades, and more time spent trying to solve the real problems might be of more benefit to the nation.
Most likely a broken economy and high unemployment will determine the next election and for certain the TeaParty-GOP folks want to make sure that the economy and joblessness ‘remains’ broken until at least election day. Thats real national patriotism in the face of hurting nation, eh? On another note! Other than superifical ‘political rhetoric’ neither party has any real and viable solutions for the economy and joblessness! Thats why the diversion of government spending and debt was created.
The deeper problem, driving all this, is that American politics has become a realm in which the response to every difficulty of the human condition is for government to amass more power and dole out more money.
And the problem is all the dolts in government, like John Kerry who just yesterday said that the media need to give less time, space and attention to all the crazy extremists, aka tea party sorts, people who want to put a stop to the federal government’s wild spending and force the government to balance its budget.
Now that the S&P has declared itself in agreement with the tea party’s assessment, what does John Girl have to say today ?
Nothing worth hearing, I’m sure.
(apparently it was ok for the media to report all the false stories of candidate Kerry’s bravado from the very brief period he “served” in Vietnam)
My only question is, why is it still AA?
Yeah, that was the first thought I had about it too.
The average American could care less; they have their sports idols, their hollywood idols and their malls and porn. What more could a corrupt amoral culture want? The give me more crowd have been indoctrinated by their teachers and their spiritual leaders to demand more and more from the government. Of course the government is broke but that does not stop them. Some fanatical democrats are calling for confiscation of the property of the rich to be redistributed to the so called poor. Al Gore a wealthy American is calling for government censorship and total control of the news media. Joe Kennedy another rich American at one time called for the imprisonment of anyone who did not agree with his green religion. Mencken once said that democracy demanded that the common people get what they deserve and get it good or words to that effect. So the morally corrupt Americans will be running around stealing from each other and killing each other in order to fulfill their so called American dream of getting something for nothing. O tempora O mores
Heh, not only that,Al Gore is now calling for Tahrir Square style revolts (against the conservatives of America, of course)! I have always had a live and let live attitude toward those far more liberal than myself, but this has changed quickly under the corporatism of the Obama regime. I believe that the U.S. government has been partially complicit in the riots that have taken place in the middle east and I think they’re itching it take them here. What a bunch of fascists. Mussolini would be proud of this bunch.
I applaud your optimism Ms. Rosett, unfortunately I do not share it. With roughly forty eight percent of this nation in the thrall of govt largess a much more significant event will be required to refocus those on the govt crack pipe. I suspect it will be the wholesale loss of tax revenue from the producers and the attendant riots from the lumpen-proletariat that will cause a return to sanity or a Venezuela scenario.
The reason many republicans are against any tax increases is because history and common sense tell you that those increased tax revenues will NOT be used to reduce our debt, but just fuel for more spending.
If our congress could be trusted to act like actual adults to pay down our debt, I think most americans would be willing to pay a little more in taxes. But we all know that won’t happen. Instead, while clamoring for taxes to “pay down the debt” we have annual budget increases on 8% autopilot.
It is all a sad joke.
John, you deserve an attaboy.
Anytime you have a critical mass engaged in a cult of personality bad things occur.
I consider my self slightly to the right of Attilla The Hun, understand that Nzi’s are left not right….but despite my admiration of Sarah Pallin…I am disturbed by the cult of personlity and it’s reverse Palin Disfunctional Syndrome.
A critical mass of the voters has shown itself to be ignorant celebrity fans….
But then I always figured leadership …as the leader of equals……
EXCELLENT!!!! A government of the people….by the people!
They told us if we default, our credit rating would be lowered, but if we increased the debt limit everything would be fine. That’s what Obama and the Democrats said would happen. Oh, well. Just another lie. What else is new?
Well you are wrong. John Boehner had agreed to a tax increase, but Harry Reid took them out because there are so many DemonCrat Senators up for reelection.
But the downgrade was no surprise. S & P warned that they needed to make a $400
Billion cut in the FIRST Year and our illustrious politicans punted. The Ruling Class won and America lost.
“DemonCrat” – I love it! Right-wingers name-calls as naturally as they breathe.
It’s not name-callin, Joseph; it’s truth-telling.
If you want economic activity, dump the regulations pushed by big biz to kill off their smaller competitors.
Financial Crisis Investigation
http://www.judicialwatch.org/financial-crisis
“Maybe, just maybe .. this will concentrate voters minds” … illustrated. http://metanoodle.blogspot.com/2011/08/debt-downgrade-gives-dose-of-truth.html
Hmph. We’re obviously just not spending enough money.
The beltway, legacy media is as much to blame for the downgrade as the Congress or President, if not more so. For example, they fiddled over Palin’s Alaska emails while our economy burned. The Tea Party was talking about the Debt Ceiling even more the 2010 election. The elite punditry class waited until the supposed deadline was looming.
The Fourth Branch of government is even more odious than the 1st and 2nd in this matter.
– Vital Speeches magazine. Obama sounds like old uncle Benito.
Additional revenue isn’t needed when you are already overspending what you receive, however I do endorse a revenue neutral overhaul of the tax laws akin to the recommendations of Simpson-Bowles. Every federal department spending level needs to be compared to 2008 levels and differences clearly justified. Like it or not, entitlement programs must be overhauled as well, including potential means testing. Obamacare must be repealed.
For a long, long time, the U.S. government earned itself a triple-A credit rating.”
Since Alexander Hamilton paid off the Rev. War bonds.
“It’s gone. Downgraded.”
Because we voted in Obama and his borrowing and spending.
“Maybe, just maybe, that’s exactly the sound bite Americans need to hear, to concentrate voters’ minds on how to get that AAA rating back.”
Voting in an anti-Obama and Tea Party oriented veto-proof majorities into both houses in 2012 are pre-conditions to that.
But, a decisive (I know, I know) Obammy the Kenyan could turn this around in a month, help his reelection efforts significantly, kick-start our economy, and start creating the environment that would turn this all around. I lay out this plan knowing that Obammy is too dumb, lazy, shiftless, incompetent, clueless, anti-American and mendacious to even consider it.
First, change some players; get rid of Geitner, Holder and, maybe a couple of other extremists and urge Reid to move on allowing someone less of a doofus (a really tough project to even find anyone who qualifies)to become Majority Leader. Urge Republican input into replacements but, not necessarily, veto power.
Then, send to Congress by the end of the month, a number of program cuts that will take effect by the end of this year. The end of the NPR, NEA endowments would be a start. The normal cuts by anti-American democrats usually start with the police and fire departments. That won’t do. Slash the community projects, slash HHS, slash Education, slash EPA. This has to be big bucks, money right now! Think: What will Cantor cut when he is President and has massive majorities in both Houses?
Then, demonstrate an eased business environment. Order drilling permits be issued, remove entire levels of administrative requirements that do very little, by the end of August.
Get out of our lives! Abolish departments that only strangle us. Diets are not a federal issue. Nor is car performance, owning a car manufacturer.
Now, this outline is exactly what the Republican candidate will promise and it will get that candidate elected. The only hope Obammy and his forces of evil have is to immediately adopt and implement this plan. We all know that won’t happen because they are too stupid, greedy and beholden to their pimps.
I was shocked just to read the title, “Reasons Why Obama Should Be Re-Elected” at http://robbingamerica.blogspot.com/2011/08/reasons-why-obama-should-be-re-elected.html
It was rather strange coming from one of the Conservative web sites, so I checked it out.
Boy, do they have a point
How do working people get the S&P AAA rating back? Well clearly we need to work longer hours, defer (or even forget) retirement, and make our children struggle in poverty and degradation to make sure billionaires can get their tax cuts on their private airplanes.
Where were you Claudia when S&P was propping up the mortgage market and giving AAA ratings to junk? Oh, that’s right, you were running your mouth about how great everything was.
Conservatives are economic retards. Get a job Claudia, contribute to society.
I think our rating dropped to AA when our balance of payments got so bad Nixon took away the gold standard. Since then we’ve had a free ride as the world reserve currency. We have lived as credit abusers and partied down like crazy on the pretense that, being the great USA, we were good for it. The joke’s on everyone. Toss in all our unfunded liabilities and the fact that future generations will refuse to pay our debts, our rating should be D for default. Because it’s coming sooner or later and you know it’s all the Tea Party’s fault for mentioning we have a problem.