RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time

RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:43:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 Congratulations to the freshman Teabaggers who know jack/shit about how Congress works but have to fuck with things anyway. Uhhh... maybe you missed this part... quote: S&P decided to lower the AAA rating, held by the United States for 70 years, to AA+ after a bipartisan debt deal signed into law this week failed to assuage concerns about the nation’s growing spending. Who was arguing to CUT SPENDING and for a BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT? Answer: THE TEA PARTY FRESHMAN!!! Who was arguing for MORE SPENDING and NO BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT? Answer: Obama, Reid, Pelosi, the Dems. CONCLUSION: The "Tea Party Freshman" were CORRECT, and Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and the Dems are the ones who don't know "jack shit". [8\|]

ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:43:46 PM)
Let's see, the Teabaggers hold the world economy hostage over what is essentially a paperwork technicallity. The deal they extorted does next to nothing to reduce the deficit ($2 trillion over 10 years is nothing comparred to the $28 trillion deficit). And future sessions of Congress are NOT obligated to abide by the deal. So all this sound and furry to signify nothing but we still get the national credit rating lowered. I guess we'll have to wait and see what impact it has. Rates might go up or they might stay the same. In either case, the world is stunned by the stupidty of the entire episode.

Aylee -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:45:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy It will have zero impact economically. I heard it will cause an increase in interest rates? Its possible but unlikely. Japan Ireland and a third country I dont recall right now had their credit ratings downgraded with no impact on interest rates. The Treasury market was extremely stable leading up the deficit agreement, indicating that its still the go to investment for safety. Canada?

Jeffff -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:46:13 PM)
Dave, dave , dave.... tax cuts INCREASE revenue. It's right there is black and white.

DarkSteven -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:49:02 PM)
The problem is that it took the mighty US government a full several months to essentially kick the can down the road. If any corporate entity took that long, they'd get a vote of no confidence from their stockholders. S&P essentially did the exact same thing for our nation's leaders - we're virtually incapable of action.

Sanity -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:49:44 PM)
Worse than that, the Dems were spending as if they had a blank check They were acting like children, they werent passing or even proposing budgets at all For YEARS The only grownups in the room were the tea Party folk who insisted on a concrete budget quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 Congratulations to the freshman Teabaggers who know jack/shit about how Congress works but have to fuck with things anyway. Uhhh... maybe you missed this part... quote: S&P decided to lower the AAA rating, held by the United States for 70 years, to AA+ after a bipartisan debt deal signed into law this week failed to assuage concerns about the nation’s growing spending. Who was arguing to CUT SPENDING and for a BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT? Answer: THE TEA PARTY FRESHMAN!!! Who was arguing for MORE SPENDING and NO BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT? Answer: Obama, Reid, Pelosi, the Dems. CONCLUSION: The "Tea Party Freshman" were CORRECT, and Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and the Dems are the ones who don't know "jack shit". [8\|]

pahunkboy -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:50:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven The problem is that it took the mighty US government a full several months to essentially kick the can down the road. If any corporate entity took that long, they'd get a vote of no confidence from their stockholders. S&P essentially did the exact same thing for our nation's leaders - we're virtually incapable of action. SP has committed treason! In more ways then one!

willbeurdaddy -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:51:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy It will have zero impact economically. I heard it will cause an increase in interest rates? Its possible but unlikely. Japan Ireland and a third country I dont recall right now had their credit ratings downgraded with no impact on interest rates. The Treasury market was extremely stable leading up the deficit agreement, indicating that its still the go to investment for safety. Canada? Thank you...too close to home lol.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:52:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 Let's see, the Teabaggers hold the world economy hostage over what is essentially a paperwork technicallity. The deal they extorted does next to nothing to reduce the deficit ($2 trillion over 10 years is nothing comparred to the $28 trillion deficit). Quite the unique sky in your imaginary world. The shitty "deal" that "does next to nothing to reduce the deficit" is a direct result of Obama, Reid, and Dems REFUSING to agree to the bigger spending cuts repeatedly proposed by the House. Obama and the Dems own this, as THEY are the ones who refused both the greater spending cuts, as well as the Balanced Budget Amendment. [8\|]

ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:53:40 PM)
I love the red herring that is the balanced budget amendment. Let's take a quick look. The 1st problem is that it iamounts to Congress abdicating their responsibilty to live within their means. It is the sole responsibility of the House to initiate spending bills. We have deficit spending because Congress wants it. The president can only sign or veto a bill, he cannot create one. So for Congree to cry We need a balanced budget ammendment is really just saying they can't do their job. The real solution is to fire every one of them. The 2nd problem is that we would have no way to spend moeny in a time of crisis. We could not have fought either World War if there had been a balanced budget amendment in place. The 3rd problem is the amount of time it takes to pass an amendment. It is a difficuly process for a reason. So saying Let's have a balanced budget ammedment means it will take several years to work through, and it still won't happen. So go ahead and play the BBA card - it's really just the joker in the deck anyway.

pahunkboy -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 6:55:45 PM)
A new amendment is unlikely- if it were that easy ERA would have passed in the 70s.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:00:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 I love the red herring that is the balanced budget amendment. Let's take a quick look. The 1st problem is that it iamounts to Congress abdicating their responsibilty to live within their means. It is the sole responsibility of the House to initiate spending bills. We have deficit spending because Congress wants it. The president can only sign or veto a bill, he cannot create one. So for Congree to cry We need a balanced budget ammendment is really just saying they can't do their job. The real solution is to fire every one of them. No, it means that one branch of government cant hold the others hostage to win more spending than can be afforded. The 2nd problem is that we would have no way to spend moeny in a time of crisis. We could not have fought either World War if there had been a balanced budget amendment in place. Try reading the amendment, you would know you are 100% wrong. The 3rd problem is the amount of time it takes to pass an amendment. It is a difficuly process for a reason. So saying Let's have a balanced budget ammedment means it will take several years to work through, and it still won't happen. Talk about red herrings, who gives a fuck if it takes time. The House already passed one in about 3 days. When the GOP wins the Senate in 2012 they will also pass one. Lets see who's in the WH veto it.So go ahead and play the BBA card - it's really just the joker in the deck anyway.

ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:04:41 PM)
Re-writting history already? I seem to recall the president offering the cons more than they asked for when Boner walked away from the table. Would $4 trillion have been better? It's still over a 10 year period with a projected deficit of $28 trillion. And are you really satisfied with cutting programs for the bottom end of society? Why can't we cut some of those corporate loop holes we hear so much about? Wouldn't that be a better route? And just exactly why can't we raise the tax rate on the richest people? For someone making over $500k - after all their other deductions and such - we're talking about an extra $8,000. And when the country is in the midsts of a depression it is NOT the time to cut spending - it should be increased. The corporate world is sitting on trillions in profits - they are not spending it. More than 1/2 the US economy is driven by consumer spending. But the consumers aren't spending. quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA Quite the unique sky in your imaginary world. The shitty "deal" that "does next to nothing to reduce the deficit" is a direct result of Obama, Reid, and Dems REFUSING to agree to the bigger spending cuts repeatedly proposed by the House. Obama and the Dems own this, as THEY are the ones who refused both the greater spending cuts, as well as the Balanced Budget Amendment. [8\|]

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:04:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 The president can only sign or veto a bill, he cannot create one. And the dipshit openly stated he'd VETO the bills that addressed greater spending cuts. quote: ...we would have no way to spend moeny in a time of crisis. I believe I'd heard one of the talking head politicians say the Bill included a means to address spending under the guise of a "crisis"??? quote: ...the amount of time it takes to pass an amendment. Who cares how long it would take? The idiots on both sides clearly need some legislative means to keep them from spending like drunken sailors.

pahunkboy -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:10:06 PM)
IMO the corporate party did this to us. Think of whom that is....

ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:10:28 PM)
Congress, no matter how hard they try, cannot ammend the constitution. It must be ratified by the states and that tends to take years. The House and the Senate COMBINED make up one branch of governemt. Again, all spending originates in the House of Representatives. We have deficit spending because Congress wants it. Not to mention it's good for the banksters, but that another story. And again, to my 1st point, we do NOT need an amendment. What we need is a Congress who can do they job WE pay them for. quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 I love the red herring that is the balanced budget amendment. Let's take a quick look. The 1st problem is that it iamounts to Congress abdicating their responsibilty to live within their means. It is the sole responsibility of the House to initiate spending bills. We have deficit spending because Congress wants it. The president can only sign or veto a bill, he cannot create one. So for Congree to cry We need a balanced budget ammendment is really just saying they can't do their job. The real solution is to fire every one of them. No, it means that one branch of government cant hold the others hostage to win more spending than can be afforded. The 2nd problem is that we would have no way to spend moeny in a time of crisis. We could not have fought either World War if there had been a balanced budget amendment in place. Try reading the amendment, you would know you are 100% wrong. The 3rd problem is the amount of time it takes to pass an amendment. It is a difficuly process for a reason. So saying Let's have a balanced budget ammedment means it will take several years to work through, and it still won't happen. Talk about red herrings, who gives a fuck if it takes time. The House already passed one in about 3 days. When the GOP wins the Senate in 2012 they will also pass one. Lets see who's in the WH veto it.So go ahead and play the BBA card - it's really just the joker in the deck anyway.

NCSpankingSwitch -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:11:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 Let's see, the Teabaggers hold the world economy hostage over what is essentially a paperwork technicallity. The deal they extorted does next to nothing to reduce the deficit ($2 trillion over 10 years is nothing comparred to the $28 trillion deficit). And future sessions of Congress are NOT obligated to abide by the deal. So all this sound and furry to signify nothing but we still get the national credit rating lowered. I guess we'll have to wait and see what impact it has. Rates might go up or they might stay the same. In either case, the world is stunned by the stupidty of the entire episode. Ok, so in other words, the entire world economy can be held hostage by a paperwork technicality ? Or in other words, something that is nothing twice removed (paperwork is nothing, if it's a technicality it is nothing twice) is going to end objective reality ? I hate Michael Savage, but he is right, liberalism is a mental disorder. Rates will go up and as we're already borrowing more money per year than the entire value of the economy in this country we're quite fucked. But until all the damn jealous assholes who think they deserve the money of others have experienced a true depression and then the socialist totalitarianism that is going to follow we're not even going to try to do shit about it. All the liberal politicians in this country look back with true glee at the years of FDR, the jackwipe that intensified the depression 2-fold but in doing so increased the power of the politicians in this country far far beyond what the founders intended. Our current economy and the coming depression is by design and the only piece of propaganda they had to come up with to enable it is "Someone else makes more money and it's not fair". I hope all you that believe that lie, live a very very long life under the conditions you're responsible for bringing about. I'd also suggest rot in hell but i'm sure satan can't stand your stench either.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:13:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 ...when the country is in the midsts of a depression it is NOT the time to cut spending - it should be increased. DING... DING... DING!!! Just proved my point for me!!! It's this line of thinking by you, Obama, Reid, the Dems that is the EXACT REASON that S&P stated as the reason for the downgrade. Once again... quote: S&P decided to lower the AAA rating, held by the United States for 70 years, to AA+ after a bipartisan debt deal signed into law this week failed to assuage concerns about the nation’s growing spending. Gee... do ya think the above is a result of spending more (as you, Obama, Reid, and the Dems want), or not cutting spending?!! DUH!!! [8\|]

Aylee -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:15:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 The president can only sign or veto a bill, he cannot create one. And the dipshit openly stated he'd VETO the bills that addressed greater spending cuts. Yep. And he is conveniently forgetting the Democrat-controlled Senate's declaration of 'Dead on Arrival.'

pahunkboy -> RE: S&P downgrades U.S. credit rating for first time (8/5/2011 7:17:11 PM)
My car is paid off. My mortgage is a fixed rate... I am not into credit cards... who cares if consumer rates go up?? CDS should be paying 2% more then inflation- which is over 10% -close to 11% right now.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625