If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Math be damned, S&P downgrades US debt from "Great" to "Meh"   (money.cnn.com) divider line 779
    More: News  
•       •       •

11604 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Aug 2011 at 11:51 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



779 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-08-06 11:17:53 AM  

Neo Sharkey: Xetal: I'm so glad that the economic terrorists in the Republican party decided to hold our debt ceiling hostage and refuse to raise revenue.

Don't worry, there is a way to get around the Tea Party not wanting to raise your taxes. You can send a check in on your own and gift the Federal Government money.

If you really believe that revenue is the solution, knock yourself out. Do what you like with your wallet, stay out of mine.

Gifts to the United States (new window)



Don't worry, there is a way to get around the big bad Democrats not wanting to cut social services. You can refuse to spend medicare money and return your social security check to the Federal Government! You can also volunteer to not drive on the roads, call the police or fire department, or use any other taxpayer funded services.

See how silly that is. That is the same thing that you are saying.
 
2011-08-06 11:19:53 AM  

Ikimasen: phenn: gaslight: From the Canadian business newspaper, The Globe and Mail.

You guys HAVE to raise taxes.

I disagree. I think we HAVE to stop slaughtering people in other nations, reign in other contractor spending and impose a fairer system of taxation.

Well, and, I mean, call it what you will, we need to increase revenues. He said "raise taxes" and you said "impose a fairer system of taxation." What it'll mostly come down to is closing loopholes, I think, because that's a lot closer to something that both parties can agree on. But revenues will need to increase.

But that's only if our goal is a balanced government budget, and I still don't quite get how that became our goal. We were all worried about job creation and unemployment, and the recession, now all of a sudden we're worried about the government having money.


Follow along with me for a moment.

If we abolished the federal income tax (a burden on your labor) and instituted a VAT, based on dollar exchange, say - to the tune of 2 cents to the dollar - who would feel it?

Incorporate every aspect of business: raw good suppliers to manufacturers to distributors to retailers to consumers.

Something tells me the federal government would have more revenue than they could say Grace over and no one would hurt in the process. Think about how many dollars change hands in one day here.

The second part of this would be seriously reigning in our expenditures for military aggression. No one wants that shiat anymore. Not even the neocons. It is costly in terms of dollars and (particularly) human life.

Minding our own business is an excellent start. Taxing in a way that is fair and apportioned is god-damned overdue. Reexamining our entitlement programs so that vulnerable people have a leg-up and wealthy retirees aren't trampling the system -- hate to say it, but we need to go there.

There are loads of good things we can do. We just need to grow sack and insist that our 'servant' government start representing us and not filthy corporate interests.
 
2011-08-06 11:19:54 AM  
I don't have any issue with raising taxes, even though I would be affected.

But, regardless of party, one can raise taxes all one wants, but:

www.foxbusiness.com

Until these curves start leveling off and turning downward, nothing is going to change.
 
2011-08-06 11:20:33 AM  
 
2011-08-06 11:22:14 AM  

bluehubcap: andrew131:
Obnoxious or not, your disagreement is invalid until you understand the actual facts of the current situation.


I'll make it easy for you: Link

Just skip to the last line of the article where it says somthing about insitutional investors.

Like it or not, the US debt market is going to take a hit.
 
2011-08-06 11:23:17 AM  
Holding the economy hostage = Treason
Making huge profits on defense spending = Treason
Misleading the public on topics of enormous importance = Treason

I advocate the execution of traitors. None of this 15 years on death row nonsense. Trial. Verdict. Dig your own grave, bullet in head.

////
We could spent Our whole lives waiting. For some thunderbolt to come.
And we could spent Our whole lives waiting. For some justice to be done.
Unless we make our own.
No police, no summons, no courts of law. No proper procedure, no rules of war. No mitigating circumstance. No lawyers fees, no second chance.
////sepultura
 
2011-08-06 11:24:32 AM  

T-Servo: ravenlore: Against whom? Fellow Farkers? S&P? Teabaggers?

Hey, first rule of Fight Club, or something like that.


Understood. Apologies for any faux-pas.
 
2011-08-06 11:26:51 AM  

phenn: If we abolished the federal income tax (a burden on your labor) and instituted a VAT, based on dollar exchange, say - to the tune of 2 cents to the dollar - who would feel it?


Well those curves wombatsrus posted would shoot through the roof, for one thing.

You really think that a 2% VAT would bring in enough revenue to replace the income tax? Really? It'd have to be a lot bigger than that -- and anything bigger represents an unconscionable burden to the poor, who really need every dollar they can get.
 
2011-08-06 11:33:07 AM  

HeartBurnKid: phenn: If we abolished the federal income tax (a burden on your labor) and instituted a VAT, based on dollar exchange, say - to the tune of 2 cents to the dollar - who would feel it?

Well those curves wombatsrus posted would shoot through the roof, for one thing.

You really think that a 2% VAT would bring in enough revenue to replace the income tax? Really? It'd have to be a lot bigger than that -- and anything bigger represents an unconscionable burden to the poor, who really need every dollar they can get.


Yup, I do. I consider the exchange of dollars on (what I mentioned). We need to consider how many dollars change hands in one day in this country. I can practically guarantee you it's more then you or I know.
 
2011-08-06 11:33:19 AM  

HeartBurnKid: phenn: If we abolished the federal income tax (a burden on your labor) and instituted a VAT, based on dollar exchange, say - to the tune of 2 cents to the dollar - who would feel it?

Well those curves wombatsrus posted would shoot through the roof, for one thing.

You really think that a 2% VAT would bring in enough revenue to replace the income tax? Really? It'd have to be a lot bigger than that -- and anything bigger represents an unconscionable burden to the poor, who really need every dollar they can get.


I don't think it could (or should) replace income tax, but it might provide short term relief. Say over 10 years, for example. It can even start at 3% and be lowered in increments over the duration. Lower income families would get a tax credit every quarter, like we do here. Its not as burdensome as you might think. The UK has had the VAT tax for quite some time and it's been working there.
 
2011-08-06 11:36:14 AM  

Cast: Holding the economy hostage = Treason
Making huge profits on defense spending = Treason
Misleading the public on topics of enormous importance = Treason

I advocate the execution of traitors. None of this 15 years on death row nonsense. Trial. Verdict. Dig your own grave, bullet in head.

////
We could spent Our whole lives waiting. For some thunderbolt to come.
And we could spent Our whole lives waiting. For some justice to be done.
Unless we make our own.
No police, no summons, no courts of law. No proper procedure, no rules of war. No mitigating circumstance. No lawyers fees, no second chance.
////sepultura


The Constitution states the USA will pay its debts. However, if someone like Congress prohibits the USA from paying it's debts, is that treason?
 
2011-08-06 11:45:09 AM  
Too much derp to debate here. Time to stop focusing on money and just focus on sex.
 
2011-08-06 11:47:33 AM  

Ikimasen: Kazakhstan is greatest country in the world:

I can't believe that this nation is full of adults that don't see a problem with granting permission to the government to borrow more money when they've consistently shown that all they will do is piss it away. You guys can blame the Tea Party all you want, but I think you all are just showing your ass.

Because they're already obligated to pay that money. Do you believe that people or nations shouldn't pay their debts? This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what just occurred and it's one that either comes naturally to conservatively minded people or one that was deliberately engendered by the GOP, because I've seen it a lot. If you have too much debt you do indeed need to work out a way to spend less. But what you don't do is start yelling about how you aren't going to pay the debts you already have.


Total idiot reply.

I never mentioned we don't pay the debts, I said we don't accrue any more debts. We can't even pay the interest rates on the debts that we have now, and it will only get worse as we borrow more money and our credit score goes down. I said we need to cut spending and let the credit bubble we are living in finally burst.

To top it off, you basically agreed with what I said and didn't even realize it.

Total, all around moron.
 
2011-08-06 11:50:51 AM  

sseye: Kazakhstan is greatest country in the world: I can't believe that this nation is full of adults that don't see a problem with granting permission to the government to borrow more money when they've consistently shown that all they will do is piss it away.

You mean like on 2 wars that don't do shiat for us? You mean like on a $400,000,000,000 giveaway to drug companies that takes money out of the pockets of old people?

So are you a gullible sap, or someone who simply hates America so much you'd rather see us fail?

It's simply amazing how many people trumpet "fiscal responsibility" only when a Democrat is in office. I still can't tell if they are all dumb as farking rocks or simply traitorous scum.




I don't know if you have me mixed up with someone else or what, but I never said I supported any war or any stimulus package, corporate welfare or government/big business cronyism. Never. Not once. I am not a Democrat nor a Republican, I am a Libertarian.

BTW America has already failed. We are in an unsustainable debt bubble that will implode eventually. Hell, it damn-near imploded 4 days ago.
 
2011-08-06 11:51:51 AM  
Tea Party: Screw the government! Yeah whoo fark the Man! Hold them at hostage, make sure we get as much as we can, we need to shake up government everywhere and rebuild it in our image!

S&P: This crap is way too wacky and unstable, if your government keeps being shaken up like this then we can't trust you guys as much anymore.

Tea Party: WTF OBAMAO?! You and your damn socialist ways have killed us again!
 
2011-08-06 11:52:24 AM  

bluehubcap: bluehubcap: andrew131:
Obnoxious or not, your disagreement is invalid until you understand the actual facts of the current situation.

I'll make it easy for you: Link

Just skip to the last line of the article where it says somthing about insitutional investors.

Like it or not, the US debt market is going to take a hit.


I never said they wouldn't. I took issue with your misunderstanding of what "investment grade" is. It still appears you don't have a farking clue what it does mean. Have you even looked it up? You seem to think AA is not investment grade, you're wholly wrong.
 
2011-08-06 12:00:13 PM  

Xetal: Neo Sharkey: Xetal: I'm so glad that the economic terrorists in the Republican party decided to hold our debt ceiling hostage and refuse to raise revenue.

Don't worry, there is a way to get around the Tea Party not wanting to raise your taxes. You can send a check in on your own and gift the Federal Government money.

If you really believe that revenue is the solution, knock yourself out. Do what you like with your wallet, stay out of mine.

Gifts to the United States (new window)


Don't worry, there is a way to get around the big bad Democrats not wanting to cut social services. You can refuse to spend medicare money and return your social security check to the Federal Government! You can also volunteer to not drive on the roads, call the police or fire department, or use any other taxpayer funded services.

See how silly that is. That is the same thing that you are saying.




How does it help America by doing business as usual when these screwballs got us into this mess? And I never said to raise taxes, that was someone else that said that. If I am against raising taxes then why would I send a money gift to the federal government? --if anything I would prefer stronger state and local governments and a weaker federal government. 535 people cannot effectively govern 300,000,000+ people, all with different cultures, backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses, etc.


BTW I don't get medicaid, medicare will be (is) bankrupt by the time I can use it, and social security? Are you farking kidding me? Listen, since my generation is paying for the baby boomers' retirement and healthcare why don't THEY stop using all of those things?

As for public roads, if I pay my registration fees, tags, taxes, insurance, and tolls then I'll drive on the roads. If I pay for a service then I get the service, although the roads and bridges aren't well maintained so it looks like they are pissing away the money.
 
2011-08-06 12:01:17 PM  

andrew131: bluehubcap: bluehubcap: andrew131:
Obnoxious or not, your disagreement is invalid until you understand the actual facts of the current situation.

I'll make it easy for you: Link

Just skip to the last line of the article where it says somthing about insitutional investors.

Like it or not, the US debt market is going to take a hit.

I never said they wouldn't. I took issue with your misunderstanding of what "investment grade" is. It still appears you don't have a farking clue what it does mean. Have you even looked it up? You seem to think AA is not investment grade, you're wholly wrong.


It's not good enough for some institutional/wholesale investors. Honestly, I'm not pulling that out of my ass. There are regulatory rules (well, probably not so much for the US, since you've been so deregulated) that say AAA only for some investment holdings. Canadian banks, for example, take their liquidity risk management very seriously.
 
2011-08-06 12:04:30 PM  

Kazakhstan is greatest country in the world: Ikimasen: Kazakhstan is greatest country in the world:

I can't believe that this nation is full of adults that don't see a problem with granting permission to the government to borrow more money when they've consistently shown that all they will do is piss it away. You guys can blame the Tea Party all you want, but I think you all are just showing your ass.

Because they're already obligated to pay that money. Do you believe that people or nations shouldn't pay their debts? This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what just occurred and it's one that either comes naturally to conservatively minded people or one that was deliberately engendered by the GOP, because I've seen it a lot. If you have too much debt you do indeed need to work out a way to spend less. But what you don't do is start yelling about how you aren't going to pay the debts you already have.

Total idiot reply.

I never mentioned we don't pay the debts, I said we don't accrue any more debts. We can't even pay the interest rates on the debts that we have now, and it will only get worse as we borrow more money and our credit score goes down. I said we need to cut spending and let the credit bubble we are living in finally burst.

To top it off, you basically agreed with what I said and didn't even realize it.

Total, all around moron.


Ugh. I was, of course, trying to include some common ground so that you and I could reach a sort of position of mutual agreement. Your response is... not really in that vein. I do basically agree that we need to accrue less debt. You'll find that the Democrats in congress think that, too. I think that we need to find ways to spend less. You'll find that the Democrats in Congress think that, too. Your claim certainly appeared to be that we should not have raised the debt ceiling. If we had done that, we would have been unable to pay the debts we already have. So by extension you seem to be saying that we shouldn't have paid the debts that we already have.

And what do you hope to gain by calling me an "idiot" and a "moron?" Do you think you're going to win me over? If that's not your goal, why are you even posting? Do you think there's a judge out there who will declare you the winner?
 
2011-08-06 12:05:09 PM  

wyltoknow: Tea Party: Screw the government! Yeah whoo fark the Man! Hold them at hostage, make sure we get as much as we can, we need to shake up government everywhere and rebuild it in our image!

S&P: This crap is way too wacky and unstable, if your government keeps being shaken up like this then we can't trust you guys as much anymore.

Tea Party: WTF OBAMAO?! You and your damn socialist ways have killed us again!


When my credit card, mortgage, and interest rates go up because of this, I will be real sure to thank the Tea Party for their patriotism.
 
2011-08-06 12:07:28 PM  
Kazakh, you've gotta chill out. I understand that you're upset with... someone about... something, but your vehemence has turned into some kind of anger and you're turning it on anybody who talks to you. That's not going to get anybody on your side or sway anyone to your opinion, it's just gonna make people think you're crazy.
 
2011-08-06 12:14:04 PM  

bluehubcap: HeartBurnKid: phenn: If we abolished the federal income tax (a burden on your labor) and instituted a VAT, based on dollar exchange, say - to the tune of 2 cents to the dollar - who would feel it?

Well those curves wombatsrus posted would shoot through the roof, for one thing.

You really think that a 2% VAT would bring in enough revenue to replace the income tax? Really? It'd have to be a lot bigger than that -- and anything bigger represents an unconscionable burden to the poor, who really need every dollar they can get.

I don't think it could (or should) replace income tax, but it might provide short term relief. Say over 10 years, for example. It can even start at 3% and be lowered in increments over the duration. Lower income families would get a tax credit every quarter, like we do here. Its not as burdensome as you might think. The UK has had the VAT tax for quite some time and it's been working there.


Yes, but the UK's VAT is 17.5%. Not 3%. And I don't see how tacking on another 17% on the price of basic necessities could not be burdensome. The fact that you could get it credited back at the end of the year is meaningless for someone who lives month-to-month.
 
2011-08-06 12:18:33 PM  

bluehubcap: It's not good enough for some institutional/wholesale investors. Honestly, I'm not pulling that out of my ass. There are regulatory rules (well, probably not so much for the US, since you've been so deregulated) that say AAA only for some investment holdings. Canadian banks, for example, take their liquidity risk management very seriously.


You know, some of us actually work in the industry and actually know how it works. Again, only the S&P downgraded US debt. The other two are holding steady at Aaa and AAA. That's Moody's and Fitch.
 
2011-08-06 12:20:16 PM  
Blaming this on the Tea Party is silly. They have no real power yet. The blame for this should be on every president and congressman in the last 20 to 30 years that gave special interests and friends preferential selection for government funding, as well as the well-meaning but financially inept public welfare programs that we can no longer afford. Also, I'd like to blame the congressional budget office for continual gross underestimation of the costs of new government programs. We need to use the next couple of election cycles to rid ourselves of the career politicians and mathematically challenged employees in our government.
 
2011-08-06 12:21:13 PM  

andrew131: bluehubcap: Yes and no. Some investments HAVE to have a AAA rating. I'm not positive (firefly212 correct me if I'm wrong, please) but I believe a lot of insurance companies are mandated that a percentate of their investment holdings have a AAA rating. (At least, they do in Canada, not sure about the US).

This means a major dump of US debt investment. We're not talking your individual bondholders, here.

US has never been downgraded before (again, firefly212 correct me), and to have this happen with an election year upcoming is disastrous. This will be ugly.

I'm quite well aware how investments and the securities markets work.


Actually, when it comes to insurance and pension funds, a lot of states (New York, for example) have laws that REQUIRE funds to hold certain amounts of Treasuries, regardless of credit rating. Feel free to look it up, it amazed me when I read it.
 
2011-08-06 12:25:30 PM  

TheTaiPan: Actually, when it comes to insurance and pension funds, a lot of states (New York, for example) have laws that REQUIRE funds to hold certain amounts of Treasuries, regardless of credit rating. Feel free to look it up, it amazed me when I read it.


It's not amazing, it's true. Treasurys are considered of the most stable investments around, you know, until the government goes around saying they'll default on it in a week or two unless [enter threat here].
 
2011-08-06 12:31:43 PM  

andrew131: TheTaiPan: Actually, when it comes to insurance and pension funds, a lot of states (New York, for example) have laws that REQUIRE funds to hold certain amounts of Treasuries, regardless of credit rating. Feel free to look it up, it amazed me when I read it.

It's not amazing, it's true. Treasurys are considered of the most stable investments around, you know, until the government goes around saying they'll default on it in a week or two unless [enter threat here].


I just found it amazing when I did research into who holds what, and who would lead the way in the sell-off, and discovered that little fun fact. I had always believed that the bond markets and bond holders had pretty much duplicated the stock market. But hey, the more you know.
 
2011-08-06 12:34:00 PM  

Bill Frist: Saturn5: So a $2.4 Trillion hike in the debt ceiling wasn't enough? Sounds like there's more to S&P's decision than how much we can borrow. We have to be able to somehow pay it back, too.

Oh, wait. I forgot this is FARK. Damn George W. Bush and his TEA BAG PARTY!! It's all his fault!!

If you actually bothered to read the farking article:

S&P also cited dysfunctional policymaking in Washington as a factor in the downgrade. "The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed."


I have absolutely no expertise in financial and economic forecasting or political savvy, but I and millions of other Americans have been complaining about the course of government decision making since before ole Ross Perot ran for office.
 
2011-08-06 12:37:14 PM  

andrew131: bluehubcap: It's not good enough for some institutional/wholesale investors. Honestly, I'm not pulling that out of my ass. There are regulatory rules (well, probably not so much for the US, since you've been so deregulated) that say AAA only for some investment holdings. Canadian banks, for example, take their liquidity risk management very seriously.

You know, some of us actually work in the industry and actually know how it works. Again, only the S&P downgraded US debt. The other two are holding steady at Aaa and AAA. That's Moody's and Fitch.


Do not presume. I work for trading risk, specifically the wholesale bank treasury and margin accounts group for a large Canadian bank. This downgrade does, in actual fact, affect our liquidity risk management.

Short term, yes it's only S&P, but Moody's may follow suit if the US government can't settle it's infighting long enough to pull a decent plan together to address it's debt. The fact that that you're going into an election year is not going to help your cause.

And for the record, no one really cares what Fitch does.
 
2011-08-06 12:40:11 PM  

Abox: Too much derp to debate here. Time to stop focusing on money and just focus on sex.

This. Whatever will be, will be. Time to go outside and enjoy life.
 
2011-08-06 12:43:05 PM  

bluehubcap: andrew131: bluehubcap: It's not good enough for some institutional/wholesale investors. Honestly, I'm not pulling that out of my ass. There are regulatory rules (well, probably not so much for the US, since you've been so deregulated) that say AAA only for some investment holdings. Canadian banks, for example, take their liquidity risk management very seriously.

You know, some of us actually work in the industry and actually know how it works. Again, only the S&P downgraded US debt. The other two are holding steady at Aaa and AAA. That's Moody's and Fitch.

Do not presume. I work for trading risk, specifically the wholesale bank treasury and margin accounts group for a large Canadian bank. This downgrade does, in actual fact, affect our liquidity risk management.

Short term, yes it's only S&P, but Moody's may follow suit if the US government can't settle it's infighting long enough to pull a decent plan together to address it's debt. The fact that that you're going into an election year is not going to help your cause.

And for the record, no one really cares what Fitch does.


As a half-trained quant (I work in insurance, managing programming groups) I have been on the phone with several people who know this area, and it is a BIG FARKING DEAL. When S&P does a downgrade, it's effect is immediate when it comes to VAR and risk management. I can tell you there are people that got pulled in today to begin hedging our company's exposure before Monday. And they are not alone.
 
2011-08-06 12:43:19 PM  
If the rating really means anything, can S&P be downgraded to "non-existent"?

This should be a declaration that it is open season on S&P to be shot and pilloried.
 
2011-08-06 12:49:40 PM  

TheTaiPan:
As a half-trained quant (I work in insurance, managing programming groups) I have been on the phone with several people who know this area, and it is a BIG FARKING DEAL. When S&P does a downgrade, it's effect is immediate when it comes to VAR and risk management. I can tell you there are people that got pulled in today to begin hedging our company's exposure before Monday. And they are not alone.


See? Someone else gets it.

Our VAR guys have been in since this morning. Fun times, our building also happens to be having an annual power down on Sunday, so there's going to be a scramble for laptops with the appropriate setups. I feel for our IT department.

This is going to be an interesting week.
 
2011-08-06 12:50:40 PM  
www.hollywoodreporter.com

None of this herpaderp really matters.

/ Damn them all to Hell.
 
2011-08-06 12:52:40 PM  

TheTaiPan: I just found it amazing when I did research into who holds what, and who would lead the way in the sell-off, and discovered that little fun fact. I had always believed that the bond markets and bond holders had pretty much duplicated the stock market. But hey, the more you know.


Can you post a link to what you found? I'm curious to see.
 
2011-08-06 01:02:45 PM  

VoiceOfBob: [www.hollywoodreporter.com image 640x360]

None of this herpaderp really matters.

/ Damn them all to Hell.


I, for one, welcome our new simian overlords.

/not like they could fark things up any worse
 
2011-08-06 01:02:52 PM  

HeartBurnKid: I don't think it could (or should) replace income tax, but it might provide short term relief. Say over 10 years, for example. It can even start at 3% and be lowered in increments over the duration. Lower income families would get a tax credit every quarter, like we do here. Its not as burdensome as you might think. The UK has had the VAT tax for quite some time and it's been working there.

Yes, but the UK's VAT is 17.5%. Not 3%. And I don't see how tacking on another 17% on the price of basic necessities could not be burdensome. The fact that you could get it credited back at the end of the year is meaningless for someone who lives month-to-month.


Where did I say it would have to be set at the UK's VAT level? Canada's is 5%. Started at 7%. Plus, it's also very specific as to what consumer goods are taxable. Example: Milk - tax exempt, DVDs - not.
 
2011-08-06 01:03:44 PM  

Ikimasen: Ugh. I was, of course, trying to include some common ground so that you and I could reach a sort of position of mutual agreement. Your response is... not really in that vein. I do basically agree that we need to accrue less debt. You'll find that the Democrats in congress think that, too. I think that we need to find ways to spend less. You'll find that the Democrats in Congress think that, too. Your claim certainly appeared to be that we should not have raised the debt ceiling. If we had done that, we would have been unable to pay the debts we already have. So by extension you seem to be saying that we shouldn't have paid the debts that we already have.

And what do you hope to gain by calling me an "idiot" and a "moron?" Do you think you're going to win me over? If that's not your goal, why are you even posting? Do you think there's a judge out there who will declare you the winner?




My goal in posting is to present my point. I didn't join this site to win the Farker of the month award, and I'm sure my pig-headedness would preclude me from winning any popularity contest anyways.

Also, since we DID raise the debt ceiling let's see how much actual principle gets paid off. If they veritably pay off even one cent of the principle that is owed I will sponsor you for Totalfark for 6 months. Since they need the money just to even balance the budget, though, I wouldn't expect that Totalfark membership anytime soon.
 
2011-08-06 01:23:10 PM  
I blame black people.
 
2011-08-06 01:35:48 PM  
What is the Democrat's solution to the debt crisis?

Raise taxes so we can pay it off.

Problem: Democrats continually come up with new or expanding social programs that eat up any additional revenue.

Democrat's solution? Raise taxes again!

Republican solution to the debt crisis: cap spending and lower taxes.

Problem: A helluva lot of the money generated by big corporations who expanded using freed funds is just going overseas and into executives' pockets. Real wages are stagnating while benefits are being cut left and right, yet productivity is as high as ever.

As I see it, neither political party at this point is worth a damn. They are (both) responsible for this mess. Giving them more money or power is like giving an alcoholic more booze.

Please post a realistic, reasonable solution that does not involve guillotines.
 
2011-08-06 02:03:23 PM  

WhyteRaven74: MannaxOne: I would like to know how this credit rating down grade is the Tea Party's fault.

The president put forth a proposal which did exactly what S&P wanted the government to do. The GOP rejected it, because it has hitched itself to the Tea Party pledge to not raised taxes under any circumstances. Note, the S&P guidance leaves no wiggle room on the issue, revenues must increase.

What proposal?

No monies for grants on research.


are you aware how the internet was created?


Yes, through military research, not through a grant program.
 
2011-08-06 02:04:47 PM  
Remember:These were the same people that rated subprime mortgages at AAA until practically the very day they collapsed.
 
2011-08-06 02:11:59 PM  

Self_Manifesto: Remember:These were the same people that rated subprime mortgages at AAA until practically the very day they collapsed.


Very true. And sadly, so did the Democrats. President Bush went to congress and warned that this would be a problem and the Democrats accused him of trying to shut out the poor from the american dream of home ownership.

(One of the very few things I think Bush did right and he even farked that up by not putting his foot down and forcing that issue to a head so that it could stop.)
 
2011-08-06 02:17:59 PM  

Kazakhstan is greatest country in the world: Xetal: Neo Sharkey: Xetal: I'm so glad that the economic terrorists in the Republican party decided to hold our debt ceiling hostage and refuse to raise revenue.

Don't worry, there is a way to get around the Tea Party not wanting to raise your taxes. You can send a check in on your own and gift the Federal Government money.

If you really believe that revenue is the solution, knock yourself out. Do what you like with your wallet, stay out of mine.

Gifts to the United States (new window)


Don't worry, there is a way to get around the big bad Democrats not wanting to cut social services. You can refuse to spend medicare money and return your social security check to the Federal Government! You can also volunteer to not drive on the roads, call the police or fire department, or use any other taxpayer funded services.

See how silly that is. That is the same thing that you are saying.



How does it help America by doing business as usual when these screwballs got us into this mess? And I never said to raise taxes, that was someone else that said that. If I am against raising taxes then why would I send a money gift to the federal government? --if anything I would prefer stronger state and local governments and a weaker federal government. 535 people cannot effectively govern 300,000,000+ people, all with different cultures, backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses, etc.


BTW I don't get medicaid, medicare will be (is) bankrupt by the time I can use it, and social security? Are you farking kidding me? Listen, since my generation is paying for the baby boomers' retirement and healthcare why don't THEY stop using all of those things?

As for public roads, if I pay my registration fees, tags, taxes, insurance, and tolls then I'll drive on the roads. If I pay for a service then I get the service, although the roads and bridges aren't well maintained so it looks like they are pissing away the money.


do you see how you divided by zero there?
 
2011-08-06 02:21:21 PM  

Kazakhstan is greatest country in the world: Ikimasen: Ugh. I was, of course, trying to include some common ground so that you and I could reach a sort of position of mutual agreement. Your response is... not really in that vein. I do basically agree that we need to accrue less debt. You'll find that the Democrats in congress think that, too. I think that we need to find ways to spend less. You'll find that the Democrats in Congress think that, too. Your claim certainly appeared to be that we should not have raised the debt ceiling. If we had done that, we would have been unable to pay the debts we already have. So by extension you seem to be saying that we shouldn't have paid the debts that we already have.

And what do you hope to gain by calling me an "idiot" and a "moron?" Do you think you're going to win me over? If that's not your goal, why are you even posting? Do you think there's a judge out there who will declare you the winner?



My goal in posting is to present my point. I didn't join this site to win the Farker of the month award, and I'm sure my pig-headedness would preclude me from winning any popularity contest anyways.

Also, since we DID raise the debt ceiling let's see how much actual principle gets paid off. If they veritably pay off even one cent of the principle that is owed I will sponsor you for Totalfark for 6 months. Since they need the money just to even balance the budget, though, I wouldn't expect that Totalfark membership anytime soon.


I'm actually quite proud of my Liter status. Lurking included I've been visiting this website for over a decade and I haven't had to pay a dime for it.

But yeah, there are a lot of people around here and, of course, around everywhere who are looking for changes. For years and years now. Remember that scene in "Dave" where they're cutting stuff out of the budget? But you can't play games with this stuff, and that's exactly what was going on with the debt ceiling debate. Course, as you say, all that's done now.

But since there's a bet on the table, I'll be watching the principle... with interest.

t0.gstatic.com
 
2011-08-06 02:28:06 PM  

HeartBurnKid: VoiceOfBob: [www.hollywoodreporter.com image 640x360]

None of this herpaderp really matters.

/ Damn them all to Hell.

I, for one, welcome our new simian overlords.

/not like they could fark things up any worse


nah... they'll fix the economy and lower the deficit to non-existent for bananas...
 
2011-08-06 02:29:12 PM  
Man, there's a lot of weak tea in this thread.
 
2011-08-06 02:34:04 PM  

Pharmdawg: What is the Democrat's solution to the debt crisis?

Raise taxes so we can pay it off.

Problem: Democrats continually come up with new or expanding social programs that eat up any additional revenue.

Democrat's solution? Raise taxes again!

Republican solution to the debt crisis: cap spending and lower taxes.

Problem: A helluva lot of the money generated by big corporations who expanded using freed funds is just going overseas and into executives' pockets. Real wages are stagnating while benefits are being cut left and right, yet productivity is as high as ever.

As I see it, neither political party at this point is worth a damn. They are (both) responsible for this mess. Giving them more money or power is like giving an alcoholic more booze.

Please post a realistic, reasonable solution that does not involve guillotines.


well, there are also firing squads, gas chambers, electric chairs, and hangings I believe...

seriously though, how about: cap or decrease spending spending, let bush tax golden goose expire, institute a VAT temporarily as someone else suggested of 2%, then we can see how that goes, and go from there... as for the decrease in spending: get out of countries we have no business being in, and downgrade our presence in peaceful allied countries (better stay in S.Korea for now due to the tard ruling best Korea).
 
2011-08-06 02:53:17 PM  

sseye: Kazakhstan is greatest country in the world: I can't believe that this nation is full of adults that don't see a problem with granting permission to the government to borrow more money when they've consistently shown that all they will do is piss it away.

You mean like on 2 wars that don't do shiat for us? You mean like on a $400,000,000,000 giveaway to drug companies that takes money out of the pockets of old people?

So are you a gullible sap, or someone who simply hates America so much you'd rather see us fail?

It's simply amazing how many people trumpet "fiscal responsibility" only when a Democrat is in office. I still can't tell if they are all dumb as farking rocks or simply traitorous scum.


Can't it be both?
 
2011-08-06 02:54:09 PM  
d3bug:

Yeah, I guess that's why the people of the younger generations who are waking up to this crapchute that we were born into, courtesy of the older generations who squander wealth, are so pissed off. We get to pay for services that we will never fully receive, and on top of that we must pay into our own IRAs and buy our own health insurance.

It's like the baby boomers covered the baton in shiat before they handed it over to us.
 
Displayed 50 of 779 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report