Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: If CCB had passed, would our Credit Rating have been cut?
Yes, it still would have. We're just in too deep. 55 36.18%
No. It would have shown we were serious about getting spending under control. 93 61.18%
I don't care, I want to keep spending like it's 1999. 4 2.63%
Voters: 152. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-06-2011, 07:50 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,403,011 times
Reputation: 8672

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
If we had cut the spending significantly we could have kept our credit rating.

We showed the world we're incapable, even with "compromise" to rein in spending in any significant way. Plus when all your cuts are on those people who paid into the system, not one cut in welfare programs it indicates you aren't even going to cut in any meaningful way.
The S&P downgrade specifically mentions the unwillingness to raise revenues as part of its reasoning for lowering the credit rating.

"In their official statement, reported by USA Today, S&P cites, among other factors, Republicans’ stance against increasing revenues under any circumstances:
“We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-06-2011, 07:51 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,663,022 times
Reputation: 18521
Had CC&B passed the Senate and the Prez., we would not have been down graded by S&P.

Didn't turbo Timmy say there is no chance of an S&P downgrade?


Who was right?


The Conservatives did their jobs. The Progressives and RINO's got to make a deal. The end result?
You want to blame a political party, for a big mistake the Progressives in both parties made? The Conservatives had the plan to stop the S&P downgrade.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2011, 07:53 AM
 
24,422 posts, read 23,084,509 times
Reputation: 15029
Ron Paul was right, but we didn't listen. We didn't listen!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2011, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,403,011 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Had CC&B passed the Senate and the Prez., we would not have been down graded by S&P.

Didn't turbo Timmy say there is no chance of an S&P downgrade?


Who was right?


The Conservatives did their jobs. The Progressives and RINO's got to make a deal. The end result?
You want to blame a political party, for a big mistake the Progressives in both parties made? The Conservatives had the plan to stop the S&P downgrade.
What part of

"on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed "

Do you not understand?

They know that cutting to much government spending out of a hurting economy now would only lead to further economic problems. There must be some revenue increase.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2011, 07:59 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,863 posts, read 46,663,022 times
Reputation: 18521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
What part of

"on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed "

Do you not understand?

They know that cutting to much government spending out of a hurting economy now would only lead to further economic problems. There must be some revenue increase.


Look what Woodrow Wilson left for the USA.

Look what it took to get us out of a depression similar to what we are in now.

Taxes were cut.
Government size & spending were cut by 2/3rds
Unions were busted back down to size.
Import taxes were in place.
Illegal immigration was not allowed.
Unemployment went down to the lowest it has ever been.


The most prosperous times in USA history ensued and lasted until another tax & spend big government micro manager took office and since then, it has been the rule to ruin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2011, 08:02 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,403,011 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Look what Woodrow Wilson left for the USA.

Look what it took to get us out of a depression similar to what we are in now.

Taxes were cut.
Government size & spending were cut by 2/3rds
Unions were busted back down to size.
Import taxes were in place.
Illegal immigration was not allowed.
Unemployment went down to the lowest it has ever been.


The most prosperous times in USA history ensued and lasted until another tax & spend big government micro manager took office and since then, it has been the rule to ruin.
Wilson, number one, didn't have a global economy to contend with.

Lets look at Roosevelt. He tried to cut government spending in 1937. That sent unemployment up, and lengthened the depression.

I'm not saying we don't need to cut spending. I'm saying we need to raise revenue also.

And S&P specifically mentioned just that in their downgrade statement.

We need to raise revenues, and cut spending. Not one, or the other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2011, 08:02 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,880,765 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icy Tea View Post
Ron Paul was right, but we didn't listen. We didn't listen!
Yup.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2011, 08:10 AM
 
Location: The Twilight Zone
773 posts, read 504,206 times
Reputation: 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68 View Post
It's unbelievable what the far right will believe. Clinton gave Bush the biggest surplus in US history to turn it into the biggest deficit. It takes a real idiot to pull that one off, but that's what happens when you give republicans complete control. They spend like lunatics and could care less about the country, just about bankrolling their corporate masters.
It's not a republican/democrat thing. It's a conservative/liberal thing. Liberal fiscal policies put us here. Conservative fiscal policy is the only way out.

If you look at the ACTUAL fiscal policies of both Bush and Obama, then the only logical conclusion can be if Bush was bad then Obama is worse. They have the same fiscal and war policies, with one difference. Obama increased both.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2011, 08:13 AM
 
201 posts, read 235,912 times
Reputation: 147
Here's the deal:

The GOP owns this economy now. They showed the world they are willing to default to prove they are bat**** crazy. So, now we are even more a banana republic than we were a week ago. Conservative fiscal policy is totalitarian capitalism (see China)

S&P is down dictating what they think our government should do, and they're doing it openly.

Until we get the corporatist out of the democratic party and the totalitarian capitalists out of the republican party, this cycle will repeat and become more rapid.

Oh and Ron Paul wasn't right. He's a man that wants to go on the gold standard. So unless you are 14, drop the Ron Paul crap. Bernie Sanders was right. The House Progressive Caucus was right. Libertarians who are old enough to drive can't be trusted with mowing the lawn, much less holding office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-06-2011, 08:13 AM
 
Location: The Twilight Zone
773 posts, read 504,206 times
Reputation: 363
It's simple:
  • The conservatives were willing to cut what was needed
  • The liberals were not willing to cut what was needed
  • The liberals won
  • America lost
  • The US credit rating was lowered for the first time in history as a result
  • This is a stain on Obama's legacy
  • The stain will never go away
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:07 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top