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.
Uncompromising republicans. The dems had a 4 trillion offer in cuts and taxes that could have been a lot more serious and impressive, and last I recall it was the largest solution talked about in the past month. However the GOP threw a temper tantrum and walked out on that.
Last I checked, what passed on Monday night was a lot of compromise on the dems part, lots of spending cuts, and no tax hikes, didn't see any compromise from the Republicans. Pretty much what its been the past few months.
From Standard and Poor's actual report
[SIZE=2][SIZE=2][LEFT]We view the act's measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation.
However, this is within the framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves
open the details of what is finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and
Congress and the Administration could modify any agreement in the future. Even
assuming that at least $2.1 trillion of the spending reductions the act
envisages are implemented, we maintain our view that the U.S. net general
government debt burden (all levels of government combined, excluding liquid
financial assets) will likely continue to grow. Under our revised base case
fiscal scenario--which we consider to be consistent with a 'AA+' long-term
rating and a negative outlook--we now project that net general government debt
would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 79% in 2015 and
85% by 2021. Even the projected 2015 ratio of sovereign indebtedness is high
in relation to those of peer credits and, as noted, would continue to rise
under the act's revised policy settings.
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[/SIZE][/SIZE][SIZE=2][SIZE=2][/LEFT] [/SIZE][/SIZE][SIZE=2][SIZE=2][LEFT]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[/LEFT]
stable--retains these same macroeconomic assumptions.
The political know it alls should have listened to the Tea Party. As it turns out, they were the only ones who had it right. They wanted to deal with this situaion right now and not kick it down the road again. The left with their typical FEAR MONGERING called it hostage taking. I call it common sense and found it refreshing.
Years of liberal fiscal policies brought us to this point. Obama's doubling down on the Pelosi/Reid/Dodd/Frank fiscal policies drove us off the cliff. Obama's hateful, angry rhetoric made it impossible to reach a deal.
I am not interested in compromise. I am interested in stopping this insane spending, PERIOD!
What a stain on Obama's legacy! The first POTUS ever to cause the downgrade of America's credit rating. That will ALWAYS be part of his resume now. Well, at least now he has a resume.
Hope & change baby. Hope and change. I guess there was change after all.
Do you people even read the crap you spew? S&P specifically stated one of the reasons they downgraded was because Republicans were unwilling to compromise on new revenue increases and S&P did not believe they would end the Bush tax cuts. Which group of Republicans held up negotiations in the House over compromise? The Tea Party!
The Tea Party is one of the primary causes of this downgrade. I have no clue what planet you're on when you think they did everything right. You may not care about compromise, but the Tea Party is accountable to more than just their 1st grade educated constituents. Without compromise, we have political gridlock, and gridlock is why S&P doesn't trust our government to deal with our debt. Lack of compromise is the direct cause of this downgrade.
Only clueless children would blame 1 man for every single problem in this country. The Presidency is bigger than 1 man, and the Presidency is not the most powerful government body.
Uncompromising republicans. The dems had a 4 trillion offer in cuts and taxes that could have been a lot more serious and impressive, and last I recall it was the largest solution talked about in the past month. However the GOP threw a temper tantrum and walked out on that.
How many times is this ignorant statement going to be regurgitated?
If we had cut the spending significantly we could have kept our credit rating.
No, we wouldn't have, because cuts were not enough. S&P wanted to see new revenue proposals and an end to the Bush tax cuts. Neither of which were offered by Republicans.
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.
Had CC&B included compromises on the Republicans part, and not included a freakin Constitutional Amendment requirement, it might have passed. Tell your party to learn the meaning of realistic Bill expectations. 67% of Congress and 75% of the States were not going to agree to Amend the Constitution 2 weeks before a freakin default.
And you must not have read S&Ps report if you think Conservatives did their job. Republicans were specifically called out on their unwillingness to compromise as a cause for this downgrade.
I love these threads; all engaged in pointing a finger across the floor in a useless post mortem exercise that only serves the purpose to determine the cause of death!
You people just don't get it at all!
Had you focused more of that military spending on education instead you may not have had this idiotic mindless ideology of two party politics reduce you to a naked homeless man standing on the corner with his hand out and a look on his face of "how did this happen to me?"
That is because we had trade tariff taxes in place. Americans took care of Americans.
No, thats because transportation costs were more expensive.
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.
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.
