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.
"Standard and Poors clearly stated that $4 trillion need to be cut in order to indicate fiscal responsibility and avoid a credit downgrade, and our brilliant leaders could come up with less than half that."
Largely due to the fact TP scared Bohener off Grand Compromise, which did eliminate $4 trillion from deficit. Half ot it via (to use Reagans' term for his 5) "Revenue Enhancements".
Winter Sucks is CORRECT. At least, I wanted to see a public vote on it, with ZERO adders to the bill. Shown on EVERY Network live..with EVERY newspaper publishing on page 1 in large font the voting record by individual.
The Tea Party wanted to cut $4 trillion from Washington's insane overspending. A single trillion dollars is so much money that it is almost beyond human comprehension. If dollar bills were stacked on top of each other, a pile of $1 trillion would reach 60,000 miles into space. Washington's level of irresponsibility has racked up over $16 trillion in national debt, irrespective of Social Security and Medicare obligations.
The Tea Party did not agree with giving MORE money to politicians who are so incredibly irresponsible that they spend 40% more than they confiscate in taxes every year. Until they are not ALLOWED to spend a penny more than they confiscate, we will be racing toward bankruptcy. There is absolutely no hope of ever getting control of government when they can spend without limit.
I'm sure every penny of those trillions that finance our elite aristocracy in Washington is VERY well spent, far better than if the working class got to save it for their retirement or spend it to improve their lives and stimulate their local economy.
How many out there REALLY think that if we just gave Big Government politicians MORE of our money, they'd suddenly be able to stick to a budget?
How many really think that the incredible spending of Washington is so NECESSARY that it can't be slashed? Since Social Security and Medicare have their own dedicated taxes, we could 100% abolish the income tax and NOBODY who wasn't a government parasite would even notice-except that suddenly the working class would have discretionary income and the economy would boom. We have a huge military that costs more than all the other world militaries put together, while the only threat in the modern world is from terrorism--which is a RESULT of our insane war-mongering.
Giving more money to politicians is like trying to make a gambling addict or crack addict promise to be reasonable.
Washington is a monster that can only be controlled by starving it. Unfortunately, it controls us, and it is determined to destroy our economy and our future.
(Reuters) - The United States will likely suffer the loss of its triple-A credit rating from another major rating agency by the end of this year due to concerns over the deficit, Bank of America Merrill Lynch forecasts.
A definite sign we're turning into a third-world country.
LOL, NHartphotog, compromise is the way to get things done, a word the TP fails to comprehend. JB and BO achieved a Grand Compromise, something the TP has never done. Any promise to cut $4 trill w/o compromise was a disingenuous attempt to fake you out, and it worked perfectly.
The Tea Party wanted to cut $4 trillion from Washington's insane overspending.
The tea party plan was to destroy medicare, medicaid, social security and every other middle and low income plans while keeping all the insane spending on the tax cuts to the rich, handouts to big oil, big pharma and other corporations. They even wanted to spend more on the already extremely over bloated military. Not to mention it would take almost 20 years to balance the budget under the tea party plan. It was so extremely far right the GOP itself shot it down. Obama had a 4 trillion cut plan on the table. He bent over backwards for the GOP only asking they cut one trillion which they absolutely refused, leading to the credit downgrade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHartphotog
How many really think that the incredible spending of Washington is so NECESSARY that it can't be slashed?
You're right and this is what Obama and the dems have been trying to do. The tea party and GOP have absolutely refused to cut a penny of their own spending. They are the first to whine about "less spending!" but want the poor and middle class to pay for their excesses instead of making cuts that everyone across the board needs to make. Everyone is ready except the top of the ladder which the right are dead set on defending and obeying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHartphotog
We have a huge military that costs more than all the other world militaries put together, while the only threat in the modern world is from terrorism--which is a RESULT of our insane war-mongering.
You're correct and it's the biggest pork barrel spending next to the tax cuts to the rich. The tea party wants to extent this insane spending which is ridiculous.
You seem to be on the right page but if you think the tea party is going to stand for cutting the pork and doing what's right for the nation, you are direly mistaken.
Fiscally responsible Republicans in the House put together a bill that offered a real chance to reduce the deficit and enforce some degree of control of federal spending. The whiner in charge of the Senate refused to even consider the bill, or to actually propose a plan of his own. Mainstream Republicans sold out to the Dems, specifically Obama's, Borrow, Spend and Tax bill, giving DC a blank check to continue spending like spoiled children. In doing so they brought us to this mess. It's long past time to vote the spoiled children out of DC and put some responsible adults in charge.
Okay, let me rephrase it then: the financial sector, inclusive to banks, credit ratings agencies, financial firms, hedge funds, and whatever else. No need to parse words, chief. It's essentially one and the same since they offer many of the same kinds of financial services, depending on the company.
OK. But they are the ones who buy our debt, so don't they have a right to downgrade us? If it weren't for them, we wouldn't be able to deficit spend.
The banks are full of sh*t. This is just their way of saying "If you regulate us, we'll use our credit ratings system to hold a knife to the throat of the American economy"
People are beginning to see through this, and they're fed up with
it.
Before accusing bank, let's turn this around a bit.
Let's say that YOU are the bank, Chickenfriedbananas Inc.
Let's say you have a customer who makes $40k year, but spends $100K a year. Every year they ask you for a higher and higher credit limit on the card. And while they are making more money each year, their spending outstrips their earnings, 2½ times, and they are now getting loans from other banks, (the CHINA Bank, the Bank of Europe, etc etc, to be able to have enough money to live on, (because hey, they are living the life, and need to buy more and more stuff).
Now they are asking you for an increase in their credit line, so they can withdraw enough money to pay the interest on all the other loans they have.
Now they are escalating this borrowing from you 50% more in the past 3 years, than they have done in ALL of their years of banking with you, would YOU believe they are solvent and keep giving them money, or would you tell them to start living within their means and paying down their debt to you and everyone else?
Would you keep their AAA Credit rating, or would you downgrade it, because you feel they are getting to a point where they may not be able to keep paying their debts?
Ending the wars in Iraq and eventually in Afghanistan is a big start. We won't see the results until next year, but it's going to be a substantive help.
"Mainstream Republicans" Toyman can get things done. TPs can't. Try proving me wrong, name one piece of legislation they have actually implemented (not just discussed), and do so w/o any excuses if they have not implemented anything.
Looks like the ratings agencies are continuing to strong arm the government regulators from looking into their books related to the AAA ratings these agencies gave to knowingly toxic CDO derivatives that led to the economic disaster in 2008. It's BLACKMAIL, it's as simple as that. The first US downgrade had little to do with our debt to GDP ratio and political atmosphere. There's always been politics in Washington, but all of the sudden S and P downgrades the US economy right before the government starts gearing up for an investigation into ratings agencies roles in the 2008 mortgage derivatives crisis? Yet countries like France maintain AAA ratings with even worse debt than us? It's absolutely unbelievable what Wall St. is trying to pull. These financial institutions are now more powerful than our so called 'elected government'.
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.
