|
On August 06 2011 14:05 Skarmory wrote:What an interesting chart. You list policy changes, but seeing as Obama comes after Bush, most of Obama's budget is simply Bush's + His trillion plus added on top. Of course he could have cut stuff from what Bush did, but clearly Bush didn't spend enough. That simply lists changes, not actual deficits ran on a year to year basis. Bush made 5 trillion in debt in 8 years, Obama did that in 2.5 years, who is the fiscal conservative??? Neither, but thanks for the very biased and misleading poll, it is what people love on TL, whatever supports their stupid views.
Do you know the difference between mandatory and discretionary spending? Because that's quantified on that graph.
Yes, Obama has been in power for less time than Bush. But he's also dealing with a recession that has depressed already low revenues to a point not seen since the administration that desegregated the military (yea that was a long time ago).
|
So can we safely stop using the word recession at this point?
|
On August 06 2011 14:07 Yttrasil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 14:02 ControlMonkey wrote:
Does anyone trust what the ratings agencies say after the financial crisis in 2008? Rating all those resold subprime mortgages AAA, when they were in fact total crap?
The US credit rating should have been downgraded years ago. Again as I mentioned before, it wasn't those agencies it was another US government agency bundling and rating the subprime loans who did that. The credability of Moody's etc is not bad and it's a hella lote more believeable it's AA+ negative outlook than AAA.
If you are talking about Freddy Mac/Fanny May, my understanding is that they bought and passed on the mortgages as securities to investors. They passed them on with the implicit backing of the US government, as they were government sponsored entities (GSE).The large banks also securitised mortgages and on-sold them. However, I believe that S&P, Moody's etc did the ratings for those securities, not the GSEs.
If you can remember the actual name of this government ratings agency, let me know, i'd love to read about it.
|
On August 06 2011 14:40 partisan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 14:05 Skarmory wrote:What an interesting chart. You list policy changes, but seeing as Obama comes after Bush, most of Obama's budget is simply Bush's + His trillion plus added on top. Of course he could have cut stuff from what Bush did, but clearly Bush didn't spend enough. That simply lists changes, not actual deficits ran on a year to year basis. Bush made 5 trillion in debt in 8 years, Obama did that in 2.5 years, who is the fiscal conservative??? Neither, but thanks for the very biased and misleading poll, it is what people love on TL, whatever supports their stupid views. Do you know the difference between mandatory and discretionary spending? Because that's quantified on that graph. Yes, Obama has been in power for less time than Bush. But he's also dealing with a recession that has depressed already low revenues to a point not seen since the administration that desegregated the military (yea that was a long time ago).
Obama excuses. Thats all he has is excuses. His trillion dollar stimulus means he is responsible for the current debt situation. This next election Obama's only hope is to run the most negative campaign in history. He will use the race card to a level that has never been seen.
Yes we Can will be gone because he made it worse.
|
On August 06 2011 15:06 nukeazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 14:40 partisan wrote:On August 06 2011 14:05 Skarmory wrote:What an interesting chart. You list policy changes, but seeing as Obama comes after Bush, most of Obama's budget is simply Bush's + His trillion plus added on top. Of course he could have cut stuff from what Bush did, but clearly Bush didn't spend enough. That simply lists changes, not actual deficits ran on a year to year basis. Bush made 5 trillion in debt in 8 years, Obama did that in 2.5 years, who is the fiscal conservative??? Neither, but thanks for the very biased and misleading poll, it is what people love on TL, whatever supports their stupid views. Do you know the difference between mandatory and discretionary spending? Because that's quantified on that graph. Yes, Obama has been in power for less time than Bush. But he's also dealing with a recession that has depressed already low revenues to a point not seen since the administration that desegregated the military (yea that was a long time ago). Obama excuses. Thats all he has is excuses. His trillion dollar stimulus means he is responsible for the current debt situation. This next election Obama's only hope is to run the most negative campaign in history. He will use the race card to a level that has never been seen.
good to see a good well constructed argument
i find reading this stuff interesting and i'd rather read through debates without having to go through this
|
We refuse to ACTUALLY deal with entitlements. We refuse to raise revenues. Our leaders are self-serving jackasses. We don't deserve AAA.
|
On August 06 2011 15:08 shawster wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 15:06 nukeazerg wrote:On August 06 2011 14:40 partisan wrote:On August 06 2011 14:05 Skarmory wrote:What an interesting chart. You list policy changes, but seeing as Obama comes after Bush, most of Obama's budget is simply Bush's + His trillion plus added on top. Of course he could have cut stuff from what Bush did, but clearly Bush didn't spend enough. That simply lists changes, not actual deficits ran on a year to year basis. Bush made 5 trillion in debt in 8 years, Obama did that in 2.5 years, who is the fiscal conservative??? Neither, but thanks for the very biased and misleading poll, it is what people love on TL, whatever supports their stupid views. Do you know the difference between mandatory and discretionary spending? Because that's quantified on that graph. Yes, Obama has been in power for less time than Bush. But he's also dealing with a recession that has depressed already low revenues to a point not seen since the administration that desegregated the military (yea that was a long time ago). Obama excuses. Thats all he has is excuses. His trillion dollar stimulus means he is responsible for the current debt situation. This next election Obama's only hope is to run the most negative campaign in history. He will use the race card to a level that has never been seen. good to see a good well constructed argument i find reading this stuff interesting and i'd rather read through debates without having to go through this
Excuse me i was pointing out that the person i quoted was not giving an argument, but an appeal to how hard poor obama has had it without acknowledging his steps to fix it has made things worse. You have just become a hypocrite with your trolling of me.
|
On August 06 2011 15:13 nukeazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 15:08 shawster wrote:On August 06 2011 15:06 nukeazerg wrote:On August 06 2011 14:40 partisan wrote:On August 06 2011 14:05 Skarmory wrote:What an interesting chart. You list policy changes, but seeing as Obama comes after Bush, most of Obama's budget is simply Bush's + His trillion plus added on top. Of course he could have cut stuff from what Bush did, but clearly Bush didn't spend enough. That simply lists changes, not actual deficits ran on a year to year basis. Bush made 5 trillion in debt in 8 years, Obama did that in 2.5 years, who is the fiscal conservative??? Neither, but thanks for the very biased and misleading poll, it is what people love on TL, whatever supports their stupid views. Do you know the difference between mandatory and discretionary spending? Because that's quantified on that graph. Yes, Obama has been in power for less time than Bush. But he's also dealing with a recession that has depressed already low revenues to a point not seen since the administration that desegregated the military (yea that was a long time ago). Obama excuses. Thats all he has is excuses. His trillion dollar stimulus means he is responsible for the current debt situation. This next election Obama's only hope is to run the most negative campaign in history. He will use the race card to a level that has never been seen. good to see a good well constructed argument i find reading this stuff interesting and i'd rather read through debates without having to go through this Excuse me i was pointing out that the person i quoted was not giving an argument, but an appeal to how hard poor obama has had it without acknowledging his steps to fix it has made things worse. You have just become a hypocrite with your trolling of me.
It's amazing to me that people still don't realize that the entire problem is the ideological gridlock. S&P has made it very clear that part of their determination was the political mess in Washington. These guys are grandstanding, pointing fingers. Everyone wants to make the other side look horrible instead of actually solving these problems. This isn't a game anymore. Go on drinking that kool aid, blaming the other side of the aisle for everything that happens, and watch this country get run into the ground.
|
On August 06 2011 15:09 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
We refuse to ACTUALLY deal with entitlements. We refuse to raise revenues. Our leaders are self-serving jackasses. We don't deserve AAA.
Completely agree. The country needs to make cuts and increase revenue. Plain and simple.
Bring offshore funds from corporations back into the country
Make small cuts across the board (very small cuts)
Reduce military forces abroad
Make small increases in taxes
Fix tax loopholes
Social security reform (why hasnt this happened yet?)
Reduce spending on social programs by cutting costs (invest in more digital so you use less physical, be more efficient, just improve things being run)
Manage employee's of government run organizations (ie: make sure that everything is being run efficiently and well... from what i hear from some people that have had government jobs is that there are a lot of lazy people working for the govt)
|
The only reason there was a "crisis" was because the budget votes and debt ceiling votes were pressed up right against each other which was the entire point of the Democrats, so they could demagogue the Tea Party, and look how many people here fell for it.
If you leave your wallet lying around and someone takes the opportunity to steal it, I think you'd still blame the thief.
|
A well deserved downgrade, given that the US government is current spending ~$1.40 for every dollar in revenue it takes in and trillion dollar plus deficits are projected for the forseeable future, with the total public sector debt levels to hit crisis levels in just 10 years even under fairly rosy projections given the growing debt problems in the euro area. Without significant deficit reductions, the US will basically be the next Greece in about a decade.
The ratings agencies track record is one of consistently overrating bad debt and taking too long to downgrade debt with worsening outlooks; downgrades of US debt are well past due.
|
Dear people,
S&P would have downgraded U.S Debt had Obama's plan passed as well. The only thing that would have averted it was somthing like Bowles-Simpson or the Ryan Budget passing. Regardless, S&P is full of idiots and U.S. T-Bill debt is still the most reliable stuff in the world, and everyone knows it based on our interest rates.
Sincerely,
cLutz
|
Not a big shock really, and yet nothing will change, politicians will blame each other for it.
|
Goldman sachs and etc. were all rated AAA days prior to going bust so i dunno what so say about his news lol..
|
There too much politics in DC!! :O
on a serious note it's a proper move by S&P although this will just make markets plummet on Monday and worldwide.
|
But nothing has changed; these ratings are utterly meaningless.
If they couldn't spot the problem in the first place why are investors going to care now they've suddenly caught on? It didn't change much in Japan and it won't change much in the USA.
|
@jdseemoreglass
+ Show Spoiler +On August 06 2011 11:11 jdseemoreglass wrote:
lol all the alarm bells are starting to go off and all the sheeple are still standing on their respective sidelines pointing fingers and blaming the other side. It's left vs. right, red vs. blue, all over again.
More and more I am starting to realize that the problem in many nations is actually their flawed representative/democratic forms of government. The average individual is simply not educated nor intelligent enough to run a country, nor to elect representatives that are capable of running a country. Every election is the pseudo-intellectuals' version of an "American Idol" style popularity contest, while the brain-dead herd animals will vote left/right even if it was a turd sandwich running for their party.
Don't you all realize it doesn't matter wtf each party did in the whole ridiculous "debt deal"? Don't you realize that we simply cannot cut enough, nor raise taxes enough, to truly get ourselves out of the hole we are in? We need a fiscal adjustment equal to approximately 15% of GDP. That is quite simply NOT GOING TO HAPPEN, no matter who is in office or who "compromises" with the other side.
The fact that we can go through this whole debt debate and end up cutting just enough to ensure that we still increase our budget next year is enough to reveal what a whole charade this political system is. We never "cut" anything, we simply reduced the rate of increase in our debt.
This is just a waste of time. People don't look at the actual numbers involved in this situation. Everyone is still stuck in "us vs. them" fantasy land.
Out of all the posts that I have read in this thread, yours is the only one that actually made sense in my eyes. Thanks. We all just have to brace for the impact that is going to come in time.
|
On August 06 2011 13:55 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 13:42 Lmui wrote:
It makes me so sad to see how raising taxes on the people who're already making a million + a year seems like the end of the world to some republicans. Even if that isn't allowed, shouldn't closing tax loopholes to gain back a few hundred million a year be reasonable? One prominent example is general electric. From what I've read, they managed to get billions in tax benefits while being one of the most profitable companies in the US, something that makes no sense to me.
I know that the US dollar is gonna dive come monday which means I'm going down to the states when my CAD is good, getting my shopping and all of my back-to-school done and wish obama and the rest of the USA's elected officials good luck in surviving whatever shitstorm may follow. So often I see people complain about "tax loopholes" and yet nobody ever specifies exactly what particular part of the tax law they are referring to. Another example. Which "loophole" are you referring to exactly, so we can discuss intelligently ?
Went out for a bit so I didn't have a chance to reply earlier but, just a few links to websites that're reasonably well known (I don't know what bias there is in them, you'll have to look at it for yourself) I just googled "tax loopholes rich america" and got a good amount of results.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/08/25/us-usa-tax-loopholes-idUSN2235030820080825
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/06/30/the-financial-landscape-american-dreams-tax-loopholes-and-swi/
A good bit of the first page contains blogs or obviously democrat favouring websites and some aren't quite what I wanted so if you want to take a look
http://www.google.ca/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=tax loopholes rich america
What I got out of it was material goods for the rich and corporations that have no choice but to work within America (private jets, gas/oil companies) get massive tax credits, and the extra hundred or so billion from closing said holes would be a huge boon to the government in this time of need.
One other thing was, didn't general electric make an absurd profit (around 6 billion?) while not paying a cent in taxes due to tax credits? What gives?
EDIT::
What I was referring to by I'm going down to US on monday is mainly that bad news in the US economy generally sends the canadian dollar upwards, which means I exchange some CAD for USD, go down and have myself a nice shopping spree.
|
Let's assume I just had my birthday, turned 18 so I can vote. I vaguely understand that our country is in trouble concerning the economy. How am I supposed to understand which politicians are promoting solid ideas that will fix our situation? How can I vote for a president when I don't understand global economics?
|
On August 06 2011 12:08 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2011 11:58 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Lets face facts , the fiat USD is dead , hence the entire world fiat monetary system will collapse with it as faith in paper collapses.
Time to return to a gold/silver backed currency. All currency is fiat currency. With a "gold standard" the government still just intervenes by changing the foreign currency reserves (and they HAVE to, that's why it can stay at a certain amount of gold per dollar). Have you even looked up why we went off the gold standard? Europe basically used it to attack the US like economic terrorists and we almost ran out of gold.
I was under the impression it was more to do with the USA not being able to afford the Vietnam war.
Good thing we don't still have a gold backed USD then , all those wars the US is involved in these days are going gangbusters for you guys right??
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
