US Credit Rating Downgraded To AA+

The only problem with SS is that they expanded it for more then retirements and then they stole the money from SS to buy more votes. If the money intended for SS was left in its account we would have more then enough to cover its cost.

I think there are way more problems than that. That's just the easy to debate issue.

First, go to the White House website. The Recovery Act | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/recovery/) There should be an accounting of all the projects funded by The Recovery Act. I'm sure you peruse the White House's site all the time.

You know, we're going to have to make some investments --spend-- whatever word you want to use. I don't think we should view any and all spending as unnecessary and burdensome. We just have to balance national priorities and be fiscally responsible at the same time. Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

You mean to use the site that claim to invest in districts that did not even exist.

We got a bunch of new roads in my town.
Many of us wondered why they tore up a decent road and rebuilt it.
Instead of dicking around with building roads that only create temporary jobs how about we do something to get manufacturing back into this country?

Not enough people want manufacturing jobs in this country. Or more precisely can't afford to have them without there being a minimum wage that makes hiring them indefensible for publicly traded companies.

You mean to use the site that claim to invest in districts that did not even exist.

Yep, that's the one I'm talking about.

FRPLG, I'm not dismissive of the events or the downgrade for that matter. It's a huge deal. We've lost billions in market cap in less than two weeks. But I wholeheartedly stand by my criticism, rating agencies have no business dictating policy. Especially S&P. They are three years too late and a dollar short downgrading anything. Had they downgraded the failed banks and unscrupulous mortgage lenders that led to the financial meltdown, had they issued the proper warnings when conditions were right, the politics of this current debate would have been far less difficult and much more achievable, in my opinion. We'd probably be looking at a completely different chain of events with a different menu of options to address them. But that's all water under the bridge now.

If lawmakers want to take their cue from economic forecasts to shape policy, fine. It shouldn't be the other away around. In some twisted way, I feel like our democracy has been undermined.



And ealier you said this:

FRPLG, I didn't say the credit rating wasn't important. A credit rating agency, in my opinion, should issue downgrades or upgrades based on economic data; The models and metrics they've been using since the company was founded. Not politics. If you think I believe that the credit rating is somehow trivial, then I don't know what else to tell you.

Its impossible for rating agencies to not dictate policy. When they downgrade a company that’s effectively what theyre doing. No matter the reason a company gets downgraded the rating agency is basically saying something needs to change and major change usually needs starts at top with management and policy. And rating agencies aren’t just using economic models to forecast growth, this isn’t pure science, it’s a mixture of art of science. It’s a evaluation of an entire company including qualitative factors. So for S&P to come out and put their primary concern on the management of US and question the policy of our leaders may be a stretch of what their main focus should be but it shouldn’t be something they neglect. When our 2 parties refuse to work together and play chicken with raising the debt ceiling it should be a concern of credit agencies and likewise investors who put trust in them.

I agree that you got to put less reliance in something that totally missed downgrading the failed banks and mortgage lenders that hurt us so badly 3 years ago, but what are you supposed to do ignore them? They made mistakes and now they are apparently acting more hawkish. If they didn’t downgrade US creditworthiness, like they failed to do so for the banks, should we be more concerned?

I guess to them, I am not a tea partier by any stretch but I do agree with some fundamental philosophy, the debt ceiling was representative of what they feel the issue has been--the willingness to continue spending money into the future that we don't have now and likely won't have then. Ultimately it was a tool for them to start twisting the Washington establishment away from the destructive policies of the past and present. The culture of our governing few is busted and it is going to take cracking that culture in half to start making the right decisions for this country. It isn't something that can be effectively changed over a long and slow process. It is going to need a shock to make it happen most likely. Until the system is changed so that the hard decisions are actually made instead of them PRETENDING to make hard decisions (but really just masking the same old same old) I applaud anyone who goes to Washington and holds it hostage.

Example number 1. Social Security. We can't afford it. We can't afford it now and we can't afford in the future. At least not without it changing so much that it isn't even the same thing any more. Yet no one in Washington does a damn thing about really CHANGING it or simply getting rid of it. Why? Because instead of making a hard but correct decision they all engage in group think to stay elected. I don't know about anyone else but when it comes down to it I pay for food, water, electricity and a host of other necessities before I start dropping a bunch of money into my retirement. But our gov't has been saying for decades "Screw that! We can pay for everything all at once even without the cash to do it! Future generations be damned!". Well guess what, the "future generation" is here and a lot of us are f*cking pissed about it.

Let's not pretend the tea party is a voice reason. Their solution consists of cut spending and cut taxes after all. These numbnuts have no problem brining the bacon back home either.

Let's not pretend the tea party is a voice reason. Their solution consists of cut spending and cut taxes after all. These numbnuts have no problem brining the bacon back home either.

Their solution is far and away better than anyone elses in my opinion. Anything that doesn't involve actually stopping spending that we can't afford is useless. Third-rail spending or not.

The question of taxes is such a sh*t issue. I'm pretty tired of people wanting the gov't do do everything but not have taxes.

I guess to them, I am not a tea partier by any stretch but I do agree with some fundamental philosophy, the debt ceiling was representative of what they feel the issue has been--the willingness to continue spending money into the future that we don't have now and likely won't have then. Ultimately it was a tool for them to start twisting the Washington establishment away from the destructive policies of the past and present. The culture of our governing few is busted and it is going to take cracking that culture in half to start making the right decisions for this country. It isn't something that can be effectively changed over a long and slow process. It is going to need a shock to make it happen most likely. Until the system is changed so that the hard decisions are actually made instead of them PRETENDING to make hard decisions (but really just masking the same old same old) I applaud anyone who goes to Washington and holds it hostage.

Example number 1. Social Security. We can't afford it. We can't afford it now and we can't afford in the future. At least not without it changing so much that it isn't even the same thing any more. Yet no one in Washington does a damn thing about really CHANGING it or simply getting rid of it. Why? Because instead of making a hard but correct decision they all engage in group think to stay elected. I don't know about anyone else but when it comes down to it I pay for food, water, electricity and a host of other necessities before I start dropping a bunch of money into my retirement. But our gov't has been saying for decades "Screw that! We can pay for everything all at once even without the cash to do it! Future generations be damned!". Well guess what, the "future generation" is here and a lot of us are f*cking pissed about it.


Bush tried, got trashed by people in his own party and most of the old farts he couldn't sell his idea to are now part of the tea party talking about "I paid into it." And these same Tea Party Republicans got into office by telling their constituents Obama is going to cut your social security, Obama is going to gut Medicare, Obama is going to kill you.

Their solution is far and away better than anyone elses in my opinion. Anything that doesn't involve actually stopping spending that we can't afford is useless. Third-rail spending or not.

The question of taxes is such a sh*t issue. I'm pretty tired of people wanting the gov't do do everything but not have taxes.

How did the vote on the Republican Study Committee budget turnout (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/156329-drama-erupts-on-house-floor-in-vote-over-conservatives-budget)?

They're peacocking is all. As we have seen from the last decade Tax Cuts can be quite costly especially since they are currently the lowest they have ever been.

Bush tried, got trashed by people in his own party and most of the old farts he couldn't sell his idea to are now part of the tea party talking about "I paid into it." And these same Tea Party Republicans got into office by telling their constituents Obama is going to cut your social security, Obama is going to gut Medicare, Obama is going to kill you.

How come the left did not rais hell like this when Clinton cut SS?