This whole debt ceiling debate has proven just 2 things to me...Everyone in Washington and the Entire "News" Media believes every American is Stupid and that they are correct...

Here is a tax reform plan I could support

For Individuals: absolutely no deductions, not one, not any…income, regardless of source is taxable income, prostitute to preacher, actor to zoologist

0$ -- Poverty Level = 2 %

Poverty -- 50,000 = 5 %

50,000 --- 100,000 = 10 %

100,000 -- 500,000 = 15 %

500,000 - 1,000,000 = 20 %

1,000,000 and above = 25 %

(Or sliding scale to these)

For Corporations: absolutely no deductions (except expenses), no government incentives, no sweet heart deals…profit, regardless of source is taxable, porn to poultry, advertizing to Zinc mining

Profit to 1,000,000 = 10 %

1,000,000 to billion = 15 %

Billion and above = 20 %

(Or sliding scale to these)

@Earlyout - right on the money. The stooges at the S&P can't count, can't add, and most assuredly can't examine a derivative investment vehicle and figure out that it is worthless. Proven facts, all.

China's Dagong Rating Agency down graded the U.S. debt (for the second time) last week.

Face it America, your in deep trouble, you just can't admit it yet.

@ wizard

I understand your point and respect it, as a conservative, this is my attempt at half way...17% of someones paycheck who is barely making it, isn't equal to 17% of someones paycheck who is racking it in hand over fist...as 22 - 24 isn't for the company barely keeping it's head above water

Why is anyone listening to S&P?!

Because they are S&P, otherwise the markets wouldn't give a rats arse what they said.

These are the jackasses who gave sterling ratings to bundles of crap mortgages, and very nearly sank the world economy.

They only became crap when people stopped paying up. The USA had a nice run with the housing market.

No down payment and cheap terms helped many people buy a house, become landlords or buy and sell, for both good and bad. Everyone did not take out ARM with bad terms. Sadly, too many did.

Their credibility should be very, very close to zero at this point.

Should, could, would of, it matters little. They are the top dog in this field worldwide. We are not the only nation that is affected by their actions.

They said how much they wished cut, we waited to the eleventh hour and cut half as much. They would of lost serious credibility if they ignored that. They have to at least appear fair to the other nations.

I'm with you, Pheaniques.

Wizard,

15K is not the right starting point. To someone making 16K losing 17% of their income is devastating. To someone making 1MM, 17% is nothing.

Absolutely agree. Tried to make this point much earlier and blame seemed to control thoughts.

So what is Standard and Poor's going to do when everyone continues on as if they did not exist? Their AAA ratings on mortgage derivatives pretty much says all we need to know about them. They are only trying to get headlines, make themselves seem relevant, and will end up on the ash heap of rating companies. Money talks, let's see if anyone walks.

Bah. The S&P can S my P.

@ rick & paul

You can view this through Partizan specs if you want, but this downgrade wasn't just about the debt ceiling debate, I've watched the statements from the rating agencies for the last several months, this was equally about debt and deficits, and that the "sham of a deal" didn't go nearly far enough to reducing the deficits...There isn't one single dime of spending cuts or deficit reduction in the compromise, the rating agencies know it, the chinese know it...

Everyone on the planet who can spell congress knew that this deal wouldn't be made until both parties had spent every spare moment demagoging this issue

marlen, that is the wonderful thing about capitalism. If you think you can get a better deal elsewhere, go for it. If you are worried about the US defaulting on its debt, I would remind you of one thing. Last week when the whole world was talking about default, the leaders of the Executive branch, the Senate, and the House of Representatives said there would be no default. I guess you should have listened to them instead of the media who have to say something to fill the 24 hours news cycle.

So tell us Pheanuts, where would you invest your trillion dollars? I did not notice where Standard and Poor's said they would invest a trillion dollars. If they had the guts to let us know that little bit of information, maybe I would think they were credible. Alas, just another company seeking their fifteen minutes of fame.

Rep Boner is exactly what is wrong with our country. He just can't get away from playing politics. It's time for the blame gae to stop. The rethugli-cants are just as guilty as the dems for the mess we are in today. The $2.1 trillion (chuckle, we'll never see it) doesn't address the national debt. All it supposedly does is slow down the rate of the deficit. Until ALL otions, spending cuts (from ALL federal departments) along with tax increases are addressed we will proceed down the same road.

All the rethugli-cants have shown the last year and a half is the willingness to do away with the social safety nets. Mention the Defense Departemnt, Homeland Security, etc. and they did in their heels.

BTW---Social Security, military retirement pay, etc. are not "entitlements". People have paid into SS their entire working lives. If the politicians had left the SS funds alone al these years we wouldn't be worried about it now. I'm tired of people saying we needed to change it. Let the pols put the money back that they stole. As for military retirement, we signed a legal contract with the government, and by extention the American people to serve a minimum of 20 years in exchange for a pension. Now people (like Norm post 1.2) want to change the rules. Where were they when we were protecting the country at a salary that was a fraction of what civilians made?

==================

intelligent one-411352

Democrat law makers have been in power since Jan of 2007 enough said, I have stated this for years now, want to see how the Democrats run their finances? Look at the states with deficits

Oh great intelligent one (I say that laughingly), you cons just can't get your facts straight can you? Idaho, the 2d reddest state, has major financial woes. So bad in fact the governor and his henchmen want to destroy education. All rethugli-cons. But please, continue, don't let fact interrupt your ignorance. But please, do this great a favor----don't vote next year. You did us enough damage with bushie/cheney.

EarlyOut-1524710

"Why is anyone listening to S&P?! These are the jackasses who gave sterling ratings to bundles of crap mortgages, and very nearly sank the world economy. Their credibility should be very, very close to zero at this point."

F..k S&P, do you personally think that US of A is doing just fine? Our debt will reach over $20 Trillion within 5 years and at 3% interest rate, we would pay over $600 Billion in annual interest payments, I am not even talking about 4% or 5% or even higher rates. Do you run your families budget like the Fed. does? It is UNSUSTAINABLE, what part of WE ARE BROKE you don't understand?

So let me get this straight...Congress goes nearly the entire year without passing a budget, adds about a trillion to the current outrageous amount of debt, spends weeks just trying to hammer out budget cuts that probably won't take effect for another year or so, and then complains that the S & P is being unfair by downgrading the debt? Really. What did they think would happen?

S & P has every reason to be skeptical of Congress' willpower to enforce these cuts and balance the budget. Both Republican and Democrat administrations have shown very little willingness to control spending over the past three decades. Congress needs to know there are real consequences for allowing this outrageous deficit spending to continue. The S & P downgrade could be a much-needed wake-up call for some real bipartisan action.

I see Republican states that also have deficits and those with histories of both parties being in power and kicking the can down the road, notably New Jersey with its current darling Chris Christie. Both parties went blithely along year after year, rewarding their cronies without worrying about who would ultimate pay while they bonded and borrowed their way through any funding problems. Now the chickens have come home to roost and everyone is only blaming Democrats???? They think you are stoopid and have no memory of what's been happening for 10 years or more. Dick Cheney said that deficits are irrelevant when asked about how we should pay for the Iraq war. Enuf said.

Oh all knowing intelligent one, did the Democrats start the war in IRAQ or Afghanistan? Did the Democrats propose to cut taxes at a time when the baby boomers were paying off the debt their parents borrowed to give them the greatest country on earth? Was there a Democrat President (although I believe a Democrat would have done the same thing) that allowed Congress to pass a prescription drug plan for seniors without financing it? Did the Democrats convince the minions they were being taxed too much? I find it amusing when someone making 15,000 dollars a year wants their taxes cut, because they are paying too much. Does a Democrat run FOX News, that has become just about the biggest joke in the world (or course most Republicans don't get it, only 2% truly understand)? For someone that uses intelligent in their nomenclature, you really aren't.

@ iam12

If i had investing money, it would not be in a company that has not made a profit since 1973, carries 15 Trillion dollars of known debt, unknown trillions of unknown debt, est. 60 trillion of expected debt, and borrows 1.5 trillion per year just to keep the lights on...and refuses to even begin to discuss any attempt to turn things around....but that's just me

Did the Dems crete NAFTA? Clinton

Did the Dems create the Community Reinvestment Act that started the mortgage crisis? Carter

Did a Dem take the Act further by making it Racially biased? Clinton

We need to get rid of NAFTA and bring manufacturing back home. A study was done and it was figured that if Americans bought American, where they could, it would cost an average of $65 p/household annually and create 200,000 jobs in the first year.

You cannot put the blame on either party as it was passed on quietly by all Administrations until it blew up. But we do need a strong POTUS there is alot more Obama could have done if he just put his foot down and ran with the ball. But he afraid of the reputation being soiled. Bush wasn't. The only thing Obama did was his healthcare and it cost him his seats in Congress.

As a long-time Republican who votes across party lines all I can say is to remember not to vote the Teaparty back in.

Pnuts, the question was where would you invest a trillion dollars? Your avoidance of the question only tells me you doubt yourself. Let me answer it for you. It would be somewhere that you would expect to get it back. Unfortunately, even with your limited understanding of economics, you did not answer the question because you know it is the United States. Let me know if I am wrong.

What did you expect, the Tea Baggers last rant was in the third world country of Bangladesh.

Were soooo close to being their shining example of what we should be.

Open their mouth and presto we lost one "A".

Lets do a repeat, soon?

Democrat law makers have been in power since Jan of 2007 enough said, I have stated this for years now, want to see how the Democrats run their finances? Look at the states with deficits and notice the similarity's, Democrats were in charge, they can't balance the books of a lemonade stand. That's why they won't pass a budget, because just like a woman they won't stick to it.

And for 2007 and 2008 the republicans voted no on everything the democrats put to vote and the five republicans in democrat clothing voted with them consistently with everything that was passed through was vetoed by Bush.

2009-2010 the republicans made it clear even before the Presidents inauguration that they intended to do nothing but obstruct and vote no on any democrat bill put to vote. A threat that they and their 5 republicans in democrat clothing kep true to and then blamed the democrats for getting nothing done and eventually placing the blame of the republicans failed 2000 to 2006 policies that put the gears of recession in progress.

Then from 2011 to date the republicans have offered nothing but bills to help destroy the middle class and poor persons and make them pay for the deficits and once again added cuts and deductibles for the rich that are eating this nation alive with more lies that these cuts are meant to entice the rich people to create jobs of which they are doing... overseas such as the republican freetrade agreement they just passed with korea.

Standard and Poor's ratings are accurate as the 2.1 trillion can not be taken into consideration as the so called bipartisan agreement was in raising the credit ceiling and the republicans came out of what they called a republican victory exclaiming that they had no intentions of passing any balanced budget over the next two years as they only agreed to listen to the bills but never agreed to reach an agreement and will not unless it includes more tax breaks and incentives for the upper class and will absolutely not bargain taking away loop holes and incentives of any kind. They admitted they did not intend to take the balanced approach and Standard an Poor like the rest of the nation and world were listening to these republicans brags.

btone

15K is not the right starting point. To someone making 16K losing 17% of their income is devastating. To someone making 1MM, 17% is nothing.

Someone making $16,000 would only pay the 17% tax on the $1000 above the $15,000 threshold, or $170. That would also make their effective tax rate only 1.06%.

I do not care what a person make in money, I care that we are all treated equally. Our current tax code is Marxist in theory and execution and with the use of credits, deductions, and rebates, picks winners and losers. The perfect example is all the deduction one can get for having a child. Why should the rest of us have to, in a way, "pay" for your choice in having a child?

Early Out:

I'll tell you why people are listening to Standard and Poor's. This time they actually got it right. Even the blind pig gets an acorn once in a while.

S & P's assessment of the U.S. credit rating is not based on our creditworthiness per se, it is based on the fact that we have a totally dysfunctional congress.

Speaker John Boehner, who is terrified of the TEA Party math-illiterates, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who has publicly stated his most important task is to limit the President to a single term have shown they are willing to destroy this country. Those two cretins NEVER did this to George Bush.

I don't care whether you are a Republican or a Democrat or an Independent that is the fact. They've taken this nation to the brink, and no one knows whether they'll do it again. Additionally, you have to consider the fact that both Boehner and McConnell have been feeding at the government trough for more than 20 years. That's right! Both of them have been there for more than 20 years, while this insanity has been going on, and somehow they've convinced a number of citizens that they're as pure as the driven snow. "Trust us!"

Trust them!?!?!?! They're not the solution. As Saint Ronald of Reagan would say, THEY ARE THE PROBLEM. They cannot be trusted. That's why Obama insisted that the ceiling be raised until after the coming election.

Standard and Poor's doesn't trust Congress. Anyone with a lick of sense doesn't trust Congress.

Why should the rest of us have to, in a way, "pay" for your choice in having a child?

Because you support giving multi billion dollar corporations write offs and deductibles that completely write off their taxes as a loss and then give them back billions in rebates? And now your party wants to give them even more?

Kill the kid to save the company approach.

@ iam12

Honest answer...If i had a trillion dollars to invest today, and had to invest it all in one "product" it would probably be the US...but wouldn't be happy with it...I am an American and love my country...there is a day coming when we will no longer be able to borrow from the rest of the world, and if you don't understand that, your understanding of economics qualifies me for the Nobel Prize

Oh great Wizard. I can understand your thinking, but after a bit of reflection, I have come up with the following theory. Those with the most to lose should pay to most to keep their dream world going. I am not sure if that is 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, or maybe more. I just know if I was making a million dollars a year, I would not worry about taxes and would want to make sure the gravy train continues. The problem is there are too many people in America making 12,000 dollars a year that think they will one day be rich and don't want the government to have any of their 12,000 dollars.

As would I Mr. PheaNiques, although I would wish to see either a change or a repeal of these free trade agreements that are killing the job markets here in the states.

When I first read this comment about S&P I said, "Huh?" I'm sorry, but S&P weren't the sole players in the housing bubble. Where exactly do you get your information? Please read the following, because you're forgetting some other very big--very big--players (Freddie Mac, Sallie Mae, Bill Clinton, and the ever-popular Community Reinvestment Act ) :

i cant belive morons are actually calling fo raising everyones taxes. we get taxed MORE than enough as it is, and if people think for 1 minute we need to raise everyones taxes for the sake of government spending sprees, i'd have to say you are off your ever loving rocker! FYI, there's been more than rumor, now they want to tax you every year for every mile you drive. they tax for everything and anything as it is. frankly its beyond BS.

Wondering how many even read the article to begin with? the rating isnt in question as to how much people are taxed. it isnt because the 2 sides cant agree on anything.... its because SPENDING IS OUT OF CONTROL!!!! get rid of all the f-ing pork we are paying on, and see just how much $$ will be saved for starters. after that go on from there. it isnt because we dont get taxed enough as it is ratings are dropping, why dont nim wits get that simple fact?

personally i am sic of seeing taxes raised... its been raised on every commodity, then if you pay so much for something you are taxed even more! jesus H, when the hell are people going to get it thru their thick heads? BALANCED BUDGET, we dont have it, that what this is all about.

OK Mr PheaNiques and mikela, now that we are being honest, the next question. How do we compete in the world and be fair. I am not against the free trade agreements because they bring us lower prices. Those prices are hard to integrate into the American economy because they mean lower wages here. I would tend to try to bring up the wages of workers world wide to our standards. I do not know if it would be possible, but to be fair, we should add tariffs to counties that do not provide health care for their citizens. Another tariff if their wages do not meet the minimum wage of the US. Of course this would mean higher prices for Americans. There is no way you can make any product in another country, then transport it, and sell it here at a lower cost without taking advantage of a human being. Unfortunately, I believe we are too greedy to make this work.

@mikela

I wish we had an honest and un-biased news source(s), then we could all begin these discussions with a universal understanding of the facts...the reason that we are losing American jobs is easy to understand for those of us who have traveled the world...We cannot produce products in America that can compete on the world market...A farmer in Asia can grow a strawberry, put that strawberry on 2 ships, 2 trucks, and a plane and put that strawberry on the store shelf in your town and still sell it cheaper that the farmer can across the street from your store

My "wife" is filipino (lives in Manila)...a few months ago she hired 2 painters from the phonebook to paint her (our) house...she paid 600 pesos (13 dollars) per day...we have literally priced ourselves out of the market, and we have spent the Trillions upon Trillions of dollars during the last 30-40 years to hide from the American people just how screwed we are

Stellar, I don't know which is more funny: a) that you think the way you do, and are a large enough of an azzhat to to be proud enough to state it, or b) you think anyone, including blacks, gives a damn either way.

Yeah, you're a racist; congrats. But the black community didn't fail you because we don't owe you jack, anymore than you owe us anything; get over yourself. What did fail you, however, is evolution, and I'm sorry you're still in the chimp-throwing-feces stage of your evolutionary development, but don't take your mouth breathing out on us. Seriously, we really don't care, dude.

Mr.PheaNiques,

I moved from Maine to So.Cali. I met my wife on the inet. She moved to Maine and had culture shock. She couldn't believe how backwoods and trusting we were nor could she believe the differance in housing and other commoditiy prices. My mortgage was 227$ a month for a nice four bedroom, two story cape with a 2acre front lawn. However she could not handle the weather so we moved back out here where she was from. I could not believe the way this state takes advantage of it's people. Like I told her then and I am more sure of it now... these people have been taken to the cleaners for so long that they have absolutely no idea just how much this state has inflated them and made it seem like this is how things are everywhere.

David, I think you are talking about a blind squirrel. Do blind pigs eat acorns? As far as the Congress is concerned, regardless of what you think about the last two weeks, Americans usually get it right and there will be another election next year. If anyone has overstepped their bounds, the American public will let them know. If you watch the Senate, they move methodically and slowly. There is a reason for it and they all know it. If you doubt America, remember, the world has 15 trillion dollars invested in it.

The idea that this latest bill reduces deficits is a bit of a joke. It does not reduce the overall debt, in fact it allows it to continue to grow at an average rate in excess of $750 billion a year. The deficit reductions were taken from the absurd deficit levels that were being projected going forward, not from any current or previous deficit levels. In addition, reducing deficits means that there will still be deficits, when what we need are surpluses to start erasing the national debt, not continuing to let it grow. If nothing changes from this latest bill, eleven years from now the US will be more than $8.45 trillion further in debt than we are today. Even if you throw out the current year, we are still looking at a further debt increase of $6.97 trillion over ten years (or just under $700 billion/year). We can not continue to spend more money than is being taken in for another ten years and expect this country to remain solvent. It is time to throw out all of the incumbents in DC and elect some people who understand basic math. With this projected further increase in our national debt, it is no wonder S&P downgraded US debt instruments.

Annual deficits going forward based on new bill in $ billions:

2011 - 1,480
2012 - 1,100
2013 - 704
2014 - 533
2015 - 551
2016 - 659
2017 - 617
2018 - 610
2019 - 696
2020 - 739
2021 - 763

Total - 8,452

ir12

The biggest problem I have with the free trade is that we get absolutely nothing in return and in the end, whatever products we begin to ship to those countries in time we then lose the manufacturers in this country that produce it to them as the company then moves there and opens shop while closing here and then instead of shipping those products there, they now ship them here at a fraction of what they were manufacturing and shipping from here because of the free trade agreement. The incentive always ends up with our manufacturers getting a leg in there and then moving their businesses away to produce using cheap labor and then selling back to here at a fraction of the shipping and tariffs they had to pay before the free trade agreements. Everytime I see a new free trade agreement I realize it is just another part of the american life blood being transfused and integraded outside our own country.

Norm903,

You wrote "Anyone on this board could balance the budget in two weeks with almost everyone agreeing with over 90% of the cuts."

Clearly, from other posts on this thread, you are incorrect. And I suspect that you would accept all of your cuts without question. I doubt that approach would travel far. We all have some stake in the economy. And for better or worse, the government is a huge factor in the economy.

Your "starve the beast" mentality might not cause a 'double-dip' recession, but lead to a full depression. Government spending helps support almost every business and job in this country. From aircraft designers to the local zoo. The airline industry is heavily dependent on the federal government for airport construction and improvements, traffic control, and the airfares for US troops between stations. The highway system depends on federal dollars to keep the inter-state and federal highways drivable. Our river transport and water system in general depends on the Army Corps of Engineers for operation and maintenance. Foreign travelers depend upon the State Department for emergency arrangements. The EPA stands between most Americans and be forced to buy bottled water from neccessity, just like Mexico. The Justice Department protects not only from thieves, but also our own law enforcement. And the list goes on. But each part of the list fulfills a need.

The space program seemed like an expensive game of one-up-manship with the Russians, but we gained vast knowledge in metals and alloys, in biology, in medicine, electronics and computers, in plastics, polymers, and chemical engineering (WD-40 was created for the space program.), in ceramics and glass, and even in organization structure, work documentation and advanced quality control.

I note that you do not address revenue. Do you honestly believe that 'starving the beast' will not have a negative impact of revenues? Economics demonstrates that every dollar injected into the economy where it will be spent generates between $4 and $7 in economic activity, most taxable. 'Starving the beast' without proper preparation and realignment will create more Detroits and strenghten our economic competitors.

You really think you could solve this problem on your kitchen table in two weeks? It seems to me that you just don't understand the problem.

Megalodon, should Congress ever pass a balanced budget amendment, they will have to raise your taxes. The past Congresses have spent so much money, there really is not the much that can be cut out of current spending. Just out of curiosity, if a natural disaster such as an earthquake, hurricane, or tornado struck your community and the Federal Government could not help because it would not be in the balanced budget, how would you feel?

ROTFLMAO!!!!

S&P'S SEES THE SMOKE AND MIRRORS OUR GOVERNMENT USES!!!

Come on, do ANY of you think our corrupt and out of control government can just keep lying to the world about our economy? You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see that we have been on the wrong fiscal and monetary path for decades. You can see by the article that the projections, spending and revenues don't match.

Just look around. The Debt Clock could be used as a fan. We spend too much on everything from our Constitutionally mandated military to how crickets have sex, and why. We build bridges for cars and tunnels for turtles that cost millions of tax payer dollars. We pay for the Arts and Cowboy Poetry.

This kind of recklessness can't continue. We know it, Congress knows it and the ratings agencies know it. We HAVE BEEN warned by S&P and Moody's with negative outlooks, Fitch has threatened it. We were told that we needed to get at least $4 Trillion in cuts or revenues, this was the bare minimum, we didn't. It's not like we owe China, Japan, Germany and others a few Billion dollars, we owe them TRILLIONS!!!!

Remember, everything in our budget is calculated based on projections. This is like sticking your wet finger in the wind to determine which way it's blowing. It will change in a few minutes. Obviously with our massive Debts and unfunded liabilities we are no longer able to convince, not just the ratings agencies, but the world that our word is good for our debts. If I was China, Japan, Korea or others I'd be leary also.

We send conflicting information to the world and then we wonder why we get downgraded. We tell them our revenues will increase but we have over 28 million Americans under/unemployed. We claim we'll reign in our spending and this year we cut a whopping $29 Billion. That's a rounding error for our $14.5 Trillion dollar debt. During the budget continuing resolutions we tried to cut $100 Billion, we ended up cutting a few hundred million dollars.

American BULL$HIT isn't going to work anymore. The world is watching and they know how fu**ed up our economy is and how much worse our government has been fu**ed up for decades. I don't know what's more embarrassing, the fact that we've allowed our government to get us into this mess or that we have previously Third-World countries lecturing to us about our debt.

Tea baggers just had to damage our economy just to prove the point that Obama's policies are not in our best interests. Many of us agree that Obama's policies are not in our best interests, but hurting your fellow Americans financially just to make a political point is hardly what our representatives were elected to do.

But besides that, S&P can suck it. They think the government bonds of Canada, the UK, Germany and France are safer and more credit-worthy than those of the U.S.?

We will see what the markets say come Monday morning.

I don't disagree with you Mr. Smith but as a democrat, I did not sit on my butt during the 2011 elections and did vote as did my wife. It helped in my state and district. I'm very sure as the conservatives are already misreading everything that 2012 will undo a large portion of the harm that the 2010 elections created and just maybe this time around, the democrat majority will negate the republicans in democrat clothing that helped the republicans party of no from 2008 - 2010 that negated the majority the democrats held. I doubt like hell that the democrats would have even tried to play bipartisan if they knew they didn't have the five republican/democrats to deal with in their own ranks.

@ JayCFO-3768452

effective tax rate sure...

But dont act like that poor person who is making 25k is not getting help.

nearly 50% of tax payers got a refund or didnt pay squat. So their effective tax rate is what?

Put this into retrospective..

Person makes 30k, gets 10k in tax breaks by use of 401k and medical insurance etc.

They then take that 20k and go, oh you have 2kids, but the poverty limit is 27k. So you qualify for nearly 5k in refunds just for your kids. That % of income tax you did pay at 20k, well thats all refunded to you, and some other tax breaks. Low and behold they walk away with a 8k check from the gov at the end of the year, when they only paid about 2k in taxes to start with.

Their effective tax rate is in the negative...

This does not even account for the food stamps they qualify for, the help they get to pay utilities and in some cases to pay rent. Yea they are hurting so much...lol. I was there once.

I actually lived better when i made 30k than i did making 50k all because of tax breaks, tax rebates, food stamps etc...

really Jhon?? the teabaggers did this??

Regardless of how those on the Vine view Standards and Poors', or Moody's ratings, the truth will be told at the next T-bill and bond auction. If the Federal government cannot sell debt at current levels, then S&P's opinion will be validated. If the Federal interest rises, all other rates will follow. So the true heritage of the summer of '011 will be the big chill as the housing market dips again, capital investment slows even more, consumer credit dries up or becomes more expensive. We could have just as easily raised income taxes across the board by 1%. Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot about all those pledges in Grover Norquist's safe. At least, the added cost WON'T be going to the US Treasury to fix our debt. It will go overseas (China) and into the hands of the top of the 1%'ers.

Truer word were never spoken Bill.

mikela: Thank you for understanding my point; Now, just make sure that everybody you know makes it on time to the voting polls so that we the people, not the God damn corporations can get out of the mess that we help to create by ignoring the Manson like group call the TeaBaggers, we need to save our country from these terrorists, PLEASE GET UP, GO OUT, TALK TO PEOPLE MAKE SURE THE CARRY ON WITH THEIR CIVIL DUTY AND THEY VOTE, LET'S GET THE WORSTS TREAT THAT DEMOCRACY HAS EVER ENCOUNTER OUT, LET US FREE OUR NATION OF THESE SCUMBAGS TEABAGGERS ENEMIES OF THE STATE TERRORISTS OUT OF OUR LIFE ONCE AND FOR ALL.

mikela, we do get something in return. Low prices. If you look at auto manufacturing, most companies that make lower priced vehicles have opened plants in the US because of the shipping prices and the fact that their workers are demanding higher wages. However if you want to buy a computer cable, you can get it from China for 99 cents and 3 dollars shipping, while an American company will charge you 5 dollars for it. It cost a lot to ship a 2,000 lb auto and next to nothing for a 5 oz cable. People are going the chose the best value for the least amount every time. The question becomes do we want to compete with someone that earns 25 cents an hour and lives in horrible conditions. That is what free trade is all about. Then the companies that operate in this manor complain about the taxes they pay. We need to figure out a way to make responsible companies pay their taxes. If you really want to fix the problem, there are too many Americans working for cash that pay no taxes. This cheats everyone that does pay taxes. I would like to see the IRS hire 1000 people and set up a hot line where Americans could report individuals that work for cash. They would be rewarded with 25% of any taxes collected. I don't know what is worse, ratting on you friends or relatives, or cheating on your taxes, but we really need to collect more revenue.

Looks like the financial aristocracy are going for a complete take over of the U.S. government. It has been that way for awhile but was always done in the back rooms and sometimes they lost.

If a corporation can dictate economic or any other kind of policy to the government you can say goodbye to even what's left of the Democratic Republic the founders of the U.S. left us.

Do you think that bunch of corporate quislings in the White House and Congress will stand up for the constitution and the sovereignty of the U.S.?

Here's something I posted earlier:

I think S & P's threats and down grading of the U.S. credit rating is blackmail and an outrageous attack on the sovereignty of the United States.

The lack of outrage by U.S. officials and any in the media to this blatant extortion and attack on the constitutional prerogatives of government to set economic policy is very disturbing and portends very dark times ahead for the Republic, if the Republic even continues to exist in any meaningful way.

I just watched a representative of S&P on CNN and he stated absurdly that the UK and France and other European countries in much deeper trouble than the U.S. deserve a higher rating because they have enacted austerity programs.

Are the ratings agencies going to dictate U.S. policy and law in the coming years (I overtly, because of course to a large extent they already do)?

Some economists think the austerity programs that Europe and now the U.S. has committed to are wrong and will make their and our situation worse not better.

Can you imagine if back when FDR was enacting the New Deal a ratings agency had dared to even threaten a downgrading of U.S. credit if the New Deal were not scrapped and the budget cut?

FDR probably would have voided their corporate charter and thrown them in jail or taken over their business. Probably even Republican presidents would have done something similar until relatively recently.

It is doubly outrageous for the U.S. to be dictated to by the ratings agencies because they helped bring about the 2008 economic crash by assigning Triple A ratings to securities even billionaire Warren Buffet referred to as Weapons of Mass Financial Destruction.

I think S&P has gambled that the U.S. government is so filled with fawning corporate puppets now that they will get away with what they are perpetrating.

Unfortunately for the country they may be right.

Your credit card statement is what it is. Seriously over your limit and can't keep up with the payments, your credit rating goes down.

We've been warned before, and by a Republican no less:

I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes meto tremble for the safety of my country. ... corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." (U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, Nov. 21, 1864,letter to Col. William F. Elkins, in The Lincoln Encyclopedia, by Archer H.Shaw).

and an expert on authoritarian rule, Mussolini:

Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.

Benito Mussolini

Fascism is the moment you can't put a cigarette paper between state and corporate power.

Benito Mussolini

I've never had a credit card so I have absolutely no idea of what happens if I go over my credit or make late payments. I did, for the sake of making online payments, get a debit card and have never over extended my credit. That was my idea of what my credit line should ever look like.

Not that your comment has anything to do with this discussion, but I have had credit cards for over 30 years and I can count on two hands the number of months I have ever paid a penny of interest in all that time.

I enjoy the free flights from all the free miles, and in more recent times, the free cash back. It's amazing how you can screw the banks when you're responsible with money!

stellar007, you do realize that Rosa Parks has passed. While I do find your post filled with humor, they are inappropriate. Most individuals one this board are trying to dicuss the problems that we face, while you are only showing your ignorance.

@iam12 in reply to 1.40

You are getting close, so I'll try to explain it, how we fix it...When my father was a young man raising a family of 6, he was a welder making about $2 dollars an hour, and that is how we fix it, and that is what the Economy is trying to do, and why we are borrowing trillions per year to keep our bloated economy from returning to levels that World Supply and Demand requires and will eventually force...

We need to reduce our cost of production and our cost of living...for instance If your making $20 per hour and your rent is $1000 per month and your grocery bill is $400 per month...we need to get back to a point where we are making $2 per hour and your rent is $100 per month and your grocery bill is $40 per month...This will accomplish several things, first foreign manufacturers will not be able to ship their products to us, and we will be able to ship our products to them...American companies can begin producing products for US markets that can't be undercut by foreign goods, putting Americans back to work...If Illegal immigrants can't come here and make 10 to 20 times what they can make in their home countries, they wont

How do we get there?? Our first and biggest problem is our debt, not just federal, but also state and private, we need to get out of debt...we need to stop borrowing and our economy will begin to contract (retract) as we begin to pay off our debt our economy will continue to contract (retract)...The Layman answer...We NEED a Depression, knowing going in, the road is going to be bumpy, painful, messy...but it is the only road, and every day and dollar we borrow to prevent it just make that road that much messier and bumpier

Common Sense, if you think the US economy is like a household budget, then you have no common sense.

Azdad,

By never having had a credit card, I have never over extended my credit nor had to ask for the credit ceiling cap to be raised. The government is working as though it had a credit card and should have only ever been granted a debit card instead.

I understand there are those such as yourself that actually use a credit card as it may have been intended, but the majority of the people that fail because of their credit should have used the debit card approach to begin with as should have our own governments. Want to raise the credit ceiling of a debit card, you first need to save versus spend and add to the credit line one dollar at a time.

ir12,

I am well aware of Rosa Parks passing... I live in Metro Detroit!

Did you know that all her money was being squandered by her attorneys? And that recently there has been court proceedings to protect her legacy? We have streets named after her in Detroit!

If you think what I am saying is funny then you are not serious about fixing our nations problems. Your ignorance is showing!

I haven't said anything worse than what I hear black folk say about themselves in songs, movies and on the street. What's inappropriate here is the double standard that got Obama elected in the first place.

Mr.PheaNinqes, you really need to get an easier name to remember. The question is do you want to bring the world to our standard of living or rescind back to the 3rd world level while the rich keep thier wealth. If China is willing to provide goods worth 10 dollars to us for 50 cents, do we take advantage of it or employ Americans to make the same product. If China has to spend the equivalent of 15 dollars to make a product the can sell for 10 dollars, what is the point. They are suffering under the same delusion as the US government that you can provide subsidies to corporations and beat the system. Just as there is no free lunch, you cannot support businesses that cannot stand on their merit.

btone,

You ask why anyone should pay for someone else's choice to have a child. Who do you think is going to pay taxes to fund your Social Security and Medicare? If you think that the government is saving the taxes being withheld from your paycheck for these programs, then gullible is written on the ceiling. Actually, the government is supposed to be saving the taxes being withheld for Social Security, but those are just IOUs in some computer system. By the way, the security and safety of those IOUs just got downgraded. As for Medicare, it is on the Bernie Madoff plan--those working now are paying for those retired now.

ir12,

So if you were black you would want to lynch me? How ironic....

I am in no way being cute, but you on the other hand have made statements about turning in your OWN family to the IRS!! (Post# 1.59) I can see what kind of "stock" your from!

Meanwhile you and many others in this forum encourage tax increases.... For what? So people like Obama can waste MORE MONEY? So Obama and friends can go and see the festival of lights next year too? No.... I say CUTS need to be made while taxes stay reasonable.

Sometimes I wonder if half these idiots who suggest raising taxes are really people in China trying to warm us up to paying more. Heck some of the poll results that come out of this place suggest there is some kind of funny business going on.

ANYONE who suggest that tax increases are the solution are probably people who are not paying taxes at all. I got news for these people... If taxes go up for the rich, you can bet your sweet donkey they will go up for middle and lower class folks as well.

Raising taxes on business is another ignorant idea! What is that going to do? Make more American businesses move to China to avoid being taxed? You can bet your sweet donkey on that too!

@1r12

I'll get to work on that time machine, convince my mom to marry Mr. Green...think "Fee Nicks"

That's part of the misnomer of this discussion, the standard of living grocery bagger or a doctor in China is not that different to the standard of living for an America Grocery bagger or Doctor...Those 2 painters that worked for 12 dollars perday painting my wifes house had a simular standard of living to what working class Americans living in a major city would expect.

It's a cost of living thing...(full disclosure) I make a little less than 50,000 per year, I have a "wife" and 2 kids (both 1 year old) in the last 3 years I've bought 2 cars (toyotas used)(1 minivan), bought a new 3 bedroom house/w lot (~23,000), and remodeled her existing house (basically rebuilt from ground up) (~7000) sent her to nursing school (300 per sem)...now I know there are places I have not been (china) and have no doubt some of these workers live in what most Americans would consider horrible conditions, but my guess it is better than they had before they were making our shoes

I guess the real (short) answer is we really don't have much leverage on foreign manufacturers (except tariffs and embargoes), which as you have pointed out yourself will raise the cost of living here, and by default require even more spending so that the poor and elderly can cope with that increase...stop borrowing and begin paying off our debt and allow the Economy do what the Economy will always do (reach balance) is the only option we have...and though more borrowing and spending might keep our heads above water a little longer, no amount of borrowing or spending will keep us floating forever, at some point inevitable is inevitable...

Stellar007: Really? you're the epitome of the Teabagger/moron... Shame on you !

So.... Now are the Republicans going to finally stfu and start working on a ballanced approach to the budget? Or are they going to cause our credit rating to go down even farther? Whats it going to be Republican/teabaggers? Boner, whats it going to be? You going to still sit there and say the same old tires dog and pony dance or are you going to start working on real legislation that can cut spending and increase revenue to pay off our debt?

Mr.PheaNiques-0000001

You sound like you have a lovely family and I wish you nothing but the best of luck and a future I would like my daughter to have. My problem began in the early 80's. Ronald Reagan came along a convinced America they needed a tax cut. I got a 300 dollar income tax cut and they raised my social security and medicare taxes 300 dollars. Big deal. However, the wealthy got a tax cut that equated to tens of thousands of dollars or more. Next Clinton came along and at the insistence of the Republican Congress whittled down the deficits and actually had the country operating in the black. Being a member of the baby boomers, I felt we owed it to our children to pay back the debt our parents borrowed to give us simply the best life on the planet. That life consisted of the Interstate Highways, the best schools, hospitals, and just about anything else you can imagine. Then George W Bush came along and felt that we were paying too much in taxes, although the debt had not been repaid and suggested a tax cut. At this point I lost all faith in my peers, they stuck out their hands and took the tax cuts with no regurads to what it would do to their children and grandchildren. The baby boomers sold out, took the money and ran. That is why you are facing the future you have now. Good luck, but when your parents want to collect their Social Security, you might want to remind them of the debt they owe.

@ir12

In the larger scheme of things, Humans are not much different than any other animal species on this planet...we will by nature take what ever we are given, or can get, even when we know intelectually that it isn't good for us in the long run...just for clarity Clinton and the republicans get too much credit for 2 years of "black" though they made the effort, they enjoyed a booming economy and increased revenues fromthe "Dot.Coms" which went bust...by our nature, we want more, even if we didn't earn it...and we have politicians, who by their nature will promise and try to give everyone more, even if they cant afford it...It is Piper time, and I think if we all could just tune out the talking heads long enough...we would all come to realize our kids and grand kids will come to admire us for it, just as many of us admire our parents and grandparents for paying the bills back in the 30's...

I don't know if the "baggers" understand what they ideology will do, and as a Social Libertarian I cannot and will not claim membership...but what they are trying to do is exactly what we need done, and I honestly hope America has the backbone for it...understanding as I say this, It will devastate me in exchange rates alone

If your house (the economy) is on fire and in danger of burning down what is your best course of action? Is it to...

A. Put out the fire; focus everything you've got on fixing the sine qua non (latin for "without which not"), the economy, or

B. Break out the paint and paintbrushes and slap on a new coat of paint to make things prettier (ObamaCare)?

Can anyone say, "Lack of ability to keep one's priorities straight and more interested in social agendas than reality."?

Stoops2Conquer, it depends, will the wet paint put out the fire?

Mr P

I am not sure of that. When one of the richest men in the world points out that his secretaries pay a higher percentage of taxes that he does, I have to have hope.

@stoops

I would first ask if the land is worth more with the house gone??? Our "Economy" is a Debt Illusion / house of cards / Mansion on a sand pile...

C. save the paint, roast some marshmallows, and begin rebuilding

@ir12

GE made billions and paid zero...there will always be anomolies...it doesn't mean the rules are invalid...yes investor income (aka capital gains) needs to be reformed...but if hope is alive which would you rather investors making out like bandits or no investors just savers

@ir12

here you hold the trillion for a minute, and answer this question

If you have the choice of paying 15% percent on your investment return, or paying 50% on your investment return...which would you chose and under which scenario would you be more likely to reinvest that trillion back into the economy??

or.... how about

D. Yes, the house is worth saving and was built in a way and to a standard that cannot be reproduced because the materials (elements) that brought it into being (the American Revolution) cannot be replicated, nor need they be.

But, unfortunately it has been allowed, due to poor maintenance (Lack of strong, intelligent leadership that actually understands what made America great to begin with), been allowed to get into a terrible state of disrepair.

We currently have in the White House a leader who is much better at blaming his predecessor than leading; who along with his political party wants to remake America into the shining example of fiscal responsibility we see throughout Europe.

OF course we are in debt up to our eyeballs; of course the country's economy is like a ship without anyone at the helm; we have a leader whose perception of the world disavows for all practical purposes faith in the one thing that can reverse our dilemma; who considers capitalism a dirty word.

We should not be the least surprised that the economy is in the crapper and going to stay there; anymore than one would be justified in feeling surprised that you would find the weather getting warmer by heading South to Florida if your goal was to see snow in Maine.

You can't hope for an economic recovery when the people in control refuse to pursue the one course of action that would bring it about because it would undermine their social agendas, what we need now, but will have to wait until 2012, is "Change we can count on".

If I were selling laptop computers to students going to college. If the choice were students in Somolia or students in the United States... well I would guess you could figure that out.

Mr P.

Investors always have to make a profit. The problem is they have to feel secure in their environment. Let's say you make a million dollars and there is a big article in the newspaper about your good fortune. You drive home from the office and pull into your garage. The door goes down and 5 individuals take you out of your car and demand all of your money or your life. How much of that million dollars you made are you willing to give to ensure a 99.99% chance that that will live. There are guarantees in life, but you can stack the odds in your favor.

Stoops

You can't hope for an economic recovery when the people in control refuse to pursue the one course of action that would bring it about because it would undermine their social agendas

As I've said (or implied) in previous posts. I don't believe we are in a recession, that would allow for a recovery...This is a Correction, and doing anything to prevent it / fight it / or hide it, is a step in the wrong direction, you might as well try to keep the sun from coming up to fight global warming...we need to embrace it, educate the public on how to deal with it, and let the rest of the world know that we are "Man" enough to admit it

Don't get me wrong, I would love to lay all of this at the feet of Obama, just so I could wash my hand of my own responsibility for it, but that isn't honest and certainly not helpful...We have a Depression in our History we know what to do, we survive it and come out stronger and hopefully smarter on the other side

@ir12

follow up, I have a chance to invest and make a million dollars, and know that there is a 99.99% chance that there are going to be five guys waiting in my garage to take it away from me...and let's say a fortune teller tells me who the five guys are, and I decide to give them 100,000 each not to be waiting in my garage, what are the chances they are going to be there anyway....99.98%??

Well put Mr. P.

Actually, we are pretty much on the same page I'm thinking. My feeling is that the situation we are currently in is absolutely of our own making. We have allowed ourselves to embrace solutions that are not so much solutions as they are the source of the problem (more government programs, more government interference, bailouts). And then, when the market does make a serious correction and the chickens come home to roost - causing the banks and financial leaders to have to face up to their lack of commonsense and profligate habits - we bailed them out (again).

No amount of increased government interference (jobs programs) or bail outs are going to solve our problem. Because you are right, this is a correction and like most major corrections that produce substantive, positive change out of which we emerge stronger and smarter (hopefully) it ain't gonna be easy or painless.

Stoops2Conquer

First let me say, I have never heard President Obama blame the current problems on his predecessor. Only individuals with intelligence have made that claim. It would take a truly ignorant individual to think that one man could run up 14.3 trillion dollars in debt. Never mind that only the US Congress has the power to spend US dollars and commit the American public to debt. You mention their is one thing that would save us, but fail to mention what that is. Tell me and I will see that the President gets it and I will give you credit for figuring it out. Please answer as soon as possible as the American public is awaiting news.

1992 -- The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) Earth Summit takes place in Rio de Janeiro this year, headed by Conference Secretary-General Maurice Strong. The main products of this summit are the Biodiversity Treaty and Agenda 21, which the U.S. hesitates to sign because of opposition at home due to the threat to sovereignty and economics. The summit says the first world's wealth must be transferred to the third world.

July 18, 1993 -- CFR member and Trilateralist Henry Kissinger writes in the Los Angeles Times concerning NAFTA: "What Congress will have before it is not a conventional trade agreement but the architecture of a new international system...a first step toward a new world order."

The DISEASE must be addressed not only the symptoms.

United States out of United Nations.

Then,

Ban the Federal Reserve Bank.

Ban Fiat currency.

Ban fractional Banking.

Then,

Close 90 percent of military bases.

Reduce Military budget by 80 percent.

Enforce our borders.

Allow alien entry by green card only.

Then,

Eliminate Homeland Security.

Eliminate criminal CIA activity.

Eliminate war on drugs.

Legalize marijuana.

Free non violent prisoners.

Stop all privatization of government functions.

Then,

Term limits for Politicians.

Repeal Electoral College.

Limit political campaign funds.

Ban all professional lobbyists.

Then,

Restore funding to Social Security.

Begin single payer universal health care.

Eliminate useless government agencies.

Line by line review of pork.

Review Politian’s benefits and salary.

Tariffs on all foreign manufactured items.

Then,

Prosecute governmental Traitors.

Eliminate CFR, IMF, Bilderberg, Trilateral, etc.

Enforce the Constitution.

Mr P

Providing you had the 500,000 up front to bribe the would be thieves, you would still be taking a chance. You receive the 1 million and head home. One of the individuals decides to kill the other four and take their 100,000 dollars. You come home and he/she take your million. The now have 1.4 million. I guess it depends on how much you trust the 5 criminals you are dealing with.

China doles out trillions to it's government controlled banks. Everyone grifts all the money and no one can pay the banks back. The Chinese governments assumes the losses, puts the bad debt indefinitely on the government books to make hide the losses and make the banks look good.

In turn they issue more cash to the corrupt Chinese banks.

I don't mind the whore bag S&P downgrading U.S. debt as long as they give China's debt junk status.

@ir12

I do have a plan, that would pay off the national debt literally overnight and reset our Economy in a few weeks or months...But it would require a President with almost (not almost) dictatorial powers...If you're interested (it is more than 140 characters)

I haven't seen any evidence from the Federal Government during my lifetime that would give me confidence that there is ever enough

Mr P

That is the beauty of the system. All we have to do is print 15 trillion dollars and pay off the 10 trillon owed to the American public and 5 trillion to the rest of the world. Problem is, we are as a people are not like that. We pay out debts. Period. No fresman Congressman from anywhere will prevent that from happening. They will be voted out of office in the next election for even allowing the world to think that could happen. Why, because that is who we are.

but I did mention it ir12, you just missed it!

It was Harry Truman who said, "The buck stops here."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_passing#The_buck_stops_here

"The buck stops here" is a phrase that was popularized by U.S. President Harry S. Truman, who kept a sign with that phrase on his desk in the Oval Office. (Footage from Jimmy Carter's "Address to the Nation on Energy" shows the sign still on the desk during Carter's administration.) The phrase refers to the fact that the President has to make the decisions and accept the ultimate responsibility for those decisions.

Did Obama create the national debt - no, of course not. Has he done anything truly substantive to eliminate it by the actions he has taken? No again and neither are he and his party likely to do so in the near or long term.

@ir12

That's not my plan, my plan is retroactively and completely honest, to both our debt and those who have benefited from it...

At noon on the first Sunday (banks are closed) after the inauguration of said President/Dictator will make the following announcement..." At midnight last night, I ordered all banks under US Jurisdiction and those international banks with Us Citizen account holder to surrender 90% of all balances to The Federal government whether from individuals accounts or corporations...when you go to work in the morning whether you work at mcdonalds or NASA or Congress or are receiving sustenance from state of federal programs you will begin making 10% of your regular income...and all of your bills will be reduced by that same 90%, grocery store prices 10%, health insurance 10%...an hour of your labor will buy the exact same things tomorrow as it did yesterday...I will use this money to instantly pay off all Federal Debt...any additional money will be used to insure first that social security and medicare will be fully solvent for the foreseeable future...I am also ordering all of the US Military back home...to supervise a National Election as soon as can be organised to provide citizens to elect representatives to re-write all US Laws, tax, criminal, civil etc...These elected official will take control as soon as that work is done...at which time I will direct each of the 50 states and territories to due the same, while referencing newly re-writen laws...This isn't going to be easy, but it is necessary for the rebirth of our Nation

This plan effectively claws back all deficit spending

Stoops too low - How about none of what you suggest at all since they are absurd. How about what Obama suggested and start with the 4 trillion cuts over 10 years to start living in our means and revenue increases to pay off national debt? You silly rabbit! you try to limit our options to what you want, there are so many more options out there besides your A, B, C, D.

Bill Marvell: Re our post 1.47. Our problem isn't revenue, it is expenditures. While a government isn't a business or household per se, no organization can consistently outspend revenue without the bill coming due.

Our elected representatives on both sides of the aisle are concerned with getting elected and then reelected, and to do it have sold our citizens into bankruptcy by cutting deals withe every special interest group out there, trading bad policy in exchange for bribes to help with reelection. Politicians, businesses, unions, liberal and conservative causes got what they wanted at the people's expense.

To give more money to this group before they show responsibility handling the trillions they receive each year in tax revenue is no longer acceptable.

While people on this thread may disagree with cuts around the edges I maintain anyone on the board could balance our budget in two weeks with 90% agreement on what got cut. Doesn't really matter anyway because we're already bankrupt and the republi-crats won't do anything until things really crash hard. At that point they'll have to finally do the right thing, but the pain of the resultant fix will be much worse than doing it now before spending additional trillions that could have gone into fixing our current situation.

There is no way to fix this without pain, but as that would interfere with the current politician's reelection it will never happen. Yes, starve the beast. Not one additional dime and if we can, cut more out of the system until they show responsibility handling the tax money we provide.

Mr.PheaNiques-0000001,

Have you traveled, or do you just ASSUME that the cost of living is tied to the prevailing wage? I've been to Mexico. They have combination Christmas Club/Lotteries for the right to buy a car LOAN to buy a new car, a down payment. A new pair of good leather shoes still starts at $65 US, or a week's take-home pay at an American factory in Monterrey. Groceries, beer and pop cost the same as in the US. Gas may or may not be less expensive since it is controlled by Petromex, the government-controlled petroleum industry. Plane fares are relatively cheap, but still beyond most Mexicans ability to pay.

Everything I have read about China indicates the same thing, subsistance farmers cannot afford to live on their own land, so the childrenare sent to the cities to get jobs that may not exist. Meanwhile your doctor may share a one or two room apartment with 1-3 roommates just to have a place to live. Not unlike some H1b enclaves here in the US, or illegal aliens here as well.

And, no, industrialization has not appreciably improved either Mexican or Chinese life. Yes, they have cheap electronic toys. Cell phones are necessary since they have virtually no landlines. But they both have chronic pollution and routine shortages of staple food (corn in Mexico is shipped to the US for ethanol production, shortage of farmers in China due to low income). Housing consumes half their earnings. And they survive by working their wives and children.

Yeah, great comparison. A grocery store bagger is supposed to be a teaching job; Show up on-time, sober, clean and neat, and ready to work. No employer expects to retire a 40 year bagger. It is not a career or destination. Being a doctor is both.

@bill

I've spent most of my adult life working throughout Europe and Most of Asia (usally 3-6 months at each location)...My"wife" is Filipino and have spent a more significant period of time there, my work has not (and will not) afford me the oppurtunity to work in China, but have met several to many Chinese Vacationers in Korea and the PI and never got the impression that any were overwhelmed by what I considered comfortable but not extravagant living...The PI in particular though...working professionals seem to have all the ammenities and comforts I would expect from the groups of American Proffesionals, and the working class Filipinos have of course meager but not wanting lifestyles again not far below the norm I would expect visiting an American working class home...my only two trips to Mexico were budget sight seeing, and wouldn't claim to have an indepth understanding of the economy, except that there is almost always, every where I've been, a locals economy seperate from the tourist economy, my time in SW asia and the middle east, has also been within the norms (of course I grew up poor, so my norm maynot be your norm)...but yes almost everywhere I've been, the locals live on much less than what I would have to spend in America for the same life, My very first trip to Manila, we orderd dilevery dominoes pizza, I paid and tried to tip the driver 100p ($2) and he looked at me like I was trying to buy his sister, my "wife" grabbed it from my hand and gave him 5p (10c), he smiled and said thankyou and left...I was driving in Manila once, I was stopped buy a traffic cop ( still don't know why) after a few minutes it was apparent he wanted a bribe, my wife handed a 100p note, he waved us on and stopped traffic for us to merge...it is what it is...

S&P is like any rating or auditing firm... they can count and they are real good at taking snap-shots in time about your balance sheet. But what they are all very bad at is advising what to do about it or predicting how any one solution will work... they are not business minded, they are accountant minded.

In this downgrade write-up, we should only take head that they see we have debt but have nothing in the works to either correct the economy or to reduce the debt... AND we absolutely need to take in their concern over our political process... it sucks worse than ever at the moment.

Unfortunately, this rating downgrade all but eliminates any investment or stimulus spending as part of any solution. These "solutions" were the only actions that would help the "speed" of the recovery and there's no way they would be passed now.

So are we regulated by this rating and the threat of new ratings to basically do what the Tea Party says to do? It sure looks like it from here. As long as they remain GOP puppet-masters nothing else is possible.

This could be a VERY LONG and PAINFUL recovery REGARDLESS of who is elected... the pain will be born by the poor and the elderly... with the class of "poor" being expanded greatly. But, hey, we can recover with them there as long as we kill all socialist support for them, right?

No... this will continue to get worse unless we seriously make something happen to accelerate job growth. And I don't see THAT happening anytime soon.

Stellar: and to think that the GDP equals the debt at the moment. We ain't getting out of this hole without some serious cutting... So, Obama can kiss the WH adios in 2012. We'll need someone who can say:

"We can't spend what we don't have." And that isn't Obama.

Liberal calling pejoratives names to Tea Party and blaming them for S&P actions, by the other hand President Obama blaming S&P for miscalculation. We are among a bunch of kids in a kinder classroom, we have a group of kids protesting because the others do their job , and the leader of them blaming the teacher for giving a bad grade for not doing his homework. We don't need childs running the country , we need adults that assume their responsibility , we need adults in this government that know the consequences of every decision. This is why our country is going down, Denocrats /socialist a bunch of morons. We are not insane 2012 is coming, re-elect Obama will be and act in insanity, pretend to get different results electing the same president is just nonsense.

@Lkessler

That is where you are dead wrong, He is a politician, he can say it, the Media will swear that he was doing it all along, and 50% of Americans will believe it...If the Republicans don't find a credible candidate he might get re-elected in 2016 also

I agree, why IS anyone listening to their crap. Who really is though. Will it change the plan? Probably not. Financial Services Sector may put pressure on Congress to change it, but I doubt it will get done. S&P is 1 of 3 with poor credibility. The people who will suffer the most are of course the people. But be careful my American friends. Whether if you agree with me or not, they are pitting us against each other.

I think just as highly of you Barry who thinks he knows Moore!

Be my guest, go ahead and support Obama and his band of merry socialists, if you like incompetence; no my problem.

Never needed your aproval to do the right thing. Yes, I support his version over Boners and his merry tea toters any day.

Obama, the conciliator, wasn't ready for the mad dog ideologues on the right on this one. I believe the AMerican people will correctly assign blame for whatever happens as a result of the credit downgrade on those ideologues in 2012.

This is true, come election time for the House, there are gonna be some changes.

Compromise is what got black people classified as having the value of 3/5 of a white person for an 1840's (50s?) census. There is such a thing as the right thing to do and principles, and thank goodness there are elected officials who care more about our country than getting reelected by trading favors for votes.

Not one more cent until they prove responsible for the funds they receive. Then we can talk about it. Nothing until then.

MrPheaniques at no time during your posts did I see anythingabout CEO's sacrificing their millions if not billions of dollars. It's all laid at the feet of the middle class...very Republican/TP of you. I am sure you are going to take the money you've earned from some United States company, retire and move to the Philippines with your wife and live like a king. This is America...you can do that but don't throw our middle class to the lions unless you are willing to be in the arena with us. Your idea sucks.

Rico: "MrPheaniques at no time during your posts did I see anythingabout CEO's sacrificing their millions if not billions of dollars." Why should they, it's theirs and the shareholders.

Until the philosophy of everything that belongs to individuals belongs to the government and the government gets to decide how much an individual gets to keep from their labor we're doomed. Want Socialism, try Italy- oh wait, they went belly-up this week and are in the process of putting in a balanced budget amendment while being required by the ECU to run a balanced budget by 2013.

Sure hope the Chinese do the same to us, it may be our only chance unless the electorate wakes up and throws the grafters out. Everyone will feel the pain, especially the middle class, but only because the rich have more and the poor don't pay much if anything at all.

Easyout --- I think you answered your own question! Yes, the ratings agencies did assign high ratings to the crap mortgages. This was due in large part to the misrepresentation of these packaged investments and the corruption of Wall Street Investors who owned them! And ... the lack of regulatory oversight from Govt! S&P is not gonna make the same mistake with the "crap" US economy, as long as there's the deep divide between the two political party giants! THAT is exactly what's destroying the US economy!

There is a very simple and fair solution to most of our financial issues as a Nation. And it starts with a Flat Tax base on income where everyone, including the uber rich, the middle guy and the poor are paying their fair share. There is no reason nor sense in soaking the rich for more, it will only allow the stupidity and unsustainable spending to continue longer until the Rich have ALL abandoned the US with their money and No One has a job.

But taxing a fair percentage on income and eliminating tax "loopholes" that allow those who do NOT want to pay their fair share to hide behind. And, would not overtax small businesses trying to get on their feet and who provide a great number of American jobs is a smart and sustainable way to tax our Nation fairly and keep our small businesses up and running.

One thing is 100% clear. Obama is not the guy to get it done. I'm sorry if you like the guy personally, but no one in their right mind can say he has America in his best interest. His absolute and deadly adherence to his ideological beliefs concerning Government are destroying America piece by piece. We are NOT Europeans. We do not want to BE Europeans. And we do NOT want a European Socialist Democracy in America. And Obama does. Deny it until hell freezes over... his actions speak louder then his MANY, MANY, MANY words that seem to always lack substance.

Bush screwed up to... He spend like it was coming from tree's. So I'm not saying Obama carries ALL the blame... But he is the guy in office... He is the President. The Buck stops with him. And he has lost a credit rating that Americans have worked to keep for a LOOOOOONG time. It happened on HIS watch... he could have slowed or stopped the Congress bickering by understanding that he could no longer keep spending and ignoring the debt. Others may be somewhat to blame... But Obama is the Coach, He is the CEO, HE is the mad in charge...... He is to blame.

It is not a hard thing, a "Flat Tax"... It, along with necessary spending cuts would solve this matter. As far as the Chinese chiming in... I suggest they learn to feed their people with Meat that does not glow in the dark, and not full of poison. I suggest they begin to act in a fair manner with trade practices... China is flooding the worlds with cheap trinket crap... and not allowing anything in. For every $100 they send out... they bring in less then $20. It is unfair, and unfortunately Bill Clinton Missed that on Treaty Day.

He may not have been a good President... But Trump was right about a great many things... how we do b8usiness and what should change about that with China is one of those things he has right. I hope whom ever takes over when Obama loses in 2012 will use Trump's knowledge and ability to earn. Trump has lost it all and made it all back... TWICE. He is now one of the richest men in America... I submit he has something worth listening to that he would be willing to say.

as they say don't shoot the messenger

If you tax the rich they will make congress get in line. The poor have no voice in Government. We must insist that they tax they actually listen to. We must insist that the Congress live by the laws they pass for us.

• Here are some facts: Since Roosevelt
  % of GDP compared to Debt level has gone down under every Democrat even Carter
  except for Obama. It went up under Reagan almost double. It went up more with
  Bush to 66 %. Clinton
  brought it down to a little over 50% and it jumped to more than 84% with Bush
  Jr. With Obama it went over 90%. It jumped the most under Bush Jr. and Ronald
  Reagan.

Here is the problem, from the perspective of Standard & Poors;

At the end of fiscal year 2008 (Bush's last year), The National Debt was $10.025 Trillion and the economy (GDP) was $14.369 Trillion, for a Debt Ratio of 69.8% of GDP.

For 2011, Obama's 2012 Budget projections show the Debt increasing to $15.476 Trillion, while the GDP is projected to be $15.080 (it will probably be lower), for a Debt Ratio of 103% of GDP.

For 2016, Obama's projection is for Debt of $20.825 Trillion, and GDP (very optimistic (a)) of $19.791 Trillion, for a Debt Ratio of 105% of GDP.

For 2021, Obama projects Debt of $26.346 Trillion, and GDP of $24.633 (again, very optimistic), for a Debt Ratio of 107% of GDP.

Greece had its "Debt Crisis" with a Debt Ratio of 111% of GDP. Unless we have a huge reduction in Deficit spending, we will quickly join Greece and other European nations in the downward spiral of 'unsustainable Debt'.

(a) - Obama's projections of economic growth are ridiculously optimistic, with a projected growth in GDP over the next 10 years of 63.3% (6.33% per year). We will probably have growth of about 2% this year, according to current estimates, which means we could easily reach Greece's Debt Ratio of 111% of GDP within 3 years with current projected spending - if Obama get reelected.

Here is the link to Obama's 2012 Budget figures to verify my FACTS See Tables S-1 & S-14;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

JS in SD "Annual deficits going forward based on new bill in $ billions: Total - $8,452 billions (through 2021 - 11 years).

I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but Obama's 2012 Budget projections show the National Debt increase as follows over the same 11 years;

National Debt for 2010 (actual) = $11,910 Billion.
National Debt for 2021 = $26,346 Billion.

That's an increase in the National Debt of $14,436 Billion ($14.436 Trillion).

Scary, huh. Here is the link to Obama's 2012 Budget - See Table S-14;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

Cause of decline in U.S. financial position

Both economic conditions and policy decisions significantly worsened the debt outlook since 2001, when large surpluses were forecast for the following decade by the CBO. The Pew Center reported in April 2011 the cause of a $12.7 trillion shift in the debt situation, from a 2001 CBO forecast of $2.3 trillion cumulative surplus by 2011 versus the estimated $10.4 trillion public debt in 2011. The major drivers were:

• Revenue declines due to two recessions, separate from the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003: 28%
• Bush Era Defense spending increases: 15%
• The Bush Tax cuts (EGTRRA-2001 and JGTRRA-2003): 13%

Times-Herald.com (July 28, 2011) - The Bush Administration raised the debt limit more than four times, increased spending cost to the American taxpayer by passing the Bush Tax Cuts, including my children and grandchildren by $450 trillion dollars. So where was the Republican-controlled Congress with cap, spend and budget during the Bush Administration?

These seniors are also voters. Social Security is a payroll tax. Seniors paid into the system. If the GOP gets its way, these same seniors will have to decide which drugs to buy, what doctor to see, what food they will have to go without, and what bills to pay.

It's unbelievable that President Bill Clinton had a balanced budget with a surplus and during his last years in office and created 22 million jobs.

But President Bush increased the debt by passing spending bills they could not pay for and only created 8 million jobs. After the Bush tax cuts for big business, job loss was in excess of 2 million with corporate profits up more than $1 trillion.

Derek-V Thank you for taking the time to craft your intelligently laid out, well organized and supported comment above; it draws exactly the correct conclusions. We need someone in the White House who actually likes America rather than someone who secretly thinks we are a greedy, capitalistic country that should be more like and more friendly with good "friends" like the French.

Obama and company believe the founding fathers made a terrible mistake when they set us on the course of freedom that ultimately allowed capitalism to flourish and for America to become the super power it became, still is, but which they cringe at the mention of. If he has his way, rest assured America will become just another politically "correct, gutless" wonder nation and join the ranks of the an "also rans". Thank you for taking the time to write what you did.

Here's an original cartoon idea related to what we have been discussing for anyone out there who wants to draw it; I thought it up.

Obama is at bat in a major league baseball stadium. It's the bottom of the 9th inning; he has two strikes already, the score is America 7 - The Other Side 9. Bases loaded.

On first base is Democracy; 2nd base Capitalism and free enterprise and on third base America's future and its financial solvency.

The pitcher has already thrown the ball - which has ECONOMY written on it and it is bearing down on Obama, who has his bat up

But wait, what's going on? What is it he's looking at in such an enraptured manner? What could it be? Oh, there is a huge cloud in the sky; shaped like a Pie and on the Pie is written - Social welfare programs; illegal alien amnesty = more constituency; Deficit spending - "If you make it we will find a way to spend it"; higher personal and corporate taxes,etc.

Final Results: America looses.

Mr.PheaNiques-0000001

You are a genius. Please run for president 2012.

The Donna ....... he couldn't have increased the debt 450 trillion. The GDP of the whole world is only around 70 trillion.

The balanced budget you talk of under Clinton was under Rep passed spending bills the last 6 years of his term. Congress passing spending not the pres. And what was the big tax policy of the Clinton 2nd term ....... A tax cut of 28% to 20% on capital gains. More than Bush cut it but nobody ever talks of that.

CBO projections are rarely accurate because they use a static present day number and do not take into account behavior or outside influences on the economy. One easy one to track is cap gains numbers. Every time the gains taxes were cut they projected a deficit and every time they were raised they projected increases. However, look back at the last three going back to Reagan in '87 and the exact opposite is true. When the rates were lowered under Bush to 15% in '03 they projected deficit revenue. But the revenue from cap gains more than doubled in three years.

Another falsehood on the '03 tax rate that to 35% in '03 was that it cost jobs and lost revenue. Look forward 4 years from may '03 went the rate went in effect for the next four years and revenue was up at a good pace and over 7 million jobs created. The lost jobs came in the last months of '08 from the Recession and had nothing to do with tax policy. Go look it up at the bureau of labor statistics website its all there.

Stoop - You're not serious, are you? First of all - Corporations pay NO taxes...second....people like Warren Buffet pay less in taxes than his own secretary pays...he said that himself....and, now that I think about it...on a percentage basis the "rich" pay less in Payroll taxes (Medicare and Social Security) than the upper middle class, middle class, and the poor....

A good place to start is to remove FICA caps from payrolls and EVERYONE pay the same tax rates....correct....well, you can start by putting your money where your mouth is!

Sorry BigATC - the 450 was a typo....

The Donna. Why not let's do a flat tax that no one can escape and while we're at it eliminate the loopholes that keep so many tax lawyers busy and rich? About time they sought gainful employment that did something that added to the economy; what a waste of brain power.

As for taxing "the rich" more and playing the old class warfare card the Democrats are so often want to play; just because someone is bright enough to become wealthy does not mean they should be penalized for being smart enough to amass a fortune; that's part of what keeps people working hard and has made America the success it has become - knowing that if you do work hard you do have a chance to one day become rich and give your family nicer things, greater security is part of the American Dream.

Does everyone realize it? Of course not, but the more you tax people the less inclination they have to push themselves and the closer they get to saying, "Why bother?"

I see....

So, the Republican's are going to take credit for the success of the Clinton administration.

Republican Bush is NOT responsible for the loss of jobs and our increased deficit due to tax loopholes and un-budgeted military spending...

and Washington Democrats ARE currently responsible for the Tea Party splitting the Republican Party in half, making them the laughing stock of the world, and causing the 11th hour budget crisis that got America's credit rating dropped?

Damn, so....why did Obama get elected instead of McCain???? It's that Republican's can do no wrong????

"AAA" rating????????

We are bankrupt! What responsible/honest/viable ratings company would even consider giving the United States a top credit rating????

Apple now has more money the the United States of America.

We are 14 TRILLION in debt, and after we fund the coming crises in Medicare and Social Security, we will be over 50 TRILLION in debt.

We are funding TWO useless wars on credit (one immoral based upon lies); the first time in world history and two of the most IGNORANT endeavors in world history.

ANYONE who would loan us more money are total MORONS and will never get their money back. Are you awake yet China ???

The only solution is to start parking our country down the block so China can't find it and have it repossessed!

(Or CLOSE THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND JAIL THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD, end 2 useless wars and cut back bloated military, repeal tax breaks to rich and big corporations, increase taxes, cut our bloated government/congress, repair our infrastructure, transition off of oil, and move to a responsible fiscal policy that looks to the future instead of stealing form the future generations).

Stoop, I agree...Let's levy a flat income tax AND a flat PAYROLL tax and close all loopholes in Corporate taxation....let's tax corporations based on the financial statements they present to Wall Street.....

That, in addition to getting rid of ridiculous pork that has been implemented into our spending system should get us back on track a hell of a lot faster that cutting out all government spending and not collecting to additional revenues....

Buy the way, all government entitlements don't go to homeless breeding pigs living on the streets drinking Colt 45....Some of them go to homeless and injured veterans that no one will hire....Oh, to repay your parents for THEIR TAX DOLLARS that they paid in over the last 40/50/60 years of their lives...

Oh, maybe we can just euthanize our sick and elderly...that would cut the Medicare and Social Security debt from being paid out!!!! Oh, wait...Medicare and Social Security come out a trust that CONGRESS has been STEALING from for years and years.....

Well, hell, still just euthanize them anyway....More $$$ for us young folks....

Donna, thats the way most people portray the political arena..... one side is all good or one side is all bad because of how they themselves believe.

Both sides have their faults, not saying Bush did all good because he didn't. Presidents are like quarterbacks, they tend to get too much credit or blame when things happen. For instance, Clinton had no major events (dot com bubble starting his last few months)and took office the 2nd quarter into a recovery from a recession. Bush came into office at a recession, dot com bubble and 9/11. And this great wall street and real estate mess in his last year.

The Clinton years had him and Gingrich work fairly well together. There were moments but for the most part as good as our two party system gets. I give them both credit, but not just one or the other.

Both sides been have been mostly putting us in a hole the last 40 years and its getting to a tipping point now because of it. Now we are about to pay for it. If we don't its gonna get real ugly in 10 years. We can't keep taking in 2.2 trillion and spending 3.7 trillion as we did this year and ignore the entitlements going bust.

I think most could agree to getting rid of the loopholes. Those with money (GE) basically write their own tax code. new tax code would be great to put everyone on an even field in the business world.

Downsize our huge government, attrition not firings. Did you know every govt job takes 20 private sector jobs to support it?

Donna: One doesn't get "repaid" for the tax dollars they put in. If that was the case people who paid more in taxes would get more out and it doesn't work that way. Take SS or Medicare for instance. Most people collecting today are reaping much more than they paid in; future generations will get much less.

Madoff went to jail for running this kind of Ponzi scheme. The bill is due and there is no one to collect from but ourselves. Stop the spending now before it is too late. The politicians put us in this bind; it is not a revenue problem, anyone on this board could balance the budget in two weeks with over 90% agreement on the cuts from the rest of the board. Of course, we aren't concerned with taking bribes to run for reelection and don't need to pay off the contributors from the left and right with the people's money.

No reason to give today's politicians one cent until they prove responsible with the trillions they already get every year. Demonstrate competence and discipline with that, and then we can look at providing more. Starve the beast into submission. The day of reckoning is coming. As bad and painful as it is to do it now it gets $4 billion dollars a day worse every day we wait.

BigATC...I was a DIEHARD REPUBLICAN until the 2008 elections....so, I know both sides of the fence....I just can't understand why those WASHINGTON IDIOTS - ALL of them - can't work together...

Norm, I understand that the SS/Medicare $$$ Trusts are cash accounts and that our SS/Medicare taxes are not accrued....Please also understand that most that you are getting "repaid" paid in when the minimum wages was less than $5...so, of course they are reaping much more than they paid in...

And, actually, we don't need a bunch of un-educated jerk-off lawyers in Washington - WE NEED TO ELECT ACCOUNTANTS!!!! Lawyer's came up with the Federal Tax Law's NOT ACCOUNTANTS!!!

Went to look up federal government jobs added from jan 1 '09 to feb 11 it was 58,000 (factcheck.org) With taking 20 private sector jobs to support 1 fed job (salary, healthcare, retirement) that has taken 1,160,000 jobs created in the private sector to support that. Sure it was similar in Bush years with Homeland Security and all that. Anyone think govt is a little to big?

Donna, i leaned dem younger, then rep as i got older. Now i can't stand either. All they do is worry about making themselves look good, the other guy look bad, being re-elected, and "wins" for themselves. That consumes about 95% of everything they do. The whole system there, money driven, disgusts me.

Accountants might not be that much better as a complicated tax code leads to big consulting dollars and fees for returns.

A flat tax or VAT is the way to go. No deductions for anything including mortgages, health insurance, investment credits, kids, business loopholes, etc., no room for anyone to hide. Accountants would hate it and rates could be much lower.

When the President started talking about layering more taxes on people earning over $250k the first thing I did was call my accountant and ask how we could stay under the $250 level. Raising taxes is a loser's game. Lower them and disincentivize gaming the system.

Stoops2Conquer: I believe that your assumption that wealth necessarily represents the intelligence and/or hard work of the wealthy person is in error. While these traits can lead to wealth, there are many others that work equally well: corruption, dishonesty, luck, birthright, etc.

Based on observation and anecdotal evidence, I'd have to say that there is very little chance that your average billionaire is either 100,000 times smarter or has spent 100,000 times as much effort amassing their fortune as someone with only $10k in assets. They've figured out how to work the system so that they can get greater than average returns for their efforts. This becomes self-perpetuating over time, as their wealth brings greater power to manipulate the system in the future.

How much of Warren Buffet's fortune is due to the fact that he lives in the United States, where the physical, intellectual and societal infrastructure exists to allow the companies he invests in to thrive? At what point should the investment of the nation in that infrastructure be funneled back to the system that provides the benefit, rather than to him and his investors? While there's no absolute answer in percentage terms, the results we see in the economy today suggest to me that we've gone too far in letting a certain class of people tap the resources of our society for their personal gain without actually participating in the further development of the economy through investments in education, infrastructure, and the continued well-being of fellow members of society.

I'm not saying redistribute everything that the rich have to the poor. I'm saying recognize the opportunity cost we bear by not requiring some investment in continuing the practices that allow for national stability and the growth of our potential as a nation from those who siphon off wealth they do not create.

And, by the way, changing the way things are counted and measured is not the same thing as building wealth. Starting in the 70's, financiers worked hard to convince people to think of their houses as "investments", getting them to pay ever more in interest for the same piece of property by misrepresenting the concepts of price and value to people who didn't have the economic education to recognize the scam. Since the whole industry was in on the plan, where were people to go for an honest opinion about its validity? Yet the perpetrators have gotten bailed out, while the "marks" are being held accountable. Our economic and legal systems need work.

DUST IN THE WIND

I do not fear the power of darkness. They have power but they do not have numbers. They thrive only in dark secrecy. Once numbers awaken to the malignancy in which they are engulfed they become exponential and there is no way they can be controlled. The power of darkness must always flee before the light. When a light is shined into their dark corners, they shrivel away and wither into dust. We must remember absolute darkness can be extinguished by one solitary candle.

Somewhere there is a leader waiting. There is a great deal of talent out there and all they need is a leader. Whenever mankind suffers under the boot of oppression leaders always emerge.

Change is in the wind.

And we are that wind...

I do not agree with every decision President Obama has made and I hope he has learned the very hard lesson that if you give an inch they will take a mile.

What i mean specifically is that during the first 2 years he held true to his promise he would support a bi-partisan approach to governing (with the exception of the health care act..also a promise).

Unfortunately what all this negotiating with the Republicans got him was push-back and endless concessions, which provided endless talking points which were spun by the Republicans, including the tea partiers to motivate their voters to get to the polls.

So here we are with what is most likely the most dysfunctional congress in the history of the U.S. Made dysfunctional by the radical extreme fringe of the Republican Party calling themselves tea partiers who demonstrate zero regard to the immediate consequences to the country in their intentional efforts to be uncompromising.

I actually agree with both the Democrats and the Republicans and yes even in some areas the radical right.

I believe the Bush era tax breaks for the richest Americans needs to end.

I believe tax loopholes need to be closed.

I also believe that the entitlement programs need to be seriously evaluated and a comprehensive plan to eliminate fraud and abuse initiated.

I believe that is these times of budgetary concern we should consider ending foreign aid before we call for the discontinuation of providing aid here at home.

I think social security needs to be left alone, it runs in the black and always had, so much so it has been looted for its budgetary surplus.

I believe those who serve in congress should be provided with the same retirement program that is offered to all other federal employees, time in service before being vested included.

I believe congress should only receive a pay increase if it is voted on by our citizens at the polls.

What we need most of all is a balanced approach and Obama's attempt to get that balanced approach in prior to the 2010 elections failed miserably. So now that we know the far right fringe will lead the Republican base around by their noses, the only hope is for Obama to be re-elected and the Democrats to regain control over the congress. Obama must not repeat his attempt to work with the Republicans and try to get things done bi-partisan.

He needs to grow a pair and pass the legislation needed to reduce the deficit and get the budget back in line, something only Democrat presidents have been able to do.

% of GDP compared to Debt went up under Reagan.

It went up under Bush.

It went down under Clinton.

It went WAY back up under Bush Jr.

With Obama trying to be bi-partisan it went up yet again, clearly bi-partisan isn't the answer.

So while Obama's attempt to work with the Republicans may have contributed to down grade it was the increases in debt under the Republican administrations along with the plain obstinate and economically ignorant tea party freshmen that broke the camels back.

After all the bickering and arguing is done; after all the posturing, parades, fanfare and fund raisers; after all the commercials, debates, advertisements and brain-dead political pundits are done... the fact is when it comes to the Presidential election of 2012...

Americans, and especially Obama will hear "echoes" of Ronald Reagan:

In 2008, Obama based "his entire campaign on his PROMISING Americans "HOPE & CHANGE"... didn't he? How is that working out so far? Duh... America's economy is far worse and the worse it has been since the Great Depression, and by many calculations, it is actually WORSE than the Great Depression, while showing ZERO signs of improvement for YEARS to come?

So, the simple questions remain...

As Reagan said to the American people, what ANY candidate can say,

"When you make your decision to vote next Tuesday,"

"It might be well if you would ask yourself:

Are you better off than you were four years ago?

Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago?

Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four years ago?

Is America as respected throughout the world as it was?"

How is all that HOPE & CHANGE you were promised by Obama working out?

People, get real... I mean you don't need to be "Nostradamus" to figure this out, just a little knowledge about American Political History.

Obama, or ANY candidate with his Economic numbers... has absolutely ZERO chance of re-election... ZERO.

peace :-)

"America's economy is far worse and the worse it has been since the Great Depression, and by many calculations, it is actually WORSE than the Great Depression, while showing ZERO signs of improvement for YEARS to come?"

That's BS. Until this week's roller coaster, the DJIA had improved from 8,000 in January 2009 http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/30/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm to consistently 12,000 or higher for the past year or so.

Unemployment rates have been slowly edging downward since the high of 10.1, now to 9.1. See here: http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3

And there has been positive private sector job growth for the last 17 straight months. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/private_sector_jobs_also_impro031333.php

Case Shiller notes that May and June both showed increases in housing prices. http://www.standardandpoors.com/indices/sp-case-shiller-home-price-indices/en/us/?indexId=spusa-cashpidff--p-us----

DrDrGimmetheNews

Unemployment rates have been slowly edging downward since the high of 10.1, now to 9.1. See here: http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3

Your data shows we started at 9.0% at the beginning of 2011. We are sitting at 9.1% after 7 months. Where's the recovery again?

And there has been positive private sector job growth for the last 17 straight months. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_08/private_sector_jobs_also_impro031333.php

"We need more rapid growth in the private sector to compensate for the cuts in the public sector," says Patrick O'Keefe, director of economic research at accounting firm J.H. Cohn and former deputy assistant secretary at the U.S. Department of Labor. Again, you need to look at the whole picture and not just a piece of it.

Case Shiller notes that May and June both showed increases in housing prices. http://www.standardandpoors.com/indices/sp-case-shiller-home-price-indices/en/us/?indexId=spusa-cashpidff--p-us----

The government's mortgage buyer Fannie Mae on Friday sought a further $5.1 billion from taxpayers, as the Obama administration struggled to keep Americans in their homes. This isn't a good indicator wouldn't you say?

Did I say things were perfect? Nope.

Did I say overall they are improving, but slowly? Yup.

Did I dispute the claim that "the economy is worse than the Great Depression"? Yup.

"...shows why leaders should appoint members who will approach the committee’s work with an open mind — instead of hardliners who have already ruled out the balanced approach that the markets and rating agencies like S.& P. are demanding." - Harry Reid

The problem is, Harry, that this is a lie. S&P nor any other rating agency has demanded a "balanced" -- tax and spend -- solution. In fact quite the contrary. S&P expressly stated that they don't care how the government resolves this debt crisis that they painted themselves into over the decades.

"Standard & Poor's takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate for putting the U.S.'s finances on a sustainable footing." - Standard and Poor's

I'm shocked that Harry Reid would make such a disingenuous, misleading, embellished statement! Well, coming from Harry...not really...no, I'm not shocked at all.

China, the largest foreign holder of United States debt, said on Saturday that Washington needed to “cure its addiction to debts” and “live within its means,” just hours after the S.& P. downgrade.

uhoh...I guess China is being run by the Tea Party now too.

The republicans put forth two bills cutting the debt by at least the required $4 trillion, and the democrats voted both down. Any poster blaming the republicans slept through the last few weeks.

I don't see how the S&P evaluation is wrong. You have an entity that is $14 trillion dollars in debt that is increasing spending for the next couple of years. The speculative $2.5 trillion is missing a lot of specifics and has a lot of basis on growth projections that are not realistic.

What is the REAL problem with the Deficits?

Just for perspective, I looked at President Obama's 2012 Budget projections, and here is what it shows with regard to just the health care entitlements - Medicare/Medicaid;

Total projected Revenues for Medicare/Medicaid over the next 10 years = $2.730 Trillion.
Total projected Costs for Medicare/Medicaid over the next 10 years = $10.530 Trillion.
That's a net Deficit in just the Medicare/Medicaid program of $7.790 Trillion.

It's interesting to note that the same Budget projections by Obama for the same 10 year period (2012-2021) show a TOTAL Deficit of $7.206 Trillion, so if it were not for the health care Deficits, we would actually show a net SURPLUS of $584 Billion over the next 10 years. These figures include the added cost of Obama's new entitlement for Obamacare. The revenues and spending projected by Obama can be verified at the following White House link - See Table S-3;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/tables.pdf

It's obvious that underfunded Medicare/Medicaid is the REAL problem with the Deficits.

My recommendation – Fully fund Medicare with increased payroll taxes of about $71 per month each for employers & employees, and for Medicaid, a combination of a small deductible ($10 per doctor visit) for Medicaid beneficiaries plus a National Sales Tax of about 2%. These simple changes would fully fund these programs and lead to a Surplus instead of huge Deficits within 10 years.

I welcome any comments.

I doubt that the S&P downgrade will have much of an impact on interest rates in this country.

Where will investors put their money - in Euros? That is even weaker than the Dollar, and the other major economies (China, India, Japan and Russia) have no need to borrow funds - they have surpluses.

So funds will continue to flow into the U.S. by default.

The Clinton administration caused the housing bubble by mandating banks give home loans to unqualified buyers without a down. They got their houses, took out 2nd's, 3rd's, bought new cars with the money and gave the houses back. Obama has way overspent and implemented Obamacare (no companies won't hire because of so many regulations to figure out) so our economy goes down. Did Obama do it on purpose so he can remake the economy the way he wants? He did say that.

The Republicans DID NOT... repeat, DID NOT cause the S&P credit ratings downgrade. All the articles where S&P told their requirements said that the S&P wanted to see $4 trillion in CUTS! CUTS! CUTS! They weren't looking for $4T in tax revenues and cuts, but only CUTS! CUTS! CUTS! The United States government has been living far outside of its means for years and this is not sustainable. There was only one plan that met the requirements of the S&P and that was the REPUBLICAN plan of Cap, Cut, and Balance. This was the only plan that resulted in the $4T of cuts that S&P wanted. Would these cuts have been painful? Yes. Were they necessary? Yes, if we want to make any substantial progress towards REDUCING our national debt, instead of increasing it like we have done for years. It was ONLY the REPUBLICAN plan that met the requirements stated by S&P and more than likely would have resulted in NO credit rating downgrade. None of the other plans included $4T in CUTS! except for Cap, Cut, and Balance.

If you don't buy what I am saying about the $4 trillion in CUTS!, look it up for yourself. Here are three articles:

http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2011/07/28/sp-rating-chief-more-or-less-sticks-by-4-trillion-deficit-reduction-number/

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/07/28/sp-4-trillion-is-only-start/

http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/S-P-Deficit-Cut-Payment/2011/07/28/id/405220

"The Republicans DID NOT... repeat, DID NOT cause the S&P credit ratings downgrade. All the articles where S&P told their requirements said that the S&P wanted to see $4 trillion in CUTS! CUTS! CUTS! They weren't looking for $4T in tax revenues and cuts, but only CUTS! CUTS! CUTS!"

Incorrect. They believe a combination of spending cuts and revenue increases are necessary. Further, they believe that the political brinksmanship (like the Tea Party politicians refusing to raise the debt ceiling if tax increases were included) has contributed to the instability. See here for the complete text of the S & P decision (NOT an interpretation or selective quoting) : http://www.marketwatch.com/story/text-of-sp-downgrade-of-us-rating-2011-08-05

Absolutely! Imagine them giving the USA an undeserved AAA rating for the last 15 years! Shame on them.

Well, domingo probably STILL has the subprime mortgage backed securities, because he ALWAYS believes what wall street conartists tell him.

S&P caused the "housing bubble"? Are you kidding?

General stupidity caused the housing bubble. Democrats in congress demanding banks loan money to people with no credit and lousy incomes caused the housing bubble. Greed from ignorant home owners refinancing themselves into bankruptcy caused the housing bubble.

Why would anyone who spends 140% of their income year in and year out deserve a good credit rating?

no, svopilot, the housing bubble and its crash falls squarely on the bush administration. remember the "ownership" society that bush kept spouting about? remember that bastard Greenspan telling folks that sub-prime mortgages were so wonderful and everyone should get one if they were going to purchase a house? since when does the head of the Fed Reserve become openly involved with politics? the bush administration was a bunch of thieving monsters whose sole goal was to bankrupt the US and many of its citizens. that way they could break down the spirit of the populace and make it easier to finally get rid of those "hateful Roosevelt" programs.

Goldenone, the BUSH administration tried to investigate Fannie and Freddie in 2005 and got Blocked by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who claimed that the whistle blower was just racially motivated. (Isn't that a familiar cry from the Left.)

Bush warned in a speech as early as 2002 that practices at the former government institutions might leave American citizens at risk for their financial practices.

I was warning friends about the practice of loaning to financially unstable indivduals with zero down payment when bush was being sworn in.

Carter started Fannie and Freddie and Clinton cut them loose with legislated advantages to take over the mortgage industry.

Where do you get this crap????????????????????????????

If you are stupid enough to buy a house you cannot afford and you go bankrupt it is YOUR fault.

If you are stupid enough to loan money to an idiot with lousy credit, YOUR fault. Unless democrats in congress mandated it as part of a loan program.

Roosevelt was a socialist piece of crap, his programs made the depression into the GREAT DEPRESSION. His inaction and stupidity led us into WWII and in the end Capitalism saved us.

Nobody owes you crap, get over it. There is no Constitutional right to FREE medical. No Constitutional right to criminally invade America. No right to narcotics and free weed. No right to a free home, cell phone, cable TV and car.

Belive it or not,,,,,,,,,,,,,,when you have kids it is your job to feed, cloth and house them, NOT MINE.

Before you start pissing and moaning about poor people and their "needs" try and remember they have homes for the most part, cars, big screen TV's, cell phones and free medical.

What this means is that Sand P's assertions is slanted. Who owns that again? Furthermore if Moody's and the other one didn't do the same why did S and P? Besides its stated reason? Did they think it would sway the other two? Also funny China is telling us to live within our means. The same as the tea bagging republicans. Looks like China owns some of them for sure. And credit has always been around for the rich. It went to the middle class and what not not but a few decades ago.

We are a country of credit but China is telling us to stop? Yeah right. We will just borrow more to spite them and I am happy to oblige. Communist shouldn't be telling anyone anything yet here they are. On the SAME page with tea bagging republicans. Hmmm.

What we NEED to do is SHUT China down by changing our free trade agreements and tax the you know what out of imports and drop taxes on exports and businesses shipping within our borders.

Give Americans incentive to stay here and hire Americans instead of PAYING them basically to move to a COMMIE country. Then you raise taxes little by little as the country then begins to grow. People keep insisting on giving the rich handouts of welfare. It hasn't worked. So they tried to cut everything. It got us downgraded. Didn't work.

So what you do to make rich people HIRE American [which is the new slogan by the way] is give them tax incentives of 2 percent to hire American. To build here and stay here. We will then see HOW MANY businessmen and rich folk are beholden to China a communist country. And see if there loyalties truly lie at home.

Also as equally important is infrastructure. All of THOSE contractors who lost there homes and business in the bubble burst should have jobs and contracts building and rebuilding infrastructure. America MUST move toward. Not stay stagnant HOPING and PRAYING for rich guys and gals to GIVE us jobs please? Might I have more sir? Not when they never came in the first place. But they sure are HORDING our cash WE the people GAVE them like hoarders on the A & E programming. Think HUGE. Think American. WE don't ask for handouts from rich people just because the government gives THEM our money as handouts and welfare. They are RICH. They do not need that money more then the elderly poor and disabled who cant find jobs even ion a good economy. INFRASTRUCTURE is the key. Build and rebuild America bigger and better. Do NOT cut back cut cut cut because the tea bagging republicans refuse to use there brains. Or the lack of ideas they have. How come that is the only ideas they have? Hmmm. Very telling indeed.

Cheers

You liar Snowdragon the FBI tried to investigate ALL mortgage lenders and where told to STOP by the Justice Department, that would be the BUSH Justice Department. LOOK IT UP

I'd like to know where all these poor people with big screen TVs are. Have yet to see one. My parents make about $50,000 a year and don't even have a big screen. Hell, not even a flat screen.

Oh, and you only get free medical care if you're DIRT POOR, and even then it's often a hassel. In TN, for example, you can't get TennCare if you make more than $18,000 a year in combined family income. Try living on $18,000 and then tell me how easy your life is.

It is said, the smaller the hovel, the bigger the plasma screen.

@goldenone

The mortgage crisis started when Carter came up with the Community Reinvestment Act. The Dems forced Banks to lend in areas where the property could not hold it value. It also made loans to people in the poverty class.

Then Clinton came along and biased the program racially and put even more pressure on Banks to lend to people who could not afford to pay back the loans. And in more then less desirable areas.

Then someone on Wall Street saw what the Dems were doing and said let's make some money off this political debacle. These bad loans would never have been there to package for sale if the Dems didn't create them. But WS knew what the Dems wanted.

And yes when Bush came into office he wanted to go over and review some of these practices but at the time the Dems were the party of no.

So face the facts and don't be so shortsighted.

@svopilot: Come on, dude. Don't you know that if you have a bad credit score it's always the credit reporting agency's fault? Who does S&P think they are taking America's over-the-top debt-to-income ratio into account?

Truth be told, we probably deserve more like a B rating at this point. I sure as hell wouldn't loan us any money.

Read about how corrupt the rating agencies are, see article on Bloomberg Business News:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-13/moody-s-s-p-caved-to-mortgage-pressure-by-goldman-ubs-levin-report-says.html

"Relying on mathematical models, Moody's and Standard & Poor's awarded AAA ratings to mortgage securities packaged during the five-year housing boom, deeming them as safe as government bonds. About 90 percent of AAA securities backed by subprime mortgages from 2006 and 2007 were later downgraded to junk status, Levin's committee said.

Such revisions forced banks, pension funds and insurance companies to sell holdings, contributing to $2 trillion in losses and asset-writedowns worldwide."

--SO actually Standard & Poor's was partly to blame for our financial crisis...
S&P executives should be in jail, not criticizing the economy that they helped ruin!

I don't know if you remember but at the time there was alot of talk about going after these executives for a criminal complaint. But it went away quietly.

I see a lot of people leaving an important step OUT OF the CDO equation. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sold loan bundles of INTACT mortgages with traceability. The buyers like Goldman, BOA and Chase then combined these bundles, broke them into shares (no longer traceable to a single mortgage) and sold them under the same rating as the original bundle. As a result, the problem we see today is no single mortgage holder to negotiate a refinance or modification. Mortgage servicers have attempted to fulfill this role, but only to repossess (foreclose). Their legal standing is murky, because they frequently cannot demonstrate any money in the game save for their servicer status. Meanwhile, trillions of dollars are locked into funds which may be solid or worthless. The loss of a direct connection is the true demon here, on all sides.

This situation was the brain-child of an Indonesian-born Australian bank employee some fifteen, twenty years ago. After a few years, he saw the intrinsic flaw and successfully campaigned to have the practice outlawed in Australia. Meanwhile, 'the smartest people in the room' types here picked it up. Why didn't upper management stop it? Commissions. The CDO creators made a fortune selling the CDO's to willing fund managers, eager to buy a guaranteed 7-10% return. Meanwhile, the banks, and at least one sharp fund manager, bet that that what system would fall apart, just like its creator realized that it would.

These fools are merely showing how much they are in control, and reprimanding the US for raking their asses over the coals for the mortgage fiasco.

The mess our government is in isn't the fault of any rating agency. If you watched the last few weeks, how our government tried to solve a problem, you might wonder why any sane person or soverign country would trust their money to us.

I have been investing for over 40 years, and I was scared of losing a lot of my nest egg because of how our government was acting. They are trully disfunctional.

I can only fire 4 of these clowns; 2 Senators, 1 Representative and a President. I just wish I could fire all 536 of them.

Ol_Arkie -I agree with most of your statement, but look at it another way. I just read Arianna Huffington's 'Sunday Roundup' where she cited:

"Maybe the ratings agency was using the same math it had when it helped create the fiscal crisis we are still struggling to get out of by awarding AAA ratings to trillions of dollars in subprime mortgages repackaged as securities."

Amen to that!

The credit agencies warned us IF we didn't lower our debt by at least $4T not to even waste our time raising it because it wouldn't help. So what did our leaders do? Well on paper it lowered it by $2T. In real time it raised our debt by $7T. Like it or not we should have taken the hit and not raised it at all> The Tea Party had it right, our leaders, as always, trying to save their butts rather than save the country.

Jim, you have to be kidding! You are an idiot if you are spreading garbage that S&P cause the mortgage meltdown. Your lack of common sense is fully exposed. How about lowering our nations debt by 7T and we will be just find. Our government is way to large.

Huskergal it's also said that Republicans/TP suck. Some believe it some don't.

To posters in this thread .... Gramm, Leach, Biley! Those not familiar with this legislation ... google it! It is this Republican DEregulation thay opened the door for Investment banks to engage in primary mortgage activities and domestic institutions to engage in multiple insurance, investment, and traditional banking activities! All with a "conflict of interest" along with that deregulation opening the door for massive corruption! THAT is the republican mantra! Let Wall Street run rampant lining their own pockets while they create bubbles destroying the middle-class!

So if it all the Republicans fault why did Obama give 90% of our stimulus money to foreign bankers? Why did Obama approve the bonuses to AIG but railed against the other banks for giving them? Why did Barney Frank and company threaten the banks that if they didn't make home loans to people who couldn't afford it that he and his friends in congress would make sure they would go out of business? Why did Countrywide give Dodd such a good deal on his home loan? And why, since we are at it, if rich people are so interested in giving the government more money why did John Kerry go to another state to register his yacht instead of MA where he would have to pay big taxes on it?

S&P are the same bastards that caused the housing bubble.

Jim. What in the world are you talking about?

Standard and Poors isn't a lending institution, it's a financial-services company which publishes financial research and analysis on stocks and bonds and provides credit ratings.

Our financial crisis was the fault of the government. Attorney General Janet Reno, under the auspices of the Clinton administration, began to put pressure on banks to give home loans to minorities and low-income/ high-risk individuals under threat of legal action by the Justice Department for discrimination. The banks would have to comply. In an effort to cover their asses, lending institutions issued sub-prime mortgages to people who would otherwise not qualify for a home loan. Even illegal immigrants were getting loans. The initial result of these "easy-to-get" loans was a flurry of housing construction and first-time home purchases. The bubble started.

The Bush administration knew of the impending crisis, but I'm sure they were reluctant to say anything lest they be deemed "racists" to even suggest that this hair-brained policy be halted. Instead, Bush made several attempts to enact regulationto bring sub-primes (Fanny and Freddie) under the control of the Treasury Department. His efforts were thwarted each time by the likes of Senators Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and Nancy Pelosi who, after the bubble burst and Wall Street crashed as a result, blamed the Bush administration's lack of regulation. Hilarious! The press, as usual, made no challenges of the Democrats.

This crisis we are experiencing was created and is being perpetuated by the Democrats. They own it, lock, stock and barrel.

End of story.

• Here are some facts: Since Roosevelt
  % of GDP compared to Debt level has gone down under every Democrat even Carter
  except for Obama. It went up under Reagan almost double. It went up more with
  Bush to 66 %. Clinton
  brought it down to a little over 50% and it jumped to more than 84% with Bush
  Jr. With Obama it went over 90%. It jumped the most under Bush Jr. and Ronald
  Reagan.

Donna426...if you knew ANYTHING about how "vehicles" (including boats) are registered for tax purposes, then you would know that the vehicle must be taxed in the state in which the vehicle resides. In other words, if Kerry keeps his boat in RI then RI gets the taxes....I know, I'm a Tennessee Tax Auditor and we have PLENTY of people taking their boats out of Tennessee to another state because our sales taxes are higher that surrounding states even though everyone wants to live in Tennessee because we have NO INCOME TAX....

There were a lot of people who exacerbated the problem of the housing bubble, but fundamentally it was caused by investors in the CDO markets. In the '60's and 70's and before, banks gave mortgages to people they knew. Default rates were extremely low, and the investments were very safe. In the 80's, investors noticed and wanted a way to get involved in such low risk loans. Banks realized that they could increase their profits by selling off their loans and using the proceeds to generate new ones. The whole system was predicated on the low default risk of the underlying mortgages.

As investors learned of the safe, profitable investment instruments, the demand for them rose. In order to meet the demand, banks needed to write more mortgages, and therefore lowered their credit standards a little bit. Since defaults didn't usually happen in the first year or so, no real difference was noticed by the investors, and so demand continued to grow. Banks continued to lower their standards, and investors failed to questions where all of the new investments were coming from, and whether they were of the same quality as those the CDO's original reputation was built. If the investors had not continued to demand the securities, the banks would not have continued to lower their standards, but since the bank's risk ended when the mortgages were securitized and sold, they had no reason not to continue writing mortgages. The easy availability of financing led to increases in the prices of housing, which led to the bubble. The problems in this scenario were many.

1. Individuals did not realize that under traditional standards, they were not qualified for the loans they were taking out.
2. The people they trusted to tell them they were getting in over their heads were the bankers, who had a strong disincentive to doing so.
3. Banks were rewarded by investors for originating loans rather than for originating solid, credit-worthy loans.
4. Investors didn't do their own due diligence to make sure that the CDO's were meeting standards for risk.
5. When the system fell apart, the government stepped in to bail out the investors and banks, whose quest for easy money started the problem, rather than homeowners, who had the least culpability for the problems, as the expert advice they relied on the banks for was faulty from the start.

On a fundamental level, banks breached their fiduciary duties to both the investors and the homeowners, yet they are the ones who've been made whole at the taxpayers expense. They should have been allowed to go into receivership with the federal government taking them over long enough to straighten out their respective messes, and reselling them to new investors after an appropriate period. The banks shareholders should have lost everything, so that the investment community would have learned that they need to monitor the activities of the businesses in which they invest. Instead, all of the wrong lessons were imparted, the wrong people rewarded, and the wrong people devestated.

And if you paid attention to the news you would know that because of the controversy he took the boat to MA and registered it there, like he should have done in the first place. Just like buying online, you still have to pay the tax to the state that you live. I guess you wouldn't know anything about that would you?

Actually - I know a hell of a lot about online purchasers...when determining the "sales" tax-ability of online purchases - only companies that have NEXUS within the "purchaser's" state are required to collect and remit sales tax. (If you don't know what NEXUS is - go look it up) If the "seller" does not have NEXUS in the "purchaser's" state it is left up the honesty of the "purchaser" to file a generic "use" tax return and remit a "use" tax - which is the equivalent to the amount that the "sales" tax that would have been collected if the "purchaser" had actually purchased the item within state lines.

Obviously Kerry took the boat back into MA and registered it there...he's a politician....if I were running for office I would have done the same thing - whether LEGALLY required to - OR NOT....which - if the freaking boat "resided" in RI - then technically Kerry ILLEGALLY registered the boat in MA. Just like you can register your car in another state but live and use the car in your home state. Same principles....

Blah, Blah, Blah...next state sales or use tax question.....

Like I said before, "if you knew ANYTHING about how "vehicles" (including boats) are registered for tax purposes, then you would know that the vehicle MUST be taxed in the state in which the vehicle resides. In other words, if Kerry keeps his boat in RI then RI should legally get the sales taxes" - Actually, that is, unless Kerry totes the $7M boat back home after every use....and, obviously, that's NOT VERY LIKELY....

"So if it all the Republicans fault why did Obama give 90% of our stimulus money to foreign bankers?"

Credible sources for this claim, please.

What do you want from those credit rating agencies? They can only give ratings based on information they receive. They based those mortgage bundle ratings on government agency statements, and we all know about government agency statements...Lies, Lies, Lies!

Not sure where you are from domingo, but when your country can sell 15 trillion in bonds and notes, then maybe I will listen to you. I would guess you are buying pesos.

Domingo: You really are ignorant of the mortgage debacle. GUESS WHO PAID FOR THE AAA RATINGS GIVEN TO THE MORTGAGE PEOPLE FOR SUBPRIME BUNDLES OF MORTGAGES!!!! The mortgage companies paid for their own ratings!

Do you really think that is good accounting principals? THEY WERE NOT BASED ON ANY GOVT AGENCY - GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT NEXT TIME.

ir12

foolish statement.

Henry lll

Blaming the S&P is like the guy who smokes 2 packs of lucky strikes a day for 40 years, then when he's diagnosed with lung cancer he blames his cardiologist.

Washington's proposal's from both the Republican's and Democrat's, were like that same guy thinking he can survive his cancer by switching to Marlboro Lights and cutting down to a pack and a half.

The cancer has to be cut out!

Domingo de la Torre

you are so very very wrong

yes, the government was partially to blame for the financial crises, especially for not listening to warnings from the Treasury Department, but that doesn't take the guilt away from S&P who accepted the bribe money from mortgage companies like Goldman Sachs for filing false credit ratings on those markets.

S&P did NOT base their findings on government reports.

I agree with the other statement...you must being buying your tacos with pesos.

• Here are some facts: Since Roosevelt
  % of GDP compared to Debt level has gone down under every Democrat even Carter
  except for Obama. It went up under Reagan almost double. It went up more with
  Bush to 66 %. Clinton
  brought it down to a little over 50% and it jumped to more than 84% with Bush
  Jr. With Obama it went over 90%. It jumped the most under Bush Jr. and Ronald
  Reagan.

Peter17...

You're the only one that makes sense here!

Domingo, you M---N. Why should any body listen to ANYTHING S&P says - or are you so f-ing st---d you really think that those subprime mortgage securities really always were AAA?

For that matter, why the hell should anyone listen to you, since you obviously believe what ever crap wall street crooks and conartists feed you.

In fact, I've got a great deal on some Great Northern Railway stock if you're interested.

So ryo.... you're saying you believe the Washington DC crooks and conartists more than the ones on wallstreet? Two evils and neither is better than the other.

Peter,

I truly believe that the reason it happened now is because people globally are starting to realize that our government is in a serious power struggle. It may as well be a military coup. Our "leaders" were playimg chicken with US default.

We are not being governed reponsibly. And until our politicians put aside their idealism and work to fix the economy together, we will be looked upon as less stable and credit worthy than we have been in the past.

Well Domingo

Looks like the LEFT IS RACIST doesn't it??

ryoushi12

"Domingo, you M---N. Why should any body listen to ANYTHING S&P says - or are you so f-ing st---d"

If you think you are so f...ing smart, please convince us how great the US is doing financially and that they don't deserve to be downgraded. Please tell us how we are going to pay the interest on our debt that will reach over $20 Trillion within 5 years and $28 Trillion within 10 years. If you know how to use a calculator please apply 3% interest on that $28 Trillion and share it with us.

It's actually simple we declare war on China and dismiss all debt to them. We tell them they are being sued for all the poisonous products they have sent here. And the pollutants they have released into the enviorment.

We stop sending money to all these Countries overseas and let someone else be the World leader. Obama's lithium in Afghanistan is going to China anyway.

Just saw Dennis Miller last night on Jay Leno saying, regarding the $15T national debt, "Just say "screw 'em" & don't pay it." Debt crisis solved.

What are they going to do, try to take it from us militarily? Oh yeah, our military is preoccupied propping up a heroin-dealing regime in Afghanistan and protecting those precious poppy fields that service the now & future heroin addicts of America and the world.

Maybe we could take our military away from their pro-drug mission and re-deploy them to defending our country when we follow Dennis Miller's advice and say "sorry dudes, we ain't paying this!"

In the words of a character in Animal House, "you f***d up, you trusted us!" Too bad for you...

The debt is ODIOUS. Traitors in Washington want to take out loans so the military can go into Afghanistan and steal rare earth materials and maintain heroin production. Their sent into Iraq on behalf of oil companies to steal the resources of that country. The money has beefed up things like TSA, who to date have done nothing but screw people over and interfere with the airline industry. The money has been wasted on illegal immigrants who should be deported. Azdad48 clearly doesn't get it. You say screw China, they'll turn around and dump the dollar and the next thing you know you'll have to have a grocery cart full of cash just to buy a few groceries. And the Federal Reserve is NOT Federal at all, it's just a private bank that's running a ponzi scheme. You think America can hold onto the glory days and not pay the piper you're 100% wrong. The world will laugh as America falls on her face in the mud... and we deserve every bit of it because we didn't take these traitorous politicians out by whatever means necessary, both dems and repubs.

As long as the teabaggers are in congress.........you know that is not going to happen! They are power hungry now. They will use this last battle as the template for the rest of their battles until they are kicked out! They do not care about doing anything that is good for this country. Grover Norquist has got the leash on them forever, like a Satanic Master! The Republicans will fight to keep their jobs at all costs because they are more important than anyone else in their district, their base and most of all, this country. Give all the "little" boys a big hand, for a job well done!

azdad48,

"Screw'em and don't pay'em" is a great lesson to teach here. And who owns the Federal debt? 72% is owned by the American public through Social Security, state and local government held bonds, mutual funds, insurance companies, retirement plans, and individuals. So who will get "screwed", the American citizen.

A real strategy would be to extend the debt ceiling, intelligently control spending and concentrate on reducing the 28% foreign and international share. Then the domestic. But that doesn't put money in certain pockets.

In my opinion, S & P is playing politics and this looks pretty much like an attempt to influence the 2012 Presidential Elections. Note that the other two credit agencies say the US is in good shape.

I think S & P owes the Citizens of the United States an Apology.

And thats my opinion.

Moody's outlook rating is now negative for USA.

It was that already but Moody's says they will NOT lower their rateing...

Magnum~

Seriously? The US is in great shape? We run our country's budget like an over privileged high school cheerleader would run a credit card.

All I see here is 'teabaggers' this, republicans that, its the dems fault...yada, yada. A lot of blame and pointing fingers. Wake up Americans. It is EVERY politicians fault. In America we have been apathetic so long we have let the politicians in all parties run amok and now we have this lovely mess of an economy. Do we deserve a high credit rating? Of course not. Yet we respond with indignation and blame S&P or this party or that. It is Washington's fault...Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Obama, Bush 2, whoever you want to blame...every single one had a pet project or distraction and did not get the mess straight. Don't forget Congress had their greedy little hands in it as well.

It is also the fault of the ultra rich who look for every tax loophole, the poor who have more and more children on the public bills, the middle class person who bought a house they couldn't afford and run up credit card bills on clothes to 'keep up with the Jones'.

We need balance. Start letting the people handle their own messes and quit bailing us out, but quit asking us for extra money when you screw our country over also.

Apple corp is reputed to have more money than the government. Under your plan anyone making money needs to give it to the government, right? Like the government is sooo great at spending money in an intelligent and practical manner.

Do you want me to believe that 23% unemployment, 8% inflation, forty-thousand closed factories, two wars, corporate subsidies and tax loop holes all over the place, etc. paints a rosy picture of our solid economy and economic policies? Get real!

We're tanking, and anyone who says different is invested in Wall Street or working for the government or their cronies.

And... you conveniently ignore the fact that the Democrats held the Presidency, the House and the Senate for the first two years of this administration and FAILED to pass a budget much less address the public debt. They did, however, use their power to ram through their Health Care bill. They had the power and did NOTHING. The Republicans are not "holding the country hostage", they are refusing to allow the Democrats to continue spending like drunken sailors on shore leave. The children are simply having a temper tantrum because the adults are refusing to fund their silliness.

Domingo, you are loose with you facts.

Domingo, if we are tanking, why do the corporations have such record cash on their balance sheets now? You really do not have a clue.

Are you out of your mind??????? Why should we penalize someone for being successful? Your are a mindless twit with absolutely no prospects of ever achieving any kind of success in your life!!!!!!!! Just kill the American Dream. Stomp on it until it is totally dead! Grow up.

Ken D Webber,

No, S&P lowered their rating due to the political impasse and the threat of recurrence within the life of even short-term notes. The 'deal' amounts to nothing more than putting a bandaid on a cut requiring thorough cleaning and stitches. When the "super-Congress" proposal is rejected (It will be.), the bandaid will be pulled off, the wound scraped without anasthesia, and left open to heal on its own. And nothing hints at sustainability to even January 2013 (less than 18 months from now). And all that by political , not economic or financial, calculation. I'm surprised we got an AA rating.

enemyplanet

you're right in there with Domingo de la Torre

neither one of you have got got a dam* clue! How can you operate on this ignorant of a level?

First off, this is just a retaliation from S&P for being blamed by the government for their part in the financial collapse. We messed up by not prosecuting them to the full extent of the law and then sentencing the rich bastards to jail for their crimes, thus destroying their credibility. Yet, this merely proves how much we are held hostage by the financial powers when our budget isn't balanced. You have to pay the lords.

Someone said a Chinese rating agency also lowered our credit rating. But of course they did you morons. We already owe them trillions and this will mean we have to pay more in interest for loans. That is what is going to hurt us.

and enemyplanet

you can't blame all the sheeet on the current administration. That's what you Repugnicans and T pee'rs love to do. Its the Repugnicns that got us here in the first place, and the current administration can't cure it all. It "IS" getting our soldiers home soon enough, and curing part of THAT cost and expense.

The worst thing we could do as Americans is to vote one of those bastards into the presidency in 2012 and let them have a hand at sucking some more money out of America and giving it to the rich and powerful and corporate criminals.

They're the one's that made fortunes off the war anyways, and to hell with the nation's debt and balances or the American people. Everyone knows who their slaves are, just like which party member APOLOGIZED to BP for how the government was treating them over the Deep Horizon spill....the REPUGLICANs! Who gave the rich and corporate powers all their tax cuts? The REPUGLICANs! So shoot that BS on down the road somewhere else.

Only a moronic imbicile would believe that any president, no matter what party, could cure the nation where it stood back in 2008 in a mere two and a half years.

Yep,

only a fool.

Great job performance Obama. Your plan to completely destroy the USA is working quite well.. Your not even going to need another 4 years to get ur done....

Standard and Poors; a McGraw-Hill Company...a US Corp. Wonder how many corporate tax breaks do they get. Maybe if they and other corporations pay their fair share the country wouldn't have this problem.

"And... you conveniently ignore the fact that the Democrats held the Presidency, the House and the Senate for the first two years of this administration and FAILED to pass a budget much less address the public debt."

Let's get our facts straight, shall we? The Democrats had a majority in the House and Senate, as well as the presidency, but held a filibuster-proof majority in only the Senate and only for 4 months total during that two years. The threat of filibuster by the Republicans was wielded and wielded often. The only year for which there was not a budget passed was for 2011; one was in force for 2009, and one was passed for 2010. While not preferable, there have been other years that passed with only temporary spending measures funding the government, notably during the Reagan era.

It is unlawful to filibuster a budget debate.

"It is unlawful to filibuster a budget debate."

But if one party filibusters or threatens to filibuster EVERY OTHER piece of legislation, it makes it impossible to get to a budget.

Wow! You're lost!

It's political!

Who needs S & P's input? We're heading into a Depression.

Already in a Depression! In depression true interest rate is negative (-2.5% now) and Fed can't go to zero or below. The current bank 4.5% disregarding true interest rate is Usury in the Bible. The only way to get around the Fed is to spend our way (with our currently discounted dollars) out of the depression like FDR and Germany did in the last depression. The value of wealth held by the rich declines in a depression. Bretton-Woods agreement abandoned the Gold Standard (currently the Chinese are buying up Gold) because Gold loses value in a depression. The pinning of world currency to the dollar just widens the collapse. Reported that China lost 8 Billion dollars in the S&P downgrade. Let's hope they send a hit team for S&P. They'll lose even more including balance of trade advantage if the US devalues its currency.

This is not about which party got what out of the debt compromise. The facts are simple. We are on an unsustainable financial course. It will take around $8 trillion of deficit reduction over the next ten year, continued financial discipline after that, a complete restructuring of Medicare and Medicaid, plus some modest changes to Social Security to fix things. That was never on the table from either the Dems or the Reps. If the members of Congress had done what was needed and if it was signed by Obama into law, none of them could be re-elected in 2012. It is that simple. Most of them care more about holding onto their jobs than saving the country.

goldenone, You spelled his name correctly at the end.

goldenone...

The government and the Elite, not the people, are headed on a disasterous path, because they already dispersed the peoples wealth among themselves, and the well has gone dry. I can't wait for the cannibalism to take root amongst the top 10% to 15% of our population. I want to see some of them flying out of office building windows!

peter, i suggest you find out how the world works, especially how this country works. every single public company runs on debt. you know loans. what do you think the stock market is? the money used to buy new issues of stock are loans to the companies. i know how investment banks work and the amount of money they loan out to companies--some of the larger companies get loans that amount into the BILLIONS. these amounts are over and above the stocks they have issued.

it is not the US debt that is such a problem...it is the lack of revenue that is the primary problem. getting folks to work would help enormously and terminating the Bush tax cuts must be done ASAP. closing all those corporate tax loopholes also must be done. if you read the S&P statement, you would realize that they were not only talking about cutting the debt, but how it should be addressed...cutting expenditures is only half of the solution...the other half is increasing revenue.

anyone that still believes that supply-side economics works, needs to study economics. it only works for the wealthy--you know those "job creators." a doozy of canard...10 years of Bush tax cuts only added to this mess and no jobs...yup, corps like to use the excuse that there is so much uncertainty and they just have to hold onto all those trillions of dollars...when is there not uncertainty? another canard.

WHERE ARE THE JOBS, BONER?? Such a pathetic little toadie he is.

domingo, i doubt that the elite, rich piggies are going to suffer...and as far as jumping out of windows--don't count on it--all the newer bldgs, at least in NYC, have hermetically sealed windows--they can't be opened. the most you can hope for is that these creeps go to the roofs and jump.

but the piggies have numerous residences outside the US. they can just hop on their private jets and go where things are nicer.

Unfortunately, Goldenone, the American people are just stupid enough to be dazzled by cutesy sayings like "a thousand points of light" and are just myopic enough to not be able to see through things like "family values" and "American principles" and all that other folderol that the GOP spews like elephant dung all over the political landscape. They'll never come out and say "We just want to make sure that the people who make over $100,000 a year never have to pay more taxes, because they are the ones who contribute to our re-election campaigns" which is closest to the truth. All those corporations and banks that made trillions of dollars off the working man, and nearly collapsed our economy didn't have to pay much taxes on all that windfall, did they?

Tax cuts and breaks for the wealthy DO NOT create jobs. If they did, then all the cuts that Shrub and his Halliburton & Enron cronies sneaked into the books would have made this the highest-employed nation on earth. Instead, the reality is, there are no jobs, and only the wealthy have spare money to spend.

As long as the average American is stupid enough to vote for the Party of the Wealthy, we will have the Republicans in office, giving breaks to the people who can afford them the most.

In response to the OP in this...Boehner is just plain wrong. President Obama was willing to make some tough choices: end Bush era tax cuts, which would have raised taxes on the wealthiest Americans. If anybody here reading these posts think this was a bad idea you are either rich yourself or you believe the lie fed to you that these are "job creators" and to raise taxes on them would cut jobs. Uh...we lost jobs under these job creator tax breaks so what now?

The Tea-Party, on the other hand, wanted the US to default, they wanted this to happen. The GOP and the Tea-Party got exactly what they wanted in all of this, which is to f*** over every average American living in this God forsaken country.

It's time America (and the swing-voters for sure) to pull their heads out of their posteriors and STOP voting for these people!

Why is it that Canada has a significantly lower national debt that is FALLING while ours is rising? Oh, wait...because they have been traditionally Democratically run. And it can work and it DOES work. Yet in this country we get fed up if somebody can't fix decades of Republican F' ups in two or four years so we keep going back to the same vomit over and over again.

If we're handing out blame, I have to lay some at the feet of Obama. This is because the Tea Party simpletons can't reasonably be held accountable for the fact that they are unable to grasp the concept of reasonable governance. They only understand their own ideology and cannot be expected to behave in a rational manner. Attempting to negotiate or even to have a discussion with them is a pointless exercise; Boehner doesn't have a lot of choice in dealing with them, but Obama should know better. He seems like the kind of person that seldom repeats the same mistake, so let us hope he takes more of a bolder course of action in the future. In the absence of adequate leadership, these idiots will do tremendous harm to the economy and the future of the nation. We voted for someone who could negotiate in good faith with responsible people - not capitulate on demands clearly detrimental to the well being of the nation.

goldenone.

Rep. Boehner's compromise came from the Senate, where Sen. McConnell gave an inch to pass a bill that he hopes will strangle Pres. Obama. Remember that McConnell stated his whole objective was to defeat Obama in 2013, not resolving any other issue.

Peter17 - You say this isn't about what each party got out of the debt compromise. You are so wrong! The American people, the majority of the Americans believed that this debt/deficit deal was so unbalanced and that it would not be good for this country or the American people.

There are right ways and wrong ways to take care of the budget. This agreement was done so that the U S would not default, not because it was a good deal for everyone. It was a bad deal for everyone. The balanced approached would have been the better way to pay down the debt and cut spending without risking a double dip recession or sending us into a depression. People have lost their houses, jobs, businesses. These are lost revenues at the very least! You believe we should start cutting all the social programs.

The Republicans got 98% of what they wanted Democrats got the relief of not putting the country in default and the teabaggers were absolutely disgusted because they wil have to fight another day to destroy the U S Government and the American people.

You need to do alot more research before you state facts that can not be substantiated. You know not what you speak!

Yep, we sure do! And your one of them.

Charles- Tax cuts DO create jobs. It works every time it's tried. Taxing people who already pay 90% of this nations revenue, sortof underminds the very princibles of the founding of this country. Just because they have more, doesn't mean we should take more. Thats exactly what our four fathers were trying to get away from. Personaly, I think it's rather arrogant to assume that your so much smarter than the rest of us, that you have to slant most of the everyday people, in a comment that degrades everyone but you. But I guess it's natural to want to spew onto others, what your own insecurities are.

Dear Real 6th-grade-dropout person,

The Gross National Product of the United States is a product of money "flowing" through the economy. You should have learned that in school before criticizing others. Wealthy people who HOARD (a Biblical Sin, Mr Moneylender) money prevent it from flowing through the economy. Lower income people spend the money from tax rebates; the filthy rich just take it out of circulation. Bush tax cuts churned through the economy $6 for every $1 paid out; yet unemployment benefits churn $12 for every dollar spent, Boeing, $16; NASA $22 going towards our GNP for every dollar spent. Because most Military spending leaves the US, a dollar on the 50% of the US budget that didn't get any cuts actually makes Bush tax cuts look like a bargain.

Yeah Charles, remember the "moral majority" crap? I've seen the Republican spew for more years than I care to say. It didn't fool me then and doesn't fool me now. I have lived in an industrial city most of my life. I remember what our waterways were like before the EPA and Superfund, not to mention the air quality. We do not want to return to those loose regulations ever again. That is exactly what the Republican party is all about, killing the EPA and the FDA and every other regulatory agency that stands between the American people and greed.

The problem is, they could never get enough votes without the smoke and mirrors (abortion, gay rights issues, war, immigration, fear, Fox News), not to mention the catch phrases:

"war on terror" aka war for corporate profit in Iraq

"less government" aka eliminate social security and medicare, then defund EPA, the FDA, USDA, and any other regulatory agency.

There will always be gullible people who vote against their own best interests. How else could Republicans get elected these days.

Mark VanGelder,

If Michelle Bachmann had actually lived in Waterloo Iowa (She lived in Cedar Falls, 5-10 miles west until 11, then in Anoka, MN), she would remember stepping out of the house and gagging on the odor from Rath Packing's rendering tanks "going bad", which they did twice a month. She would also know not to hang laundry outdoors in the spring or fall, when the foundries were running full bore. (No one hung laundry in winter -- temperature at 10-15 for highs plus 2-4 feet of snow on the ground).

I agree totally with your views on the EPA and FDA. Wait until the attacks start on the Ag Department regarding meat inspection.

Don;t forget that John of Orange was one of the premier voters on this decades of reckless spending, he never seen a huge spending bill he didn't like till 2009. Google how many times HE voter YES to raise the debit limit. Now you understand the term HYPOCRITE, of just go with liar.

Nice to see that all of you have nothing better to do than bash the Republicans!

Decades of reckless spending has been followed by 3 weeks of wreckless governing by the US House of Representatives. In 3 weeks in July the US managed to ruin its credit due to a Third Party Stonewall in Congress. The American people have given themselves a self-inflicted wound in the world credit markets. It will take decades for this wound to heal. In the meantime, America will pay more for debt service whilst it slithers around and looks up to 16 other countries that have AAA credit ratings.

Good job America. You deserve your slef-inflicted wound as you head for the toilet of the world's financial markets.

For the second day in a row S&P said this downgrade isn't about how much debt we have, but that it's about a political party using default as a threat to get what they want.

Lets say you go to a bank with your wife to get a loan, you have a lot of debt, but you still have a very good credit score so they're fine with loaning you more money. But right in front of the banker one of you says, "well, we could just declare bankruptcy if we don't feel like paying it back" they are going to be very wary about loaning you money. That is what this downgrade is.

If it was about the size of our debt, they would have said so, instead they pointed to the country being held hostage until the last minute by a political party in order to get their way.

The downgrade debacle is just beginning. Moody's is waiting in the wings to drop their bomb next week. S&P will have another round of downgrading after Congress digests the first round. The downward spiral has just begun. $15T is a big number, there is plenty of room to fall. Italy may be ahead of the US, but America is right behind and catching up fast.

Goldenone, agree 100%. A lot of politicians on both sides got us in to this mess. This should come to no surprise to anyone. S & P and Moody's have kept warning us that this would happen. The dems have done nothing but help cause this. These agencies kept telling the government to quit spending and they still did not listen. I will bet everything we have, that the only answers the dems give on this, is to blame the tea party. Well, people it is not their fault. The dems have decades of screwing up and then blame others for their mistakes. Their over spending did this. Their unwilling to compromise did this. The Republicans put a plan together to cut almost $7 trillion out of the budget and the dems did nothing but scare the heck out of people. The Republicans are not the part of no. The dems are the part of "no", "do nothing", "trash the country", and "blame and scare others".

Goldenone your are absolutely right! America does know who the rats are and they'll vote them right out of office in 2012. How dare you hypocrats blame one iota on anyone but yourselves. The Democrats had the tri-fecta of power in America and refused to do anything. INCLUDING passing a budget. They left that until now in an act of self preservation. They knew if they tried this crap during an election they'd all be voted out.

NOW, that this is over and the Dumocrats accomplished ABSOLUTELY nothing, you can bet your bottom dollar that the email hacking, name calling, mud slinging, skewing, lies and down right hatred the Democrats are known for are going to ramp into full swing. What else do they have to run on? Name one point, idea or accomplishment they can run on?

"The Dems compromised and gave up plenty." - goldenone

What was it that the Dems gave up other than their entrenched insistence that we had to raise taxes? (Technically that's not something they gave up. It's just something they didn't receive.) The Republicans gave up $350B in defense spending. The Republicans gave up some farm subsidies. The guarantee amount on student loans was reduced, but wait...student grants were significantly increased! So, specifically what did the Dems give up?

Real, who are the four fathers? I only have one.

Relying on data provided by government financial agencies. Try to identify our real enemy...the corrupt Federal Government and their supporters.

Domingo de la Torre - Our enemy is NOT the Federal Government! Syria has a corrupt government. You might want to consider moving there, if you are so unhappy here! They are running out of people to kill that speak their minds. If you don't like Syria there are many more countries that you can pick from if you really hate the United States of America. Are you a citizen of the USA? Love it or Leave it! Here you have the choice. People in other countries would gladly change places with you. Decide and act on it soon. United We Stand, Divided We Fall!

The S&P is corrupt. They were not relying on data provided by government financial agencies. Read-up. The e-mails of their employees and the replacement of all analysts who would not keep the AAA ratings on mortgage backed securities tell the real story. S&P is benefiting someone by this downgrade. The question is who?

No one in government know how to reverse the decline. Jim Jubak, financial writer for MSN money has put forth some good ideas in various articles. Just search - Jim Jubak Jobs - and you will read some really good ideas.

It is not the blame game that got us here. It is the out of control socialist spending that did this. The dems have by far, the largest blame in this.

"It is the out of control socialist spending that did this. "

Like two unbudgeted wars and an unfunded prescription drug plan? Like THAT socialist spending?

I agree with mark. We need to get rid of ALL socialist programs immediately. I say we start with the biggest socialist program in the history of the world, the US Military! Sureuely you agree, right Mark? You are against anything socialist right?

Cutting $4 TRILLION from the national debt over a TEN year period, WHILE INCREASING THE NATIONAL DEBT $12 TRILLION DOLLARS is not a solution.

Barry and the socialists are still spending 135% if the total income of the federal government and only promising to limit their growth to 8%.

You cannot possibly be worried about the "ignorance of the tea party" when you are so stupid.

If spending 140% of your income is a bad idea, offering to lower it to 135% is not a good solution.

svopilot- you are making up your figures to go with your zombie mind. There is no increasing the debt "$12 TRILLION DOLLARS". Moron. Brad Cantor is right.

svopilot

I think you need to read the dictionary on what "socialism" really is.
That's when the government owns and operates businesses.

This is about class warfare and, you, apparently are in the upper class trying to protect your investment believing you should "starve" the beast to death, as if the government is responsible for your plight in life.

As a nation we need certain services our federal government provides as in defense (they could do it cheaper, yes), national parks (unless of course you're an oil man, you'd like ruin it for my children's children), supplemental retirement (because our employers barely match retirement plans, if they have one to participate in, IF I'm given an opportunity to work enough hours to be eligible and, even then, I'm not paid enough to contribute), old age health care, maintenance of national waterways (for commercial benefit), national infrastructure among others. 52% of America earns 85% of total income, it stands to reason, they should be paying 85% of the taxes.

You fundamentally don't believe in that because you belive what Grover says. Ever wonder why his biography is so cryptic? Probably not... he got his MBA from Harvard, right? A very expensive school - did mommy and daddy pay? Where did they get their money? How much money does he have? Where did it come from? Can you possibly read between the lines????

He doesn't believe the federal government should provide ANY services to its people at all and, that's one step away from anarchy. And all the baggers believe this.....

The wealthy have gotten much better at hiding their assets funding PACs to benefit their businesses NOT to benefit America!

One thing they have funded and marketed well is the bagger bullsh!t.

In Brewster's Millions there is a line, "Why would someone spend millions running for an office position paying $50,000, if they couldn't steal it back with interest?"

So why does the bagger supporters, if you know the Kock billionaire brothers, spend all that dough???? They're altruistic, they believe in America, driving the government into the ground? Hmmm

It's not that I think you're stupid anymore, I just ain't buyin' your bullsh!t anymore and I'm now standing up trying to get you to understand this is about class war... the wealthy simply need to pay better and spread the wealth to their employees.. they actually be worth more in the long run.

Here you go my socialist friends,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

"The deficits that will accumulate under current law will

push federal debt held by the public to significantly

higher levels. Just two years ago, debt held by the public

was less than $6 trillion, or about 40 percent of GDP;

at the end of fiscal year 2010, such debt was roughly

$9 trillion, or 62 percent of GDP, and by the end of

2021, it is projected to climb to $18 trillion, or 77 percent

of GDP. With such a large increase in debt, plus an

expected increase in interest rates as the economic recovery

strengthens, interest payments on the debt are poised

to skyrocket over the next decade. CBO projects that the

government’s annual spending on net interest will more

than double between 2011 and 2021 as a share of GDP,

increasing from 1.5 percent to 3.3 percent."

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12039/SummaryforWeb.pdf

Even the CBO thinks Barry is adding $12 trillion to the debt. I'm sure they are lying too. Everybody has to be lying right?

svopilot....Good post, but sadly they won't listen. You remember me trying to explain it to them with a simple $100.00 bill. Didn't get that either. raotflmao

svopilot

George King

Fact 1 - The top 4.17% earned 52% of total income in 2008.

You're absolutely right! These individuals WILL increase YOUR personal income through increased wages, won't they? Of course, if we give them tax cuts that'll force cuts to government to reduce its tax load on you, won't it.

That's precisely why I'm not buyin' your baggin fruit sh!t anymore. The problem is not that you don't understand it, it is that you continue to buy into that the wealthy WILL create jobs if you give THEM more money.

Talk about dumb f#cks.

JayCFO

Fact 2 - The top 5% paid 60% of the total income taxes in 2008.
Fact 3 - The bottom 50% paid 3% of the total income taxes in 2008.

The problem is that these people think that they are entitled to half the pie for a 3% stake.

"Fact 2 - The top 5% paid 60% of the total income taxes in 2008.
Fact 3 - The bottom 50% paid 3% of the total income taxes in 2008."

Fact 4 - The bottom 50% still paid a higher percentage of their income out in taxes than a significant portion of the top 5% due to tax deductions that benefit the wealthy.

Hey Jay, nothing you said has anything to do with anything we are talking about. Sadly, my simple-minded friends redirecting the conversation towards irrelevant information does not change facts.

It is an agreed upon fact that no matter what Barry promises in "cuts" they are not reducing spending or lowering the debt.

The top 5% of all income earners pay 60% of all taxes. That "fact 4" is not a fact. The FACT is that the bottom 50% typically got back far more in benefits and refunds than they paid in taxes, no matter what scheme you use to justify you hatred of the "rich".

svopilot

Hatred of the "rich"....? Wow!

Were are you getting your facts from? Mine came from the IRS website from the statistics page.

Since the top 12.8% are making 75% of total income (that includes all income), shouldn't it stand to reason they should be paying that much in federal income taxes? WTF

I notice you say ALL taxes, does that include property taxes (of course never mind that residential property taxes are paid by the renters through rent), or sales taxes (which we all know is weighted towards those making less than $100k, because the wealthy don't spend that much), or how about the employee share of social security, which stops at $110k? The employer share, just like rent, is passed on to the consumer's product cost. And, to add insult to injury, they're still making 75% of the total income. Hmm, are you not full of f#cked up thoughts.

The issue is the wealthy, those top 12%, are NOT paying enough to their employees for the employees to even buy their own company's products. How much is enough before you realize everyone below $250k is paying 50-55% of your purported ALL taxes. Those earning over that are paying closer to 45% of all taxes (remember there is an automatic, this year only, 4.2% break on social security and 6.2% next year at $110k). As the income gets larger the overall percentage actually goes lower because some of those taxes are not based on income but on consumption, and the wealthy, as a percentage of their income, consume less.

When an employer pays well, the economy does much better... ever wonder why that is? hmm, I guess your brain is full of tea bags instead of intellectual thought processes.

And AGAIN,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,whining about income has ZERO to do with the conversation at hand.

Try as you may to redirect, misdirect, call names or whatever other misguided strategy you have for ignoring facts,,,,,,,,,,the facts will remain the same.

No tax increase planned or projected on any group of people or corporations will come close to covering the annual deficit. Thus they have ZERO chance of paying down the debt.

Maybe you simply do not understand? or lack the ability to reason out a problem? Sadly, scientists in Italy have taught an octopus to reason(they also seem to have proved it was not a democrat as well).

I did enjoy your distorted reasoning, especially these absurd observations.

"The employer share, just like rent, is passed on to the consumer's product cost. And, to add insult to injury, they're still making 75% of the total income."

The cost of an employee is the total cost, wages, payroll taxes, benefits, PPE and training. If you do not factor all of it into the cost of your product,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you go bankrupt or lose money until you go bankrupt.

I know that being a communist or some form of left leaning goof, you have no ability to understand what things cost. You simply demand things and the government provides them to you. Of course they are paid for by others but who cares?

I really love this one: "The issue is the wealthy, those top 12%, are NOT paying enough to their employees for the employees to even buy their own company's products".

Did you ever see an American driving a car made by GM?, a McD's employee eating McD's? Macy's employee buying clothes at Macy's with their employee discount? So untrue and so telling about your state of mind.

Wages are based on what the market demands. If workers are scarce and demand is high, wages are higher. Thus a skilled machinist earns decent money and a day laborer earns far less. You want more money, develop skills people need.

Again, as a communist or leftist you are probably unaware that actual skills are required for some jobs and you think everyone should be placed in a job by some central party lackey. All jobs pay the same because all workers are important to the party overlords or central government,,,right?

Here of course is the icing on the proverbial loon cake:

"When an employer pays well, the economy does much better..."

Now this is entertaining. Could you be more incorrect? Probably not.

Suppose McDonald's paid every employee $25.00 per hour and full benefits, including several paid holidays a year? How much would the average Big Mac meal cost? Probably about $20.00 for a combo meal, maybe a bit more.

The costs of goods and services include the costs of labor, the higher the cost to produce a product,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the more expensive the product. Think Porsche vs. KIA. Both are cars but the cost of one is far more than the other.

I worked for a Fortune 500 company about twenty years ago that exported all of its manufacturing jobs to India. Why? The total labor costs for the hundreds of random employees they had hired drove the price of a product up about 300% over the previous decade. Fighting with the unions and law suits from thousands of fake workman's comp cases every year cost them a fortune.

svopilot,

Well said!

CE

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. -- Thomas Jefferson

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have. -- Thomas Jefferson

But then there is the danger of additional TP infiltrating the govt. We need people who actually have clues. It must be done in a thoughtful manor, not in a anti-government panic.

"Infiltrating" I kinda thought they were voted in by some of the american people myself. Guess I was wrong.

16.2

I believe it's called "bait&switch". The recall elections indicate that.

You are correct, letsrock. The following is from the Grace Commission of 1982. Since Congress never following any of the recommendations, it has only gotten worse.

The Private Sector Survey on Cost Control (PSSCC), commonly referred to as The Grace Commission, was an investigation requested by United States President Ronald Reagan, in 1982. The focus of it was waste and inefficiency in the US Federal government. Its head, businessman J. Peter Grace,^[1] asked the members of that commission

The Grace Commission Report^[3] was presented to Congress in January 1984. The report claimed that if its recommendations were followed, $424 billion could be saved in three years, rising to $1.9 trillion per year by the year 2000. It estimated that the national debt, without these reforms, would rise to $13 trillion by the year 2000, while with the reforms they projected it would rise to only $2.5 trillion.^[4] Congress ignored the commission's report. The debt reached $5.8 trillion in the year 2000.^[5][6] The national debt reached 13 trillion after the subprime mortgage-collateralized debt obligation crisis in 2008.

The report said that one-third of all income taxes is consumed by waste and inefficiency in the federal government, and another one-third escapes collection owing to the underground economy. “With two thirds of everyone’s personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the federal debt and by federal government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services [that] taxpayers expect from their government."

How about this novel idea....If the democrats want to roll back the tax reductions on the wealthy to pretax times during Bush...why not roll back all taxes to Pre Bush era and start over with a flat tax. This way we start from ground zero and move forward. The blame game must stop. Bohner immediately gets up and says that it's Democratic intransigence, and yet he and Cantor left meetings they didn't agree on. We are on the cusp of forcing congress to work to their best ability and not pass the litmus test of their congregessional districts. I should think that any member of Congress, must put their best foot foward to do what is best for the country, not just the congressional district. What we need is rules to live by and ways in which we can make compromise. While the Tea B. won't go along with compromise, too bad,...we have to move along with the majority...and the majority is blaming Congress for the ills of the nation. Leadership of both houses can set a new tone, bring the country together by showing trust and tireless work on the bigger plans to turn our difficulties into successes. Let's stop the name calling Mr. Boehner, and Mr. Reid...it has to stop. Please stop for the sake our our country and for the sake of all those that you represent in your positions of leadership.

Bill Clinton and his Treasury Secretary Rubin when faced with a deficit got a budget passed with half spending cuts and half revenue increases. Everyone cried the tax increase would kill employment. Instead, with the government debt stabilized the U.S. enjoyed the longest period of prosperity in the history of the U.S.

Source: PBS Charlie Rose, former Treasury Secretary Rubin as guest.

SVOPILOT - From the very word that typed for any comment section of any story, retarded will be referred and defined by you and your obvious ignorance! You are one of the many that proves stupidity does indeed exist as long as we have freedom of speech. Thanks for proving this fact!

Jorjam,

I hate to admit this, but actually the facts support SVOPILOT. However, the rest of the story is that this is a poor time to cut spending, stymying growth whenwe need it the most.

John progressive taxing rather than flat tax and cut all the loopholes. Poor people paying 10 or 15 % is a whole lot different than wealthy paying 10 or 15%.

svopilot,

Where are you getting your facts from please? Please provide the links that states your "facts" as truth.

you are such a maroon, svopilot...perhaps you would do yourself a favor and take an intro macro economic course, because you haven't a clue about what is going on.

I don't think the expert economists have a clue either because according to them we would be out of this mess by now. So take you "macro economic course" and shove it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget

I will apologize to my dull witted dummycrat friends. Barry O. is spending 142% of the 2012 revenue.

No one, democrat or republican has offered to cut federal spending. They have only offered to slow the growth of the federal budget to 8% a year.

Thanks for playing.

What would happen if we closed the tax loopholes that the wealthy get to enjoy? Or the oil companies? Wouldn't our revenue increase?

No one is suggesting you can balance the budget with tax increases only. It must be a balanced approach. Corporations are holding on to $2 1/2 T because there is no demand for their products or services. If you put money in the hands of the middle class, they'll "consume" Business will have to hire new employees to handle the increase demand. More people will go to work, thus broadening our tax revenue. It's a real simple concept. If what is left of the middle class aren't employed they won't consume. And Companies won't hire. And that is where we are now. All the incentives for Corporations are to take their jobs overseas. Therefore, there aren't enough jobs here at home. Jobs are the answer. The Republicons campaigned in 2010 on jobs.. Where are they?

svopilot, whay are you such an advocate of the wealthy and corporations? Do you dream of being rich one day?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

brad, nicely said!

Conservatives do not use facts, they throw stuff out there and hope the gullible will eat it and surprising enough, there are a lot of fools willing to eat what they serve!

well written cantor!

SVO...

Your "facts" are not necessarilly true. Your "facts" seem based upon the assumption that 7% is the same, whether you are rich or poor.

According to *real* mathematics, 7% of $100 is $7, while 7% of $1,000,000 is $70,000. So 7% is NOT the same to *all* people. And the above illustration shows why it makes perfect sense to tax the rich.

To further illustrate my point, if you were to tax Big Oil at the same tax rate as the middle class (28% at last check), you would be well on your way to paying off the federal budget deficit, and the rich CEOs would still be rich. The five largest oil corporations, ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Royal Dutch Shell and ConocoPhillips could take the hits without much of an impact. For proof, look at their FY2010 balance sheets. Note that I took the numbers for total assets, one of the figures factored into yearly income taxes.

Exxon/Mobil: $58.98 billion (SOURCE: hxxp://www.dailyfinance.com/quote/nyse/exxonmobil-corp/xom/financial-statements)

Chevron: $48.84 billion (SOURCE: hxxp://www.dailyfinance.com/quote/nyse/chevron-corp/cvx/financial-statements )

BP: $89.72 billion (SOURCE: hxxp://www.dailyfinance.com/quote/nyse/bp-plc-adr/bp/financial-statements )

Royal Dutch Shell: $112.89 billiion (SOURCE: hxxp://www.dailyfinance.com/quote/nyse/royal-dutch-shell-cl-a/rds-a/financial-statements )

ConocoPhillips: $34.66 billion (SOURCE: hxxp://www.dailyfinance.com/quote/nyse/conocophillips/cop/financial-statements)

Total Gross Income: $345.09 billion

Less 28% income tax: $96.62 billion (This will go into the Federal coffers)

Total Net Income: $248.47 billion

So already, after 1 fiscal year, we have trimmed $96.62 billion from the Federal deficit. And that's just from Big Oil.

BTW Cantor, you are describing the concept of Economics in ideal circumstances. This set of circumstances is FAR from ideal. Especially when you have corporations that are willing to screw the working class rather than cut their CEO's paycheck by a measly 2 or 3 percent.

Oh Brad, you asked if I dreamed of "being rich".

I dream of keeping more of what I earn for myself.

I can already see that by the time I pay off my house, my property taxes will have risen so high that they will equal my entire house payment. Thus I will NEVER be able to live without a house payment.

I see my license tabs for my car and truck climbing annually as they add ridiculous fees, assessments and taxes to them every year. I even have to pay "plate reflectivity fee" because my license plate reflects light. ( five dollars a year)

I see more and more of my hard earned money disappearing into government sewers and less and less benefit from it.

I see a government willing to extend benefits to criminal foreign invaders and refusing to enforce any federal laws that interfere with their socialists/extreme leftist agenda.

I see politicians no only refusing to balance a budget, but they honestly think that if they "limit" annual increases in spending to 8%, they are somehow "saving" money. Worse yet, people are stupid enough to believe that is "reducing spending".

In my "dreams" you pay your own way and pay to educate your own kids and stop asking me to foot your bills while you squander your money on drugs, booze and the latest fad.

18.8

Ain't facts a bitch for the GOPTB.

When history has proven you wrong, what do you do? Double down?

Svopilot oddly enough as a staunch Democrat I agree with a lot of what you say. When I open my phone bill I see taxes on taxes...how crazy is that? My property taxes are outrageous and I get very few services for that. Very few!

I too see illegals using our services and bankrupting cities/states and NO president has done a thing about it! In fact our focus is kept on other "things". I see not only two parties but now 3 who have contributed to our current state of affairs.

Where you and I disagree is how to go about resolving this crisis. I see my party as one of compassion and fairness. I see yours as one for the corporations, CEO's and although you like to say less government in all reality to me it's more of a dictatorship with the poor and middle class being raped.

I wonder how we come together?

The easiest way would be for you to stop saying "the middle class is getting raped". Who the hell is raping them?

Do you think "compassion" means ignoring and refusing to enforce immigration laws and protecting our nations borders?

If you honestly think people like Joe Biden or Harry Reid care about the middle class you are an incredible idiot. They have never done a thing for the "middle class" and they never will.

The middle class is not on welfare.

The middle class does not use Medicaid as it's health insurance.

The middle class saves for retirement in 401K's and IRA's.

The middle class tries to live on a budget and within it's means.

The middle class typically owns a home and pays some percentage of their child's education and college.

The crap you see the democrats pushing is typically benefits for the criminal class. Legalized drugs, lower prison sentences for murderers, banning guns, making self-defence illegal and ease border access for drug traffickers.

Democrats always push for excessive police powers and almost to a man support post 9/11 laws that allow them to violate every amendment of the Constitution if it suits their interests.

When it comes to education, democrats drive the costs up when they insist on teachers making 100K a year for 30 weeks work, classes with 10 children each, no performance standards and making it illegal to fire a poor teacher. In FORTY years of the Department of Education,,,,,,,,,,,,the test scores of American kids have not improved while the costs of education have quadrupled.

Apparently "compassion" means lowering the standards to that of the slowest kid in school for fairness sake?

Taxes? Democrats claim that raising an additional $100 billion a year in taxes will offset a TRILLION a year in increased debt. That of course will never work.

All politicians take corporate money,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,nearly all democrats in congress and the senate are multi-millionaires and the richest in congress are democrats.

Blaming "corporations" for what ails you is again,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,simply stupid. Especially since they employee most of the nation, pay more taxes in America than nearly every country on earth and produce everything,,,,,,,,,,,,including your computer.

Raising their taxes increases your costs for good and services. Do you think they simply generate money from thin air when the tax man stops by?

"Fairness" simple means lowering the expectations to that of the worst performing person you know. "Fairness" is a Marxist word for robbery. It means that if I work hard and do my best, my reward will be snatched from my checking account to reward someone who did not try at all.

If I protest being robbed by the tax man, I am assaulted, called abusive names and demeaned for not being" fair" and "sharing my wealth" with people who do not deserve a drop of my blood or sweat.

How do we come together? I guess the day I feel others deserve my wages and hard work more than my family,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I'll call.

"barely keeping it's head above water"? can you explain why, if 3% profit over inflation (were in deflation now) has traditionally been considered decent, that 22% tax on PROFIT is not affordable? If you have a small corporation there are options to keep much of that income, if you are big enough to be listed than you are with the "big boys"n and that's just too bad. A corporation can lower its taxable income by putting money into charities, research, or growth. "barely keeping it's head above water" because your company made bad decisions in the past doesn't get anyones sympathy.

shjacks55,

It depends on how the company pays its owners. Many small companies pay the owners (chief employees) only a nominal amount. The owners then depend on profits for living expenses. If they paid comparable wages, their true profit would start to shrink to 6-8%. But if you remember the 1980's, companies realigned to expect 10-15-20% profits in the face of 12-14% interest rates and 6-10% inflation.

oh, for heaven's sake, brad. don't confuse these pea-brained maroons with facts...they only operate on beliefs.

Hopefully you get your head injury treated soon.

Bush served TWO terms as president or EIGHT years. He left office in January 2009 and Barry took over.

Everything from that moment onward is Barry's fault. Including the OBAMA tax cuts from last year.

Tell us about all the jobs and prosperity Barry has created.

The budget year is from October to September.or close to that. Therefore, for most of the calandar year 2009, we operated under Bush's budget.

Do you deny Bush was losing 750,000 jobs per month when he left? During July, Obama, despite the total obstructionism from the right created over 154, 000 private sector jobs, less the 37,000 lost public sector jobs, for a net increase of 117,000 new jobs.

Would you rather be losing 750,000 per month, or having a net gain of 117,000?

brad, these people are so filled with hate that they would destroy the US before they would let Obama succeed. they are all ignorant traitors.

Bush's 2009 budget included a $407 billion dollar deficit and I did not like that one either.

Have you ever lived within your means? Do you understand the concept?

Why do you think it is a good idea for the federal government to accumulate debt at such an astonishing rate?

How do you think we will EVER pay it back?

Do you live your life in this manner? Overspending until you go bankrupt and then overspending AGAIN?

Let's hear it.

I live within my means every month. That is how my parents raised me. I never have advocated for accumulating debt. But because of the economic policies the right adhere to, from Reagan, Bush, and Bush again, with all the tax cuts to the wealthy and Corporations, we have fallen farther and farther in debt. When Clinton was President, he raised taxes from 35.5%, I think, to 39%, 3.5%. That's it, 3.5% is what we are talking about here. But with the increased tax revenue, we created 23 million jobs, and Bush Jr was left with a surplus.

Having worked and seen the financials of the very wealthy, I can assure you, they did NOT create jobs and did NOT increase the compensation of their workers, and only when "forced" to by someone they prize wanting to leave and then they said f#ck off, during junior's tax tenure.

An overwhelming number of economists before junior's tax cuts went into effect predicted exactly what is happening now. Living within your means doesn't mean living in poverty while taking a lower paying job just because you're a nice guy! The "balanced" approach is most appropriate.

I've lived long enough to have seen (and prepared tax returns) the pre TRA86 tax structure. In truth, the 2000 Republicans have pushed through numerous tax cuts and avoided loophole closing just like the democrats of the late 70s did, which led to the TRA86 being the most fair and equitable tax bill.. it actually increased the revenue stream for the federal government; however, moving the rates down further (under junior's reign) did NOT increase revenues at all, did not create jobs, just merely put more funds into the wealthy's hand.

Not a racist, a fool. You insist the emperor is wearing new clothes when he is butt naked. The facts are just so much annoyance to you.

What facts Getit?? I've never seen Obama naked!

JayCFO:

Well said in post # 24.8 !! But I don't think svopilot is capable of understanding History & Economics 101 along with having been brainwashed by a Party.

Understanding Economic History, then would require we look at the role of the Great Society and its entitlement programs, the legacy of those. We did not get to this point overnight either with Juniors or Obama's help. The economic train wreck has been long in coming - the 1990s presaged a good deal of it. We have had warning signs since the 1970s but everyone thought these were but downturns in the economic cycle. They were indeed very serious "downturns." If Vietnam taught us anything at all, it was that one can not fight a war on pverty at home and a war abroad. We have continued to push th entitlement programs while pouring trillions into the brushfire and all out wars overseas. Go back and look at the totality of military operations and how much that syphoned off the economy. And yes Bubba (aka Bill CLinton) also participated in his round of military operations.

Don't look back to just a few years of policy making to try and lay the blame, but follow the money trail back to 1968.

Just a thought. If you want a historical perspective, another time period to compare this downturn too - read Charting 20th century Monetary Policy - which was used a good deal by the most recent work "Lords of Finance" (purlitzer price for mirroring an earlier work).

Docw,

You are correct. We should have also learned you cannot cut revenue (taxes) without cutting spending. But that one also escaped us.

S&P should know a debacle when they see it, since they were an integral part of the biggest debacle ever. Why anybody would care what this company has to say is beyond me.

When Bush 43 cut the nominal tax rate for the "wealthy," the amount of taxes actually collected from the wealthy actually went up. You can be obsessed with sticking it to the "wealthy" like Obama and many of you are, or you can be pragmatic and realize that that approach is counterproductive. You might also realize that eliminating the Bush 43 tax rate decreases and the oil company "loop holes" would not fix even 5% of the deficit, even in a static analysis.

Consider that the deficit is a ten-year projection based on myriad assumptions about growth, interest rates, inflation, etc. These things just assume that if the government raises tax rates, then tax revenues go up proportionately. NOT! People adjust. Just look at the national debt. Obama is on track to raise it more in four years than Bush 43 raised it in eight.

We have had decades of "tax and spend" or "bread and circus" government, mostly Democrats but lots of complicit Republicans. S&P just pointed it out and the Tea Party tried to put us on the first step on the road to recovery.

Please do explain to us all Ron how when the taxes to the wealthy were cut the taxes from the wealthey went up. I can' wait to her the cobbled together nonsense on that one.

Either way, taxes will not solve the problem. we need to go back to a 3 bracket system. This time 15% (up to 25,000/yr.),28%(over 25k - 200k/yr) and 45%(over 200k/yr). Business and Corporate taxes should be based on the same brackets plus a windfalls profit tax of 30% for any company making excessively high profits with low employment overhead(not including executive payrolls). Execute payrolls should fall into another bracket for corporations and businesses who pay executives more than $500k yr each.

But I too would like to know how you came to you conclusion. Not only did they get a tax cut, they also get extra credits and deductions making their over all income lower than it was under the higher tax brackets.