Hello:

Raising the debt ceiling is a utilitarian task that really shouldn't be subject to a vote, but it is. It's like taking out the trash. You either NEED to take out the trash, or you don't. It ISN'T subjective...

So, that's where we found ourselves a few weeks ago. We had a pile of trash that needed to be taken out. Now, it wasn't anybody's particular trash. Everybody contributed to the pile. But, we have this stupid law that says we have to VOTE in order to take out the trash.. I don't know why.

But, there were some who thought they could use the trash to leverage their position. They said they're NOT going to vote to take out the trash UNLESS we agreed to their terms.. Others said we can talk about it LATER because the trash is STINKING, and we got to get it out NOW...

It appears, however, the hoarders in congress thought having trash around was just hunky dory. According to them, we NEVER need to take it out. So, they said they're NOT going to vote to discard it EVER - EVEN IF their demands were met...

Now, the health department got to smelling the trash, and they warned us that they'll DOWNGRADE us, if we don't get rid of it pretty soon. The place was stinking pretty good about this time, and right before the Health Department was going to step in, we caved in to the demands of the interlopers, and voted to take the trash out.

End of story - everybody lived happily ever after...

Or not. The Health Department was all bummed out about the stink and got worried that the NEXT time, we actually might NOT take out the trash, so they DOWNGRADED us anyway. It cost us TRILLIONS.

The interlopers are saying that we got DOWNGRADED because we let the trash build up. It had NOTHING to do with the vote to take it out, or not... Besides, it wasn't THEIR trash anyway. Others are saying we got DOWNGRADED because we were held hostage to the stink..

Who is right?

excon

Quote:

---

Raising the debt ceiling is a utilitarian task that really shouldn't be subject to a vote, but it is. It's like taking out the trash. You either NEED to take out the trash, or you don't. It ISN'T subjective...

---

Wrong... if you have too much on the credit card ;you stop making purchases or at least prioritize them. You don't say... well let's just take on more debt.

There is nothing on the S&P downgrade that says they are happy that we increased the debt. They are concerned that our leaders can't agree on ways to reduced the debt.

Further ;these ratings agencies are full of bull excrement . They let Fannie and Freddie ride over the cliff and never once gave so much as a warning .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Wrong ...if you have too much on the credit card ;you stop making purchases or at least prioritize them. You don't say .... well let's just take on more debt.

---

Hello again, tom:

Actually, it's YOU who are wrong...

This had NOTHING to do with "making purchases", and EVERYTHING to do with PAYING for the purchases we ALREADY made.

Plus, you DO know that Obama just can't make purchases, as you intimate... He has NO authority to do that. CONGRESS makes purchases - Obama writes the checks. If there are more purchases, it's YOUR Republican House of Representatives that's making them.

Additionally, you appear to mirror the Tea Party when you suggest that, instead of raising the debt limit, Obama could just "prioritize" the payments...

I suppose what you're saying is, it's not really default if we only STIFF the LEAST important of our creditors... That makes NO sense at all. In the real world, default is DEFAULT.

excon

Guess you didn't read the S&P decision then.

Quote:

---

We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the
Prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related
Fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the
growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an
Agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and
Will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal
consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week
falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the
general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.

---

I say that if any of the plans the House passed were signed there would not have been a downgrade.

Once again Ex you demonstrate your obscession with TRASH whether it is throwing trash in the air or taking out the trash of political policy makers you are right in there digging the dirt, oh sorry mixed methphor there. It is no good lamenting after the event the actions of a few would be presidential candidates for whom personal standing is more important than country, just send them the message at the appropriate time. From their performances in recent showings they are not serious candidates anyway. The S&P downgrading was a moment of reality in a storm of rhetoric, it is a shame that the ripple affected more than the pockets of some who would not pay more tax

If I wanted to pay more tax I'd live in a land Red Julia presides over .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

If I wanted to pay more tax I'd live in a land Red Julia presides over .

---

Indeed Tom your contributions would be welcomed, but remember the taxes are paid by those who can afford it in contrast to the place where you live, so let's examine economic policy here, there must be some falacies in it somewhere;

Your government taxes less, provides less and has greater unemployment, lower interest rates and lacklustre performance. Our government taxes some more, provides much, has full employment once primitives are removed from statistics, higher interest rates and strong fiscal performance (some would dispute this). We pay our workers more, find work for them digging holes of one sort or another, and don't winge too much about helping the less fortunate. Something must be working.

Strangely they seem to be of similar political persuasion, perhaps that is an illusion.

Could I suggest you reverse your disastrous policies and give utopia a try. By the way we don't suggest for an instant that the little red fox has anything to do with anything other than taxing corporations and polluters. Surely you are for that?

you are a net exporter of energy resources(for now until your government regulates that to death too).Trust me... what plagues my country has been installed in your government .Electing a Gillard government guaranteed that you're nation is not immune to the economic malaise.

I'm content with less tax=less services. I ask not what my country can do for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

you are a net exporter of energy resources(for now until your government regulates that to death too).Trust me... what plagues my country has been installed in your government .Electing a Gillard government guaranteed that you're nation is not immune to the economic malaise.

I'm content with less tax=less services. I ask not what my country can do for me.

---

Two things Tom;

We did not elect the Gillard government actually she presided over the greatest demise in support any political party has known. No, the Greens and independents have shown their true red colouring and allowed her to run a puppet government. If there is an economic malaise we know who caused it

You ask not what you country can do for you and... it does nothing, so therefore you are left with no alternative you must make the ultimate sacrifice

Quote:

---

growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an
agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and
will remain a contentious and fitful process

---

Who owns the downgrade?

The hit squad for the grand obstruction party, the TEA PARTY, who run the whole show from the low information, knee jerk right wing.

Any body notice how the debate went? They asked the panel if they would turn down a 10 to one deal spending to revenues. They said YES! Case closed.

"Resistance is futile" the Borg to the Federation/Star Trek The Next Generation.

Quote:

---

Our government taxes some more, provides much, has full employment once primitives are removed from statistics, higher interest rates and strong fiscal performance

---

Take away our primitives, we look pretty good too, in the USA.

Quote:

---

or on reaching an
Agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and
Will remain a contentious and fitful process

---

Correct... S&P didn't care how we reduced our debt .They just wanted the debt reduced substantially . Tell me how raising the ceiling helped that ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Take away our primitives, we look pretty good too, in the USA.

---

Which primitives are they tal? The tea party?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

. Tell me how raising the ceiling helped that ?

---

Rhetorical questions Tom? We have too distinct arguments here Tom you know that. On the one hand we have some sort of primitive mechanism aimed at reducing government spending and on the other hand we have some sort of primitive mechanism aimed at reducing government spending or at least containing it to revenue raised. The first is pure B/S the second well we will give it the benefit of the doubt and suggest fiscal responsibility from an unbiased point of view

The BS was the idea that increasing the debt to levels above 100% of GDP moves the country towards fiscal soundness .

Obama has unleashed the dogs of SEC against S&P ,and I think he has a point.

S&P gave it's clients a heads up about the downgrade before it happened. It could explain some of the market reaction before the announcement .

Then Treasury informed S&P they had made a math error to the total of $2 trillion . But S&P had already told their clients of the pending move so they couldn't back out.

But it needed a new rationale for making the move... so they concocted the garbage about acrimony in government (as if that's something new).Despite the fact that we are seemingly dogs at each other's throat , business always gets done ,and a deal was struck.
It's hard to believe that France retains a triple A but the US is downgraded .

I think that is what the Obots believe .Their investigation by the SEC indicates that . Their attacks on the TP then are even more cynical therefore .They know the truth behind the downgrade.

S&P is full of it. As I already said;they let the economy drive off the cliff in 2008 with nary a warning. In fact ;most of their ratings during that period were for all intents fraudulent . So why do people take them seriously now when they know the whole rating business is a racket ?

How do I know that the President is probably right ? Well when investors took flight they parked their money into Treasuries . How could that be if the US debt was as bad as S&P says it is ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The BS was the idea that increasing the debt to levels above 100% of GDP moves the country towards fiscal soundness .

Obama has unleashed the dogs of SEC against S&P ,and I think he has a point.

S&P gave it's clients a heads up about the downgrade before it happened. It could explain some of the market reaction before the announcement .

Then Treasury informed S&P they had made a math error to the total of $2 trillion . But S&P had already told their clients of the pending move so they couldn't back out.

But it needed a new rationale for making the move ....so they concocted the garbage about acrimony in government (as if that's something new).Despite the fact that we are seemingly dogs at each other's throat , business always gets done ,and a deal was struck.
It's hard to believe that France retains a triple A but the US is downgraded .

I think that is what the Obots believe .Their investigation by the SEC indicates that . Their attacks on the TP then are even more cynical therefore .They know the truth behind the downgrade.

S&P is full of it. As I already said;they let the economy drive off the cliff in 2008 with nary a warning. In fact ;most of their ratings during that period were for all intents fraudulent . So why do people take them seriously now when they know the whole rating business is a racket ?

How do I know that the President is probably right ? Well when investors took flight they parked their money into Treasuries . How could that be if the US debt was as bad as S&P says it is ?

---

Oh please now you are defending BO? You know Treasuries were the only game in town, you couldn't park your money in a bank. France might not keep its AAA long but they haven't been exhibiting unstable political tendencies. Would you be happy to hear that your government could make a 2 trillion dollar error and pass it off as mistake. B/S. Sure instills confidence. S&P don't exist to give economic warnings that is what your Treasury Dept is for but obviously they are doing a Bush and are asleep at the wheel

Quote:

---

Oh please now you are defending BO?

---

A stopped clock is right twice a day.

So if I understand what you are saying BO is only right when he is standing still. How do you tell the difference?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

which primatives are they tal? the tea party?

---

Probably the same as yours. Except they are ours. Actually, we all are primitives, it just that some won't admit it.

And S&P is full of crap. Always have been. How much does Australia need Clete, we seem to be rather flush at the moment. What you thought we were broke? Naw, next time someone tells you that, just change the channels, that's what we do.

Be aware though they run scary stuff on all the channels. Except Fox, that's where all the clown shows are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Probably the same as yours. Except they are ours. Actually, we all are primitives, it just that some won't admit it.

And S&P is full of crap. Always have been. How much does Australia need Clete, we seem to be rather flush at the moment. What you thought we were broke? Naw, next time someone tells you that, just change the channels, thats what we do.

Be aware though they run scary stuff on all the channels. Except Fox, thats where all the clown shows are.

---

No Tal our primitives exist at a much lower political level they are a bottomless pit..

Tal we don't need anything, our opposition is searching for $70 billion to cut, perhaps if you contacted them... I have no idea what they will do with it if they find it, smaller government I expect or put it on a very fast train, or a very fast horse, on the other hand they could just throw out the new Great Big Tax On Everything Mark I (Mining Tax) and Mark II (Carbon Tax). Personally I'm hoping they throw out the little red fox.

I'm glad we don't get Fox here we have enough of the red one we see every day