Posted on 07/15/2011 6:13:14 AM PDT by SueRae
So the credit-rating agencies that helped to create the financial crisis that led to a deep recession are now warning that the U.S. could lose the AAA rating it has had since 1917. As painfully ironic as this is, there's no benefit in shooting the messengers. The real culprit is the U.S. political class, especially the President who has presided over this historic collapse of fiscal credibility.
Moody's and the boys are citing the risk of a default on August 2 as the proximate reason for their warning. But Americans should understand that the debt ceiling is merely the trigger. The gun is the spending boom of the last three years and the prospect that Washington lacks the political will to reduce it in the years to come. On spending, it is important to recall how extraordinary the blowout of the last three years has been. We've seen nothing like it since World War II. Nothing close. The nearby chart tracks federal outlays as a share of GDP since 1960. The early peaks coincide with the rise of the Great Society, the recession of 1974-75, and then a high of 23.5% with the recession of 1982 and the Reagan defense buildup.
From there, spending declines, most rapidly during the 1990s as defense outlays fell to 3% of GDP in 2000 from its Reagan peak of 6.2% in 1986. The early George W. Bush years saw spending bounce up to a plateau of roughly 20% of GDP, but no more than 20.7% as recently as 2008.
Then came the Obama blowout, in league with Nancy Pelosi's Congress. With the recession as a rationale, Democrats consciously blew up the national balance sheet, lifting federal outlays to 25% in 2009, the highest level since 1945.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Downgrades are expensive. We owe it all to Obamacare.
Moody’s and S&P are Rent a Rating companies. But the point is well taken. The spending of the last few years combined with a cold turkey cut off of borrowing could in effect begin the chain of events outlined in Becks... Cloward-Piven Plan he keeps talking about. Overload of the system. Could this be part of the Alinsky Plan? Is Obama in the Catbird Seat? Holy Cow Batman!
Check out the chart.
Talk about your hockey stick!.
bookmark
“...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness...”
ALTER it.
Legislatures (state and federal) can be part-time jobs with 1/10th pay, NO retirement, NO perks, NO insurance. Get a job. Pay for your own crap, you POS politicians.
It’s the socialism, stupid. DEFUND socialist collectives, foreign and domestic.
That whole Rat brigade and the Kenyan imbecilic Punk,with it’s free spending and Zimbabwe mentality,is the problem.
“Moody’s and S&P are Rent a Rating companies.”
You got that right.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2748885/posts?page=6#6
We’re told the White House list of immediate budget savings, the ones that matter most because they are enforceable by the current Congress, are negligible. His offer for immediate domestic nondefense discretionary cuts: $2 billion.
It looks like a 2 billion dollar increase in the debt cieling is in order, Mr President.
"Come on, you can say. They know." (My Cousin Vinny)
Obama AND the DEMOCRAT CONGRESS!!!! Actually ALL DEMOCRAT Congresses have gotten us into HUGE FINANCIAL TROUBLE! Elect CONSERVATIVES!!!!!
The only people that could afford to live by this would be the elite rich. Do you really want to ensure that only the rich have the ability to hold office? Right now, it's possible (if unlikely) that a regular Joe could go to Congress.
People forget that the Democrats and RINOs controlled Congress for years before Obama was elected.
One of my additional duties for my military unit is as the resource adviser...so I know how budget works. I see that during Bush's last few years...we were dealing with $200-400 billion deficits. Now...its ~$1.5T.
Now my question: Am I understanding that what they did was incorporate the stimulus spending of 2009 into the baseline of the budget? Is that why the annual deficit is so high? If so...I thought that was a one time deal. If not...what are we spending 1 trillion on in 2010 that we weren't spending on in 2008?
An economist I’m not so I can’t begin to answer your question. But I do know that over the last couple of years the amount of food stamps people can get has exploded. For a single person from $96/mo to $177/mo. Family of six from $310/mo to $1016/mo. Meanwhile, inflation has been near zip.
So I wonder why, and realize this is a deliberate building of the dependent class. These are also the folks who pay no or low federal income tax.
What has received less attention, is the way that inflation has made it's way through the food chain. I have been tracking groceries and other items from our local stores including super Walmart. Inflation has ranged from 30% to more than double since about 2008.
It is also disguised by the incredible shrinking package. For example Veggies in a can for just a few cents more per can, only the can used to be 16 oz. and is now 15 oz. These are two big items(gas and food) for families that cuts into their discretionary spending.
Add on rises in insurance premiums etc. and I don't see how inflation is zip. And considering what is going to follow this latest spending binge and easy money, we ain't seen nothin’ yet!
>>>The only people that could afford to live by this would be the elite rich. Do you really want to ensure that only the rich have the ability to hold office? Right now, it’s possible (if unlikely) that a regular Joe could go to Congress.<<<
Actually, you’re close to the idea that the founders had concerning a citizen legislature. A person who had been successful in his life would then step up and serve as a representative, essentially volunteering his time to share his insights and abilities with the rest of the community. The elite rich? How about looking at that group of people as successful business people, respected academics, inventors, entrepreneurs, religious figures, and other people respected by others for their efforts. Arnold Schwartznegger is a good example (I’m not talking about his politics) - he struggled, he achieved, he gained a good reputation, and he stepped up as governor. I can easily see where some folks who aren’t rich would still be able to serve - the writer who doesn’t care about wealth, the teacher who gets a leave of absence, a retired CEO who is frugal and sharp, a farmer who puts down the plow after 30 years in the fields.
I’m with the original post you’ve responded to. Stop making “politician” a job description. Make it the equivalent of serving your country as a Marine, but in your older years. A true citizen legislature would be responding far different to the current circumstances in our country and culture, IMHO. Several states still operate this way, too, including Alaska, where I live. The legislature meets for 90 days and then they go home to their real jobs. We have fishermen, a former columnist for the Anchorage Daily News, a guy with a big car dealership. They might not have my ideology but they know real life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.