S&P Downgrades US Debt Rating

[lazlohollyfeld]

So if the Bush tax cuts expire and taxes go up on personal income only (and not corporate), then yes the sole proprietors will have to pay more in taxes. But it seems that it is very rare where a sole proprietor will have any employees...so this won't have a big impact on the economy. Still, I wouldn't have any issue with giving sole proprietors who actually have employees a tax deduction to offset the increase in their taxes. I could definitely support that.

Awesome, now do the same level of research on a Sub Chapter S Corporation. I could save you the time and share that the last stat I saw showed 4.5 million Sub Chapter S's and they employed roughly 69 million people. That may, or may not, cause you to rethink your statement above.

It says you are in Philly and when I think Philly a very urban environment comes to mind with lots of local shops and businesses. Ask the guy who owns your dry cleaner, your plumber, the guy who owns the corner shop, your favorite doughnut shop, etc. You may be shocked at how many Sub S's you interact with on a daily basis.

 

[lazlohollyfeld]

Oh, I didn't even see the part about a tax eduction for hiring until I read Bamacon's reply. So, here is some simple math. If a typical employee (we are an IT company) of mine carries a 60,000 salary, and my cost to employ adds on another 20,000 for a total of 80,000 a year. How much of a tax credit does Shane need in order to decide that makes good financial sense? The answer is we aren't spending 80,000 a year on an employee.....unless we have a need for them.

 

[Bama Reb]

it is time for us to get rid of congressmen who care more about their party than their country.

I'm sure that will happen eventually. The problem is that it won't happen until the economy hits rock bottom, paper money is worthless and the people no longer have any need for the President, Congress or any other elected officials. Once those who are now in office and are driving this train-wreck are made irrelevant by their own irresponsibility, then and only then will they see the error of their ways. But by then it will be much too late.

 

[Bamaro]

Well duh and roll your eyes all you like but your above post says you have no clue about what you are talking about. You say that our answers to reducing the deficit aren't good for creating jobs. I say if we creat jobs we can reduce the deficit and you say duh. There is one thing I can say about you and that is that you are consistently inconsistent.

You have a severe comprehension problem

 

[Bamaro]

Getting back to the downgrade, aside from the fact that the rating agencies totally blew it with the mortgage backed securities fiasco, we need to step back and see what S&P was really saying. They weren't commenting on our ability to pay, they were commenting on our willingness. They specifically mentioned the political brinksmanship in Washington. The markets underscored this Monday by maintaining strong support for treasuries while ravaging stocks on self fulfilled expectations. Its time for O to stop sitting back and mediating what congress does, or tries to do, and take a leadership role. Not to start an argument about the policies of LBJ but he knew how to whip congress into shape. On this O seems clueless.

The market is expected to open up over 100 pts today. Hopefully it holds.

 

[Bama Reb]

Getting back to the downgrade, aside from the fact that the rating agencies totally blew it with the mortgage backed securities fiasco, we need to step back and see what S&P was really saying. They weren't commenting on our ability to pay, they were commenting on our willingness. They specifically mentioned the political brinksmanship in Washington. The markets underscored this Monday by maintaining strong support for treasuries while ravaging stocks on self fulfilled expectations. Its time for O to stop sitting back and mediating what congress does, or tries to do, and take a leadership role. Not to start an argument about the policies of LBJ but he knew how to whip congress into shape. On this O seems clueless.

The market is expected to open up over 100 pts today. Hopefully it holds.

Blasphemer!! Racist!! :wink: :wink:
:biggrin:

 

[Tidewater]

Its time for O to stop sitting back and mediating what congress does, or tries to do, and take a leadership role. Not to start an argument about the policies of LBJ but he knew how to whip congress into shape. On this O seems clueless.

On this we agree. LBJ may have been a SOB, but he was a very effective whip in Congress, and carried that skill into the Oval Office.
I think that BHO's leadership style is too laid back and hands off. He lets Congress flail too long and does not roll up his sleeves when someone with the big bully pulpit could really weigh in and knock some skulls together to get something accomplished.
That said, I remain convinced that slowing the growth of Federal spending is much more important in balancing the Federal budget than tax increases (and my read of the S&P downgrade supports that contention), although beating the class warfare drum plays to the base.

 

[Tide1986]

Getting back to the downgrade, aside from the fact that the rating agencies totally blew it with the mortgage backed securities fiasco, we need to step back and see what S&P was really saying. They weren't commenting on our ability to pay, they were commenting on our willingness. They specifically mentioned the political brinksmanship in Washington. The markets underscored this Monday by maintaining strong support for treasuries while ravaging stocks on self fulfilled expectations. Its time for O to stop sitting back and mediating what congress does, or tries to do, and take a leadership role. Not to start an argument about the policies of LBJ but he knew how to whip congress into shape. On this O seems clueless.The market is expected to open up over 100 pts today. Hopefully it holds.

I saw an opinion piece this morning that labeled it "leading from behind" which seems to be a good description of Obama's leadership skills. I think Obama's lack of experience is showing quite a bit -- he, unfortunately, is nothing more than a second-rate professor. I also believe his love for the "present" vote while in Congress gave us another clue about his leadership style. Anyway, I think you're correct to point out the details of S&P's assessment. Seems spot on to me.

 

[Bama Reb]

I saw an opinion piece this morning that labeled it "leading from behind" which seems to be a good description of Obama's leadership skills. I think Obama's lack of experience is showing quite a bit -- he, unfortunately, is nothing more than a second-rate professor. I also believe his love for the "present" vote while in Congress gave us another clue about his leadership style. Anyway, I think you're correct to point out the details of S&P's assessment. Seems spot on to me.

Agreed. 'BO' reminds me of an illiterate person pretending to read a newspaper. He can't comprehend what is written, so all he can do is look at the pictures.
How can he possibly lead anyone in ay direction when he doesn't have the slightest idea of what is being done or attempted? (Explains his "present" votes) As I've said before on other threads, he's usually the most uninformed and inexperienced person in the room.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

The real conundrum still remains, whats good for reducing the deficit is bad for creating jobs and visa versa

What IS good for creating jobs that will also reduce the deficit? To be honest I can't think of a thing. Odds are there isn't anything that can do both at the same time. With the "opening" of the global market our society has not made itself competitive relative to the rest of the world. What jobs do people think anyone in this government or any policy can "create" immediately? It is a farce, a joke and unrealistic. I would love for someone, ANYONE to tell me what policy can be put in place that would immediately "create" jobs that are of the private sector? It's not going to be anything in manufacturing because all of those jobs are in countries with much less corporate tax rates and with employees working for three to four times less than anyone here would do. Services jobs are becoming less and less available because now we not only don't manufacture anything technology and the cost of servicing a part or system has now gotten to the point where we don't service much of anything but simply replace the "part". So it is very slim odds of anyone being able to immediately "create" service jobs with policy.

So here we are, can't create manufacturing jobs anytime in the near future and the same with service jobs. So what's left? This country is in a bad, bad situation with regards to jobs. No one wants to do business here and our government seems to not want them here either. I've beaten the horse to death but have a hard time seeing it any other way but the sad reality is meaningful jobs are not coming back to this country and its something that this country will realize very soon. There will be a correction in our standard of living. It will either be voluntarily or forced. I think the latter is the most likely of scenarios. Strap'em on folks this ride is about to very rough and very ugly. :frown:

 

[Bamabuzzard]

The problem is Obama wasted so much money on inefficient, ineffective government spending. Now, we don't have any room to act. $2 Trillion in tax cuts instead of $2 Trillion in spending couldn't have been worse, and at least the people would have had more money in their pockets.

I agree but isn't that in a sense a temporary fix? The permanent fix is getting manufacturing jobs and skilled labor service jobs BACK in this country so that a person can get a good job without having a masters degree from a college. IMO, the long term "fix", if we can call it that, is to get real jobs back in this country.

 

[rizolltizide]

it is time for us to get rid of congressmen who care more about their party than their country.

It is time for us to get rid of ALL congressmen, period. If a voter has the gall to vote for an incumbent, then you deserve everything you're getting now. I don't give a rat's rectum about party affiliation, if you don't vote them out then you approve of what they are doing and you deserve what you are getting.

And senators, too, g, if you weren't including them in your crosshairs.

 

[RollTide2U]

On this we agree. LBJ may have been a SOB, but he was a very effective whip in Congress, and carried that skill into the Oval Office.
I think that BHO's leadership style is too laid back and hands off. He lets Congress flail too long and does not roll up his sleeves when someone with the big bully pulpit could really weigh in and knock some skulls together to get something accomplished.
That said, I remain convinced that slowing the growth of Federal spending is much more important in balancing the Federal budget than tax increases (and my read of the S&P downgrade supports that contention), although beating the class warfare drum plays to the base.

Eric Bolling interviewed S&P Managing Director John Chambers yesterday, and Mr. Chambers revealed that some sort of fiscally responsible move - even a balanced budget amendment - would have shown a more fiscally responsible attitude in Washington and would have probably staved off the downgrade.

They can blame this on the Tea Party till Auburn's cows come home but the fact remains, there was one budget out there which even dealt with one "entitlement" (Medicare) and the CBO scoring of it indicated that it would have trimmed around $4.4 Trillion from the budget over the next 10 years and it was rejected, brutalized and demagogued. Some on here have made the statement that it relied on "unreal expectations" as if ANY of these other deals with spending cuts 3-5 years down the road dealt in reality!

That was Rep. Paul Ryan's budget. It had its flaws, but it got attacked more than any of them. When something gets attacked that much by the opposition, especially that bunch in Washington, it makes me wonder how good it really must be.

Democrats immediately went into "scare the Senior Citizens" mode, knowing full well that the Medicare changes only applied to those of us under 50 years old, and we have plenty of time to plan for the change. I'd rather have a premium support system than nothing at all and that's where we're headed.

One thing that ALL the credit rating agencies have indicated is that we HAVE to start dealing with our entitlements. But does anyone have the guts to do it until we're just bankrupt?

 

[RollTide2U]

What IS good for creating jobs that will also reduce the deficit? To be honest I can't think of a thing. Odds are there isn't anything that can do both at the same time. With the "opening" of the global market our society has not made itself competitive relative to the rest of the world. What jobs do people think anyone in this government or any policy can "create" immediately? It is a farce, a joke and unrealistic. I would love for someone, ANYONE to tell me what policy can be put in place that would immediately "create" jobs that are of the private sector? It's not going to be anything in manufacturing because all of those jobs are in countries with much less corporate tax rates and with employees working for three to four times less than anyone here would do. Services jobs are becoming less and less available because now we not only don't manufacture anything technology and the cost of servicing a part or system has now gotten to the point where we don't service much of anything but simply replace the "part". So it is very slim odds of anyone being able to immediately "create" service jobs with policy.

So here we are, can't create manufacturing jobs anytime in the near future and the same with service jobs. So what's left? This country is in a bad, bad situation with regards to jobs. No one wants to do business here and our government seems to not want them here either. I've beaten the horse to death but have a hard time seeing it any other way but the sad reality is meaningful jobs are not coming back to this country and its something that this country will realize very soon. There will be a correction in our standard of living. It will either be voluntarily or forced. I think the latter is the most likely of scenarios. Strap'em on folks this ride is about to very rough and very ugly. :frown:

Sunshine pumper...:wink:

I'm afraid you're right on most of this. I think the "standard of living" bubble may burst now. Our gov't is totally dysfunctional and we've been putting bandaids on that situation for a long time. The only thing now that might save us is a total reset...and that would be painful.

 

[Bamaro]

That was Rep. Paul Ryan's budget. It had its flaws, but it got attacked more than any of them. When something gets attacked that much by the opposition, especially that bunch in Washington, it makes me wonder how good it really must be.

Regardless of how anyone feels about his plan, Ryan was one of the few adults in this whole mess.

 

[RollTide2U]

Regardless of how anyone feels about his plan, Ryan was one of the few adults in this whole mess.

I agree with you. I didn't like the entire plan, but in many ways it was more of a serious attempt at attacking the problem than any of them. It was certainly more serious than the one that passed.

 

[Bodhisattva]

It is time for us to get rid of ALL congressmen, period. If a voter has the gall to vote for an incumbent, then you deserve everything you're getting now. I don't give a rat's rectum about party affiliation, if you don't vote them out then you approve of what they are doing and you deserve what you are getting.

And senators, too, g, if you weren't including them in your crosshairs.

Anarchist!

 

[swoop10]

It is time for us to get rid of ALL congressmen, period. If a voter has the gall to vote for an incumbent, then you deserve everything you're getting now. I don't give a rat's rectum about party affiliation, if you don't vote them out then you approve of what they are doing and you deserve what you are getting.

And senators, too, g, if you weren't including them in your crosshairs.

Ooooooooooooh, you said crosshairs..........you better hope nobody gets shot in the near future or you will be blamed for your violent rhetoric.

 

[swoop10]

You have a severe comprehension problem

My comprehension is fine. Maybe it's you who has a problem expressing what it is you mean. My point is if congress does what it needs to do to create jobs then they will be taking a step towards helping with the deficit problem. In your first statement you said that what we needed to do to help the deficit problem wasn't good for creating jobs. Then you agreed with what I said. There is no consistency in your two statements.

 

[gmart74]

It is time for us to get rid of ALL congressmen, period. If a voter has the gall to vote for an incumbent, then you deserve everything you're getting now. I don't give a rat's rectum about party affiliation, if you don't vote them out then you approve of what they are doing and you deserve what you are getting.

And senators, too, g, if you weren't including them in your crosshairs.

oh i completely agree. it is time we threw the baby out with the bathwater. i want all incumbents gone and 1-2 term limits on everyone. i want them to have to live under the laws they created. it might make them a bit more careful when crafting laws.