Why do Republicans purposefully damage the credit rating of the US government? Fitch downgrades, just like in 2011 GOP fun and games

[horn4life 3755]

Will if any of you are watching a nice fat decline in your stock holdings and 401K today, send a thank you note to your republican representative in the House.  Just like in 2011 when the GOP decided it might be fun to toy with the full faith and credit of the US dollar, and fitch downgraded, they have done it again.

Of course when you take a 45 day recess, and kick every fucking problem down the road (except for the national crisis of Hunter Biden) this is the sort of shit that happens.  Which is why the childishness of the GOP is dangerous.  They create problems instead of solutions.

Maybe if one fucking time in the history of the Universe the GOP gave a fuck about debt any time other than when there is a Democratic President in power I would believe differently. But this downgrade is nearly entirely the fault of our Republican friends.

Anyhow... Thanks GOP!

[BamaATL 16592]

Their collective lust for power combined with their hatred and disdain for run of the mill Americans?  

When you don't have a platform that can win, you try to make issues happen you can blame on the other guy.  The mere thought of winning in a situation where the country is doing well is so foreign to them; it's extremely telling.  These are not serious people, they provide no solutions, and they don't deserve anyone's vote.  

[Stilicho 1397]

51 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Their collective lust for power combined with their hatred and disdain for run of the mill Americans?  

It's fear and power all the way down. They do the same thing when it comes to FEMA money following natural disasters.

[horn4life 3755]

man no traction for this at all?

Sad that the GOP has one playbook.  Explode deficits through tax cuts for the rich.  Shift the burden onto the middle class for the tax cuts, WITH INTEREST. Then decry the lack of accountability for reducing the deficit ONLY when Democrats are President to..... wait for it... hurt the American economy to try and hurt the Democratic President.

All the while wearing little American Flag pins denoting their amazing pretend patriotism...

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

Republicans hate America. 

[Nivek 16861]

26 minutes ago, horn4life said:

man no traction for this at all?

Sad that the GOP has one playbook.  Explode deficits through tax cuts for the rich.  Shift the burden onto the middle class for the tax cuts, WITH INTEREST. Then decry the lack of accountability for reducing the deficit ONLY when Democrats are President to..... wait for it... hurt the American economy to try and hurt the Democratic President.

All the while wearing little American Flag pins denoting their amazing pretend patriotism...

No, this isn't getting a lot of traction because we have known about this for decades.   

[Horn Dog 9674]

Pubs have not been serious about debt nor the economy since before Reagan.  Their only solution is to throw gas on the fire for a quick economic burst while they are in office and then let the Dems be the adults to clean up the mess afterwards... then take credit once the mess has been cleaned as best as possible.  There are very few on this board who were alive the last time a pub with serious economic polies meant to strengthen this country was in office.   But pubs have a super power....exploiting our lizard brain instincts  of fear and greed.  Dems can't compete against that cause their policies, which sometimes are also sometimes flawed when taken to extreme, appeal instead to cerebral concepts like fairness, compassion, etc.   Same as it ever was. 

Edited August 7, 2023 by Horn Dog

[BearSchlong 8077]

Pshaw, it’s a non event. High frequency traders simply needed some manufactured volatility.

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

47 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Pubs have not been serious about debt nor the economy since before Reagan.  Their only solution is to throw gas on the fire for a quick economic burst while they are in office and then let the Dems be the adults to clean up the mess afterwards... then take credit once the mess has been cleaned as best as possible.  There are very few on this board who were alive the last time a pub with serious economic polies meant to strengthen this country was in office.   But pubs have a super power....exploiting our lizard brain instincts  of fear and greed.  Dems can't compete against that cause their policies, which sometimes are also sometimes flawed when taken to extreme, appeal instead to cerebral concepts like fairness, compassion, etc.   Same as it ever was. 

I don’t know about before Reagan. They supported much higher marginal tax rates before Reagan. Reagan introduced massive tax cuts for the rich, massive deficit spending, and massive peacetime debt. George HW Bush was the only Republican who exercised even modest fiscal responsibility and he got roasted for it after reneging on his promise: “Read my lips…no new taxes.” His dimwit son took a budget surplus and, rather than paying down the debt, gave more tax breaks disproportionally favoring the rich and spent like a drunken sailor on shore leave. Dick Cheney covered for him saying “Reagan proved defecits don’t matter.”

I was just a kid but I remember seeing on tv how they had a “national debt clock” displayed on some building somewhere, presumably in NYC or D.C. I don’t recall. I remember seeing updates on the news and I remember when it crossed $1 Trillion for the first time and how that was a big deal. Googling for it I found this:

”When Ronald Reagan took office (…), the gross domestic debt, as a percentage of the nation’s annual income, had reached its lowest point since 1931: 32.5 percent. As the Republican presidential nominee, Reagan had often spoken out during the campaign against deficit spending. Once ensconced in the White House, however, he encouraged Congress to spend heavily on arms while also cutting taxes. As a result, during the eight Reagan years the national debt soared.”

From everything I’ve been alive to see, it all started with Reagan. 

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

Damnit. Forgot to post the link. Sorry about that.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/22/us-national-debt-tops-1-trillion-oct-22-1981-243966

[Hermanator 6945]

We just keep banking on the world needing our economy propped up to stave off their own recessions. World business has been conducted in Dollars for a long time since the relative stability of the US democratic system was preferred to places with autocratic rule like China that could be volatile. That's currently changing now with an increasing percentage of global business being done in Yuan while the fucking republican's bat shit crazy antics and the majority of American's laziness and apathy towards shutting them down is stripping away that decades long stability global markets counted on. 

[Horn Dog 9674]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I don’t know about before Reagan. They supported much higher marginal tax rates before Reagan. Reagan introduced massive tax cuts for the rich, massive deficit spending, and massive peacetime debt. George HW Bush was the only Republican who exercised even modest fiscal responsibility and he got roasted for it after reneging on his promise: “Read my lips…no new taxes.” His dimwit son took a budget surplus and, rather than paying down the debt, gave more tax breaks disproportionally favoring the rich and spent like a drunken sailor on shore leave. Dick Cheney covered for him saying “Reagan proved defecits don’t matter.”

I was just a kid but I remember seeing on tv how they had a “national debt clock” displayed on some building somewhere, presumably in NYC or D.C. I don’t recall. I remember seeing updates on the news and I remember when it crossed $1 Trillion for the first time and how that was a big deal. Googling for it I found this:

”When Ronald Reagan took office (…), the gross domestic debt, as a percentage of the nation’s annual income, had reached its lowest point since 1931: 32.5 percent. As the Republican presidential nominee, Reagan had often spoken out during the campaign against deficit spending. Once ensconced in the White House, however, he encouraged Congress to spend heavily on arms while also cutting taxes. As a result, during the eight Reagan years the national debt soared.”

From everything I’ve been alive to see, it all started with Reagan. 

I think we are saying the same thing.  My statement that pubs have not been serious people about debt/healthy budget management since before Reagan means that in my mind Reagan started it and it's been that way ever since.   Granted, I was not alive during Ford and Nixon but my sense is that they were more responsible with respect to the budget than Reagan/Bush 1/Bush 2/Trump.

 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

48 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

I think we are saying the same thing.  My statement that pubs have not been serious people about debt/healthy budget management since before Reagan means that in my mind Reagan started it and it's been that way ever since.   Granted, I was not alive during Ford and Nixon but my sense is that they were more responsible with respect to the budget than Reagan/Bush 1/Bush 2/Trump.

 

 

Okay, right. If you look at the national debt, everyone was paying down the debt after WWII until Reagan came along and then it skyrocketed. Nixon and Ford weren’t complaining about the rich paying too much in taxes (nor giving a voice to evangelical wingnuts which is a whole other Reagan era blight on GOP ideology).

[Nice Guy Eddie 13414]

9 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Okay, right. If you look at the national debt, everyone was paying down the debt after WWII until Reagan came along and then it skyrocketed. Nixon and Ford weren’t complaining about the rich paying too much in taxes (nor giving a voice to evangelical wingnuts which is a whole other Reagan era blight on GOP ideology).

We're 40+ years into Reaganomics and we've yet to prove that tax savings for the rich has led to better paying jobs for the rest or increase tax revenue, as promised.

 

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

5 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

We're 40+ years into Reaganomics and we've yet to prove that tax savings for the rich has led to better paying jobs for the rest or increase tax revenue, as promised.

We’ve proven that they don’t. Three times. 

[troph 24563]

10 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

We're 40+ years into Reaganomics and we've yet to prove that tax savings for the rich has led to better paying jobs for the rest or increase tax revenue, as promised.

 

this is rage inducing. fuck them all.

[Degenerate Gardner 4081]

Because their party has a very short term horizon where America’s best interests aren't a genuine part of the calculus. It’s about self enrichment and naked ambition. Nothing else.

[Captainant 27467]

18 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

We're 40+ years into Reaganomics and we've yet to prove that tax savings for the rich has led to better paying jobs for the rest or increase tax revenue, as promised.

 

If you ask our very fine business leader friends in DT or 6th street journal, things are better than they've ever been! What are you talking about?? There's opportunity everywhere if you just pull on your bootstraps hard enough and aren't a lazy taker [/slorch]

[Jiggy-Z 3432]

58 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

We're 40+ years into Reaganomics and we've yet to prove that tax savings for the rich has led to better paying jobs for the rest or increase tax revenue, as promised.

 

Two weeks!!!

[Pato del Muerto 52342]

48 minutes ago, Captainant said:

If you ask our very fine business leader friends in DT or 6th street journal, things are better than they've ever been! What are you talking about?? There's opportunity everywhere if you just pull on your bootstraps hard enough and aren't a lazy taker [/slorch]

Except also nobody should vote for Biden because the economy is tanking. 

[Nivek 16861]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

We're 40+ years into Reaganomics and we've yet to prove that tax savings for the rich has led to better paying jobs for the rest or increase tax revenue, as promised.

 

Obviously, we didn't cut taxes enough on the rich. 

[Satchel 6908]

I blame drag queens. Republicans can’t focus on anything of importance until we solve drag queen story hour.

[nbmishoid 941]

All good fun, but, they do this debt limit shit and the military promotion shit because they are political performers with no desire nor ability to govern.  Yet they have to be “in charge”.  Power for the sake of power.

[hayden_horn 11360]

there's something more sinister at hand here. i'm not sure what the long play is.

i can grant a trickle down economics mistake in policy, even if the idea came from a selfish bad place.

fool me once, shame on you

but we're 40 years into this failure. it's safe to say that we see the short term effects for the shit they are. the promised medium and long term effects can no longer be promised. it's fucking played out, but people still buy into it.

fool me twice, can't get fooled again, and again, and again, and again

goddammit.

how are we still fucking haunted by the 80s forty fucking years later? an entire decade of excess, built upon the success of being the only functional manufacturing power amidst a ruined world economy. everything in the 80s was a short term flash in the fucking pan. no real long term thinking, just short term (appearance of) success is all that matters. what's that you say? our current policy of dumping toxic waste into drinking waterways will have terrible long term effects? how long term we talking? oh, a century or so? i'll be dead, and i'm sure they'll have figured all that shit out by then. how are next quarter's revenue figures looking? that's what really matters!

nothing from the 80s lasted because it was all built to be short term bullshit. 

well, the bill is finally coming fucking due. and yet we still have these fucking pyramid scheme middle men out there trying to promise the rubes that if they sell just a few more widgets, this will be the year we can finally hit 100% bonus and get that 5% payrise instead of these annual 2% "merit" increases. what the middle men don't realize is that they are also the fucking rubes. we're all rubes. 

the profits are never shared.

full disclosure: this post written while listening to some dead kennedys inspiration.

[956 Worldwide 34444]

The Republican Party has the explicit party position government is bad and fucks everything up and so they actively try to make that happen every chance they get. 

[Nivek 16861]

there's something more sinister at hand here. i'm not sure what the long play is.
i can grant a trickle down economics mistake in policy, even if the idea came from a selfish bad place.
fool me once, shame on you
but we're 40 years into this failure. it's safe to say that we see the short term effects for the shit they are. the promised medium and long term effects can no longer be promised. it's fucking played out, but people still buy into it.
fool me twice, can't get fooled again, and again, and again, and again
goddammit.
how are we still fucking haunted by the 80s forty fucking years later? an entire decade of excess, built upon the success of being the only functional manufacturing power amidst a ruined world economy. everything in the 80s was a short term flash in the fucking pan. no real long term thinking, just short term (appearance of) success is all that matters. what's that you say? our current policy of dumping toxic waste into drinking waterways will have terrible long term effects? how long term we talking? oh, a century or so? i'll be dead, and i'm sure they'll have figured all that shit out by then. how are next quarter's revenue figures looking? that's what really matters!
nothing from the 80s lasted because it was all built to be short term bullshit. 
well, the bill is finally coming fucking due. and yet we still have these fucking pyramid scheme middle men out there trying to promise the rubes that if they sell just a few more widgets, this will be the year we can finally hit 100% bonus and get that 5% payrise instead of these annual 2% "merit" increases. what the middle men don't realize is that they are also the fucking rubes. we're all rubes. 
the profits are never shared.
full disclosure: this post written while listening to some dead kennedys inspiration.

Is my cock big enough, is my brain small enough, for you to make me a Supreme Court justice?

[elfenix 34172]

I think we are saying the same thing.  My statement that pubs have not been serious people about debt/healthy budget management since before Reagan means that in my mind Reagan started it and it's been that way ever since.   Granted, I was not alive during Ford and Nixon but my sense is that they were more responsible with respect to the budget than Reagan/Bush 1/Bush 2/Trump.
 
 

The 70s had persistent inflation and republican economic strategy consisted of the following:

[horn4life 3755]

10 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I don’t know about before Reagan. They supported much higher marginal tax rates before Reagan. Reagan introduced massive tax cuts for the rich, massive deficit spending, and massive peacetime debt. George HW Bush was the only Republican who exercised even modest fiscal responsibility and he got roasted for it after reneging on his promise: “Read my lips…no new taxes.” His dimwit son took a budget surplus and, rather than paying down the debt, gave more tax breaks disproportionally favoring the rich and spent like a drunken sailor on shore leave. Dick Cheney covered for him saying “Reagan proved defecits don’t matter.”

I was just a kid but I remember seeing on tv how they had a “national debt clock” displayed on some building somewhere, presumably in NYC or D.C. I don’t recall. I remember seeing updates on the news and I remember when it crossed $1 Trillion for the first time and how that was a big deal. Googling for it I found this:

”When Ronald Reagan took office (…), the gross domestic debt, as a percentage of the nation’s annual income, had reached its lowest point since 1931: 32.5 percent. As the Republican presidential nominee, Reagan had often spoken out during the campaign against deficit spending. Once ensconced in the White House, however, he encouraged Congress to spend heavily on arms while also cutting taxes. As a result, during the eight Reagan years the national debt soared.”

From everything I’ve been alive to see, it all started with Reagan. 

No doubt it started with Reagan.  To be honest, way back then PERHAPS giving the wealthy tax cuts could have spurred employment.  Only because the lack of money mobility back in 1980 for the average rich guy/company.  The math, says it was a mistake. Simply as the revenue generated from the cuts never paid for them.  That's actually not conservative for those that remember fiscal conservatism.  Today tax cuts for the rich are nothing more than reallocation of wealth to donors.  Today even a little guy can put all their money over seas, so tax cuts don't do much for the US economy unless you are giving the money to poor people. Simply as they have no portability to where they can spend their money and it has to spent locally, and the money multiplier effect (economics) would be more substantial.

Tax cuts are spending. Or more appropriately "income reduction" to pay the deficit.  Spending and tax cuts have the same effect.  But I'd rather have some roads and infrastructure,  and maybe funding for education.  Thinking it just might... might boost revenue by creating more than another couple millions over time to somebody mostly investing offshore to shield their tax liability. But hey what the fuck do I know...

[Biff Tannen 45499]

6 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

there's something more sinister at hand here. i'm not sure what the long play is.

i can grant a trickle down economics mistake in policy, even if the idea came from a selfish bad place.

fool me once, shame on you

but we're 40 years into this failure. it's safe to say that we see the short term effects for the shit they are. the promised medium and long term effects can no longer be promised. it's fucking played out, but people still buy into it.

fool me twice, can't get fooled again, and again, and again, and again

goddammit.

how are we still fucking haunted by the 80s forty fucking years later? an entire decade of excess, built upon the success of being the only functional manufacturing power amidst a ruined world economy. everything in the 80s was a short term flash in the fucking pan. no real long term thinking, just short term (appearance of) success is all that matters. what's that you say? our current policy of dumping toxic waste into drinking waterways will have terrible long term effects? how long term we talking? oh, a century or so? i'll be dead, and i'm sure they'll have figured all that shit out by then. how are next quarter's revenue figures looking? that's what really matters!

nothing from the 80s lasted because it was all built to be short term bullshit. 

well, the bill is finally coming fucking due. and yet we still have these fucking pyramid scheme middle men out there trying to promise the rubes that if they sell just a few more widgets, this will be the year we can finally hit 100% bonus and get that 5% payrise instead of these annual 2% "merit" increases. what the middle men don't realize is that they are also the fucking rubes. we're all rubes. 

the profits are never shared.

full disclosure: this post written while listening to some dead kennedys inspiration.

Everything you said is still accurate today. The 80s never ended from a business and stock market perspective. 

[hayden_horn 11360]

9 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Everything you said is still accurate today. The 80s never ended from a business and stock market perspective. 

correct.  

[Pods 7530]

On 8/7/2023 at 3:28 PM, hayden_horn said:

but we're 40 years into this failure. it's safe to say that we see the short term effects for the shit they are. the promised medium and long term effects can no longer be promised. it's fucking played out, but people still buy into it.

our current policy of dumping toxic waste into drinking waterways will have terrible long term effects? how long term we talking? oh, a century or so? i'll be dead, and i'm sure they'll have figured all that shit out by then.

Very well said. I have 1 point to add. A significant percentage of them don't give a fuck about long term, because Jesus is coming back any day now to magically fix everything.

He's 2000 years over due, which means it'll probably happen really soon now and none of this will matter, but we should probably start a cataclysmic war in the Middle East to make sure. The Lord helps those who help themselves. 

Edited August 10, 2023 by Pods

[Stilicho 1397]

31 minutes ago, Pods said:

Very well said. I have 1 point to add. A significant percentage of them don't give a fuck about long term, because Jesus is coming back any day now to magically fix everything.

He's 2000 years over due, which means it'll probably happen really soon now and none of this will matter, but we should probably start a cataclysmic war in the Middle East to make sure. The Lord helps those who help themselves. 

Serious-ish question:

Are most of the fundamentalists still holding out for the Rapture? I know the "Soldiers of Christ" from the '80s and '90s were all abuzz about it when I was forced through the Small Town Southern Baptist Experience. "Decoding Revelations", Gog and Magog, What Seals Have Been Broken?! and all of that sort of nonsense. That still their core belief?

I'm curious because they seem REALLY intent on the whole "establishing a Christian caliphate on earth" thing they've got going now. If they've given up on Transporter Chief Jesus beaming them up, then does that open up the martyrdom card that the abortion clinic bombers used to play?

Because... fuck.

[StassneyHorn 6540]

Light a candle and pray for unimpeded Bidenomics. This is the only way children