S&P Downgrades U.S. Outlook to Negative for First Time in 70 Years

[Tani Coyote]

Wrong again. Note the underlined word. With the exception of Bernie Madoff and his ilk, everybody who is rich today, became rich by earning their wealth. CEO's get paid more because their work is much, much harder.

But you don't want anyone else getting their hands on it, which can only mean redistribution or theft. The police cover the theft, so redistribution is all that is left to argue against.

The terrorists themselves have admitted this. It's the reason they switched to smaller-scale attempts such as that Christmas Bomber guy.

Odd. I also recall the terrorists saying they wanted us to conquer one hellhole after another so we'd drain our coffers, forcing us to cut back eventually. They spend millions to kill thousands and we'll spend billions to do the same. Do you see a problem here?

Never mind it's assuming conventional war is the way to go.. how many countries do we need to occupy? Take out one nest and they'll just move into another. We only have so much resources.

After? Why "after"?

After wasn't used literally. Cut them at the same time, whichever. This nitpicking is silly.

Note that absolutely nobody is saying that last one about our meddling in Libya--if you say "our meddling in Iraq is creating terrorists" but you don't say "our meddling in Libya is creating terrorists", then you are (here we go again) A HYPOCRITE.

Also note that nobody ever said "the U.S. military is creating terrorists" before 9/11 actually happened. The cut-military advocates invented that line in order to find a way to keep their agenda intact after 9/11.

Alright, great thing I never use that line.. I'm of the opinion Osama's just another political individual; if we didn't have bases in the Holy Land, he'd probably find some other way to rally radicals behind him.

Yes on both. I read your posts very carefully, and I assume you to be a conventional liberal as a direct result of what I read. I assume you're "just another liberal" because you act like one.

A liberal advocates keeping the welfare system from growing out of check, keeping taxes low(and making them borderline flat), is not afraid to intervene in foreign policy, etc.?

Case in point:

You said "after hundred or so billion off the military". I already called you on this, but it bears repeating. That is conventional liberals; they want to cut the military first. (Most likely their actual plan is to get their military cuts, then go back on their word and block all cuts to entitlement programs).

All nice but you took that too literally. Cut them at the same time then, whatever.

Already explained why. Taxes? New taxes will produce revenue NEXT year. We're going to hit the debt ceiling in ONE MONTH. Also, taxes are nowhere near enough to solve the problem. Tax revenue from the rich would have to TRIPLE. Tax revenue from corporations would have to QUINTUPLE.

As was explained earlier, don't the rich actually pay less than their marginal rate because of various loopholes and deductions? How much was it Warren Buffet said he paid, claiming no deductions, despite his fantastic wealth?

You can also increase the tax rate slightly to offset how much will have to be cut. It's one of the cases of pitching in. The poor will give up some services, the rich will give up a little more cash. The middle class... well, the middle class is screwed no matter what happens. Too rich to qualify for welfare, too poor to afford various things.

Military cuts? Not enough to solve the problem, and also politically impossible. Even Obama isn't stupid enough to cut the military significantly. I already told you--he had his chance and he didn't do it.

Not enough to solve the problem but still a great way to pitch in for the short-term. Long-term requires tackling healthcare.

Sure, there are vague suggestions--such as raising the retirement age to 70. How many dollars would that save?? Nobody has any freaking idea.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?

This estimates raising Medicare's eligibility to 70 would save 8 billion in the short term and 100+ billion in the long term. Doing the same for SS would save 247 billion.

I can see the benefits of grandfathering in the increased retirement age already. People are living longer and are having fewer children. The era of SS and Medicare as we know it is coming to an end.

We need to save a trillion and a half dollars. How much do we cut from Medicare? From Social Security? From the NEA? From programs providing clean needles to drug addicts? You proposed to cut a hundred billion dollars from the military and that's it (leaving us $1.4 trillion short.....)

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=xu1t9b14

70% spending cuts, 30% tax increases.

Then don't act like them.

I wasn't aware I advocated for isolationism, for amnesty, for hate speech laws, for huge humanitarian aid budgets, for letting the UN boss us around, for destroying our nuclear arsenal, for letting the government take over hospitals, for raising income taxes to punishing rates, for de facto outlawing cigarettes or cakes.

But if being libertarian = being liberal, then by God, I will be a liberal.

 

[RedRalph]

How on Earth are nuclear weapons preventing another Sept 11th???

 

[Tani Coyote]

I don't get it either Ralph. Short of committing genocide in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the latter of which would nuke all our allies most likely if they can't reach us.

And even then, that would definitely incense terrorism. The more we look heartless and uncaring for the Islamic populations, the easier it is for people like Bin Laden to feed them his ideology.

Having bases may or may not incense terrorism; indeed, as the biggest fish in the sea, I think Al-Qaeda and their ilk would find other justifications for terrorism, simply being non-Muslim is a start.

But while bases may or may not, not being careful with your actions definitely will influence people's tendency towards terrorism. Sure, one can argue they live in fear... but nobody lives in fear forever. Or am I imagining that all tyrants (or their successors) have their day?

 

[RedRalph]

Indeed. Basketcase has no idea what he is talking about.

 

[Mise]

Well they didn't stop the first one...