Here's the S&P Report Page 4 Last Paragraph blames Republicons

[titaniumsalute]

WE need to get this out. Print 10 copies, highlight the paragraph. If some idiot relative or friend starts blaming Obama hand them the whole report and point them to page 4.

We need to get this to media outlets. All of them. We need to point to the link to the report, site page 4 and the last paragraph. Period. Blog the shit out of this thing.

We need to send it to every Representative and Senator with a note attached saying "It is the Republicans lack of increasing taxes that has caused this. Period. WE need to do this.

We are the warriors. No one else is carrying our water. We must act and spread the message of this garbage.

No wonder the right attacked so hard...they read it and said "oh shit that isn't good for us."

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/af2c4fac-bfc2-11e0-90d5-00144feabdc0.pdf

[gateley]

1. Could somebody cut and paste that paragraph? It's not

loading for me. Thanks!

[titaniumsalute]

2. Cut and paste with sourcing

Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now
assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012,
remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority
of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise
revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key
macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.

Standard & Poor’s | RatingsDirect on the Global Credit Portal | August 5, 2011
Research Update: United States of America Long-Term Rating Lowered To 'AA+' On Political Risks And Rising
Debt Burden; Outlook Negative

[gateley]

6. Thanks - I was dying to read it!! And thanks for the sourcing -

I can send it to everyone I know! :hi:

[silverweb]

3. Here you go:

"Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade."

[gateley]

8. Thanks - leaves no doubt, does it? Wonder how they'll respond --

"that LIBERAL S&P rating system!" :rofl:

[Uncle Joe]

4. The bottom of page 4 and top of page 5.

Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now
assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012,
remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority
of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise
revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key
macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP

Standard & Poor’s | RatingsDirect on the Global Credit Portal | August 5, 2011 4
883559 | 300978643

Research Update: United States of America Long-Term Rating Lowered To 'AA+' On Political Risks And Rising

Debt Burden; Outlook Negative

growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.

[gateley]

9. You know, this has got to make even Tea Partiers give pause,

don't you think?

[Uncle Joe]

15. I think it should. gateley.

[gateley]

20. Yeah, but the minute I hit "post" I thought, "gateley, this is

the TEA PARTY you're talking about - the folks who have convinced themselves that nothing more than cutting taxes is needed".

Regardless, this is really a nightmare, one I'd bet most of us never dreamed would ever occur :(

[Uncle Joe]

23. The last I heard, the number of people willing to identify themselves as being a member

of the Tea Party aka: Koch, Beck and Fox "News" Party was dropping precipitously.

I believe some of those people may be waking up to the snow-job pulled on them.

That's reminds of another thing, I imagine Beck will come well with his gold investment.

[Fuzz]

42. True. I'm dealing with this right now. No matter what they are insisting that over-spending,

particularly Obama's, lead to the downgrade. Doesn't matter if you show them what S&P actually said about disfunctional government, lack of revenues or how close we came to defaulting.

[Uncle Joe]

13. One other point, Senator Eric Cantor has been shorting treasuries, he wins if the U.S. loses.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/searchresults.html?q=cantor+shorts+treasuries&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&sa=Search&domains=democraticunderground.com&client=pub-7805397860504090&forid=1&ie=ISO-8859-1&oe=ISO-8859-1&cof=GALT%3A%23008000%3BGL%3A1%3BDIV%3A%23336699%3BVLC%3A663399%3BAH%3Acenter%3BBGC%3AFFFFFF%3BLBGC%3A336699%3BALC%3A0000FF%3BLC%3A0000FF%3BT%3A000000%3BGFNT%3A0000FF%3BGIMP%3A0000FF%3BFORID%3A11&hl=en

[gateley]

17. That's true -- I wonder why a BFD wasn't made about this --

and now there's a bit about a $1B "bet" that someone put on S&P downgrading the rating -

[Uncle Joe]

21. That's a serious bet to put on something that has never happened before.

I wonder if Cantor is invested in the Chinese Market?

[Tx4obama]

29. Note: Cantor is in the House, NOT the Senate :) n/t

[Uncle Joe]

30. Thanks for the correction, Tx4obama.

:hi:

[MagickMuffin]

5. Not sure if this is it, but it does point the fingers @ Rethuglicons

Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.

Our revised upside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the outlook on the 'AA+' long-term rating being revised to stable--retains these same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario, we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.


edit to include the other paragraph which mentions the Administration and having the Bush Tax Cuts Expire!

[gateley]

12. Thanks - I think that's great! nt

[MagickMuffin]

22. I made an edit to include the rest of paragraph and an additional one

which points out the fact the Obama admin and Dems about letting the Bush Tax Cuts lapse.

It does sound as though they are directly pointing the finger at the Teabaggers in Congress and the rest of the Teaterrorists.

[gateley]

24. Thanks! nt

[sabrina 1]

7. I'm not sure they are blaming Republicans. It looks like they are explaining

the 'math' error of 2 trillion dollars they were accused of making it seems.

They explained that it was not an error, but a re-assessment of their original belief that the Bush Tax Cuts would be allowed to expire in 2012. Now, they do not believe that.

I'm sure about this, but I think they were going to down-rate the US anyhow.

And I do not trust them so can't really say one way or the other who they are aiming at. From past experience, they appear to work for wealthy Global Capitalists and probably should have been prosecuted for the role they played in the Global Economic Meltdown.

[titaniumsalute]

10. How are the above posts with the quotes

not blaming the Republicans? What am I missing?

[sabrina 1]

39. Republicans were not the only ones who voted to extend

the Bush tax cuts. Democrats who had a majority at the time, in the lame duck Congress, made a deal they never should have made.

While they do blame Republicans for continuing to demand 'no new taxes', they also have no faith in Democrats fighting them. Maybe this will instill some backbone in Democrats who previously seemed to think that 'bi-partisanship' is more important than the future of the country. We all KNEW what those tax cuts would cost, and if anything, this is a vindication of the much-maligned (by the Party Leadership) Progressive wing of the party.

Progressive policies work, but I'm not sure the S&P is advocating such policies. The Globalists who are apparently running the world right now, want to privatize all Social Programs and it's a bit disconcerting to me if the ratings agencies don't see THAT as a problem. It must mean they KNOW Democrats are willing to do it.

[gateley]

19. That may well be, I see the point you're making, but it still

sounds as though it's accusing the Republicans of not doing what it takes to address the issues. Or at least that how I want to interpret it! :7

[True Earthling]

33. S&P is NOT blaming Republicans...

This was also on page 4...

"Standard & Poor's takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue
measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate
for putting the U.S.'s finances on a sustainable footing."

[sabrina 1]

43. Lol, yes, I know what you mean.

Blaming Republicans is fine with me for public consumption.

But for those of us who have watched all of this play out, I feel a lot of anger now at Democrats who voted for the deal that extended the Bush Tax Cuts when they were in the majority and were told by Progressives, what a bad idea it was.

If anything, this Rating is a vindication of the Progressive Wing of the Party who were told to 'STFU' back then when we expressed outrage over that deal, by our own Party Leadership. Maybe they will listen to Progressives now? If only they would, we would not be in this condition right now, which I blame on Republicans of course, but I also blame on 'Third Way' Democrats who actually agree with many Republican policies and have pulled the Dem Party to the right.

[gateley]

46. Yeah, but I'm not sure it will even sink in that "we should have

listened to what the Progressives (and economists!) were telling us". And I don't hold out much hope that they'll listen to us in the future. :(

But if the Republicans weren't so vehemently anti-O, I think we could have resolved SO many more issues. And of course, if the Dems would have fought harder and refused to be cowed. AND IF... and if... :eyes:

[Uncle Joe]

26. I wonder if Republican "leaders" ie: Congressman Cantor shorting treasuries also played into their

consideration to downgrade.

How could it not?:shrug:

[sabrina 1]

27. Good question, Uncle Joe. It seems to me what he did

was a confirmation that they would not in any way, consider any tax increases on the wealthy. And since he is in a leadership position, he has 'inside' knowledge of how committed the Republicans are to that. The Ratings Agencies, I'm sure, took that as a sign of what to expect.

OT, but to me, betting on your country losing borders on treason. He should be asked to step down.

[Doctor_J]

11. Doesn't matter any more. The president issued a statement absolving the Repukes

while they're all over the TV blaming it on him. He's beyond "hope"

[gateley]

14. What was the statement? I'd heard Treasure was disputing

the findings by $2T, but didn't hear Obama absolved the Republicans -- could you enlighten me? Thanks! :hi:

[Doctor_J]

25. Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x737779

He "hopes that congress can work together"

[gateley]

45. Thanks - although "absolving" is a jump from banging the

bipartisan drum. He always has to say that, but plenty of Senators and Congresspeople ARE pointing the finger.

He IS the POTUS of ALL the people, so he can't just say "We're not playing with the Republicans anymore" even if that's what he's trying achieve behind the scenes.

You shouldn't take his statements at face value, as a rule. Remember his audience is more than just us.

[SpiralHawk]

16. Yet more evidence: Republicons screwed America's economic pooch

Ptoooey.

[CJCRANE]

18. American Samizdat...

It's time for the people to do the job that the media refuses to do.

[tsuki]

28. Republicon talking point...3...2..1...

S&P is part of the VAST left-wing liberal conspiracy. Ignore them.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mmonk]

32. It really doesn't matter, but where we are going from here.

Screwing over the defenseless should not be an option.

[True Earthling]

34. The S&P is NOT placing blame on the Republicans

This was also on page 4...

"Standard & Poor's takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue
measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate
for putting the U.S.'s finances on a sustainable footing."

[titaniumsalute]

35. right...but it it blatantly say that more deficit reduction isn't available

because the Republicans refusal to raise revenues.

[True Earthling]

40. No - it doesn't say that...

It says that they changed their assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire due to the recent Debt ceiling agreement.

[titaniumsalute]

48. It does say that

But the point is that their assumption changed because Republicans have shown that they are NOT willing to raise revenue by not letting the Bush Tax cuts expire.

The point is that by not letting taxes go up (Bush tax cuts to expire) costs the country Trillions of dollars.

[Tx4obama]

36. Bull. See comments #3 and #4 and all the other excerpts on this thread.

They DID say it was the fault of the Republicans.

[True Earthling]

41. This statement was highlighted as the smoking gun...

"the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues,"

That is not placing blame.. they are stating a fact and pointing that out as their reason why they believe the Bush tax cuts won't expire.

[Tx4obama]

44. they revised their ' base case scenario' because of the REPUBLICANS.

"Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade."

---------

Yes the blame does lay at the feet of the Republicans.

[DTinAZ]

47. Our interpretation vs. dispassionate report language

"Yes the blame does lay at the feet of the Republicans"

Yes, we all know that, but I too disagree about that being what S&P actually meant. The report, which I've read over and over, simply describes the situation and various elements thereof, but does not actually "blame" one side or the other.

[bvar22]

37. Now, The Democratic Party leadership needs only take to the Bully Pulpit,

and cram it down their greedy little throats.
.
.
.
.
Don't hold your breath.
More than likely, the Republicans will be praised from the Pulpit for their "Good Ideas."

[Zax2me]

38. good.,

Finally, some sanity.

[grahamhgreen]

49. It's Obama who failed to do nothing, and let the Bush cuts expire.

[proud patriot]

50. Republicans are very upset by this BTW

on the facebook walls in which I battle the pukes I rub this in their face every chance I get .

They imediately go into name calling thus losing the argument .

[Scurrilous]

51. Kick

:kick: