- Joined
- Mar 15, 2005
- Messages
- 3,650
- Age
- 50
- Location
- Delawhere?
- Nation Banner
- Main Job
- Secondary Job
- Third Job
- Server
- Quetzalcoatl
- Linkshell
- PhoenixPimps
- FFXIV
- Raesvelg Helheim
So.
In case you've been living under a rock, and didn't know that you could save 15% on your car insurance in 15 minutes by switching to Geico, Standard & Poor's downgraded US sovereign debt on Friday, from AAA to AA+, with a threat to downgrade it further to AA if things get any worse.
In a way, it's odd that brinkmanship in governance has seemingly inspired brinkmanship in finance, but I could hardly say it's surprising.
Now.
What does this mean?
Means a lot of things, actually. Pretty much all those horror stories about what would happen if the US had a technical default revolved around a downgrade of the US debt rating; this has now come to pass. Mostly what it means is that it will get more expensive for the government to borrow money.
Which doesn't sound so horrible, and wouldn't be so horrible, save for the idiots we have running the country.
S&P came right out and said that the major reason they downgraded the debt was because of instability in the political process. Compared to other AAA debt ratees, our fiscal outlook isn't particularly bad; S&P actually gave us a better rating than the UK, who they did not downgrade.
The problem is that our two major political parties are so utterly beholden to their respective special interest groups that the possibility of significant cuts is only as remote as the possibility of significant revenue increases, ie raising taxes. The Democrats will burn in hell before they allow anyone to slash their entitlement programs the way they need to be cut, and the Republicans will evidently be more than happy to burn the capital down before they agree to something as minor as reinstating previous tax levels.
They get another chance next year to convince me otherwise, but on the whole... I'm not hopeful.
And it's pretty much been the final nail in the coffin that contains my opinion of Obama.
The man has not led.
And that's what the President is for. To lead. When the political parties are mired in mutual acrimony, the President's job is to castigate them into motion. To force them to act, and act in the nation's best interest, because the President doesn't represent a party, the President represents the people, and that is what seems to have been forgotten in that most esteemed office.
But no.
Thanks to the utter failure of a campaign finance system that we're saddled with, the President is beholden to his party, and must toe the party line, even when it's clear that the party is just as insane as the people it's opposing.
In case you've been living under a rock, and didn't know that you could save 15% on your car insurance in 15 minutes by switching to Geico, Standard & Poor's downgraded US sovereign debt on Friday, from AAA to AA+, with a threat to downgrade it further to AA if things get any worse.
In a way, it's odd that brinkmanship in governance has seemingly inspired brinkmanship in finance, but I could hardly say it's surprising.
Now.
What does this mean?
Means a lot of things, actually. Pretty much all those horror stories about what would happen if the US had a technical default revolved around a downgrade of the US debt rating; this has now come to pass. Mostly what it means is that it will get more expensive for the government to borrow money.
Which doesn't sound so horrible, and wouldn't be so horrible, save for the idiots we have running the country.
S&P came right out and said that the major reason they downgraded the debt was because of instability in the political process. Compared to other AAA debt ratees, our fiscal outlook isn't particularly bad; S&P actually gave us a better rating than the UK, who they did not downgrade.
The problem is that our two major political parties are so utterly beholden to their respective special interest groups that the possibility of significant cuts is only as remote as the possibility of significant revenue increases, ie raising taxes. The Democrats will burn in hell before they allow anyone to slash their entitlement programs the way they need to be cut, and the Republicans will evidently be more than happy to burn the capital down before they agree to something as minor as reinstating previous tax levels.
They get another chance next year to convince me otherwise, but on the whole... I'm not hopeful.
And it's pretty much been the final nail in the coffin that contains my opinion of Obama.
The man has not led.
And that's what the President is for. To lead. When the political parties are mired in mutual acrimony, the President's job is to castigate them into motion. To force them to act, and act in the nation's best interest, because the President doesn't represent a party, the President represents the people, and that is what seems to have been forgotten in that most esteemed office.
But no.
Thanks to the utter failure of a campaign finance system that we're saddled with, the President is beholden to his party, and must toe the party line, even when it's clear that the party is just as insane as the people it's opposing.
