Comments:Standard & Poor's lowers the U.S. credit outlook to 'negative'

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Comments on this page were originally made using the LiquidThreads extension, which is no longer supported. It has since been exported to wikitext, but the export process was not perfect so comments may appear slightly oddly.

Start a new discussion

And people want to keep cutting taxes?

Maybe I'm, you know, missing something, but it seems to me that if we keep lowering taxes (and allowing insane tax cuts for the obscenely rich) we, you know, won't have any money to spend?

Saying "spend less" is all well and good but there's only so much spending you can cut before you start to, I don't know, screw over public schooling... Samarium (talk) 17:28, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that the people who want to cut taxes can afford to stuff the pockets of politicians, take out full-page newspaper adverts, and run slick marketing campaigns that "taxes mean businesses can't afford to employ people".

If you're old enough, you'll remember Reagan's 'trickle-down economics'; what trickles down isn't money ;) Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:54, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

The dark side of capitalism... the capital. Samarium (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

And we are but Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists. Brian McNeil / ^talk 21:13, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

you are dead on. These cash hungry people in DC will continue to cut taxes even if the whole nation has to be screwed overt to do it. 99.13.118.232 (talk) 21:44, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how you can call them "cash-hungry" if they're cutting taxes... that's like calling Gandhi "a glutton" while on his hunger strike. 24.159.24.36 (talk) 00:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

As with everyone else posting so far, I wanna say you've pretty much got the right of it. I want to add that military spending takes a disproportionate amount of our budget and if any of the people in power REALLY wanted to make a dent in our budget deficit, they could likely do so by taking a fine-tooth comb over all our military expenditures and, just by reducing waste, probably come up with quite a bit of money.

It is just evil that the country is in the state it is in, that this state of affairs originated a long time ago and will likely keep getting worse and worse until our kids or grandkids get screwed by it. 72.224.139.165 (talk) 22:23, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I like taxes. With them I buy civilization.

That means roads, healthcare, libraries, education, and a whole host of other things.

I think the most idiotic report I've seen recently was one with redtop-style headlines that 90% of people 'blow most of their monthly income in the first week of getting it". Duh. That's when your rent, utility bills, and every other expense, goes out your bank account. What would be more interesting than chastising the entire western world for mismanaging their money to sell some financial service, would be calculating what percentage of income was genuinely discretionary spending.

The money trick is a thing of wonder - until it is your pension fund invested in an Enron and a stroke of a pen destroys the imaginary money you're supposed to live on in retirement. Brian McNeil / ^talk 22:45, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

"screw over public schooling"

lol, you can't break something that's already broken... 98.250.168.229 (talk) 06:40, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

S&P does not have crediblity

While I agree with the point that our spending has been out of control, note that this is the same S&P that was rating subprime mortgages as AAA back in 2006. Why is S&P considered a credible source of ratings by wikinews? 173.59.82.182 (talk) 05:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

You are right. S&P is one of the main credit rating agencies. We will see what the others do. (But they were all rating subprime mortgages as AAA back in 2006.) Mattisse (talk) 11:40, 22 April 2011 (UTC)