Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-08-2011, 06:17 PM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-08-2011, 07:00 PM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Basically, everything that Peter said. Everything.

Request for Kleiman and Jim Pinkerton to talk about NIH.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.

Last edited by sugarkang; 08-08-2011 at 07:12 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-08-2011, 08:24 PM
bkjazfan bkjazfan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Los Angeles, Ca.
Posts: 1,192
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Data please for Mark's statement that private sector employment is getting better and the public is not.

My stats are dated but not reflective of his statement. From 2007 to 2009 private sector employment went from 115.4 million to 109.5. Public sector 22.2 million. to 22.5.

I would like these statements that are thrown around to have a modicum amount of empirical data to back them up.

So my question to Mark is how many of the 6 million private sector jobs lost have been recovered in the past 2 years? In '09 there was an uptick of public sector employment from '07 leading me to wonder when the rise in that area stopped and at what amount and how many have been lost? Anecdotal numbers about the Trenton police department is just that: anecdotal. Instead of talking about Trenton he could have mentioned Los Angeles where he teaches that has the 3rd highest unemployment rate among major metropolitan areas in the country exceeded only by Riverside and Detroit.

I am not asking for a la Mort Zuckerman figures,: U3, U6, labor force participation percentages, and the like, just numbers to show how the government is taking it on the chin now and the private sector isn't.

Last edited by bkjazfan; 08-08-2011 at 09:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-08-2011, 09:03 PM
Peter Twieg Peter Twieg is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 81
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Between the gratuitous references to the Koch brothers, Murdoch, and Citizens United, Kleinman has undoubtedly won the dubious honor of having the highest ratio of vacuous left-wing applause lines to actual honest/incisive analysis of any BhTV commentator on the debt ceiling issue.

Not a single reference to the popular consensus against further stimulus (except perhaps indirectly by insinuations of Murdoch-generated false consciousness.) Breezy dismissals of the debt problem with the assertion that default is impossible (really? We wouldn't default no matter what sort of inflation we would have to generate?) Just the usual insinuations that the whole "Tea Party downgrade" is the product of some insidious plot to ruin America in order to help the GOP win in 2012.

BhTV can do better than this.

Last edited by Peter Twieg; 08-08-2011 at 09:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-08-2011, 09:06 PM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Twieg View Post
Between the gratuitous references to the Koch brothers, Murdoch, and Citizens United, Kleinman has undoubtedly won the dubious honor of having the highest ratio of left-wing talking points to actual honest/incisive analysis of any BhTV commentator on the debt ceiling issue.
Well, they agreed on just about everything else. Let's not forget the big picture.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-08-2011, 09:38 PM
Jyminee Jyminee is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 105
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

"Nearly 100,000 local government employees have lost their jobs so far this year, and 464,000 have found themselves jobless since local government employment peaked in September 2008. Meanwhile, private sector employers, who cut jobs at a more rapid pace earlier in the recovery, have slowly added jobs. Since March 2010, when private sector employment rose for the first time in more than two years, private employers have added about two million employees to their payrolls."

http://money.usnews.com/money/career...eaten-recovery
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-08-2011, 11:30 PM
Tara Davis Tara Davis is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 193
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

If the S&P did not downgrade the debt, would Mark be on Bloggingheads calling for the S&P to be "regulated out of existance"? The DNC talking points reek of "working the ref."

Yes, you can always avoid default by printing money and trashing your own currency... but if you do that how much are your bonds worth as investments? You have a lead-pipe guarantee to get dollars back which may be worthless by the time you get them. Woop-de-fucking-doo.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-08-2011, 11:34 PM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tara Davis View Post
If the S&P did not downgrade the debt, would Mark be on Bloggingheads calling for the S&P to be "regulated out of existance"? The DNC talking points reek of "working the ref."

Yes, you can always avoid default by printing money and trashing your own currency... but if you do that how much are your bonds worth as investments? You have a lead-pipe guarantee to get dollars back which may be worthless by the time you get them. Woop-de-fucking-doo.
Debasing currency is a problem. So is this unemployment. Do you think we should just ride it out?
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-08-2011, 11:41 PM
whburgess whburgess is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,202
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
Well, they agreed on just about everything else. Let's not forget the big picture.
I don't think they disagreed on anything, including that the real problem with America is Murdoch, Fox News, and the Koch Brothers. As well as that the Tea Party are "jihadis".

This sort of nonsense is getting so routine from the left, I almost fell asleep.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-08-2011, 11:53 PM
whburgess whburgess is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,202
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
Debasing currency is a problem. So is this unemployment. Do you think we should just ride it out?

I'm sort of open to this lefty idea. Although I feel kind of dirty even admitting this.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-09-2011, 12:45 AM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Twieg View Post
Between the gratuitous references to the Koch brothers, Murdoch, and Citizens United, Kleinman has undoubtedly won the dubious honor of having the highest ratio of vacuous left-wing applause lines to actual honest/incisive analysis of any BhTV commentator on the debt ceiling issue.
Quoted for truth.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-09-2011, 12:46 AM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by whburgess View Post
I don't think they disagreed on anything, including that the real problem with America is Murdoch, Fox News, and the Koch Brothers. As well as that the Tea Party are "jihadis".
Yes. At this rate they will begin to own the moniker "Stupid Party" in addition to the Evil Party.

I call on the left to take quick action before you reach the stage of pounding your spoons on a table and screaming at us.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-09-2011, 12:47 AM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tara Davis View Post
If the S&P did not downgrade the debt, would Mark be on Bloggingheads calling for the S&P to be "regulated out of existance"? The DNC talking points reek of "working the ref."
No kidding. You kind of know who FEELS slightly responsible for this by who is furious at S&P. If this is a "Tea Party Downgrade", why be mad at S&P for it?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-09-2011, 12:51 AM
Parallax Parallax is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 219
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Wow, I am amazed how bad this diavlog was. Kleiman calls congressmen 'bomb throwers' and the S&P downgrade is now the 'tea party downgrade'. Dude tone your political rhetoric a little bit if I wanted to get this kind of one sided crap I would still own a TV, OK?

I don't agree with tea party's economics but they represent a large section of population and they were elected on a mandate to limit the government. One may argue that cutting spending is bad policy but the freedoms we have is exactly for doing things that are bad for us.

Blaming the downgrade on tea party is disingenuous. As a matter of fact anything that was cut was b/c of the pressure from the congress. If I recall correctly 6 months ago the president asked for a 'clean debt ceiling' meaning that there would be no cuts. At least the 'bomb throwers' cut 2.5 trillion out of the 4 trillion S&P was asking for!

This is a democracy and Democrats (pun intended?) should realize that the debt ceiling debacle happened because they lost the 2010 election not because GOP is evil. And it was Obama's political incompetence that lost that election. So stop blaming the other side and try not to repeat the same mistakes next time.

And about the growth ideas. All of them sounded small, non-effective and impossible in the current political climate. If we are proposing impossible to enact ideas, here are mine: The Fed starts QE-3 by buying 10-Yr treasuries at a rate of 200 billion dollars per month until the unemployment is less than 7%.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-09-2011, 12:57 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by whburgess View Post
I don't think they disagreed on anything, including that the real problem with America is Murdoch, Fox News, and the Koch Brothers. As well as that the Tea Party are "jihadis".
I disagree about this interpretation, though I admit it's the more plausible one on its face. I actually got the sense that Peter was trying to avoid having an argument. Everybody knows that the left is super pissed.

They would've been really mad if the original $4 trillion Obama deal went through, too. Peter acknowledged that we got downgraded because we (or the Tea party) didn't cut enough. If you rewatch the early portion of the diavlog, I got the sense that Mark and Peter were sorta talking past each other. It's amazing how much the left will not bother to just read the actual fucking S&P report.

I say you rewatch it and see if you don't reinterpret it my way. Notice Kleiman saying, "We should do a bunch of X." Then Peter goes, "Yeah, that would work 100%, except." Basically, he's saying Mark's ideas wouldn't work in real life. Peter gets the bonus of not having to start a fight by disagreeing with him. And this is why my first post above says, "I agree with Peter."

Quote:
Originally Posted by whburgess View Post
I'm sort of open to this lefty idea. Although I feel kind of dirty even admitting this.
LOL. I tend to have an abstract concept of wealth, as I'm loathe to just measure it in nominal dollar terms. I also get why inflation hawks hate inflation. Though, I think we have to be open to other ideas. Back when welfare mothers existed, it was sort of easy to say, "Get a job you lazy bum!" Right now, there are some 3 job applicants for every 1 job opening (I think?). These aren't people out of work because they're lazy. And this is when my inner socialism sort of kicks in.

You know what I'd really like to see? I want to settle this stupid Keynes vs. Hayek debate once and for all. I'd like to pass some gigantic Krugman fantasy stimulus. In return, Democrats sign a pledge to STFU about it forever if it doesn't work. Then, have a long term austerity plan, whether stimulus works or not.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.

Last edited by sugarkang; 08-09-2011 at 01:16 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-09-2011, 01:22 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
Debasing currency is a problem. So is this unemployment. Do you think we should just ride it out?
Would riding it out result in anything worse than what is happening now? We've stimulated and poked around with this economy so much now that we actually have no idea what works or if anything works. Is anyone keeping track of all of this???
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-09-2011, 02:13 AM
whburgess whburgess is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,202
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
I say you rewatch it and see if you don't reinterpret it my way. Notice Kleiman saying, "We should do a bunch of X." Then Peter goes, "Yeah, that would work 100%, except." Basically, he's saying Mark's ideas wouldn't work in real life. Peter gets the bonus of not having to start a fight by disagreeing with him. And this is why my first post above says, "I agree with Peter."
I see what you're saying and even entertained that interpretation myself throughout the conversation.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-09-2011, 06:04 AM
Sulla the Dictator Sulla the Dictator is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,364
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

S&P says: "Since President Obama took office in January 2009, the United States has embarked on the most ambitious failed experiment in Washington meddling in US history. Huge increases in government spending, massive federal bailouts, growing regulations on businesses, thinly veiled protectionism, and the launch of a vastly expensive and deeply unpopular health care reform plan, have all combined to instill fear and uncertainty in the markets."

I haven't heard anyone on the Left respond to that. If the S&P discuss Republicans unwilling to increase taxes, they can't ignore S&P's comments about Democrats and spending.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-09-2011, 06:13 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator View Post
S&P says: "Since President Obama took office in January 2009, the United States has embarked on the most ambitious failed experiment in Washington meddling in US history. Huge increases in government spending, massive federal bailouts, growing regulations on businesses, thinly veiled protectionism, and the launch of a vastly expensive and deeply unpopular health care reform plan, have all combined to instill fear and uncertainty in the markets."
Well, I disagree with some of this, but the one thing that I do agree about -- that drives me absolutely insane -- is the protectionism. Though, I think free trade is unpopular in both parties, if I'm not mistaken.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-09-2011, 06:59 AM
Florian Florian is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,118
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallax View Post
Wow, I am amazed how bad this diavlog was. Kleiman calls congressmen 'bomb throwers' and the S&P downgrade is now the 'tea party downgrade'. Dude tone your political rhetoric a little bit if I wanted to get this kind of one sided crap I would still own a TV, OK?
When one of two parties announces that it is willing to see the US default on its debt, who exactly should bear the blame for the S&P downgrade?

It is irrational, or at least unprecedented, for the United States to renege on its debt obligations, i.e. on legal obligations incurred by previous Congresses. I find it difficult to believe that so many Congressmen--so many lawyers, so many intelligent men and women---are unaware of this fact. So I think Mark Kleinman must be right: Only the Tea Party, Koch kooks, and glibertarians can be held responsible for the downgrade. Otherwise, I will have to believe, as I am tempted often to do, that the United States is governed by morons.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-09-2011, 07:50 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian View Post
When one of two parties announces that it is willing to see the US default on its debt, who exactly should bear the blame for the S&P downgrade?
Did you read the original S&P report? We got downgraded because we didn't cut enough. That means the fault for political impasse was caused by Democrats as much as the GOP. Probably more so.

The only other way to look at is if the GOP had taken Obama's original $4 trillion plan. That might have saved the US credit rating. Either way, we were going to get downgraded if we let the Dems (except Obama) have their way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
Would riding it out result in anything worse than what is happening now? We've stimulated and poked around with this economy so much now that we actually have no idea what works or if anything works. Is anyone keeping track of all of this???
Ezra is on the left. He's even admitted that the first stimulus sucked because nothing was shovel ready. I dunno. I suppose JimM can give us the right wing view (I'm guessing Chicago's Booth School, am I right?).
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.

Last edited by sugarkang; 08-09-2011 at 07:59 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-09-2011, 08:13 AM
Florian Florian is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,118
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
Did you read the original S&P report? We got downgraded because we didn't cut enough. That means the political impasse was caused by Democrats.

The only other way to look at is if the GOP had taken Obama's original $4 trillion plan. That might have saved the US credit rating. Either way, we were going to get downgraded if we let the Dems (except Obama) have their way.
I don't believe that. If total debt were the only criterion for this catastrophic decision (just look at how stock markets have reacted!), S&P would have to downgrade several European countries as well (and maybe they will: Wall Street would just love to destroy the euro). The US debt burden in relation to GDP isn't that outrageous, although it is now likely to get worse, perhaps as a direct consequence of this downgrade. The US has no difficulty financing its debt. Look at the yields on bonds. They are at historic lows. Indeed the stockmarket panic has driven them down even further.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-09-2011, 08:31 AM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
Peter acknowledged that we got downgraded because we (or the Tea party) didn't cut enough.
Here's what the S&P report actually said. The part you keep omitting is in bold:

Quote:
We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the
prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related
fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the
growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an
agreement on raising revenues
is less likely than we previously assumed and
will remain a contentious and fitful process.
Why do you keep leaving that part out and keep claiming that the downgrade was only because we didn't cut enough?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-09-2011, 08:51 AM
Rathertired Rathertired is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 24
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Um, no. S&P didn't say that. A Google search reveals those to be the words - the exact words - of frequent Fox News commentator Niles Gardiner. If you mean to imply that that's a direct quote from S&P, you're lying (perhaps people are actually ignorant enough to believe they would say that; if you mean to imply that it's your own summary conclusion (and you put it in quotes to show what they were basically saying), you're a plagiarist.

Here's a link to the blog you ripped off:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...ment-disaster/

It's also a false and silly sentiment (the bailouts come to mind for starters, etc.), but I've wasted enough time.

Last edited by Rathertired; 08-09-2011 at 09:02 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-09-2011, 09:01 AM
Ocean Ocean is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: US Northeast
Posts: 6,784
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian View Post
I don't believe that. If total debt were the only criterion for this catastrophic decision (just look at how stock markets have reacted!), S&P would have to downgrade several European countries as well (and maybe they will: Wall Street would just love to destroy the euro). The US debt burden in relation to GDP isn't that outrageous, although it is now likely to get worse, perhaps as a direct consequence of this downgrade. The US has no difficulty financing its debt. Look at the yields on bonds. They are at historic lows. Indeed the stockmarket panic has driven them down even further.
Please note this comment.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-09-2011, 09:06 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
Why do you keep leaving that part out and keep claiming that the downgrade was only because we didn't cut enough?
You need to rename your group to Gang of Selective Reading. Original S&P Report. I wish everyone else would stop linking to opinion garbage.

Quote:
We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.
It looks like the Tea Party did you a favor. Now, you can point the blame elsewhere for your unbelievable irresponsibility. The only person in your entire party who seems to be an adult? President Obama himself.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.

Last edited by sugarkang; 08-09-2011 at 09:10 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-09-2011, 09:30 AM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
You need to rename your group to Gang of Selective Reading. Original S&P Report. I wish everyone else would stop linking to opinion garbage.
That doesn't at all contradict what was said- the downgrade was not because of the size of the cuts or lack thereof. It was because the process made S&P believe that any future agreement on cutting spending AND/OR raising revenue was going to be impossible. And the magnitude of debt reduction was not enough. Again, the magnitude of debt reduction is a function of both revenue and spending. "not cut enough" is only partially correct, and I don't know why you insist on focusing only on spending and not on revenue. I know you're in favor of revenue, which makes me think this is just to be counter to what most dems are saying.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-09-2011, 09:32 AM
Romanized Romanized is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 75
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian View Post
When one of two parties announces that it is willing to see the US default on its debt, who exactly should bear the blame for the S&P downgrade?
This is nonsense. Obama was the only one who could have brought about default (and in that event, he should have been impeached). I could care less what S&P says. This was a good fight to have. I just hope we don't wimp out the next one.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-09-2011, 09:47 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post

Ezra is on the left. He's even admitted that the first stimulus sucked because nothing was shovel ready. I dunno. I suppose JimM can give us the right wing view (I'm guessing Chicago's Booth School, am I right?).
I'm guessing George Mason
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-09-2011, 09:51 AM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by miceelf View Post
Again, the magnitude of debt reduction is a function of both revenue and spending. "not cut enough" is only partially correct, and I don't know why you insist on focusing only on spending and not on revenue.
Heh.

I suspect you know more than you are letting on.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-09-2011, 09:54 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sulla the Dictator View Post
S&P says: "Since President Obama took office in January 2009, the United States has embarked on the most ambitious failed experiment in Washington meddling in US history. Huge increases in government spending, massive federal bailouts, growing regulations on businesses, thinly veiled protectionism, and the launch of a vastly expensive and deeply unpopular health care reform plan, have all combined to instill fear and uncertainty in the markets."

I haven't heard anyone on the Left respond to that. If the S&P discuss Republicans unwilling to increase taxes, they can't ignore S&P's comments about Democrats and spending.
Did the S&P really say that? when? where? It doesn't seem true to form that they would voice their opinions that way:

here's one thing a spokesman for S&P said:
Quote:
The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan (falls) short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilise the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith

Last edited by badhatharry; 08-09-2011 at 12:17 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:06 AM
badhatharry badhatharry is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern sierra
Posts: 5,413
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
You need to rename your group to Gang of Selective Reading. Original S&P Report. I wish everyone else would stop linking to opinion garbage.
Thanks for posting that.

I still think S&P sucks. I wish they'd started being scrupulous ten years ago. assholes.
__________________
"By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." Adam Smith
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:06 AM
Diane1976 Diane1976 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 333
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
Did you read the original S&P report? We got downgraded because we didn't cut enough. That means the fault for political impasse was caused by Democrats as much as the GOP. Probably more so.

The only other way to look at is if the GOP had taken Obama's original $4 trillion plan. That might have saved the US credit rating. Either way, we were going to get downgraded if we let the Dems (except Obama) have their way.



Ezra is on the left. He's even admitted that the first stimulus sucked because nothing was shovel ready. I dunno. I suppose JimM can give us the right wing view (I'm guessing Chicago's Booth School, am I right?).
How can agencies like S&P be taken seriously? The diavloggers aren't the only ones who have said their phony ratings were a cause of the financial crisis, although I haven't heard before that they actually, in effect, sold ratings, as was said in this diavlog. I must say that surprised me. The diavloggers said they should be regulated out of business, as they were regulated into business in the first place. Effectively selling their ratings so people would think investments were safer than they were sounds like a criminal act to me. Why aren't some of these people in prison with Madoff if this is true?
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:07 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by miceelf View Post
Again, the magnitude of debt reduction is a function of both revenue and spending. "not cut enough" is only partially correct, and I don't know why you insist on focusing only on spending and not on revenue.
You know and I know that I've been saying Obama has been reasonable the whole time, right?
You know and I know that ideally, I'd like to have a true Keynesian plan. But we can't have that because Dems don't actually fight for it. Right?
You know that I'm a barometer for Obama's re-election, right?
Presidents are won with independents and I'm pretty Obama friendly. If you lose me, I can pretty much guarantee that Obama will not win the generals.

Quote:
I know you're in favor of revenue, which makes me think this is just to be counter to what most dems are saying.
Bingo. So, why did you make me say the above paragraph? And why don't you help me to get them to stop being so frickin delusional?
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:17 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diane1976 View Post
How can agencies like S&P be taken seriously?
I think you're referring to the housing debacle? I completely agree with that. I believe that was comprehensively covered between Glenn Loury and Ross Levine. I read Levine's paper, too.

The short answer is that you don't have to. Krugman isn't. But you should know that Egan-Jones downgraded our debt a few weeks ago. They said that their downgrade had everything to do with our debt and nothing to do with the debt ceiling. Though, nobody cares about them because they aren't in the Big Three. You don't have to listen to them, either.

Quote:
The diavloggers said they should be regulated out of business, as they were regulated into business in the first place.
Umm. These regulations were put in to protect the consumer. The regulations say that assets must be rated by the ratings agencies. You know, this is what those annoying libertarians hate. The problem begins when people feel outraged and the public demands, "someone should do something about this!" That's when all the trouble starts. If you look for a hero, a hero will emerge. If you look for a prophet, a prophet will emerge.

Quote:
Effectively selling their ratings so people would think investments were safer than they were sounds like a criminal act to me. Why aren't some of these people in prison with Madoff if this is true?
It's precisely not criminal. There were some conflicts of interest. However, the regulations gave the ratings agencies a government monopoly while not thoroughly regulating how the agencies gave out ratings. In other words, all their wrongdoing was OK'ed by the government. Thanks government!
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:19 AM
Peter Twieg Peter Twieg is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 81
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Of course, one could easily point to the fact that failing to raise the debt ceiling would not necessarily have lead the government to fail to pay bondholders (and arguably via the 14th amendment it couldn't), and if it had this would've been a discretionary decision by Obama... so why would it be called the Tea Party downgrade in that case? Obviously the joint worry was that both the debt ceiling wouldn't be raised AND that this would lead the government to not pay bondholders in full, not simply the former.

And even so, if the fight was just about the debt ceiling, then the debt ceiling being raised would mean that there's no more reason to downgrade. Instead, the given reason is some combination of political breakdown and a growing debt-to-GDP ratio. And blaming the Tea Party for the former is the usual banal "the problem with politics is that my political opponents don't do what I want" tripe that will never be taken very seriously when it comes to assigning political blameworthiness for a poor status quo.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:32 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian View Post
The US debt burden in relation to GDP isn't that outrageous,
Not yet. But how outrageous does one need to get before doing something? A little outrageous, medium outrageous or super-sized?

Quote:
The US has no difficulty financing its debt.
Not yet.

Look, I've always supported Keynesianism if Dems could put out a credible plan. It's because they never have that I am forced to support cuts. I'd like Ron Paul to become president and I send him support money, but I know in the end I'll have to vote for Obama. Same shit.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:34 AM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by badhatharry View Post
Thanks for posting that.

I still think S&P sucks. I wish they'd started being scrupulous ten years ago. assholes.
As part of my mid-year resolution to be more agreeable, I am going to try to highlight things you say that I agree with. This is one of them.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:35 AM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarkang View Post
Bingo. So, why did you make me say the above paragraph? And why don't you help me to get them to stop being so frickin delusional?
I suspect we are taking different tacks to prioritizing the crazy.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-09-2011, 10:40 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Downgrade (Mark Kleiman & Peter Cohan)

Quote:
Originally Posted by miceelf View Post
As part of my mid-year resolution to be more agreeable, I am going to try to highlight things you say that I agree with. This is one of them.

Cheers.
You're a good guy. I apologize in advance for all the times I'm going to be a dick to you. I promise you, it's coming. But those will be short term spats. I just want you to know that I'll never lose sight of the fact that you're a decent man, overall.
__________________
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.