Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 518 posts

Re: United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

#411

Post by digikata »

geuis wrote: post #108
prostoalex wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What constitutes defense spending nowadays? Is it largely salary payments to current troops? Wouldn't we have to deal with a large unemployment problem in case we laid off a bunch of military employees and told them to go find a job somewhere else? Or is it payment to defense contractors, such as Valley's own Lockheed Martin? Wouldn't this cause a large number of people to be unemployed, contributing to recession?

Is it the government's job to keep people employed for the sake of employing them? No! There are times in history where government spending can help , like during the Great Depression. The government spent a lot of money on public works projects to help put some people back to work. But this didn't do much to actually end the depression. It was the onset of WWII and the subsequent ramp-up to a war economy that really…

I would mention that the US is still getting value out of many projects that were performed during the Great Depression.

Re: United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

#412

Post by stcredzero »

forgottenpaswrd wrote: post #355
redthrowaway wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only problem with slashing military spending and ending foreign interventions is that it has been just that spending, and those interventions, that have made the US the economic powerhouse it is today. The US has a history, stretching back well over a century, of launching military campaigns to support corporate interests. Be it South America, the Middle East, or Asia, the US has invaded countries and toppled gov…

"The US is rich for the same reason Rome, England, and Spain were" Not really, have you been in England, Rome or Spain? Rome legionaries were used to make roads and bridges and mining 90%of their time. If I show you the extensions of the land they "washed" to get mineral you won't believe it(you can see it using google earth, e.g in the north of spain, look for grooves around mountains). England made itself rich beca…

Thomas Jefferson and other of the US founding fathers thought a permanent military and central banking would ruin the country because military people do nothing while things work at it should they need to create new enemies so they can justify their existence.

The rise of a professional military is often cited in as a major factor in the decline of the Roman Empire. Military Conquest drove economic gain, which provided wealth, which in turn motivated greed and more conquest.

Nowadays, we don't need conquest so much as the economic activity motivated by a military, but the same cycle is there, minus the emphasis on holding territories.

It's curious to think about: The reason a state needs particular access to petroleum, is to support a large mechanized military of the kind first realized on a huge scale in WWII. This petroleum resource now creates a US dependence on other nations, which in turn justifies a large military. While a lot of other things we do need oil, there are alternatives which could offset a lot of those needs. None of those is viable for a mechanized military, however.

Re: United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

#413

Post by Duff »

jimbokun wrote: post #380
Duff wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The string-pullers behind the conservative "movement" see the Evangelical Christians for what they are -- a bunch of easily fooled suckers. (Especially the non-denominational types) They are insecure, fearful people who respond to the crazy message that's being sold. One of the big motivations behind the pushing of non-denominational, stupid christianity as you get these large flocks of people attracted to the person…

The problem is, the inmates took over the asylum. It seems that the string pullers have been pushed aside and the suckers are now in charge.

Not necessarily. The traditional conservative nutjob string pullers are people who own natural resources. They are getting very rich right now -- and that's about all they care about.

The traditional patrician Republicans are getting owned.

Re: United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

#414

Post by stcredzero »

redthrowaway wrote: post #315
jaredmck wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the primary reason the US is rich due to being located far from the battlefields in WW1&2, and after each of these wars an influx of immigration out of Europe into the newly stimulated American industrial economy? We've essentially been riding the demographic wave up the hill since, and yet few in govt/media seem to really take this into account when planning for long-term spending and economic projections. Som…

That's been important, but it's not the only factor. Yes, intactness of American industry after WWI&II was key. It certainly gave the US a big leg up in post-war industry and rebuilding. Imigration was a huge driver of the economy when it came primarily from Europe, and professionals were over-represented. Demographics can't be ignored, but neither can they tell the whole picture. I'm not trying to insinuate that the…

As such, the commonly-held libertarian view that an end to military adventurism will be a boon for the US economy strikes me as naive.

Driving economic activity by having the military act as a major consumer is really just running on a treadmill. We need to find an outlet which will lead to increases in economic activity. There is a huge investment hurdle involved, but space exploration and colonization could fit the bill. Once there is a significant human presence in space beyond low earth orbit, there will be tremendous economic growth. The major problem is that hundreds of billions of dollars of investment would be required to jump start it.

Re: United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

#416

Post by william42 »

cookiecaper wrote: post #373
dreamdu5t wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The war on drugs is only 0.5% (approx. $18 billion) of the Federal budget (approx. $3,456 billion), so it's inconsequential to our debt crisis. I whole heartedly agree that drug prohibition should be repealed, and that we need to put an end to the war on (some) drugs. But, the military, social security, and medicare comprise approx. 70% of the budget, so it's really not going to help us solve the debt.

Prisons are primarily a state-level expense. You don't get sent to federal prison for possession.

A good part of the federal debt from the stimulus and such is to keep state governments from collapsing due to the fact that they can't run a deficit.

Re: United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

#417

Post by marcamillion »

pacomerh wrote: post #335
marcamillion wrote: post #294

WOW....talk about CAJONES! I must tip my hat to S&P. This one...just WOW. I mean, I am not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch of the imagination, but I just never imagined that they would be able to pull the trigger. All it takes is some 'investigation' by the US Treasury into S&P and that's it....game over. Not that I think the US Treasury will retaliate....but WOW. I never thought they would take this step. Good…

It's Cojones. Cajones means drawers.

Sorry....my bad.

Re: United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

#418

Post by rmc »

payattention wrote: post #344
geuis wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. I have no refutations to any of your comments. I know exactly what you mean. One interesting thing about your first statement, "At the end of the Cold War, other conservatives were making the same noises that you're making now". A few years ago I had the opportunity to hear Francis Fukuyama speak. He was the author of The End of History and a later follow up book. I never knew it before then, but he was one o…

Those horrible evangelicals and ... some other conservatives. Fukuyama chose a safe target. (Or not. I didn't listen to the speech.) "Time magazine's Joe Klein has suggested it is legitimate to look at the religion of neoconservatives. He does not say there was a conspiracy but says there is a case to be made for disproportionate influence of Jewish neoconservative figures in US foreign policy, and that several of th…

I know I'm invoking Godwin's Law here, but wasn't "The Jews pushed Germany to WW1 and broke the economy" one of Hitler's excuses/propaganda peices? What's the difference between this argument and hitler's?

Re: United States loses AAA credit rating from S&P

#419

Post by notatoad »

rwmj wrote: post #357
pyre wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not enough people would though. They would flock to the other candidate that would inevitably reassure them that everything was going to be ok. Heaven forbid that people should vote by thinking about the issues rather than just digestion a handful of sound-bites.

Well why don't you educate other voters on this issue? Knock on doors and canvass, even just print up flyers and push them through letterboxes.

it is human nature to support ideas that make you happy. nobody wants to be told that their country's economic system is failing. people love to be told that everything is peachy and they have nothing to worry about. attempting to educate people about a gloomy topic is just going to make them dislike you as well.
Post reply on HN