The U.S. Credit Rating Downgrade: What It Means for You

Posted

You’ve probably heard the news already—our country’s credit rating just took a dive.

On Friday evening, Standard & Poor’s, one of the world’s three major credit rating agencies, dealt a major blow to the United States’ financial psyche by announcing that it has downgraded the country’s credit rating from AAA to AA+. This marks the first time in history that the U.S. has lost its top-ranked credit rating from one of the major agencies.

The U.S. moves from the company of other AAA countries like Australia, Canada, France, Singapore and Germany to the company of the two AA+ countries, Belgium and New Zealand. The world is reeling with varied reactions to this news, as analysts try to predict what this will mean for the domestic and global economies.  Is this media hype or true disaster? Can we fix the situation and earn our AAA score back? And what does this mean for the average American?

We cut through the noise to bring you the cheat sheet on the credit rating downgrade, the various viewpoints on the downgrade itself, its potential effects—and what it means for you.

What Happened—In a Snapshot

As we reported in our story last week summarizing the debt ceiling deal, governments receive credit rating scores that investors use to analyze credit-worthiness. These credit scores are determined by three major international credit reporting agencies: Moody’s, Fitch and Standard & Poor’s.

After the debt ceiling deal was struck, Moody’s and Fitch maintained their AAA scores for the U.S. (although Moody’s downgraded the U.S. credit outlook to “negative”). S&P, on the other hand, decided on Friday to downgrade the U.S.’s credit rating to AA+. For the first time in history, America lost its unanimous AAA rating across all three agencies. On a side note, however, China’s leading credit agency Dagong Global Credit Rating Co. stripped America, Britain, Germany and France of their AAA ratings last July, accusing the top three agencies of Western bias, and giving greater weight to “wealth creating capacity.”

Two Key Points About the Downgrade:

  • At first, S&P made a numerical error in a draft report, overstating the deficit by $2 trillion. When the error was brought to its attention, S&P stuck to its decision to downgrade the U.S. credit rating.
  • S&P cited politics as a key reason for the downgrade: A representative stated that the government’s “political brinkmanship” in the debt debate made its ability to manage its finances “less stable, less effective and less predictable.”

Critics of the Downgrade:

U.S. Treasury reps and Obama administration officials call this decision “hasty” and “amateur,” based on the huge accounting error. “A judgment flawed by a $2 trillion error speaks for itself,” a Treasury spokesman said Friday night. Additionally, some critics call this downgrade “hypocritical,” since S&P largely contributed to the real estate crash and the recession, greatly overvaluing real estate assets—but now holds the U.S. government responsible for the fallout. Others point out that S&P wields tremendous power but isn’t accountable for its actions, since its officials aren’t elected.

Proponents of the Downgrade:

S&P says it has been issuing warnings for months now—it put the U.S. credit rating on negative watch back in April. Accounting error aside, S&P holds that the government’s new plan didn’t include $4 trillion in cuts, which the agency deems necessary to reduce the country’s debt over the next decade. As for the politics, S&P emphasizes its lack of confidence in our bipartisan government’s ability to get past bickering to construct a successful plan to get us out of the debt mess, and many pundits agree. It’s like determining credit-worthiness for a couple, rather than an individual—and one that fights constantly and can’t agree on a plan.

Bottom Line:

Regardless of the validity of this rating, most agree that our budget needs fixing. And since the budget is about both numbers and process, the parties need to stop the infighting and come together to craft a solid path toward economic recovery.

What This Means for the U.S. and Global Economies

The U.S.’s AAA rating has made the U.S. Treasury bond one of the world’s safest investments, and has allowed the U.S. to borrow at extraordinarily low interest rates to finance our government operations—what will happen now?

We’ll Be Fine:

Some believe the downgrade is more of a symbolic than an economic event, and the market response will be muted, due to the U.S.’s relative standing in the world. While the U.S. market opened low today, and international markets have taken some dips, not everyone is flocking to sell their U.S. Treasury bonds–in contrast to dire predictions from some analysts. David Beers, the S&P global head of sovereign ratings, told Fox News that he didn’t expect interest rates to spike. Others are quick to remind that countries such as Japan, Canada and Australia have shrugged off downgrades with minimal effect, and five countries (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland and Sweden) have regained their AAA status after losing it—certainly a possibility for the U.S. (though it may be a while–history shows it takes from nine to 18 years). Among other countries that are confident in the United States’ financial future? Australia and France, who point out that the U.S. economy is still “one of the most powerful in the world.”

We Won’t Be Fine:

This morning, the Dow posted its biggest weekly point loss since the financial crisis in 2008, falling 5.8%. Some analysts say that interest rates will certainly rise, which will increase borrowing costs for the U.S. government, costing taxpayers tens of billions of dollars a year. Interest rates would rise for consumers and companies seeking mortgages, credit cards and loans—so everyone would feel this hit. And many other types of bonds are linked to the national credit rating: municipalities, states, hospital bonds. Additionally, some speculate that if progress isn’t made by Congress, Moody’s may also lower its U.S. credit rating to AA in the next six months to a year, further validating the country’s credit downgrade. More importantly, the U.S.’s reputation as a world economic superpower has been tarnished, the consequences of which could be long term and far-reaching. China, the U.S.’s largest single creditor, has been especially critical of the U.S. in reacting to the downgrade, its officials stating: “To cure its addiction to debts, the United States has to re-establish the common sense principle that one should live within its means.” Ouch.

Bottom Line:

Although there will be immediate reverberations, we probably won’t really know the full effects of the downgrade for months. 

What This Means for You

  • First and foremost, don’t panic. Don’t do anything rash like dump your stocks or bonds.
  • Hang on tight to your investments—remember, we always recommend investing for the long haul (or doing as Warren Buffett does, which is investing like a girl). Markets usually stabilize themselves over the long term.
  • Be a voice: Write or call your representatives to express your point of view, whether to cut or save programs. If you want to protect certain programs, make your views known, as everything will be on the chopping block over the next few months as Congress tackles the budget plan.
  • Buckle down to save for emergencies and retirement, because it’s possible that Social Security and other safety net programs will get restructured or cut.

Bottom Line:

Hold steady, and invest aggressively in your long term safety net.

Now more than ever, LearnVest is here to help you master your finances—check out our new My Money Center for a fun and efficient way to handle your budget and grow your net worth. As I mentioned in a BBC World Have Your Say segment last week on debt defaulting, a nation’s path is made up of individual decisions. At LearnVest we feel it’s as important to change a culture—a people’s way of thinking about spending and debt—as it is to form the right policy. So get started with yourself.

  • adnama43
  • adnama43
  • adnama43
  • adnama43
  • adnama43
  • adnama43
  • adnama43
  • http://www.smartmouthblog.com Nicole Longstreath

    Thank you for this article, it’s calming and very helpful.

    One thing I would add. There are many of us who believe that there is no real need for austerity and that cutting programs like Social Security is unconscionable.

    There is great wealth among a very small section of our population. We believe that progressive taxation is the only fair option. Not a flat, or “fair,” tax were everyone pays the same – but a tax rate which increases with income and wealth level.

    It’s simple: those who earn or simply have a significantly higher income can afford to pay a higher level of taxes because a much smaller portion of their money goes to the minimum standard of living.

    It’s true that our government’s spending and social programs need to examined for efficacy, but the notion that there is no money to pay for these vital services is absurd.

    • Ugh

      1. The “great wealth” will run out very quickly if we simply take it and redistribute among those who consider themselves “less fortunate”. We already saw it happen. Simply open a history book for vivid examples, and there are many.

      At the rate you’re suggesting, filling the rows of the less fortunate becomes more profitable than earning. Humans naturally gravitate towards doing what takes less effort. Again, this all happened before. Just open any history book.

      2. What you call “progressive” taxation some call “robbery”. Everyone should contribute.

      I’m glad not everyone thinks like you.

      • http://www.smartmouthblog.com Nicole Longstreath

        I did not suggest that we simply take the money from the rich and give it to the poor – although I know conservatives *love* to think that’s what progressive want to do. As a big-boy country, we are responsible for taking care of our citizens who cannot.

        When we cut social programs instead of collecting additional taxes, it’s unconscionable – meaning bad, wrong, immoral. We are not supposed to let wealthy individuals and corporations pay little or no tax (hello, GE) while we tell the elderly and poor to stop being so lazy.

        And, speaking of “robbery,” I agree with you – everyone should contribute. This means closing loopholes which allow corporations to avoid paying taxes.

        Finally, basic etiquette dictates that if you’re going 1.) to take my comments
        and regurgitate them incorrectly and 2.) insult my viewpoints that you
        don’t anonymize your handle. Being an adult means taking responsibility
        for what you say.

      • http://www.smartmouthblog.com Nicole Longstreath

        I did not suggest that we simply take the money from the rich and give it to the poor – although I know conservatives *love* to think that’s what progressive want to do. As a big-boy country, we are responsible for taking care of our citizens who cannot.

        When we cut social programs instead of collecting additional taxes, it’s unconscionable – meaning bad, wrong, immoral. We are not supposed to let wealthy individuals and corporations pay little or no tax (hello, GE) while we tell the elderly and poor to stop being so lazy.

        And, speaking of “robbery,” I agree with you – everyone should contribute. This means closing loopholes which allow corporations to avoid paying taxes.

        Finally, basic etiquette dictates that if you’re going 1.) to take my comments
        and regurgitate them incorrectly and 2.) insult my viewpoints that you
        don’t anonymize your handle. Being an adult means taking responsibility
        for what you say.

        • Ugh

          How have I insulted your viewpoints? By simply disagreeing with them? Well, it’s called Pluralism, and it’s a norm. Afaik, I didn’t call you names when I said I’m glad not everyone shares your view on economics.

          Normally I would apologize for insulting someone by accident, but this time I think I stayed within the lines. Now, to the actual point of our discussion, when you say:

          “I did not suggest that we simply take the money from the rich and give it to the poor”

          How else would you interpret your own earlier phrases:

          “There is great wealth among a very small section of our population.”

          …and…

          “It’s simple: those who earn or simply have a significantly higher income can afford to pay a higher level of taxes”

          To me that means exactly “take the money from the rich”. And, this is the “give to the poor” part:

          “we cut social programs instead of collecting additional taxes, it’s unconscionable – meaning bad, wrong, immoral”

          There you go. I didn’t invent a thing. All your own words.

          Since you insist that “Being an adult means taking responsibility for what you say”, at least agree that wealth redistribution is what you stand for.

          And, lastly, quote: “wealthy individuals and corporations pay little or no tax”. Please do us all a favor and do some research before posting straight out incorrect information not supported by facts or numbers. Apparently, you have a very vague idea of who contributes to the bucket the most. 

        • Ugh

          How have I insulted your viewpoints? By simply disagreeing with them? Well, it’s called Pluralism, and it’s a norm. Afaik, I didn’t call you names when I said I’m glad not everyone shares your view on economics.

          Normally I would apologize for insulting someone by accident, but this time I think I stayed within the lines. Now, to the actual point of our discussion, when you say:

          “I did not suggest that we simply take the money from the rich and give it to the poor”

          How else would you interpret your own earlier phrases:

          “There is great wealth among a very small section of our population.”

          …and…

          “It’s simple: those who earn or simply have a significantly higher income can afford to pay a higher level of taxes”

          To me that means exactly “take the money from the rich”. And, this is the “give to the poor” part:

          “we cut social programs instead of collecting additional taxes, it’s unconscionable – meaning bad, wrong, immoral”

          There you go. I didn’t invent a thing. All your own words.

          Since you insist that “Being an adult means taking responsibility for what you say”, at least agree that wealth redistribution is what you stand for.

          And, lastly, quote: “wealthy individuals and corporations pay little or no tax”. Please do us all a favor and do some research before posting straight out incorrect information not supported by facts or numbers. Apparently, you have a very vague idea of who contributes to the bucket the most. 

        • Ugh

          How have I insulted your viewpoints? By simply disagreeing with them? Well, it’s called Pluralism, and it’s a norm. Afaik, I didn’t call you names when I said I’m glad not everyone shares your view on economics.

          Normally I would apologize for insulting someone by accident, but this time I think I stayed within the lines. Now, to the actual point of our discussion, when you say:

          “I did not suggest that we simply take the money from the rich and give it to the poor”

          How else would you interpret your own earlier phrases:

          “There is great wealth among a very small section of our population.”

          …and…

          “It’s simple: those who earn or simply have a significantly higher income can afford to pay a higher level of taxes”

          To me that means exactly “take the money from the rich”. And, this is the “give to the poor” part:

          “we cut social programs instead of collecting additional taxes, it’s unconscionable – meaning bad, wrong, immoral”

          There you go. I didn’t invent a thing. All your own words.

          Since you insist that “Being an adult means taking responsibility for what you say”, at least agree that wealth redistribution is what you stand for.

          And, lastly, quote: “wealthy individuals and corporations pay little or no tax”. Please do us all a favor and do some research before posting straight out incorrect information not supported by facts or numbers. Apparently, you have a very vague idea of who contributes to the bucket the most. 

        • Ugh

          How have I insulted your viewpoints? By simply disagreeing with them? Well, it’s called Pluralism, and it’s a norm. Afaik, I didn’t call you names when I said I’m glad not everyone shares your view on economics.

          Normally I would apologize for insulting someone by accident, but this time I think I stayed within the lines. Now, to the actual point of our discussion, when you say:

          “I did not suggest that we simply take the money from the rich and give it to the poor”

          How else would you interpret your own earlier phrases:

          “There is great wealth among a very small section of our population.”

          …and…

          “It’s simple: those who earn or simply have a significantly higher income can afford to pay a higher level of taxes”

          To me that means exactly “take the money from the rich”. And, this is the “give to the poor” part:

          “we cut social programs instead of collecting additional taxes, it’s unconscionable – meaning bad, wrong, immoral”

          There you go. I didn’t invent a thing. All your own words.

          Since you insist that “Being an adult means taking responsibility for what you say”, at least agree that wealth redistribution is what you stand for.

          And, lastly, quote: “wealthy individuals and corporations pay little or no tax”. Please do us all a favor and do some research before posting straight out incorrect information not supported by facts or numbers. Apparently, you have a very vague idea of who contributes to the bucket the most. 

        • Ugh

          To avoid empty-wording, here’s a chart provided by mint.com that lays out the amount of tax dollars collected. If you look carefully, you’ll see that people with income $75K/yr and higher pay for all.
          http://www.mint.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/MINT-TAXES-R3.png

        • Joe Taxpayer

          1. As a “Big Boy Country”, we should be able to pay our bills, if we can’t, we have to look at what we are spending on, and how we are paying for it.  Borrowing is an emergency answer, not a day-to-day answer.

          2. Social Programs…  The phrase “A government with the policy to rob Peter to pay Paul can be assured of the support of Paul.” (G. B. Shaw, one of the very few things he got right) comes to mind.  The government buys votes with these programs.  And government money (tax dollars) gets recycled back through “Education” grants into the Teachers Unions into the Democratic Party.  Smells like corruption to me.

          3. Sure!  I agree!  Everyone and every company should pay taxes.  I am ALL for closing ALL loopholes. Fair should be really Fair.  You make $10 at McDonald’s, you pay $2, you make $100 Million on Wall Street, you pay $20 million.  An IRS form should fit on a postcard, individual, corporate, married, whatever.  You make money, you pay in to the pot.  It’s called “having some skin in the game.”  You don’t pay taxes or you get some sort of check from the government, then you are a DEPENDENT, not a citizen.  No voting for you is what I think.

          4. Ha ha!  GE.  What a joke. They own MSNBC.  Somehow Nasty Evil News Corp (owner of Fox) managed to pay, oh, just a measly 4.8 BILLION (2007-2010).  Pays to be connected, doesn’t it?

          The elderly paid into Social Security, they should get what they were promised (except it already got spent).  What did the poor do to get money from us that actually go to work?

          In a way, I’d love to sign my name, but I don’t feel like showing up on your hateful blog (“If we want to rid our national discourse of this fucking menace…” http://www.smartmouthblog.com/2011/01/10/the-palin-media-diet/)  and I think it’s better to remind those of you that think the way you do that you are few and we, the overtaxed, underappreciated taxpayers, are legion.

    • Joe Taxpayer

      Wow, I can’t believe what passes for economic knowledge these days.

      1. Your “fair option” is theft.  “You have more, so we demand to take a greater percentage of it”.  And trust me, the White House rhetoric says “Donald Trump and Bill Gates”, but the reality is “Joe and Jill Main Street”.  If we took ALL of the money and assets of the richest 100 or so people in the US, left them homeless and penniless on the street… that would pay for JANUARY of ONE fiscal year.  The “real” money is with the middle class, and that’s where the taxes will fall.

      2. Your “fair option” violates “equal rights” and certainly has nothing to do with equal responsibility.  “Poor” people don’t have any more right to their money than I do (neither do “Rich”, of course).  If I pay 40%, they should pay 40%.  That’s the “fair share” we learned about in… oh… kindergarten.  It doesn’t take an economics degree, it just takes a sense of TRUE and HONEST fairness.  A FLAT tax, which you, for some bizarre reason think is “unfair”, is the closest answer to this inequity.

      3. Your “fair option” is firmly rooted in jealousy.  This “very small section” did well for themselves, or their parents or grandparents did well for them, and you want to get your (or the government’s) hands on more of it.  Since when did it become yours to take?  Since when did ANY of our money become the government’s to take?  Where is the accountability for where this money is going?

      4. You talk about “unconscionable”.  What is “unconscionable” is kicking the can down the road to our children and our grandchildren so that we can pass on the problem.  If the US was a LearnVest subscriber, they would have to do to the Bootcamp for “How to dig my head out of my ass: An instruction for people who have an income to debt ratio of 1:1″.

      5.  Who is this “We”?  We, as a nation, need adult responsibility in Washington, not childish games, refusal to compromise, and fantasy living.  Standard & Poor’s was CLEAR that a $4 Trillion CUT was what was necessary to stave off the downgrade.  ONE PLAN offered it, and before it was even voted on in the House, the Senate and the White House announced that they would never agree.  They would never agree to have the money spigot turned off.  So, instead, we got this half measures bill, and we kicked the debt can down the road a few months, and S&P did what they threatened to do.  Couldn’t be simpler.  We were told “Elections have Consequences” and that “Change” was coming.  These are the consequences and this the Change.  Is this REALLY what you want?

      • http://www.smartmouthblog.com Nicole Longstreath

        Oh, the wrath one endures when suggesting a progressive tax rate …

        There is a great myth amongst the Middle Class that, one day, we all have the opportunity to be rich. While it’s entirely possible to start a profitable business or make smart investments, the real possibility of achieving the wealth most dream of simply isn’t realistic.

        As the gap between the rich and poor becomes ever wider, the possibility of the middle class inching into poverty becomes ever greater. One day you’re Joe Taxpayer, the next you could be Joe Shelter-Dweller.

        When I really read your comment, it seems that you and I actually agree on many things. We agree that this current level of debt is totally unacceptable, we agree that politicians are acting like jerks. But where we do not agree is the subject of the government’s rights.

        No man or corporation is self-made. Any individual or company who is of American origin made their wealth from this country owes part of that wealth back to the country.

        So, you ask, when did ANY of our money become the government’s to take? When you depended on this country to live the life you live. Everyday of your life you use some kind of government service which means you depend on this country.

        Be careful about protecting the rich. I know you like to accuse me of class warfare but, believe me, they waged their own war against us long ago.

        • Ugh

          I’m sorry for intruding into your and Joe’s conversation, but I couldn’t resist this one:
          “There is a great myth amongst the Middle Class that, one day, we all have the opportunity to be rich”
          Isn’t this, I dunno, myth, dream, hope – anyway, isn’t this why we’re daily logging into LearnVest? To “build our wealth” and “afford our dreams”? It just seemed awkward to me that you wrote this to the list of the impossible right on the website that tells you that you can, and you should.

          Maybe your and my definition of “rich” and “poor” are quite different? Somehow I don’t think we mean the same thing when using those two words.

          Being middle-class in America isn’t as bad as you make it sound. Actually, being poor in America is still better than anywhere else. I hope you’re not gonna argue with the fact that every year a significant number of people choose to be the American poor vs middle-class in their old country. Being poor in America means having a 10yr old car, having to cook your own food, and using last year model of electronics. So, rich/poor is only a matter of definitions.

          Oh, and no one is ensured from being a shelter-dweller (nasty, btw, of you to wish someone ill when all they do is ask to spend responsibly).

        • Joe Taxpayer

          I only want to protect myself, and my own.  If there are “The Rich”, then they can go about their business.  I don’t feel they have a right to my stuff, why should I have a right to theirs?  “The Rich” got that way through hard work, good investing and intelligence.  No dollar fairy came down and gave it to them.

          “As the gap between the rich and poor becomes ever wider, the possibility
          of the middle class inching into poverty becomes ever greater.”.  Actually, the two things pushing the middle class into poverty are taxes and inflation.  Both of which are going up.  Both of which are controlled by the government, or by the central banks, which are appointed by the government.

          When I first started driving, on a good day, i could find gas for 55-60 cents sometimes, in the last year I have seen it for $5.  It’s the same amount of fuel, but now it’s 10x more?  Why?  The gov’t prints money without restraint.  That’s why.  No other reason.  (well, actually, THIS gov’t makes getting the gas harder, and more expensive, but that’s an argument for another forum).  This Weimar-Style printing, and the taxes that will have to go up to pay for it, is what is squeezing the middle class.  Donald Trump hasn’t been visiting my bank to purloin a few hundred bucks out of my savings, but congress and the IRS certainly will take that much more each paycheck to pay for their profligate spending and “Stimulus” plans.

          And THAT is the problem.  Money In < Money Out.  LearnVest would tell you that's a loser's bet; why do we allow our governments to make it to the tune of $8 Billion a day?

          And…as far as "use a government service", I DO drive on roads, and take a Train to get to work, both of which i pay for, locally, via my gas tax, property tax or ticket cost.  I'm all for local taxes.  I don't mind my local property tax bill that gives us the best schools, well-paved roads and sidewalks and policed streets.  I love it!  I pay my tax, and i see the results.  And those taxes cost me FAR LESS than the chunk I send to Washington.  Where are the results I'm supposed to see for those $$$$?

        • Joe Taxpayer

          I only want to protect myself, and my own.  If there are “The Rich”, then they can go about their business.  I don’t feel they have a right to my stuff, why should I have a right to theirs?  “The Rich” got that way through hard work, good investing and intelligence.  No dollar fairy came down and gave it to them.

          “As the gap between the rich and poor becomes ever wider, the possibility
          of the middle class inching into poverty becomes ever greater.”.  Actually, the two things pushing the middle class into poverty are taxes and inflation.  Both of which are going up.  Both of which are controlled by the government, or by the central banks, which are appointed by the government.

          When I first started driving, on a good day, i could find gas for 55-60 cents sometimes, in the last year I have seen it for $5.  It’s the same amount of fuel, but now it’s 10x more?  Why?  The gov’t prints money without restraint.  That’s why.  No other reason.  (well, actually, THIS gov’t makes getting the gas harder, and more expensive, but that’s an argument for another forum).  This Weimar-Style printing, and the taxes that will have to go up to pay for it, is what is squeezing the middle class.  Donald Trump hasn’t been visiting my bank to purloin a few hundred bucks out of my savings, but congress and the IRS certainly will take that much more each paycheck to pay for their profligate spending and “Stimulus” plans.

          And THAT is the problem.  Money In < Money Out.  LearnVest would tell you that's a loser's bet; why do we allow our governments to make it to the tune of $8 Billion a day?

          And…as far as "use a government service", I DO drive on roads, and take a Train to get to work, both of which i pay for, locally, via my gas tax, property tax or ticket cost.  I'm all for local taxes.  I don't mind my local property tax bill that gives us the best schools, well-paved roads and sidewalks and policed streets.  I love it!  I pay my tax, and i see the results.  And those taxes cost me FAR LESS than the chunk I send to Washington.  Where are the results I'm supposed to see for those $$$$?

        • Joe Taxpayer

          I only want to protect myself, and my own.  If there are “The Rich”, then they can go about their business.  I don’t feel they have a right to my stuff, why should I have a right to theirs?  “The Rich” got that way through hard work, good investing and intelligence.  No dollar fairy came down and gave it to them.

          “As the gap between the rich and poor becomes ever wider, the possibility
          of the middle class inching into poverty becomes ever greater.”.  Actually, the two things pushing the middle class into poverty are taxes and inflation.  Both of which are going up.  Both of which are controlled by the government, or by the central banks, which are appointed by the government.

          When I first started driving, on a good day, i could find gas for 55-60 cents sometimes, in the last year I have seen it for $5.  It’s the same amount of fuel, but now it’s 10x more?  Why?  The gov’t prints money without restraint.  That’s why.  No other reason.  (well, actually, THIS gov’t makes getting the gas harder, and more expensive, but that’s an argument for another forum).  This Weimar-Style printing, and the taxes that will have to go up to pay for it, is what is squeezing the middle class.  Donald Trump hasn’t been visiting my bank to purloin a few hundred bucks out of my savings, but congress and the IRS certainly will take that much more each paycheck to pay for their profligate spending and “Stimulus” plans.

          And THAT is the problem.  Money In < Money Out.  LearnVest would tell you that's a loser's bet; why do we allow our governments to make it to the tune of $8 Billion a day?

          And…as far as "use a government service", I DO drive on roads, and take a Train to get to work, both of which i pay for, locally, via my gas tax, property tax or ticket cost.  I'm all for local taxes.  I don't mind my local property tax bill that gives us the best schools, well-paved roads and sidewalks and policed streets.  I love it!  I pay my tax, and i see the results.  And those taxes cost me FAR LESS than the chunk I send to Washington.  Where are the results I'm supposed to see for those $$$$?

        • Joe Taxpayer

          I only want to protect myself, and my own.  If there are “The Rich”, then they can go about their business.  I don’t feel they have a right to my stuff, why should I have a right to theirs?  “The Rich” got that way through hard work, good investing and intelligence.  No dollar fairy came down and gave it to them.

          “As the gap between the rich and poor becomes ever wider, the possibility
          of the middle class inching into poverty becomes ever greater.”.  Actually, the two things pushing the middle class into poverty are taxes and inflation.  Both of which are going up.  Both of which are controlled by the government, or by the central banks, which are appointed by the government.

          When I first started driving, on a good day, i could find gas for 55-60 cents sometimes, in the last year I have seen it for $5.  It’s the same amount of fuel, but now it’s 10x more?  Why?  The gov’t prints money without restraint.  That’s why.  No other reason.  (well, actually, THIS gov’t makes getting the gas harder, and more expensive, but that’s an argument for another forum).  This Weimar-Style printing, and the taxes that will have to go up to pay for it, is what is squeezing the middle class.  Donald Trump hasn’t been visiting my bank to purloin a few hundred bucks out of my savings, but congress and the IRS certainly will take that much more each paycheck to pay for their profligate spending and “Stimulus” plans.

          And THAT is the problem.  Money In < Money Out.  LearnVest would tell you that's a loser's bet; why do we allow our governments to make it to the tune of $8 Billion a day?

          And…as far as "use a government service", I DO drive on roads, and take a Train to get to work, both of which i pay for, locally, via my gas tax, property tax or ticket cost.  I'm all for local taxes.  I don't mind my local property tax bill that gives us the best schools, well-paved roads and sidewalks and policed streets.  I love it!  I pay my tax, and i see the results.  And those taxes cost me FAR LESS than the chunk I send to Washington.  Where are the results I'm supposed to see for those $$$$?

          • http://www.smartmouthblog.com Nicole Longstreath

            Joe, I’m glad we talked because it’s during discourse that we learn how others think and why they think how they do.

            I’ve learned from you that you value your local community and are happy to contribute. This is something we share.

            However, you probably also benefit from FEDERAL services, do you not? As a citizen, your allegiance is to country – NOT just your local town. And, as a citizen, you should be responsible to support it.

            I agree with you that it’s frustrating to watch your hard-earned money go to Washington, only to see it pissed away on bullsh*t spending. We’re on the same page here about this. But just because this part of our government is broken doesn’t mean that we toss it out.

            WE FIX IT.

            And, on the subject of hard-earned money – I’m sorry, but you’re just plain incorrect on the issue of how the rich got to be rich. The dollar fairy did come down for many in the form of totally unnecessary tax cuts. And it’s those tax cuts – along with two wars and, yes, unchecked spending – is what got us to the place we are at.

          • Joe Taxpayer

            I prefer my local government over the Federal Government because it’s more likely to address the needs that are important to me, and many times less likely to be bought off by moneyed-interests far away.  It’s normally more efficient and has a smaller per-person footprint.  And, it can’t print its way out of debt.

            I am very glad that there is a Federal Government, I just wish it would cost less, legislate less and waste less.  And, if, in the interim, it could do the job it was mandated for, like securing the national border and providing for a common defense, that would be grand.

            I am a strict Constitutionalist, and I believe that the National level government should abide by the restraints placed on it by the Constitution.  If it’s not in that document, or the Amendments, then it’s off the table.  I know, I know, good luck to me on getting that to happen.

            Tax cuts:  we’re not going to see eye-to-eye on this because we come from different premises.  I believe that the right of the government to anyone’s money should start at zero, I feel that you would pick a higher number; and you have said that some people should pay a greater percentage than others.  Tax cuts aren’t a gift to the rich, or anyone, they are simply restoring that which was stolen from you before.  (or actually, stating that it won’t be taken from you again.)

            The analogy couldn’t be simpler: I go to the store, and bring home ten bags of food for my family (i.e. my paycheck), on the way out of the store, there’s a clean-cut fellow in a grey-suit that says “Excuse me sir, i need to take four of your ten bags of food.  It’s for the greater good; to help some others.  It’s your patriotic duty, if you love this country”  Right behind him is a surly looking cop to make sure I hand it over.  A Tax Cut simply means Mr Suit takes 3 bags, and maybe grabs the eggs and bacon out of another bag.  My family isn’t ever going to get fat off of maybe one more bag of food, but maybe we don’t go hungry, or, heaven forbid (…wouldn’t want to put Social Services out of work…), maybe we help the new neighbors down the block with some that we might be able to spare now.

      • http://www.smartmouthblog.com Nicole Longstreath

        Oh, the wrath one endures when suggesting a progressive tax rate …

        There is a great myth amongst the Middle Class that, one day, we all have the opportunity to be rich. While it’s entirely possible to start a profitable business or make smart investments, the real possibility of achieving the wealth most dream of simply isn’t realistic.

        As the gap between the rich and poor becomes ever wider, the possibility of the middle class inching into poverty becomes ever greater. One day you’re Joe Taxpayer, the next you could be Joe Shelter-Dweller.

        When I really read your comment, it seems that you and I actually agree on many things. We agree that this current level of debt is totally unacceptable, we agree that politicians are acting like jerks. But where we do not agree is the subject of the government’s rights.

        No man or corporation is self-made. Any individual or company who is of American origin made their wealth from this country owes part of that wealth back to the country.

        So, you ask, when did ANY of our money become the government’s to take? When you depended on this country to live the life you live. Everyday of your life you use some kind of government service which means you depend on this country.

        Be careful about protecting the rich. I know you like to accuse me of class warfare but, believe me, they waged their own war against us long ago.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Susan-Bewley/100000644207137 Susan Bewley

    Actually, there is a major error in the article. China isn’t the largest holder of the US debt – they are the LARGEST FOREIGN holder for our debt at 8%.  Most of the debt of the US is actually held by it’s citizens. 

    • Anonymous

      Hi Susan,

      Thanks for your feedback. Many sources consider China to be the U.S.’s largest single creditor, since we are a nation made up of individuals (and therefore the debt held by citizens isn’t exactly held by one cohesive entity). We have, however, noted now in the article that China is the largest single creditor. Thanks for reading!

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Susan-Bewley/100000644207137 Susan Bewley

        Thanks :)   I wish I had the article that divided out where all our debt actually is, but a lot of it’s assets are held by corporations here and citizens through bonds and such. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Susan-Bewley/100000644207137 Susan Bewley

    Actually, there is a major error in the article. China isn’t the largest holder of the US debt – they are the LARGEST FOREIGN holder for our debt at 8%.  Most of the debt of the US is actually held by it’s citizens. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Susan-Bewley/100000644207137 Susan Bewley

    Actually, there is a major error in the article. China isn’t the largest holder of the US debt – they are the LARGEST FOREIGN holder for our debt at 8%.  Most of the debt of the US is actually held by it’s citizens. 

  • http://twitter.com/littlehouse2009 Little House

    Excellent summary of the current economic events. The points at the end of the article are clear and based on rational-thinking rather than anxious nervousness. I know that a part of me is thinking, “Holy Cow! Sell everything!” but the more rational part of me is sitting tight. Thank goodness for that part.

  • http://twitter.com/littlehouse2009 Little House

    Excellent summary of the current economic events. The points at the end of the article are clear and based on rational-thinking rather than anxious nervousness. I know that a part of me is thinking, “Holy Cow! Sell everything!” but the more rational part of me is sitting tight. Thank goodness for that part.

  • http://twitter.com/littlehouse2009 Little House

    Excellent summary of the current economic events. The points at the end of the article are clear and based on rational-thinking rather than anxious nervousness. I know that a part of me is thinking, “Holy Cow! Sell everything!” but the more rational part of me is sitting tight. Thank goodness for that part.

  • http://neatfreakwannabe.blogspot.com Jenna

    Thanks for the summary.  It’s helpful to have a reminder to “stay the course” when you see drastic market changes like the drop we’ve seen so far today.

    Also, this is a great reminder not to take anything for granted.  This situation isn’t over; we know there will be budget changes by the end of the year, and we’re not sure what those will look like.  The tax structure may change, which may change the way you decide to utilize Roth versus Traditional retirement accounts.  Social security might be affected, and you might have to save up more for retirement than you originally planned.  If you feel strongly about any issue, it’s important to make your opinions known to your congressional leaders.  Attacking each other isn’t going to get us anywhere.

    • http://www.smartmouthblog.com Nicole Longstreath

      Political discussion between people, even when it between those who do not agree, isn’t unproductive and reminds us that there are different perspectives in this world. When you discuss or debate the merits of one thought over another, you learn more about the opposing side and, often reinforce your own beliefs.

      Have you contacted your own congressional leaders? I would be interested in hearing about your experiences doing so. It’s an intimidating endeavor, and not one many of us are up to.

      • http://neatfreakwannabe.blogspot.com Jenna

        I agree that discussion is a good thing, but it’s far more productive if it’s a civilized discussion versus the insults that some feel compelled to use.  Your comments are a great example of the productive type of discourse.

        I have not contacted my leaders, but I don’t have incredibly strong opinions on these issues.  However, you won’t find me complaining about their actions, either.  If I don’t speak my mind to them, I can’t expect them to know it and act upon that.  If someone does have strong opinions on an issue, what is the harm in contacting them?  Sure, most of us are not political activists and don’t have time to draw up petitions and organize large groups of people around an issue, but we all have the power to send a letter or make a call to those in DC who represent us.

        • http://www.smartmouthblog.com Nicole Longstreath

          Good point, Jenna. It’s easy to think our voice doesn’t matter, but there’s no harm in making your voice heard.

  • Matheo

    We cannot escape the truth in numbers. When the numbers say that the US government has no money then the fact is that they have no money. Bankrupt means bankrupt. Even a AA+ is too much to give when the economy is unstable. The more we try to hide it and assume everything is ok – the more will be uncovered in order to reflect the true scenario. 

    • http://senseofcents.blogspot.com/ Michelle

      I agree. The economy is unstable and I’m surprised with the AA+.

    • http://senseofcents.blogspot.com/ Michelle

      I agree. The economy is unstable and I’m surprised with the AA+.

    • http://senseofcents.blogspot.com/ Michelle

      I agree. The economy is unstable and I’m surprised with the AA+.

    • http://senseofcents.blogspot.com/ Michelle

      I agree. The economy is unstable and I’m surprised with the AA+.

    • http://senseofcents.blogspot.com/ Michelle

      I agree. The economy is unstable and I’m surprised with the AA+.

    • http://senseofcents.blogspot.com/ Michelle

      I agree. The economy is unstable and I’m surprised with the AA+.

    • http://senseofcents.blogspot.com/ Michelle

      I agree. The economy is unstable and I’m surprised with the AA+.

    • http://senseofcents.blogspot.com/ Michelle

      I agree. The economy is unstable and I’m surprised with the AA+.