Just keep printing money…..sigh
Now everyone understands what a huge knucklehead this guy is:
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan on Sunday ruled out the chance of a US default following S&P’s decision to downgrade America’s credit rating.
“The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print money to do that. So there is zero probability of default” said Greenspan on NBC’s Meet the Press
“What I think the S&P thing did was to hit a nerve that there’s something basically bad going on, and it’s hit the self-esteem of the United States, the psyche” said Greenspan
Austan Goolsbee, the chairman of the White House’s council of economic advisors, hit out at S&P on the same show, insisting the credit ratings agency had got its math wrong.
“Well, the basic case is they made a $2 trillion math error and forgot to check their work,” he said. “So rating agencies that didn’t make a $2 trillion math error reaffirmed the AAA status. You saw Warren Buffet say that, if they had a AAAA, he would put U.S. Treasurys in AAAA status.”
Following the decision to downgrade America’s credit rating, the head of sovereign ratings at S&P, David Beers, said the Obama administrations analysis of the move was a complete “misrepresentation.”
All I heard on virtually every show was that the problem was GOP obstructionists don’t want to raise taxes. The fact that taxes are already set to rise significantly in 2013 (a high-earning Californian with investment income faces a marginal rate of 55-57%) is never mentioned. The fact that $70 billion / year is all that bringing back the Clinton tax regime only on high earners (versus deficits of $1.3 trillion / year) is never mentioned. Sheesh, I’m so sick of the argument, I’m almost ready to say fine you morons, go for it, then when the revenues somehow fail to materialize as people rush to tax shelters, refuse to invest here, or simply go Galt in reaction, maybe we can finally put that canard to rest. Where is the talking head willing to tell it straight to the average American: that if he/she wants a larger government, he/she will have to pay for it, not “that man behind the tree”. At least then, the real choices will be before voters: higher taxes (on themselves), or less government, or a combination. But no free lunch where existing spending is preserved, some else pays all the bills, the deficits come back under control, and the economy resumes growing at historic rates.
Another argument for increased high-end tax rates is that the people who have great wealth and inordinate influence over economic policies should not be personally immune to the consequences of those policies. If they’re going to impose austerity to restore balance to a system that they benefit from to a far greater degree than most people do, then they should have to participate in that sacrifice to some measure.
The world is not here entirely for their benefit.