America's GDP is much higher and its budget can conceivably be balanced without bailouts from the EU.

First off we are not talking about a household that makes 100,000 and your point has no real answer because it would never happen. People making 40,000 don't get hand outs. THE WEALTHY, LIKE CORPERATIONS AND SUCH PEOPLE DON'T USE THE MONEY TO CREATE NEW JOBS but yet they get handouts more then the poor with the bush tax cuts. They are sitting on more money then they ever have. Wheres the jobs if this works.

You want me to make it simple for you. Here If I own a shop and I get more sales because people have more money for things they need, like food or personal products, Whatever. I have to hire more people to deal with the business. In turn when money is with the rich it doesn't trade hands very much and usually goes into things that don't help stimulate the ecconomy. 

People don't have money for loans when there are no jobs. So putting money back into the working classes hands, like fixing roads, bridges and the such which is way over due. Makes more sense then putting it into the rich's hands to sit there. It will get spent faster and creat  more jobs just by them working and paying there bills. People are not eating buddy and the rich are. So what makes more sense. So the real deal is the corporations don't need it. Nor do the wealthy and ask jesus what would he do. Give more food to people who have enough to last the rest of there lives or somebody that don't have anything to eat now.  If you can't understand that there are no jobs and people are suffering then you are selfish and greedy.

Let me add to that. A lot of rich use off shore accouts to not pay taxes and also takes the money out of our economy.  So Learn your facts.

S&P Blames GOP For U.S. Credit Problem, Associated Press, Politico Cover It Up

S&P clearly lays the blame at the Republican's feet in their report downgrading our nation's credit rating. Clearly the number one problem for S&P is the lack of courage the Republicans have shown when it comes to raising revenue. Twice the report mentions the Republicans by name. Yet that doesn't stop the lying American hating Republicans from trying to blame our President for their cowardice and destructive policies. So arm yourself with the facts, this downgrade is owned lock stock and barrel by the GOP and the Tea Party.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/abraham/detail?entry_id=94858

From the report.

"Standard & Poor's takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue
measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate
for putting the U.S.'s finances on a sustainable footing."

Aside from which they place most of the blame long term on not reforming entitlements and a perceived inability to get that done.  Who's holding out on that again?

"In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability."

In otherwords, biased article that probably just typed republicans and democrats in a search bar, rather then reading the whole thing and noticing where they actually place the blame.  AP and Politico aren't hiding anything, it's just they've actually read and understood the report!

Which was, in general not cutting the deficit (An equal problem) and greater entitlement reform. (A democratic one.)

Or... as they put it.

Our opinion is that elected officials remain wary of tackling the
structural issues required to effectively address the rising U.S. public debt
burden in a manner consistent with a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated
sovereign peers (see Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and Assumptions,"
June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41). In our view, the difficulty in
framing a consensus on fiscal policy weakens the government's ability to
manage public finances and diverts attention from the debate over how to
achieve more balanced and dynamic economic growth in an era of fiscal
stringency and private-sector deleveraging (ibid). A new political consensus
might (or might not) emerge after the 2012 elections, but we believe that by then, the government debt burden will likely be higher, the needed medium-term fiscal adjustment potentially greater, and the inflection point on the U.S. population's demographics and other age-related spending drivers closer at hand (see "Global Aging 2011: In The U.S., Going Gray Will Likely Cost Even More Green, Now," June 21, 2011).

The whole "political consesnus might ermerge after 2012" sounds a lot like "Democrats might lose control of the senate and presidency to me."

I think that democrates will take the all of it. Tea party held the country hostage and s&p came out and blamed them for not pushing up revenue. Tax increases.

You seem to have missed this.

The Standard & Poors' rating agency decision to reduce the United States' long term debt from AAA to AA+ was explained in a press release that specifically mentioned "the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues," should, itself, make headlines like "Standard And Poors Blames U.S. Credit Rating Reduction On Republicans."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/abraham/detail?entry_id=94858

ABC News has just reported that the federal government expects the pristine AAA credit rating of the United States to be downgraded. According to a government official, Standard & Poors is going to downgrade the credit rating of the U.S. Government. Among the reasons cited will be “Republicans saying that they refuse to accept any tax increases as part of a larger deal.”

This proves once again, just how irresponsible the GOP has been throughout this debt ceiling crisis. Coming on the heels of yesterdays 500 point loss on the Dow Jones, this horrible news will affect millions of Americans and their families as the world braces for economic collapse. As the private industry comes to realize that the government will no longer be able to spend money, interest rates will rise and the unemployment rate will increase.

Also frightening is the fact that the economic situation in Europe continues to degrade, which will worsen when S&P officially lowers the federal crediting rating, affecting American markets even more. Republicans had several chances to compromise with Democrats but held America hostage to score political points against President Obama. After Congress passed the Republican dominated debt deal, Americans breathed a sigh of relief as many thought a crisis had been averted. But, it now appears that Republicans shot the hostage after all.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/08/05/breaking-news-s-blames-republicans/

Feel free to spin it anyway you want. thats exactly what All REPUBLICONS ARE DOING, YES CONS.

Wealthy corporations in 1961 used to pay 47% taxes and now pay 11.1% on profits. During this time we where very successful in America. Republicans don't want to budge when really these companies do not pay there fair share. At least push them up to 20%. We have Greed problem in this country, not a entitlement problem. The wealthy own 24% of the money and used to own 7%. Looks like the trickle down effect only goes up.

So get your facts straight. People are starving buddy. So go and give your money to the rich so they can put it into a offshore account and put this country even more in the dumps. People like the koch brothers make a hell a lot more money when the economy is in the dumps. Guess who started the tea party and funded it. Yes thats right, Koch brothers. They are the richest people in new york. Wonder where you info comes from.

they also cited the bush tax  cuts which have been in place sense the beginning of bush's presidency. So hold up, was that the start of our economy slipping into the dumps. why yes that was. giving the rich more money don't work. Reagan started this trickle down effect and now look where we are, in a mess and people seem to think it works. the numbers are out and republicons have ran congress for most of this last 11 years. Congress spends the money buddy. So who put us in this mess. Yet they get into congress agains and what happens again. You are clearly blind.

First off, it doesn't matter what the level of money is the general concept is the same ...

If an individual or institution has $1,000,000 it is in the economy regardless of whether it has been spent on goods or services. We do not live in a cartoon, and there are no great big money bins that hold saved money out of the economy. Money that is in bank accounts, investments or is spent on goods and services is being circulated in the economy. It doesn't matter if the money is being used by "Rich" people to buy private jets or Yachts (which tend to employ middle class Americans to manufacture these goods), or for "Poor" people to buy cheap chineese manufactured goods, the money is being circulated through the economy.

Now, being that it is already flowing through the economy you can't divide it and end up with more money any more than you can divide a litre of water in a way to get more than a litre in total.

The "loss" of money in the system is from lack of lending from banks because of much needed tightening of lending standards and a loss of collateral of most people borrowing the money. Until small business can get loans to expand and grow the economy it will be difficult for the economy to recover.

I didn't miss it.

I read the entire thing.  You seemed to have missed EVERYTHING ELSE written.

They didn't just blame the republicans.  They blamed the republicans first, then talked about a number of structual problems that are the real meat of the problem, that are going unchanged because of Democrats.

You do realize that everything you've said here is completely non related to the topic stated at hand right?

All it does is show that your overwhelming bias is clouding your judgement about what S&P actually said... cause you know.  They didn't say any of that.

Though yeah, they did mention the Bush tax cuts.

Which at best would be about... 400 Billion of a problem thats 4 to 15 trillion large.  If you'd note, that's why even Democrats always talk about "Growing the Base' now.  Which means... taxing the middle class and poor more.

If you actually rationally look at the budget, and realize how much neds to be cut in a year, the only four things big enough to cut to stop the budget shortfall are Defense, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

You could cut the Military budegt in half, and you still wouldn't be halfway to solving he problem, because Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid are all set to beign balooning due to our age demographics.... and you'd have a smaller military budget then even the most liberal liberals and libretarians in government would suggest makes sense.

All told S&P said more or less.

"More cuts are needed, and this recent issue showed that even with their backs against the wall, Republicans and Democrats have trouble working together, they need to make up the budget deficit so it stops growing by either tax increases, spending cuts or both and MUST tackle entitlement reform for the long term."

If more people held the positions republicans did during this debate, the crisis would of been solved.  Had more people held the Democratic positon during the debate... we still would of been downgraded because there wouldn't of been proper entitlement reform.