This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Did The S&P Downgrade Warning Just Make A Debt Ceiling Compromise Even More Difficult?

Tyler Durden's picture


As S&P noted in its downgrade, and made all too explicit during the follow up call, the rating agency has now started a two year timer on the administration and the legislative branch to come up with not only a fiscal solution, but a credible solution by the end of 2012. Yet as Reuters points out, the "S&P's action -- downgrading its outlook on the U.S. rating to negative from stable -- does not guarantee a deal." Basically expect more posturing from both sides of the aisle, which ironically may merely lead to a cementing of intractable positions, and kick the can so far down the street that not even S&P can see where it lands: a non-compromise compromise that the Hill is so good at, yet one which won't fly any longer. " While the White House dismissed the action, saying all sides were making progress toward agreement, Republicans and Democrats remain far apart on where to make the cuts that will be needed for long-term deficit reduction." Any call for a bipartisan agreement on deficit reduction on fiscal reform is a welcome one, and in that context, I think that (the S&P move) adds to what we believe is some momentum towards that end," said Jay Carney, White House spokesman." Yes, ironically everyone: democrats and republicans are both claiming the S&P decision, which without doubt originated from Wall Street in the first place, validates their policies. Yet the biggest winner out of all this may be the Tea Party: "It is a vindication of the Tea Party and their stance that we are spending too much," Republican Representative Blake Farenthold, a member of the House Tea Party Caucus, said in a telephone interview." ...Or not: if the Tea Party continues "cutting" deficits like it did last week, when it was ultimately uncovered that instead of a $38 billion cut the ultimate impact on the budget was about $353 million, the Tea Party will most certainly burn all its credibility very soon if it continues to "tackle" fiscal sustainability with the same fervor.

From Reuters:

Republicans and Democrats unveiled competing plans to bring deficits down to a sustainable level by the end of the decade, but they differ sharply on how to reach those levels.

Representative Eric Cantor, the No. 2 House Republican, called the Standard & Poor's downgrade of U.S. credit outlook "a wake-up call" against those seeking to "blindly increase" the U.S. debt limit.

Cantor said the S&P action makes clear that any increase in the debt limit must be accompanied by "meaningful fiscal reforms that immediately reduce federal spending and stop our nation from digging itself further into debt."

S&P zeroed in on the differences, saying it saw a risk that U.S. policymakers would not reach agreement on long-term U.S. fiscal woes by 2013.

S&P's action -- and the accompanying fall in U.S. stock prices -- will light a fire under negotiators in Washington, some analysts said.

Not all has changed in the extremely humiliating world of rating agencies:

But Moody's Investors Service, S&P's main competitor, read the debate in Washington differently, saying both sides' plans for deficit reduction represent a "potential change in the direction of fiscal policy (that) is credit positive for the U.S. federal government."

After all one should never forget that unless Mark Zandi finds a job in the administration very soon, he may end up with some measly $100k a year tenured professor tip, at some D-grade Ivy league University.

That said, we tend to agree with Greg Valliere, that today's move from S&P will actually delay the debt ceiling resolution:

Greg Valliere, a political analyst for investors at Potomac Research Group, said S&P's action makes a deal even more likely in late June or early July

"I think it stiffens the resolve of people that are convinced that we have to take action," Valliere said.

At this point, Reuters take a turn for the surreal and notes that apparently Americans actually care about stuff like the economy:

Polls show Americans are deeply worried about the state of the country's finances, which will be one of the driving issues in the 2012 presidential and congressional elections.

Um, no. All American care about is what the latest iPad app is, what the calorie content of lunch is (even as the gym membership expires never once used), and who is the latest entrant in the zombifying reality TV arena.



- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:49 | 1181094 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture



The sooner the Ponzi collapses, the sooner honest people won't have to fight government in order to make an honest living, let along not be crushed to subsidize the TBTF and chosen insiders.

Default. Now. Period. Eliminate the malignancy.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:49 | 1181109 redpill
redpill's picture

None of the spineless a-holes up there have anywhere near enough guts to even remotely consider it in a billion years.

The sad thing is we could dig out of this debt hole without defaulting if we passed a balanced budget, reformed our social welfare programs into something sustainable, scrapped our tax code, and brought our troops home.  But the pols are also too self-serving to do that.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:06 | 1181144 What does it al...
What does it all mean's picture

It is just a head fake to justify the pols' jobs, but the ceiling will still be raised. Pure political theater and expectation management.  But it does nips the chance of a QE3 and probably accelerated the timing of a hike by the Fed in the name of fiscal discipline.   

The truth is that US will not default... we might create a nuclear incident, or cover one up, but financial default is not an option.  

I would love to see that day, but it won't happen....  Because it is certainly TBTF.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:04 | 1181156 redpill
redpill's picture

QE3 will have to happen.  The only question is whether it is done in the open or in secret.  Moody's will never downgrade so they'll be held up as the gold standard (pun intended).  S&P and anyone else who tries to speak reality will be marginalized, even if you assume the action today is not orchestrated.

Hell I'm surprised they haven't claimed S&P is now a unique form of domestic terrorism.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:21 | 1181210 What does it al...
What does it all mean's picture

Well, if it happens in secret, then it goes to the non-audited portion of the Fed's balance sheet.... so there is no way to verify it one way or another... So I concede...

But what is observable is that

1.  The ceiling will be raised... (even if like TARP, it happens in two-pass) and that 

2.  US will never default.


The rest... good luck to all.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:23 | 1181223 redpill
redpill's picture

That's the problem ain't it?  It's too bad so few of our "representatives" understand why auditing the Fed is so important.

I agree with your points, I can't see a default scenario being a possibility.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:35 | 1181238 What does it al...
What does it all mean's picture

And that is why it is SOOO hard, even after the crisis, for the Fed to have an ongoing audit...  

Dodd-Frank is all bark, no bite...

This "ceiling" is itself total BS, like what Alan Greenspan said on Meet-The-Press interview, (I rarely agree with the Maestro.)  Why have a ceiling?  Just say that we will never default, and give ourselves infinite credit...

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:40 | 1181291 Verstehen
Verstehen's picture

You will default thats for sure. But first they will take everything you think is yours because you are property of the Chinese, Japanese and private offshore banks. The big plan the Americans refuse to hear is the ruble will soon be backed by gold. The Chinese will probably do the same. And Brazil and SA too. They have surpluses and can buy commodities. The Americans only have a credit card from the Chinese. You will be defeated. It is going to happen.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:11 | 1181415 George the baby...
George the baby crusher's picture

 You will be defeated

I get the feeling you wanted to write "You will be defeated infidels". Maybe I read it the wrong way.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 21:29 | 1182482 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

You appearently don't understand Verstehen.

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 03:02 | 1183125 Creed
Creed's picture

 will soon be backed by gold.

They have surpluses and can buy commodities.



blah blah blah....

they can buy our food with their gold

or starve

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:31 | 1181255 A Man without Q...
A Man without Qualities's picture

"QE3 will have to happen"

If the Fed has been selling puts on longer dated Treasuries, then QE3 has already happened... 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:29 | 1181486 morkov
morkov's picture

why isn't this scenario probable???

no QE3, just syphone for FIRE and suck-it-up for knuckle's THE GAME/OVER/

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:42 | 1181527 redpill
redpill's picture

So helicopter Ben is going to do a complete 180-degree turn, abandon the last 4 years of monetary policy, abandon his "inflation target" and suddenly embrace deflation warmly?  Sorry I just don't find it plausible.

The only way that inflation can be contained at this point would be a Volcker-esque rate hike, but such a move would utterly devastate the economy which is on QE-life support, explode the national debt interest, and quite possibly lead to civil unrest in some form.  Making such a move does not logically jive with how the Fed has behaved up until this point.  The Bernank is a true Keynesian devotee, and he will keep showering the market with USDs for as long as he can, to extend and pretend, stretch out the game into extra innings.  From his "student of the depression" perspective, time is on his side, and as long as he can keep printing, the better chance he has of the economy finally "coming back" as a result of his policies.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 18:31 | 1182039 morkov
morkov's picture

YES HE WILL!!! inflation is not going to get "the volker-esque". it's going to get mellowed-down and postponed 'till payments would be conceivable.

the past 4 years have served their purpose. capital has moved. "it" has discovered more fertile ground for profit...pending the army's reaction, of course  :)

WW3 BitcheZ (shape and form still to reveal itself)

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 21:39 | 1182508 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

I agree with your post, except for this bit -->

the economy finally "coming back" as a result of his policies.

I don't think that's what's going on.  I think the end of the boom is what it is.  I think the plan wass to maximize wealth acquisition on the way up into the intentionally engineered credit bubble. 

On the inevitable way back down, via the benefit of leaked foresight, the plan is the same, ie. maximize wealth acquisition at the expense of the dumbed down masses.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:04 | 1181157 samseau
samseau's picture

Even if we default, will things really get better?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:21 | 1181222 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Exactly.  Governments shouldn't be able to borrow money, period.  It is de facto slavery.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 23:44 | 1182846 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

I weep for my nation when 99.99% of the adults don't realize the extremely basic scam being pulled on themselves and their children, whereby a private bank is charging them interest on money it is loaning to them via their government, all sanctioned and blessed by their alleged 'elected' representatives.

  • I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up  a monied aristocracy that has set the Government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs. - President Thomas Jefferson.
  • I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution. I would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government to the genuine principles of its constitution; I mean an additional article, taking from the federal government the power to borrow money. - Thomas Jefferson
  • If (As the supreme court had recently inferred) Congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given to them to be used by themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations. - President Andrew Jackson
  • From the testimony of Marriner Eccles, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, before the House Banking and Currency Committee, Sept. 30, 1941:

Congressman Patman: "Mr. Eccles, how did you get the money to buy those two billions of government securities?"

Eccles: "We created it."

Patman: "Out of what?"

             Eccles: "Out of the right to issue credit money." (i.e.Out of the right to create it. Do you see the insanity of it all?  You and I must work hard for every dollar of ?? that we earn, while the banksters havethe legal right to create money!  RWS). 

  • Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin.....Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with the flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again.....Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear (he was said to be the second richest man in Britain) and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in.....But, if you want to continue to be the slave of the bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let the bankers continue to create money and control credit. - Sir Josiah Stamp, President of the Bank of England
  • Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws. - Mayer Anselm Rothschild

"The few who understand the system, will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favours that there will be no
opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body
of the people mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous
advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens
without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system
is inimical to their interests."

Quote by: John Sherman
Protege of the Rothschild banking family
Date: June 25, 1863 Source: in a letter sent to New York bankers, Morton, and Gould, in support of the then proposed National Banking Act
Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:37 | 1181283 whatsinaname
whatsinaname's picture

The downgrade spiel is to make stocks drop just a little bit so they can get the QE3 running. How much of drop is being targeted is a mystery. All this will be swept under a run after QE3. Easier said than done though as crude & PMs being highly resilient. Crude has to drop below 90 for QE3 to start.

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 02:58 | 1183120 Creed
Creed's picture

Clawback all bonuses given to any employee of any company that took taxpayer money to stay afloat.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:49 | 1181095 Mongo
Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:47 | 1181097 drink or die
drink or die's picture

If you want to see what Americans care about, check out on any given day.


This will all blow over in about a 3 days, once the pundits get the message out that rating agencies don't matter.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:09 | 1181170 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

Hot Searches   (USA)

  1. passover   2. game of thrones review   3. three cups of tea   4. baa   5. amtrak      6. greg mortenson   7. volkswagen beetle   8. warrior dash   9. easter recipes 10. maundy thursday      More Hot Searches »





Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:10 | 1181172 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

yup.  a bunch of circusmonkey morons surround us all. 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:49 | 1181108 treemagnet
treemagnet's picture

When treasuries require more interest, then maybe congressional whores will care a little - otherwise same deal.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:36 | 1181276 SelfishMan
SelfishMan's picture

Its too late. No matter what they do its too late. As someone mentioned above, the only way to stop this is to cut 99% of welfare and close all military bases around the world (quell the military industrial complex dragon completely). Even if those things happened, which would of course be absolutely impossible, the economy would still plunge in such a deep shit hole in abesence of regular monetary injections that it would take a few good years if not a decade to work through it. The closest analogy I can come up with is having an addict (in this case fiat monetary junkie named US economy) going through detox. If he follows through with cleaning and healing, it will come out healthy at the other end. Unfortunately, the case at hand suggests that the addict will die of overdose in next couple years.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:50 | 1181110 adeptus
adeptus's picture

Did the US just downgrade the US? You know SHTF is just around the corner when...

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:39 | 1181282 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

When you create the paradigm for everyone to BTFD, it takes a while for another paradigm to take root...  the problem this time around is that we expect printing, to some degree, in perpetuity...  as a result, the FED's job has gone from herding sheep to herding cats...

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:54 | 1181123 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Sheesh, talk about political bullshit.  There's our innovation.

It takes 'Merkin politicking to "compromise" on a binary fuckin' decision.

"We've worked together, and after some tough talk and hard negotiations, we decided we're not going to raise the debt ceiling, but we won't keep it the same either."

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:58 | 1181137 Dreadker
Dreadker's picture

Doesn't that mean they'll lower it lol... Timmy won't be happy....

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:55 | 1181126 Bam_Man
Bam_Man's picture

Oh yes, much more difficult.

Maybe that explains why Treasuries are trading higher today.

That's as good an explanation as any for price behavior in these "markets".

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:17 | 1181195 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

exactly.  "talk about a round tripper."  they'd be better off day-trippin' and "callin' it a day."  Is there anyone not trying to force the entire planet to buy equities anymore?  HELLOOOO OUT THERE?  Wall Street KILLED US, okay???!!!   "He's not the messiah, HE'S A VERY NAUGHTY BOY."  I mean "all i want is a couple percent on my WORTHLESS FRIGGIN' GREENBACKS, okay???!!!"

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:58 | 1181130 lieutenantjohnchard
lieutenantjohnchard's picture

maybe it's the world i walk in but i think you are dead wrong in the last paragraph. very clearly, and with unmistakable insight, the folks in my community are very aware of the issues of the day. but like i said, maybe my world is unique.

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 03:09 | 1183128 Creed
Creed's picture

+1 LT JC



Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:59 | 1181132 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

To the contrary, S&P served its purpose ...

the oligarchy has no interest in letting the good times stop ....

keep moving that wealth to the top....

cut away!!

everybody else, just repeat after me:

I won't feel pain... I won't feel pain... I won't feel pain... I won't feel pain...

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:59 | 1181134 ivars
ivars's picture

Silver does not seem to be as buyoyant as gold in the wake of S&P downgrade:


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 21:47 | 1182532 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

May is a Crimex delivery month.  Sliver will get going again soon as the Crimex can't make good on all it's delivery commitments.

Paying large cash premiums to forego delivery is a type of default, enabling and encouraging ... more delivery demands.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:58 | 1181136 earnulf
earnulf's picture

The CBO estimates released last week guarantee that the US/GDP ratio will move over 100%.   Is anyone else even remotely terrified by off the cuff discussions of trillions of dollars of debt?    I realize in the end it doesn't matter when the whole thing blows up and ratings mean squat after so much debacle the past three years.   Still, one would hope that an animal that can stand for long periods on it's hind legs would be able to, no, wait, it has to actually think with it's brain too....never mind, we are so screwed.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:03 | 1181147 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

debt to gdp is already 124% if you count the real numbers (You know, like real inflation, real unemployment..)

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 21:50 | 1182539 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

I think if you throw in the GSE commitments, medicaid, Social security, it comes to a lot more than 124% of GDP.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:40 | 1181517 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

I could maybe muster up a bit of concern about national debt if I thought for the briefest moment it was ever going to be paid.  I can't for the life of me understand how anyone can take this stuff seriously anymore.

I declared bankruptcy awhile back.  Fuckin' sucked. 

I remember spending about 12 days between the time when I'd finished the paperwork and was waiting for the final judgment--my interview with the judge, etc.  I didn't do anything crazy--if I'd known how things were going to turn out, maybe I would've. 

But I sure didn't worry about buying dinner on a credit-card during that period, either.

For everyone who wants some excuse to bash me for ripping off the creditors: don't worry.  I got my just deserts.  I've been poor ever since.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:02 | 1181139 ivars
ivars's picture

Watch the next USA president launch her campaing right in the conflict zone:


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:04 | 1181158 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Screw that Zionist baglady.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 22:18 | 1182542 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

Thanks SD-One for calling a spade a spade. 

This Ivazrs is a spam-bot for the zionist-baglady. Notw777 is another troll cruising for the ZBL.

She recently tried to drive to Bethlehem, but she and her goon handlers didn't realize Bethlehem is in the Occupied West Bank.  Could not get thru the ODF check-points.  Clueless wonders one and all.

Sarah was imposed on the nascent Tea Party, simply because she will reliably act as the ZBL.  These guys don't want to get out-flanked.

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 03:13 | 1183130 Creed
Creed's picture



or is that ZOG!


I'm always forgetting the nazi jargon, please forgive me

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 20:22 | 1186318 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

Zionism ≠ Judaism

Grow up Creed.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:00 | 1181140 Stoploss
Stoploss's picture

Screw 'em all, time for Ron Paul..

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:07 | 1181171 Dreadker
Dreadker's picture

Frankly... I'd vote for Ru Paul... just as much economic sense as anyone else currently in charge lol

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:04 | 1181142 Bob
Bob's picture

Lessee now . . . severe auterity for the masses or--clawback from the kleptocracy apparently being off the table for now--default. 

Me thinks the masses prefer default--wishes of S&P, TBTF's, Fed, etc., notwithstanding. 

I guess we'll see if the Tea Party can get it done for them. 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:03 | 1181154 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

default bad for kleptocracy ... so that is off the table

tea party is financed by kleptocracy .. so much for that

that leaves austerity for the masses ... please bend over everybody!

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:21 | 1181218 Bob
Bob's picture

This ends so badly for the kleptocracy, imo.  Portugal and Greece are only the tip of an iceberg.  Wall Street should be advocating higher taxes for the top 1% .  It would be a pennies on the dollar settlement--and GS would have to fund very little of it directly.  But when you are on such a huge and apparently unstoppable roll, I guess you forget that you actually can lose.  Oh, well.  Looks like this is gonna go a very hard way. 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:04 | 1181149 Sutton
Sutton's picture

The Power of the Bernank could not be undone.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:02 | 1181150 NOTW777
NOTW777's picture

its false to suggest the recent obama-boehner deal is a tea party deal. tea party had some influence but very little input. most tea party congress reps voted no

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:06 | 1181155 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

OK so 'Tea Party' has zero influence anyway.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:38 | 1181277 Bob
Bob's picture

The RepubliCorpians are exploiting the Tea Party as their pet boogey man.  Sad that those folks are such political rubes. 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:27 | 1181475 yabyum
yabyum's picture

Bob, Good call! The tea party has been co-opted by the ptb. The class war is OVER,, the rich have won.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 22:04 | 1182564 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

Re. the rich have won.

Maybe not.  Wait for the pain to kick in and run it's course.

++ for the yabyum reference.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:34 | 1181258 Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

Debt ceiling is a done deal.  consider it passed.  Why else would there have been weeks of wrangling over the budget bill that would have put the govment over the debt cap, even if they got their initial proposal of $66B cuts?  The budget bill and the debt ceiling are twins.  You cant have one without the other.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:43 | 1181296 Bob
Bob's picture

But the kleptocrats and a legion of useful ignorant minions are on a huge roll.  They're gonna stake everything on this roll of the dice.  I think they're gonna slam the deficit ceiling shut.  What that imposes upon the population will be tantamount to a Declaration of Civil War, imo, but they just can't get over themselves to the extent necessary to see where that ends.  Crazy dayz. 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 22:09 | 1182571 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

I agree with you Dr. No.  Pure theater.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:04 | 1181151 Scoobywan
Scoobywan's picture

I have failed to see any budget proposal where there isn't a deficit. Debt growth is OK if its not as fast? hmm. All seems lose lose to me. This is probably dollar bullish somehow.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:02 | 1181152 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

i didn't see the S & P downgrade, just in their "forward thinking".  AAA, wasn't it? 

QE3 is baked in;  higher ceiling baked in;  deficit spending baked in; Treasury checks to still clear for a while baked in. i got some great gingerbread mix.  i think i'll make a cake!  ...mmmm...

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:02 | 1181153 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

USA bankrupt default, all else is just blowhorning.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:09 | 1181161 PD Quig
PD Quig's picture

WTF Tyler? How did the Tea Party fail to make budget cuts?

Did you somehow miss that only a minority of GOP legislators are even willing to associate themselves with the Tea Party and that none of the leadership doing the deals in the back room are "Tea Party"? The Tea Party has all the authority of a clam at low tide in the GOP right now. Not sayin' that they've got all the answers either, but what the fuck are you capping on THEM for? As if they've failed to do something meaningful having less than 1/6 of the reins of power at their disposal?

You know, dude, in reading your policital comments, I just can't shake that you are a one of the Obama rubes who now is embarassed for having been duped by the motherfucking lying sack of shit... and now you are too embarrassed to admit that you were suckered by Mr. Hopey / Changey.

Obviously, both the parties are bought and paid for, but if there has been ANYTHING in this royally screwed country that has evidenced a pulse in the past two years, it is precisely the people who loosely call themselves Tea Party members.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:10 | 1181173 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

Don't worry about GOP legislators associating with the Tea Party ... the Kock brothers are right there for them..

austerity time for your a$$es, bitchez!

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:22 | 1181224 PD Quig
PD Quig's picture

Another mindless automaton heard from. What a dick. Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Do you have any idea how many billions more Soros and the other leftist bitches have pumped into every fucking lunatic leftist outfit for the last twenty years?

You need some new talking points, Koch-sucker.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:45 | 1181292 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

Yo, mindless!

don't hate the messenger, just giving you, uninformed, some facts:

"Five years ago, my brothers Charles and I provided the funds to start Americans for Prosperity," David Koch told AFP's annual Defending the Dream gathering in 2009. "It is beyond my wildest dreams that AFP has grown into this enormous organisation. The American dream of free enterprise and capitalism is alive and well."

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 22:19 | 1182577 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

Whatever genuine reform potential that was originally in the Tea Party was corralled and ended when Sarah the ZBL was imposed as leader from above.

BTW, what does the ZBL have to say about the Fed?  I'm sure it's entertaining.


Tue, 04/19/2011 - 03:16 | 1183132 Creed
Creed's picture

Taxed Enough Already


so, just what is it about that standard that pisses you assclowns off so bad?


the tea party stole your thunder, better luck next time

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:16 | 1181191 Vergeltung
Vergeltung's picture



Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:26 | 1181235 Tyler Durden
Tyler Durden's picture

Pretty sure nobody stopped this:$38 Billion In Cuts? Make That $353 Million

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:07 | 1181163 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

'Compromise more difficult'...yes but without fail everything always gets rammed thru 11th hour, US citizens holding the bag.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:09 | 1181181 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:08 | 1181174 mynhair
mynhair's picture

Trump the Chump will fix everything!

/end sarc

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:16 | 1181190 redpill
redpill's picture

If only epic combovers could fix economies.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:13 | 1181183 RobotTrader
RobotTrader's picture

If the U.S. is going bankrupt, why are bonds skying today?

I mean really, I remember when the deficit reached $1 trillion under Jimmy Carter.  By 1982 the cold war pushed the deficit to $2 trillion and the bond vigilanties were screaming. 

Now we are at $14 trillion, probably $40 trillion counting all the off-balance sheet crap, and interest rates are now still grinding near 40-year lows....

LOL....Nothing beats "Paper" as an investment.....

TIME 3-Month 0.000 07/14/2011 0.06
-0.005 / -.005 13:53 6-Month 0.000 10/13/2011 0.1
-0.005 / -.005 13:10 12-Month 0.000 04/05/2012 0.2
-0.015 / -.015 13:51 2-Year 0.750 03/31/2013 100-06+
0-03 / -.049 13:48 3-Year 1.250 04/15/2014 100-12½
0-07 / -.075 13:29 5-Year 2.250 03/31/2016 100-29½
0-10 / -.067 13:53 7-Year 2.875 03/31/2018 100-24+
0-10 / -.050 13:53 10-Year 3.625 02/15/2021 102-03+
0-10 / -.039 13:53 30-Year 4.750 02/15/2041 104-28
0-08+ / -.018 13:53
Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:17 | 1181193 redpill
redpill's picture

Put your money where your mouth is and load up on bonds then, Botty

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:44 | 1181304 whatsinaname
whatsinaname's picture

Botty's gonna be stuck to his Potty pretty soon.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:49 | 1181328 redpill
redpill's picture

You're an optimist, I was thinking he'd be curled into the fetal position dry-wretching on the floor behind the toilet.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:23 | 1181215 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

you first.  Don't worry "Bill Gross has your back"--and "he's big in this business so I hear."

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:23 | 1181216 malek
malek's picture

This is a hilarious chart, RT!
Did you fake it yourself?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:37 | 1181249 lieutenantjohnchard
lieutenantjohnchard's picture

did you not read tyler's post over the weekend how the fed was rigging rates lower?

so i guess you believe the usa is not bankrupt?

no wonder you're the worst trader in the usa. but i guess holding that title is why you post all day long. must be too depressing to look at your ever dimishing seed capital, even as you have no hope of getting a job, and eat on $10 day.

btw: gentleman jim sinclair sends warm regards, and expresses condolences that your jpm, vz, hd and mo are getting monkey hammered today.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:21 | 1181456 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

oh, my!  more junks for the daytime leading junk magnet. 

Lt. John, i don't "believe" the usa is bankrupt!  i think the goobermint is broke, almost bankrupt, but, dammit, still has checks (!) and they are still clearing the banks, too! 

btw, a smart, careful shopper can eat like a freaking king on $300/mo, Lt.    sir. 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 16:01 | 1181578 lieutenantjohnchard
lieutenantjohnchard's picture

you're correct. my mistake. shoulda been clearer. the usa gov't is bankrupt. but as far as eating like a king on $300 i guess it depends on what your definition of a king is. cheers.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:57 | 1181349 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Go load up on bonds them, bigmouth!

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:28 | 1181470 Big Ben
Big Ben's picture

I mean really, I remember when the deficit reached $1 trillion under Jimmy Carter.

Really? I don't remember any $1 trillion deficits until Obama took office. I think that 2008 deficit was around $450 billion. And it included some TARP loans, which were later paid back, so effectively it was less. What were you smoking back in the 70's?

Second, the US debt graph looks parabolic to me. Most of the baby boomers are in their peak earning years right now. But soon they will retire, causing tax revenues to tank and SS/medicare payments to soar.

I remember in the mid 2000's when the financial stocks were soaring and people could not pay enough for them despite the fact that their earnings were based on 110% home loans to people with no documented incomes. The only thing that I can conclude is that Mr. Market is an idiot in addition to being a manic depressive. I personally wouldn't touch long term Treasuries with a ten foot pole.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:13 | 1181184 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

No one is seriously considering default. The debt ceiling will be raised.....and raised again. We will either have QE3 (democrat solution) or WW3 (republican solution). However neither will be the final  solution, that much is guaranteed.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:16 | 1181189 ak_khanna
ak_khanna's picture

Maybe not raising the debt ceiling would be a good thing as incompeten­­­ts doing nothing is better than they doing something and making the situation worse.

The increase in debt ceiling will encourage the U.S. to borrow more money from the world which the likes of Geithner and Bernanke will then distribute it to their buddies, the bankers and the rich corporatio­­­­ns / individual­­­­s. 

They would turn around and use the money to gamble in stocks, commoditie­­­­s and currencies resulting in millions of people pushed below the poverty line as they would not be able to afford even the basic necessitie­­­­s of live needed to exist.

The stock, commodity and currency exchanges have been reduced to gambling dens whereby the more powerful traders with deep pockets move the markets to maximize their own profits at the expense of the remaining not so powerful players. 

The market operators ie banksters are currently driving the USD index down and pumping up everything else. This process will continue till there are no long positions left in the USD index and no short positions in any of the commoditie­­s, stock or currencies other than the USD.

The operators are then likely to take the long position on the dollar and short position on everything else. They would then use their money power to move the markets in the direction which would get them the maximum profit while screwing all other traders / hedge funds / investors.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:17 | 1181203 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

right you are!

It's not investment any longer ... it's pure speculation, wealth extraction in the Monopoly Game market

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:15 | 1181194 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

Thank you for the chart ... at some point, in order to have a serious discussion, we must dispel the myth of Republicans and deficits.

same bullsh!t as the 'wealth effect' and the 'trickle down economics'


too bad a lot of people can't read!

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:18 | 1181198 Verstehen
Verstehen's picture

If they would cut it would unleash hell. Spending must go on until it does not.

If they cut 4 trillion in 12 years and pile up 10 trillion thats not cutting thats delaying the inevitable.

Meanwhile more jobs are leaving or are not created because of the fraud called visas. All the laws must be revised and be viewed from a logical business friendly side. Are politicians able to do that?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:16 | 1181199 dootyfree
dootyfree's picture

The last 6 depressions came after balanced budgets... learn history.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:20 | 1181211 redpill
redpill's picture

What about the 90s?  Are you considering the tech bubble popping to be a depression?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:27 | 1181240 dootyfree
dootyfree's picture

No, but the clinton balanced budget contributed to the credit crisis.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:37 | 1181273 redpill
redpill's picture

I'd ask for an explanation there but I'm afraid it would be such a non-sequitur that it would be logical pollution.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:11 | 1181416 dootyfree
dootyfree's picture


1.  public deficit = private savings

2.  balanced budget = no deficit = no private savings

3.  in order to compensate for no private savings, private sector used debt to get by(to make up for lack of govt spending in economy)

4.  private sector loved debt and couldn't give it up, like a fat kid and sweets

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:21 | 1181457 A Man without Q...
A Man without Qualities's picture

public deficit = foreign investors = external trade deficits = loss of productive domestic jobs = growth in consumer credit = rates held too low for too long = speculative bubbles = total fucking disaster. 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 18:11 | 1181966 dootyfree
dootyfree's picture

= crap

if you understood the system, you would know external trade deficits is a good thing.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:30 | 1181488 redpill
redpill's picture

Several flaws there:

1) There was plenty of public debt rolling over if people wanted to use that as a savings vehicle

2) Private savings need not be dependent upon public debt

3) Private sector addiction to debt was caused by THE FED's interest rate policy, not the balanced budget.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:42 | 1181531 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

A big chunk of increased gummit revenue during the go-go '90s was a result of growth in profits and high-income earnings that resulted from offshoring jobs and replacement of labor with new technology.

Job stability and real-wages for the majority edged down.  None of that was any good for what some of the old-fashioned folks think of as "real economy."

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:46 | 1181536 redpill
redpill's picture

No argument there, but I don't think that was the question?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 16:07 | 1181602 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

I suspected we're in agreement, I just felt like commenting 'cause I like to type.  It depends on how one looks at the balanced budget, that's all.  This is a sophist's world.  IF revenues hadn't gone up, the budget COULDN'T have been balanced.  It's two sides of the same equation, is kinda my point.

Clinton didn't balance the budget--he lucked into a market period which enabled the budget to come into balance.  The factors which contributed to that brief period in US economic history were also foundational to the future credit crisis.

Sound-bites like "the clinton balanced budget contributed to the credit-crisis" should probably be ignored as bullshit partisan noise.  There's a way to support such a claim, but it's so far removed from context that attention is undeserved.

Anyway, I have a t-shirt I had printed that says in big block letters: PART OF THE PROBLEM

I like to wear it when I'm at the mall.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 18:08 | 1181956 dootyfree
dootyfree's picture

actually I could not care less about either side, so partisan it is not.  just telling you how it all work operationally.  learn the monetary system...

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 23:11 | 1182758 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

You ain't explained shit, dood.  Your posts don't suggest much understanding of anything.

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 01:29 | 1183013 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Clinton used accrual accounting which amounted to wishful thinking on huge tax receipts to *show* a balanced budget ON THE BOOKS, but in the future, not in real life.  We did not have *cash* on hand or even equity on hand that would
have been tangible assets to "balance" our budget. However, starting with Reagan (mid 80's)and continuing with Clinton (even with the then largest tax increase in history) we were on a better path towards balanced budgets.  The disclaimer
there though.... we borrowed money to pay for pet projects, just as Bush II became addicted to doing, because we knew SS and both Mediscare programs were insolvent, so the budget was balanced "on the books" while the National Debt
(what we owe everyone else) went through the roof!


Just keep repeating the same lie, and soon you'll find yourself believing it!

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:27 | 1181242 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

It was kind of depressing, wasn't it?

However he said depressions not recessions.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:19 | 1181202 onlooker
onlooker's picture

zombifying reality TV arena.------ where will the Dow be at close Tuesday and Friday? up, right?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:20 | 1181205 malek
malek's picture

Stated differently, S&P will shy away of doing such a step before the US 2012 elections.
The audacity of hopelessness.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:22 | 1181212 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

right... because this move is intended to help Obama ...

the mendacity of logiclessness

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:23 | 1181219 ivars
ivars's picture

In our macroeconomic forecast’s optimistic scenario (assuming near 4% annual real growth), the fiscal deficit would fall to 4.6% of GDP by 2013, but the U.S.’s net general government debt would still rise to almost 80% of GDP by 2013. In our pessimistic scenario (a mild, one-year double-dip recession in 2012), the deficit would be 9.1%, while net debt would surpass 90% by 2013.

S&P pessimistic scenario is optimistic compared to but close to my scenario from February 6th:

I think recession will last 2012 and into 2013 and will be by no means too mild ( -2-4% contraction of GDP).

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:25 | 1181231 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

In more pressing news:

Catherine Middleton might have designed her own wedding dress...



Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:30 | 1181251 fuu
fuu's picture

JPM/Silver swiftly approaching parity. I'll take my good news where I can find it.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:34 | 1181269 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

Rising equity prices are to be feared while our return on our savings accounts (let alone the value of our paycheck) are to be loathed.  You have better odds in Vegas--and for those who say we can't default S&P's just said otherwise.  The point of this entire "money destroying excercise" is to bring out the worst in all of us so that the real criminals can point to us and say "you see!  look what you get if you don't have us."  and "they" win because "fear is everwhere and always the human modus operandi."  or perhaps more accurately "a visceral hatred of courage" which is all Wall Street and apparently DC now despises.  MAINTAIN YOUR OBLIGATIONS WASHINGTON DC.  Tell S&P's to FEAR YOU!  They lied to THE ENTIRE PLANET about "credit worthiness" and did so WITH INTENT TO DECEIVE.  SO WHAT IF THEY'RE RIGHT NOW? 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:49 | 1181322 whatsinaname
whatsinaname's picture

The Wonder Years !!

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:48 | 1181306 Navigator
Navigator's picture

<<<Republicans and Democrats remain far apart on where to make the cuts that will be needed for long-term deficit reduction>>>

Yes, we have a spending problem.  It's defense spending.

But even more importently, we have an income problem.  Get used to hearing it...we have an income problem.  

You can't have bought-off politicians cutting taxes and constantly creating tax loopholes for the corporations who bought them off for decades and not reduce your income to the point of causing we have.  What a surprise.  Nobody could have foreseen this every time a wingnut screams tax cuts.

Disagree?  GE and ExxonMobil paid zero taxes....which is probably less than 99% of people reading ZH.

Close all the loopholes for corporations and charge them their 35%.  Chop defense spending by 50%.

Problem solved.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:53 | 1181335 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture

sorry, can't tax the rich (we lose all the money trickling down) and can't cut defense, we need them once the masses uprise

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:57 | 1181559 Cachao
Cachao's picture

Actually, we have a Constitution problem.  You can't have politicians buying off corps and income tax payers with loopholes without an income tax.  Look deeper than the jealousy of class warfare and you will see that the 16th amendment is a major contributor to our problems.

You can't have endless unconstitutional wars without the guaranteed revenue that the income tax represents.  You have much less rent-seeking without the income tax, higher turnover in Congress, and a whole host of other benefits.

Reading Frank Chodorov changed my life.

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 03:28 | 1183138 Creed
Creed's picture

income & property taxes have made us serfs


exist on excise taxes and cut .gov by 75%


bring the military home


seal the damn border with Mexico


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 16:20 | 1181657 sschu
sschu's picture

Close all the loopholes for corporations and charge them their 35%.  Chop defense spending by 50%.

Yawn.  Same old same old.  Such nonsense. 

We spend approx $700B on defense, so we can capture about $350B there.  Corporations pay about $200B in taxes, but since we have a $1.6T deficit, that means we need to raise corporate taxes SIX TIMES what they are now.  So corporations need to pony up $1.2T to make us whole.

Of course this plan will not disrupt the job market much.  Even at an outrageous amount of $500K per job, extracting $1.6T from defense and corporations means 3.4M jobs.  Not a perfect analysis, but close enough. 

Government at all levels is too big.  Steven Moore said that there are 22.5M people working for government local, state and federal.  This number needs to be reduced by about 66% or 15M people.  Why do we need 22.5M people working for the government?  What politician(s) is going to layoff 15M people?

It is unsolvable, get used to QE to infinity/hyperinflation or deflationary depression.  An interim step is confiscation of your 401K.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 16:31 | 1181699 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

We spend approx $700B on defense

Bullshit.  We spend approx $700B on the Dept of Defense.

You add up all the minor non-DoD "defense" spending here and there and you tack on another half-trillion or so.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 16:56 | 1181774 sschu
sschu's picture

You add up all the minor non-DoD "defense" spending here and there and you tack on another half-trillion or so.

My source was posted on ZH a couple weeks ago,  Page 9.  If we could post pixs, I would do so. 

Please provide a citation to support your statement that we spend another half-trillion or so. 


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:31 | 1181882 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Blah blah blah.  I'm not going to parse out everything, but the info is publicly available, even from the actual cost-centers themselves.  The one thing I don't have a good handle on is how to calculate the cost of debt-service on past deficits run up to fund warfare operations--that's a significant expense which is not contained in the DoD budget.

You actually have to read this stuff to understand it, though.  I don't spend my free-time making PPTs of pie-charts.  A tiny example would be that the DoE spends a billion on Naval reactor management.  It's criminally deceptive that this is left of out discussions of the "defense budget."  Dept of Homeland Security budget is $55B, the FBI spends a few billion on counter-terrorist work, we have to pay benefits and pensions for veterans (amazingly, VA doesn't even cover all of this), etc etc etc.  Minutae trump all.

Just for hoots, here's at least $150B:

Ignore whatever you don't like and call it partisanship, that's the standard approach on this sort of thing.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:45 | 1181910 sschu
sschu's picture

I'm not going to parse out everything, but the info is publicly available ... Ignore whatever you don't like and call it partisanship

So now 2 posters have refuted your claims about about a half a trillion or so in poorly documented defense savings and I am partisan!  LOL!

Lets say it really is a trillion, take away half of that and we still have $1.1T from corporate taxes to balance the budget per your plan.  They pay about $200B now.

Explain exactly how that happens.




Mon, 04/18/2011 - 18:00 | 1181944 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

I didn't say you're partisan, and my numbers haven't been refuted, because no one bothered to look.

You are still sticking with the notion that "defense spending" is nothing but the armed forces and the Pentagon, and that is bullshit.

You asked for citations, I gave you a few, you ignored them and restated your initially incorrect claim.  If you don't want to know something, you're not going to know.

I hadn't even totaled up the costs in the DoE pages and had missed the VA plus benefits calculation.  The 3 links I provided for you cover about $230B.  Take your admitted figure of "foreign aid," and it's $273B.

Peanuts, right?  This is why budget discussions are so pointless.  Most folks prefer to pick one axe to grind and ignore everything they can't be bothered to look up.

The Dept of the Interior carries the expense of LAWN CARE on domestic military bases.  And they don't hire illegals.  Is that fuckin' wild or what?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:05 | 1181805 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

1 trillion on defense spending for FY 2011, homies (officially):

US Defense Spending 1792-2016 - Charts

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:25 | 1181865 sschu
sschu's picture

Veterans - $141B

Foreign Economic Aid - $43B

Yea, these sure are defense spending items.  Not quite half a trillion or so.   

But we are off topic.  The statement was made that we can just cut defense by half and make corporations pay 35% to balance the budget. 

Sure, lets take another $70B from vets and I am opposed to foreign aid.  Total $110B.  Still a little short of $1.6T.

Sorry, your numbers are pure fiction.





Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:28 | 1181871 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

You obviously looked at the table. It's 768 billion for pure military spending on weapons & troops.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:31 | 1181881 sschu
sschu's picture

Your info is different than mine, by about 10% or $70B.  Peanuts.

Not sure what that has to do with the discussion.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:39 | 1181893 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

Sorry 'bout that.

Just looked back at your original post and I misread your number.

You're correct.


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:41 | 1181898 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

For my part, my point was *only* that your DoD number is bullshit when describing defense spending.

I don't believe for a second that we can fix the deficit by cutting defense spending in half.  I'm just saying we spend a LOT more than $700B on it.

(I also agree that $70B is peanuts, which is why I think it's absurd when you see people here pissing and moaning about foodstamps.)

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 17:58 | 1181938 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

FWIW, I agree with you.

I would not be surprised if defense spending including unofficial (but still real) numbers exceeds 1.3 trillion, and I also agree that cutting even that figure in half wouldn't matter in terms of long term debt reduction at this point.

Any serious effort to reduce the debt must tackle the big three non-discretionary parts of the budget, which constitute over 80% of the budget: Medicare, Social Security & Defense.

People can argue about what's fair or not fair, etc., but this is just basic math.

Tue, 04/19/2011 - 06:46 | 1183205 Borrowed Merkin
Borrowed Merkin's picture

...GE and Exxon paid no taxes, etc. Okay, get it through what passes for your head - corporations NEVER pay taxes. People do. If you raise taxes on a corporation, what does the corporation do? Suck it up and just eat it? NO, NO, NO freaking NO. They pass the taxes down to their customer. No corp. willingly accepts margin compression without a fight. You are an economic idiot, sans savant.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:45 | 1181310 sbenard
sbenard's picture

Just shut it down! We need to go fiscal cold turkey!

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:54 | 1181340 mynhair
mynhair's picture

Trump the Chump would primary ODummer, if he were serious.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 14:57 | 1181350 djsmps
djsmps's picture

The market looks like it could close positive.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:00 | 1181363 mynhair
mynhair's picture

Nah, just a regular 66% loss erasement day.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:01 | 1181373 jmc8888
jmc8888's picture

Glass-Steagall the fraud (entirety of system)

Default on the fraud (one by one)

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:04 | 1181388 mynhair
mynhair's picture

Tax Goobermint!

Those rich bastards pay zippo!

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:08 | 1181394 mynhair
mynhair's picture

TMV is giving me a woody......might have to jump it.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:15 | 1181412 AC_Doctor
AC_Doctor's picture

Are the Republicans going to puss out and cave in for a higher debt ceiling-fuck yes.  They are the same spend-thrifs as their donkey counterparts.

Who is going to call the first Bank Holiday correctly?

When will the first official dollar devaluation occur?

Can you spot the Marxist asshole in my avatar?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:15 | 1181431 mynhair
mynhair's picture

Bank Holiday = Memorial Day

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:26 | 1181469 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

Gas Holiday = 4th of July.
Marxist assholes? where?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:25 | 1181466 AC_Doctor
AC_Doctor's picture

Gold/Silver ratio is down to 34:1.  It was in the low to mid 40's in the previous two months.  Smart money in going into silver...

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:32 | 1181489 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

very nice call, baby_papaDocilous!  i think the spike in gold, while silver got sold off, earlier today, was to influence the G/SRatio and that "bets" around it got cashed on the upwards swing.  this happens almost daily.  just takin the fish outa the nets, really. 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:24 | 1181467 robertocarlos
robertocarlos's picture

The DOW is up 100 points now. What's the problem?

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:28 | 1181472's picture

What are we talking about here? Rating agencies? The mooks that are the Wall Street mob enforcers; held the pooch down during the gang bang with their asset ratings. Currently implicated in the takedown of the PIGS for GS and crew. S&P chosen to deliver the dummy slap by the agencies, a reminder to the Obama administration, just who owns their ass. Smart remarks about being in this together, raising taxes or developing a spine regarding Medicare and Social Security, recognizing a responsibility to the old and infirm is just a lot of silly talk. You gonna have to raise the debt ceiling after they get done downgrading your ass.

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:31 | 1181494 IdioTsincracY
IdioTsincracY's picture


Mon, 04/18/2011 - 15:40 | 1181522 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

the ratings frauds were certainly a keystone of the last wave of frauds.  people holding leveraged AAA had nothing left!  then, the bailouts! 

after they get done?  have they started?  did i miss something? 

Mon, 04/18/2011 - 22:24 | 1182602 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture


Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!