This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
S&P Downgrades US To AA+, Outlook Negative - Full Text
United States of America Long-Term Rating Lowered To 'AA+' On Political Risks And Rising Debt Burden; Outlook Negative
We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.
We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.
The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.
More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.
The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.
Rating Action
On Aug. 5, 2011, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA'. The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. At the same time, Standard & Poor's affirmed its 'A-1+' short-term rating on the U.S. In addition, Standard & Poor's removed both ratings from CreditWatch, where they were placed on July 14, 2011, with negative implications.
The transfer and convertibility (T&C) assessment of the U.S.--our assessment of the likelihood of official interference in the ability of U.S.-based public- and private-sector issuers to secure foreign exchange for debt service--remains 'AAA'.
Rationale
We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.
Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden and our perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent with our criteria (see "Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and Assumptions," June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41). Nevertheless, we view the U.S. federal government's other economic, external, and monetary credit attributes, which form the basis for the sovereign rating, as broadly unchanged.
We have taken the ratings off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by delays to raising the government's debt ceiling. In addition, we believe that the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course of U.S. fiscal policy for the next few years.
The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our view, the differences between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently. Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on more comprehensive measures. It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options. 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.
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).
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.
The act calls for as much as $2.4 trillion of reductions in expenditure growth over the 10 years through 2021. These cuts will be implemented in two steps: the $917 billion agreed to initially, followed by an additional $1.5 trillion that the newly formed Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is supposed to recommend by November 2011. The act contains no measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them.
The act further provides that if Congress does not enact the committee's recommendations, cuts of $1.2 trillion will be implemented over the same time period. The reductions would mainly affect outlays for civilian discretionary spending, defense, and Medicare. We understand that this fall-back mechanism is designed to encourage Congress to embrace a more balanced mix of expenditure savings, as the committee might recommend.
We note that in a letter to Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated total budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the next 10 years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the CBO's latest "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" of June 2011, updated to include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to Congress. In general, the CBO's "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" assumes a continuation of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.
We view the act's measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation. However, this is within the framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves open the details of what is finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and Congress and the Administration could modify any agreement in the future. Even assuming that at least $2.1 trillion of the spending reductions the act envisages are implemented, we maintain our view that the U.S. net general government debt burden (all levels of government combined, excluding liquid financial assets) will likely continue to grow. Under our revised base case fiscal scenario--which we consider to be consistent with a 'AA+' long-term rating and a negative outlook--we now project that net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 79% in 2015 and 85% by 2021. Even the projected 2015 ratio of sovereign indebtedness is high in relation to those of peer credits and, as noted, would continue to rise under the act's revised policy settings.
Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.
Our revised upside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the outlook on the 'AA+' long-term rating being revised to stable--retains these same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario, we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.
Our revised downside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as being consistent with a possible further downgrade to a 'AA' long-term rating--features less-favorable macroeconomic assumptions, as outlined below and also assumes that the second round of spending cuts (at least $1.2 trillion) that the act calls for does not occur. This scenario also assumes somewhat higher nominal interest rates for U.S. Treasuries. We still believe that the role of the U.S. dollar as the key reserve currency confers a government funding advantage, one that could change only slowly over time, and that Fed policy might lean toward continued loose monetary policy at a time of fiscal tightening. Nonetheless, it is possible that interest rates could rise if investors re-price relative risks. As a result, our alternate scenario factors in a 50 basis point (bp)-75 bp rise in 10-year bond yields relative to the base and upside cases from 2013 onwards. In this scenario, we project the net public debt burden would rise from 74% of GDP in 2011 to 90% in 2015 and to 101% by 2021.
Our revised scenarios also take into account the significant negative revisions to historical GDP data that the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced on July 29. From our perspective, the effect of these revisions underscores two related points when evaluating the likely debt trajectory of the U.S. government. First, the revisions show that the recent recession was deeper than previously assumed, so the GDP this year is lower than previously thought in both nominal and real terms. Consequently, the debt burden is slightly higher. Second, the revised data highlight the sub-par path of the current economic recovery when compared with rebounds following previous post-war recessions. We believe the sluggish pace of the current economic recovery could be consistent with the experiences of countries that have had financial crises in which the slow process of debt deleveraging in the private sector leads to a persistent drag on demand. As a result, our downside case scenario assumes relatively modest real trend GDP growth of 2.5% and inflation of near 1.5% annually going forward.
When comparing the U.S. to sovereigns with 'AAA' long-term ratings that we view as relevant peers--Canada, France, Germany, and the U.K.--we also observe, based on our base case scenarios for each, that the trajectory of the U.S.'s net public debt is diverging from the others. Including the U.S., we estimate that these five sovereigns will have net general government debt to GDP ratios this year ranging from 34% (Canada) to 80% (the U.K.), with the U.S. debt burden at 74%. By 2015, we project that their net public debt to GDP ratios will range between 30% (lowest, Canada) and 83% (highest, France), with the U.S. debt burden at 79%. However, in contrast with the U.S., we project that the net public debt burdens of these other sovereigns will begin to decline, either before or by 2015.
Standard & Poor's transfer T&C assessment of the U.S. remains 'AAA'. Our T&C assessment reflects our view of the likelihood of the sovereign restricting other public and private issuers' access to foreign exchange needed to meet debt service. Although in our view the credit standing of the U.S. government has deteriorated modestly, we see little indication that official interference of this kind is entering onto the policy agenda of either Congress or the Administration. Consequently, we continue to view this risk as being highly remote.
Outlook
The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate fiscal scenario illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently
assume could lead us to lower the long-term rating again. On the other hand, as our upside scenario highlights, if the recommendations of the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction--independently or coupled with other initiatives, such as the lapsing of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners--lead to fiscal consolidation measures beyond the minimum mandated, and we believe they are likely to slow the deterioration of the government's debt dynamics, the long-term rating could stabilize at 'AA+'.
On Monday, we will issue separate releases concerning affected ratings in the funds, government-related entities, financial institutions, insurance, public finance, and structured finance sectors.
»
- 60002 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
stupid sociopaths as dangerous, they get elected on the money of the smart sociopaths
Nice analysis, with one minor error.
The "free" money from the Treasury wasn't "free" but borrowed from you and your children's future. i.e. You have had your pocket picked in advance, so that you can be systematically looted in the present.
TPTB and TBTF will continue with this crap until either they are exterminated -- or the law is enforced. So you basically have a choice of one. The only game left to play by 'them' is the Keep The Lid On Society reality game -- and they're about to lose that too.
"TPTB and TBTF will continue with this crap until"... forget "exterminated", this happens nearly never.
RESTRAINED, now this would be fantastic
According to Cantor, congress can be bought, and Wall Street prefers Repubs.....http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870357500457504361221646179...
[When Paulson said he "couldn't " do anything to save Lehman...]---agrotera
Nice job on the Paulson/Lehman recap, agrotera!
I appreciate your optimism regarding Tea Party mantra. I fear though Tea Party membership is at or near its max. I doubt membership and its representation in Congress will grow much from here.
Far more likely, the marxist/socialist/Progressive membership grows and is embolden as the economy deteriorates. So too, I expect our countrymen, lost and dependent on decades of insidious entitlement programs, will lash out at one another. Easy prey for marxist mantra.
This is direct pressure being exerted on these same whistle blowers who have downgraded the european sovereigns after having done nothing to downgrade US banks in the 2008 burnout. The world now fully knows on past performance that these three whistleblowers are NOT representative of fair handed financial evalutaion, but look to who pays their bills and bonuses, aka WS. Their reputation is now in jeopardy world wide.
Now, in the current context, with the fiat economy on fire, the WORLD WIDE creditor nations and the IMF included have come down hard on them to INCLUDE the US economy as well as it IS the reserve currency. The straw that broke the camel's back was QE-2 shenanigans that was just serving solely WS interests, biased and oriented by the head of the largest central bank; supposedly guardian of the world reserve currency. It debased the USD, fragilized the world economy, in the currency war waged by FED over this last year. Subsequently, the Congressional gridlock of last few weeks has shown to the world that US politics has nothing to envy the Greek Parliament in its shoddiness. This has now boomeranged on the US government, Congress and the FED.
The ultimatum went out to S&P and they were obliged to do to the US what they are doing to Greece and Italy. Next week as the asset base of the bourses will probably melt further, they will now have to downgrade, France, Uk and Spain. So the pain will inevitably deepen and the uncertainty jump another quantum level.
The US public NEVER believed that their money and their government could be so treated. No more free lunches for the FED!
"these three whistleblowers are NOT representative of fair handed financial evalutaion, but look to who pays their bills and bonuses, aka WS." - falak pema
You are quite right to question just who do the "whistleblowers" serve? But "WS" is too US-centric. The global corporations and financial houses from Monsanto to Halliburton are in fact "global", and those who head them are globalists. The BIS, IMF et al has no particular aversion to subjecting the USA to the same "shock doctrine" austerity that other nations have been profitably subjected to.
Similarly, the Pentagon, and the CIA as well, have become global enterprises, with hundreds of bases, privileges with locals, profitable arrangements with local client leaders from drugs to weapons, and other self-serving deals ... "fiefdoms in the provinces" so to speak. Historically, such imperial provinces have always been a source of rebellions or coups. The globalist Pentagon has its own self-serving motives to do the bidding of its global corporatist sponsors. Patriotic nationalism is offset by the cultivated loyalty to fellow soldiers and the military organization itself, and furthered as the organization recruits internationally, and integrates globally. And any sense of national patriotism becomes increasingly irrelevant and is suppressed when the organization continuously carries out missions unrelated and contrary to the best overall interests of nearly all US citizens.
And I might add,
just as "support the president" became code for supporting the Vietnam War of occupation,
just as "support the troops" has pretty much become code for supporting global warfare,
... so too nowadays has most flag waving and display become code for supporting militarism
(not the nation's ideals of civilian pre-eminence as embodied in the Constitution)
[just as "support the troops" has pretty much become code for supporting global warfare,]---rwe2late
I agree with your later comments about the flag and civilian pre-eminence. However, reconsider your thoughts about the motives behind "support our troops."
IMO you are correct in determining the roots for today's "support our troops" goes back to the Vietnam war. However, I think you have the motive wrong.
The Vietnam war left a terrible scar on America. An unresolved undeclared war. No objective mission. A war fought by the politicians, not the commanding generals. Public opinion was wildly polarized.
Our nation's ego---right or wrong---was terribly wounded. But, something very positive, healing, started happening in the 1980's. Maybe it was First Blood, Platoon, or Born on the 4th of July, but the nation took shame on itself for our wretched reception of soldiers coming home from their tours of Nam.
I think we collectively decided henceforth we would always support the troops, and direct our anger and disgust rightly on those who caused the problem---the politicians.
My impression is that most people who sport "support the troops" stickers do not want to support the troops by bringing them home, but to "support" them by continuing to pay for their overseas deployments.
That is certainly the understanding promoted by Congress and the President.
Whatever the original nobler motive, it has widely, though not exclusively, been misused and subverted to generally become its opposite.
I see your point, of course.
IMO, the least we can do to "support our troops" is bring them home from illegal undeclared wars.
You are only highlighting by reinforcing the dichotomous parlese spoken at the head of the US Oligarchy : the elites are for world oligarchy play, as ordained by the logic of Reaganomics, NWO, outsourcing, oil/MIC power play, whereas the people are now spreadeagled by debt like sacrificed sheep all over the world. With their elected members saying one thing in public and doing just the opposite in private (via surrogate reps. like the FED). Its bringing the world down, this contradictory bias, this criminally irresponsible double talk. Its leads nowhere except to more pain for the people, not the Oligarchs.
"You are only highlighting by reinforcing the dichotomous parlese spoken at the head of the US Oligarchy" - falak pema
- only in your garbled imagination
I disagree, the world's biggest privately owned corporation namely, the privately owned >1.5 trillion dollar market cap Federal Reserve Corporation can and will have more free lunches any time they choose, since they run our government...next chapter, we all pay to hold cash in a bank==the Bank of New York already started by charging 13bp...wait and see, this will become a mandate on all cash and it will be on the Fed's balance sheet as an "expense" and all "expenses are non-refundable to the US Treasury. Their balance sheet has TRIPLED since the "crisis" in 2008 and they decided to "give" themselves an extra 0.25% on all "excess" reserves in addition ot the 6% on 1% of ALL RESERVES they view as an "expense" thus non-refundable...how special they will print money, buy treasuries, earn the interest, charge us 0.25% on the printted money then get interest on the treasuries they buy to "save us all" then use as collateral to gamble away to make us all think the market run up is "real" and not fabricated.
I'll preface this by saying I'm the one that is usually wrong about predicting things like this...
BUT, when you look at what was said by the rating agencies well before the debt ceiling talks, they were looking for 4T move in the short to medium term. They got a little over two long term back loaded. How could they not downgrade? I think thats how s&p looked at it. They were the last ratings agency to announce because they were sitting in a room trying to figure how to NOT downgrade.
In fact, I'm wondering how moodys & fitch DIDN'T downgrade. How were they convinced to not downgrade?
These questions are why I'm usually wrong about these things. The answer is politics or corruption. Probably both.
In the pool of corruption, it's hard to know who peed first.
Thanks for your Reply, toady.
1) one of my first thought was that Moody's and Fitch probably HAVE to follow, but then again, who knows these days.
2) I'm surprised. genuinely.
Right it was CHINA.They had the cojones
This wound up in the wrongpart of the thread.
What I was responding with was China was the one with the balls to step out and downgrade the U.S. first. Not the old S&P.Moodys criminals.they only did it to save face (which it did not)....Fail.
You are 2/5th's of reality/ Grass- Hopper
This Video Clip seems very appropriate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fxFkue8gZ8
Final scene from the 1968 "Planet of the ages"
"They Really Did it. Damn... Damn you all to hell. You blew it all up!"
That really does sum it up! And such a powerful scene...someone posted on You Tube, and I never noticed, but there's not shlocky final music at the very end..just the sound of the waves on the beach...cool...
The Day the Dollar Died:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N8gJSMoOJc&feature=player_embedded
forgive me the fear mongering, but y'all prepared for this anyway. aint'ya?
popcorn bitchez!
slick propaganda--true? Who knows.
I still don't buy the premise that all things American have to include loud bangs and huge balls of fire.
History suggest a half dozen years of heavy inflation. Which is hard enough.
The ONLY chance of hope that we have is if the Markets trip their 10% down breakers EVERY SINGLE DAY NEXT WEEK!
In unquestioning obedience to the S&P downgrade, I have unilaterally revalued my investments downward by 5%.
Also, in S&P fashion, I've overvalued my girlfriend's draw on my wallet and downgraded her to "SEEYA".
snap!
if she knows where her highs are she will a come anyways. The best things in life are free! ....I know,... but give me MONEY!... So sang the Beatles!
AAAdios.....HolAA+
This is all by design, bitches.
9mm watching season premier of snooki last night instead...
Big F-ing whoop. Within the next 9-12 months S & P does the same thing to most of Europe and then there is no arb for the vigilantes to latch on to.
Well played? S&p is near retarded and rated worthless securities AAA... Why is anyone listening to them? They couldnt rate my hangnail. What next, they will rate gold?
Facebook just banned me for 4 days
because I posted this video of Glenn Beck in Isreal ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHoaXgA99Mk
Please be my friend on FACEBOOK , Patrick Nesvadba
and together lets tell FACEBOOK to fuck off..
Facebook just banned me for 4 days
because I posted this video of Glenn Beck in Isreal ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHoaXgA99Mk
Please be my friend on FACEBOOK , Patrick Nesvadba
and together lets tell FACEBOOK to fuck off..
Facebook just banned me for 4 days
because I posted this video of Glenn Beck in Isreal ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHoaXgA99Mk
Please be my friend on FACEBOOK , Patrick Nesvadba
and together lets tell FACEBOOK to fuck off..
Facebook just banned me for 4 days
because I posted this video of Glenn Beck in Isreal ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHoaXgA99Mk
Please be my friend on FACEBOOK , Patrick Nesvadba
and together lets tell FACEBOOK to fuck off..
Here is PAtrick the PAINTER
live from his Austin home.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceh1zIyE6hc&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Please send him a friend request as he has just been banned from facebook over posting this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceh1zIyE6hc&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Here is PAtrick the PAINTER
live from his Austin home.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceh1zIyE6hc&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Please send him a friend request as he has just been banned from facebook over posting this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceh1zIyE6hc&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
whoops. thats a shitty looking fan you have there
I wish they shittyed up the fan around 12 noon today rather than 8:30 pm on a friday night.
You must be joking. A. This ends the week and everyone has to suck it up for the weekend with no market activity. B. This will extend the BY THE MOTHER FUCKING DIP gold/silver season just a smidgit longer.
I think it may have done the opposite. PM's rally sunday night.
I do get the feeling that my gold and silver horde just increased in value.
Lucky I live in a small town- only one postman to track down if the silver I ordered Wednesday doesn't arrive Monday....
boom!
I think nukes are louder than "BOOM" but don't quote me on that. Thankfully I haven't seen one in person.
You don't want to see the actual detonation. It does bad things to the optic nerve.
Double flash means it was a nuke.
Here's one.
that wasn't very compassionate of you...my optical stuff is all blistered mush, you fascist bastard.
does this mean all the mutuals and pensions have to sell their holdings? anyway, whatever, at least Timmeh!! has his place in the history books..
Tim Geithner is "The one" (who lost the rating for the rest of history) lol
And Obama is the other one.
nice avatar.
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
The majority of prospectus state "of U.S. Treasury quality" not a strict or arbitrary AAA rating standard as that varies from agency to agency. Thus they can hold the paper alghough there are some that will trade out for corporate grade paper (IBM, XOM, etc.) of HIGHER quality and yield.
one NO would have been sufficient but thx for the extra effort ;)
10 years later....OSAMA wins....
Nice. Osama did see first hand how the USSR was financially, militarily and morally bled dry by the US in Afghanistan.
You may be a Fabian lover but i can't fault your logic here, very true.
Have your first ever green from me
hey, BD_6!
are you baked enuf for fabian and annette? L0L!
Watch Fireball 500 (1966) Trailer Online - VideoSurf Video Search
Zackly! Terrorist Bitches! Of course, there are terrorists in every country. In some, they strap bombs to their bodies, in others, they wear nice suits, hold elections, and kill for our protection.
<-- This is from the Onion.
<-- WTF?
Downgrade, bitchez!
Burn, baby, burn!
Beat me to it!
EDIT:
Egan-Jones did downgrade the US debt a week or so ago.
Yeah, and Martin Weiss downgraded the US to a C- a few weeks ago...LOL
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/weiss-downgrades-u-s-debt-what-to-do-2-46020
I am hereby Upgrading my SPY puts to AAAAAAAAAA+.
DoChen,
Yes they did,and I think it's fitting they blamed it ALL on the GOP for not raising taxes.
Had NADA to do w/Barry,Benny & Da Boyeeez profligate spending over the past 3yrs.................and an extra 4 Trillion in spending.
WHO was it that slam dunked NO on a Balanced Budget Agreement,damn those Libertarians............Oh, and let's NOT forget the Tea Party.
The Blame game has begun.............................................as if there's not enough to go around.
But who has contrlled the purse for 3+yrs?
Barry got the finger for his bday!
So much for "the Chicago way"
Will congress fix itself or point the finger on monday?
Don't count Barry out yet. That's a nice little ratings agency you have there, a shame if something was to happen to it.
The next appearance will have to began..... "I will not seek re-election to the office of President of the United States, and if nominated by my party, I will not accept...." you know the rest!
"I am not a Kenyan"?
"I am not a Kenyan"?
That's Keynesian, not Kenyan!
A compromise. Kenyansian economics...
Oh, to see the look on my Brother-in-law's face if that were to transpire!
10-1 S&P issues a "correction" back to AAA by Sunday. Oh, and by the way, the Justice Dept WON'T be issuing those subpenaes after all.
Is that before the Asian markets open or after ?
10-1? i'll take that bet
Well, thanks for that Barry. But you know what . . . .
Dagong will hire all our people and shit on your face from Beijing.
And then what will you do?
Capice?
He sure did. I think his replacement has been chosen.
Radioactive!
Let the great unwind begin. Not one policmaker tells the truth about what true fiscal consildation and a balanced budget means: A minimum 10% hit to GDP, falsely priced assets deflating to their real value, and some true pain. Well folks, this is what happen when you borrow. You get less later in order to get more now. Welcome to later.
Absolutely correct, concise wisdom that you can explain to your teenager.
This is your debt/deficit. This is your debt/deficit on steroids. Any questions?
"Dad, can you tell me about Glass-Steagall again before I try to sleep?"
This is an excellent take on what this means to us and the ripple effects we could expect to see (written by James Wesley, Rawles just yesterday)...
http://www.survivalblog.com/2011/08/americas_sovereign_debt_credit.html
Thanks CrankItTo11.
survivalblog.com is a MUST read website.
Crank, Founders,
Green to you both. YES, it is time to prepare even harder.
THIS TIME we may be short of time!
EDIT:
Survivalblog.com is a must!
What is impressive is he made the call last night.
Zero Hedge and Survivalblog are the only two sources of news and commentary that I visit daily. I recommend both to all of my colleagues who have taken the red pill.
Much of value to be sure. Rawles is himself, unfortunately, a Zionist and therefore lacks understanding of some crucial dimensions of the issues.
Remember when Jim Grant produced that 'make believe' prospectus describing the US Treasury as a junk bond? Where is that ZH link?
Edit: Here it is.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/jim-grant-presents-prospectus-united-states-discusses-death-penalty-us-coinage-debasers
He's back!
rrr
dollars to doughnuts he's been brewin up a storm...i see a squall on the horizon
and it's a hard/
it's a hard/
it's a hard/
it's a hard/
it's a hard rain's a gonna fall
On the other hand, expect interest rates to fall if bernanke prints with carefree abandon in order to buy every treasury on offer.
AmericAA+ fuck yeah.
Awesome...
Won't be long until AmericFFFFFFFF-----------
Send in the Jackals.
This is why equities (and everything thing else) sold off. The pile on gang-bang of Lady Liberty. talk about a trillion money shots.
They just want yields for UST to go up. China, Gross and GS have all telegraphed these demands for months.
Just wait until the Gang of 12 Illegal Super Congress starts its music. BBB-
Well, one thing that won't be downgraded is the financial outlook of whichever US Gov't official leaked the news likely yesterday, if not this morning, to Goldman and friends.
You are absolutely right. This stinks to high fucking hell.
Insider trading is all about getting caught. If everyone inside knows, who could possibly see it coming??
Good luck when the public is shut out of their own government incorporated and the markets are completely fucking fraud.
The best police state central fraud markets that political money can buy.
There is some rhyme to your reason... I like Spiders.
Coincidence that the S&P 500 got hammered this week? I mean, who woulda known....
I would definitely call that coincidence. Money was flooding into Treasuries. T's would have sold off if this had leaked, as they likely will on Monday.
I concur because I wish I had bought those puts on my LQD when everyone rushed in yesterday. But then, the SSO and FAS shorts should make up for it.
<sarc>No one could have predicted this. No one.</sarc>
<sarc>No one could have predicted this. No one.</sarc>
Fuckin' scary.
Right you are.
The downfall of fiat currency is terrifying, sure. But Count Floyd is fuckin' scary.
got gold?
Confiscation event in 3... 2... 1... .
Gold is worthless to you if the government can just take it without recompense.
They can't take it if it's in your house.
The cost for such an operation would be so high that the government would collapse before they ever reached your doorstep. Nevermind the fact that you could just report it stolen.
no they will just make it illegal to hold and use gold for any purchase. they will offer you paper currency to turn in your gold and then make it illegal to hold after that point if you don't take your payoff it will just become n expensive paperweight nobody can know you have.
Total and complete bullshit.
They cannot outlaw barter. It is beyond their means to control.
Barter anything. Including gold and silver.
Tell me how they can control every transaction on the face of the earth.
Tell me.
Who rules Barter town? No really.
Sheesh, folks, despite what you might think I am not a spastic poster. I lay this problem at the feet of ZH. Sorry buddy.
That you Master Blaster?
That you Master-Blaster?
Embargo ON!
In the 1930's after FDR made Gold ownership illegal, they used a whistleblower program to get neighbors to turn in those that held gold. Consider during the the Great Depression, you have no money and are scraping by to put food on the table, while your neighbor is doing fine. You find out your neighbor has some gold stashed. You turn him in the for reward.
And your neighbor is found gutted hanging upside down from the tree in his front yard a few days later.
Never mess with another man's woman, never mess with another man's freedom, and never mess with another man's money, lest the man, mess with you.
And no-one will tell anyone they have gold. Such an allegation is impossible to prove, and any goon squad coming through the door is likely to get Waco'd.
+ $1660
More of us than there are of them. That. of course, means 80,000,000 of us who are armed and will not likely submit to the Fascist Thugs who may come our way, wanting our guns and gold...
And they will get your guns and gold and you will die for the cause. (One of your neighbors will tip them off as to when you are the most vulnerable. He needs the money they offer.)
My Colombian neighbors? Maybe, but I do not think so. They know ZIP, my trusted friends (?) know just a bit more.
Hey, could be... I am a lousy predictor of the future (at least short term)!
Maybe I can take one or more of the scum with me...
I have a ring that was my great Grandmothers. It was a 20$ gold piece converted by a Jeweler into a ring during the confiscation period. You can still see the little stars in it.
Only terrorists own gold.
American Patriots; same thing considering the founding fathers where terrorists.
When gold is outlawed, only outlaws will own gold.
When gold is outlawed, only outlaws will own gold.
Whoa! For a second there I forgot which side I was on. What were we talking about?
Oh yes they can. You honestly believe this is a free country?
Really??
Willing to literally stake your life on it???
Confiscation is pointless if you don't leave the premises alive.
+1665
You wouldn't actually wait until they grabbed somethin' before you shot, right?
Would still be a confiscation event. Roles reversed, but it'd do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIF1o3sgoKE
Confiscation is a myth. They criminalized possession of gold, not withstanding a very small amount. 10 years and / or a $10,000 fine (~$170,000 in today's money) if found guilty.
"...10 years and / or a $10,000 fine (~$170,000 in today's money)"
LOL
Somewhere I read less than 20% actually got turned in. There still seems to be a lot of pre '33 coins floating around.
So buy your 24K bullion in jewelry form....duh...
http://www.kingoldjewelry.com/s/Corporate.asp
If they are going to confiscate, they would confiscate GLD not actual GOLD. You have a bunch of real (and a whole bunch more paper) sitting in one spot.
Why would you have 100,000 cops show up at doors trying to steal your wifes wedding band when you can one stop shop? Would not end well.
However, confiscating a funds holdings "for the nations interest" would get the job done.
Bullion Bitchez, cold hard physical bullion.
BoE is NEVER getting its gold back from the NY Fed.
Neither is Germany. How ironic: Germany gave us their thousands of tons of gold to hold to prevent the Ruskies from kicking in their door and stealing it. But in the end, it still gets stolen from them. But not by the Russians, like everyone thought, but by the Americans.
hmm, just thinking: most if not all GLD is custodied in vaults in UK, including BoE. Go GATA.
Yes look what a great job they have done controlling illegal drugs and money therefrom.
Yes, they have done a good job.
</sarc>
it's a world market, they can't just take it. Can't even guess what an Australian holding gold will find his/her gold worth one second after IF the US confiscates it.... up by a factor of 10 perhaps....
Got chickens? Goates?
What is goatse?
SCTV reference +10
Even scarier in Smell-o-Vision
Currency downfalls are scary.
RESERVE currency downfalls can be terrifying.
+1 to S&P for staring down the WH. At least, relative to Moody's and Fitch.
I find this hard to believe, I have posted more than once that they wouldn't do this for fear of retribution.
There might be more to this downgrade than meets the eye. I would love to believe S&P did this in the face
of the administration, but somewhere in the logical part of my brain, I get the feeling that they were put up to it
by Obama for some diabolical reason that I can't quite yet fathom. Any Ideas out there?