S&P downgrades United States to AA+

Jul 2011
42
0
So now do you see why playing clever games with the credit rating of a country ain't such a hot plan?
 

myp

Jan 2009
5,841
50
They got the deal done on time. S&P cited fewer spending cuts than they would have wanted (it isn't even the timing of the debt raise that triggered this so much as the spending- the thing that those politicians who were delaying the debt ceiling from passing were asking to cut, albeit too little as is all too common with DC). It, as always is a subjective valuation and the way D.C. has been and the heat S&P and Moody's took after rating all those subprime assets as AAA both led to faster and harder action. It is bad yes, but the "games" you cite are not avoidable (I am not going to debate that again with you- this topic is more about the downgrade) and more relevant here is that they weren't even the cause. They should have made more spending cuts (or not spent in the first place), but the current system just incentivizes spending too much.
 
Jul 2011
42
0
They got the deal done on time.

Actually, they didn't.

The agreement was months behind schedule, causing the Treasury to have to play games with their accounts. This is what people living off their credit cards do, shift money around from card to card in a desperate attempt to keep the house of cards from collapsing.

The agreement came, not on time, but way behind schedule, at the very last minute before disaster. Both the markets and the rating agencies understand this, and are reacting appropriately and predictably.

S&P cited fewer spending cuts than they would have wanted

They also cited their growing lack of confidence in the American political system.

To me, just one view, the entire global economic system is all about confidence. Do people believe in the system or not?

If they do believe, they spend money and hire employees, leading to an upward spiral. If they don't believe, it goes in the other direction.

What's really interesting to me is that while the details of the economy are all very technical involving precise numbers etc etc, the whole system really runs on the crazy tides of human psychology.
 

myp

Jan 2009
5,841
50
Typist, it still came on time before we defaulted on any debt. Ironically, should the GOP have folded and it came earlier, we would have cut even less (than the little they cut), which would have theoretically made a downgrade come earlier or at least more likely.

As for confidence- yes, but there are different schools of thought in how to best deal with that right now. With the poor economic outlook, some will suggest you need government spending and cannot reduce it if it means killing jobs. Others will say you must reduce it and that the public sector only gets its money from the private sector anyway (I fall in this camp). Of course there are more opinions and ideas to it than that, but those are two very broad, but very prevalent ideas out there.

Anyway, the White House is fighting it due to "amateur errors" in the math. Ah, politics. http://www.google.com/hostednews/af...ocId=CNG.b36a715ab130ce2bbcf6408109ec0b93.1f1
 
Jul 2011
42
0
Typist, it still came on time before we defaulted on any debt.

Thats like saying I paid my credit card bill 10 minutes before they canceled me, when what the card company wanted, and rightfully expected, was that I pay the bill on time without creating a bunch of unnecessary hassle.

Ironically, should the GOP have folded and it came earlier, we would have cut even less (than the little they cut),

I could be wrong on the details here, but my memory is Obama wanted a bigger deal than the one passed. Did I remember it wrong? I might have...

With the poor economic outlook, some will suggest you need government spending and cannot reduce it if it means killing jobs. Others will say you must reduce it and that the public sector only gets its money from the private sector anyway (I fall in this camp).

This is an entirely valid and useful debate. What's not valid and useful is having the debate months behind schedule.

Anyway, the White House is fighting it due to "amateur errors" in the math.

I heard on NPR the errors amounted to a couple trillion dollars. Another unnecessary blow to confidence.

The average person hears all this incompetence coming from every quarter, and concludes none of them know what the #$%* they are doing, with some reason.

Imho, the source of all this is a "cleverness culture" that is running rampant in both Wall Street and Washington. Banking and budgets should be really boring predictable stuff, not the place for creative minds.
 

myp

Jan 2009
5,841
50
Thats like saying I paid my credit card bill 10 minutes before they canceled me, when what the card company wanted, and rightfully expected, was that I pay the bill on time without creating a bunch of unnecessary hassle.
Not the same at all considering there is no set payment date or "bill" that arrives in this case. But a useless argument nonetheless...

I could be wrong on the details here, but my memory is Obama wanted a bigger deal than the one passed. Did I remember it wrong? I might have...
What do you mean by bigger?

This is an entirely valid and useful debate. What's not valid and useful is having the debate months behind schedule.
The debate had been started- it just kept going til the end. That was going to happen either way- even if they started 2 months earlier than they had.

I heard on NPR the errors amounted to a couple trillion dollars. Another unnecessary blow to confidence.
They aren't actually "errors" - this is just the White House trying to bully its way to a reversal. And herein lies the problem with rating agencies- there is so much pressure from those who they are rating that it makes objectivity difficult. That is especially true on market bonds, etc. where the companies pay to have them rated- a bad rating is essentially equivalent to biting the hand that feeds the rating agencies.
 
Jul 2011
42
0
Not the same at all considering there is no set payment date or "bill" that arrives in this case. But a useless argument nonetheless...

The "bill" is the regular budget process, which any responsible party would complete according to a set schedule.

What do you mean by bigger?

If my memory is correct, Obama and Bahner were close to a deal to would have cut much more, but House Repubs scuttled it, and Bahner had to back out.

The debate had been started- it just kept going til the end. That was going to happen either way- even if they started 2 months earlier than they had.

It's going to keep happening as long as people keep drinking the Congress PR baloney koolaid and rationalizing irresponsible behavior by those who the Constitution dictates are responsible for budgets.

They aren't actually "errors" - this is just the White House trying to bully its way to a reversal.

The rating agency admitted the error almost immediately. But they decided to still downgrade, citing their lack of confidence in the political system.

And herein lies the problem with rating agencies- there is so much pressure from those who they are rating that it makes objectivity difficult.

Yes, we agree here, why the rating agencies still have credibility is a puzzle. I guess investors need something, and they're the only game going?

I know you're trying to be "realistic" but has it occurred to you how real it could get if this spins out of control?

The last time we had a great depression it brought us to WWII. Would you like to try that again, but this time with nuclear weapons?

No shit, I'm not being hysterical, having the world's core currency downgraded is serious business.
 

myp

Jan 2009
5,841
50
It's going to keep happening as long as people keep drinking the Congress PR baloney koolaid and rationalizing irresponsible behavior by those who the Constitution dictates are responsible for budgets.
Irresponsible behavior is subjective, but other than that yes, I agree.

The rating agency admitted the error almost immediately. But they decided to still downgrade, citing their lack of confidence in the political system.
The lack of cuts is still a big player in it and they cited it in the statement. And where did you see they admitted error? Either way, if it happened it is most likely due to political pressure and not because they actually made an error. That's just the excuse.

The last time we had a great depression it brought us to WWII. Would you like to try that again, but this time with nuclear weapons?
No one wants depression. There are different ideas on how to stave it off.

No shit, I'm not being hysterical, having the world's core currency downgraded is serious business.
Just a semantics thing, but the currency wasn't downgraded- the US govt was. The currency doesn't have a credit rating, it is just a store of value.
 
Jul 2011
42
0
Irresponsible behavior is subjective, but other than that yes, I agree.

Do we agree it's not subjective in this particular case?

By which I mean, shouldn't we be clear minded enough to demand that Congress do it's job (defined by the Constitution) and produce and pass budgets according to some defined schedule?

And where did you see they admitted error?

I heard it on NPR. I'm not claiming expert knowledge, so if there's another story, would welcome further info.

Either way, if it happened it is most likely due to political pressure and not because they actually made an error. That's just the excuse.

Well, look it up if you wish, and tell us what you find. The story I heard plainly said they admitted the error, but I only heard one story on one network, so other sources may tell a different story.

Just a semantics thing, but the currency wasn't downgraded- the US govt was.

You're right, I stand corrected.

The organization that produces the currency was downgraded.
 

myp

Jan 2009
5,841
50
News update: S&P downgraded around 11,000 municipal bonds that were linked to the Federal government.
 
Mar 2009
2,751
6
Undisclosed
News update: S&P downgraded around 11,000 municipal bonds that were linked to the Federal government.
I see they keep showing the pictures of the 3 butt-holes that made the decision. I know the government wants to discredit them, but they may get one or more of them killed too. People react to things like losing their retirement due to three guys one of which does not even have a college degree in accounting. He has a English lit. degree if I remember correctly.

But they wiped out a lot of money just the same.
 
Top