You tell your nuanced view of a default to international investors. I doubt they will buy it.
Nuananced view should be considered a compliment not an insult, but there isn't anything particularly nuanced about the statement I made. Its simple basic fact. As for buying it, Moody's does, and most international investors will too as long as they all get their payments.
First who gets paid first when there is only X amount of dollars to spend? Secondly I guess you read only what you want to read..........the actual memo was a little more complicated and not quite so benign:
In the memo, Moody's Investors Service said even if Congress fails to lift the limit on borrowing next week, the Treasury Department is likely to continue paying interest on the government's debt, thus leaving the nation's Triple-A credit rating intact.
A key reason for the claim is the memo's argument that things are actually much less serious than in 2011, when the nation last faced a pitched battle over the debt limit.
"The budget deficit was considerably larger in 2011 than it is currently," said the memo, "so the magnitude of the necessary spending cuts needed after 17 October is lower now than it was then."
Interestingly, the lower deficit happened under a president in which Republicans warned that deficits would skyrocket. And yet it hasn't. Its gone down. So is this the part of the memo that Republicans are passing around to show how totally fiscally irresponsible the President and his administration is being? Yet, Republicans refuse to sign off on the existing bill that keeps the sequestration spending levels.
Curious, though, is the caveat noted by one economist who warns that a strategy of making only interest payments would be short-lived at best.
Even if the government made its Nov. 1 payments, a $29 billion interest payment due Nov. 15 looms after it. Including that payment, Washington is likely to have a cash shortfall of $60 billion to $70 billion from Oct. 17 until Nov. 15.
Said the economist: "If they don't prioritize payments, there's no way they make that payment on time."
Who's the economist? Mark Zandi. Who does he work for? Moody's. In fact, he's the chief economist for Moody's. And yet, perhaps purposely, House Republicans touting that memo from Moody's didn't include Zandi's warning. Why do you suppose not?
examiner.com
Lastly this slip sliding from one year to the next over these issues does nothing to bolster confidence in the US. The past strength and stability of the US and its economy is why the US doesn't pay as high interest rates on its debt and why foreign investors are willing buy US debt in the first place. If your crazy Pols continue to act out like they are now, confidence in the US will decline. Plus, China is dying for its yuan to displace the dollar and be the currency of record in the world. Again if your crazy Pols keep playing the games they are playing they will make China's wishes come true.
And aside from the other dark scenarios that could result from defaulting on the debt ceiling, there is this:
IMF cuts global economic outlook, warns of U.S. 'fiscal accidents'
So keep up with the BS.
It hasn't been consistent...........in many polls when you combine who likes it and those who want more, you have a plurality.
That has shown up in some polls, but not poll after poll after poll for the whole time like the point I raised. Also even if its true my statement would still be 100% true. At least a plurality and often a slight majority don't want Obamacare.
No, only the polls you consider important..........the ones that side with your position.
You all sank the economy in 2008 and you're trying to do it again.
Interesting fantasy world you live in.
Nope. Reality, dude. You all never want to take responsibility for your shit.
|
