Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (613167)	5/26/2011 2:51:42 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578514

If his views expressed in The Hill and elsewhere calling for rejection of any debt-ceiling increase were the policy of any president or either house of Congress, he would cause a stock- and bond-market crash and possibly a global depression. Nonsense A U.S. default would mean the destruction of the good faith and credit of the most important economic nation in the world, with indescribably catastrophic consequences. Something like that. Whether it would be a total disaster or just a massively serious problem could be argued, but it would be a big deal and be very bad. But not raising the debt ceiling != defaulting on debt payments. The federal government brings in a lot more than what's required to pay the interest on its debts. Under Paul's position, there would be only two ways to avoid a default. The first would be the largest and most gigantic tax increase in world history. The second would be the most radical and extreme budget cuts in American history. Which is why I think the debt ceiling should be raised (after extracting some reduction in spending, or at least reduction in future spending increases in exchange, and that qualifier only because the enormity of the fiscal mess we face if we don't contain spending growth), but we would only have a default if we chose to default.