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: combjelly who wrote (613439)	5/27/2011 4:41:22 PM
From: jlallen	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579687

Moron: Not raising the debt ceiling does not equal default. There would still be plenty of money to fund debt payments....the rest of the spending would have to be cut....and spending cuts have been needed for a long time.

To: combjelly who wrote (613439)	5/27/2011 4:51:53 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579687

Thank you for your honest quote which proves my point. Note the failure that is a default is a failure "to service its debt as payments come due." A failure to service debt, not a failure to spend all the money the government had promised to spend. Your own source confirms my point. Not servicing debt is default. Cutting entitlement spending is not. Missing SSI, Medicare and other payments is a default. No it isn't. Social security payments are not payments on debt, by either common use of the term debt, or under US law. (See Flemming_v._Nestor there is no contractual right to receive Social Security payments, and such payments are not debt or property) The same holds for other social spending. Entitlement programs do not represent actual entitlements, they are just spending programs where the spending does not have to be reauthorized, but automatically continues until changed. It could be changed at any time without default.