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 : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stock bull who wrote (52369)	7/6/2011 10:15:21 PM
From: John	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 103300

I addressed the question you posed in your original post. Now, allow me to pose a question to you. If you were responsible for deciding the outcome of a U.S. treasury shortfall and were compelled to choose between (a) defaulting on bond payments, and (b) defaulting on social security payments and federal government/retired military pension obligations, which option would you choose and why? Thank you.

To: stock bull who wrote (52369)	7/6/2011 10:32:09 PM
From: steve harris	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

I don't know how you can discern lies from the truth. With that said, Google has tons of editorials about the debt ceiling, from both sides. Some say the world comes to an end if we default on bonds. Some say all you have to do is pay the interest payments on the bonds, of course, other spending would be shortchanged. How I decided what to believe is based upon these "wizards" lying to us before, I'll go with the people who says they are lying again. TARP never went to purchase toxic assets, the banks sat on it and passed out for more bonusesand funneled the money overseas. Remember AIG, too big to fail? The billions they received, they passed out among others, including overseas banks. bloomberg.com Also, TARP didn't go to TARP after it was approved: From ABC: abcnews.go.com Except, the Congressional Oversight Panel warns in its August report, TARP never actually bought any troubled assets. "It is likely that an overwhelming portion of the troubled assets from last October remain on bank balance sheets today," the panel's report says. Congress approved TARP, almost a trillion dollars, it went places we're just uncovering now through FOIA disclosures. Including billions funneled overseas. Geitner and the Fed cannot be trusted with any more taxpayer money, time to cut off their monies. Would you keep raising the debt limit on your child's credit card that you have to pay, every time they said you had to do it? Some would argue, you can't refuse to pay the credit card, it would ruing your credit rating. I'd argue that is not what is happening in the big picture, it's Junior asking for more credit to spend. They can't have it both ways. That's when you here some demanding spending cuts for a deal to raise the debt ceiling. "We'll pay your credit card now, but you must agree to stop using it". Yeah right, when has the government ever lowered their spending lately? I'll agree to a debt ceiling increase if I see an audit of every dollar that left the Treasury and Fed since 2007, including it's last stop. That's my point, you never will, people are having to use FOIA requests to get information from our "transparent" government.

To: stock bull who wrote (52369)	7/6/2011 11:22:00 PM
From: Wayners	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Do you think 100% of spending goes to bond, note and bill holders? It does not. They are the ones that hold the debt. If they are not paid on time, that is a default. The rest of spending goes to entitlement programs and discretionary spending. There is no default if Federal employees are Riffed or even if they send IOUs for entitlement programs. If you think ripping of people on entitlement programs is a default, then all you have to do is look at all the times the Feds have changed the rules in the past to short change those that dutifully paid in at the threat of jail. Aren't those defaults? Did our credit rating change as a result of those default? How about in 1971 when Nixon defaulted on Gold payments in exchange for worthless paper? That was a default wasn't it. We paid the price too with outrageous interest rates for 12 years afterwards. That's what happens when the Feds really default. How about 1933 when the Feds defaulted on their Federal Reserve Notes that they printed far in excess of the Gold supposedly backing it? There was a run on banks to convert the worthless paper to Gold. Another default.

To: stock bull who wrote (52369)	7/7/2011 1:07:43 PM
From: jmhollen	1 Recommendation Respond to of 103300

I'm thinking that just like The Donald, Banks, and Big Corporations - you just keep paying most of it, but 'restructure' the debt by pushing some of the liability to the end of the term - after the term has also been extended. Cutting the academia elitist's dumbass, give-away-money studies for subjects like "whether Burmese frogs like gnats, flies, or licorice the most on Fridays" before or after sex would also help. Even peons like us can do that with a Mortgage once or twice over the life of it, to deal with personal emergencies. Unless your banker/broker is a total arsehole like Geitner or his sleazy, limp-dicked, derivative buddies on the Street. Buttering the Demoncraps' Sacred Golden Cows, and scaring the old folks on SS will be Bumble Odumbo's tactics, though..!!! :-) . .