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 : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (10011)	8/4/2011 9:05:19 AM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

They might, but if they do I think it would be to a much smaller degree, and for a lesser amount of time, then a default on debt or contracts. I think the two would be perceived very differently by those who might lend money to the federal government. Sure, they're different. But how different, really, at a practical level? Noting that a banana republic has not yet defaulted on a debt instrument is damning with faint praise. AAA rating? Full faith? Not hardly.

To: TimF who wrote (10011)	8/5/2011 10:01:45 AM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

I still think that this discussion has been about terminology rather than substance. If you stop paying entitlement benefits without benefit of legislation to amend or terminate an entitlement program, what do you call it if not default? De facto benefit program termination? Extra-legislative entitlement cessation? Financial exhaustion program stoppage? its not because of the possibility of late payments on transfer programs, It was only yesterday that you introduced the notion of delayed payments. I did not notice it right away. Where did that come from? I agree that late payments do not constitute default. Throughout this discussion when I have spoken of not meeting or reneging on financial obligations or failure to pay, I meant failing to pay, not failing to pay on time. I don't see how failure to pay is not default. That's definitional. As for the substance, I don't see how any entity that exhibits such bad faith, even though the bad faith was not regarding a debt instrument, deserves a AAA credit rating.