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 (746361)	10/13/2013 3:20:07 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575608

>> Assuming it were even legal, and it isn't clear that it is, there is no mechanism in place to prioritize payments. This is a ridiculous statement. Of course payments can be prioritized, and of course there is a mechanism for doing it. Perhaps the system is so poorly designed it would be PITA, but it certainly could be done. At any rate, they had better get used to it. These "crises" are going to occur more and more frequently, and eventually the default will happen. That is the result of failed legislation like Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare, which are exclusively the problems.

To: combjelly who wrote (746361)	10/13/2013 4:16:26 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Recommended By simplicity Respond to of 1575608

When laws conflict in such a way that anything you do (including refraining from action) is illegal, then while individuals may simply be screwed, the government can get away with anything that's remotely reasonable. Prioritizing the debt over other spending goes beyond just being reasonable, it might be considered constitutionally required (although the relevant constitutional language is rather vague)