Standard and Poor is "doing a heckuva job Brownie"

[stilltrucking]

I am glad they have finally got so conscientious about credit ratings after they gave A+ ratings to junk securities that went bad and trashed Wall Street.

Well AIG was too big to fail, but the United States is not. Maybe that is a good thing. But before we go down, while we still can, let's start a couple of more wars.

Translating Standard & Poor's

A few days ago, Standard & Poor's announced that even if Congress passes a debt ceiling increase, they might still downgrade U.S. debt if there's not also an agreement to cut the long-term deficit by at least $4 trillion. Now, there are all sorts of reasons why no one should care much what S&P thinks. For example, there's the fact that they don't know anything more about U.S. solvency than anyone else. There's the fact that they displayed monumentally bad judgment during the housing bubble. And as Mike Konczal pointed out earlier today, there's the fact that they routinely do a lousy job of rating sovereign debt.

But there's another interesting aspect of the whole thing. Here is S&P's explanation for why they're so concerned

U.S. political debate is currently more focused on the need for medium-term fiscal consolidation than it has been for a decade. Based on this, we believe that an inability to reach an agreement now could indicate that an agreement will not be reached for several more years. We view an inability to timely agree and credibly implement medium-term fiscal consolidation policy as inconsistent with a 'AAA' sovereign rating, given the expected government debt trajectory noted above.

Did you see the card they palmed via use of the passive voice? Here's the translation: If Congress had just gone through its usual kabuki and then raised the debt ceiling, S&P wouldn't have cared. Life would go on as usual. But because "U.S. political debate" is currently so focused on the deficit, that makes addressing the deficit suddenly important regardless of what action is taken on the debt ceiling.

But this focus on the deficit didn't spring fully formed out of Zeus's forehead. It's the product of a deliberate political offensive by one of America's two major parties. (The other major party is more focused on addressing sky-high unemployment and poor economic growth.) So what S&P is saying here is this: If Republicans unilaterally decide to focus on something for partisan reasons, then the nation had better address it. And if the nation doesn't address Republican concerns, then its credit rating will go down.

Nice.

Mother Jones

[saw]

interesting tidbits to chew on for sure......most creditable pundits have not missed the fact that the congress was inundated with a huge crop of tea party wonks with an uber right agenda......many might see the tea party as this organic grassroots group, but might be surprised they are anything but....they are a well funded arm of ultra right individuals that have set up organizations with patriotic sounding names that were created to get these people elected and then have them move their agenda.....

one could argue whether their mission at this point is to simply destroy the country biblical style, but few sincere analysts see their purpose as having anything to do with the well being of the citizens of our country....and to be fair I see little difference in either party, as they both push the politics that benefit their respective allegiance to this or that billionaire or corporation.....

my belief to perfectly blunt, is that the republican's don't give a rat's ass about the debt that has been created...this issue was never raised by them when Bush was starting wars and giving his rich buddies tax breaks....never mentioned.....so why now?
the reason is attack all social programs that provide a safety net for those that really need it.....it has been their intentions for decades.....they like to refer to social security as an entitlement program......that's amazing to me....a fund that i was required to make weekly installments into for 48 years, to me, should be called an investment program......

smoke and mirrors are the business of politicians that get advice from think tanks how to spin the hidden agenda......

until we hit the streets to non-violently express our displeasure, nothing will change....elect whomever you want.....it's all broken.....and we seem to have forgotten, or got too fat and lazy, to remember dissent is the cornerstone of democracy....

[stilltrucking]

You nailed it
I don't know what it would take to get us motivated to flood the streets with people. Maybe it would help if congress voted themselves another pay raise.

I should not complain because what am doing about it except posting my frustration on this website. I am part of the problem I guess.

[saw]

yea truck, the opportunities to demonstrate haven't at this point been what I would imagine, but that will inevitably increase as more us are thrown under the bus....so it's a combination of events......more organizing is part of it, and more peoplr coming to terms with the fact that it's okay to carry signs and march.....not only okay, but essential.....it's about changing the mindsets....fresh paradigms....this deal on the table now is a stab in the back to every citizen that isn't a millionaire......

guess I better stock up on cheap cat food now, cause that's what I'll be eating down the road......check out the occupywallstreet site.....that could be very interesting in so many ways.......it may be a big indicator of where we are.....the arab spring was an example of the power of people clogging the streets....egypt, tunisia, yemen, libya ......all said enough is enough and now dictators that been entrenched for decades have had to flee...sure they still have plenty of problems.....but it's a good start...... none of this is easy

[mtmynd]

demonstrating on the streets is such a 60's thing. i only saw some of that generation doing it in support (or against) the "T-Party." I have not seen any young people get out and dis' anything in politics (exception: the union defenders in WI the first of the year had a fair share of youthful folks demonstrating and letting their voices be heard). they're possibly doing e-demon-strating... using tweets and whatevers to spread their concerns, you reckon?

[stilltrucking]

Standard And Poors Blames U.S. Credit Rating Reduction On Republicans

The title above may upset some conservatives and of course those who consider themselves Republican, but it's true. Standard And Poors, or if you like Standard & Poors - in ether case, the rating agency that assigns a grade for the long-term debt of nations - downgraded the United States' long term debt to AA+ from AAA for the first time in history, and proved in the process that Tea Party Republicans don't understand Macroeconomics.

This is what S&P wrote in its press release announcing the action on August 5, 2011:

The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate fiscal scenario illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently assume could lead us to lower the long-term rating again. On the other hand, as our upside scenario highlights, if the recommendations of the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction--independently or coupled with other initiatives, such as the lapsing of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners (my emphasis)--lead to fiscal consolidation measures beyond the minimum mandated, and we believe they are likely to slow the deterioration of the government's debt dynamics, the long-term rating could stabilize at 'AA+'.

...Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/abr ... z1UbQufrU5

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/abr ... z1UbPYtvK7