but oooh, no. no no no. fiscal responsibility is way too far right wing fringe :roll:
First of all, I'd like to point out that Moody's itself should be a junk bond. I mean, why does anyone still attach any credibility to them in the first place? A better measure of creditworthiness is the interest rates that investors demand on government bonds.
There is nothing fiscally responsible about pushing the nation to the brink of default
22 Republican congresspeople rejected even Boehner's plan as too warm and fuzzy, indicating that there is a certain bloc that will not vote for a debt ceiling hike under any circumstances. Furthermore, among those who DID vote for Boehner's plan, many did so only grudgingly and with an attached demand that they know will not happen (i.e. a balanced budget amendment).
Then we can go into the fact that the supposedly responsible right-wing fringe (to borrow your terminology) has mainly focused on cuts to non-defense discretionary spending in the current debt ceiling debate...which is at historically normal levels, easily reversible by future congresses, and should certainly not be cut during a period of high unemployment. Any truly "fiscally responsible" proposal will mostly leave this alone, and instead focus on the four areas which actually ARE a problem and are driving our long-term deficit: Health care, social security, defense spending, and tax policy.
I agree with Moody's that neither debt plan is responsible...because they're focusing on entirely the wrong kind of cuts.
With that said, I'm less concerned about what Moody's thinks than what bondholders think. Bondholders have been kind to the United States because they recognize that these problems are not as intractable, severe, or imminent as they are often portrayed...but this could all change if the government does not act to raise (or eliminate or ignore) the debt ceiling
The fiscal problems of the United States are long-term; we have time to correct our course and it's not going to happen in the next couple weeks. We need to get past the immediate threat of political default before we can focus on the long-term fiscal problems.
CC&B would, mind you....
but oooh, no. no no no. fiscal responsibility is way too far right wing fringe :roll:
CC&B would, mind you....
but oooh, no. no no no. fiscal responsibility is way too far right wing fringe :roll:
The "limited magnitude" of both debt plans put forward by congressional leaders would not put the nation's AAA credit rating back on solid footing, Moody's Investors Service announced Friday.
"Reductions of the magnitude now being proposed, if adopted, would likely lead Moody's to adopt a negative outlook on the AAA rating," the credit rating agency said in a new report. "The chances of a significant improvement in the long-term credit profile of the government coming from deficit reductions of the magnitude proposed in either plan are not high."..
[b\It also clarified that as far as it is concerned, the nation will only default if it misses an interest or principal payment on U.S. debt, not if it misses payments on other obligations like federal employee salaries or Social Security benefits.[/b]
The report also gives credence to a claim popular among Republicans: that the government has enough cash to avoid a default even past the Aug. 2 deadline set by the Treasury Department.
"If the debt limit is not raised before August 2, we believe that the Treasury would give priority to debt service payments and could thus postpone a potential debt default for a number of days," it said. "Revenues would be more than adequate for some period of time to meet those payments, although other outlays would be severely reduced as a result."...
i agree, however you will note that it wasn't the debt ceiling measure that has done this, but rather the lack of a fix to the long-term debt and continued deficits.
Please read this column (Wake up GOP: Smashing system doesn't fix it - CNN.com) Its from a conservative who actually lives in reality.
NEITHER party is fiscally responsible. Republicans amassed massive debt. Democrats couldnt even bother to submit a budget and ran up 5 trillion in 4 years. We wouldnt even be HAVING these discussions if it wasnt for the Tea Party. Yes...the evil tea party...NOT the people that have dug the country into a now 15.5 trillion dollar hole- Republicans and democrats and their mindless shills.
NEITHER party is fiscally responsible. Republicans amassed massive debt. Democrats couldnt even bother to submit a budget and ran up 5 trillion in 4 years. We wouldnt even be HAVING these discussions if it wasnt for the Tea Party. Yes...the evil tea party...NOT the people that have dug the country into a now 15.5 trillion dollar hole- Republicans and democrats and their mindless shills.
While I agree that the Tea Party's actions brought many things with our national politic and our nation debt to light, I can't give them credit for it because of how they did it.
Look, if the Tea Party was orchestrated to be that "responsible party" on all things "oversized government", why does it seem that everything they do is "attack the President and the Democrat party" if they are a mixture of Republicans, Democrats and Independents?" I would think with such a mixture of party voices they'd attack both sides, not just one. But that's what I hear from Tea Partiers: "We're here to stop all this out-of-control government spending and growth of government. Blame Obama, blame Democrats". Only near the end does anybody within the Tea Party begin to acknowledge that out-of-control spending was done by both parties, and it took President Obama to point that out, "re: Reagan raised the debt limit 18 times".
If the Tea Party really wants to be viewed as "the responsible voice in our national politics", they need to branch away from the Right-wing and form their own party affliliated with no one except themselves. Only thing can they be taken seriously as "the true voices of reason and compromise in Congress". Until then, I and most of America will only see them as the radical, ultra-conservative wing of the Republican party renamed and packaged to be something it's really not - holding both sides accountable - when in truth they're only a bunch of right-wing extremist. (Sidenote: I wonder who really controls them and sets their mandate? Bachmann, Ron Paul, Eric Cantor or someoney else?)
The democratic president is the only one who managed to create a surplus, which was promptly destroyed by bush* and the republicans. And most of that $15T hole was created under a repubs watch.
Perhaps the reason it seems that way to you is because you are so blindly ideologically bent. The Tea Party hasnt been targeting democrats and the president, they have been targeting REPUBLICANS. And frankly, while most wouldnt admit it, they espouse the exact same virtues as the majority of liberals that believe in RESPONSIBLE federal spending.
Only in the eyes of an ideologue...good ****ing lord...
Clinton created not a single budget. He passed not a single budget. He was blessed with the good sense to work with a fiscally conservative congress...and he gets major props for that. Bush gets the blame for signing every deficit budget bill he signed. The GOP is responsible for about 9 trillion in 6 years. The democrats are responsible for 5 trillion in 4 years. And you want to thump your chest and play king of dunces.
Perhaps the reason it seems that way to you is because you are so blindly ideologically bent. The Tea Party hasnt been targeting democrats and the president, they have been targeting REPUBLICANS. And frankly, while most wouldnt admit it, they espouse the exact same virtues as the majority of liberals that believe in RESPONSIBLE federal spending.
As for branching off...its not going to happen, nor would it be effective. Its not unlike the Libertarians...there is just too much power vested in the two party system and too much pandering to thoughtless folks that buy into the my party good, your party evil mindset. The Tea Party is doing just fine targeting republican candidates. What would be absolutely AWESOME is if fiscally responsible democrats actually engaged the battle.
i agree with the caveat that that measure only works when you don't have an artificial buyer (rhymes with "ned") buying up 70% of issuance. but consider the direction of moody's; they are always the dumb money, the last to know.
i agree, however you will note that it wasn't the debt ceiling measure that has done this, but rather the lack of a fix to the long-term debt and continued deficits.
bondholders have somewhat fled the even worse nightmare of Europe (temporarily driving the rate down) and have been operating in an environment where the Fed is massively intervening to drive the yield down even further.
The US Bond yields could change extremely rapidly because the underlying economic logic of why they are currently low isn't stable.
While I agree that the Tea Party's actions brought many things with our national politic and our nation debt to light, I can't give them credit for it because of how they did it.
Look, if the Tea Party was orchestrated to be that "responsible party" on all things "oversized government", why does it seem that everything they do is "attack the President and the Democrat party" if they are a mixture of Republicans, Democrats and Independents?" I would think with such a mixture of party voices they'd attack both sides, not just one. But that's what I hear from Tea Partiers: "We're here to stop all this out-of-control government spending and growth of government. Blame Obama, blame Democrats". Only near the end does anybody within the Tea Party begin to acknowledge that out-of-control spending was done by both parties, and it took President Obama to point that out, "re: Reagan raised the debt limit 18 times".
If the Tea Party really wants to be viewed as "the responsible voice in our national politics", they need to branch away from the Right-wing and form their own party affliliated with no one except themselves. Only thing can they be taken seriously as "the true voices of reason and compromise in Congress". Until then, I and most of America will only see them as the radical, ultra-conservative wing of the Republican party renamed and packaged to be something it's really not - holding both sides accountable - when in truth they're only a bunch of right-wing extremist
. (Sidenote: I wonder who really controls them and sets their mandate? Bachmann, Ron Paul, Eric Cantor or someoney else?)
How are you defining the bold?
The carry trade is alive and well, as the stability and liquidity of the U.S. Treasury market is the epicenter of it all. Why are yields still so..... low!?!?!?
Would you explain this with a bit more detail?
As to the Tea Party, as I said, okay, NOW they hold Republican's feet to the fire in insisting on more spending cuts and a balanced budget amendment. But as I've pointed out neither the CCB bill proposed in the House, the debt limit agreement presently (and apparently reached by members of Congress) nor the 1985 Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control at did anything to rein in spending in those areas we're being told are costing our government the most - Social Security, Medicare and VA benefits. Democrats haven't touched them and except for Paul Ryan's Medicare plan Republicans stayed clear of messing with them, too. Yet, who has the Tea Party attacked the most since prior to the Nov 2010 midterms? I don't have to tell you because you already know the answer to that question.
First of all, I'd like to point out that Moody's itself should be a junk bond. I mean, why does anyone still attach any credibility to them in the first place? A better measure of creditworthiness is the interest rates that investors demand on government bonds.
There is nothing fiscally responsible about pushing the nation to the brink of default. 22 Republican congresspeople rejected even Boehner's plan as too warm and fuzzy, indicating that there is a certain bloc that will not vote for a debt ceiling hike under any circumstances. Furthermore, among those who DID vote for Boehner's plan, many did so only grudgingly and with an attached demand that they know will not happen (i.e. a balanced budget amendment).
Then we can go into the fact that the supposedly responsible right-wing fringe (to borrow your terminology) has mainly focused on cuts to non-defense discretionary spending in the current debt ceiling debate...which is at historically normal levels, easily reversible by future congresses, and should certainly not be cut during a period of high unemployment. Any truly "fiscally responsible" proposal will mostly leave this alone, and instead focus on the four areas which actually ARE a problem and are driving our long-term deficit: Health care, social security, defense spending, and tax policy.
So I agree with Moody's that neither debt plan is responsible...because they're focusing on entirely the wrong kind of cuts. With that said, I'm less concerned about what Moody's thinks than what bondholders think. Bondholders have been kind to the United States because they recognize that these problems are not as intractable, severe, or imminent as they are often portrayed...but this could all change if the government does not act to raise (or eliminate or ignore) the debt ceiling. The fiscal problems of the United States are long-term; we have time to correct our course and it's not going to happen in the next couple weeks. We need to get past the immediate threat of political default before we can focus on the long-term fiscal problems.
I compare it to a ship getting blown off course: The captain knows that he'll need to veer slightly north in order to reach his destination in 1,000 miles. But there's an iceberg in his path in another mile...does it make more sense to go around the iceberg and THEN veer north, or to head directly for the iceberg?
Neither debt plan will work...because NEITHER party is even addressing cuts that really are needed FIRST....and thats bring all non essential troops home...like from Germany where their only purpose is to enhance the german economy.
Neither side is addressing the costs of illegal immigration and STOPPING ALL AID to those who come here illegally including free healthcare so they get their ass outta here.
Neither side will cut their pet Taxpayer giveaway subsidies to superrich Corporations like Big Oil and Big Farms.....until each party starts cutting the true fat...I WILL not support cutting Social Security and Medicare for future generations....they should be cut LAST and everything non american cut first and all the corporate pigs at the trough handouts....the teaparty is for the rich of the rich period and they prove it everytime they open their mouths...and most of their supporters are dumb as doornails because their policies will hurt them....braindead
So you didn't have the guts to berrate the Democrats who voted against the plan?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?