Skip to main content

One of the consequences of the impending Government Sell-Out of the American people...

... is that it may cost the United States its AAA credit rating.

From Newshoggers:

One of the fundamental assumptions in finance is that the United States government debt is functionally risk free and that its AAA rating really is AAA rating. We have built that reputation for being good debtors because the US government has never defaulted on its debt. Furthermore while the absolute size of the debt is huge, most of the fiscal analysis ratios are not significantly troubling even though recent trend lines on the current account deficit are worrying over the intermediate term.

However, the US government has engaged in a massive increase in its explicit liabilities in the past three weeks. We are now responsible for most of the US mortgage market, the largest insurer and bits and pieces of many other things that are bundled up in the MBS and ABS that we are bailing out. The AAA rating may be at risk....


Quoting the Globe and Mail:

Rating agency Standard & Poor's warned that the spending spree is beginning to endanger the prized “AAA” credit rating that allows the U.S. government to borrow at low rates from the rest of the world.


AAA Credit rating drops to AA or A and the interest on the national debt (which just got a trillion dollars bigger) goes through the roof.

Thanks, guys.

My children and my grandson really appreciate the hell out of this.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Please call Carper, Biden, and Castle. Tell them why the problem occurred (easy money from the Fed), why you won't blame them if they do nothing while the economy goes sour, why it would be bad to pass this Un-American legislation (dollar plummets, bad decisions get reinforced, sick economy gets worse), and what to do instead (cut spending/taxes, get rid of Fed, pass Ron Paul's Honest Money Act, etc.). God bless.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...