PDA

View Full Version : Moody's Fires Warning Shot.



Sev
07-13-2011, 04:12 PM
This will look good on the sock puppets resume.

Obama needs to agree to Caps, Cuts, entitlement reform and a balanced budget amendment.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/e...UyCI_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/moodys-moves-one-step-closer-to-downgrading-us-debt/2011/07/13/gIQAPRUyCI_story.html)

<span style="color: #000000"><span style='font-size: 20pt'>Moody’s moves one step closer to downgrading U.S. debt</span>

By Neil Irwin, Wednesday, July 13, 5:44 PM

Moody’s Investors Service said Wednesday it has put the U.S. government’s top-notch credit rating on review for a possible downgrade because of the risk that Washington will not raise the federal debt ceiling in time to avoid a default.

The firm added that even a brief failure of the government to pay its bills would mean that the United States’s Aaa rating “would likely no longer be appropriate.”


During a press briefing Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says President Obama expects a compromise on the debt deal, similar to the Clinton-Dole era.

During a press briefing Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says President Obama expects a compromise on the debt deal, similar to the Clinton-Dole era.

July 13 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Representative Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, talks about negotiations between lawmakers to raise the U.S. debt ceiling. Frank also discusses Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke's testimony today before Congress. He speaks with Michael McKee on Bloomberg Television's "Fast Forward." (Source: Bloomberg)

The announcement comes after Standard & Poor’s, another of the major credit rating agencies, has said that it would dramatically downgrade the U.S. government’s credit rating if payments were missed.

The U.S. has long been able to borrow money cheaply because global investors believe the government can be counted on to repay its debts. If credit rating agencies downgrade the U.S. and investors lose their faith in the creditworthiness of the government, the cost of borrowing money — in other words, the interest rate — could rise.

The Treasury Department has said that on Aug. 2, it will run out of legal tools to meet the government’s financial obligations in the absence of an agreement to raise the $14.3 trillion legal limit on how much debt the government can maintain.

The Moody’s review is prompted by “the possibility that the debt limit will not be raised in time to prevent a missed payment of interest or principal on outstanding bonds and notes,” an announcement from the firm said Wednesday. “Moody’s considers the probability of a default on interest payments to be low but no longer to be de minimis.”

It added that an actual default, or failure by the federal government to pay its bills, “would fundamentally alter Moody’s assessment of the timeliness of future payments.”

In early June, Moody’s had said it would likely review the federal government’s credit rating in mid-July if there were no “meaningful progress” in negotiations over raising the debt limit. That review is now happening.

Moody’s also has placed on review several companies that enjoy implicit backing of the federal government, most notably the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

A senior Treasury Department official pointed to the Moody’s announcement as evidence that Congress needs to act to raise the debt ceiling.

“Moody’s assessment is a timely reminder of the need for Congress to move quickly to avoid defaulting on the country’s obligations and agree upon a substantial deficit reduction package,” said Jeffrey A. Goldstein, the Treasury undersecretary for domestic finance, in a statement.</span>

Soflasnapper
07-13-2011, 04:16 PM
The president has no power to make a law raising the debt ceiling currently in place-- only to sign it, or veto it.

Unless Mitch McConnell's hail mary comes to fruition, in which case he would, of course.

Sev
07-13-2011, 04:20 PM
He's the man at the helm.
If the rating is dropped he will be the held accountable by history.

We both know that arguing that it was congresses fault wont amount to a hill of beans.

Soflasnapper
07-13-2011, 04:34 PM
Ask LWW.

He'll tell you he knows Congresses do things, and presidents are on the sidelines.

O putting SS/MC on the table is a Sista Souljah moment for him. It proves reasonableness to independents and anyone otherwise on the fence.

I was listening to a local talk show host guy down here, Jimmy Cefallo, who generally regurgitates right wing talking points (in dulcet tones, however). He's a former Dolphin player, and a fixture down here in the community, a long-time morning drive radio host.

He was CLEARLY blaming the GOP, pointing out that if O had gone so far as to anger his entire base, he had gone the extra mile for the country, while offering up some party sacred cows in the process.

So the GOP's tactics and obstinacy have lost, and O's strenuous appearance of trying to comprimise, has gained, Cefallo, and I take him as a bellweather. I also take McConnell's very odd, and likely illegal by separation of powers analysis, hail mary as a sign of GOP terror at the consequences of following their crazed conservative rump wing over the cliff.

Consequences, to be clear, to the GOP itself, out of palpable national anger. Probably could care less about damaging the country, based on any recent policy agenda they've put forward.

Soflasnapper
07-13-2011, 04:36 PM
BTW, the LAST time Moody's did this, historically, it was for this exact reason.

Sev
07-13-2011, 05:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ask LWW.

He'll tell you he knows Congresses do things, and presidents are on the sidelines.

O putting SS/MC on the table is a Sista Souljah moment for him. It proves reasonableness to independents and anyone otherwise on the fence.

I was listening to a local talk show host guy down here, Jimmy Cefallo, who generally regurgitates right wing talking points (in dulcet tones, however). He's a former Dolphin player, and a fixture down here in the community, a long-time morning drive radio host.

He was CLEARLY blaming the GOP, pointing out that if O had gone so far as to anger his entire base, he had gone the extra mile for the country, while offering up some party sacred cows in the process.

So the GOP's tactics and obstinacy have lost, and O's strenuous appearance of trying to comprimise, has gained, Cefallo, and I take him as a bellweather. I also take McConnell's very odd, and likely illegal by separation of powers analysis, hail mary as a sign of GOP terror at the consequences of following their crazed conservative rump wing over the cliff.

Consequences, to be clear, to the GOP itself, out of palpable national anger. Probably could care less about damaging the country, based on any recent policy agenda they've put forward. </div></div>

I think the establishment Repulicans are afraid to be blamed like what happened in the 80's.

They should just offer up a bill with deep cuts and no tax increases.

Let Obama veto it if he dares.

Gayle in MD
07-13-2011, 11:47 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The president has no power to make a law raising the debt ceiling currently in place-- only to sign it, or veto it.

Unless Mitch McConnell's hail mary comes to fruition, in which case he would, of course.

</div></div>

McConnell is already backing down on that one. Repiglicans have soul ownership of our bad economy, and McConnell doesn't want to disappoint the Tea Party types, who keep voting for more of the same.

Cantor and McConnell are behind the obstruction. Everybody with half a brain, can see that. Their ONLY goal is making this president a one term president.

We don't have a spending problem in this country, we have a jobs problem.

Repiglicans have nothing but more lies, more smoke and mirrors, and more idiots who still haven't learned that trickle down does not provide anything other than more opportunities for thte rich to steal!

Repiglicans only represent the wealthy. ONLY the wealthy. It has been the Repiglicans, walking out on doing their jobs, not the President.

Defaulting on raising the debt ceiling will lay right at their own clay feet!

Now, they, Repiglicans, are all out there lying about this latest meeting at the While House. Cantor interrupted the president over and over.

The president always ends the meetings, and the Repiglicans are blowing that into claims that the President walked out on the talks, typical Repiglican lies.

The Bush Tax cuts did NOT produce jobs. They produced a deficit. WE have a jobs crisis, and Repiglicans have done nothing except provide more for the wealthy, at the expense of everyone else, and protect more loopholes for the wealthy, aka spending, and tax cuts, also spending, for the wealthy.

G.

LWW
07-14-2011, 04:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ask LWW.

He'll tell you he knows Congresses do things, and presidents are on the sidelines.</div></div>

That's not quite what I said ... but coming from a leftist, that's about as accurate of a quote that I can hope for.

Now, the real story is that if this blows up it won't end until the left can blame Bush.

After all ... the democrooks refuse to put forth a budget for 2011, Obama makes a 2012 budget proposal that is defeated unanimously by both parties, and tthe democrook congress refuses to pass the house proposals while dear leader promises to veto it if they did.

What more evidence could an Obamatron ask for that it was Bush's fault?

eg8r
07-14-2011, 09:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We don't have a spending problem in this country, we have a jobs problem.
</div></div>Ignorance at its best. At a time when we have Congress fighting to raise the debt ceiling you are telling us we don't have a spending problem. The only way to get into debt is to spend more than you have coming in. W grew the size of government by spending and Obama has followed suit. Spending is out of control. If we did not have a spending problem then we would not need to cut defense spending or any other spending for that matter but you are always first to jump on that bandwagon. So which is it, spending problem or not?

If our UE had stayed at early 2000-2003 levels we would still have this massive debt to overcome so the jobs issue is moot when discussing our debt. Even if those jobs were filled (however we are at the worst point for the year and consistently going down) that revenue would not cover the bills.

Obama's tax cuts did not produce jobs.

eg8r

LWW
07-14-2011, 09:39 AM
Actually she paraphrased Marco Rubio:

"WE DON’T NEED NEW TAXES, WE NEED NEW TAXPAYERS"

Perhaps there is hope for her yet.