Standard & Poor's Rating; Yea or Nay?

[Macamus Prime]

Moody's still kept the US at AAA.

And Monday, Moody's, the second largest ratings agency, released its own report, confirming that it's maintaining the United State's triple-A rating. The country, said Moody's, enjoys "unmatched access to financing, meaning that the U.S. government can support higher debt levels than other governments."

Moody's added that it expects to see more progress made toward cutting the deficit. "Although the political process has been considerably more contentious than usual in the past few months, it finally did produce an agreement. We expect further fiscal measures over time, albeit with vigorous debate over the particulars."

Why the move to AA+ from S&P? And, this link notes and points out how some people feel about S&P.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/p-slammed-u-downgrade-174205361.html

It hasn't helped S&P's credibility that the Obama administration pointed out what it calls a "$2 trillion error" in how the ratings agency calculated the deficit over the next decade. "They've shown a stunning lack of knowledge about basic U.S. fiscal budget math," said Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.

Tsk, tsk, tsk S&P. Don't you know that Geithner eats firms in the financial industry for breakfast?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Geithner

In March 2008, he arranged the rescue and sale of Bear Stearns. In the same year, he played a supporting role to Henry Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs, in the decision to bail out AIG just two days after deciding not to rescue Lehman Brothers from bankruptcy. Some Wall Street CEOs subsequently expressed the opinion that decisions in which Geithner participated, especially the failure to rescue Lehman, contributed to worsening the global financial crisis.

Anyway,...

;-)

Back to the topic at hand; S&P rating - WHAT SAY YOU!?!

Poll incoming,....

 

[sunzt]

A little late?

Anyway S&P is right.

 

[Macamus Prime]

A little late?

Anyway S&P is right.

Like when they rated ENRON with a AAA?

 

[Schadenfroh]

S&P was humiliated during the latest financial meltdown, this is their way of trying to "makeup" for it. The US has a debt problem, but if the US gets cut, then several others that have massive GDP to debt ratios need to get slapped as well.

Like when they rated ENRON with a AAA?

Credit rating agency != auditing firm

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Like when they rated ENRON with a AAA?

US Debt obligations - Public
Enron hiding loses in offshore entities - Not so much.

And I don't necessarily trust S&P all the time. On this one they are right in my opinion.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

S&P is 100% correct in its assessment. We have a debt problem compounded by a governing problem. It's the latter that really warrants the downgrade. AAA countries don't threaten to willingly default on their debts for political purposes.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

The "I trust S&P" option is loaded. You don't need to trust them. You can critically read their analysis and determine if you agree. Credit ratings aren't rocket science.

 

[Macamus Prime]

So, Moody's is incorrect in their rating. Interesting.

And, these ratings are just fine in looking at the "surface" of the situation. And, not considering anything below or past it. Interesting-er.

There is a very thin thread holding all of this together. S&P better not exhale.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

So, Moody's is incorrect in their rating. Interesting.

And, these ratings are just fine in looking at the "surface" of the situation. And, not considering anything below or past it. Interesting-er.

There is a very thin thread holding all of this together. S&P better not exhale.

Did you make this thread just so you pretend to read the answers and post this? Yes S&P was embarrassed in the mortgage meltdown, but that isn't particularly relevant. Every piece of information the S&P used in their analysis is publicly available, if you disagree it should easy to explain why.

The reason that the US is rated lower than other countries with similar debt/GDP ratios is that that ours is predicted to get worse in the future while others are not. The baseline for these predictions are the governments own numbers.

I'm really amazed that Democrats are attacking S&P here. It's their job to look at the facts and use their judgement. If they have any conflict of interest it's probably in the direction of being too easy on the US to keep in the good graces of the government.

 

[Jaskalas]

With a government run economy our debt is only going to grow. Tax and spenders are out in full force trying to grow the problem and make it worse. I do not like the downgrade but it's simply trying to tell you the truth of the upcoming crisis.

We know how to solve the problem, but we have the will to accelerate it and I believe our government has every intention of doing just that.

 

[Zargon]

seems like most of the reasons stated for the downgrade are correct, hard to beleive a nation in as much shit as ours deserves a AAA credit rating.

if the fed was a person its score would be about 450

 

[matt0611]

Don't fully trust any of the rating agencies because they are basically government monopolies. That being said, S&P was right to downgrade the US in my opinion.

 

[PingSpike]

Anyone else sort of feel like they have been and maybe still are kissing our ass with the ratings we've had for awhile? On the other hand, they rated piles of dog shit subprime mortgages as AAA so maybe we've only maintained AAA because of grade inflation.

The solution: S&P should have come out with a new quadruple A rating and just not assigned it to us.

 

[e-drood]

pls see http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

you are 312 millions out of 6.96 billions your self-rightous, ignorant and bloody minded republican party just fu*k*d over without apology or excuss --- you have global responsibilities you ignore at your own peril

take the time to google trend update of chat rooms/discussion forums other countries (your export customers, remember) re: response to us rating downgrade and try to appreciate the overwhelming anger of others who have no control over your arbitrary political actions

s&p was so bias'd - and when did "impressions" of political dissent replace as arbiter of ability to "manage" national debt - the basis of s&p's brilliant downrating

a staggeringly large number of people worldwide have been seriously hurt by this political facedown - and absolutely nothing has changed in us perspective on "how to run your fu*ki*g gov't"...

and the federal gov't provides subsidies to state school systems teaching creationism, what has happened to america?

 

[PokerGuy]

Clearly S&P is right, and this downgrade should actually have happened years ago. Obummer and the left are launching a big smear campaign now against the messenger, which is even more reason to believe the message is true.

The US has gotten itself in a situation where there is no realistic way of getting back to any semblance of a balanced budget for decades. How anyone can consider that AAA rated is beyond me.

 

[PokerGuy]

you are 312 millions out of 6.96 billions

STFU you idiot. I don't care if we are 300 out of 843,141,523,937,875. The people of the US should do what they want to do, not what some idiot like you wants us to. Don't like it? Too bad. You worry about how to run whatever country you're in, let the people of the US worry about how to run the US.

 

[Martin]

Those who say "S&P are wrong, look at the mortgage crisis" should remember that all three ratings agencies were in on the scam.

Why do I think S&P is right? Because while the US still has many years until its finances catch up to it, the people in charge can't be counted on to make the tough decisions to set the course right.

 

[sunzt]

STFU you idiot. I don't care if we are 300 out of 843,141,523,937,875. The people of the US should do what they want to do, not what some idiot like you wants us to. Don't like it? Too bad. You worry about how to run whatever country you're in, let the people of the US worry about how to run the US.

Actually, if 300 out of 843,141,523,937,875 had as much influence on those remaining 843,141,523,937,575 as the US did, then yeah those 300 needs to worry about its extraneous effects on the others. We live in a global economy and a global society and are not on an island isolated from the world. At least, because we depend on everyone else to manufacture and buy our stuff. What those other people decide to do has a direct effect on us and vice versa these days. There's a reason the US needs to cow tow to China, the Saudi's, and bailed out on Taiwan. And it's also why Europe finances are fking everyone right now.

The cartman attitude of "i do what i want, bich" will not lead to a good outcome.

 

[PokerGuy]

Actually, if 300 out of 843,141,523,937,875 had as much influence on those remaining 843,141,523,937,575 as the US did, then yeah those 300 needs to worry about its extraneous effects on the others. We live in a global economy and a global society and are not on an island isolated from the world.

Oh, so now voters in the US should vote for politicians based on what people elsewhere think? Or vote for policies based on what people elsewhere think? "oh, I like the tea party, but the people of other countries don't agree, so I'd better vote for someone else". Absolutely not. We are sovereign, that means we decide what's best for us, not the other people, no matter how many there are.

 

[Schadenfroh]

you are 312 millions out of 6.96 billions

Western Europe, America / Canada, Australia / New Zealand, Japan and South Korea might hold a small percentage of the world's population, but that small percentage of the world's population holds most of the world's wealth, Global 500 companies and produces the vast majority of the world's most cited, peer reviewed publications.

 

[rcpratt]

I don't really care who's right and who's wrong, but I think it's a great thing in the long-term if it causes the idiots in Washington to get serious about this.

 

[kage69]

I find myself in a weird position of understanding why they did it but not exactly approving of it.

The teabaggers and those that fear them are to blame for this debacle, without their petulant grandstanding and brinkmanship this downgrade would not have happened, period.
I guess I can't blame S&P for paying attention to the world around them, even if I don't care for the results.

 

[Dulanic]

The whole poll is rather loaded and kind of pointless. The S&P is a joke, they rated the failed mortgage backed securities as AAA, that right there should kill their rating ability to F.

The real reason US bond's should stay AAA.... we own the printing presses. Wrong or right to do so isn't the issue at hand, simply that we MAKE the money and the Fed would print more money before defaulting on the bonds.

 

[Siddhartha]

Before the Congressional Republicans made a crisis out of raising the debt limit, did anyone really think that the US would not pay its debts?

The rating is suppose to reflect how trustworthy the US is in terms of paying back its debts.

 

[kage69]

I don't really care who's right and who's wrong, but I think it's a great thing in the long-term if it causes the idiots in Washington to get serious about this.

While I understand the desire for expediency here, I vehemently disagree with the notion that we shouldn't be taking recent history into account in our deliberations. Those who were wrong, dead wrong, about so much shouldn't be allowed to ante up to the table of ideas as if they still have some credibility.
The phrase "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it" seems to apply here.

Implementing things we know to be failures will not magically fix our problems, and any indignation over this should be directed at those who are choosing not to remember, not those who do.