Does the US really need a good credit rating?

[ugonow]

Fitch warns US would endanger AAA rating with even 'technical' default
By Peter Schroeder - 06/08/11 11:50 AM ET

The United States would endanger its coveted AAA credit rating if Congress allows even a short-term "technical default" to occur, according to the Fitch credit rating agency.

Fitch said Wednesday it would put the nation's credit rating on "ratings watch negative" if a deal to raise the $14.3 trillion debt limit is not reached by August.


It also warned that even a short-term "technical default" would do major damage to the nation's credit reputation. A technical default would take place if the country were unable to pay its debt payments because of a failure to raise the debt limit. In such a circumstance, the U.S. would technically have the ability to borrow more money, but would lack legislative authority to do so.

A true default happens when a country literally has no ability to pay its debt payments.

The agency's take comes after some have suggested that a short-term default might not be damaging to the country.

thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/165365-fitch-warns-against-default-of-any-length

[NoMoreLunacy]

The Republicans are being idiots in this case. Everyone knows that they are just posturing and the debt limit will go up anyway. So why waste time on this? I want far fewer hours on part of politicians spent on nonsense like this. They should instead focus on spending cuts.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Jun 9, 2011 13:10:20 GMT -5 NoMoreLunacy said:

The Republicans are being idiots in this case. Everyone knows that they are just posturing and the debt limit will go up anyway. So why waste time on this? I want far fewer hours on part of politicians spent on nonsense like this. They should instead focus on spending cuts.

No, the debt limit is not going to be raised unconditionally. The Republican Party is (for once) playing it smart. They know they have a chance-- one and only one chance-- to finally get control of our nation's spending.

In the long run, short term "technical default" while we get our spending under control, reduce future borrowing, and devise a plan to pay down our debt will actually be better for the country.

You're nuts if you think the debt limit is just going to be raised willy nilly without any spending controls. Those days are over. It appears we have a few-- enough to get the job done-- adults at the switch now and the Democratic Party really needs to STOP demogoging the issue, STOP lying, posturing, and playing politics with the future of the country. These are serious times. It's over.

[NoMoreLunacy]

Whatever. If Republicans were serious about cutting spending they would have done it in the Bush years when they had full control. I am sick and tired of paying high taxes. Republicans are just the same as Democrats, they just want to spend the money on different things. Here they are just posturing and will back down. I want true spending cuts. Like 70% of the Govt has to go. The only expenditure would be debt payments and a token military and judicial system for enforcing the law inside and outside.

[cme1201]

technical default would take place if the country were unable to pay its debt payments because of a failure to raise the debt limit.

Wouldn't a more honest statement be "technical default would take place if the country were unable to pay its debt payments because of a failure to Reign in out of control spending for the last 15+ years."

Raising the debt ceiling does nothing to address the issues and simply kicks the can down the road.

[ugonow]

They know they have a chance-- one and only one chance-- to finally get control of our nation's spending.

So you think once they get control of the senate and the WH, they will not want to saddle themselves like that,it is easier to demand another administration to? Kinda like when all of them had no hesitations in raising it what,10 times in 8 years ?Or vice vresa,Obama and dems fighting against raising it during the same time?

[Deleted]

The Republicans are being idiots in this case. Everyone knows that they are just posturing and the debt limit will go up anyway. So why waste time on this?

No they are playing politics, I would be too in their position. The best thing they could do is to get something passed limiting spending. I wouldn't care if they didn't raise the debt limit. Shut the country down for a couple of weeks. Everybody needs to get serious about cutting spending (not just one party or the other).

[cme1201]

Jun 9, 2011 15:25:59 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

The Republicans are being idiots in this case. Everyone knows that they are just posturing and the debt limit will go up anyway. So why waste time on this?

No they are playing politics, I would be too in their position. The best thing they could do is to get something passed limiting spending. I wouldn't care if they didn't raise the debt limit. Shut the country down for a couple of weeks. Everybody needs to get serious about cutting spending (not just one party or the other).

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 15:25:59 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

The Republicans are being idiots in this case. Everyone knows that they are just posturing and the debt limit will go up anyway. So why waste time on this?

No they are playing politics, I would be too in their position. The best thing they could do is to get something passed limiting spending. I wouldn't care if they didn't raise the debt limit. Shut the country down for a couple of weeks. Everybody needs to get serious about cutting spending (not just one party or the other).

Dream on if you think the current Republicans want to actually cut spending. They would have done so in 2000-2006 if they wanted to. They didn't. They are just playing politics to get reelected. And you guys are falling for it. Boycott the elections in 2012, let them all fail, and then let's have a new group of Republicans whose #1-#10 priority is to cut taxes and spend to get govt spend to about 20% of what it is today. Stop with pork already, how much more money will the rich states have to give to the poor states?

[cme1201]

#1-#10 priority is to cut taxes and spend

[Deleted]

Dream on if you think the current Republicans want to actually cut spending. They would have done so in 2000-2006 if they wanted to. They didn't.

Actually things are a lot different now than they were in 2000-2006. The Obama stimulus package put us in instant jeopardy without any breathing room. It was such a huge jump that most sensible human beings got to thinking about the amount that we owe. I think that it woke a few people (hopefully more than a few) up. I know I get emails from my Congressman & that's one of this top agenda items (besides getting rid of President Obama of course )

I would point out that the Democrats are in a ruff position. They can't really address cutting spending without cutting the number of votes they get. After the election they just might address the issue (with an increase in taxes for everyone).

[NoMoreLunacy]

Jun 9, 2011 20:17:31 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

Dream on if you think the current Republicans want to actually cut spending. They would have done so in 2000-2006 if they wanted to. They didn't.

Actually things are a lot different now than they were in 2000-2006. The Obama stimulus package put us in instant jeopardy without any breathing room. It was such a huge jump that most sensible human beings got to thinking about the amount that we owe. I think that it woke a few people (hopefully more than a few) up. I know I get emails from my Congressman & that's one of this top agenda items (besides getting rid of President Obama of course )

While I agree that the Obama stimulus package was wrong to pass, Bush is equally guilty as he started the process in 2008. Also, he spent huge amounts of money off budget on the two wars. So what we now have is a huge debt load. We need to immediately cut most Govt spending till we can pay the loan off. Then we need to save up for a rainy day fund of at least 10 years of discretionary spending. Only then should we start to think of raising spending again. We need a gut wrenching bout of cost cutting like the South East Asian nations went through in the late 90s. Yes, it will be super painful and the American middle class will probably be gone, but it is necessary at this point. How long are we going to keep taxing the rich to support the poor and the middle class?

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

Jun 9, 2011 20:22:07 GMT -5 NoMoreLunacy said:

Jun 9, 2011 20:17:31 GMT -5 @oldtex said:

Dream on if you think the current Republicans want to actually cut spending. They would have done so in 2000-2006 if they wanted to. They didn't.

Actually things are a lot different now than they were in 2000-2006. The Obama stimulus package put us in instant jeopardy without any breathing room. It was such a huge jump that most sensible human beings got to thinking about the amount that we owe. I think that it woke a few people (hopefully more than a few) up. I know I get emails from my Congressman & that's one of this top agenda items (besides getting rid of President Obama of course )

While I agree that the Obama stimulus package was wrong to pass, Bush is equally guilty as he started the process in 2008. Also, he spent huge amounts of money off budget on the two wars. So what we now have is a huge debt load. We need to immediately cut most Govt spending till we can pay the loan off. Then we need to save up for a rainy day fund of at least 10 years of discretionary spending. Only then should we start to think of raising spending again. We need a gut wrenching bout of cost cutting like the South East Asian nations went through in the late 90s. Yes, it will be super painful and the American middle class will probably be gone, but it is necessary at this point. How long are we going to keep taxing the rich to support the poor and the middle class?

You don't seriously think Congress will be voting for "gut wrenching cost cutting," do you?

[ugonow]

Actually things are a lot different now than they were in 2000-2006.

Yes,it is.We are trying to get out of the recession that started in December of 2007.