The USA took another credit rating hit! Did you even hear about it before this?

by Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ Posted 2012/04/10 01:02:19

Related Topics: Debt, Credit Rating, White House, Credit, Oil, Federal Reserve, Crash, Independent, 2008, Headquarters, Commercial, Issues, Photo, America, Market

Read More

158 votes
Read all 324 opinions
Lightning Report View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	Oscar-Michael-Golf!	7 votes	4%
	Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot!	29 votes	18%
	What's NEXT?	30 votes	19%
	Undecided	4 votes	3%
	All of the above	65 votes	41%
	None of the above	23 votes	15%

America saw another downgrade on its credit rating last week. The
White House ordered the press to keep quiet and they meekly obeyed. But
that’s not the worst problem. If the Big Three follow through on the
downgrade, prices of all commodities, including gold, silver, and oil,
could rise sharply.

Credit rating action

Egan-Jones Ratings Company (EJR)
is an independent credit rating company that answers only to investors.
No company or government that issues commercial or sovereign debt has
any influence over its decisions. A source familiar with such matters
(specifically an account executive for a major precious-metals brokerage
firm) pointed out to CNAV that the Big Three credit rating
agencies (Standard and Poor, Moody, and Fitch) all work under such
influence. Therefore, if any country’s sovereign debt deserves a
downgrade, Egan-Jones will downgrade it first. The Big Three will follow
Egan-Jones’ lead when they can no longer deny the reality.

In 2008, Egan-Jones was first to predict the crash of the housing
market. Last year, they were the first to downgrade the American credit
rating from AAA to AA+. Standard and Poor merely followed Egan-Jones’
lead.

Federal Reserve headquarters. Their monetization of the debt caused another credit rating downgrade.

The Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building. Photo: User Cliff1066/Flickr, CC BY 2.0 Generic License

On Thursday, 5 April, Egan-Jones Ratings downgraded American sovereign debt again. The American credit rating is now AA.

+41

Add a comment above

bman~AVA 2012/04/10 01:06:39

All of the above

+29
Yep, it seems like I heard that this was a very strong possibility when the socialist refused to cut his excessive spending. So it's finally happened. Hey libs out there! How do you feel about your man now huh?????? I bet you folks are just as proud as can be with him now.
>> See Replies

More polls by Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆

TheTailor to Hawkeye 2012/04/11 13:46:06

It was cutting $4+ TRILLION, that's why it was rejected.

reply
mich52 to Hawkeye 2012/04/11 14:19:16

You're the travesty of lies.... That deal would of showed some progress on our deficit and with it we wouldn't of had a downgrade... Maybe you should read abit before you spew you crap....

""because of the lack of any tangible progress on addressing the problems and the continued rise in debt to GDP," said Sean Egan, co-founder of firm, in an e-mail statement."

reply
TheTailor to mich52 2012/04/11 13:45:10

Yeah genius, that was not about stopping SPENDING, that was deficit reduction of $4+ trillion. It wasn't Boehner, it was Simpson Boles, the administration rejected it.

This is downgrade is based on the inaction after the debt ceiling deal AND, as you quoted, "because of the lack of any tangible progress on addressing the problems and the continued rise in debt to GDP,", in short, the $5+ TRILLION spent after Obama was elected, as I said.

reply
mich52 to TheTailor 2012/04/11 14:21:52

Like I told Hawk try reading before you spew bs..

"Meanwhile, Congress has done little, according to Egan. The bipartisan "super committee" that sought spending cuts of $1.5 trillion over 10 years "was a failure," he said. "Obviously, the current course is not enhancing credit quality"

The House also rejected two other budget alternatives Thursday night, including the first Congress has ever considered based on the recommendations of the Bowles-Simpson deficit reduction commission. This proposal was hailed by sponsors Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.) and Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio) as the only budget alternative that members of both parties can support..

Obama's 5t is mostly due to Bush policies and the recession.....

reply
TheTailor to mich52 2012/04/11 23:39:56 (edited)

+1
Yeah, that doesn't address what I said about spending, which is the reason Egan-Jones is looking for reform in the first place, and is the reason for the first downgrade.

Maybe you should read the first paragraph of your own link --> "(Reuters) - Egan-Jones Ratings downgraded the credit level of the United States as Washington has struggled to reduce the federal debt burden, which is projected to surpass the size of the country's economy."

Or maybe the forth paragraph ---> The firm downgraded the United States for second time in less than nine months "because of the lack of any tangible progress on addressing the problems and the continued rise in debt to GDP," said Sean Egan

It's the spending stupid. Bush hasn't anything to do with it, the so called "progressives" have been spending the country down the drain since 2007, with no budget in over 1000 days.

reply
mich52 to TheTailor 2012/04/12 00:58:50

Most of Obama's deficit is from Bush's policies...

reply
TheTailor to mich52 2012/04/12 04:15:54

Ridiculous.

reply
mich52 to TheTailor 2012/04/12 12:04:15

Afraid not....

reply
TheTailor to mich52 2012/06/13 00:44:47

http://online.wsj.com/article...

reply
Hawkeye to mich52 2012/04/11 09:49:51

+1
"Obviously this isn't all Obama's fault"

You're absulutely right.. We HAVE to recognize Harry Reid's contribution to this as well..

reply
mich52 to Hawkeye 2012/04/11 14:22:22

"Meanwhile, Congress has done little, according to Egan. The bipartisan "super committee" that sought spending cuts of $1.5 trillion over 10 years "was a failure," he said. "Obviously, the current course is not enhancing credit quality"

The House also rejected two other budget alternatives Thursday night, including the first Congress has ever considered based on the recommendations of the Bowles-Simpson deficit reduction commission. This proposal was hailed by sponsors Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.) and Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio) as the only budget alternative that members of both parties can support..

reply
Sheila 2012/04/10 17:46:35 (edited)

All of the above

+1
Not a word. OMG WTF is right. It is an election year. Why haven't the (R)s had this out all over the place?

So is THIS the change he was talking about?

reply
CMackley ~POTL~PWCM~JLA 2012/04/10 17:40:42

All of the above

+5
Obama's 'fundamental changes' are in full gear.Too bad his changes are noy in the best interest of the country but for his ideology.

reply
Steve 2012/04/10 17:40:27

All of the above

+4
Well, this should come as no surpise. We refuse to encourage those things that will allow the economy to grow. The EPA continues their war against any productive activity. We have a staggering growth of our debt which is the highest in our 236 year history; the socialization of medicine which will further destroy our economy; continued historical foreclosure rates and a true unemployment rate of well above 12%.

reply
Average Joe 2012/04/10 16:50:44

None of the above

How is this shocking? This is simply continuation of the MULTIPLE news blackouts initiated by the Bush Administration who pioneered such approaches with regularity regarding everything from photos of the returning dead soldiers to embedded war reporters to prior WH approval of soundbites and specific recordings and much more. Obama is simply carrying on the status quo of the Bush years. I'm surprised ANY conservative would have a problem with continuation of the Bush administration's standard protocol and policies including everything discussed here PLUS: content-blocking technology law signed by Bush, deliberate suppression of scientific research and results (http://environment.about.com... AT & T's Internet censorship of Bush critics and criticism (http://www.commondreams.org/... and much more. Nothing to see here, folks, move along. It's the same old business-as-usual in Washington DC where both parties screw the willing and apathetic public. As long as people continue to blame another party the government wins by keeping us at each others throats instead of focusing on the real problem ... the government. The sheople continue to wage partisan divisiveness while the fed laughs at our ignorance and line their pockets at our expense.

reply
Sheila to Average... 2012/04/10 17:48:39

+3
LMAO, so let me get this right....it is Bush's fault? OMG when will you people own what is going on????

reply
Average... to Sheila 2012/04/10 17:56:13

"You people?" LMAO. It's amazing how pointing out the facts of the matter gets one incorrectly labeled. Sorry, although for some unknown reason you need to attempt to pigeonhole and compartmentalize people, it simply can't be done, at least in this manner. I didn't blame Bush for anything and admit, I'm entertained that you would even misinterpret such a thing based on the -facts-, facts about Bush of which can be confirmed with a few simple clicks of the mouse. I merely pointed out the WH is simply coninuing on with the policies in place instituted by Bush. YOU inferred blame, not I. I simply illustrated the facts, commentary withstanding. Obama is responsible for his administration regardless whose policies he follows or continues but the FACT remains these were instituted by Bush. However, It appears a select group has a problem when Obama does it but were curiously silent when Bush did it. That's called "hypocrisy" my good man.

reply
TheTailor to Average... 2012/04/11 04:33:51

And you cited far left websites, whoops ;-) hahaha, http://www.commondreams.org

reply
Average... to TheTailor 2012/04/11 17:42:36

Riddle me this, are you suggesting or implying in any manner whatsoever this specific item is incorrect since it was reported by a site of which you take issue with?

reply
zapped to Sheila 2012/04/11 03:58:00

+1
thanks sheila ...
average here is living in this obama inducted "blame bush " syndrome ...

obama know exactly what he's doing ,,,and is intent on the road he's going down ...

reply
Sheila to zapped 2012/04/11 13:52:45

It just amazes me. Then there is the standard reply "well you didn't complain when Bush did it." Like they have any idea what I said about Bush.... Depends on my mood whether it makes me laugh or growl!

reply
Average... to Sheila 2012/04/11 17:44:51 (edited)

Actually, no one fronted you off at all. The comment was a generalization about Bush supporters yet -you- made yourself guilty by entering yourself into the equation (by virtue of recognizing yourself in the reference). THAT makes anyone laugh.

reply
Sheila to Average... 2012/04/11 17:59:45 (edited)

Darlin I was not talking to you. Grrrr.

reply
Average... to Sheila 2012/04/11 18:02:33

Then perhaps you should take it to private messaging instead of a public forum if you don't want public response.

In addition, you invited comment by proxy by commenting on -my- comment regarding (many) Bush supporters and their hypocrisy.

reply
Sheila to Average... 2012/04/11 18:05:23

LOL, have a nice day.

reply
Average... to Sheila 2012/04/11 18:16:52

+1
You too.

reply
TheTailor to Average... 2012/04/11 04:31:02

+2
Please, seek help for your Bush Derangement Syndrome. They downgraded because of the DEBT, get a clue.

reply
Average... to TheTailor 2012/04/11 17:57:24

Please point out any fallacy or untruth in my statement as opposed to attempted personalization of debate with juvenile character attacks. The facts of my statement have you baffled and/or distracted so you predictably enact the usual first mode of response favored by (usually) those who lack debate skill, that of -attack-. However, such attempted (but failed) diversions say more about you than the person you attempt to disparage. See "Subfallacies; Abusive:" http://www.fallacyfiles.org/a... When you educate yourself regarding the finer merits of debate and proper communication technique and can attack the topic and not the person who may say or post something with which you disagree, by all means, please come back and engage.

reply
TheTailor to Average... 2012/04/11 23:49:17

+2
It always takes 2-3 times before it gets into the head of the leftist that I'm not going to lose sight of the topic no matter how much you try to veer from it. I said:

"They downgraded because of the DEBT, get a clue."

Bush, has nothing to do with this, when he was in office debt was at 38% of GDP, today it's over 100%. DUH

reply
Average... to TheTailor 2012/04/12 16:13:18

If you're not going to "lose sight" of the topic then why do you continually attempt to change it? I said nothing of the downgrade or the debt nor did I blame Bush but keep trying to lodge a circumstantial fallacy if that's what you need to avoid answering my inquiry. Let's try it again, shall we? Please point out any untruth in any of my posts in this thread. Utter the chant of "Duh" a few more times and you just might become enlightened in regards to remaining on topic.

reply
TheTailor to Average... 2012/04/12 18:19:58

Well yes, you do blame Bush, right here and falsely -->"This is simply continuation of the MULTIPLE news blackouts initiated by the Bush Administration who pioneered such approaches with regularity regarding everything from photos of the returning dead soldiers ...". It's not a "news blackout" when soldiers are reported killed on a daily basis. Bush stopped the disgusting leftist press from parading their deaths in the anti-war agenda.

reply
Average... to TheTailor 2012/04/13 18:49:52

That's not blaming Bush, that's an observation of fact. Is my assertion not correct? I think I may still have the memorandum issued to the media by the Bush administration.

It most certainly IS a news blackout when the media is directly ordered NOT to photo the returning dead.

It's not the president's job to play editor and deem what is news-worthy and what isn't. This equates censorship in its most blatant form.

reply
TheTailor to Average... 2012/04/13 20:57:31

+1
Yes, your assertion is not correct. Again, if information is being published there isn't a news "blackout", news doesn't demand pictures to be news. Also, news wasn't censored.

reply
Average... to TheTailor 2012/04/13 21:08:39

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/...

reply
TheTailor to Average... 2012/04/13 21:16:38 (edited)

+1
Umm, that's a released picture with written news, nothing close to a "blackout".

reply
Average... to TheTailor 2012/04/13 21:20:06

Try reading instead of looking at the picture.

reply
TheTailor to Average... 2012/04/13 22:08:41

+1
Again you make my point, if I can READ it, there's no news "blackout".

reply
Average... to TheTailor 2012/04/15 16:43:27

You didn't read it. You have no point as you're dead wrong as the article provides. You couldn't view photos of the returning dead or read about the numbers of coffins and many other things for many years due to the blackout, now you can since the Obama admin lifted the ban.

reply
TheTailor to Average... 2012/04/15 17:45:18

It doesn't matter if I read it or not, the fact that it's available to read proves there isn't a "blackout". Additionally there's a picture, further showing there's no "blackout". GET A CLUE.

reply
Average... to TheTailor 2012/04/16 15:31:12

+1
Only the information WASN'T available for years despite your denial and refusal to read the link which would educate you regarding your erroneous claim. Your refusal to read the provided link illustrates your position more than you will ever realize. People can't be forced to learn when they steadfastly refuse. Your denial simply doesn't make it so.

reply