Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A major result of failing to approve the debt ceiling increase will be a lowering of our AAA Bond rating. That lower rating will have severe consequences throughout the country - even the world. I don't think there is any controversy over that part (that a lowered rating will be very harmful).
But just WHO is it that makes those ratings? Is there one person at the agency who sits there in an office, grinning at his computer screen, wringing his hands, and muttering under his breath:"I got em?" Couldn't those agencies look beyond the actual politics of the moment & not downgrade? What if the person/people responsible for the ratings decided that they want the budget balanced, or that they want the US to have 10X the debt it has? What restrains them? Can one person, or a very small group of people, at Moody's or S&P, none of whom have been elected, dictate to the US what the US has to do? This seems to be what is happening.
Does anyone know the details of how the raters develop the ratings?
Since they are only just now catching on to what the rest of the world already knows (America is the largest debtor nation in history), I'm not sure their rating system can be relied on for much.
We've been raiding the social security money for over 50 years and in addition borrowing money for decades since the great society programs began.
We are Capitalist with a socialist component like a cancer inside and we spend like crack whores.
Why wouldn't others have the right to declare us a risk to buy bonds from?
Our AAA rating is bogus and we all know that.
We create money to pay our bills. How sound is that ?
Our people need to grow up.
We need to only spend what we have income for.
We need a balanced budget amendment since politicians refuse to do what is required of them.
The purpose of this thread was to question WHO the agencies are, and what RIGHT do they have to TELL the American people: Do It My Way Or Else? For example, S&P says we have to cut $4T to keep the AAA rating. WHY? Why not 1, or 100, or increase? That is one entities OPINION. WHo is it that makes that decision? How?
There are already lots of threads on here with pros & cons of increasing the debt ceiling.
Ah, ok, I'll play. I'll sumise that these agencies came into being because bond purchasers needed a qualitative assessment agency of some sorts they could rely on to give a countries bonds a rating based on a universally applied set of markers.
Now; I guess these agencies plug in the markers and probably let the chips fall where they may. I'm of the opinion that once a countries bonds are weighed against the results of these markers being surveyed they really have very little choice as to whether the rating get's published or not.
They are probably only as trustworthy as their assessment accuracy; if they don't publish a rating status change in light of certain visible markers being obvious to many, they'd very likely lose whatever standing they had. Sorta like "Jimmy the Greek" odds making.
The purpose of this thread was to question WHO the agencies are, and what RIGHT do they have to TELL the American people: Do It My Way Or Else? For example, S&P says we have to cut $4T to keep the AAA rating. WHY? Why not 1, or 100, or increase? That is one entities OPINION. WHo is it that makes that decision? How?
There are already lots of threads on here with pros & cons of increasing the debt ceiling.
AGAIN, they are telling us we have a spending problem and eventually we will get higher interest on our debt. WHY? Because everything doesn't revolve around us.
Barnie Franks is pressuring the rating agencies to "refrain" from de-rating.
How does this buffoon have any remaining influence currency to squander with his being largely responsible for the crisis we're all enduring right now? When this master of entitlement stands up in the house he should be laughed into submission.
For him to suggest that agencies responsible for giving a trusted assessment of a rating should now "fudge" the figures is like the veritable "fox in the henhouse" parable. This is the very guy who suggested fudging mortgage eligibility that, in no small part, has led to this chaos.
Too lazy to Google the information? Get off your backside.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
