lawrocket 3 #101 August 8, 2011 QuoteWeren't these the same people that gave all those toxic assets a AAA rating only a few years back? Yep. And they learned their lesson. No more bullshitting and kowtowing to political pressure. Ever see a recovered junkie talk about the dangers of drugs. "Wait. Weren't you a junkie? What would you know?" My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #102 August 8, 2011 QuoteWe need to stop basing our votes on what's best for our individual ledgers and start basing votes on what's best for our country as a whole. THERE IS NO SUCH THING, DAVE! NONE! THERE IS NO SUCH THING! PERIOD. There are things that are good for some but not for others. And good for others but not for some. The tax code is good for 50% of the population who pays no income taxes. And it sucks for the rest who do. Now, making everybody pay some taxes would be good for some but bad for that 50% who pays none. It's not good for the whole country. It's good for part of it. Politics is a system designed to pick and choose winners and losers. Changing the policies means picking new winners and losers. balancing the budget and paying off the debt is not good for a large portion of the country. Why do you think the Democrats have made it known that Social Security and medicare cuts are off the table? Why have the republicans let it be known that tax increases are off the table? Because BOTH are good for some and bad for others. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Casurf1978 0 #103 August 9, 2011 QuoteQuote Not that they're wrong to highlight what's going on, but it does have a bit of a grandstanding feel to it, no? Absolutely it's grandstanding, especially at this point in time. The head of S&P is a liberal arts major. I would love to see what positions Soros took today, and I bet they were dialed in before S&P made their call. Soros and Buffet were dialed in months ago. This didn't take them by surprise. The whole ratings by these agencies is a bunch of BS. S&P had Lehmans and AIG rated as investment grade during the whole financial mess of 2008. Not only that but these rating agencies are only paid when a rating is issued. Between 2002-07 S&P, Moodys and Fitch saw their revenues increase by a factor of 2 to $6 billion just by issuing ratings. And guess what they were covering...CDOs. These guys were handing out 'AAA' ratings like they were going out of style and getting paid for it too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,121 #104 August 9, 2011 The Soviet Union fell after a prolonged and very expensive arms race against the US. The US appears to find itself in the the former USSR's position versus China. There is no way the US will be able to sustain its historic (and current) defence budgets. Obviously other programs need major cutting as well. There just simply cannot be a sacred cow. History does seem to be repeating itself and another empire is on the brink of extinction. The S & P downgrade is solely, IMHO, due to the government's ability to make decisions that matter. Or better stated, its lack of that ability. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #105 August 9, 2011 QuoteQuote*cough cough* Weren't these the same people that gave all those toxic assets a AAA rating only a few years back? Give that man a cigar. S&P, along with Moody and the others, hasn't shown a reason to put much faith in them. Not that they're wrong to highlight what's going on, but it does have a bit of a grandstanding feel to it, no? Quote Yeah I know it's not civil nor will it really solve any of our problems but there is this really old Persian saying that reads "YOU DUMB ASS, STOP BIGHTING THE HAND THAT IS FEEDING YOU!" *hint hint nudge nudge remember that tarp thing we paid to save your sorry asses after you told us those investments were perfect? And take that cigar back. TARP was a loan, in many cases forced (see Wells Fargo and JPM in particular), and the money came back. Ah yeah but let's face it if it wasn't for TARP the financial system would have been dead and these guys and gals would be working for half of what they are getting today. Anyhow financial institutions have to come to terms with one critical fact. LIKE IT OR NOT THE US IS THE BEST PLACE YOU CAN CALL HOME! Behave as our guest or we will gladly evict your sorry ass!Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #106 August 10, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote Not that they're wrong to highlight what's going on, but it does have a bit of a grandstanding feel to it, no? Absolutely it's grandstanding, especially at this point in time. The head of S&P is a liberal arts major. I would love to see what positions Soros took today, and I bet they were dialed in before S&P made their call. Soros and Buffet were dialed in months ago. This didn't take them by surprise. The whole ratings by these agencies is a bunch of BS. S&P had Lehmans and AIG rated as investment grade during the whole financial mess of 2008. Not only that but these rating agencies are only paid when a rating is issued. Between 2002-07 S&P, Moodys and Fitch saw their revenues increase by a factor of 2 to $6 billion just by issuing ratings. And guess what they were covering...CDOs. These guys were handing out 'AAA' ratings like they were going out of style and getting paid for it too. And people believed them then, and now! A-mazing.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #107 August 11, 2011 Adding to the fun of bashing the S&P, who contributed at least a little to the bashing of our brokerage and retirement accounts (short term): [url]http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/opinionshop/detail?entry_id=95131&tsp=1[url] Quote Bellows noted that S&P based its judgment on a projection that the U.S. debt as a share of the nation's gross domestic product would rise rapidly over the next 10 years. The error, which S&P acknowledged in private conversations with the Treasury Department,estimated that the U.S. debt would be 8 percentage points higher by 2021 than if correctly estimated. Instead of rescinding the downgrade, S&P changed its rationale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #108 August 16, 2011 QuoteAdding to the fun of bashing the S&P, who contributed at least a little to the bashing of our brokerage and retirement accounts (short term): http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/opinionshop/detail?entry_id=95131&tsp=1 Quote Bellows noted that S&P based its judgment on a projection that the U.S. debt as a share of the nation's gross domestic product would rise rapidly over the next 10 years. The error, which S&P acknowledged in private conversations with the Treasury Department,estimated that the U.S. debt would be 8 percentage points higher by 2021 than if correctly estimated. Instead of rescinding the downgrade, S&P changed its rationale. Well, neither Fitch nor Moody's agreed with S&P. Seems that S&P doesn't like Google any more, either.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
