Debt ceiling predictions?

[il Padrino Ute]

Raise the debt ceiling.

Defaulting would be catastrophic for he economy. It would dry up lending in the same way that the Wall Street fiasco did by creating a panic amongst bond holders. It would end up in massive job losses for government workers and dramatic and immediate cuts in numerous public services. It would also result in numerous job losses to the states and massive cuts in there budgets since they would lose funds from the feds.

I don't like big budget deficits, I think everyone is going to have to give, but it took 40 years to get to this point and an immediate and abrupt end really would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

How does anyone know what will happen? The debt ceiling has never not been raised, so we really can't say with certainty what would happen.

I suppose it's best to be safe than sorry and raise the ceiling, but it should be done with massive spending cuts. In the past, it's only increased spending because government loves to spend money. How 'bout we try to not spend what we don't have for once?

[il Padrino Ute]

No, I was just yanking your chain. When you are grim like this, it's pretty easy.

Maybe you need to ease off on the echo-chamber propaganda stuff?

When you ease off the echo-chamber propaganda, I'll do the same. Deal?

[RobinFinderson]

I thought the largest debt holders were pension funds, which typically includes a lot of middle class America...including heavily unionized companies.

I'm largely speaking of the phenomenon over the last few years where the wealthiest individuals have parked huge piles of money in bonds. I shouldn't have framed it in terms of a statistic.

RF, either you're trying to pull our chains without being funny like SIEQ, or you're swallowing what the Democrats tell you, hook, line, sinker.

Here are the top political contributions in 2008 to Barack Obama:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...goButt2=Submit

Here are the top political contributions in 2008 to John McCain:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/co...goButt2=Submit

The amount of contributions from Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Citicorp, JP Morgan Chase and UBS AG to Obama -- $6,898,634.

The same contributors to John McCain -- $1,246,198.

*Note, I would have included Bank of America and Merrill Lynch which show up on John McCain's list, but I don't have the information for Obama from the pages I linked to. As it turns out, the amount given to McCain by his top donor, Merrill Lynch, wouldn't have even made the bottom of Obama's list. Merrill Lynch and BofA very well might have given Obama more, but I don't know because Obama's minimum on his list is around $495k and the top contributor on McCain's list is $373k.

In other news, did you know that there is evidence (largely quashed because it is embarrassing to both parties) that the CIA worked with Fidel Castro in his glorious revolution? They didn't bankroll the whole thing, but as soon as it looked like it might be successful, the US started exploring the possibility of buying influence with the young revolutionary.

[Sleeping in EQ]

When you ease off the echo-chamber propaganda, I'll do the same. Deal?

Other than FCC stuff, I don't keep up with politics closely enough to know what's bouncing through the echo chamber.

I actually follow international politics and local politics more than some pundits daily talking points.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

I'm largely speaking of the phenomenon over the last few years where the wealthiest individuals have parked huge piles of money in bonds. I shouldn't have framed it in terms of a statistic.



In other news, did you know that there is evidence (largely quashed because it is embarrassing to both parties) that the CIA worked with Fidel Castro in his glorious revolution? They didn't bankroll the whole thing, but as soon as it looked like it might be successful, the US started exploring the possibility of buying influence with the young revolutionary.

Here's a profile on Goldman Sachs. Do you notice anything?

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summ...?id=D000000085

It wasn't just a phenomenon that occurred with Obama.

The GOP sure is doing a shitty job of courting these people they're supposedly shilling for.

[byu71]

I'm largely speaking of the phenomenon over the last few years where the wealthiest individuals have parked huge piles of money in bonds. I shouldn't have framed it in terms of a statistic.

Where are you reading this. I am not disputing you because maybe you have a good source. It would surprise me if true though.

Of course I guess anyone could say something and later define what they mean by "huge piles of money in bonds". What is your definition of "bond" in this statement.

[Moliere]

Where are you reading this. I am not disputing you because maybe you have a good source. It would surprise me if true though.

Of course I guess anyone could say something and later define what they mean by "huge piles of money in bonds". What is your definition of "bond" in this statement.

Every smart person would be out of bonds right now given the impending rise in interest rates.

[byu71]

Every smart person would be out of bonds right now given the impending rise in interest rates.

Well they would certainly be looking and seeing if they need to make some adjustments for when, I don't know if it is impending, interest rates start going up.

A person who relies on bond interest to live on, can't just get out of their bonds. I guess they could and live off of their capital until rates went back up and hope they spike up quickly.

[Flystripper]

Every smart person would be out of bonds right now given the impending rise in interest rates.

uuuh at the very least they would be considering if their portfolio could use some weighting adjustments.

[RobinFinderson]

Where are you reading this. I am not disputing you because maybe you have a good source. It would surprise me if true though.

Of course I guess anyone could say something and later define what they mean by "huge piles of money in bonds". What is your definition of "bond" in this statement.

Stuff I heard on NPR. Robert Reich comment on Marketplace.

[BigFatMeanie]

As in the wealthiest Americans? Here is how I know that Republicans WILL raise the debt ceiling -- their whole purpose for being is to help the wealthiest Americans get a leg up in life (arguing that a rising tide lifts all ships), and the wealthiest Americans are the group most steeply invested in American bonds. Crash the bond market and the GOP kicks its most important constituency in the balls. It won't happen. Guaranteed.

(Summoning my inner Indy) Link?

[RobinFinderson]

(Summoning my inner Indy) Link?

See the Reich link directly above your post. I've already said that I shouldn't have made the statement as a quasi-statistic, but here is from Reich:

Forty years ago, wealthy Americans financed the U.S. government mainly through their tax payments. Today wealthy Americans finance the government mainly by lending it money. While foreigners own most of our national debt, more than 40 percent is owned by Americans -- mostly the very wealthy.

[Moliere]

uuuh at the very least they would be considering if their portfolio could use some weighting adjustments.

Right, I switched into absolute mode for a minute (or maybe I'm usually in that mode).

When companies are issuing debt just to issue debt, meaning they don't really have projects lined up but the interest rates are too low to not take advantage, then there will likely be an influx of capital project activity on the horizon. I hope this happens as it will really help the economy. But then again, we could also remain in very low interest rates for a decade like Japan.

[BigFatMeanie]

See the Reich link directly above your post. I've already said that I shouldn't have made the statement as a quasi-statistic, but here is from Reich:

Unsurprisingly, a completely fact-free post by Reich. Full of claims and opinions with no support. A typical "tax the rich" screed.

Go ahead, Reich, and tax the super-rich. Tax them 100%. It won't even come close to resolving today's current budget deficits.

[byu71]

See the Reich link directly above your post. I've already said that I shouldn't have made the statement as a quasi-statistic, but here is from Reich:

I love how these guys get away with this shit because they are being interviewed by journalists who don't know their asses from a hole in the ground.

I wonder if Reich knows how much of the bond debt is owned by the Social Security Trust fund. He probably knows, but realizes the interviewer wouldn't think about it. How about the banks. I guess that is the wealthy? They are actually corporations.

I really wonder if you took the really wealthy people, Gates, Buffet, Trump, et. al. how much of their holdings is Treasuries. I would bet as a percentage, not much.

Reich just put together a cute slogan, "rich used to finance through taxes now by lending us money". Cute I guess if no one is going to call you on it and then the unknowing public thinks because he is on the radio he knows his ass from a hole in the ground.

It is too bad this stuff can't be argued to the public on merit instead of smoke and mirrors and slight of hand.

Look, it is this simple. Some people have more money than you. Would you like to take it from them? We can if we vote for the right people.