US AAA credit rating downgraded

[Ed Anger]

Relax.

[The Brain]

Take it eeeeeeeaa-eeeeea-sy.

[Ed Anger]

Take it eeeeeeeaa-eeeeea-sy.

These young people today are prone to panic. Not manly at all.

[garbon]

Take it eeeeeeeaa-eeeeea-sy.

These young people today are prone to panic. Not manly at all.

[ulmont]

Nah, I'll be too busy banging my head against the wall as I see my country driven down by one moron after another.

I feel your pain.   

[Barrister]

It's been 3 years now, I think we can say that this is far more than a mere recession. It seems to me that we are looking at low growth for developed economies for the forseeable future. So, a bit like Japan for the past 25 years. Anyone who wants governments to keep on borrowing vast amounts needs to outline where rapid future growth will come from. Without that growth, which I think will not happen, we are simply living beyond our means.

You know the Italian deficit is not even that high by current standards, about 4.8% of GDP IIRC, but their economy has been asleep for at least a decade with miniscule growth.  It will probably stagnate or even shrink for at least another decade, which is why their debts are so scary.

I dunno.  I hate to gloat, but the Canadian economy (and Alberta in particular) is doing great. 

[Oexmelin]

Canada sells raw ressources to whatever imperial power happens to be around. We are simply digging deeper, and farther now than before.

[Barrister]

Canada sells raw ressources to whatever imperial power happens to be around. We are simply digging deeper, and farther now than before.

Yes - that is a large part of why we are doing so well.  So?  My point still stands.   

(the other part being generally good financial balance sheets for both government and consumers)

[Richard Hakluyt]

We shall see. Maybe being a big resources exporter will spare Canada from the bulk of the problems. I agree that, in general, Canada has done well in the areas of fiscal and finacial discipline.

(Though your current budget deficit is 3.8% of GDP, which would have been considered appalling until very recently  )

[OttoVonBismarck]

Your assessment that "without the brinksmanship our overall situation in regards to the debt mess would be worse, not better" is what makes you retarded.

You know what would've happened without the brinksmanship over the debt ceiling? Nothing.  Like the last 30 fucking times it's gone up.

Way to swallow the Kool-Aid over actuarial accounting procedures, Berk.

If I need someone to beat a nigger's head in with a collapsible tactical baton I know where to look, but obviously you're not a good place to turn for reasoned analysis on the economy.

While S&P certainly mentioned the political gridlock over the decision to raise the debt ceiling in their analysis, my actual reading of it suggests our long term projected debt-to-GDP ratio and the fact that even after months of political wrangling we only got a $2tn / 10 year deficit reduction showed them we were not moving in a good place in regards to debt long term.

If S&P isn't totally lying about why they downgraded us, then Obama's plan to just get a rubber stamp approval with no deficit reduction at all (that was his position before everything began) would arguably have still lead to this and possibly more with the other two agencies joining in. The market and these agencies were expecting deficit reduction before the ceiling was raised, that had been known as what was going to happen ever since the budget was approved and there was talk about focusing on spending cuts come debt-ceiling renewal time. If the GOP had just rubber stamped the raising of the debt ceiling with no reduction in long term spending at all, I genuinely think the markets and ratings agencies would have responded worse than they have so far.

I will say of course the GOP had an opportunity to get "100% of what they wanted" if they had agreed to the $4tn deficit reduction plan that Obama had on the table at one point.

[Oexmelin]

Yes - that is a large part of why we are doing so well.  So?  My point still stands.   

(the other part being generally good financial balance sheets for both government and consumers)

Sure. But I felt the fact that we are simply selling unprocessed stuff to others kinda reduced the "merit" aspect which generally comes with gloating.

I would be much more impressed if the Canadian economy reduced economic disparity between its citizens. 

[Ed Anger]

It's been 3 years now, I think we can say that this is far more than a mere recession. It seems to me that we are looking at low growth for developed economies for the forseeable future. So, a bit like Japan for the past 25 years. Anyone who wants governments to keep on borrowing vast amounts needs to outline where rapid future growth will come from. Without that growth, which I think will not happen, we are simply living beyond our means.

You know the Italian deficit is not even that high by current standards, about 4.8% of GDP IIRC, but their economy has been asleep for at least a decade with miniscule growth.  It will probably stagnate or even shrink for at least another decade, which is why their debts are so scary.

I dunno.  I hate to gloat, but the Canadian economy (and Alberta in particular) is doing great. 

And here is Beeb doing his Canuck douchbag bit. Don't ever change baby.

[Cecil]

Well tomorrow will be an interesting day at the markets to be sure.

[alfred russel]

It is too bad that we take the downgrade as an opportunity to bash the rating agencies. Not that they are shining beacons of light, but it is one of the first refuges of the insolvent. It is similar to the blaming of everything on short sellers when AIG and Greece started to go down (among many others). 

[Admiral Yi]

Who's bashing the rating agencies?