This may surprise you all, but I'm not an economist. I don't know exactly what happens if the debt ceiling isn't raised. The idea I have is that the US may default and it'll be like Argentina a decade ago. Except possibly worse since the US economy is the largest in the world and could drag the rest of the world down with us and the IMF isn't likely to be able to bail us out. This is probably not accurate, but I really don't have anything better to go on. Some GOP types are saying it won't be so bad, and nothing major will happen. I do not trust them. Especially considering the one that said it is Michelle Bachman.
Whoever has the largest stocks of canned goods and bottle caps will be a rich man.
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
You would have to sell off any items of worth that may be found in the US.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 07, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
That's bad right?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 07, 2011, 03:49:52 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 07, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
That's bad right?
Yeah. It means we have to pay more in interest to borrow. The deficit could explode very quickly.
That seems counterproductive as a method of controlling deficit then.
The country needs to be bankrupted in order to be saved from fiscal ruin.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 07, 2011, 03:49:52 PM
That's bad right?
let's say its not something for America to brag about on its Facebook page.
I heard some Canadian economists saying a resulting increase in bond rates would increase cost of borrowing for mortgages in Canada.
Some speculation that this kind of ceiling brinksmanship may cause at least some effect in rates even if they get their act together and raise the ceiling.
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 07, 2011, 04:13:19 PM
Some speculation that this kind of ceiling brinksmanship may cause at least some effect in rates even if they get their act together and raise the ceiling.
I'd be surprised if it doesn't have some effect. There are clearly some insane people at the helm of our country, and insane people are capable of doing things that in the future, people studying history would be asking "WTF were they thinking?" That insanity factor has to be priced in.
Quote from: DGuller on July 07, 2011, 04:18:16 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 07, 2011, 04:13:19 PM
Some speculation that this kind of ceiling brinksmanship may cause at least some effect in rates even if they get their act together and raise the ceiling.
I'd be surprised if it doesn't have some effect. There are clearly some insane people at the helm of our country, and insane people are capable of doing things that in the future, people studying history would be asking "WTF were they thinking?" That insanity factor has to be priced in.
I predict the 2001-2011+ period will officially be known by historians as the "WTF?" period.
Quote from: HisMajestyBOB on July 07, 2011, 04:43:34 PM
I predict the 2001-2011+ period will officially be known by historians as the "WTF?" period.
I think they'll start it right after the end of the Cold War.
Quote from: The Brain on July 07, 2011, 03:41:17 PM
You would have to sell off any items of worth that may be found in the US.
Raciss.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 07, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
If he prioritizes interest I don't see why the raters would downgrade.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 07, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
If he prioritizes interest I don't see why the raters would downgrade.
Risk.
The legal status of doing that is questionable. Treasury might be forced into unorthodox means to cover other budgetary items. The prioritization may weaken pressure to reach a useful resolution and thus allow the fiscal position to deteriorate further.
it's called public "credit" for a reason.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 07, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 07, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
If he prioritizes interest I don't see why the raters would downgrade.
If I lend you money to buy a car, and you keep making payments to me but stiff other people who you owe money to, I'm going to start getting nervous.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 07, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 07, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
If he prioritizes interest I don't see why the raters would downgrade.
From an article on the subject I read only 5 minutes ago...
QuoteDebts have never been this big and credit rating agencies have never threatened to cut the US sovereign debt rating to a D - worse than Greece
Short answer? Everybody in world finance is shitting bricks at the moment at the thought of which domino is going to be the first to fall. Greece just dodged the bullet, but now investors are finding that what should be one of the most risk free countries to lend to has politicians who seem to be blinder and loonier than the average Greek street protester.
Not that I actually believe the credit rating agencies will go as nuclear as they say they will; but even a one or two point reduction in the USA's rating is going to hurt financially, and given the current world climate it would almost be irresponsible of the Agencies not to make such a reduction.
Or you could argue it would be irresponsible of them to make such a reduction; the credit ratings agencies are almost at the point of being in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" situation.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 07, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 07, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
If he prioritizes interest I don't see why the raters would downgrade.
S&P have already announced that US debt will get a significant downgrade if the debt ceiling isn't raised. The issue with the US isn't the ability to pay its interest, it's the political system.
I really think that the legislators will come to agreement before too much damage is done. This is getting pretty insane, this brinksmanship, risking pretty huge stakes in damage to US financial standing, and our esteemed great ones in the government certainly have to realize that, right?? :unsure:
Quote from: KRonn on July 09, 2011, 04:40:01 PM
I really think that the legislators will come to agreement before too much damage is done. This is getting pretty insane, this brinksmanship, risking pretty huge stakes in damage to US financial standing, and our esteemed great ones in the government certainly have to realize that, right?? :unsure:
I think that a number of Republicans and a significant portion of their electorate actually think that default is better than increasing the debt ceiling. I agree with Megan McArdle, who's no lefty, on this:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/07/why-cant-the-gop-get-to-yes/241437/
Quote from: KRonn on July 09, 2011, 04:40:01 PM
I really think that the legislators will come to agreement before too much damage is done. This is getting pretty insane, this brinksmanship, risking pretty huge stakes in damage to US financial standing, and our esteemed great ones in the government certainly have to realize that, right?? :unsure:
I'm not convinced several of them do realise that; but then that's true of a lot of politicians regardless of the political system they evolved in.
Consider Gordon Brown - I believe common wisdom is to pay down debt during a period of economic growth and good tax revenues so you can afford to take out more debt during a recession; Gordon Brown wisdom was "good tax revenues? Great, we can afford to borrow more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Well, that's how I see him anyway; if I were you, I'd be very :unsure:.
Quote from: Sheilbh on July 09, 2011, 04:43:45 PM
Quote from: KRonn on July 09, 2011, 04:40:01 PM
I really think that the legislators will come to agreement before too much damage is done. This is getting pretty insane, this brinksmanship, risking pretty huge stakes in damage to US financial standing, and our esteemed great ones in the government certainly have to realize that, right?? :unsure:
I think that a number of Republicans and a significant portion of their electorate actually think that default is better than increasing the debt ceiling. I agree with Megan McArdle, who's no lefty, on this:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/07/why-cant-the-gop-get-to-yes/241437/
Yeah, I wonder about that too, how many feel a default is favorable over raising the debt ceiling. But I have to think that the leadership and most of the party understands the rather large and damaging issues that will ensue over a default, or even if the US comes close. So frustrating. The US hasn't had a budget since long before the 2010 election, which is problematic enough. Now getting this close, about 3 weeks away and getting close to the brink, is downright infuriating, especially given the problems that may occur even just cutting it too close.
Most of the answers in this thread seem rather inexact. :unsure:
Quote from: garbon on July 09, 2011, 05:49:13 PM
Most of the answers in this thread seem rather inexact. :unsure:
I don't think anyone is really certain what will happen if the single largest debtor in international finance defaults; partly because no-one can really bring themselves to believe it will happen (I fall in that camp myself) and partly because the last time this this happened (the largest debtor defaulting) was in the Sixteenth Century* when the financial world was a lot simpler.
Edit:*Referring to Habsburg Spain; on reflection, a better comparison might be the series of defaults triggered by the Wall Street Crash.
Quote from: alfred russel on July 07, 2011, 06:13:56 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 07, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 07, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
If he prioritizes interest I don't see why the raters would downgrade.
If I lend you money to buy a car, and you keep making payments to me but stiff other people who you owe money to, I'm going to start getting nervous.
But it would be OK if he made his car payments with a credit card?
Quote from: garbon on July 09, 2011, 05:49:13 PM
Most of the answers in this thread seem rather inexact. :unsure:
I think the biggest problem is the uncertainty of it. The international financial system is so complex that you don't know exactly what will happen if you remove an assumption that nobody thought could ever be removed.
Alright, so what are the scenarios?
1. It turns out to be simply hardcore brinksmanship by the Republicans. A short while before it's absolutely too late, some sort of deal is reached and disaster is averted.
2. The Democrats cave completely and the Republicans get to push through most of what they say they want - severe cuts to the military, social security, medicare and medicaid while not raising any new revenue from anywhere.
3. No compromise is reached, the debt ceiling is not raised and default follows.
What happens next? Short, medium and long term, what are the consequences?
I've read a bit about the potential disaster that'll strike both the US's finances and the world economy in the case of option 3 - a default. I'm sure there are going to be all sorts of messes all over the world. I expect that lots of countries holding US debt would be pretty miffed; what would that mean geopolitically and for the internal politics of those countries? What would be the knock on effect for the economies of other countries, even if they're not directly exposed to US debt? Internally, how would the US voters react? It seems to me that something like that is likely to result in a sea-change in the political landscape, no? Who would the voters hold responsible for the debacle? Who would you hold responsible?
In the case of 2, with broad swathes cut through previously sacred entitlements, I expect the effect on the world economy would be much less severe. However, it would seem that plenty of Americans would be seriously affected. How would that affect the political landscape? The link upthread suggested that Democrats would quickly gain power to reverse the deep cuts; how likely is that? Do you expect any other serious changes to the political landscape in the US as a result?
As for case 1, the least serious one, what do you figure would happen? How big a segment of the voters would consider the brinkmanship irresponsible and punish the Republicans? How many would think they did the right thing and reward them? How do people view the Democrats in all of this? Is this a new way of doing politics, or will it quickly be forgotten?
Any thoughts?
2. The Republicans haven't proposed any reductions to Social Security. Obama has recently as part of his Grand Compromise.
3. You left out the possibility suggested by Joan: the debt limit is not raised and Obama decides to stiff retirees to pay debt service.
And apparently you've missed the news of the last few days that they're getting close to a deal. Revenue neutral, 2.4 in cuts to Medicare, Social Security, and other little things in exchange for a smaller increase in the ceiling.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2011, 06:25:30 PM
2. The Republicans haven't proposed any reductions to Social Security. Obama has recently as part of his Grand Compromise.
So you figure the public will hold Obama and the Democrats responsible for the cuts in SS if it starts hurting them?
Quote3. You left out the possibility suggested by Joan: the debt limit is not raised and Obama decides to stiff retirees to pay debt service.
Okay. What are the repercussions of this?
QuoteAnd apparently you've missed the news of the last few days that they're getting close to a deal. Revenue neutral, 2.4 in cuts to Medicare, Social Security, and other little things in exchange for a smaller increase in the ceiling.
No, I've seen it. I figure that goes under option 1, one way or another, but if you'd like to characterize it differently that's perfectly fair. What I'm interested in is hearing your thoughts on the outcome of such a deal.
What's to keep the GOP from going through this whole thing again next time the Debt Ceiling needs to be raised? Or the time after that? It's like Blackmail.
Quote from: Jacob on July 09, 2011, 06:28:57 PM
So you figure the public will hold Obama and the Democrats responsible for the cuts in SS if it starts hurting them?
By the public you mean retirees or near retirees I assume. Pretty hard for the Republicans to demagogue the cuts since they proposed cuts to Medicare first (and because it won't pass without their votes). There could be some backlash from AARPists but I don't see where they woud channel it. Are they going to form a Gray Panther Party?
Incidentally, I would like to point out that none of this would have been possible if Ryan hadn't had the cojones in the first place to touch the third rail.
QuoteOkay. What are the repercussions of this?
Massive law suits from people who recieve federal checks. Most of the others think the US's credit rating would take a hit and interest rates on Treasuries would rise.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 09, 2011, 06:35:51 PM
What's to keep the GOP from going through this whole thing again next time the Debt Ceiling needs to be raised? Or the time after that? It's like Blackmail.
All kinds of things.
Political self interest. Loss of majority status in the House. Elimination of deficits. Changes in the debt ceiling law. Indifference to deficits. Military dictatorship. Human extinction.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2011, 06:41:46 PMBy the public you mean retirees or near retirees I assume. Pretty hard for the Republicans to demagogue the cuts since they proposed cuts to Medicare first (and because it won't pass without their votes). There could be some backlash from AARPists but I don't see where they woud channel it. Are they going to form a Gray Panther Party?
Yeah sure. If they hold the Republicans responsible and the Democrats campaign on "vote us in and we'll reverse this heinous Republican engineered assault on seniors" would there be enough of a swing in the senior vote to make a difference?
QuoteIncidentally, I would like to point out that none of this would have been possible if Ryan hadn't had the cojones in the first place to touch the third rail.
Seems accurate, yeah.
Quote from: Admiral YiQuote from: JacobOkay. What are the repercussions of this?
Massive law suits from people who recieve federal checks. Most of the others think the US's credit rating would take a hit and interest rates on Treasuries would rise.
It sounds almost bland when you put it like that :)
What will come of that? Will the lawsuits do anything other than make some lawyers richer? What sort of impact would a hypothetical credit rating drop and attendant interest cost on Treasuries have in the US and the world at large?
Some of this is pretty murky waters to me, so if you have any idea I'd love to hear it.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2011, 06:46:41 PMPolitical self interest. Loss of majority status in the House. Elimination of deficits. Changes in the debt ceiling law. Indifference to deficits. Military dictatorship. Human extinction.
Arranged in order of least to most likely, yeah?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2011, 06:46:41 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 09, 2011, 06:35:51 PM
What's to keep the GOP from going through this whole thing again next time the Debt Ceiling needs to be raised? Or the time after that? It's like Blackmail.
All kinds of things.
Political self interest. Loss of majority status in the House. Elimination of deficits. Changes in the debt ceiling law. Indifference to deficits. Military dictatorship. Human extinction.
None of these seem likely to happen before the next time the debt ceiling will have to be raised, which will probably happen within the next year.
Quote from: Jacob on July 09, 2011, 06:50:12 PM
Yeah sure. If they hold the Republicans responsible and the Democrats campaign on "vote us in and we'll reverse this heinous Republican engineered assault on seniors" would there be enough of a swing in the senior vote to make a difference?
For similar reasons I don't see how the Democrats could demagogue it either. Proposed by a Democratic president, passed by a Democratic Senate.
But yes, if seniors swung massively Democrat I think that would change the power dynamic quite significantly.
QuoteIt sounds almost bland when you put it like that :)
What will come of that? Will the lawsuits do anything other than make some lawyers richer? What sort of impact would a hypothetical credit rating drop and attendant interest cost on Treasuries have in the US and the world at large?
Some of this is pretty murky waters to me, so if you have any idea I'd love to hear it.
Actually I take back the part about the massive law suits. California stiffed vendors for a while and Illinois has been stiffing its vendors massively for years, but I'm unaware of any legal procedings forcing their hand.
It would definitely not be pretty. If a GI doesn't get paid is he still bound by the terms of his enlistment? Are doctors going to stop seeing Medicare patients? Are retirees going to die of starvation? Is everyone at the CIA going to be furloughed? The Border Patrol? Customs and Immigration? Airport screeners? Will Amtrak shut down?
Quote from: Razgovory on July 09, 2011, 06:55:28 PM
None of these seem likely to happen before the next time the debt ceiling will have to be raised, which will probably happen within the next year.
Probably not. The short answer to your question Raz is there is nothing preventing the Republicans (or the Democrats) from using the debt ceiling as blackmail. Just as there was nothing to prevent Clinton from using a government shutdown to blackmail the Republican Congress.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2011, 07:37:13 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 09, 2011, 06:55:28 PM
None of these seem likely to happen before the next time the debt ceiling will have to be raised, which will probably happen within the next year.
Probably not. The short answer to your question Raz is there is nothing preventing the Republicans (or the Democrats) from using the debt ceiling as blackmail. Just as there was nothing to prevent Clinton from using a government shutdown to blackmail the Republican Congress.
:lol: You are drinking way to much of that Koolaid. The GOP forced a government shutdown because they were using the same tactics as they are now. Keep in mind that Clinton's poll numbers fell quite a bit because of this. Many in the GOP voiced their approval about the government shutdown.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2011, 06:41:46 PM
Incidentally, I would like to point out that none of this would have been possible if Ryan hadn't had the cojones in the first place to touch the third rail.
:huh: When has it taken cojones to use a political strategy that proved successful before? Perhaps if Ryan had touched third rail back in 2002 or2003 it might have taken some cojones, but as it stands he's just using politics that are popular with the base.
Quote from: Baron von Schtinkenbutt on July 09, 2011, 06:16:08 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on July 07, 2011, 06:13:56 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 07, 2011, 05:12:42 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on July 07, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
Geithner says he won't or can't prioritize. He is full of it. If the ceiling isn't raised, he will in fact prioritize interest payments on debt and some other stuff.
The biggest immediate impact is that all the rating agencies will downgrade US sovereign debt.
If he prioritizes interest I don't see why the raters would downgrade.
If I lend you money to buy a car, and you keep making payments to me but stiff other people who you owe money to, I'm going to start getting nervous.
But it would be OK if he made his car payments with a credit card?
Your credit rating would decrease if you were just taking more credit to pay off interest on the car payments.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 01:26:55 AM
:lol: You are drinking way to much of that Koolaid. The GOP forced a government shutdown because they were using the same tactics as they are now. Keep in mind that Clinton's poll numbers fell quite a bit because of this. Many in the GOP voiced their approval about the government shutdown.
Congress passed a spending bill and presented it to Clinton for his signature. He vetoed it. Congress didn't force him to do that.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 01:37:49 AM
:huh: When has it taken cojones to use a political strategy that proved successful before? Perhaps if Ryan had touched third rail back in 2002 or2003 it might have taken some cojones, but as it stands he's just using politics that are popular with the base.
Show me where the Republican base was screaming for Congress to voucherize Medicare and limit increases to inflation. 74% of Americans polled said they don't want Medicare touched. If you have some secret information that the Republican base are all dying for Medicare spending to be capped please share it with us.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 10, 2011, 02:32:30 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 01:37:49 AM
:huh: When has it taken cojones to use a political strategy that proved successful before? Perhaps if Ryan had touched third rail back in 2002 or2003 it might have taken some cojones, but as it stands he's just using politics that are popular with the base.
Show me where the Republican base was screaming for Congress to voucherize Medicare and limit increases to inflation. 74% of Americans polled said they don't want Medicare touched. If you have some secret information that the Republican base are all dying for Medicare spending to be capped please share it with us.
Rank and file Tea party types shout for spending cuts. From the group that believes in death panels, I don't expect them to actually know what's really being cut. 84% of Republicans support the Ryan plan. http://www.gallup.com/poll/147287/americans-divided-ryan-obama-deficit-plans.aspx So he's not really biting the bullet here. I imagine if you broke it down to each particular item you would find less support, though you are just as likely to be called lackay of the liberal media or so such nonsense.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 10, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 01:26:55 AM
:lol: You are drinking way to much of that Koolaid. The GOP forced a government shutdown because they were using the same tactics as they are now. Keep in mind that Clinton's poll numbers fell quite a bit because of this. Many in the GOP voiced their approval about the government shutdown.
Congress passed a spending bill and presented it to Clinton for his signature. He vetoed it. Congress didn't force him to do that.
The GOP isn't forcing Obama to disagree with him now either. Gingrich threatened not to raise the debt limit then too.
Quote from: KRonn on July 09, 2011, 04:40:01 PM
I really think that the legislators will come to agreement before too much damage is done. This is getting pretty insane, this brinksmanship, risking pretty huge stakes in damage to US financial standing, and our esteemed great ones in the government certainly have to realize that, right?? :unsure:
Republicans seem quite content on continually walking out.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 09, 2011, 06:25:30 PM
3. You left out the possibility suggested by Joan: the debt limit is not raised and Obama decides to stiff retirees to pay debt service.
That's already happening. Treasury has plundered the g fund in the last two months.
The g fund?
It's where they get the money to buy those strings.
I haven't found the g fund yet. :(
Quote from: The Brain on July 10, 2011, 03:44:10 PM
I haven't found the g fund yet. :(
I'm convinced it's a myth. Like squirters.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 10, 2011, 03:39:15 PM
The g fund?
A quick google produces this -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrift_Savings_Plan
G Fund - Government Securities fund. These are unique government securities not available to the general public and are backed by the full faith and credit of the US Government. The G Fund was the initial fund established by the TSP when it began operations on April 1, 1987.
Sounds like that's the Social Security "lock box." That's been plundered since the first penny was put in it.
What has been plundered according to what I read is some retirement fund, I think the railroad one.
Is there much faith in the US government anymore?
Quote from: Neil on July 10, 2011, 03:54:42 PM
Is there much faith in the US government anymore?
I have faith.
You gotta have faith.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 03:57:46 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 10, 2011, 03:54:42 PM
Is there much faith in the US government anymore?
I have faith.
Just in general, or in the specific in this case?
Quote from: Agelastus on July 10, 2011, 05:09:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 03:57:46 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 10, 2011, 03:54:42 PM
Is there much faith in the US government anymore?
I have faith.
Just in general, or in the specific in this case?
Well mostly a specific case. She's been buried in the garden for years.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 05:21:28 PM
Quote from: Agelastus on July 10, 2011, 05:09:58 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 03:57:46 PM
Quote from: Neil on July 10, 2011, 03:54:42 PM
Is there much faith in the US government anymore?
I have faith.
Just in general, or in the specific in this case?
Well mostly a specific case. She's been buried in the garden for years.
Canine faith, feline faith, or other faith?
Quote from: Agelastus on July 10, 2011, 05:26:15 PM
Canine faith, feline faith, or other faith?
Other faith. :ph34r:
Please see phrase under avatar.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 06:00:20 PM
Please see phrase under avatar.
So you had all your brothers strangled when you "ascended the throne" then?
It doesn't say Padishah of Languish.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 10, 2011, 06:09:39 PM
It doesn't say Padishah of Languish.
Well of course it wouldn't; that's a Mughal title. You'd be the Sultan or Caliph...
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.protias.com%2FPictures%2FThread%2FStarTrekFacePalm.gif&hash=f89573ec78a85ff6b8d321349128fb53fa369fa2)
I love it when you post that... :lol:
You know, this whole exchanged confused me, until I figured out that Age hasn't figured out what "under" means.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 11, 2011, 09:26:42 AM
You know, this whole exchanged confused me, until I figured out that Age hasn't figured out what "under" means.
I thought he was beating you badly in a non sequitur contest.
You asked him to look underneath your avatar, where it mentions the Ottoman Empire. You, of course, meant for him to look further below where it says you're a madman.
Thus: mutual confusion.
Quote from: Jacob on July 11, 2011, 12:39:59 PM
You asked him to look underneath your avatar, where it mentions the Ottoman Empire. You, of course, meant for him to look further below where it says you're a madman.
Thus: mutual confusion.
Avatar is the picture.
Quote from: Razgovory on July 11, 2011, 12:42:07 PMAvatar is the picture.
Yeah, and right underneath the picture is your title which right now is "Can I Be: Ottoman Empire?"
Below that is your warning level, then your post count and then your custom title "Madman of Languish."
So if you'd wanted to not confuse Agelastus you should've said "look under my post count."
Newsflash: the exact layout depends on your preference settings. IIRC.
Quote from: The Brain on July 11, 2011, 12:47:48 PM
Newsflash: the exact layout depends on your preference settings. IIRC.
The plot is unravelling!
Quote from: The Brain on July 11, 2011, 12:47:48 PM
Newsflash: the exact layout depends on your preference settings. IIRC.
That clears things up.