|
Post by jeffolie on Aug 6, 2011 7:29:32 GMT -6
IMHO the downgrade increases Tea Party credibility politically.
The downgrade supports the Tea Party's core issue that the government borrows too much to sustain its budget leading to a higher risk for its debt.
The Tea Party new found credibility comes when the Tea Party may have lost some popularity found the now broader anti incumbent, digust with House Republicans from the Debt Ceiling. This will make it harder for Obama to campaign against the Tea Party for insisting on a budget cuts without tax increases, but Obama will run against the Tea Party and Republican Party leaders anyways.
The voters number #1 issue currently remains jobs, not the debt/deficits. The Tea Party has no defense for the jobs issue. The downgrade added support to its main supporters and members while perhaps presuading the all important and growing Independents that refuse to join the Republican Party that the debt/deficits issue has more importance and may gain importance.
Wtihout the downgrade, independents might have voted against Tea Party incumbents in a general revulsion against House Republicans and government as a whole. The downgrade lowers the chance that Democrats might regain the House in 2012 from a 'throw the baby out with the bath water' un-electing all incumbents.
The downgrade will remain a political issue for months while Fitch and Moody's meander through their processing before both actually downgrade as well. This adds legs, time to the Tea Party's opportunity to expand its base from its mere 20% of the Republican House Representatives and confront Presidential nominee contenders with a real world, credible downgrade issue as a litmus test to winning in the straw polls leading up to the first primaries which are politically very far in the future.
|
|
|
Post by waltc on Aug 6, 2011 10:00:15 GMT -6
The Tea Party has always been a bit of a joke and mostly a GOP astroturf operation.
The main goal of the Tea Party was and is to siphon off the anger of many GOP voters have at what is happening with the economy. The last thing the GOP wanted was a populist streak to get going and people start talking about jobs and trade.
So they turned the anger into demands to give tax cuts to the rich and cut the shit out of the social safety net.
|
|
|
Post by judes on Aug 6, 2011 10:05:18 GMT -6
Soooo one has to wonder what is really going on here? I am one who tends to believe much of what is happening in global economics is orchestrated to a point. With the downgrading of US debt, wont many pension plans be forced under their rules to invest in only things with triple A ratings. Where will it force this money to go??
If the US can't pay it's own debt when it basically has the reigns of it's own printing press, who can? I am grappling with the question of what terrible things are supposedly going to happen if the US never pays down it's debt, even while it is always able to pay it's bills? I understand the inflation argument, but that can be solved with more equitable distribution schemes. It is the huge gap between the top 1% and everyone else that needs to be closed regardless of the nominal value of outstanding debt. Anything short of that will keep the masses mired in poverty and result in an unsustainable imbalance economy.
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Aug 6, 2011 10:10:19 GMT -6
"...The credit rating agency also said the outlook on its long-term rating was negative, warning that it could lower the long-term further rating to AA within the next two years "if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume". ... But Fitch also said it was keeping its US rating under review until the end of August. ...." As long as the topic of politics remains debt/deficits then Obama remains on the defensive. MSM attacking Republicans and the Tea Party is a constant background theme but the coming stock impact on Monday and pending further downgrades by Fitch and maybe later by Moody's will dominate the next week's news cycle not allowing a good, strong spin against the Tea Party. Obama is out of silver bullets now that Obama actively campaigned to promote the just passed deal cutting federal spending. At best Obama and the MSM media have spin to make that Tea Party House Republicans 'forced Obama' to promote the federal spending cuts. While the downgrade makes even the deal look inadequate, Obama appears to have promoted an inadequate deal while having zero options to stimulate jobs...weak at best politically next week. This is what I mean by how Obama will be on the defensive in next week's news cycle: [from the Los Angeles Times] "China demands U.S. 'live within its means'" The largest foreign holder of U.S. treasuries responds to the S&P downgrading by calling for decreases in U.S. military outlays and social spending. www.latimes.com/business/la-fiw-china-response-20110807,0,3901161.story?track=rss
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Aug 6, 2011 10:59:50 GMT -6
Soooo one has to wonder what is really going on here? I am one who tends to believe much of what is happening in global economics is orchestrated to a point. With the downgrading of US debt, wont many pension plans be forced under their rules to invest in only things with triple A ratings. Where will it force this money to go?? If the US can't pay it's own debt when it basically has the reigns of it's own printing press, who can? I am grappling with the question of what terrible things are supposedly going to happen if the US never pays down it's debt, even while it is always able to pay it's bills? Excellent question, Judes. A lot of us are asking the same thing. We can certainly print money and pay off our debt that way. That would cause at least some inflation, depending on just where the new money flows and how it got spent. The current system for the Fed to give it to Wall Street banks and hope that it "trickles down." So far, all this did with QE1 and QE2 was "trickle up" into commodities, the stock market, housing, and overseas investment. All of this actually hurt the economy, despite what the so-called experts claim. Inflation of commodity prices raised the price of food and gasoline, making food & gasoline more expensive, thus leaving Americans with even less spending power for other goods & services. By itself this hurt production demand and job creation by reducing demand for other goods and services. Boosting the stock market (or preventing its decline) increases the wealth effect of stockholders, theoretically making them more willing to spend. However, this effect was confined mainly to the most wealthy Americans, where it has little stimulative effect due to their comparatively low marginal propensity to consume (i.e., rich people are already spending a smaller fraction of their money, and giving them even more money increases their spending very little.) So the net effect on increasing demand was small, if not non-existent. Propping up housing prices potentially has the most beneficial "wealth effect" on the middle class. Unfortunately, this also increases housing speculation and movement of capital into purchase of homes by investors, instead of into productive assets like factories and equipment. But if this redirection/misdirection of capital is large enough, it completely offsets any wealth effect on middle class consumers. Homes are static, non-productive assets. As such, capital flowing into already-existing homes creates 0 jobs. And if redirects capital away from other productive, job-creating areas--it reduces job creation. But obviously the worst use of QE funds is foreign investment. Not only does this not create American jobs, it creates competing jobs in foreign countries. It creates jobs to produce goods for the American market that could otherwise have been produced by American workers. As such, it is an outright destroyer of American jobs. This phenomena on its own should rule out another QE. If the Government is going to stimulate the economy, it needs to inject it directly into the economy--not into banks with false claim that it will provide capital to increase productive investment and job creation. There is no increased demand for American production that would incentivize additional investment (or job creation.) The demand has to be created before investment takes place, not afterward. The only way to increase demand is to employ American workers 1st, to give them the spending power to increase demand. There are only 2 ways to do this. The 1st, and least effective way, is to hire workers for public works jobs. Though this might temporarily help, but it is a temporary benefit only. Something needs to come behind it to maintain the demand created when the public works projects are finished. The 2nd way--and most effective way--is to re-channel the total aggregate demand of American consumers into domestic product purchase, and away from foreign product purchase. In contrast to public works, this would provide sustainable demand. And it would provide demand that does not require sustained government funding. To the contrary, the vehicle to create this demand--imposition of Tariffs--would actually improve the Federal balance sheet. It would actually raise Federal revenues, instead of spend them. As it stands now, we had an -$82 billion trade deficit in Advanced Technology Products, and a -$116 billion trade deficit in Motor Vehicles. That's nearly $200 billion in demand that we could (and should) recover with Tariffs. At $70K per job, that's the equivalent of +2.8 million jobs. And assuming any degree of Multiplier effect, this would ultimately become well over 3 million jobs created--and probably a lot more. There is yet another way to increase demand, which is kind of combination of the other 2. This is to start Government-owned production facilities to produce goods that are not currently produced in this country, but are currently being imported due to a pre-existing demand that's not currently fillable by US producers. Such entities would not compete with American producers by definition, as there are no current American producers. Production of the special magnets requiring rare-earth metals are one example. (I posted on this elsewhere, but I can't remember the specifics). Amen, judes. And again, a more equitable distribution of wealth will increase production demand, as the less affluent spend a higher fraction of their income on purchasing goods and services. A fixed amount of wealth creates a lot more production demand and jobs when it goes to those who spend 70% of it, versus only 30%.
|
|
|
Post by waltc on Aug 6, 2011 11:16:39 GMT -6
First off S&P, Moodys and Fitches should not be allowed to evaluate and pass judgement on the U.S. given their criminal pay to play rating system they enacted over the last decade.
They are unfit.
That said this panic over the U.S. economy does indeed seem to be orchestrated. Much like the Panic of 2008 where Paulson and Wall Street scared the shit out of Congress with their massive sell offs.
Yes we can pay off our debts with a few keystrokes or even write off our debts. We can fix a lot of the budget problems with some big cuts to defense, kicking illegals out of the country, ending the bush tax cuts, putting a .25 tax on all stock and option transactions, taxing all stock/option profits as income, getting rid of Obama care and Bush's medicare changes etc.
Won't happen though, Congress is rotten to the core.
We'll have to ride this train to sovereign default.
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Aug 6, 2011 12:25:35 GMT -6
Soooo one has to wonder what is really going on here? I am one who tends to believe much of what is happening in global economics is orchestrated to a point. With the downgrading of US debt, wont many pension plans be forced under their rules to invest in only things with triple A ratings. Where will it force this money to go?? If the US can't pay it's own debt when it basically has the reigns of it's own printing press, who can? I am grappling with the question of what terrible things are supposedly going to happen if the US never pays down it's debt, even while it is always able to pay it's bills? Excellent question, Judes. A lot of us are asking the same thing. We can certainly print money and pay off our debt that way. That would cause at least some inflation, depending on just where the new money flows and how it got spent. The current system for the Fed to give it to Wall Street banks and hope that it "trickles down." So far, all this did with QE1 and QE2 was "trickle up" into commodities, the stock market, housing, and overseas investment. All of this actually hurt the economy, despite what the so-called experts claim. Inflation of commodity prices raised the price of food and gasoline, making food & gasoline more expensive, thus leaving Americans with even less spending power for other goods & services. By itself this hurt production demand and job creation by reducing demand for other goods and services. Boosting the stock market (or preventing its decline) increases the wealth effect of stockholders, theoretically making them more willing to spend. However, this effect was confined mainly to the most wealthy Americans, where it has little stimulative effect due to their comparatively low marginal propensity to consume (i.e., rich people are already spending a smaller fraction of their money, and giving them even more money increases their spending very little.) So the net effect on increasing demand was small, if not non-existent. Propping up housing prices potentially has the most beneficial "wealth effect" on the middle class. Unfortunately, this also increases housing speculation and movement of capital into purchase of homes by investors, instead of into productive assets like factories and equipment. But if this redirection/misdirection of capital is large enough, it completely offsets any wealth effect on middle class consumers. Homes are static, non-productive assets. As such, capital flowing into already-existing homes creates 0 jobs. And if redirects capital away from other productive, job-creating areas--it reduces job creation. But obviously the worst use of QE funds is foreign investment. Not only does this not create American jobs, it creates competing jobs in foreign countries. It creates jobs to produce goods for the American market that could otherwise have been produced by American workers. As such, it is an outright destroyer of American jobs. This phenomena on its own should rule out another QE. If the Government is going to stimulate the economy, it needs to inject it directly into the economy--not into banks with false claim that it will provide capital to increase productive investment and job creation. There is no increased demand for American production that would incentivize additional investment (or job creation.) The demand has to be created before investment takes place, not afterward. The only way to increase demand is to employ American workers 1st, to give them the spending power to increase demand. There are only 2 ways to do this. The 1st, and least effective way, is to hire workers for public works jobs. Though this might temporarily help, but it is a temporary benefit only. Something needs to come behind it to maintain the demand created when the public works projects are finished. The 2nd way--and most effective way--is to re-channel the total aggregate demand of American consumers into domestic product purchase, and away from foreign product purchase. In contrast to public works, this would provide sustainable demand. And it would provide demand that does not require sustained government funding. To the contrary, the vehicle to create this demand--imposition of Tariffs--would actually improve the Federal balance sheet. It would actually raise Federal revenues, instead of spend them. As it stands now, we had an -$82 billion trade deficit in Advanced Technology Products, and a -$116 billion trade deficit in Motor Vehicles. That's nearly $200 billion in demand that we could (and should) recover with Tariffs. At $70K per job, that's the equivalent of +2.8 million jobs. And assuming any degree of Multiplier effect, this would ultimately become well over 3 million jobs created--and probably a lot more. There is yet another way to increase demand, which is kind of combination of the other 2. This is to start Government-owned production facilities to produce goods that are not currently produced in this country, but are currently being imported due to a pre-existing demand that's not currently fillable by US producers. Such entities would not compete with American producers by definition, as there are no current American producers. Production of the special magnets requiring rare-earth metals are one example. (I posted on this elsewhere, but I can't remember the specifics). Amen, judes. And again, a more equitable distribution of wealth will increase production demand, as the less affluent spend a higher fraction of their income on purchasing goods and services. A fixed amount of wealth creates a lot more production demand and jobs when it goes to those who spend 70% of it, versus only 30%. All true. The FED does not try to help average Americans. Mostly, the FED answers to and is motivated to help banks and the financial elites. The FED has a federal charter and laws to back the FED's independence plus a myth that the FED has acted to help the economy. The FED, aka Ben and friends, will try to save the banks with QE3. The QE3 rescue will include helping the banks in Europe with Trillions in what the FED continues to call 'currency swaps' although these are not the traditional 'currency swaps' that one can find in the market. The impact will be a lower Dollar trend which is a continuation of the long term declining Dollar trend. Assets will be repriced higher including stocks and commodities. Timing: the FED will wait starting QE3 to be asked to rescue the banks by the banks, mostly the European banks. If Spain's bond's go over 7%, then the FED will be forced to quickly arrange the ECB 'currency swaps' support, aka Germany, which currently is stretched thin with Friday's announced efforts to buy the bonds of Ireland, Portugal, Greece and importantly Italy. Spain remains my most likely trigger. On last night's network news, huge riots in Spain featured young jobless adults demanding jobs. Currently the tremendously high jobless rate in Spain's 18 to 25 year male group increased to 45%. Spain's busted Real Estate and highly subsidized and now with subsidities removed Solar industry are both disasters that have no hope of recovery. Their 'Cajas' mortgage lending hid, fraudulently, the triple sized bad mortgage loans that reminds me of America's S&L fiasco. Spain's government run by their Socialists will be turned out of office in coming elections in November. Interest rates will fall, decline Monday ... downgrade flight to safety as stocks fall into Treasuries Monday Contrary to stories and fears published today, I expect short term Treasuries yields to fall as stock and long term bond holders run into the safety of short term Treasuries. Most stories today look to see Treasury bond yields increase Monday, rise on the order of magnitude of .7% ... these story writers are going to be surprised and caught flat footed, wrong. Some funds, financial institutions will be forced to sell Treasuries now that the downgrade creates the situation where they must own only AAA paper. These sales will be overwhelmed by the flight to safety of Treasuries from stocks, etc. in my opinion, sufficiently to make Friday's closing Treasuries yields decline Monday.
|
|
|
Post by waltc on Aug 6, 2011 15:53:37 GMT -6
Italy is also ready to go under according to De Spiegel and Germany can't do squat about it.
It's just a matter of time before the EU and it's dream of forced globalization dies with it. Ben Shalom Bernanke and his sidekick TurboTax have run out of ammo to help the elite of Europe.
The good news if we go down we'll give China the skullf**king they deserve.
And I don't think a default is far off now. Before I thought it was very remote but seeing how these clowns are trying to prop up the entire rotting global FIRE system they've created, it's clear they'll tear down the house to keep it going.
|
|
|
Post by fredorbob on Aug 7, 2011 2:07:48 GMT -6
The Tea Party has always been a bit of a joke and mostly a GOP astroturf operation. yea
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Aug 7, 2011 8:07:14 GMT -6
The Republicans have no primaries this year ... it is all posturing and straw polls
The Tea Party may have just peaked as an loose organization as the majority of all voters now refuse to join the Republican party in disgust with watching the messy, reality show of American politics making compromises loaded with pork and playing favorites. Membership in Tea Party organizations does not seem to be growing anymore so their influence may have just peaked very early, ahead of the Republican primaries and even more so from the general elections in 2012.
The majority of all voters now remains unaffiliated, independents that refuses to identify themselves in polls with either party.
|
|
|
Post by jacquelope on Aug 7, 2011 11:36:26 GMT -6
Soooo one has to wonder what is really going on here? I am one who tends to believe much of what is happening in global economics is orchestrated to a point. With the downgrading of US debt, wont many pension plans be forced under their rules to invest in only things with triple A ratings. Where will it force this money to go?? If the US can't pay it's own debt when it basically has the reigns of it's own printing press, who can? I am grappling with the question of what terrible things are supposedly going to happen if the US never pays down it's debt, even while it is always able to pay it's bills? I understand the inflation argument, but that can be solved with more equitable distribution schemes. It is the huge gap between the top 1% and everyone else that needs to be closed regardless of the nominal value of outstanding debt. Anything short of that will keep the masses mired in poverty and result in an unsustainable imbalance economy. A silver lining to this inflation is that " Downward Dollar Delivers Blow to Outsourcing". The higher the inflation, the less things will be outsourced. Of course at this point, in light of the S&P move, I am not sure how the US dollar can't continue to fall. A dollar collapse will be difficult to happen with other falling currencies there to break our fall but when the scrooges at Von Mises say the dollar's falling value curbs outsourcing, you know there's some truth to that.
|
|
|
Post by graybeard on Aug 7, 2011 12:18:13 GMT -6
Devaluation breeds inflation.
|
|
|
Post by judes on Aug 7, 2011 15:23:53 GMT -6
Thanks for your response and well thought out commentary ULC, I concur.
Since I feel this move is orchestrated for a reason, here is what I'm thinking is going on. The kleptocracy is fearful of losing their power and control of being able to steer the world economy to their benefit. Therefor they have to make the fiat paper they control appear to have a veil of credibility. Since the paper and digital accounting entries they make in their favor are not really backed by anything at all other than the paper they are printed on, this is their way of making the fiat appear to have some actual value.
If the debt can not or does not ever get downgraded and printing can continue at will, the illusion of fiat having any real value diminishes and gets people questioning. The charade has to be made to look real.
While I don't particularly like the idea of a gold standard, I do think our money should be backed by the amount of labor value expended and goods and services being traded in an economy. With our near 50% of people not employed and complete destruction of manufacturing the game of pretending our money has any intrinsically meaningful value is becoming apparent. I think the downgrade is purposeful to give a fake illusion that our money actually represents something of value.
This maneuver is being done for the benefit of the oligarchy, make no mistake about it. It creates the false illusion that our money has real value and will be used to push further austerity measures on the already poor, increasing the gap in wealth and making the oligarchs fatter. Whether it works out that way is yet to be seen and depends on the populace waking from their slumber. If the real game is ever widely known, they lose control and their ability to make people suffer at their feet.
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Aug 8, 2011 9:22:28 GMT -6
Excellent question, Judes. A lot of us are asking the same thing. We can certainly print money and pay off our debt that way. That would cause at least some inflation, depending on just where the new money flows and how it got spent. The current system for the Fed to give it to Wall Street banks and hope that it "trickles down." So far, all this did with QE1 and QE2 was "trickle up" into commodities, the stock market, housing, and overseas investment. All of this actually hurt the economy, despite what the so-called experts claim. Inflation of commodity prices raised the price of food and gasoline, making food & gasoline more expensive, thus leaving Americans with even less spending power for other goods & services. By itself this hurt production demand and job creation by reducing demand for other goods and services. Boosting the stock market (or preventing its decline) increases the wealth effect of stockholders, theoretically making them more willing to spend. However, this effect was confined mainly to the most wealthy Americans, where it has little stimulative effect due to their comparatively low marginal propensity to consume (i.e., rich people are already spending a smaller fraction of their money, and giving them even more money increases their spending very little.) So the net effect on increasing demand was small, if not non-existent. Propping up housing prices potentially has the most beneficial "wealth effect" on the middle class. Unfortunately, this also increases housing speculation and movement of capital into purchase of homes by investors, instead of into productive assets like factories and equipment. But if this redirection/misdirection of capital is large enough, it completely offsets any wealth effect on middle class consumers. Homes are static, non-productive assets. As such, capital flowing into already-existing homes creates 0 jobs. And if redirects capital away from other productive, job-creating areas--it reduces job creation. But obviously the worst use of QE funds is foreign investment. Not only does this not create American jobs, it creates competing jobs in foreign countries. It creates jobs to produce goods for the American market that could otherwise have been produced by American workers. As such, it is an outright destroyer of American jobs. This phenomena on its own should rule out another QE. If the Government is going to stimulate the economy, it needs to inject it directly into the economy--not into banks with false claim that it will provide capital to increase productive investment and job creation. There is no increased demand for American production that would incentivize additional investment (or job creation.) The demand has to be created before investment takes place, not afterward. The only way to increase demand is to employ American workers 1st, to give them the spending power to increase demand. There are only 2 ways to do this. The 1st, and least effective way, is to hire workers for public works jobs. Though this might temporarily help, but it is a temporary benefit only. Something needs to come behind it to maintain the demand created when the public works projects are finished. The 2nd way--and most effective way--is to re-channel the total aggregate demand of American consumers into domestic product purchase, and away from foreign product purchase. In contrast to public works, this would provide sustainable demand. And it would provide demand that does not require sustained government funding. To the contrary, the vehicle to create this demand--imposition of Tariffs--would actually improve the Federal balance sheet. It would actually raise Federal revenues, instead of spend them. As it stands now, we had an -$82 billion trade deficit in Advanced Technology Products, and a -$116 billion trade deficit in Motor Vehicles. That's nearly $200 billion in demand that we could (and should) recover with Tariffs. At $70K per job, that's the equivalent of +2.8 million jobs. And assuming any degree of Multiplier effect, this would ultimately become well over 3 million jobs created--and probably a lot more. There is yet another way to increase demand, which is kind of combination of the other 2. This is to start Government-owned production facilities to produce goods that are not currently produced in this country, but are currently being imported due to a pre-existing demand that's not currently fillable by US producers. Such entities would not compete with American producers by definition, as there are no current American producers. Production of the special magnets requiring rare-earth metals are one example. (I posted on this elsewhere, but I can't remember the specifics). Amen, judes. And again, a more equitable distribution of wealth will increase production demand, as the less affluent spend a higher fraction of their income on purchasing goods and services. A fixed amount of wealth creates a lot more production demand and jobs when it goes to those who spend 70% of it, versus only 30%. All true. The FED does not try to help average Americans. Mostly, the FED answers to and is motivated to help banks and the financial elites. The FED has a federal charter and laws to back the FED's independence plus a myth that the FED has acted to help the economy. The FED, aka Ben and friends, will try to save the banks with QE3. The QE3 rescue will include helping the banks in Europe with Trillions in what the FED continues to call 'currency swaps' although these are not the traditional 'currency swaps' that one can find in the market. The impact will be a lower Dollar trend which is a continuation of the long term declining Dollar trend. Assets will be repriced higher including stocks and commodities. Timing: the FED will wait starting QE3 to be asked to rescue the banks by the banks, mostly the European banks. If Spain's bond's go over 7%, then the FED will be forced to quickly arrange the ECB 'currency swaps' support, aka Germany, which currently is stretched thin with Friday's announced efforts to buy the bonds of Ireland, Portugal, Greece and importantly Italy. Spain remains my most likely trigger. On last night's network news, huge riots in Spain featured young jobless adults demanding jobs. Currently the tremendously high jobless rate in Spain's 18 to 25 year male group increased to 45%. Spain's busted Real Estate and highly subsidized and now with subsidities removed Solar industry are both disasters that have no hope of recovery. Their 'Cajas' mortgage lending hid, fraudulently, the triple sized bad mortgage loans that reminds me of America's S&L fiasco. Spain's government run by their Socialists will be turned out of office in coming elections in November. Interest rates will fall, decline Monday ... downgrade flight to safety as stocks fall into Treasuries MondayContrary to stories and fears published today, I expect short term Treasuries yields to fall as stock and long term bond holders run into the safety of short term Treasuries. Most stories today look to see Treasury bond yields increase Monday, rise on the order of magnitude of .7% ... these story writers are going to be surprised and caught flat footed, wrong. Some funds, financial institutions will be forced to sell Treasuries now that the downgrade creates the situation where they must own only AAA paper. These sales will be overwhelmed by the flight to safety of Treasuries from stocks, etc. in my opinion, sufficiently to make Friday's closing Treasuries yields decline Monday.[/quote] Interest rates are lower as I expected
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Aug 8, 2011 11:42:11 GMT -6
Some funds, financial institutions will be forced to sell Treasuries now that the downgrade creates the situation where they must own only AAA paper. These sales will be overwhelmed by the flight to safety of Treasuries from stocks, etc. in my opinion, sufficiently to make Friday's closing Treasuries yields decline Monday. Interest rates are lower as I expected[/quote] Looks like you called it right, Jeff. 10-year Treasuries are higher than they've ever been (i.e., yields are lower than they've ever been). That's some interesting insight on why Treasury yields continue to fall. I hadn't thought of that. And it seems to be panning out just as you suggested.
|
|
|
Post by fredorbob on Aug 8, 2011 21:52:30 GMT -6
Pretty slick. Republican Party creates shell party. Shell party gets blamed. Republican Party comes off looking clean.
|
|
|
Post by waltc on Aug 8, 2011 22:26:30 GMT -6
Smart indeed - blame it on the crazy people in the corner.
Obama helps the GOP further by going fundraising right after his speech like nothing as happened - he plays the role of Nero quite well.
He shucks and jives as America gets ready for a meltdown. Where in the hell did the Democrats find such a stupid, venal creature like him?
Maybe he can lecture us once again about clinging to God and guns.
|
|