Reuters is a sometimes-reliable news source. Here's one example why:
...In the United States, lawmakers and President Barack Obama fought a contentious budget battle earlier this summer that resulted in the loss of the nation's coveted "AAA" debt rating from Standard & Poor's.
Wrong, turkey.
S&P downgraded US debt because US spending pushed US debt into the yellow zone. The 'debt-ceiling' battle did not substantially reduce spending; but S&P was headed towards their re-rating regardless.
Did you READ the S&P rationale?
ReplyDeleteIf you're really asking me whether S&P mentioned, unfavorably, the brouhaha over the ceiling, then go ahead and ask.
ReplyDeleteYes, they were displeased. No, that was NOT the principal reason for the downgrade.
Who cares either way?
ReplyDeleteAt least the Reuters hack was smart enough not to call it a Tea Party downgrade.
ReplyDeleteStay off the personal attacks, Anony. Irrelevant and immaterial.
ReplyDeleteWrong, turkey.
ReplyDeleteIf you read the S&P report overview and rationale, you will read that the inability for the policy makers to reach a consensus is a SUBSTANTIAL factor in the downgrade, as important as any other.
You're both right. But who cares what S&P says anyway? It's irrelevant.
ReplyDelete