<p>OK have it your way, but criminal collusion now is a good thing when it’s the US Government that’s being rated?</p>
<p>The White House told S&P about their error - S&P was going to announce it during market hours (what a disaster that would have been) but held off to re-analyze their position and they decided to go ahead with it anyways.</p>
<p>We are living in an economically declining (thus influence) nation. Along with that fact comes the expected jockeying for position amongst the various indigenous political/economic interests. These divides will only get worse. </p>
<p>History shows that no empire has ever fallen gracefully.</p>
<p>"OK have it your way, but criminal collusion now is a good thing when it’s the US Government that’s being rated? "</p>
<p>As I said, I have no opinion about whether the U.S. should have an excellent credit rating or not. Way beyond my paygrade. (My layperson’s understanding would have said that the U.S. should have been downgraded back in 2008). I just don’t think S&P should have any standing to make ratings, and that their management should be in prison for criminal collusion.</p>
<p>But I do think our debt is way too low.</p>
<p>(It is interesting, but off point, to note that S&P supports Obama’s contention that there should have been a $4 trillion reduction, which was rejected by the you-know-who’s.)</p>
<p>Off point? Why would you even note it if you think that they’re a bunch of criminals and they shouldn’t have any standing to make ratings?</p>
<p>Seems to me you should be happy with the “you-know-who’s” for taking on the criminals.</p>
<p>Actually, wasn’t it the “you-know-who’s” who torpedoed the $4 trillion reduction that the criminals claim they were hoping to see? Maybe that’s what you mean by “taking on the criminals”?</p>
<p>You’ve commented regularly that our debt is too low. So now we have the “you know who’s” who take on your criminals at the S & P and don’t give in to their demands of a 4 trillion dollar reduction and you seem unhappy. What gives?</p>
<p>I have no problem with folks having different takes on the issue. Politics is what politics is. I object to the idea that markets, political conversations, and economic decisions are driven by a bunch of criminals who engaged in a practice of collusion that wrecked the nation’s economy.</p>
<p>Our debt is too low??? Apparently I have no grasp of economics whatsoever, because I can’t fathom how this could possibly be true.</p>
<p>Mantori</p>
<p>You need to speak to Mini. He has it all figured out.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And he has figured out that people who have violated no criminal laws are still criminals who should be put in our crowded prisons.</p>
<p>People who collude to defraud are criminals. There are laws against fraud. The fact that Obama’s Attorney General refuses to prosecute makes them no more innocent. </p>
<p>To be fair, the debt didn’t have to be too low. Had Obama just let the tax giveaways to his friends (the “job creators”, like my mother) expire, there wouldn’t even have been a need to raise the debt ceiling. But (as he was told by many of his own advisors at the time), the stimulus was way too small, and used for things (tax cuts) that had the poorest outlook for reviving the economy. Still, at current interest rates, having debt levels this low while the economy wallows makes no economic sense from what I can make out.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Can you cite any criminal laws violated by employees of S&P and identify those employees who violated the law yet remain unprosecuted? By criminal law I mean US Code or State statutes not the criminal law in Mini-land.</p>
<p>I think you are quite capable of doing your own homework. (But I will assume you have done some of it, and assume you followed, just for example, the JP Morgan bid-rigging case, can name the 18 individuals criminally charged, the admission of guilt, the amount of restitution paid thus far, and the role of S&P in rating the derivatives as part of the conspiracy, with S&P raters still under investigation.)</p>
<p>“The federal government and most states have sentencing guidelines that correct for any hidden bias. It is unconstitutional for prosecutors to remove possible jurors based on their race. The primary factor that accounts for so many African Americans in prison is a disproportionate amount of behavior that is contrary to criminal laws” razorsharp</p>
<p>Folks, please stick to the economy, markets, corruption and such OR the Mods will shut our very important discussion down.</p>
<p>Calling Doris Day.</p>
<p>The party’s over.</p>
<p>They couldn’t put humpty dumpty back together last night. Let’s see what they can do today.</p>
<p>This feels a lot like the summer of 2008.</p>
<p>My research shows that accusing someone of a crime who has not committed a crime is defamation. My research shows that none of the managers at S&P engaged in criminal behavior because of the ratings they gave financial instruments. My research shows that Mini’s statement:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>is nothing short of outrageous and he owes S&P and apology.</p>
<p>My research also shows that JPM management is different from S&P and any person should know that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right. It is very important that this discussion continue, because who knows how the stock market will react if it is shut down.</p>