Were there many people commenting when S&P recommended Enron just before it collapsed, or their

[still_one]

recommendations on lehman and the whole financial instruments before the implosion

Never before have I seen a rating agency tell a company or country what they need to do to improve their credit rating as they are doing. They are out on the talk show circuit spreading the word that the way for the U.S. to get upgraded is to cut entitlements, NOT raise taxes

Sounds to me that S&P is a corporate shrill fot the GOP

"While explaining what the U.S. could do to get its AAA rating back, the S&P official mentioned entitlement cuts but ignored the agency's call to raise revenues."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/08/07/sp-head-agency-may-downgrade-u-s-again/

[malaise]

1. S&P also backed Madoff and AIG

:puke:

[still_one]

3. Of course none of that is pointed out by our wonderful MSM /nt

[davsand]

10. They were discussing S&P' s lack of credibility on ABC this morning.

Amanpour's show had an extended discussion about that--begun by George Will.



Laura

[Oceansaway]

2. S&P is a corporate shrill for the GOP

exactly correct....they're opinion is pure shit....

[Cool Logic]

4. Enron hid their problems...

Even though our government endeavors to conceal the severity of the debt by treating SS as an off-balance-sheet liability, it is in plain view for all to see.

[TacticalPeek]

5. It is in plain view for all to see that Social Security contributes not a cent to deficit or debt.

And to mention it in relation to "the severity of the debt" is totally misleading.

Additionally, Enron was not hiding their problems by the time they wrote down $1.2 Billion and the next day S&P still fluffed their member.

October 15, 2001: Enron releases earnings, announcing a $1.2 billion equity write-down.

October 16, 2001: Standard & Poor’s affirms Enron’s BBB+ ratings.

Standard & Poor’s press release states: “The equity account reductions will have no direct effect on Enron’s cash flow. However, the company’s financial flexibility may be impaired because of the decline in Enron’s equity value, which could lead the company to rely more on debt for its future financing needs. Capital expenditures over the near to medium term are manageable and can be financed out of operating cash flow, which will ease any liquidity concerns and help maintain credit quality.

https://caraellison.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/enron-ratings-chronology-from-october-15-2001/

[TacticalPeek]

6. December 3, 2001: Standard & Poor’s lowers Enron’s rating to D following Enron’s ... bankruptcy.

December 3, 2001: Standard & Poor’s lowers Enron’s rating to D following Enron’s December 2, 2001 filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Ibid

Only six weeks later.

[still_one]

7. You have to love. A stock crashes, and all the analysts come out to downgrade it. Where were they

before it happened.

Same thing happens with upgrades, always after the fact

[Cool Logic]

11. "Social Security contributes not a cent to deficit or debt."

If the SSTF had the People's money secured with a liquid $2.6t, that would be true. But a debt secured by a debt is not and never will be a sound financial principle.

Democrats make the mistake of believing that Social Security has $2.6 trillion of assets without realizing that these assets predominately consist of receivables that are not collectible unless the People ante up another $2.6 trillion. Americans may not understand intricate accounting procedures, but they sure as hell understand that being forced to pay for something twice means they've been swindled.

Republicans make the mistake of thinking that reform and/or privatization solves the problem. Emphatically, it will not. It will still require about $2.6 trillion to clean up this accounting scandal whether or not reform occurs. Furthermore, this amount will continue to climb until Congress repeals the unified budget act and creates that "lock box" we used to hear about.

What ever happened to that damn lock box anyway? No body talks about it anymore.

[TacticalPeek]

13. "But a debt secured by a debt is not and never will be a sound financial principle." ????

"If the SSTF had the People's money secured with a liquid $2.6t, that would be true. But a debt secured by a debt is not and never will be a sound financial principle."

Pardon me, but this is gibberish. Social Security does not contribute to the deficit, period. By law, it can only spend money from the trust fund. It's a simple concept, really.


This post by digby makes it as clear as an azure sky of deepest summer:

The Fix

by digby

Short term there is no problem with social security. Long term the fix is easy. All the rest of this sky-is-falling mumbo jumbo is propaganda.

(more)
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/fix.html

[Cool Logic]

14. With all due respect, the distinction between liquid assets and those secured by debt,

is pretty significant. Regrettably, many Americans do not understand that. I'm not sure if you do either.

By law, it can only spend money from the trust fund.

That is 100% true. However, the key to comprehending the subject is to conceptualize American workers as investors in the SSTF. The SSTF trustees takes this cash and gives it to Congress in exchange for Treasury Bonds. Congress then takes the money and spends it. However, Congress refuses to combine these activities with the general fund and treats it as an off-balance sheet liability.

You make the mistake of believing that Social Security has $2.6 trillion of assets without examining and realizing that these assets predominately consist of receivables from the general fund. Furthermore, these receivables aren't collectible unless more taxes are collected from the people who anted up the missing $2.6 trillion in the first place.

All to often I read or hear news of someone being swindled. Most of the schemes employed are so simplistic and obvious in nature, that it is beyond my realm of comprehension how someone could have fallen for it.

American workers have been swindled out $2.6 trillion and many of will not realize it until its too late.

[still_one]

8. S&P should have been put out of business after their lack of representing the risk involved with

financial institutions prior to the financial meltdown

[Cool Logic]

12. Perhaps so...however, these folks should have seen it coming as well.

[L0oniX]

15. Looks like the R's and D's "can" get along after all.

[Safetykitten]

9. The hilarity of the situation must be epic at the office..."We rated shit stuff AAA...

and nobody got caught, now we go and do this!"

Can't make this shit up.