Irate Rating Rant
-
No, they lowered its outlook. Which means they think it's more likely they'll have to lower it in the future. Can't say I blame them, both groups of morons in DC are more interested in scoring partisan points off the others back than actually admitting they have a problem.:mad:
3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18
Here's the thing - - the way the markets work, lowering the outlook is effectively/functionally identical to lowering the ratings. In essence, they're saying they will downgrade the debt . . . so if you were an investor, would you pay more now knowing it is predicted to lose value? The Jerks in DC - now there's something we can both agree on. That includes the new Tea-Party jerks, who (Surprise! Surprise!) added pork to a defense bill that benefited to their districts. It doesn't take deep hindsight to realize that Bush & Co. did more harm to the US and World economies than Bin Liden could have imagined in a wet dream.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Shouldn't the EU be getting back to making absurd and pointless demands on software companies 5 years after the horse has already bolted?
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
EU governance. Unelected. Unwanted. Over here.
Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
-
So now the EU wants to have some control of Moody's, S&P, Fitch. Apparently they don't like that they downgrade floundering EU members because, well, they're floundering. Part of the clap-trap is that it can make things worse for the downgraded nation (business) and so it's unfair. And there's also the whining that the big three mentioned (above) have too large a market share. Then they follow up with the 'they're partisan' in their decision making. They seem to want to replace this with their own judgement as to what's best for the market (translation: artificially upgrading EU entities so they can claim they're doing a great job with the economy). That seems to be the EU's answer to anything in which they can't compete. No one makes anyone accept the ratings - it's their own businessmen who respect the ratings because they have found them to be (get this) accurate. But let me bestow upon you, oh Oracles of Brussels, the following hint: if you don't down-grade nations and business when they're not doing well (and thus the credit risk increases) - no one's going to listen to you because they can't trust you. Maybe that's why your own ratings services are left to fight over the scraps at the edge of the table: they're not perceived as credible. Look - bottom line - when the EU economies are a shining example of cooperation and success, then get back to me.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
I think you'll find that it's more to do with the small fact that the ratings agencies gave triple-A ratings to "securities" that were obviously extremely high risk, and that it was those ratings that led to the ridiculously high confidence in the "securities" that caused the total meltdown, not so long ago. i.e. The ratings agencies were directly responsible for millions of people losing their homes, jobs, and livelihoods, but have accepted none of the responsibility (they argue that their ratings are only their "opinion", so if people believe them and screw up, it's their own fault). If you think that's OK, then I hope you're not one of those who loses his home, job, and livelihood, the next time their "opinions" cause such a global financial catastrophe.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
So now the EU wants to have some control of Moody's, S&P, Fitch. Apparently they don't like that they downgrade floundering EU members because, well, they're floundering. Part of the clap-trap is that it can make things worse for the downgraded nation (business) and so it's unfair. And there's also the whining that the big three mentioned (above) have too large a market share. Then they follow up with the 'they're partisan' in their decision making. They seem to want to replace this with their own judgement as to what's best for the market (translation: artificially upgrading EU entities so they can claim they're doing a great job with the economy). That seems to be the EU's answer to anything in which they can't compete. No one makes anyone accept the ratings - it's their own businessmen who respect the ratings because they have found them to be (get this) accurate. But let me bestow upon you, oh Oracles of Brussels, the following hint: if you don't down-grade nations and business when they're not doing well (and thus the credit risk increases) - no one's going to listen to you because they can't trust you. Maybe that's why your own ratings services are left to fight over the scraps at the edge of the table: they're not perceived as credible. Look - bottom line - when the EU economies are a shining example of cooperation and success, then get back to me.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
A futile exercise, a "free" market will continue to operate the way it has been, in the best interest of individual entities. These rating will have less influence on the markets than Justin Beiber's haircut.
Craigslist Troll: litaly@comcast.net "I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
-
I think you'll find that it's more to do with the small fact that the ratings agencies gave triple-A ratings to "securities" that were obviously extremely high risk, and that it was those ratings that led to the ridiculously high confidence in the "securities" that caused the total meltdown, not so long ago. i.e. The ratings agencies were directly responsible for millions of people losing their homes, jobs, and livelihoods, but have accepted none of the responsibility (they argue that their ratings are only their "opinion", so if people believe them and screw up, it's their own fault). If you think that's OK, then I hope you're not one of those who loses his home, job, and livelihood, the next time their "opinions" cause such a global financial catastrophe.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark Wallace wrote:
If you think that's OK
No - I don't think it's OK. But that's not the question and I'm not the one (implicitly) to ask. If they were inept (and they were - or criminal) then their ratings should be ignored. If they were given false information by the financial institutions, then those submitting the data should be both impoverished and jailed. But - giving governments a say - and thus political expediency - is worse than anything. Just close them down, instead.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Here's the thing - - the way the markets work, lowering the outlook is effectively/functionally identical to lowering the ratings. In essence, they're saying they will downgrade the debt . . . so if you were an investor, would you pay more now knowing it is predicted to lose value? The Jerks in DC - now there's something we can both agree on. That includes the new Tea-Party jerks, who (Surprise! Surprise!) added pork to a defense bill that benefited to their districts. It doesn't take deep hindsight to realize that Bush & Co. did more harm to the US and World economies than Bin Liden could have imagined in a wet dream.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
Balboos wrote:
- the way the markets work, lowering the outlook is effectively/functionally identical to lowering the ratings. In essence, they're saying they will downgrade the debt . . . so if you were an investor, would you pay more now knowing it is predicted to lose value?
Incorrect. Lowering the outlook is basically saying, "If this keeps up, we might have to downgrade them in the next couple years." In essence, it's a warning to the government... "Fix your problems, or we'll have to downgrade you."
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
An economist is someone who can explain you why what he told you two months ago did not happen.
Just like the weatherman. I think the two professoins use the "magic 8 ball[^]" for providing answers. :laugh:
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar] In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra] posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
-
Mark Wallace wrote:
If you think that's OK
No - I don't think it's OK. But that's not the question and I'm not the one (implicitly) to ask. If they were inept (and they were - or criminal) then their ratings should be ignored. If they were given false information by the financial institutions, then those submitting the data should be both impoverished and jailed. But - giving governments a say - and thus political expediency - is worse than anything. Just close them down, instead.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
It's not a case of giving governments a say; it's a matter of making them answerable for their "opinions".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Now - here's the thing - IF the business world found them to be without credibility (for example, after the they Lehman's fund's AAA rating, then they would not care what these ratings services have to say. Self correcting, is it not? And an opportunity for all of the other services to scoop up market share as being more reliable. - - - Note, too, that when a company is audited, they are the one's who select and pay the auditor. Seems like the same conflict. Furthermore, these places give ratings without being asked (such as when they downgraded US debt).
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
Balboos wrote:
Self correcting, is it not?
Indeed. It corrects itself by putting huge amounts of money into the pockets of financial institutions, and removing it from normal working stiffs in other sectors.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
It's not a case of giving governments a say; it's a matter of making them answerable for their "opinions".
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark Wallace wrote:
it's a matter of making them answerable for their "opinions".
Which will translate into fear of government actions (justified, witch-hunts, or warning-shots) - which will cause them to be very much reserved in their judgement. The word reserved, as used hear, is really a euphemism for wishy-washy-don't-say-anything-that-someone-may-not-like. Let's see now - evaluate the Greek economy. Ah, yes. I have it: 'investigating novel developmental protocols to address obscure budgetary mismatches' Remember, as you yourself put it, these are opinions. If they're invalid, then I see no problem with giving Greece and Ireland all the money they want - or perhaps it's all blown up out of proportion and they don't really need any?
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Balboos wrote:
Self correcting, is it not?
Indeed. It corrects itself by putting huge amounts of money into the pockets of financial institutions, and removing it from normal working stiffs in other sectors.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark Wallace wrote:
huge amounts of money into the pockets of financial institutions
That's a whole 'nuther issue. From my observation, in this world, those who have the hardest backbreaking work are usually paid the least. Meanwhile, the bankers who destroyed their companies (and world's) economy were given bonus' that were often more than we'd make in a lifetime. I was reading Joseph Heller's followup to Catch-22. One of his remarks is that there are people getting obscenely rich who produce nothing but transfers of ownership. But as I said, that's another issue. Perhaps you can start your own rant - this one's keeping me rather busy.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010