up vote 2 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

The claim is that S&P is directly manipulating the current US debt crisis to avoid having to pay the piper for the 2008 US mortgage market collapse:

http://firedoglake.com/2011/07/29/is-standard-and-poors-manipulating-us-debt-rating-to-escape-liability-for-the-mortgage-crisis/

Whatever S&P’s agenda, it has nothing to do with avoiding default risks or putting the US on sound fiscal footing. It appears to be intertwined with their attempts to absolve themselves from responsibility for their role in the 2008 financial crisis, and they are willing to manipulate not only the 2012 election but the world economy to escape the SEC’s attempts to regulate them.

This website is highly partisan to the left (they were founded as a news outlet to keep the Valerie Plame case active, and I'm a member). But this claim seems a bit... extreme. Is there any evidence or supporting claim to this assertion that can be found elsewhere?

link|improve this question
I doubt there's any evidence of THAT - and the wording borders on being a question of motivation which might get this closed as off-topic. But it is fairly obvious and hopefully non-controversial that they are threatening to downgrade this time partially as a way to cover their collective a$$. If they don't downgrade or at least threaten, and there IS a real default (as opposed to imaginary one hyped by the current administration despite having enough money to pay off debts and obligations - which is a definition of defauling), then the rating agencies are basically D.E.D. Dead. – DVK Jul 30 '11 at 9:51
By the way, the CYA (real one for now, or conspiracy-theorized for 2008 at the blog) is not really the ONLY reason. The current fiscal/economic policy pretty obviously raises the risk of US government defaulting on its debt in the future, and the rating is a measure of how likely said default is to occur in the not-so-humble opinion of the agency. – DVK Jul 30 '11 at 9:56
@DVK, how would you word this question to avoid the motivation aspects of it? You're positing another motivation-- CYA for a possible default, as opposed to threatening to default to avoid having to answer for mortgage bond ratings-- but also are suggesting that the current crisis is imaginary. Where does that claim come from? Would evidence that the current crisis help to provide alternative explanations of the actions of the S&P? – mmr Jul 30 '11 at 16:36
@mmjr - the claim that the current crisis is imaginary comes from good old boring financial analysis. Take the cash at hand. Add in expected receipts. Subtract debt due. If you are left with >0, you are not in default (well, you can CHOOSE not to pay debt and default, but you can't legitimately blame the lack of raising of debt ceiling for that). The thing is, that calculation DOES leave you in the black. In other words, US government has enough money on 8/2/2011 to service the debt. Matter of fact it has enough to service debt AND pay social security (another fake end of the world claim). – DVK Jul 30 '11 at 20:58
as far as wording the question, I'm not sure. I'm not among the anti-motivation hawks around here, though I understand their motivation for the prohibition (pun intended) – DVK Jul 30 '11 at 21:01
show 6 more comments
feedback

closed as off topic by Sklivvz♦ Jul 31 '11 at 9:13

Questions on Skeptics - Stack Exchange are expected to generally relate to scientific skepticism, within the scope defined in the faq.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.