For those who believe default is a "Republican" threat

ogarbitrage · Oct 16, 2013

Quote from Ricter:

Prioritizing payment obligations, making some but not making others, IS default...

Quote from ogarbitrage:

Can you point out the section(s) stating as much in any CDS-related material or S&P/Moody's documents?

Ricter · Oct 16, 2013

Quote from ogarbitrage:

I'm not going to argue practical vs. technical default with you, for two reasons. 1) who cares? Nobody but a few crazies wanted either type, which is of course why it was perceived to be useful as a bargaining chip. 2) it's over, the tea party lost. 3) Now that the tea party has lost on the issue my own view is, see #1.

ogarbitrage · Oct 16, 2013

Okay, no accountability for your first assertion. How about accountability for this assertion?

Quote from Ricter:

Nobody but a few crazies wanted either type

Can you provide a specific example of anyone in either party saying they wanted a default?

Ricter · Oct 16, 2013

Quote from ogarbitrage:

Okay, no accountability for your first assertion. How about accountability for this assertion?

Can you provide a specific example of anyone in either party saying they wanted a default?

I didn't say the crazies who wanted one were "in a party", as in, elected. Maybe you're one of the crazies.

Arguing that failing to raise the debt ceiling wouldn't lead to a real default is no longer a useful bargaining tool for the tea party--no one (today) thinks it's going to happen anyway.

Lucrum · Oct 16, 2013

Quote from Tsing Tao:

Scat, you've misjudged ogarbitrage. He is supporting the gentleman in the video, not condemning him. You might want to unignore him, as he's a stand up guy.

Your choice, of course.

+1

Lucrum · Oct 16, 2013

Quote from CaptainObvious:

It is impossible to deny anything he said, unless you're a radical leftist commie.

Rectum is a radical leftist commie.

Ricter · Oct 16, 2013

Quote from Ricter:

De facto vs. de jure. We are being examined (again), and the short-term bond market has already reacted, neither of which would happen if we could not truly default.

"That doesn't look like a section. Support your assertion with something other than ad hominem."

So, where's the ad hominem in what I wrote?

ogarbitrage · Oct 16, 2013

Quote from Ricter:
So, where's the ad hominem in what I wrote?

No where. "Ad hominem" was the wrong phrase. I apologize and did not mean to suggest you attacked me personally as you did not.