What if US failed to increase Debt Ceiling? (31 July 2011)

Deadline gets closer and closer, yet US have not come out a concrete solution to calm the world. Whether tax increases should be included in a deficit reduction agreement or not, both Democrats and Republicans are standing firm without compromise. Republicans insist that any deal to cut deficits should involve spending cuts only while Democrats have been demanding both spending cuts and tax increases.


Although Finance Malaysia reckons that the Congress would pass the bill to increase debt ceiling, let us analyzed and prepare for the unfortunate outcome. What if the debt ceiling limit is not raised by 2nd August?

  1. US bondholders will get paid first, while other payments such as social security, military payment, and Medicare services will stall.
  2. Downgrading by rating agencies is unavoidable, which will lead to an increase in Treasury's borrowing costs.
  3. US will be losing its AAA ratings, damaging the important role of USD as one of the world's preferred currency.
  4. USD will slump to yet another all-time low, while Gold price will recorded yet another all-time high
  5. Commodities prices traded in USD will shoot up.
  6. Inflation rate in Emerging Markets will pushed up by rising resources and food prices.
  7. Hence, this will dampen the growth of the economy and China being the world's growth engine will stall by high inflation, lower domestic consumption.

It's such a nightmare for the world's economy. Anyway, Finance Malaysia thinks that both Democrats and Republicans will reach a solution and pass the debt limit increase. Ultimately, who is going to blamed for if US default? Both sides of politicians, not only Obama. The world is just not prepared for such unfortunate events while recovery is just started.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"You Can Keep Your Existing Health Insurance"

I wondered about this statement at the time Obama made it.  Clearly, by changing all the rules of health care insurance and mandating conformity, it was unlikely that the vast majority of Americans would not find themselves forced by 'The Affordable Care Act' to have to deal with a completely different health insurance plan and completely different set of health care providers. I now understand what Obama meant.   He was speaking to his immediate family and (politician) friends.  They are exempt from the "Affordable Care Act."  Clearly what he meant to say was: "if you are exempt from Obamacare, like me and my family, you can keep your existing health insurance."  He never meant to mislead.
Read more

Work Ethic of 70s, 80s, 90s

Image
Different generations have their own view on working. You like it or not, working is part of our live. No work = No life. However, this equation has since changed to " Working = No life ". Do you agree? Generally, those born in 70s were perceived to be loving their job. They work hard mainly because of 3 meals/day. For them, a secured life means having a stable job with stable income. They believe that with every efforts you put in, that will reward you back later. As such, over time (OT) is nothing for them. As a responsible 70s, losing their job is a serious matter they tend to avoid. That's why they usually found another job first, before resigning. How about 80s? Other than chasing for stable income, those 80s working adults will also look into the job scope , opportunity for promotion , or working environment . They will take initiative to find for better job. Hence, job hopping is very common for them. Notably, 80s are reluctant to sacrifice their quality of life b
Read more

Things We Now Know

The poor are losing ground in the new Obama world.  The facts are showing up even in the halls of collectivist extremes like the New York Times.  The rich are getting richer and poor are being locked in place.  Big government is throttling the economy and the hopes and dreams of lower and middle class Americans. Today's Wall Street Journal's article by Simon Constable lays out some of the simple and obvious facts of the Obama era: "The richest 20% of households account for 38% of spending, according to government data for 2011, the latest available.  Compare that with 2003 when the top earners spent 26% of the total."  The article goes on to say..."it could get even worse."  It will. Who really benefits when the regulators strangle the banks?  Do banks really need to get much more conservative in their lending practices?  Why does the government know best?  How far can you stretch the FDIC guarantees before American banking is simply a subsidiary of the US g
Read more