View Single Post
Old 11-09-2011, 02:04 AM   #31
ReneCM

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
453
Senior Member
Default
Clearly they felt the risk outweighed the relevance of a $2 trillion dollar math error.

Here's an explanation seemingly from S&P:
Quote:
Standard & Poor’s Clarifies Assumption Used On Discretionary Spending Growth

.............In the near term horizon, by 2015, the U.S. net general government debt with the new assumptions were projected to be $14.5 trillion (79% of 2015 GDP) ........

S&P Explains Why The "$2 Trillion Error" Is Irrelevant | ZeroHedge
2010 Debt to GDP of countries with AAA rating,

Country Comparison :: Public debt
(% of GDP)

14 Canada- 84.00- 2010 est.
15 France- 83.50- 2010 est.
20 Germany- 78.80- 2010 est.
24 United Kingdom- 76.50- 2010 est.
25 Austria- 70.40- 2010 est.
27 Netherlands- 64.60- 2010 est
38 United States- 58.90- 2010 est.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2186rank.html now minus the US.
ReneCM is offline


 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:15 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity