S&P Credit Rating Agency Down grades USA Credit Rating to "Unsolicited"!

A week after S&P announced it was converting its European ratings to unsolicited the rating agency now proceeds to do the same to the world's most insolvent banana republic: "Standard & Poor's Ratings Services today said it converted its issuer and issue credit ratings on the U.S. federal government (AAA/Stable/A-1+) to "unsolicited." Unsolicited as in nobody wants it. In other words, following Europe, the US will now lock out S&P in providing the agency with information.

www.zerohedge.com...

Whats the best thing to do when you dont want anyone to know your credit is garbage. Lock them out! We are doomed! its inflation to the moon now!

people need to get out of goverment and muni bonds! get out of the stock market! get out of the dollar!

Once Moody's drops its ratings, then things will really start to get worse even faster...

This is really bad news guys, or really good depending on how you look at the glass.
I think Id rather drink whatever is inside before I can't afford to.

S&F big time. This needs a lot of attention. People really need to start preparing for when everything goes up in price 50-80%, may be even more depending on whether or not the merger of the German and NY stock exchange helps to reduce the impact.

hmm banker speak..

We are converting our issuer credit ratings on the U.S. government to "unsolicited," as we do not have a rating agreement with the sovereign. Standard & Poor's will nonetheless continue to rate the U.S. government and classify the ratings as unsolicited, as we believe that we have access to sufficient public information of reliable quality to support our analysis and ongoing surveillance, and because we believe there is significant market interest in the U.S. government rating.

Standard & Poor's has also converted its U.S. government issue ratings to "unsolicited" and intends to withdraw these ratings on May 24, 2011.

This decision does not change Standard & Poor's view of the creditworthiness of the U.S. government. Our AAA/Stable/A-1+ ratings on the U.S. government remain unchanged.

imarketnews.com...

reply to post by asperetty


i think Moodys did the samething. im trying to look for an artical to conferm it

This snip might give a little light on the subject ...The U.S. Treasury’s Financial Bailout

The bailout measures of late 2008 may have consequences at least as grave for an open society as the response to 9/11 in 2001. Many members of Congress felt coerced at the time into voting against their inclinations, and the normal procedures for orderly consideration of a bill were dispensed with.

The excuse for bypassing normal legislative procedures was the existence of an emergency. But one of the most reprehensible features of the legislation, that allowed Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to permit bailed-out institutions to use public money for exorbitant salaries and bonuses, was inserted by Paulson after the immediate crisis had passed.

According to Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vermont) the bailout bill originally called for a cap on executive salaries, but Paulson changed the requirement at the last minute. Welch and other members of Congress were enraged by "news that banks getting taxpayer-funded bailouts are still paying exorbitant salaries, bonuses, and other benefits."[1] In addition, as the Associated Press reported in October 2008, "Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. questioned allowing banks that accept bailout bucks to continue paying dividends on their common stock. ‘There are far better uses of taxpayer dollars than continuing dividend payments to shareholders,’ he said."[2]

Even more reprehensible is the fact that after the bailouts, Paulson and the Treasury Department refused to provide details of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) spending of hundreds of billions of dollars, while the New York Federal Reserve refused to provide information about its own bailout (using government-backed loans) that amounted to trillions. This lack of transparency was challenged by Fox TV in a FOIA suit against the Treasury Department, and a suit by Bloomberg News against the Fed.[3]

The financial bailout legislation of September 2008 was only passed after members of both Congressional houses were warned that failure to act would threaten civil unrest and the imposition of martial law.

source www.globalresearch.ca...

I think I overreacted a little.
S&P hasn't actually dropped the rating because something is stalling it from doing so. Instead it is keeping its stance at something near neutral or undecided, and is maintaining that its last AAA rating is accurate, until further notice. Why the stall? Probably because everyone knows that if the US credit rating drops, interest rates goes up, dollar value goes down, massive sell off and relocation of wealth and investments occur, then down goes the US and half of the world's economies.