Politica Mexicana, Economia y Finanzas.
 
ÍndiceÍndice  SoporteSoporte  CalendarioCalendario  FAQFAQ  BuscarBuscar  MiembrosMiembros  Grupos de UsuariosGrupos de Usuarios  RegistrarseRegistrarse  Conectarse  AdministracionAdministracion  Viejo ForoViejo Foro  

Comparte | 
 

 S&P baja la calificación de la deuda americana

Ir abajo 
Ir a la página : Precedente  1, 2, 3
AutorMensaje
edgardini

avatar

Mensajes : 838
Fecha de inscripción : 20/04/2010
Localización : Tijuana

MensajeTema: Re: S&P baja la calificación de la deuda americana   Vie Ago 12, 2011 4:32 pm

benjolin escribió:
Citación :
No hay que olvidar, que pese a que las tasas de interés son ridículamente bajas, sigue valiendo más el dinero de mañana que el de dentro de un año, y eso también mueve las expectativas más fuerte, pues en el largo plazo, todos estaremos muertos...

No necesariamente.

De hecho paso todo lo contrario en la pasada decada en EEUU.
Yo creo que si.
En el largo plazo todos vamos a estar muertos.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
albino
Volver arriba Ir abajo
Ver perfil de usuario
benjolin
Administrador
Administrador
avatar

Mensajes : 3609
Fecha de inscripción : 13/04/2010
Localización : Quesque en mi chamba...

MensajeTema: Re: S&P baja la calificación de la deuda americana   Vie Ago 12, 2011 5:09 pm


_________________
RETIRADO DEL FORO. NOS VEMOS EN OTROS ESPACIOS.

Smile Smile Smile Smile Smile Smile


El Benja´s Blog
**
Twitter
Volver arriba Ir abajo
Ver perfil de usuario http://lapolacaforo.blogspot.com/
Damien Thorne

avatar

Mensajes : 374
Fecha de inscripción : 27/04/2010
Edad : 48
Localización : RGV

MensajeTema: Re: S&P baja la calificación de la deuda americana   Sáb Ago 13, 2011 9:04 am

S&P esta provocando un problema mayor que el que pretende resolver. Varios de los foristas son gerentes experimentados o duenos de negocio. Las decisiones las tomamos con informacion limitada y en base a probabilidades. Luego como alguien apunto, vale mas el dolar de hoy que el del futuro

En eso estan siendo irresponsables con sus mismos clientes y no solo en general. Es mucho mayor el impacto a las carteras de sus clientes con este downgrade que el que tendrian en caso de un default de deuda gringa.A eso le agregamos el factor factibilidad y la seguridad de un madrazo bursatil es mas considerable que la muy remota (si no es que imposible) moratoria del gobierno gringo. No solo jodieron a medio munco abusando de su podium, sino que jodieron a la mayoria de sus mismos clientes y aquellos que dependen de sus recomendaciones para ir al bano.

LuisJ esta en lo correcto al senalar (como yo lo hice en el otro thread) que las calificadoras son en gran parte culpables de la crisis actual por venderse y entrar en conflictos de intereses sin ningun pudor.

Pitufo Caballero: USA se quedo en la rayita de la moratoria porque sus leyes les impedian pedir mas lana no porque no estuviera esa lana disponible de inmediato en cuanto la pidieran (como asi fue). La calificacion es por no estar haceindo la chamba necesaria para evitar la necesidad de seguir endeudandose.

Y Ben-Hoe tiene razon. Parte de su chamba es contestarle a sus detractores (S&P en este caso). Buffet esta viendo el pedo global. Y USA sigue siendo el lugar mas seguro para poner tu lana del mundo.

Como lo decia antes, creo que la polarizacion (TeaParty a la derecha, los socialistas de Obama a la izquierda) es el principal problema para balancear el presupuesto. Yo diria que si hubiera que repartir culpas, la mayor tajada caeria en quien encabeza las politicas, Obama. Terquear con medidas populistas pero inmensamente impopulares como el Obamacare es una irresponsabilidad.

Forbes publica una columna esta semana comparando Obamanomics vs Reaganomics. En corto, en 2009 el columnista hizo esta comparacion. Son exactamente opuestas. Asi que sus resultados son totalmente opuestos y predecibles. La vision colectivista y socialistoide de Obama es irresponsable e incorrecta en lo fundamental.

Volver arriba Ir abajo
Ver perfil de usuario
ZaMaCoNa

avatar

Mensajes : 3505
Fecha de inscripción : 20/04/2010
Localización : aqui y que?

MensajeTema: Re: S&P baja la calificación de la deuda americana   Jue Sep 01, 2011 3:23 pm

un "panel" llega a la misma conclusion que les decia: la guerra de bush fue un agujero sin fondo para el gobierno americano.... y de pasada el cuerno de la abundancia para sus socios.

Citación :

Panel: Widespread waste and fraud in war spending
APBy RICHARD LARDNER - Associated Press | AP – 23 hrs ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. has lost billions of dollars to waste and fraud in Iraq and Afghanistan and stands to repeat that in future wars without big changes in how the government awards and manages contracts for battlefield support and reconstruction projects, independent investigators said Wednesday.

The Wartime Contracting Commission urged Congress and the Obama administration to quickly put in place its recommendations to overhaul the contracting process and increase accountability. The commission even suggested that the joint House-Senate debt reduction committee take a close look at the proposals.

"What you're asking for is more of the same," said Dov Zakheim, a commission member and the Pentagon comptroller during President George W. Bush's first term. "More waste. More fraud. More abuse."

The bipartisan commission, created by Congress in 2008, estimated that at least $31 billion and as much as $60 billion has been lost in Iraq and Afghanistan over the past decade due to lax oversight of contractors, poor planning, inadequate competition and corruption. "I personally believe that the number is much, much closer to $60 billion," Zakheim said.

Yet new legislation incorporating the changes could prove difficult with Republicans and Democrats divided over the best way to reduce the deficit.

Several of the proposals would require new spending, the commission acknowledged, and that would be a hard sell in an election year when reducing the size of government is a priority for many. Other proposals would cost little or simply require money to be shifted from one account to another, the panel said.

"If these recommendations are not implemented, there ought to be a Hall of Shame," said Michael Thibault, co-chairman of the commission. "There's an opportunity at hand."

The commission's 15 recommendations include creating an inspector general to monitor war zone contracting and operations, appointing a senior government official to improve planning and coordination among federal agencies, reducing the use of private security companies, and carefully monitoring contractor performance.

Massachusetts Rep. John Tierney, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform national security subcommittee, said Wednesday that the commission's findings are "alarming." Tierney said he plans to introduce legislation next week to create the inspector general's post.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., chairwoman of the Senate's contracting oversight subcommittee, said she plans to prepare legislation based upon the commission's recommendations.

The commission's report said contracting waste in Afghanistan and Iraq could grow as U.S. support for reconstruction projects and programs wanes. That would leave the countries to bear the long-term costs of sustaining the schools, medical clinics, barracks, roads and power plants already built with American money.

Overall, the commission said spending on contracts and grants to support U.S. operations is expected to exceed $206 billion by the end of the 2011 budget year. Based on its investigation, the commission said contracting waste in Afghanistan ranged from 10 percent to 20 percent of the $206 billion total. Fraud during the same period ran between 5 percent and 9 percent of the total, the report said. Fraud includes bribery, kickbacks, bid rigging and defective products, according to the commission.

"It is disgusting to think that nearly a third of the billions and billions we spent on contracting was wasted or used for fraud," McCaskill said.

Styled after the Truman Committee, which examined World War II spending six decades ago, the commission had broad authority to examine military support contracts, reconstruction projects and private security companies. But the law creating the commission set this September as the end of its work, even as contractors continue their heavy support of U.S. operations in the war zones.

Security, transportation, food preparation and delivery, and much more are now handled by the private sector. At the same time, the officials responsible for monitoring contractor performance have been overwhelmed by increasing reliance on private companies.

"We are far more reliant on contractors than we ever were," said commission member Charles Tiefer, a professor of government contracting at the University of Baltimore Law School. "We always bought munitions from them. But we didn't used to buy much in the way of services from them."

Col. David Lapan, a Defense Department spokesman, said the military shares the commission's commitment to improving wartime contracting and commended the panel "for shining a spotlight on the risks of overreliance on contractors" and highlighting the importance of accountability. Lapan also said the department already has taken steps to improve contracting, including devoting more people and resources to contract oversight.

But the Professional Services Council, a trade group representing federal contractors, said the commission's findings ignored the "messy realities" of working in combat zones. While the council agreed that government needs to plan better before undertaking large operations, it disputed the commission's conclusion that agencies rely too much on contractors.

The commission cited numerous examples of waste, including a $360 million U.S.-financed agricultural development program in Afghanistan. The effort began as a $60 million project in 2009 to distribute vouchers for wheat seed and fertilizer in drought-stricken areas of northern Afghanistan. The program expanded into the south and east. Soon the U.S. was spending a $1 million a day on the program, creating an environment ripe for waste and abuse, the commission said.

"Paying villagers for what they used to do voluntarily destroyed local initiatives and diverted project goods into Pakistan for resale," the commission said.

The Afghan insurgency's second largest funding source after the illegal drug trade is the diversion of money from U.S.-backed construction projects and transportation contracts, according to the commission. But the report does not say how much money has been funneled to the insurgency. The money typically is lost when insurgents and warlords threaten Afghan subcontractors with violence unless they pay for protection, according to the report.

The Associated Press reported this month that U.S. military authorities in Kabul believe $360 million has ended up in the hands of the Taliban, criminals and power brokers with ties to both. The military said only a small percentage of the $360 million has been garnered by the Taliban and insurgent groups. Most of the money was lost to profiteering, bribery and extortion by criminals and power brokers.

y eso es lo que encontraron..... pinches gringos aprendieron conmadre del modelo salinas
Volver arriba Ir abajo
Ver perfil de usuario
Contenido patrocinado




MensajeTema: Re: S&P baja la calificación de la deuda americana   

Volver arriba Ir abajo
 
S&P baja la calificación de la deuda americana
Volver arriba 
Página 3 de 3.Ir a la página : Precedente  1, 2, 3
 Temas similares
-
» Una baja masiva de controladores obliga a cerrar los aeropuertos de Madrid y Baleares
» baja laboral
» Tension Baja
» niño malo, no hay foco y la fiebre no baja
» ¿qué hacer estando de baja??

Permisos de este foro:No puedes responder a temas en este foro.
La Polaca  :: DEBATE :: Economia y Finanzas-
Cambiar a: