there is no point to prioritizing payments. a Default on any payment will be seen the same way by market forces. If you choose to pay your car loans but not your credit card, when you go to buy a new car they won’t care that you have always paid them first, they will just see that you have had trouble making your payments. The market will react to ANY default. You dont want to be holding the debt of somone that is prioritizing payments, even if you are at the top.
Not so. A "default" is defined as failing to pay any part of a pre-existing debt - i.e. interest or principal on a loan. That is very different from not paying full boat on some other governmental program that is merely a political promise.
Right now, the Treasury brings in well over $200 billion/month. The amount of interest payments and actual debt reduction (paying off bills, notes and bonds - even if there are many more issued that same month) pales in comparison to that number, so the only reason for a "default" (which would, after all, violate that terms of the 14th Amendment) would be a purposeful decision coming right from the top. No President can simply decide not to pay interest and principal because he would rather pay for some program that he likes better. It is a specific violation of the Constitution, and if he does it he should be impeached (and who cares what the Senate does - the impeachment itself would send the message that the Republicans can only be backed up so far).
I don't even know why the Rs want to pass a full faith and credit bill - Obama will veto it, but more importantly, IT ISN'T NECESSARY since the Constitution requires it.
As much money as we have coming in there is no need for any default on the credit card or the car. We need to pay what is legally obligated and then cut out the yard service and the maid. We need to quit buying single malt and take the kids camping for a week instead of flying to Disney. The problem with liberals is they see all of the programs as a birthright, as absolutely necessary.