[Jack Black]

And, as I stated earlier, if the debt is even reasonably staggered, we don't even run into the issue of temporarily exceeding the debt ceiling due to the non-instantaneous nature of the transfers.

The debt is not "reasonably staggered". We have $474B to pay from Aug 3-31. We have about $175B in income coming in. We have NO savings. It will be day to day, and early in the month we we default.

These are not trivial sums. There is no provision in international banking or the bond market for "letting it slide a little bit". It's not a nice local credit union that can give you a few days grace period because you've had an account there for 20 years and they know you'll make it up.

You fail, you FAIL.

[jjsheridan5]

You fail, you FAIL.

I take it your apology about being condescending was short-lived. The point about reasonably staggered was because the transactions are not instantaneous (we pay back principle with borrowed money, thus causing a very short period where our debt does increase -- although this is, more than anything else, just a question over the specific wording of the debt ceiling law). It has no bearing on our credit worthiness, it only may have a bearing on the debt ceiling law, if that law was poorly written.

I am just curious, you say we have "no savings". Am I to take from this that you were under the impression that, up until now, we have been paying back principle with savings? We have actually been rolling over debt for a very long time, since we have been running deficits for a very long time.