US Economy in Adverse Case of FED.?

The Financial Development Report 2012

Latest FOMC Minutes

World Economic Forum ' Transparency for Inclusive Governance'

Alan Greenspan ' Fiscal Cliff is Painful '

Showing posts with label US Budget. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US Budget. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

US Deficit falls, Crude stock depletes, Inventories Flat

US data continue to remain mixed and refuse to rise 


US Cuts the Deficit :


The U.S. government ran a deficit of $129 billion in July, the Treasury Department reported Wednesday, pushing the fiscal year-to-date deficit close to $1.1 trillion. In July, the government spent about $288 billion and took in $159 billion. The latest monthly deficit was $36 billion less than the $165 billion figure reported in July of last year, though it is just $8 billion less when factoring in certain one-time transactions, Treasury said.


Crude Inventories fall :


Crude-oil futures added to gains Wednesday after a government weekly inventories report showed a decrease in oil supplies. Crude for September delivery added $1.93, or 2.5%, to $81.20 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Oil had traded around $80.36 immediately before the report. The Energy Information Administration said crude-oil inventories declined 5.2 million barrels in the week ended Aug. 5. Gasoline supplies decreased 1.6 million barrels, and stockpiles of distillates were down 700,000. Analysts polled by Platts expected oil inventories up 1.8 million barrels, gasoline stocks down 1.2 million barrels, and distillate stocks up 1.2 million barrels. The EIA report on crude-oil supplies matched Tuesday's report by the American Petroleum Institute.


Inventory rises modestly : 


Inventories at U.S. wholesalers rose 0.6% in June, compared with a revised 1.7% in May, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. Sales of wholesalers also rose 0.6% in June, while the inventory-to-sales ratio was flat at 1.16.

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

Dollar to hit New High, Bernanke fails to sell PUT

                                              FOMC likely to spend more Bytes than $
The Data though is not that strong nor is weakened.
Bernanke likely to spend more ' bytes' and less $.
FOMC murmurs same mantra and nothing new,,,


ITS Non EVENT,,,

Sunday, August 7, 2011

Standard & Poor's Explains, Why US is Downgraded


Recent Rating Action On The United States of America

Overview

We have lowered our long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA' and affirmed the 'A-1+' short-term rating.

We have also removed both the short- and long-term ratings from CreditWatch negative.

The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics.

More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.

Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government's debt dynamics any time soon.

The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to 'AA' within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.

Rating Action

On Aug. 5, 2011, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA'. The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. At the same time, Standard & Poor's affirmed its 'A-1+' short-term rating on the U.S. In addition, Standard & Poor's removed both ratings from CreditWatch, where they were placed on July 14, 2011, with negative implications.

The transfer and convertibility (T&C) assessment of the U.S.--our assessment of the likelihood of official interference in the ability of U.S.-based public- and private-sector issuers to secure foreign exchange for debt service--remains 'AAA'.

Rationale

We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.

Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden and our perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent with our criteria. Nevertheless, we view the U.S. federal government's other economic, external, and monetary credit attributes, which form the basis for the sovereign rating, as broadly unchanged. We have taken the ratings off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by delays to raising the government's debt ceiling.

In addition, we believe that the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course of U.S. fiscal policy for the next few years. The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our view, the differences between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently.

Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on more comprehensive measures. It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options. In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements, the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.

Our opinion is that elected officials remain wary of tackling the structural issues required to effectively address the rising U.S. public debt burden in a manner consistent with a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated sovereign peers. In our view, the difficulty in framing a consensus on fiscal policy weakens the government's ability to manage public finances and diverts attention from the debate over how to achieve more balanced and dynamic economic growth in an era of fiscal stringency and private-sector deleveraging (ibid). A new political consensus might (or might not) emerge after the 2012 elections, but we believe that by then, the government debt burden will likely be higher, the needed medium-term fiscal adjustment potentially greater, and the inflection point on the U.S. population's demographics and other age-related spending drivers closer at hand. Standard & Poor's takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate for putting the U.S.'s finances on a sustainable footing.

The act calls for as much as $2.4 trillion of reductions in expenditure growth over the 10 years through 2021. These cuts will be implemented in two steps: the $917 billion agreed to initially, followed by an additional $1.5 trillion that the newly formed Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is supposed to recommend by November 2011. The act contains no measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them. The act further provides that if Congress does not enact the committee's recommendations, cuts of $1.2 trillion will be implemented over the same time period. The reductions would mainly affect outlays for civilian discretionary spending, defense, and Medicare. We understand that this fall-back mechanism is designed to encourage Congress to embrace a more balanced mix of expenditure savings, as the committee might recommend.

We note that in a letter to Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated total budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the next 10 years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the CBO's latest "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" of June 2011, updated to include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to Congress. In general, the CBO's "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" assumes a continuation of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.

We view the act's measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation. However, this is within the framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves open the details of what is finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and Congress and the Administration could modify any agreement in the future. Even assuming that at least $2.1 trillion of the spending reductions the act envisages are implemented, we maintain our view that the U.S. net general government debt burden (all levels of government combined, excluding liquid financial assets) will likely continue to grow.

Under our revised base case fiscal scenario--which we consider to be consistent with a 'AA+' long-term rating and a negative outlook--we now project that net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 79% in 2015 and 85% by 2021. Even the projected 2015 ratio of sovereign indebtedness is high in relation to those of peer credits and, as noted, would continue to rise under the act's revised policy settings.

Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.

Our revised upside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the outlook on the 'AA+' long-term rating being revised to stable--retains these same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario, we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.

Our revised downside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as being consistent with a possible further downgrade to a 'AA' long-term rating--features less-favorable macroeconomic assumptions, as outlined below and also assumes that the second round of spending cuts (at least $1.2 trillion) that the act calls for does not occur. This scenario also assumes somewhat higher nominal interest rates for U.S. Treasuries.

We still believe that the role of the U.S. dollar as the key reserve currency confers a government funding advantage, one that could change only slowly over time, and that Fed policy might lean toward continued loose monetary policy at a time of fiscal tightening.

Nonetheless, it is possible that interest rates could rise if investors re-price relative risks. As a result, our alternate scenario factors in a 50 basis point (bp)-75 bp rise in 10-year bond yields relative to the base and upside cases from 2013 onwards. In this scenario, we project the net public debt burden would rise from 74% of GDP in 2011 to 90% in 2015 and to 101% by 2021. Our revised scenarios also take into account the significant negative revisions to historical GDP data that the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced on July 29.

From our perspective, the effect of these revisions underscores two related points when evaluating the likely debt trajectory of the U.S. government. First, the revisions show that the recent recession was deeper than previously assumed, so the GDP this year is lower than previously thought in both nominal and real terms. Consequently, the debt burden is slightly higher. Second, the revised data highlight the sub-par path of the current economic recovery when compared with rebounds following previous post-war recessions. We believe the sluggish pace of the current economic recovery could be consistent with the experiences of countries that have had financial crises in which the slow process of debt deleveraging in the private sector leads to a persistent drag on demand.

As a result, our downside case scenario assumes relatively modest real trend GDP growth of 2.5% and inflation of near 1.5% annually going forward.

When comparing the U.S. to sovereigns with 'AAA' long-term ratings that we view as relevant peers--Canada, France, Germany, and the U.K.--we also observe, based on our base case scenarios for each, that the trajectory of the U.S.'s net public debt is diverging from the others. Including the U.S., we estimate that these five sovereigns will have net general government debt to GDP ratios this year ranging from 34% (Canada) to 80% (the U.K.), with the U.S. debt burden at 74%. By 2015, we project that their net public debt to GDP ratios will range between 30% (lowest, Canada) and 83% (highest, France), with the U.S. debt burden at 79%. However, in contrast with the U.S., we project that the net public debt burdens of these other sovereigns will begin to decline, either before or by 2015.

Standard & Poor's transfer T&C assessment of the U.S. remains 'AAA'. Our T&C assessment reflects our view of the likelihood of the sovereign restricting other public and private issuers' access to foreign exchange needed to meet debt service. Although in our view the credit standing of the U.S. government has deteriorated modestly, we see little indication that official interference of this kind is entering onto the policy agenda of either Congress or the Administration. Consequently, we continue to view this risk as being highly remote.

Outlook

The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate fiscal scenario illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently assume could lead us to lower the long-term rating again. On the other hand, as our upside scenario highlights, if the recommendations of the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction--independently or coupled with other initiatives, such as the lapsing of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners--lead to fiscal consolidation measures beyond the minimum mandated, and we believe they are likely to slow the deterioration of the government's debt dynamics, the long-term rating could stabilize at 'AA+'.

On Monday, we will issue separate releases concerning affected ratings in the funds, government-related entities, financial institutions, insurance, public finance, and structured finance sectors.

Saturday, August 6, 2011

The U.S. Debt Ceiling Standoff: How It Could Affect Structured Finance



On July 15, 2011, Standard & Poor's placed its ratings for certain structured finance transactions on CreditWatch negative due to their exposure to the sovereign rating on the United States of America. The resolution of these CreditWatch placements will depend, in part, on whether the U.S. sovereign rating changes and, if so, the degree to which each structured finance transaction's payments might, in our opinion, be affected by the change.
Gary Kochubka, senior director in Standard & Poor' ABS Ratings group, and Ted Burbage, head of U.S. Investor Relations, discuss the impact of three hypothetical scenarios following the possible lowering of the U.S. sovereign rating.

US sovereign Downgrade impact : The Thunderstorm


Standard and Poor's, alongwith other rating agencies had kept US's AAA/ rating on Credit Watch in March and were to review in Mid July. Accordingly, S&P, had expressed 'Dissatisfaction' reflecting the U.S. Debt  over Extended Debate. The US Law makers failed to plan  for the ' Debt Reduction' and/or the method to raise money either through ' Increasing Taxation' Or through 'Cutting Spending'.

As promised Standard and Poor's went ahead and downgraded US Sovereign Ratings to AA+. 



                                    S&P had discussed about the implication of this Action


1) We would downgrade the debt of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the ‘AAA’ rated Federal Home Loan Banks, and the ‘AAA’ rated Federal Farm Credit System Banks to correspond with the U.S. sovereign rating. 






2) We would also lower the ratings on ‘AAA’ rated U.S. insurance groups, as per our criteria that correlates insurers' and sovereigns' ratings. 


3)  In addition, we would lower the ratings on clearinghouses Fixed Income Clearing Corp., National Securities Clearing Corp., and Options Clearing Corp. as well as on The Depository Trust Co., a CSD

This reflects our view that their clearing businesses are concentrated in the domestic market and they are correlated with the U.S. economy. We assess the impact of this scenario as moderate for funds and low for all other financial institutions sectors.

4)  Impact on Funds:
 a) The ratings implications for FCQRs and PSFRs would vary. Would have an impact on funds with exposure to long-term U.S. Treasury and U.S. government securities, but not on funds with short-term investments. For FCQRs, we apply a lower credit score on investments in short-term (365 days or less) U.S. government securities than longer-term investments (more then 365 days). The 73 FCQRs that we placed on CreditWatch negative have significant exposures to U.S. Treasury and U.S. government securities that mature in more than 365 days.
 We would downgrade these 73 funds to reflect the lower long-term rating on the U.S.
  { Principal stability funds, on the other hand, seek to maintain stable and accumulating net asset values, and they invest in short-term debt instruments. As long as the short-term U.S. sovereign rating remains at ‘A-1+’, as we outline, we believe that lowering the long-term rating into the ‘AA’ category would not have an impact on the ratings on these funds because the credit quality of the U.S. would still meet the credit quality standards for all PSFR categories. Barring any potential price volatility associated with the lower long-term rating, the short-term rating on the U.S. government remaining at ‘A-1+’ would effectively be business as usual for the money market fund industry }

All other global financial services:

5)   We would expect there to be few rating actions (including outlook changes) on specific companies. In most cases, this would reflect that their businesses, operating earnings, and assets are largely U.S. based. In either instance, we don’t expect liquidity to be a critical issue for companies. Furthermore, we do not expect the knock-on effects of the lower U.S. sovereign rating in scenario 2 to lead to additional downgrades immediately in the financial services industry.
 6 )  In these scenarios, we would evaluate each company on a case-by-case basis, taking into account macroeconomic conditions and their own financial strength. If we do take rating actions, we could expect to downgrade companies that have a significant U.S. presence, with most of their business and assets in the U.S., or companies in Europe with sizable positive correlations to the U.S. insurance or banking sectors.
7)   We would take fewer rating actions, and more slowly, on financial services companies in Asia-Pacific and Latin America--if indeed we took any.


Conclusions : US down grading may Have Massive Loss of Confidence and Confusion. Recently, I posted many views from Alan Greenspan, PIMCO, And Neil Kashkari, all propounded this. I had Predicted this as ' Black Swan Event' which Market Had not Envisaged and Leave Only factored.
1) The Housing Market and Housing Finance in US and Europe shall have Deep Crators.
2)  The 401( K) Funds and Other Pension funds, Insurers like AIG, Berkshire, MET, Prudential.
3)  The Excessive ' Cash Rich ' Companies like Apple, Microsoft and Bankers will have Treasury Losses. 
4)  The ' Value Erosion' might Have Compounding Effects on Commodities, Trading Houses. 

Monday, August 1, 2011

Fact sheet: President Obama declares the " Debt Deal" -Video


Fact Sheet: Bipartisan Debt Deal: A Win for the Economy and Budget Discipline

Bipartisan Debt Deal: A Win for the Economy and Budget Discipline
  • Removes the cloud of uncertainty over our economy at this critical time, by ensuring that no one will be able to use the threat of the nation’s first default now, or in only a few months, for political gain;
  • Locks in a down payment on significant deficit reduction, with savings from both domestic and Pentagon spending, and is designed to protect crucial investments like aid for college students;
  • Establishes a bipartisan process to seek a balanced approach to larger deficit reduction through entitlement and tax reform;
  • Deploys an enforcement mechanism that gives all sides an incentive to reach bipartisan compromise on historic deficit reduction, while protecting Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries and low-income programs;
  • Stays true to the President’s commitment to shared sacrifice by preventing the middle class, seniors and those who are most vulnerable from shouldering the burden of deficit reduction. The President did not agree to any entitlement reforms outside of the context of a bipartisan committee process where tax reform will be on the table and the President will insist on shared sacrifice from the most well-off and those with the most indefensible tax breaks.
Mechanics of the Debt Deal
  • Immediately enacted 10-year discretionary spending caps generating nearly $1 trillion in deficit reduction; balanced between defense and non-defense spending.
  • President authorized to increase the debt limit by at least $2.1 trillion, eliminating the need for further increases until 2013.
  • Bipartisan committee process tasked with identifying an additional $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction, including from entitlement and tax reform. Committee is required to report legislation by November 23, 2011, which receives fast-track protections. Congress is required to vote on Committee recommendations by December 23, 2011.
  • Enforcement mechanism established to force all parties – Republican and Democrat – to agree to balanced deficit reduction. If Committee fails, enforcement mechanism will trigger spending reductions beginning in 2013 – split 50/50 between domestic and defense spending. Enforcement protects Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries, and low-income programs from any cuts.
1. REMOVING UNCERTAINTY TO SUPPORT THE AMERICAN ECONOMY
  • Deal Removes Cloud of Uncertainty Until 2013, Eliminating Key Headwind on the Economy: Independent analysts, economists, and ratings agencies have all made clear that a short-term debt limit increase would create unacceptable economic uncertainty by risking default again within only a matter of months and as S&P stated, increase the chance of a downgrade. By ensuring a debt limit increase of at least $2.1 trillion, this deal removes the specter of default, providing important certainty to our economy at a fragile moment.
  • Mechanism to Ensure Further Deficit Reduction is Designed to Phase-In Beginning in 2013 to Avoid Harming the Recovery: The deal includes a mechanism to ensure additional deficit reduction, consistent with the economic recovery. The enforcement mechanism would not be made effective until 2013, avoiding any immediate contraction that could harm the recovery. And savings from the down payment will be enacted over 10 years, consistent with supporting the economic recovery.
2. A DOWNPAYMENT ON DEFICIT REDUCTION BY LOCKING IN HISTORIC SPENDING DISCIPLINE – BALANCED BETWEEN DOMESTIC AND PENTAGON SPENDING
  • More than $900 Billion in Savings over 10 Years By Capping Discretionary Spending: The deal includes caps on discretionary spending that will produce more than $900 billion in savings over the next 10 years compared to the CBO March baseline, even as it protects core investments from deep and economically damaging cuts.
  • Includes Savings of $350 Billion from the Base Defense Budget – the First Defense Cut Since the 1990s: The deal puts us on track to cut $350 billion from the defense budget over 10 years. These reductions will be implemented based on the outcome of a review of our missions, roles, and capabilities that will reflect the President’s commitment to protecting our national security.
  • Reduces Domestic Discretionary Spending to the Lowest Level Since Eisenhower: These discretionary caps will put us on track to reduce non-defense discretionary spending to its lowest level since Dwight Eisenhower was President.
  • Includes Funding to Protect the President’s Historic Investment in Pell Grants: Since taking office, the President has increased the maximum Pell award by $819 to a maximum award $5,550, helping over 9 million students pay for college tuition bills. The deal provides specific protection in the discretionary budget to ensure that the there will be sufficient funding for the President’s historic investment in Pell Grants without undermining other critical investments.
3. ESTABLISHING A BIPARTISAN PROCESS TO ACHIEVE $1.5 TRILLION IN ADDITIONAL BALANCED DEFICIT REDUCTION BY THE END OF 2011
  • The Deal Locks in a Process to Enact $1.5 Trillion in Additional Deficit Reduction Through a Bipartisan, Bicameral Congressional Committee: The deal creates a bipartisan, bicameral Congressional Committee that is charged with enacting $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction by the end of the year. This Committee will work without the looming specter of default, ensuring time to carefully consider essential reforms without the disruption and brinksmanship of the past few months.
  • This Committee is Empowered Beyond Previous Bipartisan Attempts at Deficit Reduction: Any recommendation of the Committee would be given fast-track privilege in the House and Senate, assuring it of an up or down vote and preventing some from using procedural gimmicks to block action.
  • To Meet This Target, the Committee Will Consider Responsible Entitlement and Tax Reform. This means putting all the priorities of both parties on the table – including both entitlement reform and revenue-raising tax reform.
4. A STRONG ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM TO MAKE ALL SIDES COME TOGETHER
  • The Deal Includes An Automatic Sequester to Ensure That At Least $1.2 Trillion in Deficit Reduction Is Achieved By 2013 Beyond the Discretionary Caps: The deal includes an automatic sequester on certain spending programs to ensure that—between the Committee and the trigger—we at least put in place an additional $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction by 2013.
  • Consistent With Past Practice, Sequester Would Be Divided Equally Between Defense and Non-Defense Programs and Exempt Social Security, Medicaid, and Low-Income Programs: Consistent with the bipartisan precedents established in the 1980s and 1990s, the sequester would be divided equally between defense and non-defense program, and it would exempt Social Security, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, programs for low-income families, and civilian and military retirement. Likewise, any cuts to Medicare would be capped and limited to the provider side.
  • Sequester Would Provide a Strong Incentive for Both Sides to Come to the Table: If the fiscal committee took no action, the deal would automatically add nearly $500 billion in defense cuts on top of cuts already made, and, at the same time, it would cut critical programs like infrastructure or education. That outcome would be unacceptable to many Republicans and Democrats alike – creating pressure for a bipartisan agreement without requiring the threat of a default with unthinkable consequences for our economy.
5. A BALANCED DEAL CONSISTENT WITH THE PRESIDENT’S COMMITMENT TO SHARED SACRIFICE

Sunday, July 31, 2011

US (Im)Balanced budget: Political Strangle and Economic Suffocation

The US Debt raise and Balanced Budget is likely to be Political Strangle Hold on the Washington and is expected to remain  an financial Traction and Suffocation to the ailing Economy. The Debt Deal prescriptions may starve the Economy and Inject a traction, which is Likely to act more of Noose, than a rope.

Alan Greenspan, in his recent interviews had rightly hinted the impasse and predicated a vary Late Awakening by political class of the impending reality. Washington news is churning all sorts of formulations.
The victory to neither and both republicans, democrats hints that,
         Bush Tax Cuts not extended.
1) The Bush Tax Cuts will vanish in thin air, replaced by a ' Cumbersome formula ' paving a larger   opaqueness. The Back Door Taxing will impinge the Corporates. 
                                                                                          The Shallow Expenditure Cuts:                                                                                                                                                                                                          
2) The Governmental expenditure will be Trimmed by an extent, which may appear too little, and unsustainable. The wafer thin margin of errors and provisioning for extremities will endure to uncertainty towards real fulcrum of the deal squabble.
         Absence of Long Term Plan                                                                                                                             
3)  The Lack of Long Term Plan and Uncertainty will invite the Rating Agencies to recur the down grading of US Sovereign Debt Sooner, than expected.
        Inverted yield Curve:
4)  The Rise in Borrowing shall, hence forth will accompanied by ' Rising Yields'. The Short Term End of the Yield curve may Rise, faster than the Long Term. This will make the 'Yield Curve' Inverted for the Medium Term.
                               Balancing Of Budget is delayed :
5)  The ' Unresolved Remainder Budget' will be maintained by the US Government, for now and shall nag, the Investors like 'a wagging tail'. The State Budgets discrepancies may surface
                               Continued Political Bickering.
6)  The redundant imbalance now is likely to taken to the each state and Common Citizens. This unresolved issues may be 'political menu' for the upcoming Election.  US will be seeing much too, turbulent times than is being seen, today and Polarisation may spurt in the coming months
                               Wall Street Response
     However , Wall Street and International Equity Bourses likely to celebrate the ' Relief Rally' for lifting the immediate traction and the ' Oil And Gas Sector' is likely to have better days. The Unwinding Trade in USD Index will ensue hereafter. The Spike Volatility shall be higher with VIX nearing 30/38 range
            Investors: remain on Wait/ Watch.
     But, Investors shall be better off, If they, remain Side ways and Deal with Utmost Caution, as ' Risk' is not Priced in the Equities and Bond Markets. And, wait for Opportune time to enter.