France loses AAA rating

Yahew

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Awarded by the folks who only showed up at half time (US) or didnt show up at all (Ireland) ?

Ireland didnt invent , or award, the term Cheese Eating surrender monkeys ( what ever, despite other than anti-irishness made you think we could have invented it and popularised it?)

It was the Americans ( specifically The Simpsons, as an aside by caretaker Wille, and popularised by Jonah Goldberg in the US).

Ireland had nothing to do with it.

The UK has popularised the notion that France surrendered on it's own. In fact the Germans defeated both France and the British Continental Army at the same time.

Beef Eating To-Dunkirk fleeing surrender monkeys*

tashiusclay

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I do not think it should be the ratings agencies dictating the pace of the changes we are required to make.

The confidence would come back to people (and remember people are the markets) if they weren't constantly rocked by bad news as soon as things start to quieten down.

Yes thats partially true, confidence might return for a while, but the core problem still remains, the massive and unsustainable debt that the eu(and most developed countries) is carrying.

Its impossible to call how this sovereign debt crisis will play out, as it is pretty muc uncharted territory, but it looks to me as if we are seeing the beginning of a global power shift from west to east.

44leto

Another nail few nails put into the Euro coffin.

I hate rating agencies, they come across as holier then though, when yet they played a primary and corrupt role in falsely rating collateralized debt and mortgage derivatives which still has the world economy on the brink.

They got away with murder. The old ones should have been ordered to close. How can anyone trust them.

Crazy Horse 6

Revenge for Henry handball. Take that frogs.

alphabeat

HAH ,
fcuk YOU , France

KindOfIrish

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Isint this the same (Bog)Standard and (P1$l tho$)poor who gave AAA ratings to all those dodgy subprime lenders back in the day ?

Why are these rating agencies still in business ? Surely financial advice from the community of drunkards on Dublin bus is more credible than anythng these clowns come out with ?

US politicians need them to scare voters by pointing, how bad life is in socialist Europe;)

KINGVictor

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

I do not think it should be the ratings agencies dictating the pace of the changes we are required to make.

The confidence would come back to people (and remember people are the markets) if they weren't constantly rocked by bad news as soon as things start to quieten down.

Dictating? How are they doing that?

Confidence should come from the people- you say...how? The reality is that investors and the folks that buy bonds are not the "people". The bond buyers are making investments based on the available information based on risks and opportunity.

The credit rating agencies have been influential over the last century and have been instrumental in deciding the economic fate of a lot of countries- why cry foul because the victims now are closer to home?

dj jarvis

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Awarded by the folks who only showed up at half time (US) or didnt show up at all (Ireland) ?

do your research - learn your history , the Irish free state done Britain a big favor in reconnaissance , intelligence , air space - amongst a hundred other valid reasons - don't forget we were neutral on the side of the allies

church hill stated that if the Irish free state did not stay neutral it could have ended the UK's war effort by losing its ports and the land to a German landing force from France by the Germans

the irish worked hard to supply the UK with food and men - 10,000 Irish men died in the second world war - correct me if im wrong but per head of population did the free state not lose more fighting men than England ?

your vitriol is getting old

just because the " victors " tell the story does not mean its factually correct

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isNOQ3zQ2F0

drdeadlift

Are they down to a B rating now?

Logical Fallacy

KINGVictor wrote: »

I didnt hear that same level of cynicism when they downgraded USA's credit rating some months back.

I'm not sure i see the point of your post. Do you mean in general or me specifically?

SafeSurfer

France loses AAA rating
France loses AAA rating
France loses AAA rating


Have they tried ringing it.

NinjaK

right job

Toby Take a Bow

dj jarvis wrote: »

church hill stated that if the Irish free state did not stay neutral it could have ended the UK's war effort by losing its ports and the land to a German landing force from France by the Germans

the irish worked hard to supply the UK with food and men - 10,000 Irish men died in the second world war - correct me if im wrong but per head of population did the free state not lose more fighting men than England ?

Did Churchill not offer some sort of deal to DeValera if he declared on the side of the Allies, or is that a myth?

As for the Irish supporting the war, I think the idea of Ireland being neutral is the idea of Official Ireland being neutral.

KINGVictor

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

I'm not sure i see the point of your post. Do you mean in general or me specifically?

Ah...I mean generally. The US was downgraded by the same credit agency and it did not cause mayhem, I wonder if it was the UK that was downgraded tonite-some comments would have been a lot different.

Folks are hyperventilating like they never saw it coming...or that the downgrade is so unfair or unjustified ...based on reality..like

later12

KINGVictor wrote: »

Ah...I mean generally. The US was downgraded by the same credit agency and it did not cause mayhem

The US is the major world reserve currency, it is a safety haven. When the US was downgraded, money fled out of US companies and into a harbour: US Treasuries.

France does not enjoy that privilege because even though the Euro is an important reserve, France is not seen as the same sort of safe haven as the likes of Germany, the Uk or the US.

If the UK or Germany were downgraded, it probably wouldn't harm their bond values, just like it didn't in the USA. They're a bit like gold, markets perceive them to be steadfast and disciplined, and because market behaviour leads to self-fulfilling prophecies, steadfast and disciplined they are.

There is a danger here that what is going to happen is that investors will flee the Euro governments and go back into buying equities, which is not always helpful during a bailout bonanza.

dj jarvis

Toby Take a Bow wrote: »

Did Churchill not offer some sort of deal to DeValera if he declared on the side of the Allies, or is that a myth?

As for the Irish supporting the war, I think the idea of Ireland being neutral is the idea of Official Ireland being neutral.

some would call it a deal , others blackmail depends how you look at it

greatest diplomatic 3 card trick pulled in Europe during the war was Ireland staying " natural " for the emergency

the truth of the free states involvement in the war is well documented but rarely shown the light of day - it does not fit with the British medias view on how they won the war

some very good books on the subject around

mikeyboy

How does a thread on the downgrade of France's credit rating turn into a debate on Ireland's policy during the war?

later12

dj jarvis wrote: »

greatest diplomatic 3 card trick pulled in Europe during the war was Ireland staying " natural " for the emergency

yes, the mascara ration of '42 was a genius strategy.

dj jarvis

just seen that italy has the same credit rating as ireland ??? bbb+

could this be right ????

later12

mikeyboy wrote: »

How does a thread on the downgrade of France's credit rating turn into a debate on Ireland's policy during the war?

It's AH

Now pitch in and tell us... what you think of single mothers?

woodoo

Le twerp won't be a happy man.

General General

dj jarvis wrote: »

some would call it a deal , others blackmail depends how you look at it

greatest diplomatic 3 card trick pulled in Europe during the war was Ireland staying " natural " for the emergency

the truth of the free states involvement in the war is well documented but rarely shown the light of day - it does not fit with the British medias view on how they won the war

some very good books on the subject around

I thick you mean 'naturist'. Duh!

dj jarvis

later10 wrote: »

yes, the mascara ration of '42 was a genius strategy.

yea , coupled with the lets not get bombed to feck by the nazis worked a treat

Irish solution to a Irish problem - it worked 100% - master stroke

how many European nation aligned and neutral got ****ed by the axis ??

Ireland was not one - yet it being hugely important to the UK's survival

thank you dev

Robdude

What rating does Ireland have?

Robdude

Robdude wrote: »

What rating does Ireland have?

According to ..
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0805/breaking18.html

S&P currently has Ireland rated at 'BBB+/A-2'.

Apparently just above junk!

Robdude

Deleted User wrote: »

According to ..
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0805/breaking18.html



Apparently just above junk!

So - we're mocking France for having a better rating than us and surrendering in a war we never entered?

Interesting thread we've got here.

44leto

Deleted User wrote: »

According to ..
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0805/breaking18.html



Apparently just above junk!

According to S,,and,,p the people that gave collateralised debt and mortgage derivatives a triple A rating.

I have no idea why these people who played a pivotal role in the 2008 crash have not been tossed to the dustbin of history. Rating countries seems to be their new role, they even downgraded the US when been investigated by the Senate.

There is a story in this for some hack.

Napper Hawkins

ChunkyLover_53 wrote: »

He did in the bit about the assault not the actual 'Chowda' scene.

Quimby follows him out and they say it there. I think, I've had a lot of booze since I last saw it.

Edit: Can't find vid but found script, God bless internets.

Bart: Well, I was hiding in the kitchen when it all happened.
[flashback]
Freddy: Say it, Frenchy! Say "chowder"!
Waiter: Never!
Freddy: OK, you asked for it. I'm going to enjoy this!
[grunts, pops the cork off some champagne, chugs it]
Waiter: Hah. [slips on floor, bangs head on four frying pans, breaks
glass, hand lands in blender, then in toaster, then head falls
in oven, boiling water is spilled on his back, then into broom
closet where rat traps snap closed all over him, then beaks more
glass and falls over]
[back to reality]
Bart: And that's what really happened.
Waiter: This is an outrage! I am not a clumsy Clouseau-esque waiter. I
will --
[trips on chair, falls out window into truck containing rat
traps]

"At least...zere waire....no big ones..*SNAP*...aiiieeeeee......." :pac:

Love it.

Nodin

dj jarvis wrote: »

..................
France surrendered after 8 weeks - to one army, a lot smaller than the french army
they had more tanks and at the start of the war the french tanks were much better than the german mark III and IV

that is why they are called surrender monkeys

...by the ignorant, who ignore the fact that they were (a) beaten in the field (you'll note the allies weren't landing at Dunkirk) and (b) the number of frenchmen who travelled to continue the fight, despite their goverments surrender.

Wibbs

Nodin wrote: »

...by the ignorant, who ignore the fact that they were (a) beaten in the field (you'll note the allies weren't landing at Dunkirk) and (b) the number of frenchmen who travelled to continue the fight, despite their goverments surrender.

Yep the old surrender monkeys ballsology. One slight problem with this stupidity is an ignorance of history. In the history of Europe since Rome fell the French have been the most successful military force on land as far as battles fought and won. Without them at the Battle of Tours we'd likely be speaking Arabic. Led by a bloke called Charles the Hammer. Now that's how you name kings folks(though there was also a Charles the Bald so it can go both ways). The British like to remember Agincourt, but quietly ignore the fact the French creamed them in the 100years war. Never mind that it was Norman French who invaded them and ran the place. It was centuries before an English king could actually speak English. That great "English" king Richard the Lionheart(great name again:)) only spent a few years in the place and only had a few words of English Look at the French at Austerlitz where they took out both the austrohungarians and the russians. Oh and they did make it to Moscow too. It was coming back was where it went arseways. Nearer to today? Check out the battle of Verdun in WW1. Better yet look at military speak. Lieutenant, reconnaissance/reconnoitre, camoflage, maneuver, regiment, captain and shíte load of others come from the French. There's a reason for that. Surrender monkeys my hole. Even worse coming from Yanks, given that without the French creaming the English at Yorktown, they'd likely have been waiting longer for independence.

getz

dj jarvis wrote: »

do your research - learn your history , the Irish free state done Britain a big favor in reconnaissance , intelligence , air space - amongst a hundred other valid reasons - don't forget we were neutral on the side of the allies

church hill stated that if the Irish free state did not stay neutral it could have ended the UK's war effort by losing its ports and the land to a German landing force from France by the Germans

the irish worked hard to supply the UK with food and men - 10,000 Irish men died in the second world war - correct me if im wrong but per head of population did the free state not lose more fighting men than England ?

your vitriol is getting old

just because the " victors " tell the story does not mean its factually correct

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isNOQ3zQ2F0

yes and those who came back alive were treated like sh.. [how dare they fight for the british]

Thread fail

D1stant

Whats the French for schadenfreude?

ejmaztec

D1stant wrote: »

Whats the French for schadenfreude?

Jubilation

Radharc na Sleibhte

Say a prayer to St Anthony.
It always works when you lose stuff.

MetalDog

That arrogant little bollox Sarkozy deserves this, but the ordinary French people who are just trying to get by like we are don't. But, sh!t always rolls downhill. :rolleyes:

ejmaztec

ejmaztec wrote: »

Sarkozy and Merkel have been pissing around for months, instead of getting down to solving the Eurozone problem. The downgrade is self-inflicted as a result of the fiddling and farting around that's been going on.

Since this post, Merkel gets 10 out of 10 for stating the feckin obvious:o

Merkel says Europe must now move quickly

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0114/breaking11.html

TheZohanS

It's not just France,

France and Austria both saw their top AAA ratings cut one notch to AA-plus, while Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia also suffered one-notch downgrades. S&P dropped the credit ratings of Italy, Portugal, Spain and Cyprus by two notches.

A total of 9 countries were downgraded. I think celebrating the fact that France(or any EU country) was downgraded is short-sighted and misguided. We all pee in the same pot now.

dj jarvis

Nodin wrote: »

...by the ignorant, who ignore the fact that they were (a) beaten in the field (you'll note the allies weren't landing at Dunkirk) and (b) the number of frenchmen who travelled to continue the fight, despite their goverments surrender.

dont call me ignorant for pointing out the answer to a question another poster asked - where did i say it was my view or opinion ?

as you say, yes they were beaten in the field , they also had the BEF fighting with them - so you see the french and English were beaten by a smaller and less well equipped army - this is the reason for the notion that the french were useless and surrender FAR to quickly and easily

as the french government in exile in England also pointed out on radio broadcasts back across the channel everyday - to rally the nation as it were - because even the french knew they threw in the towel far to quickly

not my fault you are just ignorant of the actual facts , go read about it - its really fascinating

and in fairness since when do national stereotypes start having truth in them ?

dj jarvis

Wibbs wrote: »

Yep the old surrender monkeys ballsology. One slight problem with this stupidity is an ignorance of history. In the history of Europe since Rome fell the French have been the most successful military force on land as far as battles fought and won. Without them at the Battle of Tours we'd likely be speaking Arabic. Led by a bloke called Charles the Hammer. Now that's how you name kings folks(though there was also a Charles the Bald so it can go both ways). The British like to remember Agincourt, but quietly ignore the fact the French creamed them in the 100years war. Never mind that it was Norman French who invaded them and ran the place. It was centuries before an English king could actually speak English. That great "English" king Richard the Lionheart(great name again:)) only spent a few years in the place and only had a few words of English Look at the French at Austerlitz where they took out both the austrohungarians and the russians. Oh and they did make it to Moscow too. It was coming back was where it went arseways. Nearer to today? Check out the battle of Verdun in WW1. Better yet look at military speak. Lieutenant, reconnaissance/reconnoitre, camoflage, maneuver, regiment, captain and shíte load of others come from the French. There's a reason for that. Surrender monkeys my hole. Even worse coming from Yanks, given that without the French creaming the English at Yorktown, they'd likely have been waiting longer for independence.

everything you have said is correct - the question was asked why are the french called surrender monkeys and i pointed out the ONE instance in history that got them that awful title - jesus can people actually read the f2ucking posts before galloping off on their high horses

AH is just full of whinging f2uk monkeys - go hang out in PI ( not directed at wibbs - just Ah at the moment )

ScumLord

This economic recession is a man made fantasy. It only exists in peoples heads, the real world didn't change at all and we're all being taken for a ride.

ejmaztec

ScumLord wrote: »

This economic recession is a man made fantasy. It only exists in peoples heads, the real world didn't change at all and we're all being taken for a ride.

On a fast-boat to China.:(

ScumLord

ScumLord wrote: »

This economic recession is a man made fantasy. It only exists in peoples heads, the real world didn't change at all and we're all being taken for a ride.

Taken for a ride alright! We're paying dearly for this ride and it's the banksters who are creaming it all the way.

They have developed a financial system that is dependent on infinite growth indefinitely, on the up side they take a share of the profits, but on the downside they still take a share of the interest on the debts.

Then they eventually come to terms with the limits to growth, we may have a chance of getting out of this mess, until then it can only get worse.

Sad fact is, even if they DO cop it, we'll still have the issues associated to limitations to growth to contend with.

El Inho

so what im getting from this is Andy Carroll is a complete waste of €35 million?