The United States Treasury is not going to default on its debt.
But the belief that it might default would raise the interest rate the Treasury has to pay, to the advantage of creditors – for example, the Chinese government – and the disadvantage of American taxpayers.
Why does Glenn Reynolds think this would be a good outcome? His expressed intention is to make it impossible for our elected representatives to pursue policies Reynolds doesn’t like by denying the country access to the credit markets.
When Bruce Bartlett of Forbes – a conservative Republican and former Reagan and Bush I staffer – points out that Reynolds’s idea is absurd, Reynolds has no substantive response beyond his usual display of hurt feelings. He accuses Bartlett of intemperance. He adds that Bartlett “seem[s] surprisingly anxious to defend” Barack Obama, who is never named or alluded to in Bartlett’s post, and who, according to Reyonlds, is “trying to turn the United States into Zimbabwe.”
During the Bush years, Reynolds specialized in accusing Bush’s critics of wanting the country to lose militarily and collapse economically. I wondered why he thought so. Now I think I know: he was merely projecting onto his political adversaries the attitude that he and his friends expected to adopt if a liberal ever occupied the White House.
Yes, Glenn, dissent is patriotic. Trying to wreck your country’s credit, not so much.