Once upon a time the concept of 'backed by the full faith and credit' of the United Staes government, as defined under Art. IV of the Consitition, meant - -
This was the collateral for federal debt. Rather a nebulous definition, but the dollar was strong and stable because it was backed by the gold standard and our paper currency was defined as 'legal tender' because it too was backed by the 'full faith and credit' of the United States government - the 'issuing agency'.
Fast forward - - -
Can a government with an approaching $20,000,000,000 debt and no sense of urgency, let alone a responsible plan, for coming to grips with it's own pending fiscal dissolution, be considered as acting ' in full faith - - ' , or for that matter 'any faith' with its People?
This was the collateral for federal debt. Rather a nebulous definition, but the dollar was strong and stable because it was backed by the gold standard and our paper currency was defined as 'legal tender' because it too was backed by the 'full faith and credit' of the United States government - the 'issuing agency'.
Fast forward - - -
Can a government with an approaching $20,000,000,000 debt and no sense of urgency, let alone a responsible plan, for coming to grips with it's own pending fiscal dissolution, be considered as acting ' in full faith - - ' , or for that matter 'any faith' with its People?
Clearly intended as a rhetorical question.