Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (17955)	2/28/2004 5:25:04 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

those rates would be much higher if it were not for Japan, and to a smaller degree China purchasing our long-term debt i do not think they are touching our long term debt--there is not enough of it to achieve the currency interventions they are implementing. total Treasury debt maturing in 20yrs or later amounts to less than $200 billion, and this number continues to decline. this is because the Treasury is issuing short-term securities that carry much lower coupons--the government version of an ARM. their thinking is to issue 1yr paper at 1% or 2yr paper at less than 2%, rather than 30yr paper at 5%. the vast majority of US Government debt matures in less than five years, and this is where Asian CB buying is concentrated. incidentally, the lack of Asian CB buying at the long end of the curve is why US long rates are comparable to or even higher than the long rates of other industrialized countries. there is no subsidy at the long end. long term US Treasury debt is about equal to the market cap of Intel.

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (17955)	2/28/2004 11:18:17 PM
From: MulhollandDrive	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

netcastdaily.com jim puplava interviews john rubino

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (17955)	2/29/2004 10:35:55 PM
From: Amy J	Respond to of 306849

Elroy, "oppose the passage of California Props 57 and 58. Rolling the California debt into $15 Billion of bond issues removes the incentive to repeal Prop 13, which I see as inevitable. I think it's better to have our day-of-reckoning now rather than later. " Now I'm actually beginning to get convinced to vote no on prop 57 and 58. Both Rep and Dem need to learn how to raise taxes and cut any wasteful spending. (Probably will vote yes on 55 though to give universities $2B and then to fix broken toilets and leaky roofs for gradeschools which could cost more to fix over time if left untreated. Though there are valid arguments against it.) Regards, Amy J