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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (215400)	1/19/2005 1:23:15 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573816

Are you opposed to T-bills BTW? That might explain something I was missing in my reading of your posts. My objection to posts from both Tim and you is I'm left with the feeling that you see a difference in investment quality between T-bills and the special treasury notes help by the SS Admin. Could you comment on the relative security of these two financial instruments?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (215400)	1/19/2005 1:27:19 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573816

Are you opposed to T-bills BTW? That might explain something I was missing in my reading of your posts. My objection to posts from both Tim and you is I'm left with the feeling that you see a difference in investment quality between T-bills and the special treasury notes help by the SS Admin. Could you comment on the relative security of these two financial instruments?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (215400)	1/19/2005 2:29:44 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573816

re: I thought you didn't like federal debt, which is what those T-bills basically represent. Debt for the treasury, an asset for Social Security. I agree with you that including the SS surplus in the federal budget is unconscionable. It's "Enron accounting", but it's still just accounting. There is a "trust fund"; the pols are using it to hide their profligate ways. That doesn't change the discussion on how to "rescue" SS, except to make the $2T cost of partial privatization even more onerous. re: Options have value. There is something vaguely familiar about this discussion and the one on expensing options. John