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 Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (53569)	2/12/2006 12:57:24 PM
From: jackjc	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110194

Claude, the banks have ways of delaying payment under certain conditions, but the Treas has to honor their debts, with printed money if necessary. Print enough paper money and these so-called bubbles in RE, certain stocks, etc turn out to have been wise places for cash, as long as the payments are made.

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (53569)	2/12/2006 2:25:44 PM
From: shades	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 110194

Could T-Bills become unsolvent? That seems impossible. You are talking total collapse here? I thought they were GAURANTEED by the constitution - we can cut so many other things in government that are NOT gauranteed before those will be risky eh? Like SS, veterans pensions, school spending - etc etc. californiarepublic.org Regardless of the merit, or lack of, of the current tax, the process puts voters in charge of making the final decision, and reaffirms the doctrine that not only should taxes be imposed through the consent of the governed -- the basic premise of Proposition 218 -- but that those same citizens have an inherent right to withdraw their consent. And while it is the fate of taxes, not bonds, that is to be considered by voters, the process illustrates a very important difference between the obligation that comes with taxes and that associated with bonds. Taxes do not represent a long-term commitment. Although taxes may seem to be set in stone, with sufficient citizen unrest, taxes can be cancelled at any time by elected officials or by voters through use of the initiative. Bonds, on the other hand, are almost always an inviolable long-term obligation. Those who purchase bonds are guaranteed repayment by the "Impairment Clause" of the U.S. Constitution. For local bonds, payment is assured to creditors by placing a lien against all property within the sponsoring agency's jurisdiction. For some taxpayers, being asked whether they would prefer to pay for taxes or bonds, the question is akin to being asked which finger they would prefer to have broken -- all of the options are unpleasant. Still, the vast majority recognize that some taxes and bonds are a necessary evil to pay the cost of a civilized society. But, given the choice of funding a project through ongoing tax revenues or bonds, taxes are almost always the better choice, because, as the residents of Watsonville are showing, voters have the option to change their minds.

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (53569)	2/12/2006 2:52:00 PM
From: shades	Respond to of 110194

Is heinz recommending DROOY? Recently posted here - they can take lots of things - but not your gubbment constitutionally gauranteed bonds eh? gata.org Under TWEA during times of war -- and also under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. Secs. 1701-05 ("IEEPA") during peacetime national emergencies -- the president has broad powers to regulate property in which there exists a foreign interest. See TWEA § 5(b)(1)(B); IEEPA Secs. 1702 (a) (1) (B). Consequently, the president may restrict shares in any company owned by foreign persons consistent with the purposes of any declared emergency. In this respect, foreign-owned shares in gold and silver mining companies are no different from foreign-owned shares in companies in any other industry. Finally, you raise concerns about the "instant destruction of gold and silver investors and the precious metals mining industry in the United States." In the establishment and implementation of sanctions, the U.S. Government is always mindful of the domestic impact of restrictions meant to serve national security and foreign policy purposes. Just as the U.S. Government has been mindful of the practical impact that sanctions have on various service and manufacturing industries, it would also be mindful of the potential impact of sanctions with respect to the markets and industries associated with precious metals. I hope you find this letter instructive. Thank you for your interest. If I can be of any further assistance, please call me. Sincerely, Sean M. Thornton Chief Counsel (Foreign Assets Control) U.S. Department of the Treasury Washington, D.C. 20220