Paper "AMERO" will replace the dollar by spring!? - page 36
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Tax legislation is then always directed against 'groups of people', as investors pay less tax than workers, pensioners often pay no tax at all, employees of public hospitals may pay a reduced tax. The population is divided into small groups and their taxation is very different. Why the pathos about "a group of people"?
You grabbed the news off the top of your head and started blathering on about something you don't know, and now you're making it up.
Well, kid, if you don't know anything about a "group of people," I'm not gonna explain it to you. Search rules, and legislation in the states isn't that big, you'll figure it out.
The word highlighted in your quote is spelled wrong. It's taxation.
And, by the same token, the word princent is also tymbo spelling. Wiki is your guide.
So? And oil in '98 was about $12 a barrel, and today it is 4 times higher, i.e. it has risen steeper than gold. Salary in Moscow in '90 was $10-20 a month, today it's a matter of luck.
And the fact that there are 3-4 times more paper unsecured quid. And all that paper doesn't circulate in America, it circulates around the world.
Theses:
- Yields rise when the price falls.
- The price falls not only when investors sell bonds, but also when they continue to buy (all new bonds printed by the FR, not the same bond from each other), but do not agree to pay a high price. There is no question of "getting rid of" at all. If investors start getting rid of them, the price will simply collapse as there will be no one to buy the bonds.
- The FR has said it will buy back some long bonds, i.e. an artificial shortage is being created, which means the price is going up.
By the way, a very correct decision in my opinion, and it is not at all certain that the machine will be switched on. Many long bonds were issued a long time ago with a very high coupon, i.e. today the FR is paying too much for those old debts. He can borrow today at low interest and use the money to buy back old bonds with a high coupon. They have to pay a higher price now, but in the long run they save a lot. For example, you have a flat mortgage with a fixed 15% interest rate, but the situation in the world has changed and you can refinance your loan in another bank already at 10%, your expenses will be a penalty for cancelling the first contract.
It is likely that the FI resonates with the market by trying to take corrective management through bond yields - anchor points of "portfolio-building" models
That's not how you spell the word highlighted in your quote. It's taxation.
And, by the way, the word precedent is also a Timbo word. Wiki to the rescue.
When you run out of substantive arguments, there is a shift to grammar. How familiar this is.
It is likely that the FR is in tune with the market trying to take corrective control by operating with bond yields - reference points of "portfolio-building" models
Bond yields are set by investors, not by the FI. The FI would like to borrow money for free, but no one gives it to them for free, but they do, given current conditions, at 0.9% per annum if for one year.
Bond yields are a serious indicator precisely because no one can manipulate them. Even the purchase of 300bn of bonds has moved yields only slightly and this is a temporary effect which will fade very quickly.
And the fact that there are 3-4 times as many paper dollars unsecured. And all that paper doesn't go in America, it goes around the world.
I have already offered everyone to take unsecured dollars from them in exchange for full-fledged Russian roubles. For every dollar that is cheaper than the paper it is printed on, I offer a whole ruble - the future reserve currency.
Rejection of this proposal means an automatic recognition that the dollar is worth something and is backed by something, and therefore you can stop with the nursery school bullshit about paper and unsecured dollars.
Bond yields are set by investors, not by the FI. The FR would like to borrow money for free, but no one gives it to them for free, but they do, given current conditions, at 0.9% per annum if for one year.
Bond yields are a serious indicator precisely because no one can manipulate them. Even the buyout of 300bn worth of bonds has had a very slight impact on yields and it is a temporary effect that will fade very quickly.
timbo, no one is arguing that. I meant trying to stabilise the returns as they sit in the portfolio-builder models i.e. investors.
timbo, no one is arguing that. I meant trying to stabilise price levels by FR as they are sitting in the portfolio-builder model i.e. investors.
So I'm not arguing, I'm clarifying. The FR doesn't care about investors' portfolios, it cares about its own debt portfolio. And if there is an opportunity to reduce the cost of maintaining that portfolio, only a complete fool would not take advantage of it, and there are no fools sitting in FR.
1. where are these houses?
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-search/Detroit_MI/price-na-10000?sby=1
http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-search/Detroit_MI/price-na-10000?sby=1
Yeah, well... Maybe you can also tell me where to get one of those: (electroactive polymers) which is a polymer strip .... nano tech. :)