LOGO
General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here.

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 07-14-2011, 07:23 PM   #1
trorseIrripsy

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
415
Senior Member
Default
How is a bond not an "IOU"?
It's a bit more complicated in that it spells out interest rates, principle, lists a maturity time, and other such stuff. In short it's a more complex financial instrument then just a simple IOU especially since everything is regulated and defined by law while an IOU is not.
trorseIrripsy is offline


Old 07-14-2011, 07:34 PM   #2
krasniyluch

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
487
Senior Member
Default
If bond holders are first in line to collect the 60% of funds still supported by taxes (and they are, no way around that), how does that turn into Social Security checks not showing up? Obama's already screwed bondsholders before. Remember the GM bankruptcy? He doesn't care about what the law says.
krasniyluch is offline


Old 07-14-2011, 08:22 PM   #3
retTreftowhexm

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
386
Senior Member
Default
I do know that there are no IOUs in the social security trust fund unless you consider a Treasury Bond to be an IOU. Legally all the SSTF must be invested into T-Bills.
A bond can be an asset but not if you hold your own bonds. That's why they are like ious.
retTreftowhexm is offline


Old 07-14-2011, 08:40 PM   #4
Maribellin

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
460
Senior Member
Default
Ben gets confused a lot it seems.
Maribellin is offline


Old 07-14-2011, 08:52 PM   #5
fotochicaes

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
423
Senior Member
Default
What the hell does that have to do with Al Gore? Oh, right, if two people are part of the same party then Ben thinks they will behave the same way in any circumstance...
fotochicaes is offline


Old 07-14-2011, 08:56 PM   #6
Intory

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
457
Senior Member
Default
1. Obama hasn't declared war on Libya (which, of course, some believe is the problem.)
Uh, no the problem is that he's waging a war without the authorization of congress. Last I checked King George used to do that too.

2. Show me a quote from Obama saying he wouldn't declare war on Libya. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/04/us/politics/04military.html

3. Given America's history, I can't think of anyone who would believe the Democratic party is the "party of peace." Which is why Ozzy is *still* carrying water for the Goracle? I don't get Ozzy. Democrats lie, especially about war. Since Wilson, it's practically standard.
Intory is offline


Old 07-14-2011, 09:05 PM   #7
scoundtrack

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
469
Senior Member
Default
So... having an opinion about someone is the same as "carrying water" for that person. Stating that you believe, despite evidence to the contrary of the past 12 years, that Gore would have done what Obama could not? I'm puzzled. Obama was a much stronger dove than Gore. Gore was a foreign policy hawk.
scoundtrack is offline


Old 07-14-2011, 10:29 PM   #8
Janny2006

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
471
Senior Member
Default
King George was a King and not an American, what's Obama's excuse?
Janny2006 is offline


Old 07-14-2011, 10:38 PM   #9
BashBeissedat

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
389
Senior Member
Default
@ ben
BashBeissedat is offline


Old 07-15-2011, 10:29 PM   #10
TolleyBoymn

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
459
Senior Member
Default
Two weeks.
TolleyBoymn is offline


Old 07-21-2011, 01:47 AM   #11
ahagotyou

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
571
Senior Member
Default
So, basically, there is no reason for the checks to stop, right?
I can think of one. If I'm not mistaken T-Bills are redeemed via a reverse auction so they'd have to change they system if they want to just cash in T-Bills in the SSI trust fund without everyone else holding a T-Bill to also cash out. Do you honestly think Congress will pass a special law just to allow that?
ahagotyou is offline


Old 07-21-2011, 02:43 AM   #12
Qynvtlur

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
407
Senior Member
Default
Much better then anything you post being true.
Qynvtlur is offline


Old 07-21-2011, 06:36 PM   #13
SQiTmhuY

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
500
Senior Member
Default
What are the odds of this being true?
They got it completely right; the only reason Republicans are balking at every deal proposed
While technically a true statement where Democratic deals proposed = 0, I think it still appropriate to invoke OIAW™.
SQiTmhuY is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:14 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity