T-bonds at 0% why not just keep the money?

A

Archin

Does this mean they expect all other equities to fall in value. Why lend money with no return, is their some advantage over holding it?
 
Quote from Random.Capital:

Holding large quantities of actual cash isn't without cost, either.
More...

This is good. Could you elaborate on the costs? Governments should penalize holding large quantities of cash with a tax as well. This works as a solution to curb government spending on debt repayments.
 
Quote from Archin:

Does this mean they expect all other equities to fall in value. Why lend money with no return, is their some advantage over holding it?
More...

T-Bonds are making a little more then 0%. They were up over 18% last year. That's not zero huckleberry. The interest might be zero, but the appreciation sure ain't.
 
Quote from Martinghoul:

Why not? And yes, bonds at 0% can actually be less costly than holding cash (for example, recently cash yields went a little negative due to the cost of FDIC insurance)...
More...

Are you generally supportive of ZIRP or do you think it is more harmful than helpful?
 
Quote from denner:
Are you generally supportive of ZIRP or do you think it is more harmful than helpful?
More...
It has all sort of costs associated with it, without a doubt. But yeah, I do believe it's appropriate for certain circumstances.
 
Quote from Maverick74:

T-Bonds are making a little more then 0%. They were up over 18% last year. That's not zero huckleberry. The interest might be zero, but the appreciation sure ain't.
More...

The yield is guaranteed, the appreciation isn't. Some stocks are up over 30%, perhaps they should have gone with those.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top