MFOHome About Commentary Discussions Funds The Best Resources Support Us!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Categories

In this Discussion

  • Anna February 2017
  • Derf February 2017
  • hank February 2017
  • msf February 2017
Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Art Cashin: " The Market Wants Details On Tax Reform"

Comments

  • msf
    "The Treasury Secretary said that 50 year and 100 year bonds weren't completely out of [the] question, and that indicates that they are at least thinking they may have to go the deficit route and use those bonds to defray things." (1:20)
  • hank
    edited February 2017
    A 100-year bond would appear to lend new meaning to the term kicking the can down the road.
    Anyone buying one would need to have a very long term investment horizon.
    :)
  • AnnaAnna
    edited February 2017
    A 100 year bond gives holding to maturity a new flavor not to mention long term bond fund and effective maturity and duration.

    On the "that ship has sailed" side, Imagine if the rates in the late 70s and 80s could be locked in forever.
  • Derf
    Those 70's-80's bond would be callable ?!
    Derf
Sign In or Register to comment.