|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 11, 2014 11:36:35 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 11, 2014 12:13:31 GMT -8
Low interest rates are the bane of savers and a boon for borrowers. It really makes no difference to the poor, they do not save and they do not qualify for good loan rates. Many truly rich people do invest in bonds. My richest client is interested in security of principal, not growth. He is mainly in muni bonds.
The author of the piece is mainly interested in bashing Krugman. If his piece makes any sense is beside the point.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 11, 2014 13:52:50 GMT -8
Low interest rates are the bane of savers and a boon for borrowers. It really makes no difference to the poor, they do not save and they do not qualify for good loan rates. Many truly rich people do invest in bonds. My richest client is interested in security of principal, not growth. He is mainly in muni bonds. The author of the piece is mainly interested in bashing Krugman. If his piece makes any sense is beside the point. Besides pointing out just how wrong Krugman is again, I would offer that bashing the little smug idiot is a noble undertaking. What is wrong with that? |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 11, 2014 15:40:22 GMT -8
Low interest rates are the bane of savers and a boon for borrowers. It really makes no difference to the poor, they do not save and they do not qualify for good loan rates. Many truly rich people do invest in bonds. My richest client is interested in security of principal, not growth. He is mainly in muni bonds. The author of the piece is mainly interested in bashing Krugman. If his piece makes any sense is beside the point. Besides pointing out just how wrong Krugman is again, I would offer that bashing the little smug idiot is a noble undertaking. What is wrong with that? Where is his evidence? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 11, 2014 16:11:59 GMT -8
Besides pointing out just how wrong Krugman is again, I would offer that bashing the little smug idiot is a noble undertaking. What is wrong with that? Where is his evidence? His first paragraph points to Krugman's NYT article as proof. It stands alone and needs no further strengthening. |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Jul 11, 2014 16:53:15 GMT -8
His first paragraph points to Krugman's NYT article as proof. It stands alone and needs no further strengthening. LOL |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 11, 2014 16:57:46 GMT -8
His first paragraph points to Krugman's NYT article as proof. It stands alone and needs no further strengthening. LOL I guess I just exposed how well you can read. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jul 25, 2014 14:09:39 GMT -8
He thinks the rich get bad returns because of low interest rates. He thinks this because that is the return he is getting. Further proof that he is really stupid.
|
|
