Mnuchin floats 50 and 100 year bond issuance

[devil21]

https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/art...-time-is-short

Steven Mnuchin, President-elect Donald Trump's nominee for Treasury secretary, said Wednesday that he would consider issuing 50- or 100-year U.S. government bonds as a way to lock in such low borrowing costs. Treasury traders immediately responded, with a sudden plunge in value for the longest-dated U.S. government debt. more at link

At first that sounds like an absurd idea, however it's not the first time that such long bonds have been issued here. Investing in those ultra-long maturity sorts of bonds would be something like a "legacy investment". Google "Federal Reserve Box".
https://www.international-due-dilige...-series-bonds/

[helmuth_hubener]

Well, this would be good news for my investment strategy. Right now the longest Treasury Bonds are 30-year bonds. Fifty year bonds would be much more powerful. A hundred years.... !!!!!! That might be too powerful! I'd have to think about it. But generally, I want the longest bonds possible for that component of my portfolio. The government stopped issuing the 30-years for a while back in the early 2000s, and that was a bummer.

Not necessarily a great idea for the country, though. Although... not necessarily a very bad one, either. Again, I'd have to think about it.

[LibertyClick]

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...-Street-Banker

https://mises.org/blog/steve-mnuchin...-street-banker

Is Steve Mnuchin Just Another Wall Street Banker?

[Zippyjuan]

As an investor, I would not be interested in such long term bonds with rates so low. If rates were double digit, lock them in. As a borrower issuing bonds, you want to lock in these low rates as long as you can.

[helmuth_hubener]

I would not be interested in such long term bonds with rates so low.

Yeah, well, you weren't interested in them 10 years ago, either, with the rates "so low" as they were then. Bet you're slapping your head now! Nor in 2000, nor in the 1990s.... Look, know-it-all "investors" like you, Juan, have been trumpeting their intelligence in staying out of bonds for, oh, over 35 years now.

Sad thing is, you're actually too proud to ever slap your head and realize you made a mistake. Never, never, never will you admit that. Sad... but also funny!

[Zippyjuan]

No, I wasn't interested in bonds the years ago either. Bonds are good if you hold them when rates are high and good if you are trading them while rates are falling. I get a better return on my dividend paying stocks than I would on bonds (I have some in the three to five percent yield right now plus increases in the value of the stock as well). Rates are at or near the bottom so the most likely direction is up meaning falling bond prices if you are trading them and very low rates locked in if you are holding them.

Are you a long-term holder of bonds or are you a trader (or in a trading account)? If you are a holder are you happy locking in two or three percent returns for the next ten years? If you are a trader, how much lower and for how long do you think interest rates can go down?

If it has worked for you, great. I am happy for you. Different people seek different things in their investment choices.

I also invested in paying off my mortgage and that is giving me an even higher return. My disposable income rose by about 25%. That is huge.