[Info-vax] HP stopping VMS paper documentation ?

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2011-12-01 08.01, AEF wrote:
> On Nov 30, 9:09 pm, Johnny Billquist<b... at softjar.se>  wrote:
>> On 2011-12-01 01.12, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>
>>> On 2011-11-30 20.24, AEF wrote:
>>>> On Nov 30, 11:35 am, Johnny Billquist<b... at softjar.se>  wrote:
>>>>> On 2011-11-30 06.30, AEF wrote:
>>
>>>>>> On Nov 29, 6:52 pm, Fritz Wuehler
>>>>>> <fr... at spamexpire-201111.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> The U.S. is not bankrupt. It is still paying its bills, and can
>>>>>>>>>> borrow
>>>>>>>>>> at near zero percent interest rates. That is not bankrupt.
>>
>>>>>>> It's bankrupt, morally and financially. But they make the laws and
>>>>>>> twist
>>>>>>> them and enforce them (or not, depending on if it is or isn't to their
>>>>>>> benefit) and they print the money, they don't have to admit it when
>>>>>>> they're
>>>>>>> bankrupt.
>>
>>>>>> Can a bankrupt entity borrow money at near-zero percent interest?
>>
>>>>> Google for "US BONDS INTEREST RATES".
>>>>> It's nowhere near zero percent. Where did you get that idea?
>>>>> Why would anyone want to loan out money without getting any interest?
>>>>> That sounds like a loosing proposition.
>>
>>>>> Johnny
>>
>>>> http://www.bankrate.com/rates/interest-rates/prime-rate.aspx
>>
>>>> The Fed funds rate is 0.25%. That's about as low as it can go. I'd
>>>> call that near-zero. If you don't like that, how about "as low as it's
>>>> ever been". This is not a sign of bankruptcy!
>>
>>>> If you consider this to be bankruptcy, then every entity on the planet
>>>> is bankrupt.
>>
>>> You do understand that this is not the rate the US government pays when
>>> it loans, right?
>>
>>> Once again. google for "US BONDS", which is what the US government uses
>>> to loan money, and see what rates the US pays. What you, as a domestic
>>> person pay in interest when taking a loan inside the country have almost
>>> no bearing on the rates the government itself have to pay when loaning
>>> money.
>>
>>> The same is probably true in Greece. People with house loans inside
>>> Greece is probably not paying the same rates as Greece itself have to
>>> right now. At the moment, Greek bonds for 10 years sits at around 6%.
>>
>>> US EE bonds (as an example) goes over 20 years, at which time the US
>>> guarantees that you'll get double your money back. (You figure out what
>>> the interest per year is for that, but it's definitely not zero, or near
>>> zero.)
>>> US I series bonds currently sit at 3.06%.
>
> Short term rates are pretty low:
>
> http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/Pages/TextView.aspx?data=yield
>
> A one-year Treasury note gets 0.12% interest. Is this not low?


Ehhh. That is the treasure yield *curve* rate. Not the *rate*.
It tells you how much it expects to *change* (or have *changed*) over 
time...

That is not the same as the actual interest paid.

*sigh*

	Johnny
> [...]
>> By the way. I should point out that I'm not claiming the US is bankrupt.
>
> Looks like I misread who said that. It appears to be Fritz Wuehler.

Yup.

>> I'm just refuting silly claims like the US being able to borrow money at
>> no interest, or that there aren't any problems in the US. They are in
>
> I didn't say no interest. See above.

But you still aren't reading the numbers right.

>> deep shit, but less so than some European countries... But also more so
>
> Define "deep shit". (~_^) I mean, can you be a little more specific?

The US is currently spending way more money than it is making. This 
cannot go on for ever. They need to change this, or else they would 
eventually go bankrupt. The US debt is gigantic. And it will take quite 
a while, and lots of work, to start paying it off. And doing so is never 
fun.

The Greek have done the same, for a longer time. And the population 
really don't seem to understand that they have been partying on loaned 
money, and that they need to pay it back.

> Yes, there is a long-term deficit problem, but there is a short-term
> unemployment problem that needs to be addressed first.

True about both problems. But you cannot just ignore one while looking 
at the other.

	Johnny