From: “Richard Fiero” <rfiero@pophost.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: d25502b375d4170ec99d12ed16b0745e6d5ea283de5fdee63c2a897869a88c23
Message ID: <199610010607.AAA14373@smtp.pophost.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-10-01 08:19:49 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 16:19:49 +0800
From: "Richard Fiero" <rfiero@pophost.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 16:19:49 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency
Message-ID: <199610010607.AAA14373@smtp.pophost.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
E. Allen Smith wrote:
> One of the attractions of privately-produced currencies is as a
> hedge against inflation; this development may be a competitor to this
> idea. On the other hand, this setup does have an unavailability in _time_
> of the money (more so than other, equal-security bonds of the same duration),
> which may offset its greater spendability.
> -Allen
I don't get it. Why is this bond not saleable like any other? What
"privately-produced currencies" are a hedge against inflation? If
this bond is saleable like any other, why is the money unavailable?
What means "greater spendability?" Is this assumed to be yet another
government plot because it competes with other offerings and reduces
the cost of borrowing?
Respectfully.
-- Richard Fiero --
Return to October 1996
Return to ““Richard Fiero” <rfiero@pophost.com>”
1996-10-01 (Tue, 1 Oct 1996 16:19:49 +0800) - Re: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency - “Richard Fiero” <rfiero@pophost.com>