Analti_Calte

DDL24 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> me.tega Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Paraguay Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > It is still C. Guaranteeing principal and
> > > interest of a high quality sovereign still ok
> > even
> > > given the horrible climate. Maybe the book
> > gets
> > > edited in the coming years. Bunds and tbonds
> > are
> > > to be considered default free.
> >
> >
> > I guess you understand my thought pattern. I
> might
> > as well just post my thoughts right away. The
> US
> > will said to be in a "technical default" is the
> > debt hits $14 trillion. The US is a sovereign
> > entity just like Greece.
> >
> > If Libya had treasury securities (I think they
> do)
> > I doubt that they could honor it now. If some
> kind
> > of unexpected disaster happens in the US, there
> is
> > a chance of default. The CFAI says that it is
> > unethical to give any form of investment
> > guarantee; so just because the US has
> guaranteed
> > its treasuries does it mean we can re-interpret
> > the standards based on this?
>
>
> So the statement that TIPS is a default risk
> free/inflation risk free instrument is incorrect?
> I thought i read it in the CFAI book or maybe
> schweser....then what do we use as risk free rate?

Stock + Put - Call