Fidelity has sold all of its short term T-Bills

[Gothmog]

This major news, fidelity is the largest manager of mutual fund . Fidelity is worried about a default http://www.jsonline.com/business/fidelity-sells-short-term-t-bills-b99117195z1-227151731.html?ipad=y

[Junkdrawer]

1. Brinkmanship...

How close before it's too late to pull back....

[roamer65]

10. That is anyone's guess.

No one wants to be the last to sell.

[BumRushDaShow]

2. Rachael mentioned this on her show. nt

[Gothmog]

53. I heard about this on her show and then went and found the article

O'Donnell also covered this last night. Interest rates are going to rise due to the fears about the debt ceiling.

[flamingdem]

3. yikes

Fidelity is the heavy hitter, others will follow like sheep. Baaah!

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Rachael said they were the largest holder of mutual funds.

But she did say that they mainly sold what was to come due around the Oct. 17th date (not all of what they have).

[flamingdem]

15. Oh! Well that's better but..

now Lawrence O'Donnell on msnbc is predicting gloom and doom using the Fidelity action.

I'm worried that pure gossip mill fear will create a crash!

Also known as a buying opportunity to some.

[Gothmog]

21. The cost of borrowing is going up

This is scary

[A HERETIC I AM]

33. They don't hold them...

They create them.

Shares of mutual funds are held by individual investors. Fidelity is merely the manager. They buy and sell securities on behalf of the mutual funds they have created.

[Loudly]

4. Interest on the debt is safe. But return of principal is a legitimate concern.

Especially so for the 90 day paper.

[Brother Buzz]

12. Well, there you have it

[flamingdem]

17. Can you explain to the financially challenged

what role the principal has and why is that a concern? Why on 90 day paper?

[Loudly]

20. The dollar amount of your investment in Treasury notes (bills) is the principal.

To repay principal, new debt must be placed into the hands of investors.

If there is an impairment placing new debt, then repayment of principal is in jeopardy with reference to the maturing debt.

On a ten-year Treasury note, this is barely a blip of concern. Much can happen over the long term to fix the problem of our fiscal future. And repayment of the principal isn't necessary until arrival of some time in the less immediate future.

In the short term, impairing the incurrence of new debt poses a threat to the more rapid turnover of the more rapidly maturing old debt.

Hence Fidelity's disposal of their short term U.S. Treasury paper.

[jtuck004]

28. The friggin' principal is a mirage, there is little to no worth underlying it,

so repayment of nothin' is...nuthin anyway. A nation of hamburger fryers and milkshake servers, government employees, and wealthy people paying a few who will stick their nose up their ass and not cause trouble a little more. God forbid that should collapse.

What's I find funny are all the people who throw those with the least under the bus every day just so they can go to work in their fume-producing cars while they wreck their planet without realizing they are propping up the Mi$$ Robme crowd, and those who live on retirement on the backs of others, (because what money they are getting is money being raised by companies to buy back their stock and pay investor dividends, not invest in more processes or future expansion), and then they complain that they are losing "money", while all around them people are losing their very lives on a daily basis.

The people who have the most to lose are those with the most, those that are the most comfortable, who today maintain that status by keeping others uncomfortable, not because of what they produce. One should remember that. Those with the least already know how to live outside those boundaries.

Be not afraid, unless you have been living off of others.

[A HERETIC I AM]

37. Nonsense.

Utter nonsense.

[jtuck004]

42. Fine. Show me the underlying worth. In 1960, milions of people working, producing,

a few being taken care of, exploiting natural resources and a few people. People worked, put their money toward retirement, which should have been invested in creating more wealth-producing activities. Instead it was largely stolen by the wealthy, moved offshore or into their pockets, while the facilities that created the wealth were sold to the nations we used to profit from. The dollars people put toward retirement didn't "magically" inflate, they are still worth what they were when they put them in there, on the day they them in there, which is not much. The money they should have made from more production was pocketed, moved, stolen, and money was borrowed to keep the game going. Just like Social Security, used for other purposes than what was intended, in the best cases leaving a shoebox full of IOUs behind, and in the worst simply nothing. Since about R. Reagan this nation has done nothing but finance its way forward, and the financial crisis from the thieving banks that created great wealth by borrowing against air was merely the culmination of that. When it collapsed the government, instead of telling the people that it was time to be grown-ups and hold everyone accountable remembered what happened to J. Carter when he tried that, and began to finance the criminals so they would not fall, at the expense of everyone else.

And when interest rates rise despite all they have done, and they will, the entire illusion will collapse.

Every one of these years that has gone by we add about 2 million people to the population, yet production (feel free to look up home sales, car sales - look at what they were years ago - look at the population growth and how they have diverged. I tire of doing googling for lazy people) hasn't even made a pretence of keeping up.

Software is a huge business right now - I can download a very, very good program from a person in India today to run my business, or from a person in China. They get paid $22 a day with a degree. Americans can hardly eat for $20/day. Who will win that battle? Gonna cut off trade? Go ahead - you die faster.

They are hardly alone, but pick any of the largest companies and see what they are doing. Apple, for example, raising huge amounts of money, buying back stock, paying investors BIG dividends. They aren't expanding capacity, innovating. They are doing nothing but raising the price of their stock based on short-term return to investors - screw what its underlying worth is. Here, Here, - they aren't investing for the future, they are a cash cow for short-term investment profits, with over a 100 billion of their cash sitting offshore avoiding taxes. Microsoft isn't investing - they increased their dividends by 5 cents. And companies have been doing this for 40 years, Here.

On top of all that a large percentage of our workforce is dependant on huge volumes of hundreds of billions of dollars in financing being renewed every few years - Kosman talks about it in The Buyout of America. When the day comes that those dollars are too expensive, and it will, those jobs will be gone as well.

One can poo-poo it all they want, just like teabaggers and religious zealots scoff at climate change and anything else that doesn't suit their narrow world view, but I have yet to see any facts that substantiate another future.

[Loudly]

45. There isn't a single thing you are complaining about...

that can't be fixed by a tax increase on wealth and the highest incomes.

And by the government owning businesses either started from scratch or acquired like any revenue seeking organization fearlessly seeks acquisitions of businesses.

Do you realize that the profits of a government owned business can be taxed at 100 percent?

[jtuck004]

66. That's too shortsighted. It would be like supporting an insurgency by giving them bullets

with no guns.

What the people need is a way to train themselves to quit perpetuating the system that controls them, the very thing that la Boetie described in 1450 or so.

Tax them, go ahead. Give someone with no knowledge of how to make it a big pile of cash. It will only be a matter of time before those who have the knowledge get it back, as they have done repeatedly. If you remember, the inequality thing is only worse today, but there have been periods where it was very bad before, so we took some away and gave it to people in our condescending way, with a facade of fake compassion. It never seems to enter people's heads that it is disrespectful to think they can't learn and compete with these assholes, to give someone a coupon for a quart of milk without making provisions for them to learn how to produce it themselves, as if they are just as smart and capable as anyone else.

On the other hand, it's easier to control them if you make excuses for not educating and training them to be your equal, eh?

There is a an old book by an Industrial Union organizer named Matles called "Them and Us". In it he talks about how the "leadership" of the backstabbing Gompers in the AF of L cozied up to business and in league with the government killed off the Industrial Union movement with their Business Unions, like the ones we have today, making decisions "for" people instead of living in their shoes and making decisions "like" them. They cut the heart out of the industrial labor movement, whose goal was to put the workers in charge of making the decisions that they, themselves, can make just as competently as any bean counter.

And here we are again...

[JDPriestly]

70. True.

[Loudly]

38. Don't talk shit about principal.

People's life savings is denominated in principal.

All of your concerns about energy and the environment and stock buybacks and the internal combustion engine are just low level noise in the context of people being able to live out the rest of their lives from the lump they think they've accumulated during their working life.

[jtuck004]

44. Of course it is. And do you think the Mi$$ RobMe crowd gives a flying rat's ass about them?

But you know about money. Say in 1970 I put $1500 in an account for retirement. That money doesn't do anything, at all, unless it is invested, doesn't magically inflate, doesn't do anything. It has to be put into something that generates a return. But since 1980 the money has been going into the pockets of the wealthy, and into building up the manufacturing capacity of countries outside of this one, while we went into debt to finance the lifestyle to which we decided to become accustomed. We systematically dismantled our manufacturing output, our jobs, our educational systems, and let our infrastructure decay. The only reason our real unemployment rate, the U6, has "improved" from 14 to 13.7% is because people have been moved into the "no longer in the job market" category - yet a look at table A:16 says there are over 6 million in that group who want a job, but have no place to even look Here.

You are correct in one sense. People, if they have not already, will be taking their lumps before too long.

[Loudly]

47. Give me that $1,500 in hindsight.

Apple and Microsoft and Amazon and Google and Netflix.

You could have been participating in all that. It was publicly traded.

Into the pockets of the wealthy should have been you, and still can, theoretically.

[jtuck004]

64. Why would one want to willingly participate and profit from the destruction of their

neighbors and country? Might as well point out that since the Internet is out there, we should profit from child pornography.

What those companie$ are doing is helping few but themselves, and only a few at the very top a whole lot more than anyone else. What they are creating is of minimal value in most cases, and does a whole lot to hurt people.

I prefer to find ways that more of my neighbors can do better, instead of helping just a few profit from everyone else. That's what cooperatives and understanding business is about.

Not that I am not stuck in the same game as everyone else is, the one we keep perpetuating. But since we are the ones making it possible, we are the ones who could change it if we ever got the backbone to say goodbye to the plantation owners.

[JDPriestly]

69. We are a society. We all live off the same economy, the same practice of exchanging value for work

and for value. We all live off others. Unless we live in the wilderness somewhere, collect berries that just grow without cultivation and eat animals that cross our paths.

Everybody lives off others. There are no exceptions. Ayn Rand was simply wrong in her view of the world. The biggest mogul, the titan of industry, needs other people to sell his products to and to buy products from.

Since everybody lives off others in one way or another, then everyone should be afraid. Is that your point?

The problem with the right-wing philosophy is that they see men as islands. They think that a human can live without the other. Cant' be done unless you go off in woods. And if you do that, don't fall. Don't get sick. Don't lose your way. Hope the weather stays good. You may not survive for long.

[jtuck004]

73. No - we live with others. Only some of us live off of others.

Such as those who won't help themselves and could, and those who profit unfairly. Just working and producing and buying is not living off of others, but profiting while providing nothing, and profiting excessively while impoverishing those who do the work, and helping them with that process IS living off of other people, and it is despicable. Else all this crap about inequality is just crap.

I don't know about afraid, but allowing one's life to be controlled by and the output taken without being adequately compensated by larger powers for nothing more than a fleeting security against the vagaries of freedom is nothing more than slavery. Just because a whole nation has mostly accepted it as a given doesn't make it any more acceptable. It is a choice, but the fear comes from bringing ones self to acknowledge that. That scares the shit out of everyone.

[flamingdem]

34. Why thank you Loudly

Bonds are suddenly very interesting to me. I'm glad that this move by Fidelity does not presage doom but they are certainly being prudent.

[A HERETIC I AM]

35. That is an incorrect statement. For any treasury security shorter than 2 years...

There is no difference between the interest and the return of principal.

Obligations shorter than 2 years do NOT pay "Interest".

They have a YIELD, which in this case is the difference between what you paid for it and what it will mature at.

Unlike the 2 year and longer, they do not pay bi-annual interest or "Coupon" payments.

They are what are known as "Zero Coupon Bonds". They are bought at a discount to Par and mature at Par. In order to get the interest, they have to give you your money back.

[Loudly]

40. You are describing only one variety of Treasury instrument.

Most Treasury investors are receiving interest (though not a lot) on a steady principal.

Why would you introduce uncertainty just to upset people or cause them doubt or concern?

Zeroes have their place, but they have little to do with most people's holdings.

Including most bank holdings, which is what most people's bank accounts are holding, indirectly.

[A HERETIC I AM]

46. You clearly are not very well versed on this subject.

So let me put your two posts together;

You said, in response to the OP;

Interest on the debt is safe. But return of principal is a legitimate concern. Especially so for the 90 day paper.

That is simply not true. The OP is referring to an article that states Fidelity "no longer holds any U.S. government debt that comes due around the time the nation could hit its borrowing limit." Your statement that the "interest on the debt is safe" is nonsense because the paper they have sold DOES NOT MAKE INTEREST PAYMENTS. It is Zero Coupon paper that is bought at a discount to par and matures at par. The difference is the yield. When they are redeemed by the Treasury they pay the par value. If the yield was 2% for example, the US Treasury is not going to just pay 2%, they are going to redeem the whole thing. The primary risk in this entire scenario is that after the 17th, unless Congress raises the debt limit, the US Treasury will not have the money to either redeem a series that is maturing or make a coupon payment that is due. Either or both of those are by definition, a default.

Here is a screen grab from Treasaurydirect.com that shows all the securities maturing between now (10/11/13) and November 10


There are 4 issues maturing on the 17th of this month totaling roughly $120 billion. THAT is what the Treasury is really worried about. And they are ALL Zero Coupon issues. They must be redeemed at par or the Treasury will have defaulted.

You are describing only one variety of Treasury instrument.

I am describing the exact type of Treasury instruments that Fidelity is selling. Short term, Zero Coupon paper.

Most Treasury investors are receiving interest (though not a lot) on a steady principal.

While it is true that the vast majority of the nations debt is in longer term paper and that paper pays biannual interest payments (the Coupon) the last portion of that sentence makes NO SENSE with regard to the holding of a bond of ANY type. "On a steady principal"?!? Are you aware that the price of a bond fluctuates? Are you aware that they can both rise AND fall in value? Are you aware that regardless of what you pay for it, bonds mature at "Par" and the coupon percentage paid is figured off that par value? Do you know what Par is? Do you know how much in dollars the standard is?

The value of a given lot of ANY type of bond will by NO MEANS stay "Steady" during the time you hold it. The value of a bond fluctuates all the time, with virtually every trade. If someone else sells a block of the same bonds you hold for LESS than you paid for them, the value of your holdings will FALL. What stays steady on bonds that pay a coupon is that very thing - the coupon rate. Coupon rate does not change, with very few exceptions (T.I.P.S. are an example)

Why would you introduce uncertainty just to upset people or cause them doubt or concern?

I am doing no such thing. I am providing accurate information. If that question was rhetorical, I can assure you Fidelity did not do this with the intent of introducing uncertainty. They did it because the Prospectus for the affected Money Market Mutual Funds REQUIRES IT.

Zeroes have their place, but they have little to do with most people's holdings.

Really? How many Americans hold Money Market funds? As a general rule, most average investors do not buy individual lots of shorter term Treasuries, that is true, but if they own a money market fund, they are in there, I guarantee it.

Including most bank holdings, which is what most people's bank accounts are holding, indirectly.

I would be very interested in seeing where you got that notion. Do you think your bank is buying ten year paper with your savings account? Is that what you are insinuating? Because nothing could be further from the truth.

If you go to this page from Treasury Direct and click on the "go" button next to "All Treasury Securities" "By Auction Date". When that opens, set the "From" month to September and click "Search". That will show you all the varying maturities of Treasury Notes, Bills and Bonds sold at auction for the last month, everything from 5 day to 30 year. Under the column that says "Interest Rate" you will see that the notation "n/a" is present and it is ONLY present on paper with maturities shorter than 2 years. That means all those with the n/a appearing are ZERO COUPON BONDS. Even though they call them Bills and Notes, they are technically still Bonds.

Please don't profess to school me when it is clear by reading what you wrote that you barely have a parochial understanding of the subject.

[Loudly]

48. Again, I think you are slicing and dicing a portion of the debt.

Treasury bills are what funds the most critical operations. They don't pay a lot of interest, but their maturity is so regular and ongoing that they don't experience much market fluctuation at all AS LONG AS PRINCIPAL CAN REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO BE RETURNED.

The crisis we face is in short term refunding.

[A HERETIC I AM]

49. Again, don't profess to school me on this subject.

I am way ahead of you.

I understand what the problems are and where they are.

I was attempting to demonstrate to you that your choice of words was misleading if not downright inaccurate.

[Loudly]

50. You are trying to make the case that zero coupons dominate the landscape.

Those are a minor component of how the nation's debt is held by investors.

[A HERETIC I AM]

52. Oh, for fucks sake.

Where the hell do you get that from?

I said;

"While it is true that the vast majority of the nations debt is in longer term paper and that paper pays biannual interest payments"

Will you PLEASE go back and read your post that I responded to and then read mine again? Huh? Willya?

And while you're at it, try answering the questions I asked you.


Sheesh. Next you'll be telling me that China buys its bonds directly from the Treasury.


See page 15

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

5. My retirement accounts are with Fidelity

I've lost $15,000 since this shit started.

[A HERETIC I AM]

13. Have you sold? n/t

[freshwest]

22. So is mine, but will be defined benefit. Did you have it in a 401K?

Just curious. Main thing my company worried about was lower revenue, but they say they have gotten that fixed by an agreement with the labor department. It's in the small print and I don't understand a thing. All it says is they have to give us notices and that the benefit is not affected. I haven't heard about this from them yet. Maybe it's because it's a DBP.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

24. I have both a 401K and a managed IRA

The 401K has its limited choices as you probably know. Trades in the IRA account are done by the investment team managing it. The only input I have is the ability to transfer funds between accounts.

[freshwest]

26. Okay, I've never had either of those. Just the defined benefit. It kicks in if everyhing doesn't go

to hell thanks to the GOP. Sorry they ripped you off. Chances of a profit may have made it seem like a great thing. at one time. I prefer the guaranteed, even if it is lower, defined plan.

[dkf]

29. You made a bundle this year if you lost $15,000 since this started.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

30. Yes

Obama was doing a great job with the economy before the Banana Republicans blew it up. Hopefully this is just bump and these guys pull their collective heads out of their asses.

[dkf]

31. Well it wasn't about to go up up up forever.

At least this was somewhat predictable, at least so far.

[Loudly]

41. October coincides with a natural downturn built into the market cycle.

With the fiscal crisis being the perfect excuse for a decline.

However, we have a new Fed Chairman candidate. Someone who will continue to generate new currency out of absolutely nothing.

Creation of new money will ultimately translate into a prolongation of this bull market for corporate equities.

Down markets appear to be a buy opportunity.

Nevetheless, I am building inverse positions like crazy. There is a pin headed for this balloon.

I wake up every day saying Fuck the Dow and Fuck the S & P.

This is borne from an inherent contempt for artificiality.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. I love nightmare scenarios in the morning

won't bother with the analysis here though.

[roamer65]

8. I'd bet the Federal Reserve bought most of them.

I fully expect QE on steroids if more selling occurs.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. I expect that too,

[flamingdem]

19. Up or down in direction?

Sounds like you're saying down, but what if it's resolved after a month?

[BluegrassStateBlues]

9. Aaaand we're a little bit closer to fucked.

[TomClash]

14. They're all doing it nt

[riderinthestorm]

16. Wrench your eyes off the Orange One + the rest of the clowns and watch these stories

THIS is where the true indicators lie.

[roamer65]

18. I hear the sound of Ben Bernanke's helicopter, I do believe.

[kiranon]

23. Someone will benefit financially from this crisis; hope

it isn't a member of Congress or one of their backers who has advance information (insider trading) about what will happen and when and takes advantage of that information in the market. Some win and some lose and usually ordinary citizens, retired persons, small investors lose.

[Katashi_itto]

32. Koch Bros are Shorting Stocks. They tank the country to make a killing

[blkmusclmachine]

36. But the Kocks said they're not doing this...

[Katashi_itto]

39. ....

[stuffmatters]

71. With his Black swan fund Eric Cantor bet against the US in the last debt ceiling fight

The longer the debt ceiling stayed unlifted, the closer the economy came to the edge, the more money Cantor made in his Black swan fund. And he was one of the major legislators, as Rep Whip, pushing and prolonging the brinksmanship. Then profiting.

And I'm sure he's benefiting richly in the current shutdown and threat of debt default this time.

[antigop]

25. OP title is misleading...that's not what the article says

The article does not say that Fidelity sold ALL of its short-term t-bills....just the ones that will come due in late Oct or early Nov.

"She said Fidelity has been restructuring its portfolio to focus on securities that mature later this year or in early 2014."

[Gothmog]

54. The title of this thread is the same as the article quoted.

The issue that I was trying to make is that the markets are reacting to the GOP statements about letting the government default on its debts. The article's title is accurate and shows that the markets are reacting to the increased risks due to the stupidity of the tea party and the GOP

Prior said that Fidelity no longer holds any U.S. debt that comes due in late October or early November, the window considered by many investors to be the most exposed if the government runs out of money and defaults on its obligations.

"We expect Congress will take the steps necessary to avoid default, but in our position as money market managers we have to take precautionary measures," Prior said.,,,,

Fidelity's actions underscore what traders have noticed the last week. Investors have dumped U.S. government debt that comes due this month, with the heaviest selling occurring in one-month Treasury bills. The yield on the one-month T-bill jumped to 0.3% Tuesday, its highest level since the 2008 financial crisis. The yield was nearly zero at the beginning of the month.

Money market mutual fund managers don't want to be caught holding U.S. government debt that comes due around the time the government hits the debt ceiling. They fear that the government could be unable to pay back bond holders, said Gabriel Mann at the Royal Bank of Scotland Group.

"Investors are buying protection," Mann said.

Read more from Journal Sentinel: http://www.jsonline.com/business/fidelity-sells-short-term-t-bills-b99117195z1-227151731.html?ipad=y#ixzz2hKNExhEp

[antigop]

56. no, the title of the referenced article is: Fidelity sells short-term T-bills

It doesn't say that Fidelity sold ALL of its short-term T-bills.

Your OP title says: Fidelity has sold all of its short term T-Bills

That's NOT the title of the article you referenced.

From investopedia: http://www.investopedia.com/university/moneymarket/moneymarket2.asp

"T-bills are short-term securities that mature in one year or less from their issue date."

The article does NOT say Fidelity has sold ALL of its short-term T-bills -- it just says Fidelity sold those that will come due in late October or early November.

[Warpy]

27. Everybody needs to be aware of the Republicans talking openly

about defaulting on the t-bills owned by Boomers and meant to pay for their Social Security. They've been talking like this ever since Stupid was in office. They do NOT want to pay us back for what they stole to disguise what those big tax breaks to billionaires actually cost.

If they default on us, there will be a worldwide panic sale of US debt and with good reason. They cannot be trusted. Ever.

I'm sure the other brokerages have bought them up, think they'll get paid first and everybody else can just bend over again.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

43. They sold then because yields went up

The fact that they sold them is good news

[DonCoquixote]

51. and the first canary in the coal mine

bites the dust.

[Javaman]

55. I maintain, if the halfwit repukes don't give in, there will be a massive sell off late tomorrow.

As Rachel Maddow Explained on Tuesday, Monday is a holiday, and the remainder of the week, reps are supposed to be back in their own districts which means Friday (tomorrow) is the day a vote must be cast.

Of course there could always be an "emergency" session called, but given the stupidity of boner and the tea bagging morons, I have a feeling that's not going to happen.

The real "brinkmanship" that taking place is between the repukes and the tea baggers. Who will flinch first.

the next 48 hours will tell us a lot.

[lastlib]

57. no sweat, folks--PIMCO's buying 'em.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2013/10/10/pimcos-bill-gross-to-fidelity-well-buy-those-bonds/

Don't read too much into Fidelity's move--there are technical accounting reasons, peculiar to Fidelity's money-market funds, for doing it. Yes, it's based on a perceived high likelihood of gov't default, but there are other factors in play for them.

[seabeyond]

59. Exactly. I was coming in to post this. The company is highly respected and they do not seem too

Concerned

[magical thyme]

58. interesting. Pre-edit title of OP was correct. Why did you edit it to inaccurate?

Trying to create a shitstorm of panic among DUers?

Fidelity is only selling its SHORT TERM bonds THAT ARE COMING DUE DURING THE DEFAULT PERIOD, not all its bonds, in order to protect its Money Market fund from slipping below $1.00/share, which could happen with a default that lasted a couple hours.

Pimco is buying...

[antigop]

60. I called attention to the misleading title in post #25

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023818444#post25

[magical thyme]

62. my point is that the OP initially used an accurate title

Then specifically changed the title. He/she specifically chose to make inflammatory and misleading.

A subtle, but distinct, difference from your post. Yours reports an error. Mine questions motive.

[malthaussen]

61. Yes, Virginia, Wall Street is shorting America.

Why not? It's all about the money.

-- Mal

[pangaia]

63. I am 69 and have all my IRA in Fidelity Treasuries Only MM

So-- am I about to get my pooch screwed?

For what it is worth, I have been taking every bit of savings in banks out IN CASH. at least until.. disaster or everything blows over..

[A HERETIC I AM]

65. No.

This move by Fidelity is in compliance with the Prospectus of the individual funds. It has to do with the "Liquidity" provisions of the Prospectus relating to their Money Market Funds.

It is a move designed to ensure that these funds do not fall below $1.00/share.

You're fine.

[pangaia]

67. Whew. Thanks

My sister is a retired financial advisor and saw 'this day' coming years ago.
She and her husband have everything in gold and T-bill ladders. She's a millionaire.
I decidedly AM NOT. :&gt

She suggested that 100% Treasury fund rather than cash reserves or other MM funds as being, if anything was, the safest.
I'll move my 401(K) SEP there today.

Everybody hang in there.

[JDPriestly]

68. Think of it. Only the Republican members of Congress know how and when this artificial crisis

will end.

I wonder how many of them are planning to make some money off the mess they created. I'd like to know that someone will investigate their stock market accounts and their purchase, sales, shorts, etc. on Treasury Notes during this time.

[stuffmatters]

72. Cantor got away with it last time

It's both insider trading and insider manipulation/influencing legislation for self-enrichment. I remember Ginni and Clarence Thomas did something similar when she set up/registered her Liberty Money Machine well before Citizen's United decision became public. Their household was obscenely enriched by SCOTUS Citizen's United decision, and her Liberty money vacuum started raking in the wingnut dough well ahead of all the others. It was judicial insider trading but also, as Cantor, Thomas used his position of public trust to time/influence/control the govt outcome for his own self-enrichment.

[Ilsa]

74. I've been saying this for days.

The a-holes in Congress are manipulating the market and making $£€¥ on the economic uncertainty.