I don't get it

Post #300,963 by mhuber 12/11/08 9:51:05 AM Reply	I don't get it How is this better than literal cash in a safe? The standard reason not to literally store significant cash in physical currency form is that inflation will eat it. But inflation will eat a 0% T-bill just as fast, and safe deposit boxes are probably cheaper than the fees. Or is it just that cash in a safe just seems incredibly unsophisticated? Or is it this question just part of my tendency to look at the low-tech solution? I once wrote a manual for a pointed stick, and one of the things I love about my new profession is that the highest technology I use is a warm rock.
Post #300,964 by Another Scott 12/11/08 9:56:55 AM Reply	Currency speculation must play a big part. As mentioned near the end of the article, if one is foreign and thinks that the dollar will increase in value then buying even at 0% interest can make sense. It's not sustainable, though. Cheers, Scott.
Post #300,966 by beepster 12/11/08 10:48:16 AM Reply	Cost of the safe would take a very large safe to store 100 billion in cash. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #300,968 by jay 12/11/08 1:32:03 PM Reply	Has to go somplace Fund managers and such often face rules that limit how much cash they can keep on hand. They have to do something with the money. They face an even bigger psychological reason to do something. People with money in the fund are paying for the privilege, so the fund managers have a good reason to be seen doing something. That way, when you get the fund reports you see they invested the cash but didn't make or loose any money, rather then just sat on it. Jay

Welcome to IWETHEY!