<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bonds vs. stocks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sovereignspeculator.com/2010/02/05/bonds-vs-stocks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sovereignspeculator.com/2010/02/05/bonds-vs-stocks/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress.com site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 00:05:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://sovereignspeculator.com/2010/02/05/bonds-vs-stocks/#comment-1422</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mike]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 08:13:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sovereignspeculator.com/?p=3589#comment-1422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#039;s the right idea. Basically, bonds are cash for big boys. Stocks down = treasuries up. Why should this be any different now that at any point in the last 2 years?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s the right idea. Basically, bonds are cash for big boys. Stocks down = treasuries up. Why should this be any different now that at any point in the last 2 years?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GolfBoy</title>
		<link>http://sovereignspeculator.com/2010/02/05/bonds-vs-stocks/#comment-1421</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[GolfBoy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 05:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sovereignspeculator.com/?p=3589#comment-1421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mike,

I am trying to understand the case for being long TLT for (let&#039;s say) a year.  Is it (1) the Fed won&#039;t dare raise rates while the market is tanking; (2) flight to safety will drive demand for U.S. Treasury debt; and (3) the Dollar&#039;s generally unexpected strength?  Thanks--]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike,</p>
<p>I am trying to understand the case for being long TLT for (let&#8217;s say) a year.  Is it (1) the Fed won&#8217;t dare raise rates while the market is tanking; (2) flight to safety will drive demand for U.S. Treasury debt; and (3) the Dollar&#8217;s generally unexpected strength?  Thanks&#8211;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

