Search results

Add one more reason why the fed stays low for longer. Unit labor costs are plunging http://barrons.econoday.com/byshoweventfull.asp?fid=438108&cust=barrons&year=2009#top Fed futures are putting a bullish 123 after their dip, so it looks like time to pull the trigger and add agressively. Yet...

Lets say he used some of the ponzi money to help charities, the poor and needy. Is there some kind of evidence that robin hoodism helps with less tough sentences?

Even more when you add that there is a reason those studies show why there is this free lunch in easing cycles. I dont believe in efficient market hypothesis but I do believe in a weak EMH(Actually a double weak EMH), so its good for me to find out why there are dollar bills laying around, this...

From the WSJ "Since the 1970s, the Fed has waited 14 months, on average, after unemployment topped out to tighten the screws on the economy." Even if the UR peaked last month(which is a downright laughable theory) this still means its unlikely to see a rate hike in the next year. According to...

Fed doesnt hike 0.9(90%) * 30bps = gain of 27bps Fed hikes in your scenario 0.1(10%) * 70(your 100 - the 30 priced in already) = -7bps Even under your scenario those contracts have positive expectancy. I find it, however, highly dubious that idea that there is 10% chance of a 100bps hike...

I would be in your camp if the contract had something like 5bps in spread(providing large odds to a hiking event). at 30 it just looks to me the contract is doing what all these studies show, providing a premia for long positions For the contract to lose money the fed needs to hike twice...

Rosenberg lastest updated is very good. He reaches a similar conclusion that I shared in the journal -The stock market is pricing in 4.25% GDP growth next year, that is pretty darn unlikely to happen We look to be in the middle to a mini stock bubble, I'm not concerned about this becoming a...

Fed Futures initially tumbled and now are stabilizing, its has not been a good morning as an effort to hedge by going long ES predictably result in a quick loss. It was never my intention with a journal to give the idea that my speculations couldn't go wrong instead it was to post the blood...

The 'labor force' dropped by 422K to 154,504. This is likely to be the denominator in both UR and U6, so perhaps this is why. Even though there were job losses, people considered to be in the labor forced went down by even more

I'm yet to figure out how the household data+estabilishment data can both show employment losses yet the UR falls with the U6 rate falling at the same time, wtf? This is puzzling maybe rosenberg knows what the hell is going on

You are correct that in contracts like Feb you make a little but might lose a lot. But that situation resembles being an insurance company charging a high premium for an unlikely event. Buffett made a lot of money overcharging for insurance. I'd say the currently 30bps priced in Feb is a...

Thats the point of that study, there is a risk premium in holding those contracts. Much like holding equities produces long-run profits on avg. And Mcculey was assuming greenspan would not be chairmain after 2004. His bet would have been right if the chairman had changed in 2004

Not even the brazilian/australian central bank is talking or signaling hikes. When the countries with higher relative economic strenght start doing it then I will be worried about that. The BOE is now increasing their purchase program, I dont think that will happen in the US(at least not right...

I cut back in some shorts this should make room for fluctuations in fed futures contracts There are tons of reasons to expect no policy change from the fed for 1 year, heck probably for 2 -The last two easing cycles(with similar inflation levels) the fed only started to raise about 1 year...

There is a paper now explaining why fed futures tend to price in ridiculous fed policy probabilities http://dss.ucsd.edu/~jhamilto/ff_ms.pdf Apparently it has to do with the tendency of markets of pricing in higher long-term rates then it would be normally expected. This explains the...

Who you think is more LIKELY to have higher counterparty risk, a bank with $1m notional derivative exposure or a bank with $1T exposure?(Remember I said LIKELY, dont try to spin the facts by saying you cant use notional to measure counterparty risk) Now go ahead and yell that nobody knows shit...

The 30's had 1/3 GDP collapse mainly because of bank panics, collapsing money supply, 10% yearly deflation. Those things are not present right now, the economy will be out of recession within 6 months in all likelyhood

Define depression

Reminds me of Roubini and Rosenberg downgrading their S&P 'target' to below 600 whithin days of the march 9 bottom

Rogers is a fool, this rally has nothing to do with inflation. The broad money supply is actually struggling to growth. Long-run expectations are totally in the soft landing price stability zone http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=USGGBE10%3AIND