King Obama: The Fall

Quote from Ricter:

Wow, type type type, lol. You are affected.
More...

attachment.php
 

Attachments

Quote from Tsing Tao:

So, I clicked your link. Of the ten links on the first page:

1, 2, 5 and 6 were all quotes by Uber Dove Janet Yellen.

#1 gave absolutely no specific manner in which any unwind would take place, just that "Yellen said an eventual end to the central bank's bond-buying stimulus will not mean interest rate increases are imminent, stressing the weak nature of the recent economic recovery." Ok, Yellen said so. Horseshit.

#2 was a forex blog that stated Yellen said the Fed must "unwind asset purchases “in a timely way” when the time comes in order to avoid inflationary pressures. " Great. How, again?

#3 was from by Matthew Yglesias, who has been discredited here many times as Krugman-lite, but lets look at what he has to say, again. He says that John Taylor is wrong. Let's see, who is more credible? Taylor or Yglesias? That's like putting Hayek up against Big Bird. But Yglesias only says in the article that the Fed doesn't have to unwind (which is hilarious) or it could simply raise interest rates on reserves if the banks begin to pull their money from it. So what do you think will happen first? The money going into the economy or the Fed's monthly meeting raising rates on reserves? The Fed has shown itself, time and time again to be behind the curve. Joke of an article, did you even read it?

#4 CNBC article titled "Unwinding US Balance Sheet May Disrupt Markets: Fed's George". Supports my case, not yours.

#5 was a duplicate of #2. Still irrelevant.

#6 was a duplicate of #2 and 5, just another website picking up the same story.

#7 Story from Bill Gross entitled "More from Gross: Fed stuck with bad bonds forever - Investment News". Supports my case, not yours.

#8 is former Fed Chair Volcker saying "“The much-more frequent mistake, in my opinion, is that we go too slow,” he said. “It’s never popular to take the so-called punch bowl away.”" More of that "Behind the curve" part of addressing the problem. Still, no outlined exit policy whatsoever.

#9 is the man himself, Bernanke saying "Bernanke confident Fed will unwind economic stimulus." But no exit plan outlined whatsoever.

and finally, #10 is a Barron's article entitled "Defensive Inflation Plays - Penta - Barrons.com" where it talks about inflation being the danger because "Time will tell whether the Fed timed things right; the track record of central banks, historically, does not breed confidence" and " U.S. investors can prepare themselves in case the Fed loses its grip and prices suddenly skyrocket, by studying the lessons learned by other investors who have lived with and invested in high inflation countries like Argentina, Russia, and Mexico."

So without scrubbing the entire internet, I did what you suggested and found even more reason to believe you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to financial markets. Not only was no exit plan outlined in anything in that first page of google links, but you clearly are unable to articulate how this exit could occur, because you simply don't have a clue how it would be done.
More...
I presented the weakest possible way of finding exiting-QE materials possible, and there were still a couple of hits. You went ad hominem on one, he's been "discredited here", lmao! (There's that megalomania again. Some cranks on ET's P&R have "discredited" someone? Lol.) You don't even try.

So I made a bit longer tail search string and found this:

http://www.chiltoncapital.com/curre...nfinity and Beyond.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,0,563

That one's new, it's not the piece I found earlier. This is nearly without trying. But clearly more than you. And get your lips of lukie's cock, lol.
 
Quote from budcampbell:

you sound like you are scared of rednecks.......boy.
More...


Nah, I just realize that their options are limited to late night Klan meetings and internet forums.:)
 
Quote from pspr:

You know this is the case. Black quotas are required and skewing tests is the logical solution. It happens everywhere. That's what AA is all about and you know it.

The Department of Justice is forcing the Dayton, Ohio Police Department to lower its testing standards because not enough African-American police recruits are passing the exam.
More...

Uh, no, that just what AOWM think it is to make excuses for their own failings.:)
 
Quote from Ricter:

I presented the weakest possible way of finding exiting-QE materials possible, and there were still a couple of hits. You went ad hominem on one, he's been "discredited here", lmao! (There's that megalomania again. Some cranks on ET's P&R have "discredited" someone? Lol.) You don't even try.
More...


It is funny when they say that. :D

Tsing does not normally do this, so I am a bit surprised.
 
Quote from Ricter:

I presented the weakest possible way of finding exiting-QE materials possible, and there were still a couple of hits. You went ad hominem on one, he's been "discredited here", lmao! (There's that megalomania again. Some cranks on ET's P&R have "discredited" someone? Lol.) You don't even try.

So I made a bit longer tail search string and found this:

http://www.chiltoncapital.com/curre...nfinity and Beyond.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,0,563

That one's new, it's not the piece I found earlier. This is nearly without trying. But clearly more than you. And get your lips of lukie's cock, lol.
More...
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/INmqvibv4UU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Right, so the guy/s who got it so fucking wrong "consistently"in the past are going to perfectly time their action in the future??

:D :D :D
 
Quote from Ricter:

I presented the weakest possible way of finding exiting-QE materials possible, and there were still a couple of hits. You went ad hominem on one, he's been "discredited here", lmao! (There's that megalomania again. Some cranks on ET's P&R have "discredited" someone? Lol.) You don't even try.

So I made a bit longer tail search string and found this:

http://www.chiltoncapital.com/curre...nfinity and Beyond.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,0,563

That one's new, it's not the piece I found earlier. This is nearly without trying. But clearly more than you. And get your lips of lukie's cock, lol.
More...

Dude, just because you enjoy fellatio with other men (I'm guessing you give rather than receive, it seems your type) doesn't mean the rest of us are into that.

But back to your article and the next round of Ricter pummeling.

First, you continue to post articles that take the place of you answering my question, because you don't have the ability to comprehend what the Fed's exit strategy could possibly be. You have no clue as to the mechanics of how it would work. Zero. Zip. Nadda. You're fucking clueless, and everyone here can see it.

Instead, all you do is try to obfuscate (your M.O.) with random links you hope will deflect the conversation away from that one simple fact - that you're fucking clueless on this topic. You claim I'm a megalomaniac, but how does ego come into the picture when all I'm doing is telling you that you're fucking clueless? I'm not saying I'm the smartest guy to walk the planet, or that I'm the pinnacle of wisdom on Federal Reserve policy. Never once did I make any of those statements. All I said is that I am brilliant in comparison to you. But then, on this topic, so is a hamster.

In regards to the article you posted, it explains what QE is, points out the valid concern about inflation, states that QE has been successfully exited in Japan and Sweden (which is only half correct because Japan is still doing it, in fact accelerating it) and then ends with this quote:

Will the Fed be able to dodge the specter of inflation and the side-effects to economic growth of exiting QE? It is impossible to say, but the evidence suggests it can be done. The Fed may commit to QE for too long, missing its opportunity to exit and tighten policy. Tighten too early and the Fed risks def lation and stagnant employment growth. Tighten too late, and there
is the legitimate chance inf lation will pick up and run well above the Fed’s long-term 2 percent target.
More...

Great, "who knows" is the answer. Sure, Sweden exited correctly, but that was a crisis typical to our S+L crisis, nothing at the magnitude of this. They doubled their balance sheet. The Fed is way way beyond that point. This is not comparable to the Sweden model, and the author knows it, which is why he - just like you refused to provide any specifics on how an exit would be done without causing distortions.

So what's next, Palooka?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top