The Credit Crisis Financial Stocks Short Journal

Erm, this is a bit of a "Dept of the Bleeding Obvious" type of research... I am all for rigorous analysis, but the conclusion ain't exactly a shocker, innit?
 
In other news, a new Cleveland Fed research paper concludes that the Pope is catholic and bears shit in the woods. Gotta do something with those Phd's and $150K/year salaries.
 
Evidence that is IS different this time with regards to regulations, business always have to deal with uncertainty of law making but this time they have to do that more than usually
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=ag53TU5k3TiQ

And with regards to the Fed paper, its the first time I saw a study talking about home equity borrowing and financing of businesses, there is plenty talking about HE borrowing and personal consumption but not on business finance
 
The Fed is now facing the consequences of having mislead the markets about their QE2 intentions of 'lowering interest rates to boost employment and inflation', I always doubted that story, it wasn't high rates or high UR that got them to act. Matter of fact it if you look at the data it was a decline in UST yields on the double dip story and a decline in iexpectations, that combined with core inflation numbers which had been low for a few months(plus employment that failed to improve but it doesnt seem that this was a big factor since it had not improved for ages) got them to take insurance against deflation by boosting the balance sheet

But the markets are used to thinking in terms of rates and the Fed does not want to be seen a having a regime shift so they talk about rates like they always do. As a result now everyone thinks the program has failed because rates rose
 
Quote from Daal:

And with regards to the Fed paper, its the first time I saw a study talking about home equity borrowing and financing of businesses, there is plenty talking about HE borrowing and personal consumption but not on business finance
More...

Only folks who have their heads as far up their asses as the Phds at the Fed would think its news to realize that a lot of folks tap (or used to tap) their home equity to finance a business, buy an investment property, lend to a child for their business ...
 
Quote from Daal:

And with regards to the Fed paper, its the first time I saw a study talking about home equity borrowing and financing of businesses, there is plenty talking about HE borrowing and personal consumption but not on business finance
More...
If I am not mistaken, NFIB mentions this pretty much every time they publish their confidence numbers (I think Dunkelberg, their chief eco, has been banging this drum for a while). Again, rigor is all fine and dandy, but they're not exactly shocking anyone with their conclusions.
 
Bernanke Q&A a time.com
"Would it be beneficial to the economy if I created new dollars out of thin air whenever I wanted? If it isn't good for me to do it, why is it good for you and the Fed to create new money at whim? —Jonathan DuPree, MARTINSBURG, W.VA.
The Federal Reserve is buying Treasury securities in order to lower interest rates, which in turn helps people buy houses and cars and promotes investment by firms. That leads to a stronger economy. These policies are not leading to increases in the amount of currency in circulation.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2037495,00.html#ixzz18vP953RX"

What he is saying is technically correct but its quite misleading
 
Its amusing to see people taking comfort on the muni market using historical data that says that munis had a very low default rate. Its like they learned nothing from the US home price collapse
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top