Joe Miner Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41853378/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Yep. So was Enron, for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted March 1, 2011 Author Share Posted March 1, 2011 Careful with that avatar, you might melt someone's face! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Please take any positive crap you have to say about the US economy to the Rainbows and Unicorn Farts forum. There is no room for this type of talk here. You have been warned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barack Obama Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Mission Accomplished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 In all honesty, I dont see how any credible economist can gauge QE's overall success for at least another 2-3 years. The risks of QE don't pose short-term risks but more so its after effects. Which would be inflation risks (that we are beginning to see) and debt monetization dependency that places the US dollar in more danger of a possible collapse or serious devaluation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 In all honesty, I dont see how any credible economist can gauge QE's overall success for at least another 2-3 years. The risks of QE don't pose short-term risks but more so its after effects. Which would be inflation risks (that we are beginning to see) and debt monetization dependency that places the US dollar in more danger of a possible collapse or serious devaluation. A credible one wouldn't but one who is in the media would. Anything to paint the picture of success to keep their ally Obama going strong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 A credible one wouldn't but one who is in the media would. Anything to paint the picture of success to keep their ally Obama going strong I hate to pile on, but the ENTIRE basis of the story is based on (1) a guy at Pimco admitted he was wrong and (2)this statement: "Since then stocks have soared, the unemployment rate has dropped and Americans have started to spend more." The drop in unemployment is an anomaly and anyone paying even the slightest attention to it knows this. (Saying QE2 is responsible for the drop in unemployment is like saying the drop was a direct result of the GOP taking over the house since it's done nothing but go down since they were sworn in.) And Americans are spending more, in part, because a direct result of QE2 is that things would actually cost more. You can fit everything I know about economics on the head of a pin, and yet these truths is as clear as day. Is the premise true? Yes. Is it a viable story? I guess, if you know slightly less about the economy than me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Sure it's a success -if the goal was to export global revolution - oh and wall street ain't main street, if you're putting money there and you're not a full time investor then you should write sucker on your forehead- the minute that market isn't artificially propped up it's going to fall like a rock, if I was the predicting typed I'd say late May. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 The drop in unemployment has very very little to do with job growth, but more so with people continuing to drop out of the work force, which I find to be a bit puzzling. But none the less that is what the drop in the unemployment rate can be attributed to, which in my view is much more worrisome than having more people enter the work force with a higher unemployment rate, because this indicates that one or more of a couple things are happening which is some people have been out of work so long that they are either resigned to the fact of not getting a job and content with just getting by due to gov. dependency unemployment checks or that job skill erosion is truly setting in and there simply arent jobs for these people to find or willing to accept. My guess is there is a mixture of the two. Having said all that, I still expect job growth to be over 250K jobs a month very soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 In all honesty, I dont see how any credible economist can gauge QE's overall success for at least another 2-3 years. The risks of QE don't pose short-term risks but more so its after effects. Which would be inflation risks (that we are beginning to see) and debt monetization dependency that places the US dollar in more danger of a possible collapse or serious devaluation. So are you saying Gross is no longer credible? I thought he was your hero? Seriously, I think QE2 did accomplish some of what was hoped for, but is also the fuel to the rapid commodity price hikes. Bernanke seems to stubbornly believe the commodity price effect is short term. I wonder if he realizes the extent that commodity "investments" have become institutionalized, so that any inflationary fears spark more investments and higher prices? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 So are you saying Gross is no longer credible? I thought he was your hero? Seriously, I think QE2 did accomplish some of what was hoped for, but is also the fuel to the rapid commodity price hikes. Bernanke seems to stubbornly believe the commodity price effect is short term. I wonder if he realizes the extent that commodity "investments" have become institutionalized, so that any inflationary fears spark more investments and higher prices? I do like Gross, doesnt mean I agree with everything that he says, and I did preface the comment with "overall success". Also did you catch the OECD report on commodity prices and what they attribute it to? They happen to believe its mainly due to actual physical demand and very little with monetary policy. I know you are in the camp of "speculation", I believe its a good balance between the two, in which I'm sure I'm right. People point to the Cushing oil supplies as "proof" that it is speculation, in which of course they have no clue in what they are talking about because CUshing oil supplies is a regional issue, not a global one. We are in a perfect storm of conditions for future high inflation (not by "economists" metrics" but by every day companies and lower to middle class people), we have strong global growth which is undoubtedly putting pressure on commodity supplies, loose monetary policy causing people and investors to exchange dollars for tangible goods and imminent future oil supply disruptions. Put all this together with slow growth in the developed world with overburdened fiscal budgets, you have a nasty recipe for stagflation, which is something I talked about here years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 In all honesty, I dont see how any credible economist can gauge QE's overall success for at least another 2-3 years. The risks of QE don't pose short-term risks but more so its after effects. Which would be inflation risks (that we are beginning to see) and debt monetization dependency that places the US dollar in more danger of a possible collapse or serious devaluation. Kind of like grading the NFL Draft on the following Monday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted March 2, 2011 Author Share Posted March 2, 2011 Kind of like grading the NFL Draft on the following Monday Who needs to wait until Monday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Who needs to wait until Monday? Peter King MMQB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Who needs to wait until Monday? I already give the Bills a C+...the guy they pick in the first round will be a real reach. I also can't believe the Republicans picked such a lousy candidate to run for President in 2012... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 (edited) I do like Gross, doesnt mean I agree with everything that he says, and I did preface the comment with "overall success". Also did you catch the OECD report on commodity prices and what they attribute it to? They happen to believe its mainly due to actual physical demand and very little with monetary policy. I know you are in the camp of "speculation", I believe its a good balance between the two, in which I'm sure I'm right. People point to the Cushing oil supplies as "proof" that it is speculation, in which of course they have no clue in what they are talking about because CUshing oil supplies is a regional issue, not a global one. We are in a perfect storm of conditions for future high inflation (not by "economists" metrics" but by every day companies and lower to middle class people), we have strong global growth which is undoubtedly putting pressure on commodity supplies, loose monetary policy causing people and investors to exchange dollars for tangible goods and imminent future oil supply disruptions. Put all this together with slow growth in the developed world with overburdened fiscal budgets, you have a nasty recipe for stagflation, which is something I talked about here years ago. It's hard to lump everything into the word "speculation" now because instruments have been created to "invest" in commodities via ETFs, ETNs, ETPS ( ) etc. With this financialization of commodities, we are seeing greater volatility. True speculators are having a field day in this new environment. As for Cushing, yeah, there's a crapload of N.Am. crude stockpiling causing the divergence in prices with Brent. The domestic bastards are taking advantage of the recent spike in Brent though and gouging us. The Fokkers! Edited March 2, 2011 by TPS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 I also can't believe the Republicans picked such a lousy candidate to run for President in 2012... Really, you can't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts