Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • Good Riddance To QE: It Was Just Plain Financial Fraud  [View article]
    QE is absolutely no different to any other monetary policy, it merely uses a different mechanism to operate. ALL MP ops to lower rates involve creating money "out of thin air". this is no fraud: every 1st economics student knows that is how the monetary system operates in every country on the planet. if David Stockman thinks that is some sort of revelation then one can only wonder what exactly he was doing in his illustrious 20 year career on Wall Street. a career so illustrious that he left it to instead write an ignorant and bigoted blog to people even more ignorant and bigoted than himself.

    if you want fraud, THAT is fraud. pathetic.
    Nov 11, 2014. 02:27 PM | 23 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did Draghi's Comments Move The Euro Down Today?  [View article]
    so, draghi says a/ a rate cut was discussed b/ the no-change decision was "consensus" (ie not unanimous) c/ they discussed negative rates on deposits (because they are so concerned about banks not lending) and d/ the ECB forecasts for GDP and inflation have been lowered, and when the EUR tanks against every other currency, you think the move seems unrelated to the news?

    i find that a highly suprising conclusion. to say the least.
    Dec 6, 2012. 04:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Don't Expect QE3... Yet  [View article]
    yep, that's right; when economic indicators dont match with your fantasies, the economic data must be a conspiratorial lie. exactly why the Commerce Dept would want to lie about inflation, i am,however, unclear about.

    re the article: the stated reasons for no QE announcement this month mostly make sense, but the idea that announcing QE3 will therefore mean "QE to infinity" is a nonsense. obviously there is no process which continues 'forever', no matter how you interpret that word. nor any more reason for QE3 to be the start of a long series, than QE2 was. the Fed, and everyone else, is well aware that there are diminishing returns for this strategy, as well as political factors to deal with, so every new round of QE makes the next more difficult to justify.

    re car prices: it is quite obvious that comparing prices 10 years apart on specific models, is completely meaningless, given that the specification of the cars can change quite a bit over a decade. and the japanese manufacturers tendency to constantly upscale their models over time. should this really have to pointed out? 40% increase over 10 years is.... 3% compounded. hardly out of control inflation anyway.
    Jun 18, 2012. 12:56 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fed, Subservient Media Ignore Difference Between Real and Bubble-Driven Demand  [View article]
    "The markets "should" sell off, if not today, then Monday."

    well, the markets certainly didnt sell off today, and today is almost over. if they dont on monday, are you going to include yourself as one of the "incompetent boobs who cant understand the present, let alone predict the future"??

    "...the Fed's money pumping causing the runaway gas price inflation which Bernanke blames on worldwide demand"

    obviously you havent noticed but crude hit $150 in 2008, before there was any quantitative easing, so apparently there are other factors which might be affecting energy prices. further, the USD, in which crude is priced, is 20% lower than, say, 1 year ago. until march of this year, the USD price of crude simply kept up with change, and has only outstripped it in the last 2 to 3 months. so, again, no correlation between QE, and energy prices.

    it is a great shame on America that this sort of garbage appears anywhere passed off as journalism. and the author here has the temerity to call other people 'so called journalists'. i suggest the author follow his true calling and just post comments to 'articles' on the ZeroHedge website.
    Apr 29, 2011. 03:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • GE: Everything That's Wrong With Capitalism in America Right Now  [View article]
    GE did not receive TARP funds, which was an exchange of cash for shares. even if it did, that would not increase profit. that would increase owner's equity. it was, however, able to issue FDIC guaranteed debt, in exchange for a fee. that arrangement was terminated in 2009. it is remarkable that the article author's 16 years as a finance professional does not allow him to understand the most basic facts when writing yet another Seeking Alpha load of tripe.
    Jan 27, 2011. 09:13 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Global Oil Scam: 50 Times Bigger than Madoff  [View article]
    it is really pathetic to see so many people laud this garbage as really interesting/informative etc, when it is just such garbage from start to finish. the journalism is completely dishonest, and most of the responses show no critical thinking whatsoever.

    other than intentional inaccuracies noted earlier, you can add:
    *ICE crude futures are cash settled using the NYMEX settlement price
    *ICE europe is regulated by the FSA in the UK
    *FSA UK provides loads of audit trail data to the CFTC.

    read here:
    Nov 12, 2009. 11:31 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Global Oil Scam: 50 Times Bigger than Madoff  [View article]
    and how much of ICE do these conspirators own?
    well, Morgan Stanley, BP, Goldman Sachs, and UBS, each own <2% of ICE. so the implication in the article that ICE is their little baby is intentionally false.
    Nov 12, 2009. 09:41 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Global Oil Scam: 50 Times Bigger than Madoff  [View article]
    a few points here:
    *morgan stanley and goldman sachs have paid back TARP, so how are they using your TARP money to rachet anything?
    *it is typical of ALL futures markets that the face value of outstanding contracts is much higher than the underlying market, and the number of contracts delivered. ICE is no different in that regard.
    *Nymex trades energy contracts too, which are deliverable, and yet have experienced exactly the same price movements. so, logically, it is not the lack of a delivery process which has allowed crude to rally.
    *last year, crude got up to $140, then fell to $40. hello! was that price manipulation too? or was it only price manipulation when the price rises, but not when it falls?
    *ICE US, which trades coffee, sugar, cocoa and cotton is US regulated, and those contracts have also experienced huge rallies.
    *ICE Europe IS regulated, just not by the US authorities. so the assertion that it is unregulated and unaudited is incorrect, a fact which the author well knows. and we know what it is called when you say something you know to be untrue. of course, that is ok if you are a journalist, right?
    Nov 12, 2009. 09:23 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment