SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/13/2006 8:11:00 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
RE reality knocking in home town rag - SRQ, FL

... however, few are disposed to listen -- business section had 2 new projects featured, including "Grande Bay" - 31 acres, 152 condos (500k - 2M) + retail and office

... be sure and enlarge the photo for a sample of the utter trash that's being built.

----------

"Speculation was rampant in '05"

heraldtribune.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/15/2006 4:25:47 PM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
The “Holy Grail” -- Noland

prudentbear.com

<snip>

Fed chairman Bernanke has proffered that “to understand the Great Depression is the Holy Grail of macro-economics.” Regrettably, that prolonged quest has proved a colossal misadventure. There is, however, an opportunity for redemption. In the end, mastery of the current Global Credit Bubble and inevitable bust offers the (long-delayed) bounty of macro-economic “salvation.”

Reading the analyses of today’s Depression experience authorities (notably Dr. Bernanke and Univ. of California’s Dr. Barry Eichengreen) leaves one with the sense that they are oblivious to the essence of the inevitable repercussions from the preceding boom’s gross excesses and distortions. There remains a curious disregard for the fundamental role played by Credit and speculation in fostering the fateful Bubble, this despite centuries of financial history illuminating their central responsibility. Rather, the inclination is to point blame at the Federal Reserve for not aggressively inflating the money supply after the stock market crash, as well as the deflationary forces supposedly imposed by the gold standard global monetary regime. It all may be politically correct, exactly what the economic community and policy-makers are eager to hear, and exceptionally career constructive, but that doesn’t elevate it to sound analysis.

I am compelled to expand on the superb analysis highlighted last week from “Banking and the Business Cycle” published in 1937. For starters, I definitely give contemporaneous analysis credence, knowing that views developed some decades later will be adulterated by misconceptions, personal and ideological biases, historical revisionism, and by whatever economic fad that is all the rage at the time. The authors’ focus on boom-time money and Credit excesses as a leading cause of the Depression was exceptional and quite credible. Nonetheless, the boom had unique circumstances that proved to be major distracting factors for the purposes of developing a more general and long-standing theory of business cycles.

The Federal Reserve System was in its infancy during the “Roaring Twenties” boom, so its operations and influence were understandably an analytical focal point for contemporaries and future economists alike. Discerning contemporary analysts of that period focused on the Fed’s prominent role in fostering and repeatedly bolstering the boom-time monetary expansion, while today’s Depression “experts” fault the incompetent Fed for its failure to orchestrate post-Bubble reflationary measures. This irresoluble debate certainly detracts from a clearer understanding of and appreciation for the paramount role of boom-time Credit and speculative excesses.

One can actually examine today’s environment and ascertain a much more analytical “pure-play” with respect to Credit, speculation and the course of financial and economic Bubbles. I certainly have no intention of dismissing the Fed’s role. Yet when it comes to the actual expansion of Credit, the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet is for this cycle hardly a factor. For example, Fed assets expanded only about $37 billion during 2005, compared to bank Credit’s $680 billion, ABS’s $645 billion, the Broker/Dealers’ $300 billion, and “Funding Corps’” $200 billion. Total mortgage borrowings expanded last year by about 38 times the amount of Fed growth.

Bank reserve requirements are today a Credit non-issue, after muddying the Twenties’ Credit expansion analytical waters. Non-banks have become an instrumental source of “money” & Credit creation and financial intermediation, liberating Credit analysis from the traditional ambiguities of fractional reserve banking and the Fed’s role in creating system reserves to be “multiplied.” Financial innovation – especially when it comes to new Credit instruments, avenues of financial intermediation and mechanisms facilitating speculative leveraging – is a paramount issue today as it was during the Twenties, although hopefully the analysis will be more fruitful now that “financial innovation” is not intermingled with issues associated with a neophyte central bank system. Not dissimilar to the “Roaring Twenties,” the Federal Reserve’s role in nurturing an overindulgent backdrop and accommodating the private-sector “money” and Credit “printing presses” is the most fertile analytical perspective.

Momentous developments in technological advancement and production capabilities also confused the analysis of money and Credit during the Twenties, as it invariably does during any extended boom. The extraordinary gains in industrial productivity and its influence on the general price level garnered significant interest from the economic community back then. A reasonably strong case was made in “Banking and the Business Cycle” that the Fed’s effort to stabilize the price level (when it should have been declining along the lines of productivity advances) provided a major impetus to the inflationary Bubble. One is, nevertheless, left unclear as to what extent the Credit boom and its interplay with the real economy were bolstering both production increases (“Investment Inflation”) and the flurry of technological advancements, which were then exerting downward pressure on goods prices.

Many economists today hold the view that productivity gains and globalization provide a favorable backdrop conducive to outsized economic growth, quiescent inflation, and permissive monetary conditions, along with accompanying rising asset prices and surging financial wealth. I propose that the issue this cycle for the U.S. economy is not its productivity gains or industrial capabilities but the capacity for the economic system to expand salable “output” – goods and services to meet the inflated demand from Credit creation-induced purchasing power. In a services-based (certainly including the healthcare, media, communications, and computer/electronic/digital output) economic system, the causal link between Credit growth and “output” expansion may arguably be more discernable. Whether it is or isn’t, the capacity for (contemporary) output to easily accommodate inflating purchasing power (more healthcare, more higher-priced services generally, more downloads, more upper-end and luxury products/services, more media, more electronic gadgets, more imports, etc.) must now become a focal point of Credit Bubble analysis.

The danger of hyper-elastic output rests with its capacity to readily accommodate progressive Credit expansion and attendant excesses without an alarming increase in output prices. Mistakenly perceived a virtue, the problematic upshot of this circumstance is a ballooning Financial Sphere and a cumulating pool of (global) liquidity available to inflate asset market Bubbles, stoke self-reinforcing speculation, and impart myriad unchecked financial and economic imbalances.

Even today, we are subject to the bullish propaganda that the “efficiency” by which the U.S. economy now uses energy ensures that surging crude oil prices exert only a minimal restraining influence on GDP. But this dynamic has little if anything to do with actual efficiency. Rather, it is indicative of a major transformation in the nature of economic output, as well as an Economic Sphere commanded by the Inflating Financial Sphere. Surging energy prices today neither stymie output nor elicit tightening from the monetary authority – but they are efficiently “monetized.” Energy inflation is a consequence of and additional stimulus to Credit inflation, with Credit excess begetting higher oil prices, begetting only more Credit and higher prices.

From a Credit Bubble prospective, the economic system’s pricing mechanisms now largely operate without adjustment or self-correction. Virtually unlimited “output” readily expands to meet demand, rather than the market force of rising prices working to crimp demand. It is the unstable financial boom dictating an inflated and highly imbalanced level of economic output. In a replay of the Twenties, an atypical economic backstop warranting determined policy restraint is misinterpreted as one permitting of monetary looseness.

Alan Greenspan and others’ efforts to blame the current global currency regime (“pegged” Asian currencies, in particular) for mounting imbalances recalls analysis that pinned late-‘20s instabilities and the depth of the Depression on the vagaries and then breakdown of the global gold standard. Again, the focus must be first and foremost on underlying Credit systems and conditions. Greenspan, of course, is keen to point fingers at foreign governments and their “pegged” currencies, when the impetus for the Great Credit Bubble can be traced back to “pegged” U.S. interest-rates, in conjunction with Fed assurances of abundant marketplace liquidity and a persistent inflationary bias. Such an unparalleled financial backdrop beckoned for reckless excess.

No currency system or monetary apparatus can be expected to function stably in the face of rampant underlying Credit expansion and resulting cumulative speculative financial flows. The Twenties’ financial profligacy doomed the gold standard, and it is simply inconceivable how a stable global currency regime could today be maintained in the face of the unprecedented dollar-based Credit inflation and the ensuing massive pool of global speculative finance.

The 1920s/’30s gold standard debate is lost in time. But great effort must be made to ensure that underlying Credit systems and speculative dynamics (the U.S.’s in particular), along with resulting U.S. and global economic maladjustments - are the focal point with respect to the analysis of any future systemic dislocation - and not the global currency system, as hopelessly flawed as it is. Ballooning foreign central bank reserve holdings are not THE global imbalance, but are instead indicative of deep underlying Credit system and economic maladjustment. Ditto the unknown Trillions of assets being accumulated by the global leveraged speculating community.

There will be more than ample blame to spread around when this historic boom gives way to bust. Learning the correct lessons from this experience will demand the acceptance of responsibility for our own financial and economic misdeeds, of which there have been many. The “Holy Grail” of macro-economic understanding is an unattainable goal, yet we are presented with an exciting opportunity to get economic analysis and theory at least back on the right track. The first step will require the recognition and acceptance that unrestrained Credit and unchecked leveraged speculation are inconsistent with the stability of Capitalistic systems.



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/17/2006 8:25:28 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
The penny is "in the money"

by: lotsa_fiat_money 04/17/06 01:53 am
finance.messages.yahoo.com

... Some pennies minted in 1982 and all pennies minted after that are copper-clad zinc (97.5% Zn, 2.5% Cu). Most pennies minted in 1982 and all the ones minted prior to that are an alloy of 95% Cu and 5% Zn. 1982 was the year the mint made the transition so 1982 pennies are a mix of the two and you can distinguish them by weight. The older alloy is 3.11g and the newer clad one is 2.5g. I've taken the time to weigh 1982 pennies that I collect and roughly 90% are the 95%/5% Cu/Zn alloy.

That said, using:
Cu = $2.80/lb
Zn = $1.39/lb

...the alloy pennies are worth 1.87 cents each and the newer clad ones are 0.785 cents each. The older pennies have been in the money since $1.50 Cu last year. I have two predictions for the fate of the penny:

1) The US mint switches to copper-plated steel pennies.
2) The older alloy pennies start to disappear from circulation to due Gresham's Law
xhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham's_Law

The nickel is almost in the money and my prediction is the mint switches to nickel-clad something, where "something" is zinc or steel.

FWIW - You can see how many pennies are in circulation from this site:
xhttp://www.coinfacts.com/small_cents/cents_lincoln_memorial_reverse.html



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/17/2006 8:29:06 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Seeking Cover if the Prices of Homes Fall

nytimes.com

<snip>

YOU'RE worried that the law of gravity, as it applies to home prices, has merely been suspended, not repealed. Short of selling the attic (or a few outbuildings, if life has treated you very well), how can you hedge against a decline, if it ever comes?

A cheap and practical solution may be on its way. The Chicago Mercantile Exchange expects to begin trading this month in a series of futures and options that will allow homeowners and others to bet that indexes of home prices in each of 10 metropolitan areas will rise or fall.

<snap>

LOF'ngL!



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/17/2006 11:52:30 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
from Ben Jones - ‘We’ve Outsourced The Speculation’: NAHB

thehousingbubbleblog.com

<snip>

"... Of those who bought or refinanced homes in 2005,
29% had zero or negative equity,
and 15.2% were underwater by 10% or more..."


<snap>

LOFL!



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/19/2006 8:30:54 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Insanity Sucks -- Steve Plant

4/19/2006
fxa.com

6:45 AM New York time. I like putting my f***ups right up front. And the last couple of weeks I’ve been talking about a top coming in oil. Well… they would have carried me out yesterday for sure. Thankfully I can talk about markets but make it clear I’m not putting every trade on. Some things deserve discussion but I’m not suicidal. What I observe in oil gives me great pause to think toward commodities in general. I wrote a couple of bits for FXA-Online yesterday afternoon. And since there was little going on in FX, and the Fed minutes had already been out for a while, I had some fun pointing out the silver and copper charts. What I touched on in my two bits was that bull markets in commodities historically go higher until they ration demand. And in our current case, commodity markets essentially have an unlimited supply of capital on the sidelines, in the form of small percentages coming out of more traditional investment vehicles. The higher prices go, the more attractive these markets appear to managers in search of returns. So from the capital flow side, there might even be a greater propensity than in past cycles for commodity markets to ignore supply/demand fundamentals. And… since the universe of economists right up to the Fed will tell you that prices of commodities are more easily absorbed into the cost structures of goods and services without adversely affecting final price than ever before, we take even less notice (as consumers) of those higher prices. Yesterday, despite all we have seen from commodities, core PPI rose only 0.1%. These are two very dangerous ingredients if one uses them to form a view on how high prices for some of these commodities can go. Even gasoline… where price increases are passed directly through… people have barely altered their consumption habits despite prices having doubled in two years. What does that say for how high they have to go to slow demand? Markets move to the point of pain. If I have to realign my thinking regarding bullish potential (as I am in oil right now) to accommodate an even greater price impact from capital flows into commodities, AND I see no evidence of demand being rationed. Then (as a shiver goes down my spine) the last thing I want to be doing is talking about a top in any of these commodities.

The other side of my internal debate centers on how I view the sentiment skew and the significance of the parabolic spike in copper and silver. I know I have been talking about the spike for a week now. I think it is very important. I’d rather not see one personally. Parabolic spikes historically represent the peak of emotion… panic… crisis. They tend to represent the insanity of a buying or selling climax. I worry that the more copper explodes, the more “low quality” capital it will attract. By low quality I mean capital that has no loyalty to the trade. The opposite of the commercial hedger. Capital that will turn around and liquidate or even short it at the first sign of trouble. I’m not trying to pooh-pooh speculators as low quality capital. I mean… I’M low quality capital! I simply associate those high volatility spike periods with get-rich-quick participants who are here one day and gone the next. You can’t put on CNBC without hearing all kinds of hullabaloo on commodities. Ads urging the public to get involved in the commodity bull markets abound. As someone with a contrarian mindset, it is very tough to not be affected observing all these indications and behaviors. I can think back to many examples where in the long run it paid to fade a parabolic move. Insanity sucks. I don’t want the commodity bull market to be over. I believe in the symmetry of markets in both price AND time. So an 18-year bear market in commodities should not correct itself in 4.

The upshot is; my view on how long and how far commodities can go continues to evolve. And with yesterday’s oil market driven shift toward renewed bullishness, I am… for the first time in a while… looking for a window to sell the stock market. A sustained rise in equities and a sustained rise in energy prices are two diametrically opposed concepts. Forget copper… the fact that equities can have the biggest rally since April 2005 with oil prices making new all-time highs, regardless of the Fed being done… is insane. If oil prices are headed to the point where they will force a rationing of demand, and they have a lot farther to go to do that, I say the trip will not wear well on equities. Oil is starting off lower this morning. If we get another one of those days where it ends up higher, and stocks look like they’re starting to run out of gas, I may put that trade on in small size.

Lastly today, I will say that I covered the trading unit of my dollar short yesterday. I am now down to core positions in both long gold and short Dollar Index. All I can do is add to these positions. If they continue to trend without correction, I will continue to ride them.

Steve Plant

FXA



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/19/2006 10:55:40 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
here is the shit, here is the fan

<snip>

"... The competition for access to oil is emerging high on the agenda for President Hu Jintao's visit to the White House this week. President Bush has called China's growing demand for oil one reason for rising prices, and has warned Beijing against trying to "lock up" global supplies..."

<snap>

nytimes.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/19/2006 12:21:58 PM
From: ild  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194
 
Berson's April's Outlook
fanniemae.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/21/2006 1:09:50 PM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 110194
 
Symposium: China: Time Bomb Walking

frontpagemag.com

----------

boo!

... pantywaists want to whack Tehran...

... real warriors for freedom want to march on Beijing.



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/22/2006 7:35:47 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194
 
Thirsty China looks to Saudi oil deals

english.aljazeera.net

<snip>

"... The president of China has arrived in Saudi Arabia at the start of a visit designed to strengthen ties between the world's leading oil supplier and a nation fast becoming its biggest consumer..."

<snap>

Revised Headline:

After pissing time away in Washington observing Cheney nap and Shrub cogitate on a remarkably remedial level, Hu does some business in the Middle East...



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/22/2006 8:03:01 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194
 
slightly ot -- "Get your filthy hands off me you damn dirty ape!"

bagnewsnotes.typepad.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/22/2006 5:09:07 PM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Dollar may feel sting after G7 fingers China

Sat Apr 22, 2006 10:19 AM GMT
za.today.reuters.com

<snip>

"... The overall message that markets will take away from finance officials from the Group of Seven rich nations who met on Friday is quite simple: the dollar will decline..."

<snap>



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/24/2006 10:51:11 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
If GM Fails, Then What?

latimes.com

Ooh La La!



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/24/2006 12:31:08 PM
From: ild  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194
 
Berson's Weekly Commentary

Economic Commentary
April 24, 2006

Leading indicators suggest home sales will continue to slow.

fanniemae.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/25/2006 8:22:05 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
The Politics of Scarcity -- billmon

billmon.org

<snip>

"... Moral of the story: superpowers that have to import 10 million barrels of oil a day can't indulge in Wilsonian foreign policies, or even maintain the pretense of indulging in Wilsonian foreign policies — at least, not for long. Addicts can't afford to be idealists. Just ask any of the other junkies..."

<snap>



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/26/2006 11:16:52 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Developer Hopes To Get Mileage From BMW Offer

washingtonpost.com

LOF'nL!

... at least it's not a POS GM or F... or new ugly as sin Chrysler...



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/28/2006 1:02:43 AM
From: ild  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194
 
March MICA data
micanews.com

The number of PrivateMI applications received in March by MICA members was 141,117 or 29.7% more than the 108,788 received in February. The dollar volume of primary insurance written on newly originated 1-to-4 family conventional mortgage loans totaled $20,927.2 million in March, a 36.9% increase from the previous month’s $15,280.2 million. Traditional primary insurance totaled $11,954.4 million and bulk primary insurance totaled $8,972.8 million in March. In that same month, primary insurance in-force totaled $622,735.4 million. MICA members reported 40,299 cures and 37,928 defaults during March.




To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/28/2006 2:37:25 AM
From: shades  Respond to of 110194
 
Mexican Housing Fund Infonavit Issues MXN1.2B In MBS

(Why should the Gringos in the USA get to have all the fun Senore?)

MEXICO CITY (Dow Jones)--Mexican government-run housing fund Infonavit said Thursday it sold 1.2 billion pesos ($108 million) in mortgage-backed securities in its first issuance this year.

Infonavit, Mexico's biggest mortgage lender, said the issue was part of its new MXN6 billion program for MBS. Demand for the paper was 1.6 times the amount offered, and the securities, known as Cedevis, were sold at a real annual interest rate of 5.8%.

Infonavit said the rate was competitive compared with earlier issues. The Cedevis have a maximum life of 22 years and an expected average life of 5.4 years, Infonavit added.

The placement brings to MXN6.43 billion the amount of mortgage-backed securities issued to date by Infonavit, or 46.8% of the total outstanding MBS in the country.

-By Anthony Harrup, Dow Jones Newswires; (5255) 5080-3450; anthony.harrup@dowjones.com


(END) Dow Jones Newswires

April 27, 2006 13:56 ET (17:56 GMT)

Copyright (c) 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.- - 01 56 PM EDT 04-27-06



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/28/2006 2:39:55 AM
From: shades  Respond to of 110194
 
China Ag Bank Prepares To Launch Asset-Backed Securities

(Meanwhile the chinese growing envious of the recent mexican decision say why should they not join the MBS party? hehe)

BEIJING (Dow Jones)--Agricultural Bank of China, (AGBC.YY), the country's third-largest commercial bank by assets, said Thursday it has started preparations to launch asset-backed securities.

The primarily rural lender, which has lagged its rivals in reforms, said ABS are an important task for the bank this year.

Developing ABS would be "significant for our bank's future shareholding reform and lifting our competitive standing," the bank said in a statement.

Agricultural Bank of China's plan to introduce the securitization products comes after the central bank cleared domestic lenders to sell them last year.

Government approval of asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities, which are common in developed financial markets, offers Chinese banks an additional channel to raise capital, and the chance to gain an early foothold and expertise in the field.

China Development Bank and China Construction Bank Corp. (0939.HK) issued the country's first ABS and MBS in December last year, shortly after they received government approval.

Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, (600000.SH) a medium-sized lender, has also said it plans to issue ABS this year.

Agricultural Bank of China is the only one of China's Big Four state-owned banks not to have been reformed into a shareholding bank. It is awaiting a government decision on a bailout package that would pave the way for the introduction of foreign strategic investors and an overseas listing.


-By Rick Carew, Dow Jones Newswires; 8610 6588-5848; rick.carew@dowjones.com

-Edited by Andrew Bullard


(END) Dow Jones Newswires

April 27, 2006 01:53 ET (05:53 GMT)

Copyright (c) 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.- - 01 53 AM EDT 04-27-06



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/28/2006 2:03:50 PM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Steve Plant at 6am this morning:

4/28/2006

I Stand Corrected

6:00 AM New York time. I could not have been more wrong on recent economic numbers. Housing has been my economic lynchpin but rather than post disappointing numbers, New Single Family Home Sales posted the biggest monthly increase in 10 years. Pretty much erased any memory of the prior months large decline. My bet with Gilmore is toast. Obviously the new record highs in Consumer Confidence and Existing Home Sales that I discussed on Wednesday were equally surprising. My reoccurring problem is I can’t help but be effected by the anecdotal evidence I see around me. I see more and more For Sale signs and they seem to stay around longer. The people I come in contact with who are in the real estate business are not optimistic. The realtor for the subdivision behind our house pulled into the gas station behind me on Wednesday evening. We chatted. He told me they had just one (1) couple during their entire Saturday open house. What am I supposed to think? The spread between what I see and hear and what the data says is just getting wider every month. Maybe it’s just a matter of patience. Even Bernanke acknowledged a slower housing market in his testimony yesterday.

And speaking of his testimony yesterday… I can’t remember the last time I saw the stock market get whipsawed like that. The Dow went from down 50 on the sentence; “to allow the expansion to continue in a healthy fashion and to avoid the risk of higher inflation, policymakers must do their best to help to ensure that the aggregate demand for goods and services does not persistently exceed the economy's underlying productive capacity.” To up 40, on the next two; “Based on the information in hand, it seems reasonable to expect that economic growth will moderate toward a more sustainable pace as the year progresses. In particular, one sector that is showing signs of softening is the residential housing market. Both new and existing home sales have dropped back, on net, from their peaks of last summer and early fall.” Granted… the two statements WERE separated by a new paragraph. I bailed my short S&P position on one of the later morning reversals when I judged it apparent the market was going to hold its gains. It cost me about one S&P point. Strike two.

The dollar meanwhile acts like death. While the two-sided Bernanke testimony drove the stock market both ways yesterday, the dollar was virtually one way. It would take news of a return to the gold standard to get it to sustain a rally at this point. Capital is really flowing now. Any up tick at all becomes an opportunity to sell. I briefly entertained covering more of my short yesterday afternoon and actually going below core position size but I talked myself out of it. The degree to which the dollar has moved should not in and of itself be a reason to take profits (I told myself). If it manages to start trading higher on bullish news THEN I’ll seriously consider that option. The worst thing a long-term, low activity person like myself can do in a market like this is trade himself or herself out. All the time and work and patience get thrown out the window and under exactly the conditions that were originally hoped for during the process of initiating the trade. We get the first look at what could be a very strong Q1 today. The dollar’s reaction to that will be very interesting.

I don’t know if you have noticed but the recent corrective lows in gold are getting higher and higher. Participants still want gold. That’s why the lows each day since last Thursday have continued to be successively higher. Participants are waiting for less and less pullback each time, they are losing their patience. Gold has shrugged off weaker oil prices all week. And copper (the more important ancillary driver) has already taken back much of yesterday’s losses. The potentially catalytic news of a rate increase in China is in process of rolling off the market’s back. Traders who sold on that news are probably already thinking… oops. One day soon I think we get another upside explosion in gold.

Steve Plant

FXA

----------
----------

<g>



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/29/2006 9:54:32 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 110194
 
very ot -- Keith Richards Hospitalized in New Zealand

hosted.ap.org

"... Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards suffered a mild concussion while vacationing in Fiji and was flown to a New Zealand hospital for treatment, a band spokeswoman said Saturday.

Media reports said Richards fell out of a palm tree..."


----------
----------

Mqurice -- due to proximity, you're elected to smuggle poor Keith a bottle of Chivas and a joint...



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)4/30/2006 10:56:15 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 110194
 
ot -- Colbert at the Press Club: not to be missed

crooksandliars.com

movies.crooksandliars.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/1/2006 7:56:45 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Can the dollar block survive another bout of dollar weakness?

Brad Setser
Apr 30 2006
rgemonitor.com

In case you haven't noticed, the dollar is now closer to 1.30 (v. the euro) than 1.20 - or even 1.15. Carry is no longer king. There is talk of a "regime change" in the fx market. Or at least an attitude change. If the G-7 takes imbalances seriously, the fx market will too ...

It isn't just the euro either. The pound generally seems to move in tandem with the euro (Sorry, Maggie). And Canada has a strong dollar policy even if the US doesn't. The loonie, like oil, is testing multi-year highs.

It sort of feels a bit like 2004 all over again. At around $1.26 for euro, the dollar is about where it started 2004 - and about where in started in the fourth quarter of 2004 as well. Korea is back in the market as well, fighting won appreciation. Steve Johnson of the FT:

Furthermore, the final communique from last weekend's G7 meeting, which called for greater currency flexibility in emerging Asia to help reduce global imbalances ... also led to expectations that the dollar might finally weaken against Asian currencies.

Indeed this happened - for an entire 24 hours - before Japan started complaining about the speed of the move and South Korea backed up its own complaints with a wall of intervention to stop the won from strengthening.

I feel for the Koreans. The Bank of Korea seems to want to run an independent monetary policy. They don't want to be part of the dollar block. But it is hard out there for a won ... when the rest of North Asia sits out the dollar move. Japan's Vice Minister is working hard to keep the yen very, very weak in real terms. And China decided not to operate a basket peg last week. The won isn't just strong v. the dollar. It is also strong v. its etymological cousins the yen and the yuan.

The US may - or may not - have a weak (strike weak; insert competitive) dollar policy. Tim Adams certainly would like China to have a strong RMB policy. Bernanke denied the G-7 statement signaled any intent to manage the dollar down, but he also said the G-7 wants market determined exchange rates. Bloomberg:

Bernanke today also said it is ``not correct'' that the G-7 sought to weaken the dollar. The group ``supports a market- determined dollar,'' he said.

In the first quarter, countries outside the G-7 spent about $180b (by my calculations) resisting market pressures for their currencies to appreciate. A market exchange rate for the dollar right now means a weaker dollar ... Just ask Korea's central bank.



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/1/2006 8:02:45 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Finite End Game -- Steve Plant

5/1/2006
fxa.com

5:45 AM New York time. Sometimes you just have to hold on with both hands and enjoy the ride. I managed to not scratch an emotional itch to cover more of my position on Friday morning. If I had given in, I would have been watching from the sidelines at what turned out to be yet another awful day for the dollar. The traders I spoke to on Thursday who were banking on some long-term trend support for the dollar, as a place to make a trade from, are long gone… blown out just north of 1.25 Euros. Gold too! I wonder at this point how many participants have traded out, and just can’t get themselves to pay up to get back in again. I don’t think I could do it… having to suck it up and buy into this strength. I have to believe the pool of gold buyers on a dip and the dollar sellers on rallies has grown to be substantial. I have nothing new except point to the hideous reaction to Friday’s GDP report as evidence that this move is not exhausted yet.

I am not a price forecaster. I have no idea where these markets can go. I only know this; a drastically weaker dollar and sharply higher commodity prices have our leveraged economy pointed toward the direction of pain. And if at some point bonds decide to participate in a meaningful way on the downside, then it becomes an even worse problem. And since it is one of my core beliefs that it is the nature of markets to seek out and exploit pain, then all I will conjecture at this point is that things will get a lot worse before they get better. The climax of any drastic shift in the pricing structure of the capital market status quo is fear followed by panic. We are still a long way from that. Oil prices have only recently begun to bite. The dollar and gold remain curiosities at best to most of us. Copper does not affect the average American but at the periphery. Even bonds yields have not traveled far enough north to really make the average American nervous. While some may argue that oil is close, (the Journal has a piece on that this morning), in my view, prices in none of these markets have yet to drive a change in behavior, all of them must go a lot farther to generate real problems.

There is one fairly new idea that has been running through my head recently, the bones of which I will briefly put some meat on this morning. The Q1 Employment Cost Index was reported to have risen at the slowest rate in 7 years on Friday. The smaller than expected increase was due to a reduction in benefits. I have grown increasingly bearish on the stock market the past few weeks. I have grown bearish despite strong corporate profits and economic news. The problem is, it is cost cutting that has increasingly become the way to improve the bottom line and increase value to the shareholder. And right now, for most corporations, there are still costs to be found that can be reduced. I see evidence of it all the time in my duties at FXA. This pressure has been on the rise and is currently the worst I’ve seen it in my six years there. In financial services and banking, the leading edge of American business, it’s no longer the salesperson or the trader (the revenue generators) who calls the shots, it’s the IT person or the business manager (the bean counter) who does. During one of my visits in late Q4 I heard a bunch of people at one of our customers bitching about a reduction in their health benefits. I understand the problem; margins in FX and on other financial market products and services have sharply contracted since 2000. But you can only get so much out of the cost side. And if the revenue side is stagnant, you’re looking at a finite end game. Eventually… the pressure you put on the back end circles around to further constrict the front end. A declining cycle evolves. The whole system begins to run down. It’s the parasite syndrome. Eventually, the cost cutters begin to kill the host from the inside. We got our first look at this phenomenon in hard copy on Friday with ECI. This is why I’ve been watching the behavior of the stock market very closely. We are at new 6-year highs on many of the indexes. But upside momentum has been declining. I read the charts of the S&P 500 index and the NASDAQ as running out of gas. Q1 06 will be a peak in both economic activity and possibly corporate profitability for who knows how long. Declining price momentum on peak good news in any market is always an ominous sign. Yes… I’ve swung and missed twice now. But I’m still in the poking stages. I’ll continue to monitor this situation very closely.

Steve Plant

FXA



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/19/2006 1:45:31 PM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
How to deal with the US$ as a "spoiled child"?

People's Daily
May 19, 2006
english.peopledaily.com.cn

The average exchange rate (middle price) of RMB Yuan against US dollars Monday broke 8:1 mark and hit 7.9982:1. This is a new record in the exchange rate of RMB since the reevaluation of Yuan on July 21 last year. Clearly, it is an important symbol of the increasing flexibility of RMB exchange rate mechanism.

However, people should not ignore the fact that when China is rapidly advancing the reform of RMB exchange rate mechanism and actively promoting the trade balance through expanding domestic demand, the US dollar simply continues acting like a "spoiled child" within the international financial system, selfish and self-indulgent, not willing to be responsible for its dominant reserve status in the international financial system, for the excessive issuance of the currency, and for its low saving rates. All it expects is to let developing countries like China assume the consequences of the economic imbalances, just like what it did in dealing with the currency relations with the Japanese Yen in the last century.

China is facing an increasingly conspicuous problem: how should it deal with the US dollars as such a "spoiled child"?

Excessive issuance of US dollars has led to an excess liquidity of the global economy and served as a macro background of the appreciation of RMB. To observe the exchange rate curve of the RMB against the US dollar, one must first study the dollar trend.

From 2001 onwards, in order to hedge the technology bubble economy and the negative economic impact of the "9.11" terrorist attacks, the US Federal Reserve continued to adopt a slack fiscal policy and lowered down the federal benchmark interest rate from the original 4%-8% to 1% and maintained the level for a three-year period. Associated with this, Bank of Japan implemented the world loosest monetary policy and lowered the interest rate to zero so as to fight against the long-term deflation and economic depression.

In recent years, Bank of England, the US Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank, etc, have already, one after another, begun to increase the interest rates. Bank of Japan has recently concluded the four-year expansionary fiscal policy in an attempt to tighten its excessive liquidity. But the overall pattern of the excessively loose fiscal environment still remains.

From the view of global pattern with the massive issuance of US dollars, some Asian countries, taking China as a typical head, accumulate this kind of "junk currency" (whose purchasing power is continuously declining) through large scale of export. This is a very unfair pattern for these Asian countries.

Given the overall pattern of the loose global liquidity, the status quo of the global economic imbalances has become the important surveyor's pole that dominates the flow of the capital. In 2005, the US current account deficits amounted to over $800 billion, while the surplus of Europe, Japan, oil-exporting countries, and some emerging Asian economies increased. The huge amount of US current account deficits and the rapid growth of debt have gradually damaged the confidence of foreign investors. International investors believe that a long-term depreciation of the US dollars is inevitable which will unceasingly increase the exchange rate risks of the dollar assets. Meanwhile, the United States is right at the end of one interest rate rise cycle. But Japan, Euro zone countries, China and some other countries and regions are right under way of accelerating the economic recovery therefore right at the initial stage of an interest rate rise cycle. The gap of the yield spreads between dollar assets and the assets of other countries and regions will gradually be narrowing.

Under such circumstances, the investment attractiveness of the US dollar relative to other countries and regions assets is evidently weakening, which has led to a gradual shift of the global capital from focusing on the dollar assets to the assets with higher rate of return and smaller exchange rate risks in Japan, Asia and other emerging areas. This is also why the stock exchange prices keep on rising in the bull market in Japan, India, China's Hong Kong, Brazil, China and other countries and regions. The flowing trend of the global capital led to an ample liquidity in the surrounding markets. Within a short term, it is difficult to reverse the trend. This also exerts pressure upon the rising of exchange rate of these countries.

By People's Daily Online; The author Ba Shusong is deputy director and research fellow with the Financial Research Institute, Development Research Center of State Council



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/19/2006 3:07:14 PM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Fed's Hoenig warns of rate overshoot risk-report

Fri May 19, 2006 2:49 PM ET
today.reuters.com

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Thomas Hoenig said on Friday it was important for the central bank to take into account the lags with which interest rate changes affect the economy, saying inflation already looked set to slow.

"One of the things I've learned is ... that monetary policy works with a lag, but it's hard to appreciate that when you're in the midst of the cycle," Hoenig said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, published on the newspaper's Web site.

"I'm still very much opposed to allowing inflation pressures to get out ... but you don't want to be so dogmatic that you're not taking into account ... how lagged (monetary policy's) effects are," he said.

Hoenig told the paper that while recent inflation readings were higher than he had anticipated, they were the result of prior accommodative monetary policy. He said the impact of the latest rate increases would be felt in the coming year.

"I thought, given the higher energy prices and strength of the economy, we would see some pass-through from the total (consumer price index) into the core and we've seen that," he said.

But Hoenig, who is not among the voters this year on the Fed panel that sets interest rates, said if his forecast that the economy will slow toward its potential growth rate starting in the current quarter is on track, "some of that (inflation) pressure should come off."

"To what degree, I don't know yet. We have to continue to look at the data as it flows through," he said.

----------
----------

LaughingOutFuc*ngLoud!

We're going to pause, sports fans.



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/23/2006 7:47:35 PM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
The End of the Carry Trade

Cynic's Delight - Ben Carliner, Director of Research Economic Strategy Institute

cynicsdelight.blogspot.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/25/2006 9:46:03 PM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
Wiping Out the Middle Class

by Bill Bonner
May 24, 2006
lewrockwell.com

"Much of the middle class was wiped out."

So said our lawyer in Buenos Aires. He was speaking about the last financial crisis in Argentina.

"Those who understood what was going on didn't lose a thing. We had our money in dollars or euros...with accounts in Switzerland or Miami. But when the government let the peso fall...and then put on controls to keep you from getting your money out of the bank while it was falling, you can imagine what that did to people. It's always the middle classes who suffer."

Argentina is now on the mend. People are working. The streets are crowded and the restaurants are full. The peso, which was once worth as much as a dollar, is worth only one third as much. But in the last year, the peso has gone up. It is the dollar that is falling now.

And who will get wiped out this time?

We have been wondering. The popular illusion is that the Fed will manage the dollar down gently. Little by little, the presses will roll at the U.S. Treasury, dollars will pile up overseas, and the greenback will fall against foreign currencies – and gold – in a landing so cushioned that no one will notice. The dumb foreigners will simply wake up one day and find their U.S. dollars and U.S. bonds worth only a fraction of what they thought they were worth. America's debtors will get off scot-free.

Could it be that easy and smooth, dear reader?

We venture a little analysis here. In the short run, as Warren Buffett puts it, the markets are a voting machine. People get any goofball result they want. Vox populi; vox dei. But in the long run, markets are weighing machines. The masses are left mute. Sola vox dei loquitur. Only God speaks. Only the fundamentals matter. Only the truth is heard.

America's middle class has put their faith in various graven images: Ben Franklin, Andrew Jackson, George Washington – dead presidents printed on green paper. They have voted for more and more spending, more and more bread, more and more circuses, more and more foreign wars. They claim to be religious, but they put their faith in the princes and powers of this world – in jobs and credit...in the government. Their voodoo economy is built on magic paper money and directed by witch doctors. Everyone knows they make mistakes, but no one expects them to fall on their faces.

And most of all, America's middle class counts on houses. Most have few assets beyond their own homes. They have no secrets accounts in Switzerland. They have no euros. They have no Picassos and no Bugattis – or Joe Camels. They have no gold. Even the little they do have – their own homes – are mortgaged more heavily than at any time in the past. A modest decline in prices would leave millions of people upside down – with mortgages higher than their house prices.

Americans used to pay off their mortgages during their working years and then live in their homes, free and clear of debt, during their retirements. Typically, houses were then passed along to the next generation. Now, the house serves a new role. It is supposed to pay the bills from the cradle to the grave. Rather than savings or pensions, people are counting on the rising value of their own homes, not only for current expenses, but for those in retirement, too. Many people take out mortgages on their primary residences, says USA Today, in order to buy vacation houses. When they retire, they intend to live in their second home year round, sell their primary house, and use the proceeds to fund their golden years. Who is going to pay for all those houses left behind? Illegal immigrants from Mexico? Maybe.

Don't wait too long, is our advice. Remember, voting eventually yields to truth. The truth is, houses are already so expensive in many areas that few people can afford them. And the foreigners look like they could wise up at any moment.

Boom begets bust. A bust in housing would leave a lot of Americans broke at the worst possible time – just when their working years are coming to a close. A real collapse in the housing market would wipe out much of America's middle class – no matter what happens to the dollar.

"Bay area home sales fall sharply," says one of yesterday's ominous headlines.

• "One Million in Britain Fear Bankruptcy," is the headline story on today's subway tabloid. Only a million? Surely the number will go up as the down cycle intensifies.

• In America, two headlines suggest worry among top officials: "Fed Chief Urges Caution on Mortgages," says one, from the Financial Times. The other comes to us from the Wall Street Journal: "Greenspan Expresses Concerns on Derivatives..." Fed chiefs, present and past, are covering their derrieres.

• And in Afghanistan and Iraq, things seem to go from bad to worse...bombings, drugs, murders. We recalled our own words from four years ago: No one goes to war in Afghanistan or Mesopotamia without later regretting it.

• Gold...gold...gold! Gold fever has not yet hit the world's investors. This is still just the second stage of the bull market. As foretold in this space, gold seems to be in a correction. We looked at a chart this morning that made us think the price should drop between $650 and $545 before the correction was over. But what do we know?

All we know is that when the voting stops and the truth-telling begins, gold is likely to be a lot more valuable – in dollar terms – than it is now. We are hoping the price falls below $650. We will buy more.

• Finally, we are always trying to connect the dots in order to see the big picture. Sometimes we see clearly, but most often, not. We thought we saw a few more connections on Sunday, when listening to our favorite Anglican priest, Peter Mullen, at St. Michaels.

Unlike other economists, we have no illusions about our trade. We cannot tell you how to get rich (other than the old-fashioned way: work hard, save your money, get lucky), nor can we offer any new raz-ma-tazz formula for the U.S. economy. In fact, we are always amused when the question is put to us: "What should the U.S. do to avoid the financial disaster you see coming?"

"Well, nothing," is our stock reply.

Of course, there is a lot that could be done, but nothing that would actually eliminate the problems. People are too deeply in debt. They, and their elected representatives, have made promises that can't be kept. To make matters worse, the world economy is evolving. The great advantage enjoyed by the West for the last 300 years is disappearing. The teeter-totter is teetering toward the East. Like it or not, the Western nations are destined – on a relative basis – to get poorer. And their creditors, foreign and domestic, are likely to be stiffed.

Still, government officials and private consumers could cease making the situation worse. They could stop spending money they don't have, on things they don't need. Of course, that would trigger the very crisis they hope to avoid. At least it would clear the air and prepare the way for genuine growth and prosperity in the future.

But don't hold your breath, dear reader. It is not likely to happen. Success is a hard thing to recover from. The success of the American empire – and the American consumer economy – will not be corrected easily. It will, most likely, require full, frontal catastrophe. That is just the way things work. All of life grows, develops, matures, corrupts, degrades, degenerates...and eventually expires. At its peak, an organism – or an institution – is like a man in his 50s at the top of his success – a midlife crisis waiting to happen. It could be a pretty girl in the office, a war in a foreign country, architecture, booze, disease, or just the advancing years: something will bring him down.

"People make a fundamental mistake," explained Mr. Mullen, or words to that effect. We don't take notes during a sermon...perhaps we should. "They confuse themselves with God. They think that their own personalities are divine. So, when they do something wrong, and feel bad about it, they don't think they need to stop doing it. No, they think they need to find a way to feel good about what they are doing."

That is the problem with modern economics, too. Economists have given up trying to figure out what rules an economy follows. Few seem to have any interest in the rules and even fewer advise people to stick to them. Instead, they make up their own rules as they go along – helping to set interest rates, trade restrictions, fiscal policies, tax levels, all in the guise of managing and guiding the economy. There is no right and no wrong, they say, just technique. They admit that they cannot tell us what price oil will sell for next week...or even tomorrow. Still, they pretend that they can look into the future and improve it before it happens, by adjusting, jiggling, tuning, and manipulating whatever levers are available to them.

We don't believe it will work. "As ye plant, so shall ye reap," we recall. If ye cast your seed on barren rock, it will not grow – no matter how many levers ye yank. And if ye sow the wind, well, ye might end up getting a cyclone.



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/29/2006 9:34:34 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
China April oil demand growth strongest since 2004

Mon May 29, 2006 7:29 AM ET

today.reuters.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/30/2006 7:43:02 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
exit Greenspan Put, enter Bernanke Premium

----------

Treasury Yields Rise as Investors Add in the `Bernanke Premium'

Call it the "Bernanke premium."
bloomberg.com

Traders in the U.S. bond market have added about 10 basis points, or 0.1 percentage point, to Treasury yields because they're concerned the Federal Reserve, led by Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, will fail to contain inflation or send clear signals on the direction of interest rates. Ten basis points cost the government an additional $1 million in annual interest on every $1 billion it borrows.

Bernanke raised doubts among investors twice in recent weeks. Treasury prices fell after he told a reporter at a party in Washington last month that the market had misunderstood his remarks to Congress signaling the Fed might pause in its two-year campaign of raising rates. They dropped again last week when he said inflation expectations are ``well contained.''

``There's a Bernanke premium in the market,'' said Gary Pollack, head of fixed-income trading for Deutsche Bank AG's investment-management unit in New York, which manages $11 billion in bonds. ``We have a new Fed chairman and an uncertain Fed policy,'' he said last week.

Yields on 10-year Treasuries barely rose as the central bank boosted rates 14 times between June 2004 and Feb. 1, when Bernanke took over from former Chairman Alan Greenspan. Since then, the benchmark note's yield increased 53 basis points and now is 2.95 percentage points more than the core rate of inflation, the highest so-called real yield since December 2003.

Worst Since 1999

``You want protection to the extent inflation may be picking up here,'' said James Keegan, a New York-based senior bond fund manager with American Century Investments, which has $19 billion in fixed-income assets.

Ten-year yields rose above 5 percent last month for the first time since 2002. Treasuries of all maturities have lost 1.34 percent this year, the most since 1999, according to Merrill Lynch & Co.'s U.S. Treasury Master Index.

While the benchmark 10-year Treasury was little changed last week at 100 13/32 to yield 5.05 percent, prices are becoming more volatile. The Merrill Option Volatility Estimate, or MOVE, Index last week rose to 71.9, the highest since February. The index indicates investors expect yields to rise or fall as much as 72 basis points over the next 12 months.

Yields on Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities, or TIPS, which provide insurance against rising consumer prices, also show investors are more concerned now than at the start of the year. The gap in yields between U.S. notes and inflation-linked debt due in 10 years widened 28 basis points to 2.64 percentage points this year. The difference represents the average rate of inflation traders expect over the life of the securities.

Three Little Words

``Investors don't know whether he'll stay the course and tame inflation,'' said Barr Segal, a managing director at Los Angeles- based TCW Group Inc., who helps oversee $54 billion in fixed- income assets. ``The last thing you want to hear is those three little words: behind the curve.''

Besides being fresh to the job, Bernanke, 52, also faces the challenge of containing inflation at a time when prices of commodities such as zinc, oil and aluminum are at or near record highs, according to Bloomberg data.

Bernanke, a former Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor, likely will use his experience as a Fed governor from 2002 through June 2005 under Greenspan to help him chart monetary policy, said Jack Malvey, chief global fixed-income strategist in New York at Lehman Brothers Inc.

``It's hardly like we have an inexperienced chap who's new to all this,'' Malvey said last week. Lehman is one of the 22 primary dealers of U.S. government bonds that trade with the Fed.

Communicating the Message

Traders in the $4.2 trillion market for U.S. government debt questioned Bernanke's communications this week after a Commerce Department report on May 26 showed that the government's price index for items excluding food and energy rose 2.1 percent in April from a year earlier. The increase exceeded the top end of the Fed's preferred zone of 1 percent to 2 percent for the first time since March 2005.

A day earlier, Treasuries fell as some traders focused on Bernanke's addition of the word ``well'' when describing inflation expectations as being ``contained'' in response to questions from Representative Jim Saxton, chairman of Congress's Joint Economic Committee. Traders interpreted the change from policy statements since Sept. 20, that only said expectations ``remain contained,'' as a sign that Bernanke isn't concerned about rising commodity and labor costs.

Bernanke testified before the same group April 27 that ``the committee may decide to take no action at one or more meetings'' and wait for more economic data before raising rates even if there are signs of inflation.

Traders took the comments as a sign the Fed was preparing to pause. Bernanke then told CNBC reporter Maria Bartiromo at an April 29 party in Washington that the market misunderstood him. Yields on 10-year Treasury notes rose 9 basis points after the report, sparking an uproar because the comments weren't made in an interview or in formal communication from the Fed.

`Lapse of Judgment'

The Fed chairman told the Senate Banking Committee on May 23 that the remarks were ``a lapse in judgment'' and that he would use ``regular and formal channels'' to deliver future statements.

The Bernanke ``premium'' probably amounts to an extra 5 to 10 basis points in yield, said Mitchell Stapley, who oversees $21.9 billion as chief fixed-income officer at Grand Rapids, Michigan- based Fifth Third Asset Management.

``You talk about Presidents having a honeymoon period,'' Stapley said last week. ``There doesn't seem to be any honeymoon period for Fed chairmen.''

Greenspan's statements were often deemed obtuse and offered little clarity about how the Fed determined what was important.

``Now we're getting that clarity and we're finding it's not as easy as it sounds,'' Stapley said. ``Be careful what you wish for.''



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)5/31/2006 12:27:26 PM
From: ild  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 110194
 
April MICA data
micanews.com



To: Ramsey Su who wrote (58009)6/9/2006 11:50:06 AM
From: sciAticA errAticA  Respond to of 110194
 
I think everything is coming down to 1 core question -- which has evolved into something of a distorted and philosophical question over the years of the US dominating a reserve, fiat currency...

Is the real economy, like the financial economy, something of an abstraction -- and intellectual and institutional construct that will conform to a synthetic set of imposed rules?

Or does the real economy have its genesis, its alpha and omega, back on the island -- with a man, and a stick, daily collecting coconuts to survive?

Everything, in my view, hinges on the conclusion -- which I perceive as self-evident.