Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (78456)	4/29/2008 3:22:27 AM
From: mishedlo	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 116555

Once again you are dragging prices into an equation where they do not belong. The Fed cannot control the price of oil. PERIOD Mish

To: koan who wrote (78456)	4/29/2008 7:13:11 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Re: No economic model in the world goes against that equation With the notable exception of the one used by the geniuses running the FED. We pay people to borrow money and then are shocked, shocked, that the investments they make don't seem to make sense. Negative real rates are not a good thing. That the FED put them in place when the economy was not wallowing in slack was a very bad thing to do. Actual savers (as opposed to the wildcatting speculators that dominate this board) receive negative returns. Is it any wonder that money managers have taken to emulating drunken casino players? It's the only way to not show a negative real return. The worst thing about a negative real interest rate is the it behavior it forces. If the FED really wants to help the economy vs. enriching political cronies, it should be paying savers 6% (2% real rates) and offer homeowners mortgages and (limited) credit cards at 5%. If visa needs to charge 29% interest rates plus huge fees to maintain its business model then visa needs to go away.