Showing posts with label AJ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AJ. Show all posts

Monday, June 13, 2016

The Bilderberg Illuminati Secret Conference

The Bilderberg Illuminati Secret Conference
By Anthony Jerdine| June 13, 2016 — 8:22 AM EDT
The world’s most secretive meeting took place on June 9-12. At an undisclosed location in Dresden, Germany, heads of states, politicians, tech luminaries and finance’s top names will convene for the 64th annual Bilderberg Summit. The invite-only conference will feature no press, no cameras and no quotes. Led by a steering committee, helmed by Henri de Castries, French Count and CEO of multinational insurance firm AXA, the Bilderberg provides its attendees with a forum for informal discussions about the major issues facing the world, without the need to propose resolutions or pass any votes deciding any outcome.
Naturally, the veil of secrecy has stimulated the imaginations of conspiracy theorists, who view the Bilderberg Meetings as a forum for a cabal of the world’s elite to influence the future course of humanity. One of the most popular conspiracy theories behind the purpose of the meetings, is the furthering of the so-called “New World Order”—a homogenous single government that seeks to impose its dominion over every sovereign nation on the planet.
However, real life is not as nefarious. According to the Bilderberg’s official page, the key topics discussed included:
Current events (most likely with an emphasis on Brexit)
China
Europe: migration, growth, reform, vision, unity
Middle East
Russia
US political landscape, economy: growth, debt, reform
Cyber security
Geo-politics of energy and commodity prices
Precariat and middle class
Technological innovation
Perhaps the SPECTRE-esque plots were on the other memo. Rather, the remarkably tame list is reminiscent of other exclusive meetings such as Davos. Of note however, is the discussion around the “precariat”, which according to British economist Guy Standing, who popularized the term, are:
“…the perpetual part-timers, the minimum-wagers, the temporary foreign workers, the grey-market domestics paid in cash… the techno-impoverished whose piecemeal work has no office and no end, the seniors who struggle with dwindling benefits, the indigenous people who are kept outside, the single mothers without support, the cash laborers who have no savings, the generation for whom a pension and a retirement is neither available nor desired.’
In other words, the marginalized and alienated groups that are fueling the rise of demagogues such as Donald Trump and new Philippines president Rodrigo Duerte, is a cause of concern amongst the global elite.
Some of the big names on this year’s guest list includes, several finance ministers, professors, 30 plus heads of companies, such as John Cryan, CEO of Deutsche Bank AG (DB), David Cote, CEO of Honeywell (HON), Ben van Beurden CEO of Royal Dutch Shell plc (RDS), Peter Thiel, President of Thiel Capital and co-founder of Paypal (PYPL) and Eric Scmidt, Executive Chairman of Alphabet Inc (GOOGL). And finally, before we get too dismissive about the conspiracies, note that two attendees from 1991 and 1993 were a young Senator from Arkansas by the name of Bill Clinton and a lowly minister by the name of Tony Blair. Coincidence? You decide.

Monday, March 14, 2016

Oil Price “May Have Bottomed Out”

Oil Price “May Have Bottomed Out”: IEA
By Anthony Jerdine | March 14, 2016
The International Energy Agency released a mixed assessment of the crude oil market Friday, saying “there are signs that prices may have bottomed out,” but cautioning that the recent rally should not “be taken as a definitive sign that the worst is necessarily over” and that they “cannot be precisely sure when in 2017 the oil market will achieve the much-desired balance.” Brent crude oil is trading up 1.6% at $40.70 Friday morning, having recovered from lows around $27 in January.
OPEC Stands Its Ground
The report said that global oil supplies fell by 180,000 barrels per day in February to 96.5 million b/d (mb/d). Output was still 1.8 mb/d above last February’s level, however, showing that oversupply remains a problem. The primary reason is the desire of OPEC, and especially the cartel’s leader Saudi Arabia, to maintain market share by driving higher-cost producers out of business.
The report showed signs that bid may be working. Since last February, non-OPEC production has fallen slightly, while OPEC production has risen. Compared to January, however, OPEC’s February output fell by 90,000 b/d to 31.61 mb/d. Saudi Arabia’s production, on the other hand, inched up from 10.21 mb/d to 10.23 mb/d. The report forecasts non-OPEC production to fall by 750,000 b/d to 57 mb/d in 2016.
OPEC and non-OPEC producers have been in sporadic talks about freezing oil production at January’s levels, which has provided the market with a level of confidence and encouraged the rally in prices. IEA’s report shows that, although talks have not been successful, production fell between January and February anyway. One reason is that supply in the OPEC countries Iraq, Nigeria and the UAE fell by a combined 350,000 b/d in February. There are also “signs that non-OPEC output is falling, the report says.”
Iran is the main sticking point in attempts by producers such as Russia, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and Qatar to coordinate a production freeze or cut that includes OPEC and non-OPEC members. The country lost significant market share due to international sanctions, and is determined to gain it back, whatever the near-term effect on prices. Geopolitical tensions between Iran and Saudi Arabia have exacerbated the situation, as has the rise of fracking​ in the U.S.
Demand
The IEA left its forecast for 2016 global demand unchanged at 1.6 mb/d. It noted that “sharp decelerations” in the U.S. and China had driven demand growth down to 1.2 mb/d in the fourth quarter of last year, following a five-year high of 2.3 mb/d in the previous quarter. Commercial inventories in the OECD increased by 20.2 million barrels in January, while demand cover remained at a “comfortable” 32.7 days. The report also noted weak refinery throughput in the OECD.
The Bottom Line
IEA sees oil prices stabilizing in 2017, and says that they may already have bottomed out. Ironically enough, closely-watched talk of a coordinated production freeze in February came to nothing, but production ending up falling slightly over the month anyway. For now, the standoff between OPEC producers, led by Saudi Arabia, and non-OPEC producers continues. In addition, the standoff between Iran and Saudi Arabia has fractured the cartel itself. Still, prices have already recovered by over 50% from January lows, so it’s possible – but not guaranteed – that the worst is indeed behind us.
Oil Price “May Have Bottomed Out”

Sunday, March 13, 2016

Emerging Currency Markets

5 Emerging Markets Currencies to Consider in 2016
By Anthony Jerdine| March 13, 2016
The currencies of the world’s leading emerging economies have been in a tailspin for years. The Chinese renminbi, Indian rupee, Russian ruble and Brazilian real each declined by more than 20% between 2012 and 2015. This is one of the reasons why the U.S. dollar experienced a resurgence in global markets despite the Federal Reserve’s massive quantitative easing programs.
Another result of the Fed’s easy money policy was ultra-low interest rates between 2007 and 2015. Income investors looked away from traditional savings vehicles, such as Treasury bonds and certificates of deposit (CDs), in favor of stocks and high-yield bonds.
There was a time when emerging market debt was considered an attractive investment. Bonds in Indonesia, Brazil and Russia were once considered winners thanks to high nominal returns, but the catastrophic inflation in these countries transformed their bonds into big-time losers. The situation was even worse in Argentina, which is now shut out of bond markets, and Venezuela.
What Makes a Currency Appreciate?
Currencies trade in relative prices in international markets because the world theoretically operates through a floating exchange-rate regime. If the U.S. dollar loses 2% of its purchasing power while the Russian ruble loses 5% of its purchasing power, then the dollar is supposed to appreciate, or strengthen, against the ruble. American investors should try to find emerging market currencies that are not going to lose as much purchasing power as the dollar in 2016.
There are two ways a currency becomes more valuable. The first is a reduction in the currency’s circulation. If fewer yuan are floating around the international system, that means each remaining yuan becomes that much more valuable as the supply shrinks. The second is an increase in the home economy’s labor productivity. For example, Russia is an oil-rich nation, and the ruble should become relatively more valuable if Russian oil exporters become more productive.
Strong currencies raise incomes, help bondholders and make it easier to afford foreign goods. On the other hand, a rising currency means it is probably more difficult to pay off debt or sell in foreign markets. Hold currencies, or assets denominated in currencies, will hold the most value in the long term.
1. Poland: The Złoty
Poland’s economy entered 2016 with as much momentum as any other European nation, with the last quarter expected to be the most robust in nearly five years. The country’s labor market is strong and business confidence is rising. The combination of low inflation, impressive domestic demand and increasing productivity has led to an expectation that the Polish złoty will rise throughout 2016.
2. South Korea: The Won
South Korea has one of the most fundamentally sound and productive economies in the Asia-Pacific region. The Korean won lost nearly 15% against the U.S. dollar since its peak in early 2014. Low debt-to-GDP figures for the South Korean government should alleviate pressures to print lots of new money.
3. Hungary: The Forint
Hungary currently has low interest rate problems, and there are many underlying economic concerns. The Hungarian forint has performed admirably in forex markets since mid-2012 and could experience inflows from investors running from India and Russia.
4. Indonesia: The Rupiah
The Indonesian rupiah is a momentum play and not backed by serious fundamentals, or at least not compared to the forint, won or złoty. It was trading at record lows against the dollar before rebounding significantly at the end of the year. This is a currency to keep an eye on, especially if commodity prices rebound.
5. India: The Rupee
The rupee is a riskier bet than other emerging market currencies because of India’s problems with inflation and uncertain monetary policy. The Indian government is torn between fighting high prices and trying to devalue to promote Keynesian-style growth programs. However, the rupee outperformed virtually every other emerging market currency on a risk-adjusted basis in 2015 due to its high interest rates. The rupee offers a 7.5% deposit rate for 2016.
5 Emerging Markets Currencies to Consider in 2016

Saturday, March 12, 2016

Daylight Savings Time

Spring is just around the corner but first we have to adjust our clocks for daylight savings time. Be sure to turn your clocks ahead one hour as daylight savings time begins at 2:00 am on Sunday, March 13, 2016
Learn about daylight savings time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time)
As a reminder, be sure to replace the batteries in your smoke alarm and if you have a digital thermostat with replaceable batteries, be sure and check or replace those batteries as well.

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Courage

Greetings
by Anthony Jerdine
Courage has been on my mind- if we look at the textbook definition it is the quality of mind or spirit
that enables a person to face difficulty,
danger, pain, etc., without fear. (dictionary.com)
Now this may seem we are heading off to battle, or facing a lion in the jungle- but in actuality most humans are faced with their own suffering mind, negative thoughts and lack of action.
Fear permeates their subconscious and soul fields.
Simply put, most humans are not living 100% in their Full Potential.
How does this change?
Or the question I should ask is, are you wanting to live from your Full Potential 100% of the time?
I know I do.
Here are a few teachings to guide you to stay in your highest, most positive and best Self.
1) Create dynamic action in your body. The body needs to act ceaselessly- action builds up energy and strength. Inaction will allow weakness to take over and ultimately destroy the body. MOVE.
2) Surrender your mind- not to just anything- but to a higher ideal. Rest your thoughts on something greater than yourself- something noble, purposeful and beyond any selfish interests. This will allow you to gain mental stamina in the world- to rise above. The higher the ideal- the greater your stamina, objectivity and interestingly enough, your success.
3) Develop your Intellect. This is not about acquiring more information- this is building the muscle within you that makes decisions according to Divine Right Timing and Divine Right Order. Your intellect maintains a strong sense of Self, your individuation from the Ultimate Energy and directs all your actions towards that above chosen ideal.
Does this sound like a lot?
It’s not, honestly. It takes a rhythm, a discipline.
It takes COURAGE- to go above and beyond what most humans will ever commit to.
You got this..
And I’m right with you. 💯
Courage defined
About these ads
Occasionally, some of your visitors may see an advertisement here
You can hide these ads completely by upgrading to one of our paid plans.

Monday, March 7, 2016


TIPS


TIPS are Hot: Is Inflation Back?
By Anthony Jerdine | Updated March 07, 2016
For the duration of the recovery, inflation has been sluggish, lagging the Federal Reserve’s target of 2%, even as improvements in the labor market would seem to indicate that the economy was healthy. As of Friday, however, there are indications that inflation is at last picking up. Treasury inflation-protected securities (TIPS) are attracting more attention from investors, indicating that the market expects inflation to pick up in the near future.
The 10-year breakeven inflation rate, which measures the spread between 10-year Treasury yields and 10-year TIPS, has reached 1.51 percentage points, rebounding after hitting a low of 1.18 on February 11. In other words, investors expect inflation to average slightly over 1.5% in the coming years.
While the level has not reached the ideal 2%, the uptick is an encouraging sign following a sharp drop in inflation expectations after Japan’s central bank introduced negative interest rates at the end of January. Combined with better-than-expected employment data released Friday morning, the increased interest in TIPS could prompt the Fed to consider hiking interest rates sooner than expected. Federal funds futures for November, which measure the betting market’s expectations for rate rises, rose to about even odds following the jobs report.
The iShares TIPS Bond ETF (TIP), the TIPS fund with the most assets under management, has seen a daily inflow of nearly $102 million as of Friday morning and $371 million over the past week, accounting for over 40% of its year-to-date gain of $914 million. The fund’s price has risen nearly 3% year-to-date, nearly erasing a 0.2% twelve-month decline.
The price index for personal consumption expenditures (PCE), the benchmark the Fed uses to track inflation, rose 1.3% year-over-year in January. The core index, which excludes food and fuel, rose 1.7%.
The Bottom Line
Worries about a deflationary environment have dogged markets for much of the recovery, and anxiety has only increased as an unprecedented negative interest rate policy spreads from Europe to Japan. Perhaps the fears are overblown, however, as markets’ inflation expectations appear to have bottomed out last month. As the rout in commodity and fuel prices drops out of comparisons, inflation data is likely to look more encouraging. That, in turn, could prompt action by the Federal Reserve.
TIPS are Hot: Is Inflation Back?

What Caused the Great Depression?


What Caused the Great Depression?
By Anthony Jerdine
What Caused The Great Depression?
Economists may dream of a perfect market where no bubbles, crashes, or recessions occur, but these phenomena are inevitable when the players are human. The Great Depression, one of the worst blows to the world economy, serves as a prime example of how vulnerable markets can be.
The stock market crash of 1929, usually cited as the beginning of the Great Depression, was preceded by the Roaring ’20s, a period when the American public discovered the stock market and dove in head first. The crash wiped out many people’s investments and the public was understandably shaken. When bank failures erased the savings of those who weren’t even invested in the stock market, people were shattered. Although the market crash was unavoidable, the bank failures could have been prevented with better regulation. Read on to find out how the Great Depression occurred.
The Fickle Fed
Twenty-two years earlier, the panic of 1907 offered a similar scenario, as panic selling sent the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) spiraling downward and led to a bank run to boot. With no Federal Reserve to inject cash into the market, it fell upon investment banker J.P. Morgan to organize Wall Street. Morgan rallied people who had cash to spare and moved that capital to banks lacking funds. The panic led the government to create the Federal Reserve, in part to cut its reliance on financial figures like Morgan in the future. (For more on the Federal Reserve, read How the Federal Reserve Was Formed.)
In the crash of 1929, however, the Fed took the opposite course by cutting the money supply by nearly a third, thus choking off hopes of a recovery. Consequently, many banks suffering liquidity problems simply went under. The Fed’s harsh reaction, while difficult to understand, may have occurred because it wished to give Wall Street some tough love by refusing to bail out careless banks, a response that it felt would only encourage more fiscal irresponsibility in the future. (For insight on the crash of 1929, see The Crash of 1929 – Could It Happen Again?)
Ironically, by increasing the money supply and keeping interest rates low during the roaring twenties, the Fed instigated the rapid expansion that preceded the collapse. In some ways, it set up the market bubble leading to the crash and then kicked the economy when it was down. Although some people, such as Milton Friedman have rightly suggested that the Fed’s mismanagement of the economic situation greatly contributed to the Great Depression, there still would probably have been a minor recession regardless of government involvement.
Presidential Blunders
President Roosevelt rode into office by characterizing a “do nothing” attitude. In truth, however, his predecessor, Herbert Hoover, had done far too much to try to halt the recession following the crash. One of Hoover’s main concerns was that workers’ wages would be cut following the economic downturn. In order to ensure artificially high wages among all businesses, he reasoned, prices needed to stay high so companies would continue producing. To keep prices high, consumers with the money would need to pay more. Yet the public had been burned badly in the crash, and most did not have the resources to overpay for products.
This bleak reality forced Hoover to use legislation, the government’s trump card, to try to prop up wages. Following in the unfortunate tradition of the protectionists, Congress tried to restrict the flow of foreign goods by passing the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. Because foreign nations weren’t willing to buy over-priced American goods any more than Americans were, Hoover decided to choke out cheap imports. The Smoot-Hawley Act started out as a way to protect agriculture, but swelled into a multi-industry tariff. Other nations retaliated with their own tariffs, essentially cutting off international trade. Not surprisingly, the economic conditions worsened worldwide and the U.S. economy sunk from a recession into a depression.
Although Roosevelt promised change when he came into office, he continued Hoover’s economic intervention, only on a bigger scale. He created the New Deal with the best intentions, but like Hoover’s wage controls, it backfired. With previous recession/depression cycles, the U.S. suffered one to three years of low wages and unemployment before the dropping prices led to a recovery. Responding to this historical trend of a few hard years followed by a recovery, American industrialist and philanthropist J.D. Rockefeller remarked, “These are days when many are discouraged. In the 93 years of my life, depressions have come and gone. Prosperity has always returned and will again.” By attempting to immediately recover without swallowing the bitter pill of two hard years, Hoover and Roosevelt may have actually prolonged the pain.
New Deal
The New Deal set lofty goals to maintain public works, full employment, and healthy wages through price, wage, and even production controls. The New Deal was loosely based on Keynesian economics, specifically on the idea that government works can stimulate the economy. Occasionally these projects were ideal, but there were just as many cases of mismanagement, political back-scratching and general waste that dogs government-run initiatives. (For related reading, see Can Keynesian Economics Reduce Boom-Bust Cycles?)
One of the most heartbreaking results of the New Deal was the destruction of excess crops to justify the artificially high prices, despite the need for cheap food. In fact, many of the agencies created by the New Deal broke up black markets selling cheap goods. This forced factory workers to stop working and generally halted the production that was needed for recovery. Even unemployment remained high because companies couldn’t afford to keep large payrolls at the rates set by the government.
Eventually, recovery came in the unappealing form of World War II. Although the notion that the war ended the Great Depression is a broken window fallacy, it did open up international trading channels and reverse price and wage controls. Suddenly, the government wanted lots of things made inexpensively, and pushed wages and prices below market levels. When the war finished, the trade routes remained open and the post-war era went from recovery to a bull run in a few short years.
The Bottom Line
The Great Depression was the result of an unlucky combination of factors – a reticent Fed, protectionist tariffs and a Keynesian, government-centered recovery plan. It could have been shortened or even avoided by a change in any one of these. Many supporters of the government’s intervention point out that the quick recovery from other depression/recession cycles may not have occurred as rapidly in 1929 because it was the first time that the general public, and not just the Wall Street elite, lost large amounts in the stock market. Similarly, the Fed can avoid fault because it didn’t know that the government would pass a trade-crushing tariff and take other questionable measures.

How The Federal Reserve Was Formed?


How The Federal Reserve Was Formed
By Anthony Jerdine
The Federal Reserve is widely considered to be one of the most important financial institutions in the world. The Fed can either be your kindly grandmother or the mother-in-law from hell, and its character is usually a function of the Federal Reserve’s board of governors. Its monetary policy decisions can send waves through not only the U.S. markets, but also the world.
In this article we will look at the formation of the Federal Reserve and follows its history as it riles the market and then turns it around and sends it to new highs.
Life Before the Federal Reserve
The United States was considerably more unstable financially before the creation of the Federal Reserve. Panics, seasonal cash crunches and a high rate of bank failures made the U.S. economy a riskier place for international and domestic investors to place their capital. The lack of dependable credit stunted growth in many sectors, including agriculture and industry.
J.P. Morgan and the Panic of 1907
It was J.P. Morgan who forced the government into acting on the central banking plans it had been considering off and on for almost a century. During the Bank Panic of 1907, Wall Street turned to J.P. Morgan to steer the country through the crisis that was threatening to push the economy over the edge into a full crash and depression. Morgan was able to convene all the principal players at his mansion and command all their capital to flood the system, thus floating the banks that, in turn, helped to float the businesses until the panic passed.
The fact that the government owed its economic survival to a private banker forced the necessary legislation to create a central bank and the Federal Reserve.
Learning from Europe
In the years between 1907 and 1913, the top bankers and government officials in the U.S. formed the National Monetary Commission and traveled to Europe to see how the central banking was handled there. They came back with favorable impressions of the British and German systems, using them as the base and adding some improvements gleaned from other countries.
The Federal Reserve was given power over the money supply and, by extension, the economy. Although many forces within the public and government were calling for a central bank that printed money on demand, President Wilson was swayed by Wall Street arguments against a system that would cause rampant inflation. So the government created the Federal Reserve, but it was by no means under government control.
The Great Depression
The government soon came to regret the freedom it had granted the Federal Reserve as it stood by during the crash of 1929 and refused to prevent the Great Depression that followed.
Even now, it is hotly debated whether the Fed could have stopped the depression, but there is little doubt that it could have done more to soften and shorten it by providing lower interest rates to allow farmers to keep planting and businesses to keep producing. The high interest rates may even have been responsible for the unplanted fields that turned into dust bowls. By restricting the money supply at a bad time, the Fed starved out many individuals and businesses that might otherwise have survived.
The Recovery
It was World War II, not the Federal Reserve, that lifted the economy out of the depression. The war benefited the Federal Reserve as well by expanding its power and the amount of capital it was called on to control for the Allies. After the war, the Fed was able to erase some of the bad memories from the depression by keeping interest rates low as the U.S. economy went on a bull run that was virtually uninterrupted until the ’60s.
Inflation or Unemployment?
Stagflation and inflation hit the U.S. in the ’70s, slapping the economy across the face, but hurting the public far more than business. The Nixon administration ended the nation’s on and off again affair with the gold standard, making the Fed that much more important in controlling the value of the U.S. dollar. The big question for the Fed was whether the nation was better off with inflation or unemployment.
By controlling interest rates, the Fed can make corporate credit easy to obtain, thus encouraging business to expand and create jobs. Unfortunately, this increases inflation as well. On the flip side, the fed can slow inflation by raising interest rates and slowing down the economy, causing unemployment. The history of the Fed is simply each chairman’s answer to this central question.
The Greenspan Years
Alan Greenspan took over the Federal Reserve a year before the infamous crash of 1987. When we think of crashes, many people consider the crash of 1987 more of a glitch than a true crash – a non-event nearer to a panic. This is true only because of the actions of Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve. Much like J.P. Morgan in 1907, Alan Greenspan collected all the necessary chiefs and kept the economy afloat.
Through the Fed, however, Greenspan used the additional weapon of low interest rates to carry business through the crisis. This marked the first time that the Fed had operated as its creators first envisioned 80 years before.
The Bottom Line
Criticisms of the Federal Reserve continue. Boiled down, these arguments center on the image people have of the caretaker of the economy. You can either have a Fed that feeds the economy with ideal interest rates leading to low unemployment – possibly leading to future problems – or you can have a Fed that offers little help, ultimately forcing the economy to learn to help itself. The ideal Fed would be willing to do both. Although there have been calls for the elimination of the Federal Reserve as the U.S. economy matures, it is very likely that the Fed will continue to guide the economy for many years to come.
How The Federal Reserve Was Formed

Sunday, March 6, 2016


Mindset shift


It’s controversial when I say that “Poverty is a state of mind” because people don’t think deeply through what I mean. Obviously being poor is real, not 100% mental. I have been broke before.
But what got me off that couch was a change in mindset. A shift.
Without that mental shift, no amount of handouts or well-meaning people’s help would have done me any good in the long run.
For today’s Book-of-the-Day, I was reading “Creating a Learning Society” by Joseph Stiglitz.
He says, “The transformation to ‘learning societies’ which occurred around 1800 for Western economies, and more recently for those in Asia, appears to have had a greater impact on human well-being than improvements in allocative efficiency or resource accumulation.”
Joseph Stiglitz won a Nobel Prize as an economist and his scientific research confirmed that what actually keeps nations, communities, and individuals poor is not primarily a lack of capital or opportunities (what most people think).
Instead, Stiglitz found the root is a lack of knowledge, and more specifically a lack of knowledge on how to gain more knowledge.
The inability to learn quickly and efficiently…
What his research found was, “What separates developed from less-developed countries is not just a gap in resources but a gap in knowledge.”
Like the Chinese saying goes, “Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.”
You must learn how to learn.
It’s an art and a skill.
Most people are too slow of learners due to their fixed mindset that won’t adapt to feedback analysis because of their simple stubbornness and delusion (wishing the world was like their fantasies instead of having the courage to seek truth).
Learn how to learn more quickly and you will live a very rich life (not just financially).
P.S. Joseph Stiglitz said knowledge is one of the central features of a learning society. Most new entrepreneurs fail because they make decisions without enough knowledge.
Mindset shift is key

Wall Street Week


March 7, 2016
Good news is good news
Don’t look now, but the U.S. economy is actually doing pretty well. Even more significant, though, is the fact markets are treating the good news as, er, good news!
First, the data. This week February auto sales volume reached its highest level since 2001, the U.S. manufacturing sector contracted more slowly, the Fed Beige Book showed evidence of upward wage pressures and a better-than-expected monthly jobs report highlighted the health of the U.S. labor market.
The big one, Friday’s non-farm payrolls report, revealed the U.S. economy created 242,000 jobs in February (versus expectations of around 190,000) while an increase in labor force participation caused the unemployment rate to hold firm at 4.9%. The only negative aspect of the report was wage growth, which declined year-over-year.
There were even more bullish details hidden deeper in the report, like the household survey showing employment gains of 530,000 and the construction unemployment rate falling to its lowest seasonally-adjusted level since 2006. The economy has now recorded positive job gains for a record 65 straight months (the previous record was 48). The raft of strong data prompted the Atlanta Fed to revise its Q1 GDPNow forecast up three basis points to 2.2%.
What does it all mean? After the financial crisis the Federal Reserve reflated asset prices by moving interest rates to zero and introducing quantitative easing. It worked, but also conditioned markets to look at every piece of economic data through the prism of what it meant for monetary policy. Good data was bad for the market because it meant the Fed might take away the “punch bowl.” Stocks rallied on bad data because it meant QE might grow or last longer.
Investors held a deep-seated anxiety about what would happen when the Fed exited the market, like agoraphobics scared to leave the house without benzodiazepines. Chairman Ben Bernanke increased the Fed’s communication to help wean stocks off the drugs, and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) made a largely symbolic rate hike in December 2015 to expedite the normalization process.
Heading into 2016, the consensus among economists was that risks of recession over the next 12-18 months were low. The Fed’s dot plot even forecast four interest rate hikes in 2016. However, a flight to safe-haven bonds indicated financial markets weren’t buying into the rosy outlook. Over the past few weeks, though, that trend has changed as the spread between economist and market views has started to tighten.
The fact markets are responding more rationally to fundamentals is a positive development. The fact good news is good news is good news. Part of it boils down to the eroding credibility of central banks, but perhaps that shift was necessary to force local governments into fiscal stimulus and structural reforms.
This week’s data moved up the timetable for a 2016 rate hike, but the market didn’t seem to care. Investors have been yearning for a market where things make sense, and at least in the U.S. we have taken the first steps in that transition – for better or worse.
Industrial evolution
The narrative goes that ‘China is killing us on trade.’ But the same forces of globalization that led to the decline of North American industry are actually starting to reverse with a vengeance due to currency fluctuations. Chinese manufacturers are moving factories to Mexico and South Carolina, which more than any other state has experienced the pain and gain of globalization. As Donald Trump wrote on his Trump University blog, outsourcing jobs is not always a terrible thing in the long run.
Overall global trade, though, has grown at a lackluster pace for five straight years, a trend not seen since the 1970s. Much of the blame has been assigned to slowing demand from China, but a growing number of economists are researching the correlation between the growth of the digital economy and the slowdown in global trade. As automation like 3-D printing continues to disrupt traditional labor-intensive manufacturing, the trend could accelerate.
The flow of digital information around the world more than doubled between 2013 and 2015. Companies have begun bringing production closer to home or concentrating it in bigger markets. Digital transfer of information is replacing cargo ships. While the developed world will be forced to adapt to the structural decline of industrial jobs, the diversity of the U.S. economy means the current manufacturing recession isn’t really a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
China
Chinese markets got in on the act this week, recording their biggest weekly gain of 2016 in spite of an unconvincing performance at the G20 summit, a credit outlook cut from Moody’s (its first negative action on China’s credit rating since 1998) and large-scale public sector layoffs. Maybe it helped that the government reportedly intervened in the stock market Friday.
The worst kept secret in the world is that the Chinese banking system has a lot of bad debt on its hands. But that isn’t stopping bankers from packaging those loans into securitized products. Smell like subprime? Sort’ve, but in this case there are no illusions about these assets being AAA-rated.
China’s bid to restore confidence also rumbles on, with the government this week muzzling an outspoken business man on social media and seeking to humanize President Xi Jinping by highlighting the four known times he cried.
Sweet oil
With oil languishing in the $30s, a wave of bankruptcies in the energy sector is inevitable, with well-capitalized firms waiting in the wings to scoop up distressed assets. This week, Exxon said I’ll see your $450 million IPO and raise you a $12 billion bond offering. Amid the looming threat of a credit downgrade, the oil giant decided to go ahead and start building its war-chest.
Meanwhile, the U.S. shale industry tells OPEC: if oil gets back above $40, we’re coming back. While shale producers at one time had break-evens of around $60-70/barrel, technological advancements have continued to drive down production costs. Saudi-led OPEC has been attempting to drive “uneconomic producers” out of business before agreeing to any production cuts, but has, more than anything, just shot itself in the foot. Exhibit A: Saudi foreign exchange reserves are tanking. When oil prices do rise, those West Texas shale wells will just come back online under new ownership, anyway.
Argentina!
They did it. Argentina reached a deal with its remaining holdout creditors, who will receive 75% of their claims and enjoy handsome returns on their 15 year-old investment. The deal is contingent on the Argentine congress repealing legislation blocking the government from paying late holdouts better terms than those in earlier restructurings, but that is expected to be a formality.
To pay for the deal, Argentina will raise the $15 billion in overseas bond markets, to which it will have access for the first time since 2001. After 15 years of bad-faith negotiations, though, the holdouts are still skeptical of Argentina and will push for the payments to take place before the injunction preventing Argentina from issuing bonds is lifted.
It’s been emotional, but this is a win for everyone, including new Argentine President Mauricio Macri, who has targeted a series of structural reforms to boost the nation’s moribund economy. The fate of his administration’s business-friendly approach could have major implications throughout the region.
Indexing vs the Yale (Endowment) Model
If you have a truly long-term investment horizon, you can outperform liquid index funds by investing in a portfolio of mostly private, levered, illiquid securities. That is the belief underlying the Yale (Endowment) Model pioneered by David Swensen in the late 1980s.
The problem is that after two decades of outperformance (which ended spectacularly in 2009), the institutional investing world caught on, piled into private equity and eliminated much of the illiquidity premium. The Yale Model is flawed and unsustainable according to the former and current CIOs of Hewlett-Packard (HP).
Failure to see the big picture
Two weeks ago we talked about Neel Kashkari’s well-marketed, misguided plan to regulate Wall Street banks like nuclear reactors. This week, the Wall Street Journal’s Greg Ip wrote ‘too big to fail’ critics go too far on banks. “In their zeal to stamp out any possibility of future government bailouts, policy makers risk creating new vulnerabilities that could undermine the economy and make the next crisis worse.”
Especially if those policies are crowdsourced.
The idea that stringent regulation would solve the financial industry’s ills has been put to the test this year as big bank stocks have been pummeled under pressure from slow growth and negative interest rates. Bill Gross thinks Wall Street should just start getting used to a new, lower-margin normal.
Emerging opportunity
Last week we talked about PIMCO’s view that emerging markets could be the “trade of the decade.” This week, investors continued to make the case that emerging markets (EM) have gotten “so bad they’re good.” The best time to diversify into an asset class is after an extreme period of underperformance, not outperformance, wrote Charlie Bilello, making EM an attractive play right now. EM Looks Terrible—Time To Buy, wrote Larry Swedroe.
Perhaps the most troubled emerging market of the bunch, Brazil, found out this week that its economy shrank by 3.8% last year – its steepest contraction in 25 years. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicts a further 3.5% decline for the Brazilian economy in 2016, which would mark the country’s worst recession since 1901.
However, Brazil’s Ibovespa benchmark index rallied an eye-popping 20% this week amid news the crackdown on systemic government corruption is gaining steam. Former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was detained and questioned, increasing pressure on his hand-picked successor President Dilma Rousseff, whose defiance in impeachment proceedings has prevented the implementation of structural reforms needed to resuscitate the Brazilian economy.
The complicated legacy of Aubrey McClendon
One day after being charged with conspiracy to suppress prices for oil and natural gas leases, former Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon died in a fiery single car crash in Oklahoma City. Although his career was somewhat tainted by his 2013 ouster from Chesapeake and the recent conspiracy charges, in his heyday McClendon was known as a charismatic, swashbuckling innovator who spearheaded the U.S. shale revolution.
In other news
Bloomberg’s Luke Kawa kindly created a user guide for Warren Buffett’s annual Berkshire Hathaway shareholder letter.
JP Morgan GEO Jamie Dimon conducted a rare, wide-ranging interview with Bloomberg News editor-in-chief John Micklethwait in which he gave a frank assessment of the future of finance.
For the first time, Google accepted blame for an accident involving one of its self-driving cars.
Nobody is eating at steakhouses in New York’s Financial District anymore because Wall Street has moved north to Midtown.
Meet the $18 million Yahoo exec you’ve never heard of. Yahoo! might be hemorrhaging money, but at least its executives are making out well.
In case we need another reminder about the no-brainer case for infrastructure investment, Mark Thoma laid it out very eloquently.
Robots are coming for Wall Street: The New York Times put together an insightful series on how technology is reshaping the workplace.
Weekly Roundup
Markets rally on oil, financials
Global stocks rallied for the third straight week amid signs of a strengthening U.S. economy and waning fears over China’s economic slowdown. The small-cap Russell 2000 led the way with a 4.3% gain, followed by the Nasdaq (2.8%), S&P 500 (2.7%) and Dow (2.2%). After a three-week rally totaling 7.4%, the S&P is now down only 2.2% year-to-date.
As risk appetite flooded back into the market, U.S. treasurys sold off ten basis points to 1.86% while junk bonds capped off their largest seven-day inflow since such record-keeping began in 2002. Oil certainly played its part in the equity and junk bond rally, with West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude rallying nearly 11% for the week to $36.33/barrel. Equity and credit in beaten-down energy names enjoyed large rallies from depressed prices, an example being Chesapeake Energy (CHK), which spiked more than 40%.
Economic Data
Friday’s jobs report capped off a week of strong economic data (more on that above). The U.S. economy added 242,000 non-farm jobs in February (versus expectations for 190,000) with upward revisions to January and December. The bad news was wage growth declined 0.1% year over year. By Friday, Fed Funds Futures markets were predicting around a 50% chance of a September rate hike, whereas expectations at the beginning of the week favored a December hike. The raft of strong data prompted the Atlanta Fed to revise its Q1 GDPNow forecast up three basis points to 2.2%.
Asia
Asian markets also enjoyed impressive gains for the third straight week.
Japan’s Nikkei 225 rallied 5.2% and is now more than 12% off its recent lows, although still down around 10% in 2016. For the first time ever, the Japanese government sold 10-year notes at negative interest rates – and the $19 billion auction was three times oversubscribed! Japanese officials touted the merits of negative interest rate policy (NIRP) while leaders at the G20 summit pledged to pursue more structural and fiscal reforms in place of unconventional monetary policy.
China’s Shanghai Composite rallied 3.9% while Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index gained 4.2%. After assuring global finance chiefs at the G20 summit it had the tools to cope with slowing growth, China eased pressure on its banking system by cutting its reserve requirement ratio to 17% from 17.5%, a move expected to free up more than $100 billion.
Europe
Europe’s Stoxx 600 Index rallied 4.4% as pressure on bank shares subsided. While U.S. markets rallied on strong data, European markets are being boosted by expectations for further stimulus from the European Central Bank (ECB) next week. Eurozone consumer prices fell at an annualized rate of 0.2% in February, doing nothing to change the ECB’s thinking.
Emerging Markets
Former Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (“Lula”) was detained by federal authorities in connection with the corruption and fraud scandal that has ravaged the country’s economy. Current President Dilma Rousseff, the Workers Party’s handpicked successor to Lula, faces the increasing likelihood of impeachment, a fact cheered by Brazilian markets eager to put the catastrophic era behind them. In fact, the benchmark Ibovespa index finished the week up around 20% despite news the country’s economy contracted by the widest margin in 25 years.
After 15 years of negotiations, Argentina reached a deal with holdout creditors over defaulted debt pending approval from the Argentine congress. President Mauricio Macri’s new government moved swiftly to resolve the quarrel only three months into his term, allowing Argentina to once again tap global credit markets.
Corporate News
U.S. exchanges, Intercontentintal Exchange Group (ICE) and CME Group, are reportedly considering bids for the London Stock Exchange (LSE) to rival its advanced merger talks with the Deutsche Boerse.
Wall Street Week