Fed Taper

Reducing QE by $10b per month.
«1

Replies

  • tim_stim_s Senior Member Posts: 1,951 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    Reducing QE by $10b per month.



    this is a good thing potentially, yes?


    sign that the economy is in better shape, needs less propping up?
    Fly Fishing in Maine - www.flyfishinginmaine.com
  • Fed is clearly feeling better about life than in did in December.
  • higher short term interest rates?

    <Glad I locked mine when I did>
  • It's interesting. The ten-year T-Bond rate is actually down. Market apparently is breathing a sigh of relief b/c Bernanke said to expect further tapering to be very slow.
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 6,736 Senior Member
    Did anyone else think fly line for a second?
    Buffco?

    Serious question: Is the Fed Chairman truly the most powerful individual in the world?


    Sent from my ObamaPhone using Tapatalk
  • I've always thought he or she was the second most powerful, although with China owning so much of our debt, that may now be questionable.
  • BuffcoBuffco Senior Member Posts: 10,244 Senior Member
    Shawn C. wrote: »
    Did anyone else think fly line for a second?
    Buffco?

    No. I thought about Federal ammunition, and then cartridge taper.
  • Buffco wrote: »
    No. I thought about Federal ammunition, and then cartridge taper.

    You haven't lived our culture. You are. . .what's the word I'm looking for here. . . nekulturny.
  • HextallHextall Senior Member Posts: 9,520 Senior Member
    Perfect double taper.

    - George Brett
  • dryfliedryflie Senior Member Posts: 1,442 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    I've always thought he or she was the second most powerful, although with China owning so much of our debt, that may now be questionable.

    With China holding but 1.3T of our total 16T+ debt it's significant but hardly overwhelming.
    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” - John Kenneth Galbraith
  • BuffcoBuffco Senior Member Posts: 10,244 Senior Member
    Nice. Had to Google that one.

    Wait a minute. Guns has a culture!

    /wipeshandsonpants
    //sniffs, wipes nose
  • Buffco wrote: »
    Nice. Had to Google that one.

    Wait a minute. Guns has a culture!

    /wipeshandsonpants
    //sniffs, wipes nose

    I got that from reading Tom Clancy novels in my youth. Serious.
  • dryflie wrote: »
    With China holding but 1.3T of our total 16T+ debt it's significant but hardly overwhelming.

    If they dumped, the s would hit the f.
    There's a scene in "Too Big to Fail" in which the Chinese Finance Minister informs Henry Paulson that the Chinese have been approached by the Russians with a plan to dump their combined Treasury holdings - basically to cripple our economy. After Paulson soils his pants, the Minister informs him that the Chinese rebuffed the Russians.
  • I saw that movie. You think that really happened?

    What incentive do the Chinese have to dump that debt?
  • In fact, doesn't China HAVE to buy that debt, to prop up their currency?
  • Yes, that happened. Paulson confirms it in his own memoir.
    From an economic viewpoint, they probably have no incentive, right now. To the extent they have aspirations of super power-dom, who knows.

    Buying our debt helps keep the yuan lower than it would be otherwise.
  • Best line in that movie: (from memory, so not exact)

    So you want to merge the two biggest banks in America into one superbank?

    Yeah. . . is that a problem?

    no. . .they're just gonna be really f*cking big.
  • The first time I saw that movie, I started hyperventilating, like it was all coming back.

    The second half of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009 were a nightmare.
  • dryfliedryflie Senior Member Posts: 1,442 Senior Member
    Steven wrote: »
    If they dumped, the s would hit the f.
    There's a scene in "Too Big to Fail" in which the Chinese Finance Minister informs Henry Paulson that the Chinese have been approached by the Russians with a plan to dump their combined Treasury holdings - basically to cripple our economy. After Paulson soils his pants, the Minister informs him that the Chinese rebuffed the Russians.

    Seems to me the Chinese made the right decision. Crippling our economy would simply cripple their own as well as the European economy. What all this would do to the Russians is unclear to me but it hardly seems good.

    There's an interesting series of Novels (Chung Kuo) by David Wingrove which postulates China's destruction of the world's economy by financial manipulation. This is Scifi stuff of course.
    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” - John Kenneth Galbraith
  • MikeAMikeA Senior Member Posts: 3,783 Senior Member
    dryflie wrote: »
    Seems to me the Chinese made the right decision. Crippling our economy would simply cripple their own as well as the European economy. What all this would do to the Russians is unclear to me but it hardly seems good.

    Speaking of economics. I watched Surviving Progress last night. Great show and worth watching if you have Netflix.

    David Suzuki's segment stuck with me. "Conventional Economics is a form of brain damage."
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fciwoXxgSP8
  • MikeA wrote: »
    Speaking of economics. I watched Surviving Progress last night. Great show and worth watching if you have Netflix.

    David Suzuki's segment stuck with me. "Conventional Economics is a form of brain damage."
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fciwoXxgSP8

    Unfortunately, Suzuki (a geneticist/activist) wasn't speaking of economics, and if he ever took a course in economics it must have been macro.

    Referencing something as an externality doesn't mean that economists think it doesn't matter or don't care about it as Suzuki implies. Externality means that the total cost or benefit of an action accrues to more than just the party that chose to incur that cost or benefit. Externalities can be negative (pollution) or positive (if I get a flu shot, the guy in the next office benefits).

    There is a whole sub-branch of economics that has studied the problem of externalities, how externalities lead to market breakdowns and what to do about it. Nobel prizes have been awarded.

    Let me ask you something: Would you think it worth watching an economist/activist discuss global warming? How about a Ph.D. in Old English Lit discussing Alzheimer's research?
  • Steven wrote: »
    How about a Ph.D. in Old English Lit discussing Alzheimer's research?

    This might be worth a look. sign me up.
  • I'm sure PBS has one on tape.
  • ricinusricinus Senior Member Posts: 6,214 Senior Member
    David Suzuki is a Canadian version of Al Gore..

    Mike
    My new goal in life is to become an Alter Kaker...
  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,813 Senior Member
    ricinus wrote: »
    David Suzuki is a Canadian version of Al Gore..

    Mike

    Did he invent your version of the internet? Is it powered by motorcycles, or by the harmonic power of tens of thousands of violins?
    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 2,926 Senior Member
    David Suzuki is correct, economics deals with the money system and how to benefit from its manipulation. Monetary profit is the driving force and its effects on the physical environment are externalities and mostly detrimental.

    An energy production and distribution system based in science, and wholly in accord with nature and the physical environment is the solution to the problem.
  • EdB wrote: »
    David Suzuki is correct, economics deals with the money system and how to benefit from its manipulation. Monetary profit is the driving force and its effects on the physical environment are externalities and mostly detrimental.

    Meanwhile Mexicans starve while oil underground is considered to be owned by all Mexicans. And because nobody "owns" it, it's not worth anybody's while to develop it.
  • dryfliedryflie Senior Member Posts: 1,442 Senior Member
    Me thinks Mr Suzuki has twisted Steven's panties. FWIW I believe Economics is a science, however much like Meteorology it can tell you what is happening today but 3 weeks out it's about as accurate as any long range weather report.
    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” - John Kenneth Galbraith
  • EdBEdB Senior Member Posts: 2,926 Senior Member
    Burning fossil fuels has been scientifically determined to be detrimental to the environment (global warming) and the survival of humans on earth. Guy McPherson was on Abby Martin's program "Breaking the Set" last night explaining why it's already too late to save the human species from extinction. I don't know if he's correct, but he probably is if we continue with the money system and don't replace it with an energy system.

    The solution to the problem of starving Mexicans is to replace the money system with an energy system which would provide an abundance of food for everyone in North America with the scientifically determined least harm to the environment.
  • dryflie wrote: »
    Me thinks Mr Suzuki has twisted Steven's panties.

    There's plenty of stupid around. What gets me in a twist is the belief that just because a person is breathing means he or she understands economics.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.