This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Bernanke Buys $7 Billion In 7 Year Bonds
PIMCO alone is one thing. PIMCO and the FED combined is a whole new ballgame not even the bond vigilantes have much of an appetite for.
Even as he was testifying today, Ben was hitting the Green means Gobble button on his blackberry. The end result: $7 billion bought out of $18.6 billion in submitted orders. The other end result: Jenny Craig 0, Fed Balance Sheet Liabilities +7,000,000,000
»
- 3265 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I don't understand, BB has said consistently that "We are not monetizing."
Isn't this monetizing?
Can someone clarify for this dinosaur-brain? TIA
I think he waved his arm as he said that before congress, ala Obi Wan Kenobi.
It does seem to be a contradiction in terms does it not? Perhaps when they announce a 'special program ' to do QE, they don't consider it QE.
As always, watch what liars do, not what they say.
Bernanke, Obama, BUsh, Geithner, Paulson, Barney 'I alter history' everytime I speak' Frank; they are all corrupt.
regarding the aforementioned criminals, truer
words were never spoken throw in crook chris dodd.
Here is Ben's explanation:
He isn't monetizing because he sold treasuries first before he bought more treasuries, so he holds about the same amount of treasuries.
FWIW, I don't think he actually sold the treasuries, but swapped them for other assets through his programs, so he can say "see, our treasury holdings are about normal" while still monetizing the debt. If you are looking for a legitimate, logical answer, well keep dreaming.
yes, that is exactly what he's done. Whenever he claims he's not monetizing, all he's doing is putting on display for the entire thinking world to see, how much of an arrogant BS artist he really is as well as what contempt he has for the rest of the populace. Yes, he is absolutely monetizing debt is the short answer.
I also remember him saying back in 2006 (or 2007?) that he doesn't buy the premise that real estate prices will ever go down, because historically they never went down before. Simple as that. My advice: don't listen to what he says, but look at what he does.
This is the second event in the last few weeks. A few weeks ago, Geitner or Bernanke( I forget which one) where speaking on the hill. As they were speaking, a significant news release was put out by their agency. Talk about running scared. There was discussion here about frontrunning as overnight futures had spiked prior to the news release.
Is Bernanke playing word games? He said "he(Fed) wasn't monetizing debt". If Pimpco is doing it for him, then he's right. Maybe the question isn't being asked correctly. "Are the FED or it's agents monetizing debt?" Is Pimpco an agent? I don't know.
monetizing is occurring virtually through fed
shill
agents at treasury auctions who bid up the price of
bonds. this what a lot of the "indirect" bidding
is about. suspect deutche bank and ecb among others
Can CB's use currency swaps, which are off-balance sheet transactions, to support bond purchases? You buy mine, I buy yours. Could they monetize each others debt?
When Rep Grayson asked Bernanke about the spike in the dollar coincident to opening half-trillion dollar swap lines all across Europe, he was basically asking him this question. When Bernanke said it was a coincidence Grayson just laughed at him.
Sometimes all you can do is ridicule the ridiculous.
I don't think BB is classifying any of the Feds purchases of Treasury debt monetizing, per se.
It's like a duck quacking and claiming it's not a duck. It's a mallard.
It's still a duck, Bennie.
I think they re-introduced the 7-year just for the sake of monetizing it. None of the major sites (Yahoo, Google) track it on their top-level pages. It receives much less scrutiny than any other maturity.
Bastards...
My position in TMV took it on the chin today, but I'm happy holding it until yields shoot past 6.5%.
http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=acdeq6NF3748
Nice link. The terms of that CIT loan is so egregious that the only reason I can see the board supporting this is to buy a few months of time for the stock to run up so directors/executives can cash something out in the money.
Otherwise, CIT is just wasting its time and screwing a different investor base.
Am I having an acid flashback? Babylon... http://www.shavethetraders.com/index.html
You don't even understand how pissed I am, I spent 2 months convincing my coworkers to start purchasing treasuries. The ticket was ready to go.... then the yield dropped 10 points and I spent the rest of the day fighting again. Fuck the last safe yielding investment up for the rest of the RIA community up. Yep, we're fucked.
you being serious? youve been trying to convice people to buy us treasuries? or did i totally miss the sarcasm here somewhere?
Mr. bernanke is a traitor to this country under the service of wall street actively destroying the monetary base in oder to allow them to keep getting their bonus.
I look at TBT, and I do not understand hw we can be hitting new highs, but treasury yeilds not hitting new highs. Nobody buying this crap. I figured it would be a good way to protect against dollr collapse, have to rethink
IMO, about a coin flip which wins out in the short term (1-2 years), the hyperinflationary expansion of the monetary base by the Fed in the last 9-10 months or the severe deflationary pressures present (and growing stronger each day) in the ashes of what we used to call "the US economy." And, I don't give a rat's ass about the latest CPI number to come out of the BLS (or any portion of their report) showing inflation. BLS should stand for Bureau of Liars and Scumbags.
My guess is the deflationary pressures win in the short term followed by hyperinflation on the heels of even more reckless monetary and fiscal policy in response. Could easily be the chicken (hyperinflation) before the egg, though.
This hyperinflation scenario is not going to happen because it already did...in housing!!
And of course Ben is monetizing. Much worse, its becoming rather obvious to John Q Public that tax dollars are sent abroad to then buy Treasuries. (After all can't have any failed auctions, now can we).
The problem is the bell has already been rung. Can we buy a little more time? Sure.Well maybe. If Obama 's declining popularity has any relationship with consumer confidence, so goes this faux green shoots economy.
PS- Why the fuck do I have to keep doing math problems when I'm signed in. This is bullshit Tyler.
C'mon big ben. Keep buying this stuff up. Daddy needs to re-fi (so I can pay the bank back with monopoly money). Joking aside, I was too much of a bumble to cash in on the 4.7% rates... if she'll get around 5, I'll go ahead and pull the trigger. I won't be looking a gift horse in the mouth the second time around.
Historically, foreign banks and the fed purchase 10 to 20 percent of the sales. At the 30 year bond sale a few weeks ago, they purchased over 50 percent of the issue.
Required participants are not making bids high enough for the Fed's satisfaction. If central banks did not purchase, the interest rates would be much higher.
It sounds like the half-trillion swap lines across Europe would be Ben paying for the bonds his shills (Rothschild banks) purchased for him.
Hey !! When Congress wants to spend money it does not receive in the form of taxes, they give a security (bill, bond, or note) to the Fed and the Fed establishes a line of credit in the amount of the security. The auction by the Treasury is to give an appearance the U.S. is borrowing the money but it is only an image to gloss the Fed's selling some of the securities to remove cash from circulation (same as the FOMC selling bonds). If the Fed did not sell securities, the economy would be awash in cash.
Why should we not say it is Congress that is monetizing the debt ??