This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Candy From Strangers, Or Who Is Buyng All Those Treasuries?

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Marc McHugh from Across the Street

Candy from Strangers

When TrimTabs Charles Biderman questioned the source of the money that propelled
stocks 65% from the March 2009 lows, he got beaten with the idiot stick
so badly that he actually turned bullish in April 2010.  Lost in the
ensuing choke-out was the fact that no one ever actually answered his
question, unless scoffing and muttering “dark pools and stuff,” under
your breath counts (and he’s the one who should be wearing the
tin-foil hat?
).  Here we go again. 

The first thing you should notice when looking at The Treasury’s
2010 Q1 Bulleti
n is that it’s  incomplete, as I’m sure most of
Secretary Tim Geithner’s homework assignments were.  Of the 12 columns
on Table OFS-2 (Estimated Ownership of U.S. Treasury Securities), Turbo
managed to fill in only 5 (FYI: it takes Treasury more than two
months to prepare the bulletin

From the data actually present, we can determine that Treasury issued
461.7 Billion in new debt Q1.  That’s not surprising,
we’ve been running at the $500 per person per month clip for almost two
years now.  What is surprising is that the Fed  &  Intragovernment
holdings went down $17B.  Foreigners,
God bless ‘em, scooped up an additional $192.5 B, while 
US saving bond  holdings were basically flat (-$1.1 B).

Um, we’re out of data now, but not debt.  287.4 Billion 
(62%) of  Q1′s public debt is not accounted for on the report.
Fortunately when discussing who could digest that much debt in three
months, we can quickly eliminate 6 of the 7 “not available” data points
(depository institutions, pension funds, mutual funds, insurance
companies, and State & local governments).  The only logical
conclusion is at least a quarter trillion  in debt was
purchased by “Other Investors” in Q1.

Aren’t you glad we cleared that up?

What’s that?  “Who the hell are Other Investors,” you say? 
Good question.  It does seem rather nebulous, especially considering
that they are now clearly our best customer(s).   Not very bright
though.  They stepped in and bought like crazy as interest rates went
to record lows.  Still I think we should send a basket of fruit and a
nice thank you note, because without them we would surely have had a
failed auction (read Keynesian apocalypse).

The Treasury defines Other Investors as: 

Individuals, Government-sponsored
enterprises, brokers and dealers, bank personal trusts and estates,
corporate and non-corporate businesses, and other investors.

Thanks Turbo, for narrowing  it down to just about everyone under the

Let’s go ask Ben!

Geithner’s a slacker, this is known, but Fed Chair Ben Bernanke’s SAT
score (1590!) suggests analality (?) (mine was considerably
lower).   Besides, Treasury’s footnotes on tables OFS-2 tell us
that  the source for 6 of the 7 empty columns is the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Flow of Funds Table
(and which was actually released before the Treasury
Bulletin – don’t get me started…).

The Fed’s flow of funds data is an exercise in convolution, but it
wasn’t too difficult to extract the data missing from the Treasury
bulletin.  Here’s the breakdown:

  •  Depository Institutions   +$59.6 B
  • Private Pension Funds   +$30.9 B
  • State & Local Government Pension Funds  +$7.1 B
  • Insurance Companies  $2.1 B
  • Mutual Funds  -$18.9 B
  • State & Local Governments  -8.5 B

Depository institutions and Private pensions purchased record amounts
of  Treasuries in Q1.  Which means that “Other Investors” accounted
for $215 B of the Treasuries issued in Q1.  Yes, I
realize that this is somewhat lower than my original estimate, but in my
defense that was a logical
conclusion.  Who knew banks and private pensions are expecting another
stock market collapse?  Nobody at CNBC anyway.  They’re too busy
laughing at Main Street for not seeing the awesomeness of the recovery.

Before putting away the Fed’s flow of funds, it is worth noting that
brokers and dealers (who are included as other investors) do
not share the pessimism of banks and private pensions.   They dumped $19
during the quarter.  This brings us to the turd in the
punchbowl.  The Household sector, who the Fed says
purchased a whopping $68 B.  Now before you start
thinking your neighbors are taking their unemployment checks and
sneaking off to Treasury auctions, listen to what Sprott Asset
Management’s Eric Sprott and David Franklin said of the household sector
in their December 2009 report entitled, Is it all just a Ponzi Scheme?:

To quote directly from the Flow of Funds Guide, “For
example, the amounts of Treasury securities held by all other sectors,
obtained from asset data reported by the companies or institutions
themselves, are subtracted from total Treasury securities outstanding,
obtained from the Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of
the United States Government and the balance is assigned to the
household sector.” (Emphasis ours) So to answer the question – who is
the Household Sector? They are a PHANTOM. They
don’t exist. They merely serve to balance the ledger in the Federal
Reserve’s Flow of Funds report.

I guess that means your neighbor isn’t our superhero, and besides, if
he was he’d have a cooler car.  So who are these strangers with candy
hell-bent on making sure this sugar high doesn’t end?   I don’t
There I said it.  Maybe Charles Biderman gets rattled
when everyone calls him a moron, but I’m used to it.  S0 fire away, but
answer the question.

By the end of 2010, Other Investors will own more than 10%
of the US public debt (1.5 Trillion or so).  They bought more than 45%
of the new debt in Q1.  At what point does this kind of opacity become
unacceptable?  Why can’t the Treasury fill out its own bulletin with
information already available?  Why do we have to wait five months for
information that is so vague, you can’t even call it information with a
straight face?

And last but not least, where do we send the fruit basket?

Other Reading:

Is it all just a Ponzi Scheme? (Sprott &

Smoking Guns of US Treasury Monetization (Jim Willie)

Treasury table OFS-2 (updated by author).


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:24 | 501832 Misean
Misean's picture

"They are a PHANTOM. They don’t exist."

Perhaps they're computers plugged into some rented office space in the Cayman Islands.

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 21:17 | 502076 DarkMath
DarkMath's picture

It's actually one big Household (no S). Don't tell ANYONE, but I've got a friend at the Treasury and he tells me they actually have a picture of "The Household" that is buying all that debt (it's a very very rich family, I won't bore you with the details). Once you see their house you'll understand how they can afford %10 of our Treasury Debt:


Tue, 08/03/2010 - 21:30 | 502092 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

No, that family is bankrupt too. They just have a printer. Shhhhhhh! Don't tell. Or the other countries will find out and want some too. Oh, wait...

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 08:36 | 502537 DarkAgeAhead
DarkAgeAhead's picture

Yep, all of those annoying futurists have been predicting the technological singularity for some time now.  Who could have figured though, when the computers developed AI, they'd start buying government debt rather than converting humans into usuable energy sources ala the Matrix!?

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:24 | 501833 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Ooh, ohh, I know the answer to this question, as it is always the same answer to the question "Who's the sucker?"

We are!

Isn't collectivism wonderful?

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:26 | 501836 Rainman
Rainman's picture

Whitney referred to bank revenues as " phantom " . Now this dude uses the same term to describe the non-existent household sector buying Treasuries.

Things are getting spookier.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 10:31 | 502015 Rusty_Shackleford
Rusty_Shackleford's picture

"I see dead people,... buying Treasuries."

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 14:09 | 502984 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

With my children's inheritance.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 15:27 | 503135 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

"I see Dead Presidents buying Treasuries"


"All the time."

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 00:01 | 502259 zhandax
zhandax's picture

Appreciate the sarcasm; Fed prints like there is no tomorrow and sticks the bill up the ass of every household in the US.  What more obvious place to account than the 'household' sector?

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 01:55 | 502336 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

Indeed. But there is only so much room to stick things before folks finally start to feel it. Something has to give. Has auditing the Fed come down to a colonoscopy? Bet we would learn more truth than what is being proposed.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 09:28 | 502612 zhandax
zhandax's picture

A true accounting "colonoscopy" of the fed would confuse me to no end...I dropped out of Pre-Med to enroll in the College of Business?

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:26 | 501839 poopdeville
poopdeville's picture


Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:31 | 501841 Goldenballs
Goldenballs's picture

Lets just say when this crap is brought and sold its amongst friends in high places some of which will be left holding the baby or will it carry on that long that it is repackaged and sold to a new generation who,ve not been burned.The more figures you see the more unreal it becomes, desperation ain,t the word .................................................... Carry on up the fed .........

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:33 | 501846 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

Market Ticker did a piece on this.  He talked about buying Bonds that did not exist and then shorted them.  More supply than demand to short them into the ground?

Who knows. 

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:33 | 501848 Boilermaker
Boilermaker's picture

You DO NOT want to know what is in the sausage.  Just eat it.

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:35 | 501849 drbill
drbill's picture

Nothing to see here. Move along....

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 23:02 | 502202 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

Wed, 08/11/2010 - 15:35 | 516156 andyupnorth
andyupnorth's picture

I love how when the old man says he's actually the wizard, Dorothy replies, "I don't believe you!"

It's hard to believe the truth when you've been lied to all your life.

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:36 | 501851 seventree
seventree's picture

Other Investors: Individuals, Government-sponsored enterprises, brokers and dealers, bank personal trusts and estates, corporate and non-corporate businesses, and Other Investors.

Let's try some variable substitution. That always helped me in algebra.

Other Investors: Individuals, Government-sponsored enterprises,

brokers and dealers, bank personal trusts and estates,

corporate and non-corporate businesses, and [

Individuals, Government-sponsored enterprises,

brokers and dealers, bank personal trusts and estates,

corporate and non-corporate businesses, and [

Individuals, Government-sponsored enterprises,

brokers and dealers, bank personal trusts and estates,

corporate and non-corporate businesses, and [...]...

Well, maybe not.

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 19:36 | 501956 SWCroaker
SWCroaker's picture

Okay.  THAT got a belly laugh.  :)

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:37 | 501856 Shameful
Shameful's picture

Could it be The Phantom?!?!?

We all know who is buying it.  Zimbabwe Ben is working the presses.  Man things sure are easy when you have an unelected unaudited organization manning the printing press!  Remember a lot of the foreign purchases came from places like the UK.  So the bankrupt UK gov is buying our debt at record levels...sure why not I can believe that.  Currency swaps are awesome.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 10:59 | 502738 Gwynplaine (not verified)
Gwynplaine's picture

Or maybe The Shadow.  As Orson Wells said, "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?  The Shadow knows!"

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:42 | 501864 Thalamus
Thalamus's picture

When the Detroit crew runs things you expect the books to balance?  I look forward to 5 years from now, after Marshall law is imposed of course, that this crooked administration be on trial for crimes against our country and be made examples of for future generations. 

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 21:25 | 502087 lewy14
lewy14's picture

It's Martial Law. Martial.

(Pet peev).

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 15:28 | 503136 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

No, he was right.  "Marshall Law" as in "The John Marshall School of Law."  I think some of chi-town's best politicos have toured it.  One might say we're already living it.

Thu, 08/05/2010 - 00:19 | 503963 Arkadaba
Arkadaba's picture

It is peeve. Peeve

(Pet peeve)

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:48 | 501874 InconvenientCou...
InconvenientCounterParty's picture

Bizarro world: Wingnut conspiracies proliferate like tribbles. Reality turns out to be worse than most of the theories.

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 23:33 | 502243 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Bizarro world indeed Incon. Up is down just as surely as war is peace.

Reality is blinding for most, which is why it's kept under wraps.


Wed, 08/04/2010 - 00:36 | 502287 Problem Is
Problem Is's picture

Green shoot is brown turd and reform is no reform...

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:47 | 501875 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

Willie also did a piece on this and noted that Great Britan's US Treasury holdings doubled in a 5 month period...while the new GB Gov is cutting gov spending in an austerity move by 40%. Does that make sense to anyone?

"This story is a gem. The Chinese dump USTreasurys and England accumulates them. Or more accurately, the USFed hides its vast monetization efforts in the United Kingdom account ledger item. No way to the reasonable man can Britain purchase $170 billion in USTreasurys in five months from legitimate sources of savings"

Tue, 08/03/2010 - 21:02 | 502063 DavidPierre
DavidPierre's picture

Jim Willie lays out some very interesting insights into the rigging of the bond market ...QE.... fraud...etc.

Meet 'The Man' who called all the BS years ago.



"$1.5 Trillion disappeared from the top floors of the WTC on 9/11.  Nobody followed this up."


His sarcasm is priceless re: JKF and 9/11 in part 2 of the interview.

Jim Willie's life has been repeatedly threatened and he now lives in Costa Rica.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 01:50 | 502338 Hephasteus
Hephasteus's picture

Ya he was saying reacting in some really hilarious ways during that interview. I was about to bust a gut.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 01:58 | 502342 laosuwan
laosuwan's picture

i like shadowstats because they put up some numbers to back up what they are saying. with willie its always, " i have a friend who has a friend who told him..." Now, he may be right but you can be right by guessing. the thing with people like willie (and max) is that they tend to view everything that happens in the world through their biases and their suspicions, so they begin to see conspiracy in everything.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 03:20 | 502372 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

Just admit it. You are part of the conspiracy.

Breathe deep. That thing constricting around you is not as bad as you think. You are waking up, that's all. It takes time to start breathing, moving, thinking and eating on your own. We are here for you.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 16:02 | 503231 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture being disconnected from the Matrix?

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 16:04 | 503236 MsCreant
MsCreant's picture

Yes, I was being silly and serious at the same time.

Wed, 08/04/2010 - 03:28 | 502375 DavidPierre
DavidPierre's picture

If you want all the numbers and all the details just break into your piggybank and subscribe to "The Golden Jackass"...Willie's newsletter. 

Maybe there is "conspiracy in everything".

  • Conspiracy (civil), an agreement between persons to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights, or to gain an unfair advantage
  • Conspiracy (crime), an agreement between persons to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement
  • Tue, 08/03/2010 - 21:46 | 502107 laosuwan
    laosuwan's picture

    Or more accurately, the USFed hides its vast monetization efforts in the United Kingdom account ledger item.


    The only question is how long can it go on? If the government is the only buyer for the government's debt, the game will surely end at some point. But when...?

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 00:00 | 502258 hamurobby
    hamurobby's picture

    Aaaand if not, how about who is buying equities? its just an anomaly, dont bother with it, just keep on rolling, its a recovery! or a recover up of a broken system. At least in the past we had some semblance of dignity in managing the almighty dohlar.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:54 | 501883 Boilermaker
    Boilermaker's picture


    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 18:55 | 501888 traderjoe
    traderjoe's picture

    7 cells not filled in? No wonder he couldn't work TurboTax.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 19:51 | 501975 Buck Johnson
    Buck Johnson's picture

    I never thought about that Waterfall, it does make a little sense.  Is it possible to Short Sell bonds?  I would think it would be possible, but I don't know if someone could give me an answer that would be super. 

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 20:19 | 502012 AUD
    AUD's picture

    I think the buyers might be the chumps who got stuck with all the worthless MBS, CDO's, ABCP's and other assorted TP's.

    Thank god the Fed stepped in and bought the job lot.

    Amazingly, you can still buy gold with your USD's (& other currencies).

    Some interesting movements in the gold basis recently though.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 22:18 | 502147 mark mchugh
    mark mchugh's picture

    Congratulations on being the first nimrod to completely miss the point!

    And I was having such a good time reading the other comments too....

    Yes, Treasury's data has always lagged.  So what?  The data is available, so why not plop it into the spreadsheet? 

    You're excusing a 3 month lag in available data because "all the other guys did it"?

    Sorry you didn't appreciate my jabs at Geithner, but almost HALF the debt in Q1 was purchased by "mystery" buyers.  THAT was the point.  THAT's something maybe we should be concerned about for a whole bunch of reasons.

    The only question I have (and I'm being totally serious) is did you really not understand what the article was about, or were you looking to change the subject?

    Inquiring minds wanna know?

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 23:23 | 502227 Nolsgrad
    Nolsgrad's picture

    no, I read it. All of of it. And I pondered for a bit. still, the proof is not in this pooding.

    but, and a big one, I think we'll monetize at some point.


    never read your comments, sorry.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 20:54 | 502051 fiftybagger
    fiftybagger's picture

    Jimmy Rogers, 1988


    What I suspect will happen—and I am just speculating, I don't have to make this decision yet—is that somewhere along the line a recession will develop. Initially, the politicians will say, "We've got to bite the bullet and suffer through this. This is good for us; it will help clean out our system." People are going to buy that for a while. Then it is going to start to hurt. Then it is really going to start to hurt. At that point, the politicians are going to give up, and they are going to start to inflate their way out of it. But the only way to inflate your way out at that point is to really print money! In that scenario, we start off with a recession and end up with very high inflation. Right, but we could have wild inflation first and then deflation. Another very real possibility is that we will eventually have exchange controls. Fortunately, I don't have to make my investment decisions for two or three years forward right now.

    What kind of exchange controls?

    By exchange controls I mean limitations on capital flows. If you want to go to Europe, you can't take more than $1,000. You can't ship money out of the country without the government's approval.

    What happens to the relative values of currencies in a situation like that?

    The dollar disappears. What would bring on exchange controls is the dollar getting weaker and weaker. The politicians would then try to bring in Draconian exchange controls, which would just make the situation worse.

    When you say disappear, are you talking about the dollar becoming like the Argentine peso?

    Why not? Why couldn't it happen? Remember the Civil War expression, "I don't give a damn about a greenback dollar."

    You talk about the collapse of the dollar as if it's an inevitability.

    In 1983, we were the largest creditor nation in the world. In 1985, we became a debtor nation for the first time since 1914. By the end of 1987, our foreign debts were greater than all of the foreign debts of every nation south of the Rio Grande put together: Brazil, Mexico, Peru, Argentina, and all the rest.

    Can I paraphrase the chain of events you imply as follows: Nothing meaningful will be done to change the budget deficit situation. The continued budget deficit will guarantee that the trade deficit situation stays bad or even gets worse. That, in turn, guarantees that sooner or later, the dollar will come under extreme pressure.

    Absolutely. That's why I'm not long the dollar.

    How does the bond market fit into this scenario?

    At some point, foreigners are going to stop putting money into this country because of the weakening dollar. That means the American public will have to finance the debt. We have only a 3 to 4 percent savings rate. To get the American public to finance that debt, interest rates would have to be very high. If the Federal Reserve tries to avoid high rates by printing more money, then the dollar just disappears and the Fed loses control completely. That is the case where you get hyperinflation and 25 to 30 percent interest rates. Either way, we are going to have high rates. You might start out with lower rates first if the politicians decide to bite the bullet by having a recession. But then, they will eventually give up and start printing money. But, sooner or later, the bond market collapses. Absolutely. Sooner or later, we repeat the English experience of not having a long-term bond market. But I don't know when sooner or later is. It could be three years; it could be ten.

    How far did British bonds fall in the situation you are referring to?

    About 70 percent





    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 23:25 | 502228 Nolsgrad
    Nolsgrad's picture

    my favorite books!

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 00:10 | 502269 hamurobby
    hamurobby's picture

    We have only a 3 to 4 percent savings rate. To get the American public to finance that debt, interest rates would have to be very high.


    Well luckly as of today as per bloomberg, we are now above 6% so we have plenty of money saved up to save the country, just like Japan! 401 anyone? see, all is well! hahahahaha its going to be fun living in interesting times.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 16:08 | 503240 RockyRacoon
    RockyRacoon's picture

    My understanding of how the "savings rate" is calculated is the differential between personal income and sales figures.  The difference supposedly being savings.  If one pays down debt instead then it is considered savings?  Also, are purchases based on credit considered? Someone correct me and point out how "savings" is calculated.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 16:07 | 503241 RockyRacoon
    RockyRacoon's picture

    Aaargh.  Double post.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 21:02 | 502062 docj
    docj's picture

    OT (with apologies if this has already made the rounds here):

    So even if you believe The Ministry's numbers, you get $150K cost per job "saved or created" and a roughly 15% opportunity cost (meaning that the vaunted multiplier for the Spendulus wasn't the 1.4 people like Paulie Krugnuts pimps, but was really more like 0.8 - as in, we lost money on every job "saved or created" for $150K, each.)

    You have to try really freaking hard to screw-up things more thoroughly than does this administration seemingly by accident.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 21:20 | 502077 Battleaxe
    Battleaxe's picture

    What is the IMF, Alex?

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 22:01 | 502125 palmereldritch
    palmereldritch's picture

    Great link.  Recent Max K on point.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 22:38 | 502170 Implicit simplicit
    Implicit simplicit's picture

    Great links. Thanks

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 21:48 | 502111 palmereldritch
    palmereldritch's picture

    I think I found a picture.

    Formerly known as Fido he now goes by the handle 'FEDo'

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 22:58 | 502190 Perseid.Rocks
    Perseid.Rocks's picture

    Maybe the Household Sector is the US taxpayer and they're borrowing against everyone's retirement accounts. As I recall this term 'Household Sector' started getting used back in Jan 2010 around the same time we were seeing all those news pieces on forced buying of Treasuries in 401k's and IRA's.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 22:55 | 502193 Perseid.Rocks
    Perseid.Rocks's picture

    Maybe the Household Sector is the US Taxpayer and they're borrowing against everyone's retirement accounts.


    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 23:11 | 502214 Terra-Firma
    Terra-Firma's picture

    I call BS. You can't have a number not exist. THis is doublspeak.

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 23:28 | 502234 Bankster T Cubed
    Bankster T Cubed's picture

    "These are not the droids you are looking for"

    Tue, 08/03/2010 - 23:30 | 502239 Its the Vatican...
    Its the Vatican Stupid's picture

    Pesky litte things aren't they? Gettin' all into the economic workin's an' such?





    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 03:10 | 502369 Bartanist
    Bartanist's picture

    My guess is the BIS.

    It is not exactly foreign because it is omnipresent over all central banks. I suppose it could be considered international, but I do not think that a banker would want to call it international.

    If it is the BIS then it may be buying control of the US debt for when it will insist that we change from the dollar to their SDRs.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 03:32 | 502377 MsCreant
    MsCreant's picture


    Borg Integrative Settlements

    They drive us off the cliff to drive us into further illusionary dependency on them. Better than Houdini, an illusion that has lasted since 1913?

    I know I sound like I am off the deep end here. But I can't help this. What has to be true? That they all get together, knowing everyone is bankrupt, and that the system is logistically frozen across the globe, and they compete with each other? They do what? They say what? I am actually beginning to think it is stupid not to believe there is a conspiracy. I did not appoint them to be in charge of anything. How about all of you?


    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 08:01 | 502498 spinone
    spinone's picture

    The truth is worse than any conspiracy theory out there.

    Thu, 08/05/2010 - 04:39 | 504114 i.knoknot
    i.knoknot's picture

    i'm still trying to find the silly 'opt-out' button.

    it's gotta be there somewhere.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 09:38 | 502627 SamuelMaverick
    SamuelMaverick's picture

    This is a freakin tragedy.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 10:10 | 502664 Justaman
    Justaman's picture

    The 5 C's on the road to serfdom (in order):

    collusion (for correlations to be near perfection, governments have to be heavily involved),

    conspiracy ("everything is fine?!?", "recession, what recession?"),

    contagion (government's loading up on each other's debt with ridiculously low RISK-FREE rates), 

    catastrophe ("No one saw this coming, I thought this s**t was safe"),

    and last, but not least,

    colonoscopy (and not by a doctor)

    FUBAR, biatches!


    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 10:10 | 502665 Justaman
    Justaman's picture

    The 5 C's on the road to serfdom (in order):

    collusion (for correlations to be near perfection, governments have to be heavily involved),

    conspiracy ("everything is fine?!?", "recession, what recession?"),

    contagion (government's loading up on each other's debt with ridiculously low RISK-FREE rates), 

    catastrophe ("No one saw this coming, I thought this s**t was safe"),

    and last, but not least,

    colonoscopy (and not by a doctor)

    FUBAR, biatches!


    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 10:11 | 502666 Justaman
    Justaman's picture

    The 5 C's on the road to serfdom (in order):

    collusion (for correlations to be near perfection, governments have to be heavily involved),

    conspiracy ("everything is fine?!?", "recession, what recession?"),

    contagion (government's loading up on each other's debt with ridiculously low RISK-FREE rates), 

    catastrophe ("No one saw this coming, I thought this s**t was safe"),

    and last, but not least,

    colonoscopy (and not by a doctor)

    FUBAR, biatches!


    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 11:41 | 502793 banksterhater
    banksterhater's picture

    Biderman lost almost all credibility when he turned bullish right before the market top in late April-May, he CAVED to his principles and bashing of his clients I suspect, saying he underestimated the flow of transfer payments (as a source of equity buying). He had it right all along. Now we have mutual fund cash at the lowest since record-keeping, where it was at the previous top.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 11:58 | 502813 mark mchugh
    mark mchugh's picture

    I totally agree.  He got bashed for his explanation, not his observations.  I'm not willing to stick my neck out as far as he did, but I certainly can't figure out where the money that flooded into equities was before it flooded into equities.

    This is the same thing.  I'm pretty sure it's a crime scene, but I'm not smart enough to know exactly what happened....

    So I'm very grateful I was given the chance to put it in front of the ZH crowd.

    Thanks, Tyler.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 13:02 | 502901 Downtoolong
    Downtoolong's picture

    "Why can’t the Treasury fill out its own bulletin with information already available?" 

    I guess even the government hates filling out govenment forms. I know I do.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 14:14 | 502995 RingToneDeaf
    RingToneDeaf's picture

    Oh, come on, it is so simple and obvious you should be ashamed.

    Here is the answer the Fed would have you believe: It's MAGIC!

    Or better still,

    Sherlock Holmes, The Problem of Evil, the only remaining possibility.

    Wed, 08/04/2010 - 15:37 | 503169 phat tails
    phat tails's picture

    I hope Bloomberg wins its case against the Fed under the Freedom of Information Act. Does anyone have any updates on this case?

    Sat, 10/09/2010 - 10:10 | 637664 senthil456
    senthil456's picture

    There are certainly a lot of details like that to take into consideration.I read and understand the entire article and I really enjoyed it to be honest.
    cheap vps | windows vps | forex vps

    Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!