This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Please read my latest and post your comments here:
http://pensionpulse.blogspot.com/2010/06/from-hysteresis-to-hysteria.html
Thank you,
Leo Kolivakis
- advertisements -
Contact Information:
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Suggested Reading:
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure. Here's our Cookie Policy.
What you just posted: ' Please leave your personal anecdotes/emotions/feelings towards me (lol) out of the equation.'
...and, your anecdote from up thread...
'So no Fortune 500 company hedges currency risk? Really? S&P earnings will evaporate bc of Euro woes? What about the rest of the world which is booming? Come on, Bruce, let's not exaggerate and paint it all black.
My dad just came back from Greece. In his own words: "They complain and whine as they always have done, but I saw people shopping, going out to restaurants and bars". Admittedly, he was in Iraklio, Crete, not Patras which is public sector employee dominated city feeling the pain, but it's not just in Greece. My friend came back from Spain, Switzerland and France and told me the same thing. Another one from Italy, and she told me the same thing. Europeans are notorious for whining and bitching, but in reality, things are not as dire as they make you believe. They're hopelessly pessimistic and dour people.'
Leo, the rules are the same for everyone. If you don't want us to use anecdotes then you should not use them.
You'll get nowhere arguing with such impeccable logic with Leo.
He is simply an amoral, ignorant, hypocritical, pollyannish, pro-establishment defender. Just "flag as junk" his every post, and maybe we can rid ourselves of his dissemblings, obfuscations, hypocrisy and fervent defense of the political and financial status-quo.
Leo is a joke. A joke with no punchline.
Leo
Please provide a link to these "wage bill"stats
Yes, do provide the source and links. We care about this. Skin in the game. Citizens of said country and all that. Any verifiable good news would be huge.
There's your problem Leo. You keep taking the opinion of the professional economists with no skin in the game over the "Professional Investors" who have to decide if the numbers are describing the real world picture. As for me, I'll take Bruce's opinion over any group of professional economists every time.
Skin in the game?!?!? Look at what the top funds are doing, not what they're saying:
http://pensionpulse.blogspot.com/2010/01/hot-hedge-fund-trades-of-2010.html
Loading up on stocks and loading up on Citigroup (highly leveraged to the US economy)!!!! These are the top hedge funds in the world, with plenty of skin in the game!!!! Wake up already!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously..?
leo
wake up already
are you opposed to searching for the truth .
and finding some opposing points of view ,, and debunking them some shred of credibility
how about springing for a few bucks and add a section to your biased point of view .
and do a slow read into williams // shadow statistics
May Nonfarm Payrolls Rose 20,000 Net of 411,000 Temporary Census Hires and Fell by 31,000 after Revisions and Birth-Death Model Shenanigans
- May Household-Survey Employment Fell by 35,000
Irrespective of Census Hires
- Unemployment Rates Were Artificially Low Due to Census Effects: 9.7% (U.3), 16.9% (U.6), 21.7% (SGS)
- M3 Signal for Double-Dip Downturn Intensifies
for a guy that just reads and pick and chooses what sounds good to back your thesis.
serious discussion lol
If I had remained in the fund that I was in back in 2005 I would be 80% losers now.
Don't tell me how smart hedgies are...better yet, listen to what Marc Faber has to say about hedgies, and the non-recovery.
http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/2010/05/marc_faber_mirr.html
Sorry, hedgies in my opinion have their dumb clients' skin in the game and not enough of their own. They can retire of one year's winnings, blow up the next year and still hit the fuckin Hamptons.
Not good enough.
Indeed. Add that the "owner" of the money is not always their client. Case in point...Pension funds, that will be guaranteed by Goobermint...err taxpayers.
Only the taxpayer has skin in the game anymore.
OK, wake up. I am awake. I have seen plenty of these hedge fund experts you talk about go kaboom over the last few years. As for the no skin in the game comment I was referring specifically to the economic analysis. Taking statistics at face value and drawing conclusions is easy if it is not your own money. As for the hedge fund managers buying Citigroup...well, stupid is as stupid does I guess. The fundamentals you speak of are fabricated so it is easy to spout this recovery shit - much like you do in every post/comment.
That blog post is five months old. What are they doing now?
so between the administration and the fed reserve a mere 13 trillion dollars were spent to get this 'well its only one data point, things are on the mend' unemployment number. COME ON!
what you are sellin - i ain't buyin it.....
So basically you were wrong, but, you really werent that wrong as the jobs report is not as bad as people are claiming.
I wonder what it'll take for you to not be such a bull. SPX 900, 800?
"I wonder what it'll take for you to not be such a bull. SPX 900, 800?"
Ha ha. Leo says, 'Buy the dips on the Chinese solars' all the way to 0.
Market Zero, Dude.
then again, I might have asked the same question of the zerohedge bears on the way up.
The people on this site have been bearish since the bull market began last March. It's what drew me here originally. I, lacking knowledge and experience, was also bearish.
Then I saw what happened, and zerohedgers were completely wrong about being bearish since Dow 7000. 70% gains later, and they're still bearish. I guess that that broken clock is finally starting to be right, maybe...
Ask your pals at the BoC what happens to S&P earnings and revenues if the E/$ goes to parity. They will tell you that the bottom line hit could be 20%. With at 18 multiple that translates to a big drop in S&P.
We got a taste of that Friday. Everyday that goes by I get more convinced that there is no soft landing for Q3 and Q4. Consider the WSJ today re: residential RE. The declines in sales are 25-30% in most areas of the country since the tax credit expired. We have no gas in the tank unless the Feds fill it with printed money. We will be unwinding stimulus measures everymonth for the next 18. So I do not see the upside you see.
I repeat a point I have made in the past. QE will wipe us out in less than a decade. It is the very worst thing that could be done if you had any hope to have a favorable outcome. It will simply destroy all of those who go down that road. You see it as a panacea for Europe now. So far the ECB has wisely resisted this foolish step. But it may still happen. When/if it does it will be the end for Europe. I pray that they are not so stupid to follow your advice.
QE = Slow, but Certain Death
Bruce, why do you bother? Leo's an economic idealogue and arguing with an idealogue is pointless. He is INCAPABLE of listening, whether it be to you or the 'facts' all around him. Discussing the state of the economy and its future with Leo is JUST LIKE like trying to convince a fundamentalist Christian of Evolution; despite evidence being all around them, the Bible (National Bank of Canada) say it's not so. And nothing you say will ever change that. Personally, I'd rather watch paint dry.
The National Bank of Canada is the smallest of the "Big Six" national banks, with a market cap less than $10 billion (compared to the Royal Bank's $75 billion, and the Bank of Commerce's - which is the smallest of the "Big Five" - $26). While the other banks are growing, the National Bank is shrinking, having closed roughly 200 of 700 branches in the last ten years. Its base lies primarily in Quebec, a noted hotbed of ruthless free market capitalism. I'm an avid reader of the Canadian financial press, and I rarely see anyone from the National Bank quoted, though I must confess I confine myself to the English language dailes, and not La Presse or Le Devoir.
Leo might love 'em, but the rest of Canada ignores the National Bank. Of course, for the most part, Canada ignores Rosie as well, so make of that what you will.
And just to reiterate Leo's one correct point: the "National Bank of Canada" is a strictly private, commercial bank. Our central bank is simply the "Bank of Canada", and there is no affiliation between the two.
Then I would guess Kevin, that they are heavily invested in solars, and EU bonds.
Just do as I will do from now on, and automatically "junk" any further postings from this intellectually insulting and morally reprehensible "Leo". He is nothing but a disgrace to real economic analysis, and is a discredit to this site.
I would venture to say that Bruce responds with coherent rebuttals because he prefers to contribute instead of spitting at people with whom he disagrees. I agree with you generally that Leo is economically delusional, but I just don't see the need for the "aggression". Is it a pirate thing? Fight Club? I expect more from a privateer like yourself.
Oh, I've had my coherent rebuttals of Leo in the past, but at this point I have simply moved past all that, as he will invariably evade or sidestep any meaningful rebuttals, as he has in this thread and in every other inflammatory post I have ever read from him here on Zerohedge. Just as in dealing with a typical forum troll, one eventually learns that honest and serious responses to him will either be ignored or evaded. I refuse to give Leo the consideration that he does not deserve nor is willing to give to others.
As for my anger toward Leo, it stems from his repeated past admonitions (in other threads) that we surrender to the kleptocratic and sociopathic finanical and political elites and willingly take part in their corrupt and manipulated system, as it is "the only game in town", and that any real opposition to them is just pissing into the wind and self-defeating. Sorry, but I do not tolerate Quislings, whether in the political or financial sphere, no matter how "practical" their advice might be.
I stand corrected. Maybe we could tie a rope to his hands and feet and clean the barnacles off the bottom of the ship with him?
Aye, matey, keelhauling the scoundrel would be his just desserts, by thunder!
Maybe a good long dip into the cool and briney caress of Davey Jone's Locker will knock some sense back into the poor scallywag!
Akak, you're a lot more like the parrot on the shoulder than the pirate that carries the parrot.
*squawk!* GOLED BITCHEZ! *squawk!*
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't QE mean simply the purchase of assets by the Fed? People equate it with money printing and hyper inflation and all that but unless the Fed can force people take on more debt, (and they can't. All they can do is offer money as cheaply as possible in hopes people borrow), the effect of QE is limited. If we are in a deflationary environment, it doesn't matter about QE - it just delays the inevitable deleveraging that has to occur, but it can't avoid it. So long as people are net reducing credit exposure, and they are, QE is peeing against the wind.
The printing presses cannot keep up with the financial obligations that have (who sez so?) to be paid to uphold the international banking system, while actual physical production of assets is dropping (mostly due to lack of real credit [thanks Obamatron!]) all the time. This occured previously in Egypt in the period of 1861-1882 with cotton (way to go British Colonialism!).
In short Mathematical reality trumps financial fantasies (AGAIN!)
Any questions, see http://larouchepac.com/node/11296
"People equate it with money printing and hyper inflation and all that but unless the Fed can force people take on more debt, (and they can't. All they can do is offer money as cheaply as possible in hopes people borrow), the effect of QE is limited. "
__
Sorry, but there you are wrong.
Who said anybody had to "borrow?"
They can just give it away
Billions to Cali et al to "help" with the pensions, 15K next year to buy a house, cash for retrofitting your house, etc...
You could easily do a couple of trillion in QE without a single loan.
Spot on. All it does, as we saw, is allows the gamblers to sell their shit to the Fed for fresh cash, which they can't lend as there is NO demand for loans and LIMITED quality debtors out there. So, they do what they did from MAR09 to APR10, gamble with the cash.
Then, it all implodes over again and the printed cash gets wiped out.
Nature will not allow something to be created from nothing. Something must come from something else. Conditions --> Manifestations --> Conditions and so it goes.
No "real" production --> Cash bonfire.
Leo,
Please provide a reference to this wage bill assertation. Other than that, I don't agree with you on anything. We are standing at the naked edge of the abyss right now.
Thanks,
jc
Leo -
Interesting that you know people who travel to the PIIGS and "people are out eating, shopping, etc" and you accept their anecdotal evidence as gospel.
Yet I comment on issues in SE Florida - where hundereds of established, multi-year, multi-generational businesses are going under... and my observations are "emotional."
Bottom line: Fundamentals are deteriorating. SE Florida is a leading indicator as RE is marked to market OR inflated to current valuations. Either way we are screwed. There are fewer and fewer jobs here, and the rest of the US may be slow to recognize this reality... but they will.
Leo, your basic premise that fundamentals in the US and elsewhere are 'improving' is false.
The logic you scaffold upon the broken foundation is faulty as a result.
The fundamentals started falling apart when credit began being a substitute for real returns on both labor and capital - on almost all economic levels - back in the 1990's. The world has been living on borrowed time as well as borrowed money since then.
At bottom what matters is present output, not abstract demand pulled from the future. Since the government cannot create value or do much to stimulate output - it can only add credit to that being multiplied in a period of credit expansion - there is insufficient real output to exchange for anything other than more credit.
Present output is dependent upon inputs that allow a return. The killer has been and is continuing to be increasing real (relative to output) energy costs. Nominal oil prices have been going down. Why? Because of conservation or greater efficiency? No, because people around the world are going broke and cannot afford the higher prices. 'People going broke' does not indicate a recovery of any shape or form.
Ironically, the high energy prices are what is causing people to go broke- energy costs increase as a percentage of GDP. Nominal oil prices decline but incomes to pay for the oil decline faster. The parallel is the austerity- driven debt compounding spiral manifesting itself in Europe; a feedback loop that depresses GDP faster than it depresses debt service costs. It is this cycle in the energy economy that has trapped the entire industrialized world.
To quote Hugh Hendry, "I would recommend you panic!"
Only the feckless governments desire to create the appearance of recovery for political purposes. The outcome is a Potemkin Economy that is a facade with nothing - no output - behind it.
I'm going to stick with Rosenberg and BK on this one.
Leo, In my experience less than half of the US multinationals hedge their fx exposures. Of those who do most are hedging "cash" risk. Intercompany receivables and dividends. Some hedge inventory. Very few hedge their FASB position as this is a non cash item and hedging can use up cash.
If you added up the S&P total exposure, both cash and balance sheet I would estimate that 20-30% is hedged. The rest is not.All of these adjustments will find their way to the income statement. None of the results will be positive.
Put your CFO hat on. How far into the future would you hedge cash risk? Six months tops. At the end of the period the cash comes in and the hedge protects the loss. Okay fine. But the Euro has been dropping all year. Those hedges are rolling off now as we get to 6/30. What happens to the CFO who has his hedges roll off? He hedges anew. This will not stop until the Euro get to a point where it is actually oversold. We could see sub par before this blows up. Do not think that your S%P top and bottom lines are protected in this situation. Everyone of them is suffering a loss. Even those that hedged their cash and inventory.
Bruce, it is YOU who should be posting the headline commentary here on ZeroHedge, and Leo who should be relegated to the comments section, if he deserves any voice here at all.
I concur.
I'm relatively new here, only been lurking for six months or so, posting for a few weeks. I have always asumed Leo had Contributor status because he brought some sort of bullish balance to a bearish forum.
When I started reading Leo's stuff, I thought that he spent a pretty fair amount of time trying to back up his opinions with data, albeit skewed.
Then I noticed that whenever he was losing a fact based argument,,,, out come the S.I. girls, like some Robot Trader wannabe.
Now the posts seem to be taking on a sort of desperation in justifying the hopium. I turned to ZH because it was the best place to find some honest analysis of a dishonest system. I don't know if Leo's getting worse or I'm just getting more familiar with his work. Either way, I'm beginning to question his value as a contributor because the shit he spews is no different than can be found in a thousand different venues. It sort of defeats the purpose or turning to an alternative news source.
Reading Leo on ZH is kind of like fucking your own wife at an orgy.... Showed up looking for something different, and getting the same old same old.
Funniest post of the day!
And all too on point, as well.
As was the rest of your post, CC.
Actually, the analogy doesn't make sense to me at all.
I seems to me that Leo is the lone voice on this site that believes in the recovery hype.
If anything, you can't say that his posts are the same old shit...
There are 530000 gold threads a day that are akin to "fucking your own wife at an orgy."
Dude , enough already. Reading you on EVERY single thread go offtopic on gold rants is kind of like fucking the ugliest chic at an orgy whilst she nags at you.
Johnny, you are a closet fag. You're such a "Goldophobe" you have to bitch about it even on threads that NEVER BROUGHT IT UP! I bet you walk around with a Maple Leaf shoved up your ass, and have custom Kruggerand nipple clamps.
Do you have ANYTHING else in your bag o tricks, or are you really the one hit wonder we all think you are?
Douche.
Whoa..he struck a nerve did he?
I dont see the rationale between his dump on gold and your arrogant attack.
If you "don't see the rationale", then you clearly aren't familiar with the incessantly antagonistic trolling of Johnny B.
I personally don't think CC went far enough in condemning that rat bastard.
"maybe next month" has now been touted since BroBama took office.
Leo, you ask us not to use anecdotal observations...So why are you using anecdotal observations?
I don't think that we are headed for a double dip because I don't think the Main St economy has improved at all ex-QE. Last estimate I saw was that for every five bucks the gov is spending on QE/transfer payments we are getting a buck pop in GDP. Sounds about right...The only question left in my mind is how long the Fed/Treas can keep borrowing and printing before their creditors say 'enough'.
You say fundamentals are improving? Are you one of the cheerleaders for CNBC? Tell me, where is the good news? Dow up 80% due to government bailouts of the autos, financials, and currencies? Maybe it's the foreclosure rate that is improving and homeowners under-water......nah, it's not that.
Could it be the $13 Trillion our government debt is......doubtful. Hmmmm, maybe it's the real unemployment rate, don't think so. Even teachers are taking pay cuts and paying for some benefits. Or let me guess, it's the 99 weeks of unemployment that states things are improving?
Where do you live? I need to move to that planet! The DOW was higher in 2000. Please, throw me some of your optimism!
A little help here Leo. Just what is the 5% wage bill that you refer to? Are you suggesting that taxable incomes are rising? They are not, actually they are falling.
PS next month you will not get a 400+ contribution from census. It will be much smaller. IOn july and August it will be a big negative. Where is the good news on emploment? Non in the next three months that I can see.
Bruce,
There is a very tragic possibility that the GOM oil spill will fill the next jobs report with the numbers.
There is a huge tragedy there, waiting to explode and the Government and the privateers will have to hire massively, albeit temporarily to manage all the out-comes from there.
Such is how I see it. And then, as we trot our way to never never land, a new draft.
I hopium I am wrong, but I don't do bongs and feel I am not.
This is beyond six-sigma territory we are in.
In the end, we are all mucked!
Wage bill? What's a wage bill? New kind of short term bond or a 5% hike in minimum wage?
Meet Mr. Pollyanna.