This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Q&A On QE With GS
Jan Hatzius, who has been spot on in every prediction so far this year, provides the following rhetorical Q&A on what is now a definitive QE2 announcement in less than 30 days (and if one doesn't come, the mid-term elections will be accompanied by a whole host of flash crashes). In a nutshell: "we continue to believe that these purchases will ultimately involve at least $1trn, possibly quite a lot more...more importantly, QE2 works on other elements of financial conditions, including equity prices and the exchange rate." In other words, look for gasoline at $10 at a gas station near you within 6 months, promptly to be followed by complete economic collapse and a 25% chance of revolution on the side.
From Goldman's Jan Hatzius
Q&A2 on QE2
We see Friday’s speech by William Dudley, president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, as a strong signal that the FOMC is likely to announce another round of asset purchases at the November 2-3 meeting. Although the initial amount is apt to be $500 billion (bn), most likely in longer-term Treasury securities, we continue to think that the program will cumulate to more at least $1 trillion (trn), possibly much more. In this comment we reiterate and update our views on this issue, again in Q&A format.
Three weeks ago we published a daily comment, in Q&A format, reiterating our expectation for a second round of quantitative easing, commonly referred to as “QE2.” (See Jan Hatzius, “Q&A on QE2,” US Daily Comment, September 14, 2010.) In that comment we reaffirmed our view that QE2 was likely to occur sometime before the end of the first quarter of 2011, most likely via additional purchases at least $1trn of longer-term Treasuries (defined by the FOMC as having maturities of two years or more). Since then, the September 21 FOMC statement and last Friday’s speech by William Dudley, president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, have boosted our assessment of the probability that the FOMC will announce asset purchases at the conclusion of its next meeting, on November 3. In this comment we amplify on this judgment, again in Q&A format. (For the Dudley speech, see http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/speeches/2010/dud101001.html.)
Q: Why is the Dudley speech so important? Didn’t he say these were just his views and not necessarily those of his colleagues?
He did say that, as all FOMC members do when they give speeches. However, as Vice Chairman of the FOMC, he is one of the three most senior members of the committee. As such, he would be highly unlikely to give a speech of this significance without the concurrence of Chairman Bernanke and probably other key members of the committee. This does not mean that all 17 members, voting or otherwise, are in agreement, but it does strongly suggest that there is sufficient support for additional asset purchases to make it a serious option at the next meeting.
More importantly, President Dudley made it clear that current conditions are unacceptable insofar as the committee’s meeting its dual mandate is concerned. The clearest statement occurred at the very outset, even before he noted that “what I am going to say [emphasis ours] reflects my own views and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Open Market Committee and the Federal Reserve System”:
“Viewed through the lens of the Federal Reserve’s dual mandate—the pursuit of the highest level of employment consistent with price stability, the current situation is wholly unsatisfactory. Given the outlook that the upturn appears likely to strengthen only gradually, it will likely be several years before employment and inflation return to levels consistent with the Federal Reserve’s dual mandate.”
In other words, QE2 does not depend on conditions getting worse, meaning further increases in unemployment or further declines in inflation. At least in Mr. Dudley’s view, conditions have to improve to justify the FOMC’s not easing policy further. In this regard, three aspects of the quotation are noteworthy: (a) language that is uncharacteristically direct language for a Fed speech, (b) the focus on the Fed’s mandate, which has figured prominently in recent Fed communications, and (c) the length of time he thinks it will take to achieve that mandate, a point with which we thoroughly agree.
Q: How likely is an announcement of asset purchases in November, and how has this probability changed in recent weeks?
An announcement to this effect is quite likely. All along, the November meeting has seemed like the first genuine opportunity for the FOMC to make this move considering that that the panel was still focused on the exit strategy in late June and that the meetings in August and September were both one-day affairs, which limited the opportunity for extended debate. Also, updated forecasts will be released at this meeting, making it somewhat more likely than other sessions. At the beginning of August we thought it might take longer than until November to build a consensus for more asset purchases given that (a) most members of the FOMC have had a more optimistic view of growth than we have and (b) several members appeared to harbor significant reservations about further balance-sheet expansion. However, after seeing the September 21 statement, we said action at the November 2-3 meeting was a “strong possibility. It now looks even more likely, for the reasons already noted.
Q: What would you have to see to make asset purchases unlikely in November?
Questions like this are always hard to answer in a specific way, as one can always imagine any number of events that could put the committee off, improbable though they might be. However, when we consider that Fed officials were willing to put this message out more than a month before the next FOMC meeting, knowing that markets would price in” asset purchases beginning at that session, their intent to proceed must also be fairly robust to any upside surprises in the economic data between now and then. We therefore think a pattern of exceptionally strong data, not fluky and not confined to one report, would be needed to push the decision off. Even then, asset purchases would still have a large probability of occurring in subsequent months.
Q: How big will the operation be, and how will it be packaged—all up front or in pieces?
In his speech, President Dudley said “some simple calculations based on recent experience suggest that “$500 billion of purchases would provide about as much stimulus as a reduction in the federal funds rate of between half a point and three quarters of a point,” noting quickly that this estimate was “sensitive to how long market participants expected the Fed to hold on to these assets” and to market confidence in the Fed’s “ability to exit when the time is right…” In our view, this passage is important in two respects.
First, his mention of a specific figure suggests that this is an amount currently under consideration as an opening round. While that might ultimately change, Fed officials would surely be aware that markets would be disappointed with a smaller figure. Hence, any departure from this amount is more likely to be up given that a favorable market response to the announcement is instrumental to its success.
Second, by tying the choice of an amount to the size of a conventional easing in the federal funds rate, Mr. Dudley provides the analytical underpinnings for comments former Fed Vice Chairman Donald Kohn made about a month ago, when he suggested in a New York Times interview that QE2 might proceed in more incremental steps than the original program. Speaking today at a CFA Institute Fixed Income Management Conference in California, Brian Sack, Manager of the Fed’s System Open Market Account (SOMA), reinforced the idea that Fed officials see additional balance sheet expansion as a substitute for cuts in the federal funds rate that are not currently possible. (See http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/speeches/2010/sac101004.html.)
If the FOMC takes a more incremental approach than it did in late 2008/early 2009, as suggested by these various officials’ comments, then it follows that markets will not know right away how big the asset purchases in QE2 ultimately will be. Thus, while $500bn sounds small compared to our expectation of “at least $1trn,” we continue to believe that these purchases will ultimately involve at least $1trn, possibly quite a lot more. This expectation is already built into our outlook for the economy in 2011. It is one reason why we anticipate a pickup in growth as the year wears on. The forecast of $1trn in Treasury purchases is in addition to those resulting from reinvestment of repayments of principal on agency debt and mortgage-backed securities (MBS).
Q: Doesn’t the incremental approach sacrifice the benefits of a larger market response to a “big bang” announcement?
We believe it does, as discussed in a daily comment in early September. (See Jari Stehn, “Big Bang vs. Small Steps: Thoughts on Designing QE2.” US Daily Comment, September 8, 2010.) However, this may be the price necessary to achieve consensus in the FOMC. Moreover, the sacrifice might end up being relatively small if markets extrapolate whatever patterns they see in the FOMC’s behavior. Against other uncertainties, notably whether the next round of asset purchases will have the same impact per dollar that is implied by current estimates based on QE1, this difference is probably small. We will have more to say in upcoming research about quantifying the effects of asset purchases on interest rates in particular and financial conditions in general.
Q: Will the asset purchases in QE2 be in Treasury securities or are more MBS purchases possible?
We continue to think that the purchases will be in longer-term Treasuries, at least initially. However, recent Fed commentary has left the door open, at least implicitly, to a resumption of MBS purchases at some point. For example, in discussing its reinvestment policy, the September 21 FOMC statement noted simply that “[t]he Committee also will maintain its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its securities holdings,” whereas the August 10 statement said: “[t]he Committee will keep constant the Federal Reserve’s holdings of securities at their current level by reinvesting principal payments from agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in longer-term Treasury securities.” Of course, the earlier statement made reinvestment into Treasuries the “existing policy,” but the fact that Treasuries are not specifically mentioned might suggest an increased willingness to redirect those reinvestments toward MBS. More recently, President Dudley’s speech outlined “purchasing medium and long-term Treasuries or agency mortgage-backed securities,” as one of the Fed’s expansionary tools without elevating one over the other, either there or elsewhere in the speech.
Q: What can the Fed hope to accomplish when the demand for credit is so weak and spreads already so low?
This is the most common question we field regarding QE2. Most observers see the likely impact on long-term rates as low, especially as markets already price in a significant probability of asset purchases. They also question how much additional borrowing will occur in an environment where credit standards have tightened and households are deleveraging.
These are legitimate concerns, but they do not mean QE2 will not have an effect. As President Dudley pointed out, those who are able to borrow will do so at lower rates, freeing up some of the income now being spent on debt service. Perhaps more importantly, QE2 works on other elements of financial conditions, including equity prices and the exchange rate. To the extent these moves bolster consumer confidence, reducing the drive to boost saving, and make US goods more competitive in world markets, QE2 can work through channels other than credit.
Q: What options besides renewed asset purchases does the Fed have?
The main alternatives are to modify its communication with the markets and to tinker with its inflation objectives. Recent speeches by Fed officials have offered some ideas for consideration on both fronts. On communication, he suggested that the FOMC could be more explicit in saying how it planned to respond to shortfalls in meeting its objectives for inflation and unemployment. On tinkering with its inflation objectives (this is our term—decidedly not his!), he suggested that the Fed could, in essence, target the price level over the medium term. Thus, if inflation continued to fall short, then the FOMC would explicitly try to offset that with higher inflation later.
Most observers probably think of the Fed’s commitment to keep the federal funds rate at “exceptionally low levels…for an extended period” when they think of communication. In this regard, the committee has already taken a significant step toward QE2 in our view, though not one that has been widely recognized in market chatter. In particular, by saying explicitly that inflation is too low relative to its mandate, we believe that the FOMC has effectively defined “extended period” to be a lot longer than many probably assume. After all, even if one assumes that they can successfully raise short-term rates before shrinking the balance sheet, why would they start to do so when inflation is too low? In this regard, an observation toward the beginning of Mr. Sack’s speech is noteworthy:
“Indeed, according to their most recently published forecasts, most FOMC members expect the unemployment rate to remain above 8.25 percent through 2011 and the inflation rate to remain below its mandate-consistent level through 2012. In addition, the economy remains vulnerable to downside surprises that could take both output and inflation further away from the FOMC’s objectives.”
Now, Mr. Sack doesn’t sit on the FOMC, and he doesn’t speak for the committee either. But he does make a valid point about the likely behavior of inflation over the next two to three years. If the committee already sees inflation as too low through 2011 at a minimum, and unemployment at a level that is clearly too high, then why won’t that extended period extend well into 2012, if not beyond?
»
- 12404 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
From today's WSJ.com:
Dear Conspiracy Crackpots: Here’s How QE Works.
http://blogs.wsj.com/marketbeat/2010/10/05/dear-conspiracy-crackpots-heres-how-qe-works/?mod=rss_WSJBlog&mod=marketbeat
QE isn't DESIGNED to kill the dollar?
Tool is an understatemen for this author. Just like so many of his kind... one-dimensional. Complete failure to understand the situation.
You're such a conspiracy crackpot.
Feeling like one lately. The MSM blackout regarding the obvious, and relentless propoganda over the last couple of months has been nothing short of amazing.
If Obama is trying to export more debt then he is 100% correct in his policies. If he is referring to physical goods then please consider, printing does not make raw materials abundant.
I would gather that the countries to which Obama wants to export to will be VERY pissed off on BS Bernanke's coordinated efforts to make the USD worth...less.
I'd place more of my bets on new tarriffs (and a possible trade war) than increased exports.
Is our administation really that stupid?
My prediction...the year is 2017 and GS will be talking QE 9.
It’s pretty easy for Hatzius to be “spot on” when he’s reading from the official plan. And most ZHers know it; thank Heaven.
The whole things turns the stomach. A privately-held Fed purchasing interest-bearing liens on future taxes, providing liquidity to their insolvent cronies, etc. Yuck.
Dont pay taxes, kill the beast thru starvation.
Did this guy Hatzius predict the re-emergence of the "resilient consumer"?
Especially the tatooed ones with no jobs?
LOL.....
Or how about the rise in furniture spending? Joe Six hasn't made a mortgage payment in 18 months, and he just got word that he can squat in his house for another 12 months.
Might as well go buy a new bedroom dresser.
LOL....
Sheesh, everything is getting heatmapped today.
LPS looks like a p.o.s. to me. told u guys about it yesterday whien it was 2 higher. anyone really believe that press release? judging from the price action today i would say no. y do they have half dozen vice presidents making salaries of nearly $2 million? what the f do they do all day? apparently they not checking those signatures.
I.B.M. gotta.show.respect.
A close friend of mine is a wholesale furniture rep in the SW. He said this is the worst year in 30+ years of furniture sales. Stores that survived the intial crash in 2008 are now closing their doors. Some stores are trying to survive by going to the leanest inventories ever, sometimes only having one display model to sell.
Not if the data comes " BETTER THAN EXPECTED" either way is a win win, if the data is weak buy because it means the Fed will take action. if the data is strong, buy because the economy is getting better. Yes folks thats the setup. We have been setup to want inflation as well. It's all about perspective.
Time to settle into that 3 point SP range for the next 4 hours.
If they pump the market high enough CNBC can claim that we don't need QE2.
A four minute Must-Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yge311sFhC8
Bob, thanks for the link. I haven't had an original thought in years. Posted the vid at my site. Sweet.
http://thecivillibertarian.blogspot.com/
I see it as an anthem for Our Times. Much as I can understand the cynicism of the folks who condemn the impotent passivity of the "sheeple" and implicitly (whether deliberately or not I do not know) write off any possibility of popular awareness and action, I do know that sometimes all it takes is a single match to ignite the powder keg of change.
(BTW, as I mentioned a few days ago, SW, you occupy a unique position that could be powerfully leveraged to contribute much more to the cause.)
Luv ya, man.
Wow, Erin's dad sounds really pissed!
Ten dollar gas, a quadrillion dollar deficit, then hang em in the square.
REVOLUTION BITCHEZ!
Gold is 1337!
You mean 1340
Some people throw a party when AU goes erect. I, however, hear the sound of funeral dirge.
Like the following?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7656347491310375572#docid=-2587616811970917638
Well, being long gold, I hear this:
http://www.thesixtyone.com/s/MMd7WhFDstJ/
"Now_____ can go f' themselves"
(Just replace "Liberty Mutual" with your favourite financial institution/insurance company/governing body)
"This conversation is over..."
Hey, funerals are great, IF you hated the person that died, and stand to inherit their fortune. This is the case for those of us who own silver and gold.
Q: Is Goldman Sachs a bank?
RFLMAO
Mr. Hatzius is talking pur bullsh1t. This would be the end of the USD as a reserve currency.
And?
Where do you think you are going to find 75 million ameikans with enough spine to leave the EBT soupline long enough to start a revolution. Good luck with that.
Shit man fuck. Whataya gotta spoil my fantasy for?
Is there any truth to the rumor that high priced hookers are only accepting gold coins?
Yes, but only give them a 1/10 oz to start or you'll spoil it for the rest of us.
Finally a use for that fake Chinese gold. hookers
The First American Revolution was conducted with only 1% of the population. 3.5 million should be quite easy to find, given the size of the Tea Party.
All hail the new emperor, King Yuan.
Market just turned on the jets - look out above! I think they need to get the Dow to 11,000 just make everyone feel better.
They want to draw the public back in, but the retail investor is running toward the exits.
The Q3 GDP should be a big downward surprise when it is released at the end of the month (despite the fact that they will lie at first .5-1% higher than the final revised number). My guess is that it the initial will be .5% positive growth, revised to -.25%. See the CMI index analysis at dshort.com for a glimpse into the future.
Continued real estate mess and negative GDP should trump the POMO, we will see.
I think they are going to pump this pig every way they can so as not to disappoint too much on GDP. Almost without a doubt, they will give one number then revise it lower in subesequent months too. Seems to me this is the 11th hour here... hail Mary play coming up to avoid the dreaded double-d we all know is an outright papered-overed depression.
Gold and Silver going ballistic.
correction: benjamins in ur pocket being devalued
I'm for the revolution.....I've about had it with the government manipulation of markets to the benefits of the friends who help the idiots in office.
Amagi
The idiots at the Fed are now trying to duplicate their policy error by juicing dot com stocks in the late '90's, housing in the '00's and now stocks again. It is the only game they know how to play as they have totally fucked up the economy to the point it can't function normally now. They think by screwing the average Joe and making the banksters even wealthier will make us all numb to the Fed’s incompetence……..in the end the Fed will go down in flames.
+100
Let's get one thing clear: the Federal Reserve is not incompetent.
They are intentionally doing ZIRP/QE to screw the middle class (got inflation?) to favor banks and anyone else who is drowning in debt. Why they reason that more QE is designed to lower unemployment, they know full well that it won't move that needle. Remember the reasoning for QE 1.0? Remember, to get banks back to lending again? How did that actually turn out? That's right... the banks didn't lend... they used free money to pad reserves and play the Treasury spread.
The few antidotes left for countering this theft are (1) voting incumbents out en masse (and that will take too much time); and (2) mass demonstrations on the Federal Reserves footsteps in Washington.
If we get to the point where crude oil is $150 per barrel-- and people clue into WHY-- we will start seeing those demonstrations. Otherwise, it's more American Idol for everyone!
By the end of the week will we be right back were we started the week. That was the case last week. One thing is cretin, it aint going down. The dems have done a great job of running up the Fed charge card, the Fed like this and will help the dems stay in place to raise taxes. A roaring stock market will help them stay in power.
Dems or Rethugs... Thay are all the same... Look at your history: Regan ran up huge deficits, Bush II implemented $Trillions in unpaid for tax cuts for the top 1% with the help of the Rethug controlled congress (now the Dems are thinking of continuing them),lied us into a war for oil and water and ran up HUGE deficits in the process (much of which has vanished due to greed and corruption on the part of the US corps. that profited immensely), that set the stage for Obama and he, like a fool, (following the advice of Getiner and Summers) took the hand off and continues this deplorable policy. HE AND MANY OF THE DEMS ALONG WITH MOST OF THE REPUBS ARE CORPORATISTS... THEY ARE BEHOLDEN TO THE CORPORATIONS, NOT YOU... NOT ME... WE LIVE IN A CORPORATE OLIGARCHY/PLUTOCRACY.
And we continue to frame arguments in terms of Dem/Rethug or liberal/conservative like that means anything. These are "bright shiny objects" designed to keep the sheeple distracted. The sooner we recognize that neither ofr the parties have our interests at heart, the sooner we will be able to get ou hands on the tiller and start getting this country back on track.
So please, enough of the talking point politics put out by both sides.
You're essentially spot on, dude. But please, PLEASE, don't fall for the lunatic argument that tax cuts are something poor-ol-gubment has to 'pay for'. Say it with me: Gubment has no money of its own. It only has that which it forcibly extracts from the sheeple, or directs the private bankster cartel to magically poof into existence. Equating a reduction in the amount of money extracted from the peasantry to Uncle Sugar digging into 'his own wallet' is pure oligarchy-speak.
That is the exact sort of argument framed by the false donkey/elephant paradigm, which you are thankfully well aware of. Don't let the vermin bait you!
Except its not working, Obamas approval has just dropped since Sept 1 another 1.5 points to his lowest ever. So the idea of pumping to election success is simply empty, its not working at all and is only pissing off the insolent peasantry even more. Plan B to be activated next- Fear and Panic in the month of October I guarantee youll see it soon.
Sheep,
In general I agree... If a repub held the White House... The Dem are as dumb as a box of hammers... They don't have the sense to pull somthing like that off.
Oil $82.59. This is the economy killer, as oil goes back to $150 per barrel
As the icon of the word double-dip on Seinfeld, quite an appropriate statement.
I guess a better ISM number trumps the Massive Mortgage Mess that seems to have disappeared today.
I feel much better now knowing that Mess was really not a Mess at all and we are on our way to prosperity again.
A) Any article that starts out by trying to alienate a large and growing section of the US population by calling them conspiracy theorists is immediately NOT CREDIBLE. So, it should be ignored as a tool of the banks.
B) The structural issues with the US go far, far beyond trashing the dollar so that in some mythical fairy land of the future global corporations will want to start employing factory workers here in the US ... as soon as the standard of living has been trashed sufficiently and the middle class are sufficiently compliant debt slaves who have no other hope.
Face it QE as with TARP are mopping up tactics after debt has effected the wealth transfer. It is used to enslave the populace to the debt currency. We live in an evil banking empire. All of those bankers, traders, lawyers and politicians produce nothing so they need to create mechanisms to steal it from those that do produce things. Those mechanisms are all around us and are called: debt, interest, taxes, laws, wars, inflation, bankruptcy and deflation.
If you do not admit it, then you are either part of the problem or think that you are part of the ruling class ... you are not and you better get used to it.
Hey Tyler -
Looks like the shorts finally gave in....huge volume today.
I think these people are playing the talk of QEII.
wow, they is broker than broke, I for show aint buy'n nuttin now. wow
So how much of QE Lite is left? It has to last to the election right?
Instant replay:
"...and make US goods more competitive in world markets"
Why not just say "devalue the dollar".
Quantitative easing (counterfeiting) to infinity means global currency devaluation. – Jim Sinclair
From today’s Sinclair’s general editorial:
Dear CIGAs,
It is all over. Gold is going to and through $1650.
The people who know it has hit the fan are the OTC derivative manufacturers and distributors. They are the buyers of gold in huge tonne chucks in the cash market.
QE to infinity is absolutely in the cards.
Yesterday I emailed all of you who are on the free JSMineset email list concerning the Kentucky RICO civil suits that speak clearly and directly to the fact that securitized (collateralized) debt on mortgages is a can of worms with many mortgages having no paperwork, lost paperwork or paperwork that has been duplicated many times in many collateral debt instruments.
Goldman is now being sued over collateral debt obligations, those items I have referred to as without good collateral.
The you know what has hit the fan and Gold is being bought by the devils themselves. The ill gotten gains of OTC derivatives are taking cash gold from producers and markets by the tonne.
Gold is going right through $1650, an opinion I have held publicly for more than 8 years, on or before January 14th, 2011.
http://jsmineset.com/
Sinclair’s Thought For The Morning
All the mean emails from hedge fund managers and gold shorts calling me a pinhead telling me there isn’t a snowball’s chance in Hell of gold trading at $1650 on or before January 14th 2011 seem to have stopped.
The truth is if it does, I am joining a Franciscan Monastery for the mute.
Well, that is informative and about what I thought. So it begins....
Nothing new there except maybe $500 bil to start with a flare, and to start as early as Nov 3 and to talk publicly about these prospects prior to the election and the action to be taken.
I did predict the $10 gas and have made jprovisions to hoard as needed and can make own fuel (and moonshine) with sugar hoarded. Just sucks.
In separate remarks yesterday, President Obama and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke articulated a similar view of the country's budget situation.Bernanke said that, one way or another, America's enormous budget deficit would have to be addressed or the economy would be threatened??? So where are you getting the money for QE2? Must be all those excess reserves...LOL, or maybe you off all the worthless MBS you have in your portfolio...
Just keep hitting the bong before you print Ben...It will make you feel better, since you can't seem to bring yourself to practice what you preach!
Yep Ben has been running PR propaganda campaign about Q/E2 for months now, and I think the reality is he simply cant pull it off. All hype and no fuel. Hype for hypes sake, and we'll never see this magic money flow since it would implode this whole jalopy to smithereens.
You're correct about everything except "he can't pull it off". Bernanke will pull it off, and it will have the effect you mention.
But really, if you hand 1000 credit cards and the keys to a brand new ferrari to the most irresponsible teenager on earth, then leave for summer vacation... do you believe he won't cause havoc? Really?
These jerks are worse than irresponsible teens.
They’re setting the taxpayers up for an additional tax fleece to transfer the value of real money to their banker QE counterfeit printed out of thin air—taking real milk from the producers and mixing it with their water—using the issue and destruction of money by the Fed as a weapon “to perpetrate poverty amidst abundance, which renders individuals and nations powerless to protect themselves, and which may even be perverted to serve vast designs for the complete subjugation of the human race to tyranny, exploitation and the powers of darkness and evil.”
Enough with the speculation on what the Fed is going to do. Question is what is the president and the congress telling the fed what to do, who in turn get their campaign money from the foreign interests. So what is in the interest of Japan, China, and Europe. The campaign contributors are donating in large amounts to push their agenda. What is there agenda, can anybody enlighten me?
Also protectionism, the middle class is getting robbed by the low interest rates and rigged markets, so what is the status of that bill in congress to bolster protectionism, can anybody edumcate me on this bill, and the agenda of what the foreigners want our economy and dollar to do?
thanks
Best advice I can give is sit thru The Obama Deception, then take stock of wats going on today. All designed for collapse into 1 world govt, 1 world currency and all that rubbish, and the UN comments last week were theyre angry because theyre behind schedule. Lots of time left as some think? I dont.
"quite a lot more"
Well now, how big is big from a Goldman perspective?
Did you see the video where they are foreclosing on people that own their homes free and clear? What a lawless clusterfuck - IF someone told you that the gov't would be creating bonds and then creating money to buy them "to lower interest rates" you would have laughed them off the net. Now, not only is it not ridiculed, its promoted by FED Governors. We are fooking d00med.
Where can one see the vid, QBall?
ohhhh, 25% chance of a revolution... viva la statisticians.
It’s a interesting news,i like it.Additionally,wellcome to my website prettyboots.org ,here are so many UGGS On Sale such as:UGG Elsey wedge|UGG Elsey wedge black|UGG Elsey wedge chestnut|UGG Elsey wedge espresso|UGG Langley|UGG Langley black|UGG Langley chestnut|UGG Lo Pro Button|UGG Lo Pro Button black|UGG Lo Pro Button blue|UGG Lo Pro Button cream|UGG Mayfaire|UGG Mayfaire black|UGG Mayfaire chestnut|UGG Mayfaire chocolate|UGG Mayfaire sand|UGG Mayfaire red|UGG Nightfall|UGG Nightfall black|UGG Nightfall chestnut|UGG Nightfall chocolate|UGG Nightfall sand|UGG Sundance II|UGG Sundance II black|UGG Sundance II chestnut|UGG Sundance II chocolate|UGG Sundance II sand|UGG Ultimate Bind|UGG Ultimate Bind black|UGG Ultimate Bind chestnut|UGG Ultimate Bind chocolate|UGG Ultimate Bind sand|UGG Ultra Short|UGG Ultra Short chocolate|UGG Ultra Short sand|UGG Ultra Short black|UGG Ultra Tall|UGG Ultra Tall chestnut|UGG Ultra Tall sand|UGG Ultra Tall balck|UGG Ultra Tall chocolate|UGG Suede|UGG Suede black|UGG Suede chestnut|UGG Suede sand|UGG upside|UGG upside black|UGG upside chestnut|UGG upside mocha|UGG Roxy Tall|UGG Roxy Tall black|UGG Roxy Tall chestnut|UGG Roxy Tall chocolate|UGG Roxy Tall sand|UGG seline|UGG seline black|UGG seline chestnut|UGG Corinth Boots|UGG Liberty|UGG Liberty black|UGG Liberty cigar|UGG Highkoo|UGG Highkoo amber brown|UGG Highkoo espresso|UGG Highkoo grey|UGG Highkoo black|UGG Knightsbridge|UGG Knightsbridge black|UGG Knightsbridge chestnut|UGG Knightsbridge grey|UGG Knightsbridge sand|UGG Knightsbridge chocolate|UGG Adirondack|UGG Adirondack brown|UGG Adirondack chocolate|UGG Suburb Crochet|UGG Suburb Crochet black|UGG Suburb Crochet chestnut|UGG Suburb Crochet chocolate|UGG Suburb Crochet grey|UGG Suburb Crochet white|UGG Kensington|UGG Kensington black|UGG Kensington chestnut|UGG Roseberry|UGG Roseberry black|UGG Roseberry sand|UGG Gaviota|UGG Gaviota black|UGG Gaviota chestnut|UGG Gaviota chocolate|UGG Desoto|UGG Desoto black|UGG Desoto chestnut|UGG Desoto chocolate|UGG Brookfield Tall|UGG Brookfield Tall black|UGG Brookfield Tall chocolate|UGG Gissella|UGG Gissella black|UGG Gissella chestnut|UGG Gissella espresso|UGG Payton|UGG Payton black|UGG Payton chestnut|UGG Payton red|UGG Bailey Button Triplet|UGG Bailey Button Triplet black|UGG Bailey Button Triplet chestnut|UGG Bailey Button Triplet chocolate|UGG Bailey Button Triplet grey|UGG Bailey Button Triplet sand|There are so much style of cheap uggs for sale ,so once you go to my website you will be very surprise.
ugg boots london I saw something shocking uggs london on my way to work the other day. uggs new york While bundled in a long sleeved shirt, wool sweater and coat, with a Pashmina, hat and gloves,ugg boots london sale I saw a man with his bike a the bus stop in SANDALS. He wasn’t overly well dressed for cold weather, in jeans, t-shirt and open jacket. Now, having lived in Oregon for the past decade I have come to be aware of what “true Oregonians” consider winter attire. ugg boots london shop This primarily consists of the inbred belief that flip-flops are a necessity year round, and sweaters and umbrellas are for tourists. I do not uphold this belief.ugg boots sale london I love getting dressed up for winter, layering on leggings with my sweater dress and ugg boots new york, a sweater and a jacket, and a rotating army of scarves, hats and gloves.ugg boots london stockists I don’t enjoy being frozen, especially knowing how easy a situation that is to avoid. uggs new york sale So personally, buy ugg boots london I do not consider myself a “true Oregonian.” I like umbrellas, and only wear flip flops when it’s above 75 degrees.Based on the population of Oregon, ugg new york I’m probably in the minority. Although I have come to accept that these people are just immune to cold in a way I am not, uggs new york of sale I do still think they are crazy. I’m guessing that the good folks at UGG Australia caught wind of these people because look at what they have to offer: sandals with fleece!uggs new york on sale