Put another way, the amount of high quality collateral backstopping this mess has shrunken dramatically. On top of this, traders have been piling into sovereign bonds in anticipation of various QE programs, forcing yields to multi-decade if not multi-century lows.
When Obama talks of a "massive fight" with Wall Street, is he referring to:
- the tens of billions in handouts handed to each and every bank, unleashing the age of socialized losses and privatized profits?
- the condification of the Too Big To Fail concept?
- presiding over a Department of "Justice" that openly admitted it would not prosecute certain bankers over fears of systemic collapse consequences, thus mathin up TBTF with Too Big To Prosecute?
- the implementation of Barney Frank which was supposed to rein in banks and instead had Citigroup lawyers and lobbysists write the language write the language in the Derivatives Swaps Out provision of the Omnibus bill as a result of $70.3 trillion in total Citigroup derivatives, which the bank knows will one day require another taxpayer bailout?
So on Monday? He refused to nail down a day. But Germany is ready.
Why would financial firms pay so much for blogger Ben Bernanke’s thoughts? Aside from the marketing benefits we noted, there is one good reason. In essence, you’d want to know what Bernanke would think if he were wrong or ill-informed about some important economic issue. That is something money managers understand in a way that academics and policymakers do not, for being wrong – and knowing what to do next – is a critical skill for the professional. Getting the most information from Bernanke, either in a one-on-one or just reading his work online, boils down to just two questions: “What doesn’t he know” and “What is he sure of that is actually wrong?”
In welfare state America its virtually certain that through one artifice or another taxes will go up and the national debt burden will rise to crushing heights in order to keep the baby boomers’ entitlements funded. While Keynesians and Wall Street stock peddlers are clueless about the implications of this - it actually doesn’t take too much common sense to get the drift. Namely, under a long-term path of fewer producers, higher taxes and more public debt, the prospects for rejuvenating the previous historically average rates of real output growth are somewhere between slim and none - to say nothing of the super-normal rates implied by the markets’ current bullish enthusiasm.
The amount of ten-year equivalents held by the Fed decreased to $1.835 trillion from $1.849 trillion in the prior week, which reduces the amount available to the private sector to $3.944 trillion from $3.919 trillion in the prior week. There were $5.778 trillion ten-year equivalents outstanding, up from $5.768 trillion in the prior week. After the Treasury issuance, maturing securities, rising interest rates, and Fed operations during the week, the Fed owned about 32.05% of the total outstanding ten year equivalents.
The next time something breaks in the financial system… it won’t be just individual banks going belly up. It will be entire countries. What’s happened in Cyprus and Greece is coming to your neighborhood… wherever you are.
Investors are beginning to question the efficacy of these extreme central bank policies. More are joining the chorus of critics that believe policies have become counter-productive in both the short and long run. If true, it could mean that a Fed hike might come sooner than markets believes; and may occur prior to the arrival of the desired and optimal economic conditions. There must be a lesson to learn for those investors who blindly follow central bank actions. The lesson embedded in the dramatic re-pricing in European financial markets during the past 12 days may simply be that there are dangers when chasing assets irrespective of price levels. It seems to us that the ability of central banks to generate a Pavlovian or conditional investor response to their policy actions is now rightly being called into question.
UK election surprise raises Brexit referendum risk; Greek default imminent; Payrolls miss and revised drastically weaker... can only mean one thing - front-run central banks and panic-buy stocks and bonds...
In a remarkably unbalanced and lazy article on gold this month the Economist magazine attempts to dismantle the case for investors and others to own gold. Both from an investment point of view and also from an ethical point of view. The article is so laughably one sided that it resembles propaganda rather than journalism. Therefore, we take pleasure in dissecting the article misleading sentence by misleading sentence.
Three days ago, when looking at the unprecedented, record outflows from US equities we asked a simple question: "who is buying... no really". We now have the answer.
Having painted themselves into an impossible corner of junk Keynesian economics, they are now clueless about how to get out. So its time to recognize that there has been a monetary regime change. The Fed might well have been your friend since March 2009 or even for the last several decades. But stranded on the zero bound and smothered by a $22 trillion collective balance sheet, the central banks of the world are now fast becoming your fiend.
For over 30 years, sovereign nations, particularly in the West have been buying votes by offering social payments in the form of welfare, Medicare, social security, and the like.
Last week we revealed that the Swiss National Bank is the proud owner of an equity portofilio that sums to $100 billion, or around 15% of Switzerland's GDP. Courtesy of the bank's latest SEC filing, we now know just what the Swiss were buying in Q1...
If there is one thing more worrisome for the world's central planners than a stock sell-off, it is a bond rout 'proving' that they have lost control. The overnight carnage across global bond markets appears to have triggered someone (or someones) to step in - in dramatic size - to rescue bonds and save the world once again.