This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
NY Fed Issues Mea Culpa That Nobody Saw at 6PM on Black Friday
NY Fed Issues Mea Culpa That Nobody Saw at 6PM on Black Friday
Courtesy of Lee Adler of the Wall Street Examiner
In a report released on Black Friday around 6 PM, when nobody is around, let alone paying attention, except for crazy people like me, the NY Fed posted a mea culpa on just how lousy its economic forecasts have been, a function which I had already performed over a year ago (The Fed - Clueless, Delusional, or Both?). The author of the report stated the crux of the failure thusly:
One source for such metrics is a paper by Reifschneider and Tulip (2007). They analyzed the forecast error performance of a range of public and private forecasters over 1986 to 2006 (that is, roughly the period that most economists associate with the Great Moderation in the United States).
On the basis of their analysis, one could have expected that an October 2007 forecast of real GDP growth for 2008 would be within 1.3 percentage points of the actual outcome 70 percent of the time. The New York Fed staff forecast at that time was for growth of 2.6 percent in 2008. Based on the forecast of 2.6 percent and the size of forecast errors over the Great Moderation period, one would have expected that 70 percent of the time, actual growth would be within the 1.3 to 3.9 percent range. The current estimate of actual growth in 2008 is -3.3 percent, indicating that our forecast was off by 5.9 percentage points.
Using a similar approach to Reifschneider and Tulip but including forecast errors for 2007, one would have expected that 70 percent of the time the unemployment rate in the fourth quarter of 2009 should have been within 0.7 percentage point of a forecast made in April 2008. The actual forecast error was 4.4 percentage points, equivalent to an unexpected increase of over 6 million in the number of unemployed workers. Under the erroneous assumption that the 70 percent projection error band was based on a normal distribution, this would have been a 6 standard deviation error, a very unlikely occurrence indeed.
He then went on to enumerate the 3 big reasons the Fed had gotten it wrong:
- Misunderstanding of the housing boom. Staff analysis of the increase in house prices did not find convincing evidence of overvaluation (see, for example, McCarthy and Peach [2004] and Himmelberg, Mayer, and Sinai [2005]). Thus, we downplayed the risk of a substantial fall in house prices. A robust approach would have put the bar much lower than convincing evidence.
- A lack of analysis of the rapid growth of new forms of mortgage finance. Here the reliance on the assumption of efficient markets appears to have dulled our awareness of many of the risks building in financial markets in 2005-07. However, a March 2008 New York Fed staff report by Ashcraft and Schuermann provided a detailed analysis of how incentives were misaligned throughout the securitization process of subprime mortgages--meaning that the market was not functioning efficiently.
- Insufficient weight given to the powerful adverse feedback loops between the financial system and the real economy. Despite a good understanding of the risk of a financial crisis from mid-2007 onward, we were unable to fully connect the dots to real activity until 2008. Eventually, by building on the insights of Adrian and Shin (2008), we gained a better grasp of the power of these feedback loops.
He then added that perhaps the biggest reason for the failure was "complacency," with which I heartily concur, but to which I would also add hubris and stupidity.
At the beginning of the piece the author cited a Turbotax Tim Geithner quote: Our best plan is to plan for constant change and the potential for instability, and to recognize that the threats will constantly be changing in ways we cannot predict or fully understand.
Adding to that the author wrote, "The quotations from Keynes and Geithner at the start of this post capture the importance of constantly striving to ensure that policy is robust to unexpected events. As explained in much of the recent work of the 2011 Nobel Prize-winning economist Tom Sargent, the unexpected events for which policymakers need to make provision have the characteristic of being the most likely unlikely bad event. The collapse in housing prices and its propagation to the economy certainly fit this description."
This is what I would call the "Nobody could have foreseen" fallacy, a tool often used by the professional economist and economic pundit class. I guess that I and the countless thousands of others who frequented this and other bearish websites at the time of the top of the housing bubble, who did foresee what was coming, must be the "nobody" that the pros refer to.
It's good to be nobody or not so good, because even though nobody took precautions, nobody ultimately took the hit. Because in this case, nobody was prepared for what happened, and nobody took steps to both protect and profit from it, while the rest of the Wall Street seers and the Fedheads, who are all somebody, didn't foresee it. As a result somebody got their asses kicked. But that hasn't stopped them, because Uncle Sam bailed them out, spending nobody's money, and nobody's children's and grandchildren's futures to do it. So in that sense, it's better to be somebody, even though somebody initially took the loss that nobody saw coming, until the US government bailed them out on behalf of nobody.
All kidding aside, I wrote the following comment on the NY Fed Liberty Street blog. I don't know if it will still be there in the morning, so here it is.
The excuse that most other professional forecasters didn't foresee it is just that, an excuse. Some professional forecasters did see it. They were derided as Cassandras and dismissed by Wall Street and Fed insiders, who are only beholden to each other, and to their own delusions.
Millions of amateur economic forecasters who frequented the financial message boards and blogs saw what was happening and what was coming. They had one important advantage. They live in the real world, not inside the Beltway, not within the marble halls and equally hardened thought processes of the Fed, and not in the ivory towers of academia, a word which sounds like a disease, because it is a disease. Not only do these environments cause delusional thinking, they attract delusional people. The same is true of policy makers.
I call it elitist personality disorder. It leads to delusions of grandeur, delusions of omniscience and omnipotence, and the unwillingness to take responsibility for failure and incompetence, instead engaging in blame shifting.
Postscript. Yep, less than a half hour later, they pulled my comment. I left a subsequent comment which isn't fit for a family oriented website like this one.
Get regular updates on the US housing market, and stay up to date with the machinations of the Fed, Treasury, Primary Dealers and foreign central banks in the US market…stay ahead of the herd. Click this link to try WSE’s Professional Edition risk free for 30 days!
Pic credit: Banksy via Bruce Krasting
»
- ilene's blog
- 27684 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Time to get serious.
The "social sciences", of course including "economics", are NOT sciences.
They only purport to study and experiment with data in the way that actual sciences do with real materials and observable events capable of being measured and replicated, regardless of any attempted imposition of hope, belief and "change you can believe in".
Newtonian physics remains the paradigm ... gravity rules, OK, whatever that actually comprizes.
It is irrefutable that there is a universal effect of a something that enables us to weigh a sack of onions AND launch space-craft, with "sling-shots" off of gravitational fields of our own planet, the Moon and other planets.
Oddly enough, there actually is, or was, a human equivalent of gravity ... a nebulous something that kept us "gravitating towards each other and orbitting each other".
BUT that is almost totally gone, though the "social sciences" persist with the myth that, since tribes and other forms of social existence were destroyed, we still live in a world in which we have "real relationships".
Back in the 1980s Maggie Thatcher said, "There is no society, just individuals out for their own self-interest."
She was called "mad" by even her most loyal disciples, but she was right ... I'd come by the same conclusion years before, BUT without her grim satisfaction that the very foundation of the existence of any social species had been destroyed, with ourselves as the most vulnerable.
We do not have fur ... thus need clothing, which requires co-operative effort.
We need shelter, far more than any other species; thus we need to co-oporate, NOT compete with each other as individuals.
We lack natural weapons, e.g. fangs and claws, fleetness of foot and virtually everything all other species have ... including other social species who naturally co-operate, e.g. wolves and chimps.
We are born FAR more helpless than any other species and take far longer to grow up (if ever).
We are the inverse of the Darwinian "Survival of the fittest".
The only edge we have on other species is the intelligence/brain power to make clothes, build shelter and make weapons to kill for food, BUT soon turned into weapons to kill each other.
OK rant over.
... "period from 1986 to 2006 known by economist as the Great Moderation" Yeah, during that period gangsters Mozilo, H Paulson, Corzine, Summners, Dimon, Blankfine and all the boys were looting the system for Trillions of dollars. ( They ALL saw it all coming because they made it happen ).
MODERATE that.
Awesome! Go Ilene! What is insane is that everything you say is true and yet it just keeps going ?!?
The Fed/Elite have every reason to be offended by, and delete the comment, because it states that they were acting stupidly in allowing the train to crash. They know full well that they were following a well-designed, and expertly carried out, operation. Perhaps the author forgot that they were the beneficiaries of their "stupidity".
Whew, I feel better now...
HARD TO KEEP THOSE LIES STRAIGHT!
BTW that was no mea culpa, but a long winded pseudo-intellectual farce of an excuse.
I just read the comment at the NY feds site. Also some other critical ones.\
What gets me is once they were caught flat footed by the housing collaspe, they were still in denial about the contagion that followed. Whats more they are currently right now in real time "not seeing" this worse double dip underway and still think they can control whatever happens by printing.
The warning signs were clearly there, sure noone could predict the exact day the markets collapsed, but it was obvious it was coming and the regulators did nothing yet still have their high paying jobs unlike millions of taxpayers.
Another discussion board I used to frequent used the name "Versailles" to describe the insular and self-reinforcing world of the media pundits and the politicians. It applies just as well to this.
When you spend all day eating the best food and walking through hallways with gold-leaf on the ceiling, your perspective does change a bit.
I remember Pelosi saying she was going to DC to drain the swamp. That all changed when she found out that DC wasn't a swamp but a hot tub.
Of course they pulled the comment; THE TRUTH HURTS.
The elitists need to connect a lot more dots:
Pretty simple, huh?
Think those Piled Higher and Deeper's (PhD's) can connect the dots?
Maybe when their heads are in the guillotines, just like France's elites circa 1789-99.
I pointed out that someone saw this coming back in 2001, and that seems to have disappeared from their comments section as well. Maybe they just don't like to be reminded that Ron Paul makes them look like a bunch of either TOOLS, Liars, or both..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFd8YluIVG4
Why does the FED even take the time to write anything? We all know why they exist. It is not an effort to help....only plunder.
END THE FED!
adding to the falacies you described i would add....the falacy of blaming the masses.
it goes something like this.....-----it's not the banks fault or the fed's fault for cheap money, and easy lending policies , which were not responsible for the problems we now see of everyone in the private and public sector being far too indebted. because-----it's the borrowers fault.
this is the stockholm syndrome upper middle class and elitist argument of blaming the masses for consuming too much and this is why they are broke . the falacy contains truth in that it is pointing out the obvious fact that the consumer did face a choice in overconsuming and that groups of more fastidious conservative consumers were careful in making sure they could afford their debt load.
but it is a fallacy because it is the drug dealer blaming the drug consumer for problems resulting from bad drugs.
yea, the half truth is a fallacy because it conspicuously leaves out the other half of the truth, perhaps the more important half, that the lender is the one who ultimately controls the supply and has the upper hand , the more powerful hand, in the relationship of issuing debt for the purpose of consumption----
and this fallacy is all the more disgusting because it is the people who are broke and the lenders, many of whom are still wealthy, and many of whom are still doing their best to protect their wealthy by supporting 'inflation targeting' and 'price stability' by issuing more debt and by propping up fraudulent markets, as well as supporting police power and marginal welfare for the poor and massive welfare for corporations, rather than supporting a political reform resulting in-----shrinking of the public and private debt bubbles, reigning in of institutional influence of corporations,nonprofits, and other freeloading tax dodging, influence pedaling legal entitites representing the vested interests of groups of people mostly interested in dragging down the entire country into a morass of long stagflation and overreaching domestic totalitarianism and international warfare.
the fallacy that it is the people's fault is the fallacy of distracting from a true solution. the underclass overconsumers will always be punished by a free market. kleptocrats by definition prevent a free market by ensuring socialism for the rich, providing them an entitlement to overconsumption based on declaration of law and free reign to commit fraud, not by producing valuable goods or services to the economy----- that is the problem with this fallacy.
If anyone is an expert on placing blame it's a lawyer.
Adler's piece is a cheesy caricature of Potter's article, which is well worth a read. Plus, contrary to Adler's complaint about his comment being censored, it was up on the FRBNY web site as of the time of this post.
But I have to agree with Adler and with ZH that the timing of the release sure does look as though somebody wanted to bury it.
There's an investment take-away in Potter's article. If the Fed-niks are talking this way among themselves, we can be sure that the forecasting staff will want to lean over backward to avoid winding up (again) in the embarrassing posture of clueless complacency that Potter so well describes. So we can count on it that the next calamity will if anything be over-forecasted, as they will be a lot quicker to sound the alarm.
Maybe they'll have a lot more foam on the runway than we expect for whatever's coming in from Europe? Hope springs eternal...
some serious research, and indictments- i mean indictments would solve these standard deviation deviants
The comment you said was removed is actually there, it is the 1st one.
http://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2011/11/the-failure-to-forecast-the-great-recession.html
"but to which I would also add hubris and stupidity."
if you had left it at that, the article would have been brilliant....the job of the economist is to lie with rose colored glasses....it is intentional....the fed chairsatan has proclaimed that recessions are only in your mind....if you could get ocd therapy you could go out to spend spend spend, borrow borrow borrow into economic nirvana....the lunatic is in your brain - not the economy...
What I don't see is the Obama Lie or operation Save Obama's Ass. Every fucking piece out of Washington and MSM must be spun to make the man-child, community organizer Barack Barry Hussein Soetoro Obama what's his name look good.
In fairness, many economists including the Bernank acknowledge their lack of predictive capability. Who is the fool here?
In fairness ???? If you cannot reasonably predict the results of your actions, then resign ?
Just trying to be "fair" and all.
In other words, why do economists have jobs?
Taking into account the natural spread of error over time, the Fed should just take up darts. These forecasts take on the reputation of touts at the horse track. The Fed reports should be published in The Daily Racing Form.
http://georgesblogforum.wordpress.com/2011/11/02/the-daily-climb-2/
First the Fed needs to find the dartboard....
"Smart" detail crunchers continue to stare at the same old "frame", framing their own believe system. They have eyes but they dont see, they got ears but the dont hear.
Sucks to be nobody.... So now that the "Nobody's" are wiped out , who is going to tote the note? You got it.... The other nobody who thinks he's somebody.
Hey, watch it.
I get blamed for everything!
Nobody blamed you.... So blame yourself
Let's be honest here.... The Fed knew exactly what they were doing during ultra low interest rates, the housing boom, easy credit everywhere..... just like TPTB (aka BofE in this case) knew how easy credit in Greece and elsewhere would turn out.
The results we are seeing today is no surprise, especially to the elite joo bankers (the FED, BofE, etc). We have been engineering into the current conditions.
According to the fed, these negative comments are transitory and expected to return to positive in the weeks ahead.
expect the unexpected.
Lee Adler is my colleague at Wall Street Examiner, and there is even more to this story.
http://www.wallstreetexaminer.com/blogs/winter/?p=4299
Well said russwinter.
""""There is a whole system of what I call negative selection that is set up to actively find personal that fit the incompetent elitist personality disorder mold. Negative selection is common in tightly controlled totalitarian regimes. Stalin used negative selection routinely to cull ranks of anybody even suspected of having a brain. Sadly this is what we are starkly witnessing in the waning days of Ponzi crony capitalism globally.""""
Sounds like public education in AAMERICA
I love your comment (the one that was removed). Straight to the heart of the matter.
I like how they thought pulling your comment somehow invalidated it. That is exactly how they run their policy. The level of frustration they must be at to remove your comment speaks volumes. LOL. The Fed and Treasury are a bunch of hacks trying to put humpty dumpty back together with a blender.
Why all the verbiage?
All they really had to say is: I don't seem to recall.
What they really need to say, but never will because they're pulling the wool over their own eyes: I don't understand.
They even inadvertently acknowledged their understanding:
One of their biggest problems is trying to force everything into a Gaussian bell curve distribution. Not everything is subject to a normal distribution. Trying to make it so results in what should be (according to the models) once-in-a-million-year events happening every two or three years.
Benoit Mandelbrot pointed this out, but most economists still blindly cling to their sacred normal distribution. Abandoning it would bring down their towering edifice of pseudo-scientific theories and impressive-looking equations, revealing that modern economics is no more scientifically rigorous than astrology.
And lets remind the FED of what really set up the this fiancial global disaster of biblical proportions........It always happens when the Galactically Stupid (GS) meet up with Criminally Insane (CI) And the out of touch with the universe Quazzi NOT a Government Agency,The FED........i.e. Federal Reserve Bank...
In this case we have Gramm-Leach-Bliley GLB representing the GS along with Rubin & Summers the CI that penned GLB and of course Our beloved FED..........Who in thier infinant wisdom granted a temporary waiver in september 1998 to Citigroup as if they have the authority to issue waivers to corporations that come into existance against US law......i mean ""What The Fuck Over..........?"" Oh ya......... stay focussed............These three groups of IDIOT's distoryed 60 years of protection provided by the Glass Steagall Act........and consequently wiped out a global economy worth 60 trillion dollars in less the 6 years...................Can I Get A WTF...............WTFO..................?
The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub.L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999–2001). It repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. With the passage of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies were allowed to consolidate. The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
A year before the law was passed, Citicorp, a commercial bank holding company, merged with the insurance company Travelers Group in 1998 to form the conglomerate Citigroup, a corporation combining banking, securities and insurance services under a house of brands that included Citibank, Smith Barney, Primerica, and Travelers. Because this merger was a violation of the Glass–Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, the Federal Reserve gave Citigroup a temporary waiver in September 1998.[1] Less than a year later, GLB was passed to legalize these types of mergers on a permanent basis. The law also repealed Glass–Steagall's conflict of interest prohibitions "against simultaneous service by any officer, director, or employee of a securities firm as an officer, director, or employee of any member bank."[2]
TO: ItsMedicationTime Sat, 11/26/ - 08:46
Interesting post you made......but there is far more to the story.....this is an excerpt from article "Electile Dysfunction" in general discussion forum
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/non-partisan-sleaze-and-money-rant
While there are often hotly contested campaigns between conflicted candidates with little or no merit, the proliferation of shoddy political products in this years ‘lesser of two evils bait-and-switch-athon’ is truly exceptional. The reigning king of dissembling impostors is the current resident of the White House, Barack Hussein Obama. Elevated to the Oval Office in a time of great crisis and uncertainty, Mr. Obama assumed the Presidency with an unparalleled opportunity to make history as one of the great leaders of our time. Unfortunately, his reach exceeded his grasp and he proved not only unworthy of the challenge, but also unwilling and unable to deliver the change that he had promised. While there are numerous lack-of-performance issues associated with Barry O’s ‘Bush-Lite-Presidency’, his most egregious failure was an unconditional surrender to the money huggers on Wall Street.
Between 1999 and 2007, Wall Street perpetrated a gigantic global fraud by selling worthless paper disguised as investment grade securities. The seminal legislation which allowed these crimes to occur was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB). GLB overturned the depression era Glass Steagall Act (GSA) which had separated investment and commercial banking activities. (1) (2) Though Wall Street had tried to do away with GSA for years, the catalyst that eventually resulted in GSA’s repeal was the 1998 merger of Citibank with Travelers Insurance. That merger, which created the investment banking colossus Citigroup (Citibank), was in violation of GSA’s banking statutes. Gramm-Leach-Bliley, passed on November 12, 1999, repealed Glass–Steagall allowing banks, brokerages, and insurance companies to merge, making the Citigroup deal legal. (3) (4)
Even though a $300 million lobbying campaign paved the way for passage (5), GLB still wasn’t a slam dunk. It required intervention at the highest level. Enter Robert Rubin, at the time, the Secretary of the Treasury. ”According to a report in the New York Times, Rubin helped broker the final compromise language on financial deregulation. And while he was brokering a deal between Congress and the White House, he was also, according to the New York Times account, negotiating his own deal with Citigroup. A few days after the banking deal was finalized, Citigroup announced it was hiring Rubin as a de facto co-chair of the corporation.” (6)
All of that happened in 1999. Now, fast forward to November 5th, 2008, the day after Obama’s election and two months before he officially took office. Having won the Presidency, it was time to make personnel changes that would reflect the transition from campaigning to governing. Chosen to lead the economic search team was a close friend of President-elect Obama’s, Michael Froman. A Harvard law classmate, one of President Obama’s largest fund raisers, and, Robert Rubin’s former Chief of Staff at the Treasury, at the time of his appointment as chief headhunter, Mr. Froman was also a Managing Director at Citigroup. (7)
Allowed to keep that position, Mr. Froman proceeded to select people whose decision making would affect not only his future but that of Citi as well. One of the advisors chosen by Mr. Froman to join the Obama economic team was Jamie Rubin, the son of Robert Rubin. (8) It should be noted here, that when this occurred, not only was Robert Rubin still on the Citigroup payroll making approximately $15 million a year, but several high ranking members of the new administration that would be selected by Mr. Froman, including Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner, senior White House economics advisor Larry Summers,, and Peter Orszag, the budget director, were all “past protégés of Mr. Rubin.” (9) (10) .
On November 23, 2008 a $306 billion bailout of Citigroup was officially announced making the first act of the hope and change presidency a massive rescue package for the same Citigroup wrecking crew that had lobbied so hard for the repeal of Glass-Steagall. A final report from the Congressional Oversight Panel issued in March of 2011 found that between TARP, the FDIC, and the Federal Reserve, Citigroup received federal funding during the financial crisis totaling $476.2 billion in cash and guarantees. (11) Moreover, according to the first ever GAO audit of the Federal Reserve, total aggregate borrowings by Citigroup during the financial crisis (December 1, 2007 through July 21, 2010) amounted to $2.5 trillion dollars. (12)
Nice article, thanks.
It would be nice to see thesehand full of chuckleheads brought to justice...........Say like in the world court and tried for crimes against Humanity.......
The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), yes, as in Phil Gramm, PhD in economics who ran for president of the US.
Correct.His wife,I believe sat on Enron board.
The same..............They'll give a degree to anyone who shows up..........It's really amazing to watch these modern day fools try to second guess what the real....... smart people did in the 1930s.............
"
The excuse that most other professional forecasters didn't foresee it is just that, an excuse. Some professional forecasters did see it. They were derided as Cassandras and dismissed by Wall Street and Fed insiders, who are only beholden to each other, and to their own delusions.
Millions of amateur economic forecasters who frequented the financial message boards and blogs saw what was happening and what was coming. They had one important advantage. They live in the real world, not inside the Beltway, not within the marble halls and equally hardened thought processes of the Fed, and not in the ivory towers of academia, a word which sounds like a disease, because it is a disease. Not only do these environments cause delusional thinking, they attract delusional people. The same is true of policy makers.
I call it elitist personality disorder. It leads to delusions of grandeur, delusions of omniscience and omnipotence, and the unwillingness to take responsibility for failure and incompetence, instead engaging in blame shifting."
You have a point. Back in the 80s I was working as a truck-driver and tried to warn my fellow plebs that 401k - called "Superannuation" in Australia - schemes could never work in the long run, because they require that "everyone makes a profit" and that is absurd, like any Ponzi scheme, or chain-letter scam.
I also saw that the outrageous interests rates then being charged - 18-19% - on mortgages and ordinary loans, were attempts by banks to balance their books.
I am no clever clogs, but I always took an interest in what has become "Pure Financialism".
Forget Capitalism and Mercantilism (whatever they really were, but at least to do with 'tangibles') ... since at least the repeal of Glass-Steagul Act, all we have now is a world casino/Ponzi scheme which is certain to crash.
Forgive me if I'm being a bit incoherent, but I am busily demolishing a bottle of Port as a temporary escape from knowing that our species has never faced worse times.
Sure there have been wars in abundance for millenia, but not nuclear - except for Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the recent use of 'depleted uranium' in Iraq, Yugoslavia, Gaza and Libya.
Sure there have been previous genocides, but never on the actual, or potential scales as at present, e.g. if war on Syria and Iran is set in motion (as seems very likely).
Sure past civilizations have over-exploited resources - Libya was once the "bread basket" of the Roman Empire - but nothing compares with our current form of civilzation for utter, global destruction.
I am just a common or garden bloke with a tad of intelligence and common sense.
For all of my working life I produced 'stuff'; variously working as a truck driver, a factory hand, dairy farm labourer, carpenter, mechanic and even, for a while, working as a teacher to pass on my knowledge of woodwork, metalwork and technical drawing.
I am not blowing my own trumpet, but ain't it odd that, in my spare time, I got to know most of the ins and outs of financialism, e.g. derivatives, CDOs and the shonky world of banksters generally.
Gerald Celente, for instance, has devoted his whole life to financialism and got caught with his trousers down.
FFS (though I have no faith in gold ... for good reason) years ago I could have told him to stay away from "paper gold".
Stupid or what!!? Modern banks got started, a few hundred years ago, by leveraging actual physical and issuing "promise to bear notes" which could not be honoured.
How come I know this shit, when 'analysts' do not?
I happen to quite like Gerald Celente, Max Keiser and sundry others, but only bacause they say what I already know PLUS more detail and more dot-joining.
Due credit to them.
Even though I might well have known heaps, if it was not for Gerald, Max and others, nothing would ever get revealed, e.g. I lack the charisma and singularity of purpose to put across any kind of message.
I am apologizing for undue criticism of those more focussed than I have been on 'economics'.
Setarcos
Well said.
Credit Creation has a speed limit. Only criminals ignore this reality.
They are stupid, liars or both. Time to outsource forecasts to India
for the record I tried to submit something to the site, and there is some thing called type pad I have never heard about. I don't trust the fed, and I am rather certain I am already on some list consiudering I believe bernanke and others should be hanged for ecoonomic crimes against humanity. the rticle does a real white wash on all the warnings the fed received and ignored. Well, that's what they are paid for after all. It's interesting how really6 evil people are always convinced they
are doing good.
Yeah, what a surprise that it was pulled down. total information control and spin. keep saying lies until they stick, the rove doctrine. It says volumes that the agency can't stand to have criticisms on their web site. the op made a big mistake in not providing the link to it though so we could all put our two cents on on censorship