• Steve H. Hanke
    05/04/2016 - 08:00
    Authored by Steve H. Hanke of The Johns Hopkins University. Follow him on Twitter @Steve_Hanke. A few weeks ago, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) sprang a surprise. It announced that a...

In Its Latest Nonfarm Payroll Mea Culpa, Goldman Stumbles On THE Answer... And Changes The Rules Of The Game

Tyler Durden's picture




 

One has to read very carefully and all the way through the latest Jan Hatzius NFP post-mortem, to catch what may be the most important piece of information Goldman has ever telegraphed to clients, and thus, to the Fed. But first, why the note? As a reminder, after predicting correctly just what the impact of the record warm weather would be on today's NFP print (recall "Is A Bad NFP Print Days Away - Goldman Says Warm Weather Added 70,000-100,000 Jobs; Now It's Payback Time", something Zero Hedge warned first 2 months prior in "Is It The Weather, Stupid? David Rosenberg On What "April In January" Means For Seasonal Adjustments", but that's beside the point) yesterday Goldman was kind enough to tell us precisely what to expect when it hiked its NFP forecast from 175,000 to 200,000 ("If Goldman's recent predictive track record is any indication, tomorrow's NFP will be a disaster.") Of course, betting against Goldman's clients continues to be the winningest trade of the year, if not the millennium.

But that's not the point. Neither is Goldman's attempt to mollify what little muppets are left following its latest faux pas ("we believe that the underlying trend in payroll employment growth is around 175,000 as of the March report"), or to once again shift its focus to a bearish one having flip flopped worse than Dennis Gartman in recent weeks (see The Muppets Are Confused How Goldman Is Both Bullish And Bearish On Stocks At The Same Time) after saying that "we would expect the headline number for April to fall short of this figure, partly because the weather payback is likely to be substantially larger in April than in March and partly because the underlying trend may be decelerating slightly." Nor is the point that Goldman once again attempts to handicap the next latest and greatest New iPad, pardon, New QE. What's the point - QE is inevitable, and it will happen. But at a time that Obama deems appropriate - the one overriding consideration this year is to boost Obama's popularity into the election by any means possible, with structural inflation and employment taking a back seat.

No, all of these are secondary items. Here is what is of absolutely critical importance in the just released Goldman letter, nested deep in Hatzius' final paragraph, where it would otherwise be missed by most:

...we have found some evidence that at the very long end of the yield curve, where Operation Twist is concentrated, it may be not just the stock of securities held by the Fed but also the ongoing flow of purchases that matters for yields...

For those who are aware of the Fed's sentiment vis-a-vis the debate of stock vs flow of money effect, this will be a stunning revelation. Especially since it vindicates what we have been saying since day one, namely that when it comes to securities price formation in a centrally-planned regime, it is flow not stock that matters. And as those who follow the Fed's thinking know too well, the Fed is convinced it is stock, not flow that serves as a consistent catalyst for subjective risk valuation. The above quote is just the first crack in the Fed's thinking, because if Goldman now believes this, so will Bill Dudley, following his next meeting with Jan Hatzius at the Pound and Pence, and shortly thereafter, it will become canon at the Fed.

One way of visualizing what this means is to think of a shark which has to be constantly in motion in order to survive. Well, the allegory of Jaws can be applied to liquidity addicted capital markets. Translated simply, it means that it is irrelevant if the Fed's balance sheet is $1 million, $1 trillion or $1,000 quadrillion. A primacy of flow over stock means that UNLESS THE FED IS ACTIVELY ENGAGING IN MONETIZATION AT EVERY GIVEN MOMENT, THE IMPACT FROM EASING DIMINISHES PROGRESSIVELY, ULTIMATELY APPROACHING ZERO AND SUBSEQUENTLY BECOMING NEGATIVE!

We don't have sufficient time to go into the nuances of what this revolutionary run-on sentence means on this good Friday, suffice to say that it makes virtually all the literature on modern monetary theory (in practice of course, the theoretical part is such gibberish that only fans of MMT and Neo-Keynesianism care about it - something nobody actually in the market gives a rat's ass about) obsolete. It also means that absent "flow" or instantaneous Fed monetization engagement at any given moment, risk will collapse, regardless of the actual size of the Fed's balance sheet (which of course has other structural limitations). What is most critical is that this one statement from Hatzius sows the seeds of doubt, and provides a decoupling between prevalent risk prices, and explicit levels of historical Fed monetization. Because what the ascendancy of the flow model means is that unless the Fed is willing to telegraph that it will monetize devaluing assets in perpetuity, thus providing the "flow", the Fed is assured at failing at its only real mandate: keeping the Russell 2000 pumped up.

And while the Fed may be happy to sacrifice its balance sheet at the altar of Dow 36,000 just to preserve the Wealth Effect fallacy, the other counterliability, the US Treasury stock, which by implication will have to rise as it will be the security monetized the most to keep the deficit funded, may not be quite as pliable, and eager to rise parabolically, especially in a time when more and more question the reserve status of the USD, when faced with the ascendancy of the CNY.

Finally, the market still having a trace of discounting left in it, will become quite aware of all these considerations and deliberations, and will promptly demand a practical application of the "flow" model. Which also means that absent constant, ongoing monetization, either sterilized or not (although as we pointed out earlier this week, the opportunity for ongoing sterilization by the Fed is now almost finished as it will have just 3 months of short-end bonds left to sell past June), stocks will crash.

Unwittingly, Goldman may have just resorted to the nuclear option to force the Fed to engage in monetization much faster than it would have otherwise done so, by diametrically changing how Goldman, the Fed, and thus the market perceives Fed intervention.

Or maybe it was all too "wittingly"...

Full Jan Hatzius note:

US Views : Payback (Hatzius)

 

1. The March employment report was a disappointment. Although the unemployment rate fell, this was due to a drop in the labor force as household employment gave back some of its prior big increases. More importantly, the job gain in the establishment survey of just 120,000 fell well short of anyone's estimate. The big question is how much of the slowdown from February’s 240,000 gain was due to special factors, including “payback” for the unseasonably warm winter, and how much reflects weakness in the underlying trend.

 

2. We do think the warm weather has been an important driver of stronger payroll numbers over the past few months. As we have shown, all of the acceleration in nonfarm payrolls since the fall has occurred in the (normally) cold states, and our state-by-state panel analysis suggests that weather has boosted February’s level of payrolls by 100k or a bit more (see “Payroll Payback?” US Economics Analyst, 12/14, April 5, 2012). This state-level model suggests that none of the inevitable payback for this boost should have occurred yet, since March was just as warm relative to the seasonal norm as February. That said, weather-sensitive sectors such as mining and building construction did show some weakness, so we would pencil in 10k-20k for weather “payback” in March.

 

3. In addition, the 37,000 drop in retail employment was partly related to one-off job reductions in the department store industry, and should probably not be included in an estimate of the underlying employment trend. Taken together, we believe that the underlying trend in payroll employment growth is around 175,000 as of the March report. At this point, we would expect the headline number for April to fall short of this figure, partly because the weather payback is likely to be substantially larger in April than in March and partly because the underlying trend may be decelerating slightly (as suggested, e.g., by the drop in temporary help services employment in March).

 

4. Largely because of the weakness in the employment report, our standard metrics for evaluating the US data flow have also started to send a less upbeat message. Our current activity indicator (CAI), which summarizes all of the key monthly and weekly activity data, is showing a preliminary 2.5% for March, down from 3.5% in February. Likewise, our US-MAP, which compares the data with the Bloomberg consensus, has averaged negative readings since late February, after six months of positive surprises. All this reinforces our view that the discrepancies in the US economic data will be resolved mainly via deceleration in the job market indicators rather than acceleration in GDP.

 

5. We admit to being puzzled by the twists and turns in Fed communications over the past few months. On January 25, Chairman Bernanke said that under the FOMC’s projections, he saw a “very strong case” for finding “additional tools” to support economic expansion. But in the March 13 minutes, only “a couple” (i.e., two) of the committee’s ten voting members—a number so small that it probably does not include the chairman, whose position makes it unlikely that he would be in such a small minority—thought that additional stimulus could become necessary, and even that only “if the economy lost momentum” or inflation looked likely to undershoot. All this would make perfect sense if there had been a sharp upgrade of the committee’s central forecast over the past few months. But the minutes also said that “…the economic outlook, while a bit stronger overall, was broadly similar to that at the time of their January meeting.” And Chairman Bernanke, in particular, last week went out of his way to cast doubt on the not on that the stronger jobs data through February were indicative of a sharp pickup in growth. Our conclusion is that there has been a shift in the Fed's reaction function back to the hawkish side, and there may be a bit more complacency about the risks to the outlook than suggested by the committee’s decision to retain the assessment of “significant downside risks” in the March 13 statement.

 

6. So what can we expect from the Fed? Easing at the April 24-25 meeting looks highly unlikely, although the tone of the statement and the Chairman’s press conference may take a fresh turn toward the dovish side. Easing at the June 19-20 meeting, in contrast, still looks more likely than not, at least under our forecast of weaker activity and benign inflation. Our baseline remains a renewed asset purchase program which involves Treasuries and MBS and whose impact on the monetary base is sterilized via reverse repos or term deposits, but it is also possible that the committee would extend Operation Twist; there is approximately another $200 billion available, and it would only take a small reduction in the flow of purchases to make this number last until yearend.

 

7. Stepping back from the tactics, we still see a strong fundamental case for following up Operation Twist with a successor program. First, even under its own forecast, the committee expects to be far from fulfilling the employment side of its mandate by 2013-2014, so it is easy to sympathize with Chicago Fed President Evans’s call for more action. Second, growth could well disappoint the committee’s forecasts, given all the usual uncertainties around the weather impact, the inventory cycle, energy prices, and the “fiscal cliff” at the end of 2012. Third, a failure to do more might imply a tightening of conditions, assuming financial markets are still discounting some probability of easing. In addition, we have found some evidence that at the very long end of the yield curve, where Operation Twist is concentrated, it may be not just the stock of securities held by the Fed but also the ongoing flow of purchases that matters for yields. And fourth, the risk of a material inflation overshoot seems low given the still-large amount of spare capacity, not to mention the Fed’s ability to reverse course and tighten financial conditions substantially via forward guidance, rate hikes, or even asset sales should the need arise.

0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 04/06/2012 - 19:41 | 2323655 chunga
chunga's picture

Good one.

Not so sure about FEMA though.

I remain unconvinced that I'd like to meet them under any circumstances.

 

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:29 | 2323496 bugs_
bugs_'s picture

In any ponzi it is the flow that matters.  Goldman IS right this time!  (LOL)

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 21:17 | 2323859 RiverRoad
RiverRoad's picture

Like Chuck Prince said, "Just keep dancing 'til the music stops."  AKA "Go with the flow"...right over Niagara Falls.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:29 | 2323499 BeetleBailey
BeetleBailey's picture

I can only hope that at the outset of the next war, some military leader takes out every single bank in existence. That they target every single Federal Reserve bank. Hits are put out for every single bank CEO - and, their underlings.

We need a complete re-rack of the entire banking system - top to bottom.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:51 | 2323554 jeff314
jeff314's picture

i think Hitler tried that in ww2

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 20:06 | 2323713 Matt
Matt's picture

If he was trying to do that, he would have invaded Switzerland instead of Russia.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 21:16 | 2323858 knukles
knukles's picture

Nah, he banked in Switzerland.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 19:04 | 2323578 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

 

Hits are put out for every single bank CEO - and, their underlings.

NO.

THEY ARE JUST FOOTSOLDIERS, LIEUTENANTS AND CAPTAINS, WE NEED THEM ALIVE.

OTHERWISE WE WILL NEVER GET THE CAPOS!

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 19:41 | 2323653 spentCartridge
spentCartridge's picture

Can't un-vote 'bout vote :(

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 21:27 | 2323889 onarga74
onarga74's picture

But then who would be left to hate?  Not Illinois Nazi's again?

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:34 | 2323508 Nid
Nid's picture

Ha ha ha ha!!! Looks like Bagger Ben ain't so damn tricksey after all....his industrial strength Ponzi has a limited shelf life.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:35 | 2323513 fonzannoon
fonzannoon's picture

I don't believe that they could follow sich a brilliant diamond in the rough sentence with a complete full retard one...

"And fourth, the risk of a material inflation overshoot seems low given the still-large amount of spare capacity, not to mention the Fed’s ability to reverse course and tighten financial conditions substantially via forward guidance, rate hikes, or even asset sales should the need arise".

Kind of diminishes any brilliance.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 00:44 | 2324089 Mary Wilbur
Mary Wilbur's picture

What does she mean by "spare capacity?"

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 03:04 | 2324147 Mentaliusanything
Mentaliusanything's picture

low Industrial output / Labor surplus - War puts them to use

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:40 | 2323523 Bluntly Put
Bluntly Put's picture

"UNLESS THE FED IS ACTIVELY ENGAGING IN EXPONENTIALLY INCREASING FORMS OF MONETIZATION AT EVERY GIVEN MOMENT, THE IMPACT FROM EASING DIMINISHES PROGRESSIVELY, ULTIMATELY APPROACHING ZERO AND SUBSEQUENTLY BECOMING NEGATIVE!

There fixed it for you :P

 

 

 

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:53 | 2323527 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

This is actually rather obvious and I'm not even shocked GS fucktard would explicitly state this. In other words, how can you make money on ANYTHING BUT FLOW at this stage since the underlying fundamentals of most stocks are, let's be polite, wholly unrelated what their QE hopium propped up trading values are; ergo, fast flow swirls the shit around and up until it doesn't -- this is the very long end of the Ponzi curve where if the fed doesn't keep increasing the flow on anemic volume (ie investors abandoning ship and/or GS chum), we have essentially nothing but toxic grossly overvalued stocks (esp banking sector), iGizPodMaker notwithstanding.

 

Folks, flow is the driver of near zero volume and rising index values. Let the Russell2000 crash already and it'll still be overvalued.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 20:12 | 2323728 Crimedog
Crimedog's picture

I'm not gonna argue that stocks are currently overvalued because I agree with you.  But to say "we have essentially nothing but toxic grossly overvalued stocks (esp banking sector), iGizPodMaker notwithstanding" 

is ridiculous.  There are a TON of good comapnies out there producing REAL goods in the economy and have REAL value.  Apple is not even close to being the only one.  Don't lump the banking sector in with the real economy that atually makes things.

 

I'm just glad this jobs number is going to be followed by a sell-off so that I can get back into good stocks on the cheap.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 20:37 | 2323790 AustriAnnie
AustriAnnie's picture

By saying "Apple is not the only one" are you implying that Apple's stock price is justified by the "real goods" it creates and the "real value" of those goods?

 

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 21:34 | 2323883 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

AustriAnnieI was being quite facetious re: Apple, as evidenced by the iGizFukPod devices mention....

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 21:33 | 2323880 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

CrimedogOn average too many stocks, irrespective if issued by producing relatively productive companies, are grossly overvalued

And you precisely supply the proof by this YOUR statement: "so that I can get back into good stocks on the cheap." I'd amend cheap and say for FAIR MARKET VALUE.  

Further simplifying my above statement: do you think SP/DJ/NAS/Russell2k are grossly overvalued? If you do, then my statement above is correct. If you don't, then please, by all means put some of your monies into those indexes.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 07:03 | 2324237 WTFx10
WTFx10's picture

There are a TON of good comapnies out there producing REAL goods in the economy and have REAL value.  Apple builds toys for adults who aren't too intelligent. I wouldn't call that real value. Toss the ipad ,iphone,  in a year and purchase the newer model with your iWallet ? Just revolving toys.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 20:36 | 2323784 AustriAnnie
AustriAnnie's picture

"since the underlying fundamentals of most stocks are, let's be polite, wholly unrelated what their QE hopium propped up trading values are"

Problem is, their first tactic was to show up on every MSM market talk hour and say that it was fundamentals that made stocks worth buying.  But they didn't get the dummies to buy, so now they're throwing a "we want QE" temper tantrum.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:41 | 2323528 mr. mirbach
mr. mirbach's picture

So many words to tell the FED to keep printing or the Ponzi ends.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:45 | 2323537 kato
kato's picture

Nice writeup. Interesting. Thanks. Often wonder what Volkler is thinking.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 19:39 | 2323646 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

How to get his gold out of the country.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 19:07 | 2323538 Hansel
Hansel's picture

No shit, goldman.  The treasury keeps issuing more paper, so if the fed doesn't soak it up, rates go up.  Is this goldman's attempt at intelligence?

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 19:39 | 2323650 LowProfile
LowProfile's picture

I honestly think it's their explaining to a clueless Fed how things really work.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:46 | 2323539 Nid
Nid's picture

Long Bag-Holders

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:48 | 2323543 Cdad
Cdad's picture

Yep...QE infinity.  That is what is required now...now that the Fed and the rest of the criminal syndicate have broken the markets, broken trust with the American people, and broken normal capital formation.  Of course, the other option is to let price discovery return to the markets while dismantling the TBTF criminal banks that have brought us to this sad place.  Either or...

Nice article, Tyler.  One of your best written and most concise.  Hat tip.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 21:20 | 2323871 onarga74
onarga74's picture

Good luck bro.  Bernanke is a heroin dealer in a suit.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 12:51 | 2324576 PalladiumJockey
PalladiumJockey's picture

Wonder if Benny Boy knows Charlie Sheen's coke dealer, who I also heard wears a suit!

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:50 | 2323549 lolmao500
lolmao500's picture

Meanwhile in Wisconsin :

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/06/scott-walker-wisconsin-equal-pa...

Scott Walker Quietly Repeals Wisconsin Equal Pay Law

A Wisconsin law that made it easier for victims of wage discrimination to have their day in court was repealed on Thursday, after Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) quietly signed the bill.

The 2009 Equal Pay Enforcement Act was meant to deter employers from discriminating against certain groups by giving workers more avenues via which to press charges. Among other provisions, it allows individuals to plead their cases in the less costly, more accessible state circuit court system, rather than just in federal court.

In November, the state Senate approved SB 202, which rolled back this provision. On February, the Assembly did the same. Both were party-line votes in Republican-controlled chambers.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 19:16 | 2323598 Raymond K Hessel
Raymond K Hessel's picture

Good.  The less government, the less economic interference.  Don't like your job?  Get a better one.  Don't like your pay?  Find an employer that pays better.  This law seems to court a Detroit-style economy for Wisconsinites.  If it didn't work in Detroit, why is it going to work anywhere.  

By Detroit I mean the auto industry.  

By the auto industry, I mean the way unions forced auto makers to pay everyone equally.  

By this, I mean socialism, failure, stupidity, etc.

Sack up and stop looking for other people to give you the "life you deserve".  

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 20:08 | 2323723 Ned Zeppelin
Ned Zeppelin's picture

On principle I kind of agree with you, on the other hand, I think you're probably just another douchebag interested in fleecing employees.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 21:13 | 2323851 Havana White
Havana White's picture

Easy for you to say, the not-black, not-Hispanic, not-female Raymond K Hessel.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 00:33 | 2324078 Zero Debt
Zero Debt's picture

Your best argument is an ad hominem?

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 22:26 | 2323956 donsluck
donsluck's picture

I have never understood the logic behind the "owner's can organize but workers can't" argument. A union is worker's reponse to the counter the corporate organization with one of their own. Otherwise each worker is a sitting duck.

Also, the owner's were never "forced" into anything, the only real power the workers have is to stop working, and when it's organized, it's a strike. It's just a power struggle, and unions level the field.

To suggest workers have no right to organize is un-American, as it's akin to limiting the freedom of association.

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 23:21 | 2324009 Prometheus418
Prometheus418's picture

Once again, the point of the Wisconsin public union debate seems to be lost on some people.

Walker did not do anything relating to private unions organized against corporations- he broke the back of the public unions, who were funneling tax money back to the politicians to vote themselves rases.  It was a closed system that was being used to strip tax revinue out of the private citizens' accounts.  It was exactly what he said he was going to do when he was campaigning, and he did it. Most of the protesters we've been dealing with are not even from the state- they were bussed in from other areas to make a huge noise.  It may look a certain way on your TeeVee- but when you've lived in a town with a population of a couple thousand your whole life, I assure you that you know when the people holding signs on the corner are not from your area.

The local public employess I know were afraid when it passed, but most have come to realize that they are now better off than they were before.  Schools have more funding, and it prevented massive layoffs of public-sector workers.  Trimming out excessive bureaucracy and systemic abuses from the public sector is not a bad thing- and it is certainly not the same thing as forcing private citizens to work for slave wages in a salt mine without PPE.

Private unions are another matter entirely, and while I'm not a fan of them myself, I would actively oppose any attempt of the government to eliminate them.  They're not the same thing, and should not be bundled together.

Walker is a good man- he says what he is going to do, and then actually does it- even when it is unpopular.  If even 10% of our national politicians were like him, this mess would be cleaned up by now- maybe not perfectly, but at least honestly.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 00:39 | 2324084 Mary Wilbur
Mary Wilbur's picture

I agree with you. Scott Walker is a good governor. You're lucky to have him.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 12:01 | 2324469 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

He is a fucking hatchet man for the Kochs....

 

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 00:37 | 2324081 Mary Wilbur
Mary Wilbur's picture

GM and Chrysler should have been allowed to go bankrupt.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 01:50 | 2324119 boogerbently
boogerbently's picture

....bailing out GM so the same employees that ran the company into the ground wouldn't lose their jobs,

OR

bailing out banks, for their irresponsible investment practices, without any greater oversight or regulation???

I don't see much of a difference.

We pay for BOTH, right?

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 03:12 | 2324153 Mentaliusanything
Mentaliusanything's picture

It is the Westminster System in action.

Unions are always in opposition and Employers are always the Government.

It should always be closely balanced for the best outcomes

Read Symbiotic relationships

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 22:38 | 2323972 Marginal Call
Marginal Call's picture

Detroit has run full steam ahead into the limits of a finite world.  Expanding debt/credit wasn't a problem with cheap plentifull fuel.  The Detroit experiment started out great in that it provided the factory class wages to become the consuming class of the middle that grew the wealth of everyone.  The car economy was great until in didin't work anymore in the oil economy.

 

And as far as your opinion on jobs and government interference- that's how jobs and factories were created.  By governments robbing man of his ability to sustain himself and forcing him into the life of a wage slave at the behest of capital.  People didn't line up to work in factories because they wanted a job, they were forced to under the power of the state.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 12:58 | 2324589 PalladiumJockey
PalladiumJockey's picture

Man, you're completely missing the point of that legislation.  The issue here is gender pay-gap, nothing else.  I guess you agree women are worth less than men?  Oh, I also suppose you'll like the China-like wave of worker policies that are coming back to these shores as well.  Enjoy!  Glad to think all the basic protections unions did get for us will be gone.  I'm really hoping to breathe in some toxic fumes 25 hours a day for virtually nothing.  While unions do go overboard now and again (UAW, anyone?), I think the workplace protections have helped workers.  Unfortunately, it appears we have to choose again between having a job and having health, as the world rebalances somewhat.  It would also be extra ironic if you read this on your iPad.

Sat, 04/07/2012 - 16:14 | 2324959 ffart
ffart's picture

Why should someone who bleeds a week of every month and takes 3 months of vacation a year get paid as much as a man?

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:51 | 2323550 TradingJoe
TradingJoe's picture

Monday's "Action" will be a "tell all" going forward!!! I expect a bounce, followed by the actual CORRECTION with the S&P in the triple digits as a result!!!

Fri, 04/06/2012 - 18:52 | 2323555 whoopsing
whoopsing's picture

Morphine for the dying , lest they realize they are dying

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