Thursday, August 1, 2013

Hawks and Doves

Moral: Wherein we claim that we are not knocking Ben (and his ilk) and that we are interested in the future of economics.


Or, we're interested in the economics of the future. More on that below. We'll add a new twist and look at Ben's ilk (well a subset defined by participation in the FED's bumbling ways). Why? He may be leaving; too, he has not been a lone player all along, though it's his face that we see when the FED has to talk to us, Congress, and the press.

You know, it's more of the last. But, what could the FED say to someone that it's torturing daily?


Right now, we have to report that the WSJ did an analysis which showed that the Doves were better at prediction (at least within this time frame) than the Hawks. The WSJ also talked to a few experts who made various observations. Let us add one: does self-fulfilling prophecy come to mind?

Aside: the image shows the table with results from the WSJ study.

Dove? Yes, those who coo-coo, while Ben goes goo-goo, after which the market'rs (more than addicts, ..., bordering on criminality) go gaga (again, apologies to the Lady). That is, those who don't want to taper (heck, they ought to unwind).

Hawk? Supposedly, someone who says to take off the training wheels (sheesh). These don't seem to have much say.


Now, about the future. Of course, predictions need to be done. Call them forecasts so as to bring in something a little more sane, weather prediction. By definition, these are look-aheads. Who has 20/20 foresight? Heck, we do not have 20/20 hindsight (all sorts of issues, such as our underdetermined basis). So, look-aheads would be based upon good methods, but they need to be updated, to boot.

You know what? The push to book cooking comes from a serious idiocy that has been allowed to manifest itself as smarts in the business world related to look aheads and meeting them (monthly dance of the CEO/Kings, the new royalty). And, we claim science and engineering as examples of our progress? Wait! I did use busyness, did I not? STEM has some applicability there; yet, busyness will need a whole lot more.

Aside: Remember about six years ago, thereabouts, when all we heard was that risk was solved and that would not be another downturn of a serious nature. Well, if you do not remember, we'll have to pull that idiocy to the fore in our argument for the necessity to be aware of singularities (to be defined further). The mess now is even worse than before things fell apart from thinking problems that are very much analogous (even related) to the risk fantasy (fair dusting, indeed).

Too, we need to re-look at money. Right now, it's some cosmic (comic) bit of crap that is managed by a set of wizards (recent books and articles discuss this whole issue). Yet, there are those who have reaped the rewards (raped the economy, at the same time). So, we can see what money can do. We cannot see all of the downsides (evidently, otherwise we would wake up and do right, yes?) for which the near-zero concept will be important.


Ah, so much to look at. Thanks, WSJ, for the study.


07/25/2015 -- We're about six weeks after the June look back at 800 years ago (Magna Carta). Too, though, poster boys have popped out of the woodwork, including Zweig.

02/11/2015 -- Wikipedia: Zero interest rate policy.

09/17/2014 -- The coo-coo, goo-goo goes on. The landscape is strewn with the lifeless bodies of the savers. Thanks, Janet.

12/19/2013 -- Ben did his parting shot (whimper that it was); they're going to taper slowly, less than a 1/8th on the bond buy, starting next month. And, he's going to torture savers for another year or so. We'll have to see how the pieces fall. The markets got heavily seeded today in hopes of luring in the idiots and moms/pops (who cannot afford the pending losses). So, it's pop, fizz, ..., again. Too, we'll see more goo-goo talk to the immature markets and the addicted investors thereof. One of many technical issues that we'll have to get into: Nanex's view.

10/03/2013 -- Oh, yes, two posts (Fed-aerated and 7oops7), but no mention of savers being slapped silly. Notice in the savers post that an image says no bullets left. Ah, yes, Ben panicked and used up his ammo. But, has he not shown all of us (and the world) that there was a whole lot of other maneuvering possible? But, too, does he know that he's cowboy'ed us into a corner?

09/18/2013 -- Pop, fizz, ... Ben had to show largess because of idiots who ran the economy to the ground (rogues all around). Ben is going. What do we have to look forward to? Businessweek has a review issue (of the past five years). Several articles are especially interesting. Too, phrasing shines: spin dross into gold (in relation to mortgage bonds). Perhaps, we'll get back to some of the more pertinent ones, at some point. If we do, it would be to bring forward what has been said here, from the beginning. To wit? Tranche and trash (WSJ has a good take on that). Securitization? This article brings on weeping (one example of the misuse of mathematics and computing that has been harped about). Adoption, and improved understanding, of lazy evaluation let loose the powers that resulted in the wild web and its little children, namely social media and more. To grasp the problem, we have to go back to computing that is in some type of responsible area. Avionics comes to mind. If what is couched as software in looser domains (financial engineering? -- looser?, yes bailouts are the norm despite all of the protestations of the ruling elite; or the whole cadre of the poorer folk can just suck it up when there are problems in order to relieve the fat cats' loss) were to used in flight controls, would we not have planes falling out of the sky? We'll get back to the simple issues that seem to not be seen by the elites chasing after the bucks that Ben has been throwing out of his helicopter.

08/21/2013 -- I was wrong. I thought that Ben would go goo-goo, again, as his doves want him to do. But, there is talk of a taper, albeit slowly. Sheesh. No one does "cold turkey" anymore? That's how I quit smoking. Why is it that the FED feeds addiction (that's a monetary policy?)? Now, when does the slapping the face silly quit?

08/15/2013 -- FED site, FEDofNYPre-FOMC Announcement "drift"

08/07/2013 -- Investors? After the last taper talk (more than a month ago), things jiggled a bit. Some lost money. Some gnashed their teeth (but, for someone, like my ilk, who has been slapped silly for several years now, what comfort ought we give to those who don't know how to wean themselves from their addiction? --- in the meantime, Ben, we, the savers (saviors?), continue to be good citizens despite the Fed's attempt to trample us under the dirt). At that time, Ben had his Doves talk goo-goo. So, the mania began again. Yesterday, there was a slight downturn supposedly as some Hawk (or two) said, perhaps, next month there might be some fiddling with the taper (the talk wasn't that the investor would get reamed - forgive me, I was in the U.S.Army at 17 and learned some good lessons -- also, I was a medic so I know of orifices, to boot). Ben's problem is that he's in a fog (who isn't?). Yet, he runs around with the elite like an oracle (he ought to consider some of the Prophets about which he knows, perhaps), strokes the addicts, bends in to the money'd, and more. And, he looks for signs (omen analyzer -- ah, age-old behavior). And, he misses the obvious. For instance, what they're calling jobs (related to his triggers) are really just glorified indentured servancy roles. In fact, these things are to drive a consumer-oriented economy? ...

08/05/2013 -- Let's see. Financial Engineering needs some attention. Perhaps, with the likes of MIT involved, this discipline can learn to lead the way out of the morass. Expect more on this topic. If things continue as they are, markets will be pure chimera (as in, ca-pital-sinos). Investors? We'll go on about that, too. It's guaranteed that most in the equity markets will lose. Why is that not talked about by those heads we see daily yakking on TV and newer media? No, they would rather go gaga (apologies to the Lady). So, we'll have to address this issue: the point (price) at which loss outweighs any gains to date. All cannot sell to make a profit. Now, there is a way that all could sell high (government as the buyer of last resort - Ben has been doing this, albeit with bonds - yet, it frees up money that can go to equities -- government? of course, taxpayers). We'll have to look at the misuse of mathematics; plus, doers need to be brought back to a respectful position.

07/31/2013 -- We'll have to address the take that Ben has applied to savers so that he could put it elsewhere (mainly, into the chimera of the ca-pital-sino). That is, make its magnitude known (very large). How can Ben sleep at night with the growling tummies of all of the savers whose dinner he gave away to the fat cats?

Modified: 07/25/2015

No comments:

Post a Comment