Friday, October 24, 2008

Savers sacked

There's talk that the Fed is considering lowering its rate to 0.75. Gosh, Ben, you blinked before. Now, you're desperate? [Note, originally pointed to Yahoo Finance page which has expired]

Look, Ben. That market and game that gets your attention is not worth its salt beyond being a field for fraud and froth.

So, you're going to throw more pixie dust at those who you want to put their money in stock. Well, Alan's low rate is considered a factor in the mess. Why should you follow suit with the equity bias (yes, keep those gamers on the Street and at the CBOE satisfied)?

In fact, it looks as if we need to bolster the models that are driving decisions; as well, why not start to consider getting beyond the gab standard, to start to remove the fiction (Marx' view, 7'oops7 view) out of finance?

Remarks:

08/01/2013 -- Ben cannot unwind or taper downhe has too many Doves. We'll have to get back to the king thing (yes, the divine rights of the CEO, new royalty, in other words) and dampening of these types by a new outlook (Magna-Carta'√≠sh).

06/23/2013 -- Ben sure has talked up (gabbed to) the investors; a recent downturn offers a lot to think about.

03/15/2011 -- The M & Ms are apropos.

09/09/2009 -- Alan's reign will be looked at, in time.

08/24/2009 -- Last year, Ben blinked and panicked. He frantically pulled out all stops as if with no thought for tomorrow. Now, he has no use for 'mea culpa' big daddy that he is. Ben, start to unwind now. The Vienna School's view that these things are undecidable (which is a computational issue) is right on.

08/10/2009 -- As promised, FEDaerated is here.

07/31/2009 -- Let's see, 5,000 got over $1M for services rendered. Well, that's probably a sign of being a best-and-brightest, at least to certain eyes; it's called rolling-in-the-dough.

Now, this can be used to illustrate how the game it to fill the pockets of a small set to an exorbitant amount. Does the game need to be that way? Hell no. We'll look at that some more.

07/30/2009 -- The WSJ reports that Ben lost last year, despite his best efforts to keep the equity market afloat. Gosh, was there not a time when those guys had to forgo personal gain? Well, it's obvious from his portfolio that Ben's not on the savers' side. Nice to know. You see, Ben, some of us aren't looking to put our hands into the pockets of others (as do the best and brightest). No, we're looking for a little gain with preserved principle. Get it?

07/16/2009 -- Well, effects from several months of meddling (big Ben's economy) can be analyzed. Yet, the main questions is where is all this going? Systemic issues are still there.

04/25/2009 -- People matter.

12/18/2008 -- Savers still take it on the nose. We need to address inherent differences between debt and equity (Modigliani notwithstanding).

10/30/2008 -- A more robust basis is possible, but it would require better behavior on the part of those involved.

Modified: 08/01/2013

No comments: