Trading/Investing Thread - Page 115
Forum Index > General Forum |
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Down 500 points in the first 15 minutes. | ||
jhotom
1 Post
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Vivax
21769 Posts
https://www.statista.com/statistics/246420/major-foreign-holders-of-us-treasury-debt/#:~:text=Of the total 7.42 trillion,countries and Caribbean banking centers. By what 'hack' does the national debt of the US become serviceable, if not by devaluation of the dollar? The last time that happened, a few banks went bust (08). Or inflation went up (last three years). Biggest glaring issue being energy costs | ||
pmh
1351 Posts
Swizz and Caymen islands at 3/4 with 300 billion. The hack is the fed and the dollar beeing reserve currency. Doesnt the fed hold like 5+ trillion of debt as well? I do think the dollar will devaluate in the coming years and i also think inflation in the us will go significantly higher before improving. They are a little bit behind Europe on the inflation curve for various reasons but they will catch up in the end and probably overshoot europe in the process. In the long run the most important fundamentals still point towards a deflationary scenario. And we might return to that type of economy (and market) after all the disturbances (pandemic,war,energy prices) have been processed. Which could be within 2 year if there are no further disturbances. Though it could also take 8 years in a pessimistic scenario. The energy transition is very painfull now but it will unlock a lot of potential later on. Europe is building a massive amount of renewables right now which will come online in the next 2-3 years. Not all problems are behind us yet (far from) but for today the sun shines. | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Maybe we can "hack" our way out of the debt conundrum by picking at the carcass of the industry leaving Europe until we generate enough growth to mitigate the effects of the inevitable continuation of the financial crisis? There's not exactly a winning play given how bad the debt situation is, but if we can cannibalize away enough from regions doing worse than us then at least we can lose less stateside. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Vivax
21769 Posts
It's kind of megalomaniac to expect production to fix everything with these disparities in consumption between countries. If you want to talk about cannibalizing, it's that race to the top of who can consume the most energy to gain the economic advantage before cheap fossils are really dead and buried. I don't even know why China's consumption is so huge, I'd wager it's from household electronics usage and IT infrastructure. Someone's been pulling a lot of money out of the Chinese index lately | ||
![]()
KwarK
United States41946 Posts
| ||
Vivax
21769 Posts
On October 05 2022 00:39 KwarK wrote: Dollar is the safe harbor currency, as other currencies experience weakness and inflation the dollar strengthens and imported goods become cheaper to the US consumer. You can’t look at what happens elsewhere and assume it’ll hit the US, the dollar is unique in that regard. I found that observing the dollar's run up towards Feb 2020 accompanied by the stock rally, the result was the massive downwards sling that sent crude price into the negative. The debasement that followed came with increased energy costs. If the US kept debasing the currency, the price increase on the energy would immediately eat up the gain for the debt issuing sector. Like in the 1970s, we're stuck in stagflation, but there's only few countries left with easy access to energy on their territory. One is at war | ||
pmh
1351 Posts
On October 05 2022 00:39 KwarK wrote: Dollar is the safe harbor currency, as other currencies experience weakness and inflation the dollar strengthens and imported goods become cheaper to the US consumer. You can’t look at what happens elsewhere and assume it’ll hit the US, the dollar is unique in that regard. I dont know,maybe you are right. Personally i am rather pessimistic about the future economic development of the US,which is a first in my lifetime. I genuinly think Europe is in a (much) better position long term for many different reasons. a 1970,s scenario has been on my mind as well. Both for europe as well as the us. That would be the most pessimistic scenario though bar some worldwide military conflict. There is similarities but there is also a few differences. There are many alternatives for fossil now which wasnt the case in 1970-1980. Those alternatives require huge investments to get online but once online they will be a big fundamental improvement. On the other hand the demographic fundamentals are now worse then in 1970-1980. There is a few things that are better in comparison and there is a few things that are worse in comparison. Its difficult to say how it will all play out. The geo political situation is also an important factor and that is difficult to predict. A 1970,s scenario for this decade is very well possible but i think (much) better outcomes are also still possible. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Twitter shares surged 15% on Tuesday after Bloomberg reported that Tesla CEO Elon Musk plans to go forth with his deal to acquire the company for $54.20 a share. The stock was halted after the report. Musk agreed to the deal earlier this year, valuing Twitter at $44 billion, but he quickly changed course and tried to back out of the agreement. Twitter sued Musk to force him to go through with the purchase. According to Bloomberg, which cited people with knowledge of the matter, Musk made his latest proposal in a letter to Twitter. Source | ||
Sermokala
United States13735 Posts
No one outside of the USA wants the dollar to be the reserve currency but the only possible replacement would be the Euro. The amount of international debt is denominated at least 80% in either a dollar or a euro amount. With the recent war and the further expansion of NATO the Euro will never replace the dollar for a generation. I don't think people realize what it means to be the reserve currency and how much of an empire it makes the united states. If China Japan the UK Russia go bankrupt the world will feel the hurt but will carry on. If the US were to go bankrupt the world economy would collapse. Trade requires reliability and stability. The United states navy guarantees safety of the seas and the Us dollar guarantees the value of the means of exchange. If you remove those two things the world becomes a much more violent and volitle place where global trade just doesn't happen on the same scale as it does now. | ||
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4315 Posts
On October 04 2022 23:59 pmh wrote: The market is betting on a fed pivot. And looking at the numbers today they seem to be very convinced about this. Reserve bank of Australia was yesterday expected to raise rates 0.5% but only moved them .25%.May be due to the rapidly falling house prices in the overpriced east coast capitals as mentioned earlier. Stock market best day in two years.Maybe the pivot has started here already. | ||
pmh
1351 Posts
This isnt true. The dollar beeing reserve currency has been very beneficial for Europe and the UK as well,and from a certain perspective (when considering the alternative as you said) for a large part of the whole world. Europe does want the dollar to remain reserve currency , they definitely dont want to be in a position where the euro is the only reserve currency. | ||
Vivax
21769 Posts
On October 05 2022 08:13 pmh wrote: No one outside of the USA wants the dollar to be the reserve currency This isnt true. The dollar beeing reserve currency has been very beneficial for Europe and the UK as well,and from a certain perspective (when considering the alternative as you said) for a large part of the whole world. Europe does want the dollar to remain reserve currency , they definitely dont want to be in a position where the euro is the only reserve currency. Euro as reserve is just unrealistic, being in the middle and all that Energy consumption alone seems to suggest what's realistic (to anyone who isn't able to top that) | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
endy
Switzerland8970 Posts
On August 26 2022 23:41 endy wrote: central banks are stuck between a rock and a hard place... can't raise rates, can't print more money ww3 probably the only outcome market shorted everything prior to the speech after the PCE pump, thank you Jerome shorts printing ![]() the Fed is so F'ed | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Some economists fear the Federal Reserve—humbled after waiting too long to withdraw its support of a booming economy last year—is risking another blunder by potentially raising interest rates too much to combat high inflation. The Fed has lifted rates by 0.75 percentage point at each of its past three meetings, bringing its benchmark federal-funds rate to a range between 3% and 3.25% last month—the fastest pace of increases since the 1980s. Officials have indicated they could make a fourth increase of 0.75 point at their Nov. 1-2 meeting and raise the rate above 4.5% early next year. Fed Chairman Jerome Powell has said the central bank isn’t trying to cause a recession, but it can’t fail in its effort to bring down inflation. “I wish there was a painless way to do that. There isn’t,” he said last month. Still, several analysts worry the Fed is on track to raise rates higher than required, potentially triggering a deeper-than-necessary downturn. “They’ve done a tremendous amount of tightening,” said Greg Mankiw, a Harvard University economist who advised President George W. Bush. “Recessions are painful for a lot of people. I think Powell’s right that some pain is probably inevitable…but you don’t want to cause more than is necessary.” Until June, officials hadn’t lifted rates by 0.75 point, or 75 basis points, since 1994. Instead, they usually preferred making smaller quarter-point increases that gave them more time to see their economic effects. “I would slowly ease the foot off the brake,” Mr. Mankiw said. “That means probably for a given meeting, if they’re debating 50 or 75, go with 50 instead of 75.” Former Fed Vice Chairman Donald Kohn agrees it is near time for Fed officials to slow their rate increases. “They need to downshift soon. They need to somehow downshift without backing off,” he said. Fed officials left rates near zero last year as they focused on spurring a strong labor market recovery. The war in Ukraine this spring sent commodity prices higher and fueled concerns that inflation might become embedded into wage and price contracts. “Moving in these 75-basis-point steps was effective when the Fed had a long way to go. It becomes more problematic when they need to calibrate policy more carefully, and I believe we’re approaching that point,” said Brian Sack, who ran the New York Fed’s markets desk from 2009 to 2012 and is now the director of economics at hedge-fund manager D.E. Shaw. Some Fed critics say the current surge in inflation is the result of global disruptions rather than an overheated U.S. labor market, and they are pointing to signs that prices have begun to fall for a swath of goods and services, including commodities, freight shipping, and housing. Housing costs have contributed notably to inflation in recent months amid large increases over the past year in residential rents. But housing demand is falling sharply as the 30-year mortgage rate nears 7%, a 16-year high—a direct result of the Fed’s rate increases. Home prices started to fall this summer in more U.S. markets, and economists at Goldman Sachs expect price drops of between 5% and 10% nationally by the end of next year. Apartment rent increases also have begun to slow. Asset prices have also taken a beating, which tends to reduce spending and investment. A portfolio invested 60% in stocks and 40% in bonds is down nearly 20% this year. “The housing market doesn’t look pretty, and that will eventually spread to the rest of the economy,” said Mr. Mankiw. Lower asset prices will, too, at some point, he said. Fed officials are cautious about expecting inflation to fall because it has consistently defied such forecasts over the past year. Some have pointed to risks of additional economic disruptions—for example, higher energy prices this winter if Russia suspends oil sales. The strong U.S. labor market is fueling several officials’ concerns by making it easy for workers to switch jobs in pursuit of higher pay, putting upward pressures on wages. That could especially be the case if consumer spending keeps shifting away from goods toward more labor-intensive services. Eric Rosengren, who headed the Boston Fed from 2007 until last year, said he sees the Fed’s projected policy path as broadly appropriate. “If anything, I think the risks show they’re going to have to raise rates a bit more than they’re suggesting,” he said. “The U.S. economy, to date, looks more resilient than I might have expected given the rate increases that have already occurred.” Traditionally, the Fed set policy based on forecasts of inflation, which lags behind changes in output. But officials now are reacting more to the latest inflation data “because they have absolutely zero confidence in their ability to forecast inflation,” said Nathan Sheets, chief global economist at Citigroup. He said he is concerned the Fed will overdo rate rises but concedes inflation in the service sector is “pretty concerning.” One risk is that economic activity slows sharply but filters through to inflation measures with a longer-than-usual delay. Wholesale prices of used cars have been dropping in recent months, for example, but this hasn’t shown up broadly in price indexes yet. Housing prices and residential rents are calculated in a way that is particularly lagged. Mr. Sheets said waiting for proof that inflation is declining before slowing rate rises means monetary policy could be “held hostage by something you know with high confidence is going to reverse in the coming months.” New York Fed President John Williams said last week he expects falling commodity prices and easing bottlenecks to bring inflation to 3% by the end of next year, leaving it still too far above the Fed’s 2% goal. Government policy makers focused heavily last year on avoiding the mistakes they thought were made after the 2008 downturn. Some said it would be easier to bring down inflation that overshot the Fed’s 2% target than to lift inflation from below that level. Now, officials have signaled they are willing to err on the side of raising rates too much because they don’t want to repeat the mistakes of the early 1970s, when consumers and businesses began to anticipate high inflation, causing prices to keep rising. The Fed ultimately raised interest rates high enough to trigger a severe recession in the early 1980s to bring down prices and break that psychology. “There is a record of failed attempts to get inflation under control, which only raises the ultimate costs to society of getting it under control,” Mr. Powell said last month. Fed officials have spent considerable time studying the 1970s “and will avoid making those mistakes,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at accounting firm KPMG. “But it opens the door to a whole host of new mistakes.” Mr. Sack said he sees meaningful risks from both too much and too little tightening. “It’s not a completely one-sided story,” he said. “There are also risks from financial markets reacting in an abrupt way to higher rates, or from the slowdown in activity building on itself and becoming harder to control.” Source | ||
| ||