Bulls, Bears & Bucks #72 Horrorwinter op komst!

quote:

Op woensdag 28 augustus 2013 09:43 schreef Perrin het volgende:

[..]

[ afbeelding ]

Idd, duurder dan in 2008 alweer.

quote:

Op woensdag 28 augustus 2013 11:11 schreef PaulieWalnuts het volgende:

[..]

Heb je deze ook voor de Japanse yen?

quote:

Op woensdag 28 augustus 2013 11:29 schreef Perrin het volgende:

[..]

Jazeker:
http://www.indexmundi.com(...)ths=180¤cy=jpy

quote:

Op woensdag 28 augustus 2013 11:42 schreef PaulieWalnuts het volgende:
Importeert Japan ook niet bijna alle soft commodities? Dat gaat ook pijn doen de komende 30 jaar als we naar een wereldbevolking gaan van 9 miljard mensen met steeds minder landbouwgrond.

quote:

Op dinsdag 27 augustus 2013 11:57 schreef Basp1 het volgende:

[..]

Ik zou liever zien dat alleen de belastingbetalers die deze falers gered hebben gaan profiteren van de beursgang.

quote:

Federal Reserve Employees Afraid To Speak Put Financial System At Risk

WASHINGTON -- Regulators overseeing the nation’s largest financial institutions are distrustful of their bosses, afraid to speak out, and feeling isolated, according to a confidential survey this year of Federal Reserve employees.

The findings from the April survey of roughly 400 employees, presented to Fed staff during multiple meetings in June and July and obtained by The Huffington Post, show a workforce that is demoralized, and an institution where teamwork is nonexistent, innovation and creativity are discouraged and employees feel underutilized.

...

Despite the improvements in the Fed’s record as a regulator, employees who help draft regulations say they feel as if they’re working alone and that collaboration between teams and departments is rare, which risks undermining the Fed’s enhanced record as a bank regulator, according to survey results and interviews with Fed staff.

“We’re supposed to oversee a sprawling and complicated financial system and huge banks -- all the while making sure we don’t implement policy that hurts the economy -- and we can’t even properly manage ourselves,” said one Fed official who helps develop regulatory policy. “How can we be trusted to supervise the system when the Fed can barely supervise its own staff?”

Banking supervision and regulation division employees frequently use the word “siloed” to describe the units inside the division. Information isn’t shared; workers in various units dedicated to developing some policies don’t work with employees in other units, leaving policy development fragmented and uncoordinated.

Regulators scattered across the 12 regional Fed banks also have complained to their Washington counterparts about the lack of information-sharing.

quote:

Op dinsdag 17 september 2013 10:41 schreef SeLang het volgende:
Even een momentje van bezinning:

Welke conclusies kunnen we hieruit trekken over centrale banken?

quote:

Fed Faces Tough Sell on Low-Rate Strategy

Federal Reserve officials face a communication challenge explaining their interest-rate plans when they gather for a policy meeting this week.

Their updated economic projections could show an economy that appears back to normal by 2016, but their projections of where short-term interest rates will be could show rates still quite low by then. Their challenge: How to justify the low interest-rate plan when their own estimates suggest an economy regaining its health.

The dilemma has been overlooked in recent weeks by investors and other observers more focused on other Fed dramas. One is the uncertainty about whom President Barack Obama will nominate to succeed Ben Bernanke as Fed chairman, particularly after the withdrawal from the race Sunday by Lawrence Summers—a former economic adviser to the president who was a leading contender for the job.

The other issue is whether Fed officials will decide at their meeting Tuesday and Wednesday to start winding down their $85 billion-a-month bond-buying program. Fed officials face a close call at the meeting on whether to start pulling back on the bond-buying program, also known as quantitative easing, according to interviews with officials earlier this month and their public comments.

But the commitment to low rates is widely held inside the Fed, and officials have been searching for ways to reinforce their pledge. "Monetary policy will continue to be extraordinarily stimulative for quite some time," San Francisco Fed President John Williams said in a speech earlier this month.

As the economy improves, the Fed is trying to shift its emphasis from bond buying, which has uncertain costs and benefits, to the low-rate pledge. Both the commitment to keep short-term rates low and the bond-buying program are meant to stimulate higher risk tolerance in financial markets and encourage borrowing, spending, investing and economic growth.

The Fed has pinned short-term rates near zero since December 2008 to help the struggling U.S. economy recover from deep recession. It has pledged to keep them near zero until the jobless rate drops to 6.5% or lower, a threshold Fed officials expect to cross by 2015. Still, officials have been vague in describing what they'll do with rates once they do start raising them.

The Fed's guidance on future short-term interest rates has a substantial influence on where markets move today's long-term interest rates, such as those for mortgages, car loans and business borrowing. If investors doubt the Fed's low-rate pledges, they could push up longer-term rates, raising borrowing costs for businesses and households and potentially restraining an already-sluggish recovery.

Explaining the path of rates far in the future will get more complicated when the Fed releases its 2016 forecasts for the first time on Wednesday. Those forecasts are likely to show an unemployment rate within the 5.2% to 6% range that officials believe is normal in the long run and an inflation rate near the Fed's 2% target. The Fed's most recent public forecast, made in June, showed the jobless rate right around 6% by the fourth quarter of 2015 and inflation near 2%.

Contrast the economic forecast with the Fed's interest-rate forecasts. In the long run, Fed officials believe the federal funds rate—an overnight bank lending rate that they manage—should be around 4%. They consider that to be a "neutral" in the long run, a rate that leads neither to too much inflation nor too little.

But the latest official projections show Fed officials expect the federal funds rate to be about 1% by the end of 2015, rising by a small amount after the jobless rate dips below 6.5%. It looks unlikely that the Fed would aim for 4% by 2016. Mr. Bernanke has signaled that once the Fed starts raising rates, officials expect to proceed slowly.

How will the Fed square an economy near full employment with a federal funds rate that remains historically low?

"There is an inconsistency there," said John Taylor, a Stanford University professor who has been critical of the Fed's recent policies. He said it sounds like a formula for inflation or asset bubbles because monetary policy might be looser than the economy warrants.

Fed officials have hinted at several explanations for their interest-rate road map.

Janet Yellen, the Fed's vice chairwoman and a contender to become next Fed chief, in two 2012 speeches pointed to computer models that work something like flight simulators. They spit out estimates for the federal funds rate that best produces low unemployment and stable inflation based on estimates of how the economy normally behaves. These "optimal control" models have pointed to the benefits of a low fed funds rate far into the future even as unemployment declines.

Some academic theories support this view. Columbia University's Michael Woodford has argued for years that when the economy is hit by a shock and interest rates fall all the way to zero—as happened in 2008—the best way to recharge the economy is to promise to keep rates near zero even after the economy looks like its back on a normal footing.

Still, academic theory and arcane models are hard to sell to an often-skeptical public and perplexed investors.

A simpler explanation is also circulating around the Fed: Even if unemployment falls below 6% by 2016, the economy it will still be debilitated by the lingering effects of the 2008 and 2009 financial crisis and in continued need of a low interest rates to spur activity.

Put another way, a normal fed funds rate might be 4%, but the economy still won't really be back to normal by 2016 so it will require the continued support of interest rates below that level. Because the economy will still face drags, this thinking goes, low rates won't spark inflation.

They could take other steps to reinforce the low-rate pledge, such as assuring that rates won't begin to rise if inflation is much below the Fed's 2% target.

The Fed's sales pitch could have a big impact on markets. Long-term rates on instruments such as mortgages and 10-year government bonds have already jumped by more than a percentage point since May, in part because of investor doubts about the central bank's interest-rate plan.

The challenge is made harder by impending leadership changes at the Fed. Mr. Bernanke's term as chairman ends in January and nobody knows the strategy of an as-yet unnamed successor.

Mr. Bernanke could be pressed on these issues at his press conference Wednesday, after the Fed meeting.

"He's going to have to bob and weave around the question when it's asked," said Michael Feroli, economist with J.P. Morgan.

http://online.wsj.com/art(...)079143276866818.html

quote:

How will the Fed square an economy near full employment with a federal funds rate that remains historically low?

"There is an inconsistency there," said John Taylor, a Stanford University professor who has been critical of the Fed's recent policies. He said it sounds like a formula for inflation or asset bubbles because monetary policy might be looser than the economy warrants.

Fed officials have hinted at several explanations for their interest-rate road map.

Janet Yellen, the Fed's vice chairwoman and a contender to become next Fed chief, in two 2012 speeches pointed to computer models that work something like flight simulators. They spit out estimates for the federal funds rate that best produces low unemployment and stable inflation based on estimates of how the economy normally behaves. These "optimal control" models have pointed to the benefits of a low fed funds rate far into the future even as unemployment declines.

quote:

“I did not see and did not appreciate what the risks were with securitization, the credit ratings agencies, the shadow banking system, the S.I.V.’s — I didn’t see any of that coming until it happened.”

quote:

BIS veteran says global credit excess worse than pre-Lehman

The Swiss-based `bank of central banks’ said a hunt for yield was luring investors en masse into high-risk instruments, “a phenomenon reminiscent of exuberance prior to the global financial crisis”.

This is happening just as the US Federal Reserve prepares to wind down stimulus and starts to drain dollar liquidity from global markets, an inflexion point that is fraught with danger and could go badly wrong.

“This looks like to me like 2007 all over again, but even worse,” said William White, the BIS’s former chief economist, famous for flagging the wild behaviour in the debt markets before the global storm hit in 2008.

“All the previous imbalances are still there. Total public and private debt levels are 30pc higher as a share of GDP in the advanced economies than they were then, and we have added a whole new problem with bubbles in emerging markets that are ending in a boom-bust cycle,” said Mr White, now chairman of the OECD’s Economic Development and Review Committee.

The BIS said in its quarterly review that the issuance of subordinated debt -- which leaves lenders exposed to bigger losses if things go wrong -- has jumped more than threefold over the last year to $52bn in Europe, and jumped tenfold to $22bn in the US.

The share of “leveraged loans” used by the weakest borrowers in the syndicated loan market has jumped to an all-time high of 45pc, ten percentage points higher than the pre-crisis peak in 2007-2008.

quote:

FED stelt afbouw van aankoopprogramma uit

Tegen alle verwachtingen in heeft de Federal Reserve zojuist bekendgemaakt afbouw van de monetaire stimulering nog even uit te stellen. Dit omdat de vooruitzichten voor de Amerikaanse economie voor 2013 en 2014 slechter zijn dan drie maanden geleden. Volgens de FED heeft de economie de steun nog steeds hard nodig.

quote:

Op woensdag 18 september 2013 20:23 schreef Perrin het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

[..]

quote:

Op dinsdag 17 september 2013 10:41 schreef SeLang het volgende:
Even een momentje van bezinning:

De Lehman collapse is nu 5 jaar geleden. Die ineenstorting was grotendeels het gevolg van veel te expansief monetair beleid in de voorafgaande cyclus....

Nu, 5 jaar na dato, is de Fed nog steeds all-in. Rente op alltime low, balancesheet op record grootte en nog steeds groeiende in een record tempo ($85 miljard/ maand).

Bedenk nu dat deze noodingreep al ongeveer even lang duurt als de hele voorafgaande opgaande cyclus!

Welke conclusies kunnen we hieruit trekken over centrale banken?

quote:

Op donderdag 19 september 2013 06:13 schreef hpeopjes het volgende:

[..]

Dat hun rol uitgespeeld is.

quote:

Op woensdag 18 september 2013 22:04 schreef SeLang het volgende:
Even crossposten dan maar vanuit Beursvloer:

Vreemde marktreactie imo. Kennelijk zat iedereen scheef en moest zich indekken

The Bernank liet toch duidelijk doorschemeren dat de tapering er gewoon heel binnenkort aankomt, mogelijk nog dit jaar. Maakt het nu echt zoveel verschil of je nu begint of over 2 maanden? Dit blijft gewoon boven de markt hangen.

De discrepantie tussen forward guidance over rente en de macro-economische prognose zoals ik die in een eerdere post al aangaf kwam er inderdaad: rente wordt verwacht ultra laag te blijven zelfs bij full employment. Als argument wordt er gegeven dat dat gerechtvaardigd is vanwege "headwinds".

Dit is het gedeelte waarvan ik verwacht dat het in de toekomst voor veel volatiliteit zou kunnen gaan zorgen want het is maar de vraag of de obligatiemarkt dat argument slikt. De kans bestaat dat de inflatieverwachting dan gaat toenemen en dat daarmee de rente op de lange maturities gaat oplopen. En daar kan de Fed weinig tegen doen.

Een andere mogelijkheid is dat de huidige businesscycle binnenkort op z'n einde loopt en de economie gewoon weer neerwaarts gaat voordat het "normale niveau" is bereikt. Dan staat de Fed met de rug tegen de muur met ZIRP en een balancesheet van $4T....

De vraag is of wat men als "full employment" en "normale groei" beschouwt en waar men nu dus naar streeft of dat wel daadwerkelijk het normale niveau is. Want het niveau van voor de crisis was niet een normaal niveau maar een artificieel hoog niveau, opgepompt door veel te lage rente en bubbles in huizen en aandelenmarkt. Het is imo wellicht niet realistisch om te verwachten dat je terugkomt op dergelijke niveaus voor groei en werkgelegenheid. Het is echter de vraag of beleidsmakers dat wel zien, aangezien zij altijd hebben ontkend dat dat een bubble was.

quote:

Op donderdag 19 september 2013 10:18 schreef crashbangboom het volgende:

[..]

Maakt iemand zich eigenlijk druk om dat balancesheet? Als ze die stukken tot maturity houden, is er dan een probleem met de hoogte ervan?

quote:

Op donderdag 19 september 2013 06:13 schreef hpeopjes het volgende:

[..]

Dat hun rol uitgespeeld is.

quote:

Op donderdag 19 september 2013 11:51 schreef SeLang het volgende:
Hun rol is duidelijk niet uitgespeeld want ze trekken juist steeds meer macht naar zich toe. Maar je kunt wel heel cynisch worden over het idee dat een elite van 12 mensen van achter een bureau een $17T economie probeert te sturen met modellen die blijkbaar foutief zijn.