<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: What A Fine Mess You Have Gotten Us Into</title> <atom:link href="http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/</link> <description>Helping Institutions and Ordinary People Invest Better by Focusing on Risk Control</description> <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:02:53 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: David Merkel</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19502</link> <dc:creator>David Merkel</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:24:38 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19502</guid> <description>Belinda, what I mean is that BAC, JPM, C, and WFC are now so large that the government would have a hard time dealing with all of the knock-on effects if one went under.
Bond newbie, my apologies.  Were I managing corporates now, I would not be aggressive yet.  Too many things are breaking that don’t break in ordinary recessions.  I do like the yield on TIPS now, and would be overweight, but not max overweight.  I would be equal weight on credit now, there is enough spread to make things interesting.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Belinda, what I mean is that BAC, JPM, C, and WFC are now so large that the government would have a hard time dealing with all of the knock-on effects if one went under.</p><p>Bond newbie, my apologies.  Were I managing corporates now, I would not be aggressive yet.  Too many things are breaking that don’t break in ordinary recessions.  I do like the yield on TIPS now, and would be overweight, but not max overweight.  I would be equal weight on credit now, there is enough spread to make things interesting.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: The Market Traders</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19238</link> <dc:creator>The Market Traders</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 08:23:55 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19238</guid> <description>&lt;strong&gt;Big Troubles for the Euro...&lt;/strong&gt;
David Merkel submits: The Euro has been falling recently versus the Dollar.&#160; Why?&#160; There have been many theories proposed, but I want to offer my own theory this evening.&#160; Fiat currencies are political creatures, and are only as strong a...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Big Troubles for the Euro&#8230;</strong></p><p>David Merkel submits: The Euro has been falling recently versus the Dollar.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; There have been many theories proposed, but I want to offer my own theory this evening.&nbsp; Fiat currencies are political creatures, and are only as strong a&#8230;</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: jj</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19084</link> <dc:creator>jj</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 01:44:01 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19084</guid> <description>Your example of recapitalizing the banks is the better way , similar to 1930&#039;s RFC , much better than the Paulson - RTC version</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your example of recapitalizing the banks is the better way , similar to 1930&#8242;s RFC , much better than the Paulson &#8211; RTC version</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Belinda</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19083</link> <dc:creator>Belinda</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:17:28 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19083</guid> <description>You say &quot;we are putting a lot of faith in the health of Citigroup, Bank of America, and JP Morgan.  If one of them fails, the game is over.&quot;
What does this mean?  That FDIC won&#039;t insure these accounts?  What are you talking about?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You say &#8220;we are putting a lot of faith in the health of Citigroup, Bank of America, and JP Morgan.  If one of them fails, the game is over.&#8221;</p><p>What does this mean?  That FDIC won&#8217;t insure these accounts?  What are you talking about?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: matt</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19081</link> <dc:creator>matt</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:16:53 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19081</guid> <description>The argument for buying TIPS is duration (which can also work against you). Disclosure: Long long TIPS.
PS: Beautiful day on the hill</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The argument for buying TIPS is duration (which can also work against you). Disclosure: Long long TIPS.</p><p>PS: Beautiful day on the hill</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Spurgeon Coleman</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19080</link> <dc:creator>Spurgeon Coleman</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:09:44 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19080</guid> <description>Regarding TIPS I believe David is looking at the future, but I’m sure he’ll respond later and I shouldn’t try to speak for him. He’s several leagues above me, but even I knew one can’t lend to all who request a loan. I’m blessed to be in Treasurys. At some point, the massive U.S. spending will result in inflation.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding TIPS I believe David is looking at the future, but I’m sure he’ll respond later and I shouldn’t try to speak for him. He’s several leagues above me, but even I knew one can’t lend to all who request a loan. I’m blessed to be in Treasurys. At some point, the massive U.S. spending will result in inflation.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Spurgeon</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19079</link> <dc:creator>Spurgeon</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 21:31:03 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19079</guid> <description>Regarding TIPS I believe David is looking at the future, but I&#039;m sure he&#039;ll respond later and I shouldn&#039;t try to speak for him.  He&#039;s several leagues above me, but even I knew one can&#039;t lend to all who request a loan. I&#039;m blessed to be in Treasurys. At some point, the massive U.S. spending will result in inflation.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding TIPS I believe David is looking at the future, but I&#8217;m sure he&#8217;ll respond later and I shouldn&#8217;t try to speak for him.  He&#8217;s several leagues above me, but even I knew one can&#8217;t lend to all who request a loan. I&#8217;m blessed to be in Treasurys. At some point, the massive U.S. spending will result in inflation.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: trying to survive</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19078</link> <dc:creator>trying to survive</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:39:05 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19078</guid> <description>I suggest that you seriously review your position. David Rosenberg chief economist at Merrill Lynch says all portfolios should be invested in LT treasuries NOT TIPS. I have been killed on my TIP positions. Rosenberg says we are in a deflationary environment which will last for some time.I wish I had taken his advice earlier.I concur with &quot;bond newbie&quot; above..</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suggest that you seriously review your position. David Rosenberg chief economist at Merrill Lynch says all portfolios should be invested in LT treasuries NOT TIPS. I have been killed on my TIP positions. Rosenberg says we are in a deflationary environment which will last for some time.I wish I had taken his advice earlier.I concur with &#8220;bond newbie&#8221; above..</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Bond newbie</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19075</link> <dc:creator>Bond newbie</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 01:45:57 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19075</guid> <description>David wrote: &quot;As for bonds, keep them short, unless you are buying long TIPS.&quot;
But you just had two posts in the last week crowing about buying yieldy, long-duration financial bonds back in 2001-02. What&#039;s changed?
And if you like TIPS, do you really think the real rate is attractive?
5 yr conventional Tsy = 3.06%
5 yr TIPS = 1.86%
5 yr TIPS coupon = 0.625%
So inflation expectations are 3.06-1.86=1.20%
1.20% - 0.625%= 0.575% real return
I&#039;m just a bond newbie, so maybe I&#039;m doing this wrong, but I&#039;d sooner go with long conventional Tsy than TIPS here. Long Treasury yield are a classic lagged indicator, and inflation is clearly headed down in the short and intermediate term. I am confident of this because the bailout plan is not being financed with seignorage, but with further borrowing, which will retard future growth and therefore future inflation. Demand for Treasurys is extremely high, so supply concerns are overdone.
What I don&#039;t get is why the arbitrage opportunity between FNM and FRE agency bonds and Treasurys is so wide....</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David wrote: &#8220;As for bonds, keep them short, unless you are buying long TIPS.&#8221;</p><p>But you just had two posts in the last week crowing about buying yieldy, long-duration financial bonds back in 2001-02. What&#8217;s changed?</p><p>And if you like TIPS, do you really think the real rate is attractive?</p><p>5 yr conventional Tsy = 3.06%<br
/> 5 yr TIPS = 1.86%<br
/> 5 yr TIPS coupon = 0.625%<br
/> So inflation expectations are 3.06-1.86=1.20%<br
/> 1.20% &#8211; 0.625%= 0.575% real return</p><p>I&#8217;m just a bond newbie, so maybe I&#8217;m doing this wrong, but I&#8217;d sooner go with long conventional Tsy than TIPS here. Long Treasury yield are a classic lagged indicator, and inflation is clearly headed down in the short and intermediate term. I am confident of this because the bailout plan is not being financed with seignorage, but with further borrowing, which will retard future growth and therefore future inflation. Demand for Treasurys is extremely high, so supply concerns are overdone.</p><p>What I don&#8217;t get is why the arbitrage opportunity between FNM and FRE agency bonds and Treasurys is so wide&#8230;.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: matt</title><link>http://alephblog.com/2008/09/27/what-a-fine-mess-you-have-gotten-us-into/comment-page-1/#comment-19073</link> <dc:creator>matt</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 28 Sep 2008 23:15:59 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://alephblog.com/?p=973#comment-19073</guid> <description>I just don&#039;t like the trickle down theory--that if you pump money into Wall Street, some of it will trickle down and everything will be all right. They think the solution to this whole mess is to get banks lending to people again. There are several problems with this belief:
1. This whole mess is the consequence of too much borrowing. The government&#039;s solution is to get people borrowing again--interrupt the healthy deleveraging that is happening in the consumer sector.
2. Hopefully, if banks begin lending again, they won&#039;t resume the lax  lending standards that they had over the past 5 years. This implies that people will need to come up with down payments. According to the data, Americans generally don&#039;t save and haven&#039;t saved over the past several years.
3. If the government manages to stop the credit market dislocation, that still doesn&#039;t address the broken consumer problem. This year, we have seen the consumer weaken considerably. We have also seen rising unemployment that has yet to hit consumer spending. Corporate earnings, in my opinion, decline dramatically from here and we will see a bankruptcy crisis outside of the financial sector as consumer cuts back on discretionary spending.
Now, you kind of joked above and I&#039;ll joke here. Let&#039;s have a trickly up bailout. The 600 stimulus checks we all got earlier this year cost 150 billion. At 700 billion, we could all get 2800 dollar checks. The way Americans manage their money, it would all end up in the bankers&#039; hands eventually. Why not have a trickle up bailout, which would be more palatable to Americans (who oppose this bailout more decisively than they elect a presidential candidate every 4 years).</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just don&#8217;t like the trickle down theory&#8211;that if you pump money into Wall Street, some of it will trickle down and everything will be all right. They think the solution to this whole mess is to get banks lending to people again. There are several problems with this belief:</p><p>1. This whole mess is the consequence of too much borrowing. The government&#8217;s solution is to get people borrowing again&#8211;interrupt the healthy deleveraging that is happening in the consumer sector.</p><p>2. Hopefully, if banks begin lending again, they won&#8217;t resume the lax  lending standards that they had over the past 5 years. This implies that people will need to come up with down payments. According to the data, Americans generally don&#8217;t save and haven&#8217;t saved over the past several years.</p><p>3. If the government manages to stop the credit market dislocation, that still doesn&#8217;t address the broken consumer problem. This year, we have seen the consumer weaken considerably. We have also seen rising unemployment that has yet to hit consumer spending. Corporate earnings, in my opinion, decline dramatically from here and we will see a bankruptcy crisis outside of the financial sector as consumer cuts back on discretionary spending.</p><p>Now, you kind of joked above and I&#8217;ll joke here. Let&#8217;s have a trickly up bailout. The 600 stimulus checks we all got earlier this year cost 150 billion. At 700 billion, we could all get 2800 dollar checks. The way Americans manage their money, it would all end up in the bankers&#8217; hands eventually. Why not have a trickle up bailout, which would be more palatable to Americans (who oppose this bailout more decisively than they elect a presidential candidate every 4 years).</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
