Recent comments by RE

Rob Dawg wrote:

Huh? Banks aren't allowed to carry physical assets on their books. They are banks and subject to banking regulations. You must be mistaken.

It is my understanding that commercial banks can carry residential properties on their books.

sm_landlord wrote:

The Conundrum 2.0 model seems to be missing a few things.

Ignoring Keynes isn't terribly smart especially about a subject he extensively covered.

JP wrote:

I wonder if anyone will start to question the fact that the biggest element of any budget -- housing -- has had huge swings but inflation hasn't.

IMO it is the monthly payment that drives affordability far more than the home price.

Monthly payments haven't fluctuated anywhere near as much as home prices.

sm_landlord wrote:

Oh, great. Now they tell us.
Will CR be publishing the transcript of Fischer's speech tomorrow?

No mention of the liquidity trap in the whole article...

No wonder they don't get it.

1 currency now -yogi wrote:

RE say: if Mikey Bloomberg made $27 billion, and bought 9 $100 million houses, American house prices as a percentage of income is among "the lowest in the world".

As facts and knowledge aren't exactly your strength, why not simply enjoy your retirement? It is much safer than investing especially when one lacks essential skills.

1 currency now -yogi wrote:

The Fed swallowed whole toxic assets. Inflation is low unless you want to buy or rent a house. Inflation is low because we are still reaping the benefits of the digital information revolution.

In your fervor for knowledge, did you pay attention to the fact that U.S. housing costs as a multiple of income is among the lowest in the world?

But just BS along.

arthur_dent wrote:

Bill's distressing gap is a nice example. The new money is being used to fund economic transactions that are not captured by gdp but do show up in targeted asset price levels.

Care to itemize some important "economic transactions" not captured by GDP?

Citizen AllenM wrote:

Genius, pure genius I telz you. According to Friedman this could not happen, and yet here it is.

Someday this war's gonna end...

I thought that this is interesting as well.

What Does Money Velocity Tell Us about Low Inflation in the US

...Based on this equation, holding the money velocity constant, if the money supply (M) increases at a faster rate than real economic output (Q), the price level (P) must increase to make up the difference. According to this view, inflation in the U.S. should have been about 31 percent per year between 2008 and 2013, when the money supply grew at an average pace of 33 percent per year and output grew at an average pace just below 2 percent. Why, then, has inflation remained persistently low (below 2 percent) during this period?

1 currency now -yogi wrote:

RE wrote:

even over a few accounting hops

No, that was your rhetoric.

"Your honor, if you would just follow these simple accounting hops you will realize that the cash tendered for my client's Miami condo was professionally laundered. Uh...I mean "clean"!

Utterly silly. The reason you don't show all accounting hops and only get into the key movements, is because the detailed hops/movements get into corporate strategy and competitiveness and would therefore obscure the overall picture.

The fact that you don't get that displays your complete lack of financial/business awareness.

But don't let knowledge and facts get in the way of a populist story.

1 currency now -yogi wrote:

'There are "accounting hops" and other intricate steps to ensure that the dollars exchanged with China for finished goods don't lose their purchasing power over time despite the Fed's easy money policies.'

Resorting to rhetoric when you can't explain?

1 currency now -yogi wrote:

Dollar denominated debt is issued to PREVENT printing but simpletons don't understand the difference.

Hahahha. That's funny. So the debt holder can tell the Fed to halt QE? In what language? Backed by how many legions....

LOL and here I thought that debt Issuers decide what products to sell. China simply decides which securities, given their policy objectives, they want to bid on.

QE has been used by CBs around the world including China. It is just part of the CB toolbox. Buyer's discretion.

1 currency now -yogi wrote:

No, we don't "sell dollars" to "acquire yuan". We print new dollars to pay our dollar-denominated debt. The debt is still largely to China.

When the Chinese worker produces a product, its Chinese cost structure is in Yuan. When the U.S. distributor acquires wholesale, even over a few accounting hops, the transaction involves selling dollars and purchasing Yuan as the Chinese supplier wants Yuan to operate in China. This puts upward pressure on the Yuan.

Dollar denominated debt is issued to PREVENT printing but simpletons don't understand the difference.

1 currency now -yogi wrote:

Yuan wants the Fed to print nominal dollars to pay US debt to China. Does that erode the buying power of the factory worker who assembled his computer? Who cares! Saving is evil.

Would you explain how selling dollars to acquire yuan erodes the Chinese worker's purchasing power as he/she is paid in Yuan?

Wisdom Seeker wrote:

None of it's real until you sell...

Actually, none of it's real until you exit the fiat casino altogether, and buy something that IS real...

What measure of value is more real than fiat?

Just because simpletons are horrible at abstracting by no means implies that they understand demand. Quite to the contrary.

sdtfs wrote:

You mean the ones you stole from Macy's?

The VERY ones...

RiF, if you're out there.

I'm curious if you succeeded with the free Win 10 Pro installs?

merchants of fear wrote:

Dem clown shills wanted for full-time spin control jobs on the dumbed down Blue Team shill blogs.

Not much changes. The airhead still has nothing of value to contribute. Talk about "dumbed down".

Did RiF succeed with his no-cost Windows 10 install?

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

oh, it's over? too bad... still downloading, guess I'll just give the beta a spin one of these days.

I don't think it's over. At least I haven't heard anything about it!

Mike_PNW wrote:

I know some people pretty high up at MS..would you be comfortable with me forwarding them your conversation with RIF??

Up to you. It's a public forum.

Mike_PNW wrote:

what would MS say if they knew you were providing instructions to others online on how to do this??

I honestly don't know.

They can turn registration of that key off in 10 secs flat. Why didn't they do it?

Mike_PNW wrote:

so back to the Macy's analogy.."hey..if we look the other way while they are stealing out merchandise...our returns will be lower"

The Macy's analogy is a bad one.

What these commands do is enable the transformation of a WIDELY distributed version of the operating system (Win 10 build 10240) from a "Beta/Release Candidate" version into an "activated" version. These commands are MS Windows OS commands that check with MS servers (!) if these are o.k. to gain legit (activated) status.

MS hasn't stopped the check, at least until a few hrs ago.

This isn't stealing, now is it?

Mike_PNW wrote:

stealing is stealing...

It isn't stealing when MS leaves a well-known loophole open. MS is more interested in market share than preventing piracy at this point.

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

Download in process... could just as well have used a torrent I suppose. Probably faster.

If you use a torrent make sure it is from WhiteDeathTeamOS. During the Beta they seemed to be the designated MS leakers.

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

nice, I will keep that info handy. I guess there is a (legal) place where one can download all sorts of MicroSofts for VMs for personal use...

Don't wait too long. My guess is that this approach will only work until the 29th.

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

yes, very cool - legal for virtual machine use, sign me up.

Exactly, I created lots of VMs.

  1. Download the 10240 ISOs (torrents or not).
  2. During install skip entering product codes (twice).
  3. Once installed and signed into a MS account open an Admin CMD window and enter the following commands:

slmgr /ipk W269N-WFGWX-YVC9B-4J6C9-T83GX
slmgr /skms kms.xspace.in
slmgr /ato

If all three commands don't return success run them one more time. I never had to do it more than twice.

Windows should be activated now.

There is a free way to create legit (activated) installations of Windows 10, either fresh install or upgrade.

I created 10 or so. You might have to be an "insider" (I am) but for some it might be worth a shot.

Let me know if you are interested.

At this price you can't go wrong.

OT For those looking for a cheap but capable smart/Android play phone.

$19.99 shipped for a refurbished Tracfone LG L34C dual core.

I added a Chinese generic 64GB micro SD card for less than $8.

Brand New Tracfone LG Optimus Fuel L34C with Triple Minutes for Life Retail Pack | eBay

I rooted it and haven't even registered with Tracfone yet. I'm presently using Google Hangouts/Voice exclusively for Wifi calling.

I am presently downloading the huge Nokia Here offline maps so that I can use it as an offline GPS without incurring any data charges.

Great deal even if simply used as a mp3 player.

poicv2.0 wrote:

"What if you posted something other than complete nonsense? "

Why engage the blog's airhead? All it does is pollute the blog with even more inane comments. He is a lost cause.

sporkfed wrote:

It would destroy the passing game, the build up.

Agree.

tg wrote:

offsides in soccer is almost an impossible call at times for the linesman as he has to be even with the 2nd to last defender (goalie last defender usually) keeping an eye on the attacker while watching the ball leave a foot some 50 yards behind. An automated system that alerted his flag would be quite useful

It is quite complex to automate as the rule only applies to the intended target of the pass. Just because ANY attacking player stands off-sides doesn't mean a stoppage of play.

bearly wrote:

It needs to corrected by discouraging outsourcing/offshoring.

You clearly hate a competitive market. Yeah import price controls are the ticket...

Just ask j6p in Switzerland how that's been working out.

Take a name asswipe wrote:

last time I checked, the top 1% saw an 125% percent increase in wealth/income since the onset of QE. Your point is?

Gini has been rising at the current pace for decades.

Distribution needs to be addressed via taxes not by risking the economy.

Take a name asswipe wrote:

To the ceo's, debt and shareholders, yes. Not so much to the rest of us. The risk was to the status quo, assets would of found a bottom, but the status quo would of been wiped out and replaced anew.

Totally disagree. A huge hit to GDP means a correspondingly huge hit to income = a severely slowing economy.

Jackdawracy wrote:

Why not?, the very same scheme saved us from ourselves in high finance.

I am not familiar enough with agriculture to make that call.

However, the small farmer needs credit as much if not more so than corp ag. Therefore without credit at reasonable rates, small ag is doomed.

Jackdawracy wrote:

So, you agree that only the largest corporate ag concerns should be given unlimited amounts of water, in order to save agriculture in California?

No, I disagree with your analogy.

Jackdawracy wrote:

What if we handled the drought like we did the financial crisis, where only the largest corporate Ag concerns were given unlimited amounts of water, and every other farmer was told to pound sand?

We watched the start of the banking domino theory in 2008. The same with GM and its suppliers.

The GDP hit of a "healthy" cleansing would have been huge and with it the carnage among the "healthy".

Just because they survived as a RESULT of policy actions is by no means assurance they would have otherwise (see 1930-1933). The risks to find out were a bit high.

Rob Dawg wrote:

Updated to include the ratio of population growth to jobs growth:

Did you break out government jobs?

Cinco-X wrote:

Cold snaps like the ones that hit the eastern United States in the past winters are not a consequence of climate change. Scientists have now shown that global warming actually tends to reduce temperature variability.

So can I assume you agree with the study's basic premise?

Scientists at ETH Zurich and at the California Institute of Technology, led by Tapio Schneider, professor of climate dynamics at ETH Zurich, have come to a different conclusion. They used climate simulations and theoretical arguments to show that in most places, the range of temperature fluctuations will decrease as the climate warms. So not only will cold snaps become rarer simply because the climate is warming. Additionally, their frequency will be reduced because fluctuations about the warming mean temperature also become smaller, the scientists wrote in the latest issue of the Journal of Climate.
....
Temperature extremes will therefore become rarer as this variability is reduced. But this does not mean there will be no temperature extremes in the future. "Despite lower temperature variance, there will be more extreme warm periods in the future because the Earth is warming," says Schneider. The researchers limited their work to temperature trends. Other extreme events, such as storms with heavy rain or snowfall, can still become more common as the climate warms, as other studies have shown.

EngineerJim wrote:

My point is Bolton is an irrelevant has-been.

We will see what his draft status is a year from now.

EngineerJim wrote:

Yes, that was John Bolton.
He represents the opinions of John Bolton.
Again, where is the they?

At which point does Bolton speak for these organizations where he is a senior member.

Bolton is currently a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI),[6] a Fox News Channel commentator, and of counsel to the Washington, D.C. law firm Kirkland & Ellis.[7] He was a foreign policy adviser to 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney.[8] Bolton is also involved with a number of politically conservative think tanks and policy institutes, including the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), the Institute of East-West Dynamics, the National Rifle Association, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, the Council for National Policy (CNP) and the Gatestone Institute,[9] where he serves as the organization Chairman.

merchants of fear wrote:

The HCN Blue Team clown troupe will move on as anything goes for their side.

Twofer. Straw man plus name calling.

Bad Dawg Bobby wrote:

BUT,,,,,Completely FREE, so far.

Content-free posts are taxing not free.

burnside wrote:

One thing I don't think was brought up was our progress paying down ww2 debt. I don't know that the timing was ideal, but I tend to think there would have been a call for some kind of downward revision to the tax code regardless of who proposed it.

I tend to agree.

http://i.imgur.com/673ODoQ.png