Recent comments by RE

arthur_dent wrote:

the uber-neo-neo-Keynesian CBers have pretty much buried that concept.

As opposed to Austrians who idolize a system that caused the most volatility in history and barely existed 15 years fully fledged (1900-1913)?

What a hoot!

sm_landlord wrote:

An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, the power to destroy.

Democracy can only survive when it's free to tax.

ResistanceIsFeudal wrote:

I'm sure that's unrelated to 1913's special Christmas gift.

Did you check post 1933?

burnside wrote:

The subsequent thirty-five years puts the lie to that as reflected in your provided chart.

Volatility, i.e. the most recessions, not the biggest ups and downs.

burnside wrote:

RE, I hadn't expected to locate a twenty-four year stretch free of blemishes. But the optimism of that era - even where it's describing itself - hasn't got much historical company.

The era from 1890-1914 was marked by the most economic volatility in U.S. history.

ImageShack - uspercapitagdplongterm.png

Bubblisimo Gerkinov wrote:

It's full of toxic chemicals.

Formaldehyde does no harm, trust me...

burnside wrote:

It has always seemed to me that the single great confluence of Western moments lay between 1890 and the guns of August. The future can seldom or never have looked more promising to more people then it did in those years.

I'm not so sure.

Panic of 1907 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 

Since the end of the Civil War, the United States had experienced panics of varying severity. Economists Charles Calomiris and Gary Gorton rate the worst panics as those leading to widespread bank suspensions—the panics of 1873, 1893, and 1907, and a suspension in 1914. Widespread suspensions were forestalled through coordinated actions during both the 1884 and the 1890 panics. A bank crisis in 1896, in which there was a perceived need for coordination, is also sometimes classified as a panic.[60]

sm_landlord wrote:

One guy in Slough whines loudly about having to go into London, for example.

From Slough you have to take the train first to connect to the tube.

lawyerliz wrote:

THE Baker Street?

Yep.

Because of the tube a lot of businesses move to the periphery. All my offices were.

Mike_PNW wrote:

you'd probably have to compare maps of where people work in each of those cities..LA doesn't have much of a dt business district

I lived in Baker St. and worked in Harrow, Edgware and Uxbridge.

vtcodger wrote:

I understand that travel by auto in the LA basin has become pretty dreadful and I sympathize. But I'm not sure public transit is going to accomplish what its advocates think it will. Too damn much sprawl.

It works pretty well in London.

London, Los Angeles, New York, Paris Densities Compared by Urban Area Sector

sm_landlord wrote:

That site doesn't allow external links. This might work:

Thanks. It's the second chart in the article.

energyecon wrote:

With the observed short run inelasticity, you are always going to be in for a bumpy ride.

This chart in 2010 dollars is instructive.

http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/oilprice1869.gif 

energyecon wrote:

With the observed short run inelasticity, you are always going to be in for a bumpy ride.

This chart in 2010 dollars is instructive.

http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/oilprice1869.gif 

Yoringe wrote:

Maybe a Lada Niva is in reach.....

Beats a Trabbi any day. Wink

Belmont wrote:

I wonder how many decades Obama care will set Democrats back?

Like Social Security?

sporkfed wrote:

I'd say the use of insurance has disconnected people from
the true price of healthcare.

I'm sure that is why the U.S. has the most expensive healthcare.

And it's a piece of cake to negotiate when you're seriously ill...

burnside wrote:

That was an impressive expansion. Fair to say the old lady of Threadneedle Street neither broke into a run, nor stumbled.

And its debt matched Japan's level twice in the past 200 years.

UK National Debt - Current, Recent, Historical Charts Tables

burnside wrote:

I can't single Japan out. It's as if no nation either manages such an ascent or grasps the concept of stalling.

The U.K. in the 19th century?

bearly wrote:

You were pumping gas as a gas station attendant at Texaco ?

Smile I was a PM at Aramco and a consultant with Texaco.

KarmaPolice wrote:

Mr. McBride should know that you do not have 50 percent drops commodity prices over a 6 month period (especially oil) due to supply and demand issues.

As I was personally involved, I remember it fell from $30 to ~$12 starting in late 1985.

sum luk wrote:

… currency wars: https://twitter.com/stlouisfed/status/543918468471750657 

Wasn't the beginning of the end of the GD marked by "currency wars"/going off the gold standard?

bearly wrote:

The polls were in line. The priceton methodology was to cherrypick against conventional wisdom to support their own bias.

You obviously never read the methodology. It is open source with NO bias unless you change it.

Pathos over facts, again.

bearly wrote:

Got any more idiotic impossible long shot election calls from that site with the great accuracy?

It was as accurate as the polls which is what I want. Things (polls) change as I said at the time.

http://election.princeton.edu/

Belmont wrote:

LOL. It's for effect. Not all liberals are idiots of course. Like 2 are ok.

I'm consistently impressed by the reasoning ability of conservatives.

Pathos has its uses after all.

emergency hotdog wrote:

re, i must be missing something in your links from the last thread. one states that the curve never inverted in the last few recession periods. the next link, (picking a arbitrary date) shows a 3-mo yield at 5.16 and a 30-yr at 4.82. those are some interesting charts.

Note that the first link only talks about pre-1950.

The graph again confirms that at no point before or during any of the 3 recessions during this period did the yield curve invert.

emergency hotdog wrote:

man, i could swear that the us curve inverted in 07 or 08. gonna have to dig around.

This should help.

US Treasury Historical Yield Curve 1990 – 2013 | Explore Analytics: The Blog

sm_landlord wrote:

With ZIRP, the yield curve might never fully invert, just flatten out like a zombie's EKG.
There may need to be a different definition of a yield curve "inversion" while in ZIRP.
Uncharted territory, indeed.

Interesting charts:

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/economic-indicators-during-roaring-twenties-and-great-depression-iv

More importantly, during both the hugely deflationary (to the point of nearly -50% YoY) 1920-22 recession, and from early 1928 on, the yield curve was inverted. In fact, during 1929, the inverted yield curve (with long term bonds ~1.5%-2.5% under short term rates), and featured Fed interest rates 6% over the inflation rate, the most serious inversion until 1981 when Paul Volker killed inflation by raising interest rates some 9% over the inflation rate.

JP wrote:

Just like old times.

Thanks for your posts yesterday!

Mary wrote:

Come, now. You must have seen this message before.

I have.

BTW use this prefix for more accurate results.

"site:hoocoodanode.org Kennedy would not be welcome in Democratic party"

Cinco-X wrote:

President John F. Kennedy would not be welcome in his own Democratic party if he were alive today.

Twisting...

The Myth of JFK as Supply Side Tax Cutter - US News

Another important piece of context is the thinking behind the tax cuts. Kennedy's economic policies were rooted in a Keynesian belief in the stimulative effects of budget deficits. While FDR and his aides had embraced countercyclical deficits as necessary in times of recession or depression, Kennedy was the first to advocate planned deficits in a time of neither war nor economic emergency. The aim was for the tax cuts to stimulate demand, driving the economy from the bottom up.

Firemane wrote:

I definitely think with the gas price plunge - all the inflation references will be concentrating on "core" - rather than the broader index.

Makes sense, right?

curious wrote:

Consider a government with $17T in debt....

Debt service is not limited to public debt.

The key is to reduce overall debt levels without killing nominal GDP.

Like this.

Graph: All Sectors; Credit Market Instruments; Liability, Level / Gross Domestic Product - FRED - St. Louis Fed

JP wrote:

Alternatively: The bond holder used cash-on-hand to acquire the MBS. The bank now holds that cash. Does it let the cash sit unused? Of course not, it makes a loan.

Agree in theory but the bank business process will always use the loan process IMO.

Wisdom Seeker wrote:

But as I keep emphasizing, I am not the one repaying a bank loan. I'm making a payment to a bondholder, who presumably paid for the bond earlier. Heck, if you've got a total bond market fund in your portfolio, I'm paying you. (I might even be paying myself, since I have a bond fund in my retirement account!)

For an MBS bond holder your payments are a receivable/asset.

The bond holder has a liability for the loan it took out to the bank when acquiring the MBS.

Wisdom Seeker wrote:

Nowadays, when I pay off my mortgage, I am NOT repaying a loan from a bank. I am paying off an investor who owns an MBS. The investor now has the credit which I gave to him, so it has not been destroyed.

See the difference?

But you missed this:

... just as taking out a new loan creates money, the repayment of bank loans destroys money. For example, suppose a consumer has spent money in the supermarket throughout the month by using a credit card. Each purchase made using the bill in full at the end of the month, its bank would reduce the amount of deposits in the consumer's account by the value of the credit card bill, thus destroying all of the newly created money.

Wisdom Seeker wrote:

You really need to stop believing things that are demonstrably false.

Get educated.

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/quarterlybulletin/2014/qb14q1prereleasemoneycreation.pdf 

Wisdom Seeker wrote:

No. I'm sorry, but that's just not even wrong.

Paying off loans destroys money.

Wisdom Seeker wrote:

We want to minimize mortgages and debt to maximize the sustainable, total productive capacity of the nation.

With less debt there is less money. At constant velocity, there is less nominal income resulting in lower GDP and therefore demand.

Lower demand results in less investment and therefore lower competitive productive capacity with fewer jobs/pay.

A perfect 1929/30 policy prescription.

Wisdom Seeker wrote:

But shouldnt't we, as a nation, WANT equity accumulation (negative extraction), because that's what builds net worth for homeowners and increases the nation's capital base? Folks who borrow money to finance houses should, over time and on balance, be paying the loans back, not borrowing more.

"as a nation" that's not useful as it cuts production/income and therefore slows the economy. As an individual, yes as it provides a buffer for bad times. The paradox of thrift applies.

You can't eat the "nation's capital base" as dryfly would say. Without production but lots of "savings" we all go hungry.

lawyerliz wrote:

Can Algore travel overseas?

Without problems.

Yoringe wrote:

Al Gore Rythm??

Welcome to the Webby Awards

Setting the record straight on one of the recent history’s most persistent political myths, The Webby Awards will present Former Vice President Al Gore with The Webby Lifetime Achievement Award in recognition of the pivotal role he has played in the development of the Internet over the past three decades. An early advocate of high-speed telecommunications as an engine for economic growth, Gore was among the first members of Congress to recognize the importance of the Internet. As a Senator, Gore spearheaded legislation which created the National Research and Education Network, a critical initiative that spread the Internet beyond the field of computer science. During his eight years as Vice President, Gore led efforts to expand the Internet access to the nation’s schools and libraries and provided critical political support for both the speedy privatization of the Internet and continued research in advanced networking technology. Vint Cerf, widely credited as a founder of the Internet, will present former Vice President Gore with the award.

Vonbek777 wrote:

How Government Did (and Didn't) Invent the Internet | TIME.com

Interesting how the author avoided controversy by not mentioning Gore's role.

sdtfs wrote:

One can only hope.

Bush's Swiss visit off after complaints on torture
| Reuters

Bush was to be the keynote speaker at Keren Hayesod's annual dinner on February 12 in Geneva. But pressure has been building on the Swiss government to arrest him and open a criminal investigation if he enters the Alpine country.

Mary wrote:

As lawyer liz might say, "so what." The SCOTUS was unable to enforce habeas.

Leaving your borders is not advisable.

The U.S. is a signatory:

United Nations Convention against Torture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.