Saturday, April 25, 2015

Varoufakis and Stiglitz

If you've been pondering the "Greece Crisis" and/or proffering opinions on teh ebil Sociamalists, you might want to first watch this:

Some weekend reading

Here's some stuff:

Equitable Growth - monopsony and market power in the labour market. And that's yet another contributor to secular stagnation: the constant erosion of labour power until consumer demand enters a final death spiral.

WSJ Real Time Economics - strong religious beliefs stifle innovation. No shit, eh? You idiots just figure this out now? Or have you finally decided, after 30 years of inroads by loony fundamentalist idiots, that it's finally time to quit indulging them and start fighting back? - Barrick faces fresh opposition to executive pay plan. Hmm. Any idea why that might be, Johnny boy? I mean, just look at all the value you and your board have added to this company!:

I mean, your $13 million compensation last year was only 0.1% of ABX's market cap! That's awfully fair considering the value they're getting from you, right? Eh, John-boy?

And because the Frank Giustra/Hillary thing is now a thing, I've condensed the entire story down to this:

Talking Points - NYT sheds light on its deal with conservative author. So basically, the Giustra-Clinton story is only being rehashed by the New York Times because they signed a deal to promote a smear book full of lies and distortions by Peter Schweizer, a Republican propagandist and Breitbart News senior editor-at-large. There's your paper of record, America!

Thursday, April 23, 2015

And yet again, some evening news

I bought a fancy 10" tablet for extra-cheap today, for reading.

And I'm finally getting registered to start my economics degree this summer. One year for a BA, a second year for the Honours BA, and then I'll start my investment newsletter. Ha! That'll be fun.

Til then, here's yet more news:

Bespoke - little sentiment change despite A GODDAMN ALLTIME NEW HIGH. Do you think these AAII numbers will change now?

New Deal Demoncrat - it really was the weather and the oil patch. In case you've been reading some clueless blogger who's been sarcastically mocking the idea that Q1 weakness was due to the oil patch and the weather, NDD provides you with actual hard data. You can go with the smarmy idiot blogger, or you can go with real data: it's up to you.

Vox EU - secular stagnation in the US. Quote:
Causes of US secular supply stagnation

Four factors account for the stagnation of purchasing power in the US economy: 1) declining labour share; 2) depleted capital; 3) reduced productivity growth; and 4) declining labour-force participation. I will discuss indexes that capture each of these factors in turn using indices that all start at unity in 1989. An index of total purchasing power from earnings is the result of multiplying the four indexes together.
I'll take (1), Alex. (2) is merely caused by (1), (4) is a result of (1) signalling to workers that they may as well not bother working because nobody's going to be paying them a living wage, and (3) is the result of the victory of the kleptocrats generally - which is also the main cause of (1).

Rortybomb - short-termism in the market. And short-termism is also caused by the victory of Republican kleptocrats.

Y'know, maybe someday Summers and K-dog and all them will fucking realize that this SecStag story is just another word for the economic destruction wrought by idiot Republican policy and kleptocratic rentierism. Then maybe those fucking bourgeois pretenders can join me on the real left wing.

There's your US market breakout, now buy it!


 QQQ breaks out to a new all-time high. Now buy it, Whitey. Unless maybe you don't like making a 10% profit in 2 months? Is that it?

SPY breaks out to a new all-time high. So quit whining about Q1 growth, you white-ass honky cracker who wouldn't know economics if it punched you in your tiny white-boy dick.


Transports were quite weak end of March, for no particular reason. I had actually taken the bottoming out in early April as a possible signal that the rest of the markets would break out. Kind of a reverse Dow Theory signal.

Because I'm better than those white-ass honky crackers you be givin' your money to, yo.

Why I'm hopeful on miners: a chart

One reason I was so hopeful about gold and GDX on my previous post is this:

Instead of breaking down, Barfight CEO Gold is instead threatening to break above the SMA(50).

Which means nothing til it means something. But for a crappy miner like this, with a crappy chart like this, the fact that it's not behaving crappily on the past 2 days' shenanigans in the gold price is positive. Hopefully sellers will eventually tire out and this stock can start going up. I mean, it's not as if they're losing money, right?

In fact, on the US chart above, this is a great place to average down: add to your position today, and use $1.50 as a point where you can stop out if the stock ends up turning down. On the Canadian chart, it's even better: buy below $1.94 and use $1.86 as a stop point, there's a really solid line of support there.

Which is probably why the chart is looking so good to me. So maybe it's not good after all, you never know. Maybe it's just dummies doubling down on BTO that's holding it up.

Now all I need is for MUX to stop sucking too. Their chart sucks more than BTO's.

Oh and Dalradian, which looks okay, just a consolidation, but even still it'd be nice to see these asshats move up for a change.

At least I didn't do something boneheaded like shorting Royal Bank. Eh, Verdmont?

Looks like you shoulda gone long, not short, Verdmont!


Hey, Verdmont!

Gold and miners status report

Some charts.

I think I'll just repost stuff from IKN from now on

Bronte Capital - on Narinder Singh Sarao being small fry. Via IKN.

I'd just like to point out that anyone who's ever even watched the L2 of a junior miner knows for a fact that we're being spoofed constantly.

I've personally made a lot of (small-fry intraday) trade money on this with a few stocks. IIRC, Mag Silver used to be like this; DPM still is like this today.

I met a guy at PDAC a few years ago who was a pro-level trader (i.e. not some dick like me with a discount broker account and ooh wow L2 access) who could explain the details of how it was done. And he was just some schmo, so it's damn well common knowledge.

Basically any junior that moves >5% in a day is being pushed around by market manipulators, and any exploreco whose ask book dries up and walks away from you the minute you place a limit buy order is being pushed around by market manipulators.

The OSC and BCSC regularly read my blog, so I'm sure absolutely fuck-all will ever be done about this.

Yawn, Frank Giustra, yawn

IKN - OMG I just found out Frank Giustra hangs out with the Clintons! You're a little late to the frickin' party, dude! Check out the following:

NYT Jan 2008 - after mining deal, financier donated to Clinton. And its rebuttal:

Forbes Jan 2009 - Clinton commits no foul in Kazakhstan uranium deal.

The real news story here is that because Sarah McLachlan, via her bf Geoff Courtnall, is now hanging out with all these junior mining people:

and because Hitlary (ha ha! Was I the first to use that? Oh I'm so clever!) really faces no competition for the presidency, certainly not from the gene-pool rejects on the loony right wing, this means that Sarah, via Frank, will soon be in a position to influence American policy regarding abused puppies.


Here, let me quote Rosengren in detail

Since you didn't read it, you lazy-ass white honky cracker, here's the relevant bits:

WSJ Real Time Economics - you're still not listening to Rosengren you dumb-ass cracker. Quote:

WSJ: Maybe the Fed shouldn’t be talking about an exit, because it is making it harder to achieve one.

ROSENGREN: Our goal is not to surprise anyone. We shouldn’t be specific about timing. We should be specific about what we need in order to actually be doing something. The last statement highlighted that we needed further improvement in labor markets and we need to be reasonably confident that inflation is moving back to 2%. If we start getting economic data consistent with those conditions then I would expect market conditions to move. We don’t want to surprise people. We want to make it pretty clear that we are getting closer to the conditions where it makes sense to do that.

Economic data have come in much weaker in the first quarter than we might have expected. The employment report was weak. Most private-sector forecasts for first quarter [gross domestic product] indicate that it will be even slower than the 2.2% [growth] we saw in the previous quarter. That wasn’t anticipated in most forecasts. Economic data has a tendency to sometimes surprise us. We’ll have to see if these factors are temporary or whether it is a broader reflection of what is happening globally. That is why we can’t be specific on dates. We can only be specific about the kinds of economic conditions where a tighter policy would be appropriate.


WSJ: Given the developments that we’ve been talking about, the slowdown in the first quarter, the jobs numbers, the risk of slow growth overseas, has the probability of the first interest-rate move occurring in 2016 rather than 2015 increased in your view?

ROSENGREN: If we get an outcome that is consistent with the forecast of a pickup in the next three quarters, that would be an environment where it may be consistent with raising rates later this year. It is in the forecast. It is not in the data. If we continue to have data that look like less than 2% growth, that would not be an environment that you would expect to produce a tightening in labor markets. That wouldn’t be an environment where you would necessarily see inflation moving to 2%. Then that would be the condition that we would have to defer any monetary-policy tightening. That is a different outcome than most baseline forecasts, including my own.

WSJ: So it would take more forecast revisions?

ROSENGREN: Most of the economic forecasts that you see from the private sector are expecting inflation to move towards 2% and the labor market to continue to tighten. We actually have to see those forecasts being realized. Those forecasts by and large, the last several years, have had that same component, and they haven’t actually been realized.

My God, he's handing it to you people.

Seriously, he's given Whitey the fucking essay questions for the final exam and still Whitey is too damn stupid to figure out what he's supposed to do.

Wednesday, April 22, 2015

Yet more newsbits

And even more reading:

Calculated Risk - chemical activity barometer rises for fourth straight month. A minor leading indicator for manufacturing, and it's still going up.

WSJ Real Time Economics - Fed's Rosengren explains everything, not that anyone will bother to listen. Seriously. Fucking read this. Then stand amazed at how fucking idiotic THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES IS for failing to pay attention to his exact and clear explanation of when rates are going to rise.

The Krugginator - airbrushing austerity. K-dog holds the right-wing wackaloons' feet to the fire again:
Sorry, but no — that’s not how it happened. When I wrote about fear of invisible bond vigilantes and belief in the confidence fairy, I wasn’t inventing stuff out of thin air.

David Cameron didn’t say “Hey, we think recovery is well in hand, so it’s time to start a modest program of fiscal consolidation.” He said “Greece stands as a warning of what happens to countries that lose their credibility.” Jean-Claude Trichet didn’t say “Yes, we understand that fiscal consolidation is negative, but we believe that by the time it bites economies will be nearing full employment”. He said "As regards the economy, the idea that austerity measures could trigger stagnation is incorrect … confidence-inspiring policies will foster and not hamper economic recovery, because confidence is the key factor today."

I can understand why a lot of people would like to pretend, perhaps even to themselves, that they didn’t think and say the things they thought and said. But they did.
You have to keep publicly reminding stupid people that they are stupid, or else they might forget how stupid they are.

Bloomberg View - the IMF's big Greek mistake. Quote:
Greece's onerous obligations to the IMF, the European Central Bank and European governments can be traced back to April 2010, when they made a fateful mistake. Instead of allowing Greece to default on its insurmountable debts to private creditors, they chose to lend it the money to pay in full.

At the time, many called for immediately restructuring privately held debt, thus imposing losses on the banks and investors who had lent money to Greece. Among them were several members of the IMF’s board and Karl Otto Pohl, a former president of the Bundesbank and a key architect of the euro. The IMF and European authorities responded that restructuring would cause global financial mayhem. As Pohl candidly noted, that was merely a cover for bailing out German and French banks, which had been among the largest enablers of Greek profligacy.
Almost everyone now agrees that pushing Greece to pay its private creditors was a bad idea. The required fiscal austerity was simply too great, causing the economy to collapse. The IMF acknowledged the error in a 2013 report on Greece. In a recent staff paper, the fund said that when a crisis threatens to spread, it should seek a collective global solution rather than forcing the distressed economy to bear the entire burden. The IMF’s chief economist, Olivier Blanchard, has warned that more austerity will crush growth.
Now, with that, read this next article:

Simon Wren-Lewis - Greece: of parents and children. This about sums it up:
Chris Giles has a recent FT article where he describes how non-Greek policymakers (lets still call them the Troika) see themselves like parents trying to deal with the “antics” of the problem child, Syriza in Greece. He splits these parents into different types: those that want to act as if the child is grown up (though they believe they are not), those who want to be disciplinarians etc. As a description of how the Troika view themselves, and present themselves to the public, the analogy rings true. It certainly accords with the constant stream of articles in the press predicting an impending crisis because the Greeks ‘refuse to be reasonable’.


So why do the Troika insist on continuing with brinkmanship? Can it be that this is really about ensuring that an elected government that challenges the dominant Eurozone political and economic ideology must be forced to fail?
I think you answered your own question there, dude.

Reuters - 2015 monsoon expected to be below average. Oh poop. Quote:
Rains are expected to be 93 percent of a long-term average
Oh, okay. 93% isn't a big deal. Past data suggests you've got to drop quite a bit below that before agricultural yield is negatively impacted.

Question about Batman The Dark Knight Rises: WHAT THE FUCK?

Okay, this has been bugging me.

I've been getting older. There's no Alzheimer's in my family whatsoever, but my dad had an old age Parkinsonism or pseudo-Parkinsonism caused by old age diabetes. And I did do a lot of drugs in my youth.

So imagine my concern when I watched Batman: The Dark Knight Rises a couple days ago, and found myself utterly fucking unable to follow the movie.

I mean I'm being honest here.

I had to remind myself that I was only drinking diet Dr. Pepper, no booze. I had enough sleep that day. I've been eating healthy. So why is it I couldn't even follow the fucking plot, or even figure out if there was one?

There were characters suddenly appearing and disappearing, and I had no clue who they were.

Other characters were instantly disappearing from one place and then reappearing somewhere else.

The motivations of all the characters were utterly indecipherable to me.

OK, I found the Roger Ebert review, and this makes me feel better:
All of these characters and their activities produce stretches in the first half of the film during which, frankly, I was not entirely sure who was doing what and with which and to whom. The movie settles in for its sensational second half, however, although not everybody will be able to precisely explain the deep stone well where Bane imprisons Bruce Wayne.
Yeah, I mean it's nice and all for the blatantly homosexual bad guy to dump Batman in a deep well that only one person ever got out of, specifically to taunt him with his helplessness as Gotham is destroyed, but...

The fuck, why? Why bother? Is your little Shadows club really so fucking important that you can't just kill the people who piss you off?

I mean come on, gay gimp-mask dude! You had to tunnel under the city for months on end, attack a stock exchange, blow up every bridge and tunnel out of town, blow up a stadium, steal some sort of Bruce Wayne infinite power device, turn that into a neutron bomb, stick it in some gay futuristic car that never stops driving, steal all of Bruce Wayne's other stuff... for what?

So for this entire clusterfuck of a movie, I was asking myself one of the following questions at every minute:

1. Who the fuck is this person here? Seriously, where did they just come from?
2. Why is this guy doing this? I don't recognize this as any sort of human motivation, either real or fantastical.
3. Wait, why is this thing happening? Why when you have a neutron bomb do you stick it on a truck that's always driving around town?
4. Who am I supposed to root for? Everyone seems evil - vacuously evil, clueless nobodies.

Oh and of course

5. Oh isn't it just a big coinkydink that the muscular gay face-mask evil villain guy decides to go all Occupy Wall Street? I mean, so the rich billionaires and their cop lackeys are all heroes, but every average joe in NYC Gotham is a slavering Maoist who's just waiting for the opportunity to turn his city into some sort of class-war version of a failed state? Really?

Batman: Dark Knight Rises is so insufferably fucking incompetent, stupid and ponderous that I'm going to have to watch Inception again tonight, just to make sure I still can follow a complex story and I'm not going fucking senile.