Sunday, May 2, 2010

Absolving the rater, Goldie as Satyr, 99 weeks later ... dude! don't be such a hater!

A google news search of 'GDP Commerce Department' yields 26,600 hits. A google news search of 'GDI Commerce Department' yields 19 unique hits ?!?!

And to the best of my ability, it appears that none of the 19 'hits' even discusses GDI?

How about the blogosphere? 1460 hits for the former selection this last week and ZERO hits for the latter?

For the heck of it went to the gubmint web page but they aren't showin' it and I guess the inability to calculate it for myself shows the limitation of my bachelor degree.

Maybe I shouldn't be so hard on myself...

John Williams (via King Report) on Q1 GDP reliability: 'Given the lack of meaningful data available for the "advance" estimate of first-quarter 2010 economic activity, the Bureau of Economic Analysis will not attempt even to guesstimate the Gross National Product (GNP) or Gross Domestic Income (GDI) for first-quarter 2010 until next month’s (May 27th) "second" estimate, or first revision, of the first-quarter GDP.'

Ominous portent? But wait there's more...

Consumer Metrics Institute (via King Report): 'If the sampling period had shifted to two weeks earlier, the reported GDP number would have been 4.4%, substantially higher. However, if the sampling period had shifted to two weeks later, the GDP growth rate would have been only 2.0%, less than half the reading from only 4 weeks earlier. This is the sign of an economy in rapid transition.'

This morning's King Report : 'When we told a hedge fund consultant that PPI is accelerating at a record pace, he reminded us the Ministry of Truth has the GDP Implicit Deflator at a five decades low! For over a decade we have moaned that PPI understates true inflationary pressure and CPI greatly understates inflation due to OER, hedonics, sampling, geometric weighting and any of the numerous other schemes that have been implied over the past 20 years or so. CPI is constructed to not show inflation. If the US government beancounters employed a realistic inflation metric, there would be no GDP gain. If the US government employed accurate inflation metrics, there would be little or no GDP growth since 1999. Then we would have harmony with the negative job and income growth of the past decade.If not for OER, the CPI would wipe out GDP growth in Q1 – and this includes all the hokey CPI chicanery that understates inflation.'

What would I do without my red pills, Morpheus?

But gosh so many experts rely on GDP, and its obvious that the recovery is (still) nascent right? There's no need to empirically argue otherwise is there?

Experts are also trying to offer a narrative as to what motivated our 'I Can't Believe it's not Capitalism' Plan: too much leverage, OTC derivatives, lax regulation', lax underwritin'. All true no doubt. Seriously doubt though that 'charges' will be brought up on all the culprits contributing to this litany of woe. Whom amongst the banksters would not be charged and whom of the 'chargers' could even approximate chastity?

For example, shouldn't the SEC investigate this?

Huffington Post (March 2004 FOMC Minutes): 'As top Federal Reserve officials debated whether there was a housing bubble and what to do about it, then-Chairman Alan Greenspan argued that the dissent should be kept secret so that the Fed wouldn't lose control of the debate to people less well-informed than themselves. "We run the risk, by laying out the pros and cons of a particular argument, of inducing people to join in on the debate, and in this regard it is possible to lose control of a process that only we fully understand," Greenspan said, according to the transcripts of a March 2004 meeting…'

And while you're at it SEC how about indicting Yellen as a co-conspirator?

By Jim Grant
Grant's Interest Rate Observer
December 2, 2005

'Former Fed governor Laurence H. Meyer, in a 2003 talk at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, described a telltale exchange on the subject of how to define[price/financial] stability. The scene was Meyer's first FOMC meeting, in July 1996, and governor Janet Yellen was making the case for inflation targeting; she said she would aim for 2%. Greenspan replied that the Federal Reserve had a mandate to foster stable prices, not rising ones. To which Yellen rejoined that the Fed also had a mandate to promote full employment. To hear her tell it, a small positive rate of currency depreciation is a necessary lubricant for economic growth (not so, according to a survey of 133 economists over 50 years, produced in 2002 by Stanley Fischer et al.)

"Janet then seized the initiative", Meyer related,"asking the chairman how he would define price stability. Greenspan tried to get away with his vague definition; 'Price stability is the state in which expected changes in the general price level do not effectively alter business or household decisions.' But Yellen pressed him and asked him if he could put a number on that. Remarkably, the chairman agreed, and said he preferred zero inflation, correctly measured. Janet asked him if he could settle for 2% incorrectly measured."

Meyer finished his story;

During a go-around on the topic, only a few Committee members preferred a target of zero, and the consensus was very strong for a 2% target. The chairman ended up summarizing the discussions 'an agreement for 2%' but he cautioned members not to reveal that such a discussion took place.'

Most certainly acknowledge that connecting the dots and ascribing consequences to actions is too challenging for the MSM comics but golly might it not be considered preventative medicine to at least glimpse at the similarities between the late 20's and the late oughts? 40 'days' and 40 'nights' from 1932 to 2012 dontchaknow....

(Posted on Sept 5, 2009)
The two most trenchant similarities of the two periods? - 1) Pre- and post Glass Steagel and perhaps not coincidentally, 2) The top 0.01 percent of earners in the US are now taking home six percent of all the income, higher than the 1920s peak of five percent, and a whopping six-fold increase since the start of the Reagan administration, when the top 0.01 percent earned one percent of all the income. There is no consensus among economists on whether large disparities in income lead to economic disruption, but it is hard to ignore the correlation between rising income inequality and the onset of economic crisis. The last time the US saw similar differences in income was in 1928 and 1929, just before the start of the Great Depression.

Fast-forward to today and some PHD per a tucked-away paragraph in the comics:

'The top 1% held 34.6% of all national wealth in 2007, by Dec.31, 2009 they held 35.6%. Meanwhile, the share of national wealth held by the bottom 90% fell to 25% from 27%.'

That's creative destruction 21st century style folks!

Any other lessons to be ignored?

'It was the financial war between European nations attacking each other's bond markets openly shorting them that led to all of Europe defaulting on their debt. Even Britain went into a moratorium suspending debt payments. This is what put the pressure on capital flows sending waves of capital to the United States that to some degree was kind of like the capital flow to Japan into 1989. This put tremendous pressure upon the dollar driving it to new record highs that were misread by the politicians who did not understand capital flow. They responded with Smoot-Hawley misreading the entire set of facts.' -Martin Armstrong

Beware the Trojan Hoax! (The new 100 billion plus bailout notwithstanding.)

Well golly that's scary but just too complicated for J6P ... we need to break it down into pellet form, offer a tonic for the pain that is the 'new normal' and in classic American style, we need a villian...

U.S. vs. Goldie is the Amerikan version of Yukos vs. Russia. Greedy until proven guilty? Better to adjudicate against the participants of the circus then to put the microscope on the folks that baked all the bread. Of them an example must be made, as the pablum narrative falls squarely in line with mob justice. Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis (Juvenal) for SEC chairman!

Actually the Goldie fracas is entirely more discomfiting than a simple plutocratic sacrifice to the hamster-wheeled populace, it is a small glimpse behind a curtain exposing a conspiracy of silence and an assemblage of tribes and machinations that frankly your humble blogger tries his best to not stare too hard at. Its' too damn frustrating, best to just raise your kids with love and kindness than become embittered by the revelations that the truths one holds to be most dear are lies told to you by liars.

And of course, blogging is cheaper than therapy.

Would appear that Goldie is having trouble getting their 'club' membership renewed. Now any settlement from the SEC will involve a sign-off by Justice. Pay no attention that DoJ has not sought any information from Goldie nor have they interviewed any people currently working for Goldie just focus on the word CRIMINAL puh-leeze. For they are as the Washington Post reports 'casting a wider net'... and believe you me that does not mean they are going to charge the derivatives king J.P. Morgan ...oh no!

We need the bookmark for this era, else how can we turn the page and start afresh? Stakes are much higher this time, so someone needs to be 'unmade', you can't just squeeze a family member to get a confession, a la Milken. If Goldie is 'taken out', won't every single soul on the planet herald that as the denouement of the 'What Just Happened Crisis'? If Goldie is, by some mind-boggling turn of events, found innocent by an impartial jury then who could possibly be guilty if the biggest baddest bankster ain't? Goldie is trying to get ahead of this but for your humble blogger something feels wrong, like a glitich in the matrix so to speak. Upon further reflection, would be shocked if the case made it to a jury and frankly given the ominous undertones of between-the-line reading now think the odds favor Goldie being whacked.

But who cares about Goldie? Live by the sword, die by the sword. Its' 'just desserts', 'had it comin' and all that...

While we are it, who cares about free markets? Who cares about a free press? Freedom is for those that can afford it and if you haven't noticed this is the age of austerity, well at least for some folks...Don't forget that old chestnut of... how does democracy end? To the sound of thunderous applause. Maybe we should stop clapping.

When Holder says 'We're here not to win cases, but to do justice' it reminds your humble blogger of a failing bank stating' Nothing to see here. Move along.' or an ideological news slash entertainment channel proclaiming that they are 'fair and balanced'.

You bray it? You ain't it.

Per quantum mechanics there exist an alternative reality where the acid bath of ' proof of an intent to defraud' would be applied to the custodes, all the banksters, and the comedy that is government statistics.

One last rant...

Consumer spending up! Goes to show the power of proper role models, be your own corportocracy writ large. American schemer and synarchy for all. A nation of squatters with revolving credit.

We should fear the austere. Revolving credit spins ever more slowly without evolving incomes. The economic horror movie coming to the local cineplex? 99 weeks later.

Absolving the rater, Goldie as satyr, 99 weeks later ... dude! don't be such a hater!


joe said...

anony M,

What do you think about fundamental-value-driven market-neutral equity funds? A number of them have taken it in the shorts for almost 36 months. Investors have redeemed a lot of money from them. The whole-sale sell off in 2008 and whole-sale rally since March 2009, left a lot of stocks miss-priced based on fundamentals relative to one another.

I-Man said...

One of your best, AM...

Indeed, Stakes is High... (like De La)

And there is sign of a glitch...

But this, above all, stood out to the I:

"Its' too damn frustrating, best to just raise your kids with love and kindness than become embittered by the revelations that the truths one holds to be most dear are lies told to you by liars."

One love,

Anonymous Monetarist said...


Let's get together to fight this Holy Armageddon (One Love)
So when the Man comes there will be no no doom (One Song)
Have pity on those whose chances grove thinner
There ain't no hiding place from the Father of Creation


I-Man said...

You might like this...

Off topic, sorta.

Anonymous Monetarist said...


In the past would have thought.. that sounds reasonable and prudent.

For the last few weeks however, have moved from theories, discussed previously on this blog, to sim trading on a fractal-based trading method.

Its' mechanical, has no connection to fundamentals whatsoever (well I should say in the sense most folks hold for that term), and is working like a charm.

Anonymous said...

embittered by the revelations that the truths one holds to be most dear are lies told to you by liars."

thanks I-Man, i kinda took this remark personally. AM meant to apply it to all mankind.

liked, and could comprehend most content.
AM, you do a little bit of
jump, jump

Jump Jump
The Mac Dad will make you Jump Jump
The Daddy Mac will make you Jump Jump
Kris Kross will make you Jump Jump

thank god you aren't increasing harder word verification, like ZH is thinkin about implementing with math problems†

joe said...

anony M says, "For the last few weeks however, have moved from theories, discussed previously on this blog, to sim trading on a fractal-based trading method. Its' mechanical, has no connection to fundamentals whatsoever (well I should say in the sense most folks hold for that term), and is working like a charm."

Too rapid-fire for me. I like trying to buy something cheap, and trying to catch a big swing upward, using fundamentals and technicals.

Fast trading means competing with people with way more IQ, time, and resources than I have. Longer duration trading means lower returns and easier competition.

Anonymous Monetarist said...


I hear ya.

My thoughts are that we trade in markets with a style that we are in sympathetic resonance with.

For me that means : 'if you have an opinion you're probably wrong', 'thinking just gets in the way', and 'any business decision made emotionally is probably a bad one'.

So for me, a mechanical system that I can back test, that gives quick ins and outs, is what works best.

Anonymous Monetarist said...

Bang a Gong VB!

Anonymous Monetarist said...


Yeh, have seen that page before...

Tribes and machinations...

Anonymous said...

I believed the Republican side of things for 26 years.After the last 8 years,I think that twice in this century,after a long period of dominance,the republicans convinced everyone that if you cut taxes for the top earners,and get all those red-tape regulations out of the way,the big boys on Wall Street will create a magic paradise of wealth for all of us.I ignored my grandfather Rueben-one tough old Irishman who lost everything in the Great Depression-when he told me never under any circumstance trust or vote for a republican.Like a teenager who has totaled the car twice,some day the republicans will be asking us for the keys to the national car again.They will promise to be really careful.Great essay,AM.Mark.

Anonymous said...

get it on, guess that was my mantra†

Anonymous Monetarist said...


Well... it certainly is 'trickling' down isn't it?