Kinda neat.
-
Kinda neat.
Idly watching oil prices off to the side, and stonks in the background because of earnings and rates and such
Feds announce no rate change, traders clearly 100% expecting it, no reaction
Powell announces he'll stay as a governor after his term as chair is over, jump across all indicies
Is this traders going "oh thank fuck, the shitstain doesn't get to fill a seat with another fool"? Or just coincidence?
I dunno either, but it was kinda neat.
-
Kinda neat.
Idly watching oil prices off to the side, and stonks in the background because of earnings and rates and such
Feds announce no rate change, traders clearly 100% expecting it, no reaction
Powell announces he'll stay as a governor after his term as chair is over, jump across all indicies
Is this traders going "oh thank fuck, the shitstain doesn't get to fill a seat with another fool"? Or just coincidence?
I dunno either, but it was kinda neat.
This is what oil's doing this morning, btw. West Texas. Brent is worse ($110.50-ish) - they crossed back to the more typical relationship several days ago.
#OilPrice #fascism #FuckTrump #IranWar
-
This is what oil's doing this morning, btw. West Texas. Brent is worse ($110.50-ish) - they crossed back to the more typical relationship several days ago.
#OilPrice #fascism #FuckTrump #IranWar
Oh, also of interest: the headlines note that there were the most dissenters on this rates decision since 1992. Since people were looking for a rate cut the implication is that the dissenters wanted one.
That is NOT CORRECT.
There were four dissents.
_One_ wanted an immediate rate cut, as context around the headlines would imply.
The other three wanted the forward-looking possible-rate-cut-languge _removed_. They wanted no rate cut now, and they wanted the suggestion of a rate cut at the next meeting _taken out_, meaning they expect higher inflation.
This is the opposite of the contextual headline implication and one should take it onboard for one's inflation expectations accordingly.
-
Oh, also of interest: the headlines note that there were the most dissenters on this rates decision since 1992. Since people were looking for a rate cut the implication is that the dissenters wanted one.
That is NOT CORRECT.
There were four dissents.
_One_ wanted an immediate rate cut, as context around the headlines would imply.
The other three wanted the forward-looking possible-rate-cut-languge _removed_. They wanted no rate cut now, and they wanted the suggestion of a rate cut at the next meeting _taken out_, meaning they expect higher inflation.
This is the opposite of the contextual headline implication and one should take it onboard for one's inflation expectations accordingly.
This is not financial advice and I am not a financial advisor, but my inflation expectations are more in line with those of the dissenters.
People see the gas/diesel price shocks. Most people aren't yet really seeing the shipping price shocks. The goods price shock hasn't hit yet, but it absolutely will; if you look you can see it coming.
As for food, well, people are seeing a little foods price shock but it's mostly transportation impacts passed along so relatively low-key so far for most, but if fertiliser supplies don't get sorted - China's helping with that in eastern Asia, sharing from their considerable reserves stockpile - the hard impacts will be four to six months off.
-
This is not financial advice and I am not a financial advisor, but my inflation expectations are more in line with those of the dissenters.
People see the gas/diesel price shocks. Most people aren't yet really seeing the shipping price shocks. The goods price shock hasn't hit yet, but it absolutely will; if you look you can see it coming.
As for food, well, people are seeing a little foods price shock but it's mostly transportation impacts passed along so relatively low-key so far for most, but if fertiliser supplies don't get sorted - China's helping with that in eastern Asia, sharing from their considerable reserves stockpile - the hard impacts will be four to six months off.
Hi, I used to be an economics blogger, can you tell? It's kind of my comfort zone, particularly when things are interesting, by which I mean brace for impact.
-
This is not financial advice and I am not a financial advisor, but my inflation expectations are more in line with those of the dissenters.
People see the gas/diesel price shocks. Most people aren't yet really seeing the shipping price shocks. The goods price shock hasn't hit yet, but it absolutely will; if you look you can see it coming.
As for food, well, people are seeing a little foods price shock but it's mostly transportation impacts passed along so relatively low-key so far for most, but if fertiliser supplies don't get sorted - China's helping with that in eastern Asia, sharing from their considerable reserves stockpile - the hard impacts will be four to six months off.
@moira one-datum anecdata, I picked up groceries yesterday and ignoring that my basic grocery order has inflated from ~$200 three years ago to $400, I kept putting the order off because common things were just staying Not Available.
Like, they’ve never been out of Fritos before. The world is truly ending when Fritos are hard to get.
-
Hi, I used to be an economics blogger, can you tell? It's kind of my comfort zone, particularly when things are interesting, by which I mean brace for impact.
(I was one of the people warning anyone who would listen about both the tech and housing bubbles, and street-protested the bailout that created the Giant Pile of Money which has _completely fucked_ the relationship between stock values and actual productive economy ever since - not that it was on the most stable of ground to begin with - and which also created the megabillionaire fascist political tribe which helped get us here. Day-to-day bores me, so I don't bother with it, which from a reader's POV means that when I start blogging economics again, shit's getting crinkly, weird, and historically that's meant explosively bad.)
-
This is not financial advice and I am not a financial advisor, but my inflation expectations are more in line with those of the dissenters.
People see the gas/diesel price shocks. Most people aren't yet really seeing the shipping price shocks. The goods price shock hasn't hit yet, but it absolutely will; if you look you can see it coming.
As for food, well, people are seeing a little foods price shock but it's mostly transportation impacts passed along so relatively low-key so far for most, but if fertiliser supplies don't get sorted - China's helping with that in eastern Asia, sharing from their considerable reserves stockpile - the hard impacts will be four to six months off.
@moira @UkeleleEric and by the time these appear, the original cause will be in the rear view mirror and those responsible can easily divert attention and blame to more proximate people and events
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
