|
Arglebargle III posted:We're almost done with 2016. Stop loving trying to jinx December for us. 
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
Anyone actually in a short position on the market?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
I'm both. Hedging my personal finances while speculating with my business portfolio.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:I'm both. Hedging my personal finances while speculating with my business portfolio. financialadvisors.txt
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:financialadvisors.txt I know that it sounds ridiculous but from an accounting viewpoint I can assure you that it's very rational. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Rated PG-34 posted:Anyone actually in a short position on the market? My TMV fund went up 75% or so since the election. But it's like a 3x bond short and I only have $1500 in it. A few months back I was convinced the bond market would collapse. It's play money so I will only cry for a week of things go poorly. It's really just for day traders too. I should probably dump it because I don't know poo poo but it's fun to watch numbers go up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/tracyalloway/status/803977799375749120 A great read about Wilbur Ross. Your new secretary of commerce and the people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/30/italy-referendum-all-you-need-to-know-about-renzis-crunch-vote It looks like the No side is going to win. quote:Some of Italy’s biggest banks are in bad shape. How will the referendum affect the banking sector? lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
Italian banks are a crater in the ground and the latest rescue attempt organized by, I think, Goldman Sachs, attracted so little interest it was ridiculous. But the spin is going to be that it's the referendum's fault. Calling it now. What do you guys think are the chances Monte dei Paschi goes down, takes Deutsche with it, and then it all goes to hell?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 08:34
|
|
|
Sorry I haven't read much on dB's involvement. Can you provide a summary?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
I'm probably botching this, but I think it boils down to something like DB extending billions in loans to Italian banks which are now bankrupt and if forced to realize those losses (instead of getting bailed out in a circuitous manner as happened with Greece) DB would go bankrupt as well. People who seem to know what they're talking about (as far as I can tell) think there's a good chance that if the referendum fails it could precipitate a new Euro crisis and lead to the breakup of the Eurozone, which I find to be pretty reasonable as it's been obviously unsustainable for years, barely limping by through massive bank bailouts at the expense of the citizens of everybody other than Germany. The other thing is that if the referendum does pass it increases the odds that the 5-Star Movement take power in the next election, so it's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Mozi fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Mozi posted:I'm probably botching this, but I think it boils down to something like DB extending billions in loans to Italian banks which are now bankrupt and if forced to realize those losses (instead of getting bailed out in a circuitous manner as happened with Greece) DB would go bankrupt as well. How does a state leave the Eurozone without precipitating an instant banking crisis? I'm not even talking about the political issues, just the technical details on how you announce you're leaving the Eurozone and prevent everyone from withdrawing all the Euros out of their bank accounts immediately. My understanding is that any country in the Eurozone is basically stuck, the recent history of Greece exemplifies this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
The breakup of the Eurozone would be the eventual consequence of the collapse of the European banking system, but I'm not sure of the actual processes that would be involved. I should say again I don't have a really great understanding of these matters.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
I don't even want to imagine what effects the second biggest currency in the world collapsing would have on exchange markets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
The great (?) thing about living in interesting times is we get to see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
How accurate are Italian polls? I'm guessing pretty garbage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Mozi posted:The great (?) thing about living in interesting times is we get to see what happens. I'd prefer if it didn't happen during the most important investment years of my lifetime. Boomers had it so easy by comparison.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
I'm gonna ask something dumb: the DOW and NASDAQ and all that have been hitting records after Trump's election, and people are saying that means Trump is good for the economy. However, I don't really understand how we go from high DOW and NASDAQ to "everyone has jobs and money now". I also don't see how Trump himself is what caused the market changes. How does this matter and why is it happening?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:How does this matter and why is it happening? The short answer is that it doesn't matter and you shouldn't watch index movements to get a feel for the larger economy. The slightly longer answer is that a Republican administration is likely to be good in a short term sense for a lot of industries, but not necessarily for the economy (ie, jobs and income) on the whole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:I'm gonna ask something dumb: the DOW and NASDAQ and all that have been hitting records after Trump's election, and people are saying that means Trump is good for the economy. However, I don't really understand how we go from high DOW and NASDAQ to "everyone has jobs and money now". I also don't see how Trump himself is what caused the market changes. How does this matter and why is it happening? It's an effect of Trump's victory speech. The markets are basically like a horse, nervous as gently caress and will get spooked by anything unexpected. For example, in 2014 the market would collapse basically every single time Syriza announced a press conference and then immediately rebound when the press conference turned out to be nothing. (I made a lot of money off of this) What happened after the election is kinda similar. After it was clear that Trump was winning we had a market panic (the markets had already begun deflating after the FBI announcement about Hillary but they really turned at this moment) for about 2 hours, until his victory speech that is. The tone of that speech was so unexpected and out of character that the markets basically rebounded immediately. There was hope that maybe the world wasn't ending and we have basically been riding it since. I think Trump speaking with a lot of republican and investment bank insiders is also further increasing that effect since there is then hope that maybe he won't actually end global trade as we know it. For now, the markets are mostly optimistic. This has no bearing on anything in the real economy but companies ability to get loans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
The market feeeling is that Trump will have a fiscal policy that will be more expansive than the present. It is difficult for a government to spend money without it trickling out throughout the real economy, and thus companies will gain from added work and more spending from many different segments. Normally when a countrys government increases deficit spending the markets can react negatively because it increases the risk that bonds cannot be honored in the future. But The US is such an integral part of the global economy that a US default would be cataclysmic, and the logic is that in that case you might as well be exposed to the US because there wont be ANY safe places to hide your assets anyway. catfry fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Dec 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
catfry posted:The market feeeling is that Trump will have a fiscal policy that will be more expansive than the present. There's this too. Fiscal policy at a federal level has been basically nonexistent over the last six years thanks to obstructionism in Congress, so there are a lot of people who feel that doing literally anything is probably better than endlessly leaning on monetary policy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Fiscal policy from any western nations would probably send markets exploding upwards at this point. Everyone is tired of the low-growth environment.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Keeping in mind that stuff like the Dow and NASDAQ at this point have an extremely, extremely tenuous relationship with reality and are even further away from the 'real' economy. It's all financial organizations trading numbers back and forth to get their numbers to go up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
bird food bathtub posted:Keeping in mind that stuff like the Dow and NASDAQ at this point have an extremely, extremely tenuous relationship with reality and are even further away from the 'real' economy. It's all financial organizations trading numbers back and forth to get their numbers to go up. This is dangerous thinking. Momentous shifts in the market have little effect on reality (aside from traders exchanging profits/losses) but actual crashes have wide-ranging implications for everything from lending to pension funds. It's only fake until a big financial institution gets hit by liquidity crunch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Mozi posted:I'm probably botching this, but I think it boils down to something like DB extending billions in loans to Italian banks which are now bankrupt and if forced to realize those losses (instead of getting bailed out in a circuitous manner as happened with Greece) DB would go bankrupt as well. I was thinking of that, but also of the fact that that DB seems to be very undercapitalized (and while trying to give you a figure for that I found this and this.), and also it has a derivatives portfolio of 47 trillion USD. (For reference, Germay's GDP is 3.36 trillion USD). On the derivatives, DB's CEO has said that the fears are overblown and that it's all ok because some of those derivatives they owe and some they are owed to them. So it's all fine and dandy with those derivatives! As 2009 proved conclusively. In short: duck and cover.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
The market could also be getting excited about the stock buybacks and dividend payouts that companies will do following the implementation of Trump's promise to slash the tax on repatriation of deferred overseas income.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:The market could also be getting excited about the stock buybacks and dividend payouts that companies will do following the implementation of Trump's promise to slash the tax on repatriation of deferred overseas income. I thought those billions would go to jobs and salaries. Oh, wait...
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Dawncloack posted:I was thinking of that, but also of the fact that that DB seems to be very undercapitalized (and while trying to give you a figure for that I found this and this.), and also it has a derivatives portfolio of 47 trillion USD. (For reference, Germay's GDP is 3.36 trillion USD). Ah, yikes. Considering the fear of their collapse if the US's $14b fine is levied, this seems a bit much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
At this point I treat news that is good for the market as bad for Americans
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Markets like a Republican. That's all there is to it. Seems odd since it's generally Democrats that grow the economy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Markets like a Republican. That's all there is to it. Seems odd since it's generally Democrats that grow the economy. Yeah but Republicans lower my taxes right now! I demand instant gratification. We must have exponential growth! We must have the biggest growth possible this quarter at any cost. Inflate that bubble and then whine and blame Democrats when it pops.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
Markets like Republicans because they like corporate welfare.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:This is dangerous thinking. Momentous shifts in the market have little effect on reality (aside from traders exchanging profits/losses) but actual crashes have wide-ranging implications for everything from lending to pension funds. It's only fake until a big financial institution gets hit by liquidity crunch. Fair point on the clarification, should have specified that detonating markets can absolutely cause problems everywhere else. I guess the best way to say what I intended is that it works much more in that one direction than the other. The markets can gently caress up reality by screwing those numbers up, but those numbers are very detached from the actions, processes and objects/goods of reality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:Markets like Republicans because they like corporate welfare. Republicans love deficit spending when they control all the branches of government
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Markets like a Republican. That's all there is to it. Seems odd since it's generally Democrats that grow the economy. Markets are about corporate profits, and Republicans are all about that to the exclusion of basically everything else. Markets can absolutely do well even when the general economy isn't, and it can stay disconnected for a long time, especially regionally. Considering the state of the election as a rejection of the status quo to all those folks who have no savings and no investments and thus gain gently caress all from the markets going up (which is a majority of the working populace at this point), it isn't a good sign. Seeing that it's horrible businesses like for-profit prisons and for-profit colleges/schools are what's rebounding since the government is going to green-light their scams, it's going to be a wild ride for a while until the problems come home to roost. But this time there won't be sanity in the government to actually soften the landing or ameliorate some of the worst affects. rscott posted:Republicans love deficit spending when they control all the branches of government And this. Republicans increased the deficit heavily during a massive housing bubble (and thus tax revenue bubble) the last time, and nobody had any problem. The Paul Ryan budget plan involves heavy deficit spending in absolutely monstrous amounts (due to severe tax cuts) until people start retiring with his new lovely Medicare setup, and suddenly the budget looks much better 10-15 years out as retirees get hosed. That is of course assuming that they don't royally gently caress the economy with yet another financial disaster and that they stop increasing spending. The fundamental issues at the global level are still present - China having economic woes/bubble(s), Australia and Canada having giant housing bubbles, systemic issues in the EU, Brazil suffering, Russia suffering and shrinking as a result of low gas prices, etc. Even if oil prices go back up it'll just sap demand elsewhere. I'd still bet Trump's job numbers will still be shittier than Obama's, even with Obama inheriting the mess of the GFC and having a general draw-down on government employees (both federal, state, and local) happening during his terms.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
What are the odds that Trump has the US Govt bail out Duetchebank and them "forgiving" all his loans once he's out of office?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:What are the odds that Trump has the US Govt bail out Duetchebank and them "forgiving" all his loans once he's out of office?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
Pervis posted:I'd still bet Trump's job numbers will still be shittier than Obama's, even with Obama inheriting the mess of the GFC and having a general draw-down on government employees (both federal, state, and local) happening during his terms. I've probably said it before, but if we pass through 2017 recession free, I'll eat my hat. The OPEC announcement raised people's hopes a little, but I doubt we're going to see even a fraction of the business investment needed returning for $50 oil. Ultimately, I suspect a lot of the outlook going forwards is going to depend on U.S. economic policy: Trump might be able to win a few token victories at home, keeping a few thousand jobs from fleeing overseas, but asking companies en masse to not lower their expenses via job exporting at a time when profits are already gloomy is really sawing the branch you sit on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:16 |
|
|
rscott posted:Republicans love deficit spending when they control all the branches of government
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2016 07:24
|
|
