|
As always, the US(D) is always the best place to be in when there's turmoil. Kinda crazy how the major currencies have nose-dived against the dollar over the past 6 months
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
nah CoCos have been actually pushed onto the markets by regulatory bodies as a way of injecting capital during bad times. there's nothing dodgy about that. the problem is that they've never been tested (triggered).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
they're nothing like ABSes
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:if Deutsche Bank goes it has something like 2 or 3 times the GDP of Germany as its total capital footprint, so Germany couldn't even save it if it wanted to (and even if it wanted to, it's not allowed under EU rules which they strongly supported). lol
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
It's quite possible to create a system where you have the consumption habits of the top 1/5/10% driving economies and an entire underclass.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
The narrative that the economy's being screwed because millenials aren't spending hasn't panned out though. with less being spent on big ticket items like a mortgage or cars, they spend more on day-to-day goods or services
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
tbf, you're from Spain where basically no one works. in the States and most of Europe, you still have millenials consuming to the extent where consumer goods/services providers haven't been impacted directly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
namesake posted:If you're wondering what financial instrument is going to implode and destroy the global economy then it's probably the ETF, although that needs something else to go really bad first and I'm going to say it'll be a tech crash. ETFs aren't bad and I'd love to hear your explanation why they're going to crate the global economy. The stuff coming out here is a good reason why DnD is not a good place to discuss anything related to finance.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
namesake posted:The SEC is concerned about how they operate and are valued against how they're thought to operate and should be valued https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-16-15/s71615-60.pdf and with a market of over $2 trillion they're extremely popular at all levels of investment, that's a bad combo in terms of known risk and rational response from investors if they start going bad. lol the comment focuses on regulatory and disclosure concerns without going so far to say there's actually an existing problem. if you tell me that BlackRock shouldn't be allowed to say this - “ETFs are investment products that can help individuals build a nest egg, prepare for retirement, or save for their children’s education. They also help institutions such as large pension plans, foundations and endowments meet their financial obligations.” without a bunch of caveats, that's fine by me
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
I dunno ToxicSlurpee. A lot of the stuff you're saying seems to be normative rather than descriptive. I get the impression that you're treating the downturn as an opportunity for American consumption habits to be cut down to what you think are sustainable (e.g., less spending on poo poo, moving to city centres, shorter commutes etc.)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
With a UNSC comprising of Trump, Putin, May, Le Pen, Jinping, it seems like a stunning repudiation of globalism
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2016 10:46
|
|
|
Lol, I'm bearish on the economy but anyone thinking that a Trump administration immediately leads to a recession is probably thinking emotionally about the election (and can feel free to short the market). From a policy standpoint, the dismantling of regulations across industries will likely lead to a short term to mid term fillip to growth. I think it'll lead to long term poo poo but who knows when it'll blow up.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
Which the US/Trump administration is paradoxically likely to handle better than the rest of the West. Europe is drowning in austerity, Trump with control of all arms of the government will be better positioned to fire on all stimulus cylinders if necessary whereas a Clinton administration would likely have fought tooth and nail with the GOP for every dollar of stimulus.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 07:34
|
|
|
Nah, again I think you guys are kneejerking as Krugman did. I agree that Trump is going to be a disaster for the economy long term but there's no reason to start crying that everything is going to blow up in the next year or two - if anything, it'll give ammunition to the right if nothing happens. Stuff like privatization and tax cuts don't depress the economy in the short term and if anything, Trump seems to be of the Huey Long persuasion. Krugman quote:But will the extent of the disaster become apparent right away? It’s natural and, one must admit, tempting to predict a quick comeuppance — and I myself gave in to that temptation, briefly, on that horrible election night, suggesting that a global recession was imminent. But I quickly retracted that call. Trumpism will have dire effects, but they will take time to become manifest.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
Raising rates if "another bubble is building" isn't a bad thing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
Yah but as we've seen those pitchforks end up being pointed towards ethnic minorities and other disenfranchised classes, not the plutocrats.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
Trump is already boosting the markets before he's taken office. Where are all the people up thread talking about an imminent economic crisis.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Lol at the people moving the goal posts from a recession is imminent to a recession will take place at some point in the future. The usual suspects itt have been crying wolf about the world economy blowing up since 08. At what point can we call you guys preppers.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
Trump saved 1000 Carrier jobs and created 50000 new ones through a deal with Sprint. What has Obama done?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
Kinda funny to see progressives who had previously criticized employment stats for not factoring in the underemployed or those who had given up looking for jobs are now talking about how good the Obama economy is. "America is already great!"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Like the election was largely decided by how lovely neoliberal Dems have managed the economy and we still have people defending the Obama-Clinton economy. Like there's a serious amount of denial among posters here.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
MPS blowing up along with the EU is pretty good news for the US.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 07:50
|
|
|
We'll see a flood of money from Europe to the US partly due to flight to safety and partly due to the US commitment to deregulation. With stuff like Dodd-Frank on the chopping board, US financials are up 20% over the past month. I mean the EU is melting down - look at Fillon talking about firing half a million civil servants while Trump is focused on bringing jobs back to the US e.g. Sprint.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 08:02
|
|
|
In a post-Trump world?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
whataboutisms about the bad team does it too doesn't really come off well when the "good" team is supposed to be for workers etc.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
A bit surprised at the number of free trade fundamentalists itt given what's been going on the past couple years with Brexit, Trump, and the rise of a bunch of populists across the world. Even China, on the other side of the equation, is having digestive issues with maintaining growth at all costs. You can talk about an abstract "rising tide lifts all boats" but unless you can create a care package for those that are left behind then be prepared to see spasms of populism.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
yeah, saying that serfdom is preferable to developing country factory work smacks of first world privilege.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
You guys need to read up on your market history. The SEC temporarily banned short sale of financial stocks in '08 so it's not unprecedented in the US.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
I know we have to do this song and dance every couple months but yes, the average Chinese/Indian is better off today than (s)he was as a peasant historically. Saying otherwise smacks of first world privilege.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
call to action posted:Yeah, we're privileged, and admitting to it or not doesn't change it. I'm still, gasp, going to put my children's welfare ahead of some random Chinese person - sorry if this squicks you out even if y'all act along these lines regardless. And that's precisely why Trump's vision of the world won out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
It would help if people like Helsing clarified what exactly they're railing against. The tirades about capitalism, globalisation, and neoliberalism are pretty meaningless when you see them shifting goal posts depending on what's advantageous to their argument e.g. China as good versus Russia because they did not 'liberalize' whatever that means, and then on the other hand argue that China is worse off because they have adopted capitalist/market practice.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 06:02
|
|
|
Oh ok, I didn't realise that people were actually making the argument that China was better off as it was circa GLF/Cultural Revolution. Or if the argument is the speed of liberalisation, I'm all for that - there's obviously a transition period.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 06:30
|
|
|
Singapore is an example of a heavily interventionist government fused with a very open market but progressives heavily criticize it from not just a human rights standpoint but an economic equity standpoint as well given its lack of a welfare structure.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 10:57
|
|
|
Relitigating the GFC as being caused by a pullback on debt issuance, consumer or otherwise, is bizarre.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
The sample size is too small plus the line between technical recession and periods of close to zero growth is fine enough that that table is pretty meaningless. At least for the markets, forward looking indicators like CAPE have been saying we're due for a correction since 2013 but tough luck on bears. Think the S&P has been averaging 15% over the past 7 years.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2017 00:46
|
|
|
Don't get personal investing advice from D&D. And sucks to be anyone out of the markets anytime since the GFC. Even a broad market index like the S&P500 has been averaging 15% annually since then.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
Past performance yada yada. Just observing that we've had posts/threads every year since 08 about how this time is the big one. I still remember peak oil being something seriously discussed here.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 07:41
|
|
|
Yes, time in market matters a lot more than market timing. There's a shitload of literature on this. An example is a study finding that the vast majority of the S&P's gains over 20 year time periods are concentrated in about a percent of the total trading days.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
It's kinda true about immigrants though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 00:48
|
|