QE is creating a speculative stock bubble.

[I B Hankering]

.

Originally Posted by CJ7

as usual that's not what I ask you.

back to your rock

[CJ7]

Ben is talking about tapering QE and has been since May .. IMO his comment was made to soften the impact on the financial markets when he does just that..

The End.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CJ7

Ben is talking about tapering QE and has been since May .. IMO his comment was made to soften the impact on the financial markets when he does just that..

The End.

That's because Bernanke KNOWS there is a connection between the rise in the stock market and the Fed's QE policy, CBJ7. Poor, poor, poor, CBJ7.

[CuteOldGuy]

Turns out QE tends to benefit the rich at the expense of the poor. Turns out BJ is a Republican. Who knew?

[BJerk]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Turns out QE tends to benefit the rich at the expense of the poor. Turns out BJ is a Republican. Who knew?

Who knew you were a tedious and obstinate person to deal with - all your ex friends.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Turns out QE tends to benefit the rich at the expense of the poor. Turns out BJ is a Republican. Who knew?

+1 It's making the very rich (especially the bankers) richer, while the average person cannot even join in the game.

Originally Posted by Bert Jones

Who knew you were a tedious and obstinate person to deal with - all your ex friends.

Meanwhile you ignore your own obstinacy, BJ.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by WTF

The monetary (sic) adopted by Volker ruined Carter and saved Reagan!

No, dumbfuck, Jimmy Carter dug his own grave. Here's what you meant to say:

The inflation Carter let loose through his sheer economic incompetence forced Volker to adopt painfully tight monetary policies and sealed Carter's defeat in 1980. Reagan came in and fully supported Volker, making it easier for the Fed chief to stick to his tightened monetary course long enough to squash inflation expectations and setting the stage for a subsequent economic recovery that lasted for the remainder of Reagan's time in office (82-88) and was more than twice as strong (in terms of GNP growth) as today's feeble Obama-fumbled "recovery".

[LordBeaverbrook]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That's because Bernanke KNOWS there is a connection between the rise in the stock market and the Fed's QE policy, CBJ7. Poor, poor, poor, CBJ7.

Sure there is a connection. There is also a connection between QE and employment as well as overall economic activity. THAT IS WHY THE FED IS USING QE. Just because there is a connection doesn't mean it is a bubble and just because it is a bubble doesn't mean it will burst. This is mainly just hysterics at this time, but bubbles are certainly something to watch for.

Shiller also says there is a possibility of a bubble, but he is not "sounding the warning now", though he is concerned about the U.S. financial markets and tech as well as several foreign real estate markets.

Many smart people don't think we are yet at real bubble levels.

"The latest memo from Howard Marks includes a long and thoughtful discussion about the present day markets, but he concludes with similar thoughts – this is not a bubble.

• “Prices and valuation parameters are higher than they were a few years ago, and riskier behavior is observed. But what matters is the degree, and I don’t think it has reached the danger zone yet.
• “The absolute quantum of risk doesn’t seem as high as in 2006-7. ”
• “The modern miracles of finance aren’t seen as often (or touted as highly), and the use of leverage isn’t as high. ”
• “Prices and valuations aren’t highly extended (the p/e ratio on the S&P 500 is around 16, the post-war average, while in the 2000 it was in the low 30s”.
• I think most asset classes are priced fully – in many cases on the high side of fair – but not at bubble-type highs.”

Read more at http://pragcap.com/howard-marks-this...hb0lhgXgKiJ.99

[LordBeaverbrook]

Originally Posted by lustylad

No, dumbfuck, Jimmy Carter dug his own grave. Here's what you meant to say:

The inflation Carter let loose through his sheer economic incompetence forced Volker to adopt painfully tight monetary policies and sealed Carter's defeat in 1980. Reagan came in and fully supported Volker, making it easier for the Fed chief to stick to his tightened monetary course long enough to squash inflation expectations and setting the stage for a subsequent economic recovery that lasted for the remainder of Reagan's time in office (82-88) and was more than twice as strong (in terms of GNP growth) as today's feeble Obama-fumbled "recovery".

OK, genius, I guess you didn't notice that started under Nixon to win the 1972 election? How was Carter supposed to control Fed policy under Nixon? Oh, and I guess the oil shock had nothing to do with it either? Carter had much help digging his own grave and there was plenty of economic incompetence to go around. Now who is the dumbfuck?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/04/op...html?th&emc=th

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by austxjr

OK, genius, I guess you didn't notice that started under Nixon to win the 1972 election? How was Carter supposed to control Fed policy under Nixon? Oh, and I guess the oil shock had nothing to do with it either? Carter had much help digging his own grave and there was plenty of economic incompetence to go around. Now who is the dumbfuck?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/04/op...html?th&emc=th

Hey genius, you ought to look at the numbers before you make excuses for the dumbfuck peanut farmer. Inflation did flare up under Nixon, but it was quickly brought back under control. In 1976, the CPI rose by 4.9%. Then Carter came in and quickly threw away all of the hard-fought progress made in reducing inflation. Consumer prices rose by 6.7% in 1977, by 9.0% in 1978, by 13.3% in 1979 and 12.5% in 1980. So inflation was already accelerating sharply well before the Iran revolution pushed up oil prices again, due to a host of dumbfuck Carter policies ranging from steel import protectionism to dollar devaluation. Who is the dumbfuck again?

And btw, since you mentioned the oil price shock, who pressured the Shah of Iran not to suppress the mullahs in the streets? That was a brilliant foreign policy decision, wasn't it? The mullahs have been grateful ever since.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by lustylad

No, dumbfuck, Jimmy Carter dug his own grave. Here's what you meant to say:
.

Reagan should have licked Cater's balls for appointing Volcker.

Originally Posted by lustylad

And btw, since you mentioned the oil price shock, who pressured the Shah of Iran not to suppress the mullahs in the streets? That was a brilliant foreign policy decision, wasn't it? The mullahs have been grateful ever since.

Who sold arms to the mullahs? Those mullahs who wanted Ronnie elected and reneged on letting the hostages go...something which probably cost Carter the election.

This ain't the Sean Hannity show , where you can spout all the one sided shit you please without me kicking you in the balls and setting the record straight.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by WTF

Reagan should have licked Cater's (sic) balls for appointing Volcker.

Who sold arms to the mullahs? Those mullahs who wanted Ronnie elected and reneged on letting the hostages go...something which probably cost Carter the election.

This ain't the Sean Hannity show, where you can spout all the one sided shit you please without me kicking you in the balls and setting the record straight.

Wow, I can't believe you actually pat yourself on the back after posting something so colossally stupid! You really are dumber than dumb. You don't even realize how illogical your arguments are. You say Reagan should have thanked Carter for calling in Volker to put out the inflation fires - knowing Carter was the arsonist? Yeah, that makes sense.

And if you want to blame Reagan for Ollie North's free-lancing, you should at least put it in perspective. Was any damage done by selling a few weapons to Iran in 1986? Maybe it kept the Iran-Iraq war going a little longer - so what? Now compare that with the long-term strategic setback suffered by the US when Jimmy Carter shoved the Shah off his Peacock Throne. 34 years of "Death to America", state-sponsored terrorism in Lebanon, Khobar, Buenos Aires, etc., a hostile Iran on the verge of having nukes and seeking to dominate the Straits of Hormuz... How can any serious observer of American foreign policy equate the two? Only a totally blind dumbfuck like WTF would even try!

[bambino]

Fuckin Peanut Farmers

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by lustylad

And if you want to blame Reagan for Ollie North's free-lancing,

Been there, seen that. If you believe North was freelancing you are stupid and clearly have no idea of what you speak. The Norths were/are some pretty sleazy people, but they are not freelancers.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Been there, seen that. If you believe North was freelancing you are stupid and clearly have no idea of what you speak. The Norths were/are some pretty sleazy people, but they are not freelancers.

lusty is a freelance idiot