Looks like our Govt will be running out of money sometime in August, according to GS economist Alec Phillips.

The Strategas Washington policy team estimates a 75% probability that a debt-ceilung deal wont happen until 2 weeks before the ultimate X-date, and a 65% chance that it will come down to the final week.

Yields of one month T-Bills are already trading at a full 1% point less than the 3-month Bill, for the assurance of avoiding even a highly improbable default.

The 2011 standoff led to the first ever downgrade of the U.S. from a triple A rating by Standard & Poors, which led to a 19% drop in the S&P index.


Stay tuned.

DiabloWags said:

---

Looks like our Govt will be running out of money sometime in August, according to GS economist Alec Phillips.

The Strategas Washington policy team estimates a 75% probability that a debt-ceilung deal wont happen until 2 weeks before the ultimate X-date, and a 65% chance that it will come down to the final week.

Yields of one month T-Bills are already trading at a full 1% point less than the 3-month Bill, for the assurance of avoiding even a highly improbable default.

The 2011 standoff led to the first ever downgrade of the U.S. from a triple A rating by Standard & Poors, which led to a 19% drop in the S&P index.


Stay tuned.

---

This is more "partisan folly" by the GOP -- who had no issues with raising the Debt Ceiling three times while Trump was President, with nary a whimper.

The proper response from Democrats should be "Go ahead, crash the economy. If you do, it's on you."

Fortunately, Biden has pledged to veto any debt ceiling bill from the House that proposes spending cuts. A clean bill, or nothing. I criticize Biden a lot, because he deserves it, but holding firm against the House GOP theatrics is the right thing to do.

However, given that Powell, the Fed, and Capital are intentionally trying to crash the U.S. & world economy, this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

We have

• the Fed proposing more interest rate increases, causing more unemployment & business bankruptcies, and continuing the Liquidity Crisis;
• the downgrade of the U.S. banking sector by Moody's;
• the BRICS moving away from the USD, and reducing their dependence on the U.S. economy, eventually moving to replace the USD as the world's reserve currency;
• the U.S. increasing its military presence in Asia & provoking China;
• the U.S. refusing diplomatic approaches to ending hostilities in Ukraine;
• the bursting of the Housing Bubble (version 2.0)
• the introduction of the U.S. Digital Dollar in July;

Failing to raise the debt ceiling & defaulting on U.S. Treasuries, on top of all these factors, will likely result in a brutal wipeout, with stocks & real estate -- especially commercial real estate -- taking the biggest hit.

The wealthiest of the wealthy will then be able to buy real estate, companies, and equipment at fire sale prices. As it was in the 1930s, the wealthiest of the wealthy will increase their fortunes, while the accumulated wealth of most of us will evaporate.

As I've said before, there will be no "soft landing." This will be far worse than 2008.

If you've believed as much U.S. economic propaganda as political propaganda, you're likely to be one of the bagholders.

The thieves who stole $trillions from American individuals in 2008 were never held accountable, and they're coming back for whatever was left on the table.

If Biden lets the Republicans crash the economy over this he is a failure. He just needs to mint a Trillion dollar coin and the problem is solved.

McCarthy's legislation to reimpose austerity is a recipe to repeat the low growth of the last decade.

So if we are going to have a recession, and the odds of a recession are pretty good given that this has pretty much been the goal of the Fed, what does a wise investor do in order to take advantage of it? I have a pretty large cash position already. Sell more securities to raise more cash? Sell puts on stocks I already have my eye on?

cbbass1 said:

---

As I've said before, there will be no "soft landing." This will be far worse than 2008.

---

You sure are full of "gloom and doom" as you continue to parrot your "labor vs capital" argument.
Never mind that there's a big reason why any "recession" wont be worse than 2008.
Never mind that the March unemployment rate was at 3.5%
I must admit, you're pretty consistent.
I'll give you that.

dimitrig said:

---

So if we are going to have a recession, and the odds of a recession are pretty good given that this has pretty much been the goal of the Fed, what does a wise investor do in order to take advantage of it? I have a pretty large cash position already. Sell more securities to raise more cash? Sell puts on stocks I already have my eye on?

---

It's an interesting "battle" between Mr. Market and the FED.
The Equity Market doesnt believe the FED and is already anticipating rate cuts in the back end of the year.
This is why the S&P is pushing 4200 and 20x earnings.

The best 6 months for the market are already behind us.
The worst 6 months (historically) are from May to October.

That's where the slogan Sell in May and Go Away comes from.

6-month T-Bills are hard to beat at 5.1%

DiabloWags said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

As I've said before, there will be no "soft landing." This will be far worse than 2008.

---

You sure are full of "gloom and doom" as you continue to parrot your "labor vs capital" argument.
Never mind that there's a big reason why any "recession" wont be worse than 2008.
Never mind that the March unemployment rate was at 3.5%
I must admit, you're pretty consistent.
I'll give you that.

---

"Parrot?"

The basis for the Labor vs Captial model is simple: About 70% of our economy is Consumer Spending. So answer me this: From where does the revenue of large corporations (i.e., Capital) come?

In a healthy Consumer economy, most corporate revenue comes from Customers purchasing goods & services.

And from where do Customers get the $$$ to purchase goods & services? They get $$$ by selling their Labor. Because most Customers are Workers.

Capital has been driving Wages & Salaries down since 1980 without relent. In the last 40+ years, Capital has shaped U.S. economic policy, and much of the world's economic policy, to drive wages & salaries down to the absolute minimum.

These Neoliberal policies have brought us to the point where the majority of Workers, in the U.S. and throughout the world, can no longer afford to purchase the goods & services that they produce.

The wealth that used to be held by U.S. Middle Class Workers has been transferred to large multinational corporations & Private Equity.

Because so few people have enough disposable income to fully participate in the economy, producers of consumer products no longer have an incentive to invest in new & better products. The ROI isn't there. Instead, companies buy back their shares, hoard their wealth, and complain that there just aren't any investments with decent ROI.

As interest rates rise, the smaller-tier producers, who run on thinner margins, can't roll over their loans. Many of the top 2000 or 5000 companies were zombies or near-zombies to begin with. Who's going to lend their precious cash to a zombie company while the Fed keeps raising interest rates??

Neoliberal Capitalism is like a big machine where Capital extracts as much wealth as it can from Customers, pays as little as possible to Workers, and pays little or nothing to Government to build & maintain infrastructure or educate their employees. This is unsustainable. We've reached the limit of our economy's ability to sustain itself.

Since the Worker/Customer class can no longer support Capital with its purchases of goods & services, Capital has turned to a more reliable provider of funding -- the "evil" U.S. Government. Yes, the same Government that Capital has purchased and drowned in the bathtub is now seen by Capital as the Writer of Big Checks. Defense spending & Military aid go straight from U.S. Taxpayers to "Defense" contractors. The banks and the financial sector are, and will be, crying for bailouts from Uncle Sam.

The bank CEOs made so much $$$ after the 2008 crash -- with ZERO consequences -- that they're going back to the buffet once again for a generous second helping. Why wouldn't they?

Then, in July, when unemployment spikes and markets & housing prices crash, the U.S. Treasury will introduce its own Digital Currency. So if you want $$$ to pay rent or eat or survive, you'll have to be OK with having every transaction, however small, tracked.

Neoliberal Capitalism can no longer survive without massive intervention from the U.S. Government (i.e., U.S. individual taxpayers).

As it relates to Cal & CFB, we'll see some NIL commitments from donors, made in the Era of Easy Money, that won't get paid. And as the number of cable subscribers continues to decrease, and more people "cut the cable" and stream over the internet, there'll be less $$ from sponsors.

Expect a lot more pressure from universities to cut or discontinue the funding of majory college sports. There will be fewer & fewer programs for whom the athletic department cash flow is a net positive.

Until we decide to go back to economically sustainable New Deal policies that put more $$$ in the hands of Worker/Customers, and tax corporate earnings at 35% to 45%, life will be more grim for the majority of Americans, and we'll be at the mercy of the Fascists.

cbbass1 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

As I've said before, there will be no "soft landing." This will be far worse than 2008.

---

You sure are full of "gloom and doom" as you continue to parrot your "labor vs capital" argument.
Never mind that there's a big reason why any "recession" wont be worse than 2008.
Never mind that the March unemployment rate was at 3.5%
I must admit, you're pretty consistent.
I'll give you that.

---

"Parrot?"

The basis for the Labor vs Captial model is simple: About 70% of our economy is Consumer Spending. So answer me this: From where does the revenue of large corporations (i.e., Capital) come?

In a healthy Consumer economy, most corporate revenue comes from Customers purchasing goods & services.

And from where do Customers get the $$$ to purchase goods & services? They get $$$ by selling their Labor. Because most Customers are Workers.

Capital has been driving Wages & Salaries down since 1980 without relent. In the last 40+ years, Capital has shaped U.S. economic policy, and much of the world's economic policy, to drive wages & salaries down to the absolute minimum.

These Neoliberal policies have brought us to the point where the majority of Workers, in the U.S. and throughout the world, can no longer afford to purchase the goods & services that they produce.

The wealth that used to be held by U.S. Middle Class Workers has been transferred to large multinational corporations & Private Equity.

Because so few people have enough disposable income to fully participate in the economy, producers of consumer products no longer have an incentive to invest in new & better products. The ROI isn't there. Instead, companies buy back their shares, hoard their wealth, and complain that there just aren't any investments with decent ROI.

As interest rates rise, the smaller-tier producers, who run on thinner margins, can't roll over their loans. Many of the top 2000 or 5000 companies were zombies or near-zombies to begin with. Who's going to lend their precious cash to a zombie company while the Fed keeps raising interest rates??

Neoliberal Capitalism is like a big machine where Capital extracts as much wealth as it can from Customers, pays as little as possible to Workers, and pays little or nothing to Government to build & maintain infrastructure or educate their employees. This is unsustainable. We've reached the limit of our economy's ability to sustain itself.

Since the Worker/Customer class can no longer support Capital with its purchases of goods & services, Capital has turned to a more reliable provider of funding -- the "evil" U.S. Government. Yes, the same Government that Capital has purchased and drowned in the bathtub is now seen by Capital as the Writer of Big Checks. Defense spending & Military aid go straight from U.S. Taxpayers to "Defense" contractors. The banks and the financial sector are, and will be, crying for bailouts from Uncle Sam.

The bank CEOs made so much $$$ after the 2008 crash -- with ZERO consequences -- that they're going back to the buffet once again for a generous second helping. Why wouldn't they?

Then, in July, when unemployment spikes and markets & housing prices crash, the U.S. Treasury will introduce its own Digital Currency. So if you want $$$ to pay rent or eat or survive, you'll have to be OK with having every transaction, however small, tracked.

Neoliberal Capitalism can no longer survive without massive intervention from the U.S. Government (i.e., U.S. individual taxpayers).

As it relates to Cal & CFB, we'll see some NIL commitments from donors, made in the Era of Easy Money, that won't get paid. And as the number of cable subscribers continues to decrease, and more people "cut the cable" and stream over the internet, there'll be less $$ from sponsors.

Expect a lot more pressure from universities to cut or discontinue the funding of majory college sports. There will be fewer & fewer programs for whom the athletic department cash flow is a net positive.

Until we decide to go back to economically sustainable New Deal policies that put more $$$ in the hands of Worker/Customers, and tax corporate earnings at 35% to 45%, life will be more grim for the majority of Americans, and we'll be at the mercy of the Fascists.

---

This is all true and correct except for the part where you blame it on liberals instead of conservatives.

cbbass1 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

As I've said before, there will be no "soft landing." This will be far worse than 2008.

---

You sure are full of "gloom and doom" as you continue to parrot your "labor vs capital" argument.
Never mind that there's a big reason why any "recession" wont be worse than 2008.
Never mind that the March unemployment rate was at 3.5%
I must admit, you're pretty consistent.
I'll give you that.

---

"Parrot?"

The basis for the Labor vs Captial model is simple: About 70% of our economy is Consumer Spending. So answer me this: From where does the revenue of large corporations (i.e., Capital) come?

In a healthy Consumer economy, most corporate revenue comes from Customers purchasing goods & services.

And from where do Customers get the $$$ to purchase goods & services? They get $$$ by selling their Labor. Because most Customers are Workers.

Capital has been driving Wages & Salaries down since 1980 without relent. In the last 40+ years, Capital has shaped U.S. economic policy, and much of the world's economic policy, to drive wages & salaries down to the absolute minimum.

These Neoliberal policies have brought us to the point where the majority of Workers, in the U.S. and throughout the world, can no longer afford to purchase the goods & services that they produce.

The wealth that used to be held by U.S. Middle Class Workers has been transferred to large multinational corporations & Private Equity.

Because so few people have enough disposable income to fully participate in the economy, producers of consumer products no longer have an incentive to invest in new & better products. The ROI isn't there. Instead, companies buy back their shares, hoard their wealth, and complain that there just aren't any investments with decent ROI.

As interest rates rise, the smaller-tier producers, who run on thinner margins, can't roll over their loans. Many of the top 2000 or 5000 companies were zombies or near-zombies to begin with. Who's going to lend their precious cash to a zombie company while the Fed keeps raising interest rates??

Neoliberal Capitalism is like a big machine where Capital extracts as much wealth as it can from Customers, pays as little as possible to Workers, and pays little or nothing to Government to build & maintain infrastructure or educate their employees. This is unsustainable. We've reached the limit of our economy's ability to sustain itself.

Since the Worker/Customer class can no longer support Capital with its purchases of goods & services, Capital has turned to a more reliable provider of funding -- the "evil" U.S. Government. Yes, the same Government that Capital has purchased and drowned in the bathtub is now seen by Capital as the Writer of Big Checks. Defense spending & Military aid go straight from U.S. Taxpayers to "Defense" contractors. The banks and the financial sector are, and will be, crying for bailouts from Uncle Sam.

The bank CEOs made so much $$$ after the 2008 crash -- with ZERO consequences -- that they're going back to the buffet once again for a generous second helping. Why wouldn't they?

Then, in July, when unemployment spikes and markets & housing prices crash, the U.S. Treasury will introduce its own Digital Currency. So if you want $$$ to pay rent or eat or survive, you'll have to be OK with having every transaction, however small, tracked.

Neoliberal Capitalism can no longer survive without massive intervention from the U.S. Government (i.e., U.S. individual taxpayers).

As it relates to Cal & CFB, we'll see some NIL commitments from donors, made in the Era of Easy Money, that won't get paid. And as the number of cable subscribers continues to decrease, and more people "cut the cable" and stream over the internet, there'll be less $$ from sponsors.

Expect a lot more pressure from universities to cut or discontinue the funding of majory college sports. There will be fewer & fewer programs for whom the athletic department cash flow is a net positive.

Until we decide to go back to economically sustainable New Deal policies that put more $$$ in the hands of Worker/Customers, and tax corporate earnings at 35% to 45%, life will be more grim for the majority of Americans, and we'll be at the mercy of the Fascists.

---

This is all true and correct except for the part where you blame it on liberals instead of conservatives.

---

Neoliberalism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

Read it, and you'll no longer be confused.

---

It's not about me. It's not about you. It's not about the definition of academic words like neoliberal. Outside a classroom everyone who reads that word just reads "liberal". You should know what you are communicating.

cbbass1 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

As I've said before, there will be no "soft landing." This will be far worse than 2008.

---

You sure are full of "gloom and doom" as you continue to parrot your "labor vs capital" argument.
Never mind that there's a big reason why any "recession" wont be worse than 2008.
Never mind that the March unemployment rate was at 3.5%
I must admit, you're pretty consistent.
I'll give you that.

---

"Parrot?"

The basis for the Labor vs Captial model is simple: About 70% of our economy is Consumer Spending. So answer me this: From where does the revenue of large corporations (i.e., Capital) come?

In a healthy Consumer economy, most corporate revenue comes from Customers purchasing goods & services.

And from where do Customers get the $$$ to purchase goods & services? They get $$$ by selling their Labor. Because most Customers are Workers.

Capital has been driving Wages & Salaries down since 1980 without relent. In the last 40+ years, Capital has shaped U.S. economic policy, and much of the world's economic policy, to drive wages & salaries down to the absolute minimum.

These Neoliberal policies have brought us to the point where the majority of Workers, in the U.S. and throughout the world, can no longer afford to purchase the goods & services that they produce.

The wealth that used to be held by U.S. Middle Class Workers has been transferred to large multinational corporations & Private Equity.

Because so few people have enough disposable income to fully participate in the economy, producers of consumer products no longer have an incentive to invest in new & better products. The ROI isn't there. Instead, companies buy back their shares, hoard their wealth, and complain that there just aren't any investments with decent ROI.

As interest rates rise, the smaller-tier producers, who run on thinner margins, can't roll over their loans. Many of the top 2000 or 5000 companies were zombies or near-zombies to begin with. Who's going to lend their precious cash to a zombie company while the Fed keeps raising interest rates??

Neoliberal Capitalism is like a big machine where Capital extracts as much wealth as it can from Customers, pays as little as possible to Workers, and pays little or nothing to Government to build & maintain infrastructure or educate their employees. This is unsustainable. We've reached the limit of our economy's ability to sustain itself.

Since the Worker/Customer class can no longer support Capital with its purchases of goods & services, Capital has turned to a more reliable provider of funding -- the "evil" U.S. Government. Yes, the same Government that Capital has purchased and drowned in the bathtub is now seen by Capital as the Writer of Big Checks. Defense spending & Military aid go straight from U.S. Taxpayers to "Defense" contractors. The banks and the financial sector are, and will be, crying for bailouts from Uncle Sam.

The bank CEOs made so much $$$ after the 2008 crash -- with ZERO consequences -- that they're going back to the buffet once again for a generous second helping. Why wouldn't they?

Then, in July, when unemployment spikes and markets & housing prices crash, the U.S. Treasury will introduce its own Digital Currency. So if you want $$$ to pay rent or eat or survive, you'll have to be OK with having every transaction, however small, tracked.

Neoliberal Capitalism can no longer survive without massive intervention from the U.S. Government (i.e., U.S. individual taxpayers).

As it relates to Cal & CFB, we'll see some NIL commitments from donors, made in the Era of Easy Money, that won't get paid. And as the number of cable subscribers continues to decrease, and more people "cut the cable" and stream over the internet, there'll be less $$ from sponsors.

Expect a lot more pressure from universities to cut or discontinue the funding of majory college sports. There will be fewer & fewer programs for whom the athletic department cash flow is a net positive.

Until we decide to go back to economically sustainable New Deal policies that put more $$$ in the hands of Worker/Customers, and tax corporate earnings at 35% to 45%, life will be more grim for the majority of Americans, and we'll be at the mercy of the Fascists.

---

This is all true and correct except for the part where you blame it on liberals instead of conservatives.

---

Neoliberalism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

Read it, and you'll no longer be confused.

---

It's not about me. It's not about you. It's not about the definition of academic words like neoliberal. Outside a classroom everyone who reads that word just reads "liberal". You should know what you are communicating.

---

The terms "liberal" and "conservative" have become meaningless, and there's no agreement on their definition. They're more commonly used in the context of social issues, rather than economic.

The core of the "Democratic" Party is socially liberal, but decidedly Neoliberal, favoring the hegemony of Capital, the privatization of The Commons, globalization, "small government," deregulation of private enterprise, and austerity for Workers.

Continuing to confuse liberalism with Neoliberalism allows the deception to continue.

---

You will keep shooting yourself in the foot, I guess

dimitrig said:

---

So if we are going to have a recession, and the odds of a recession are pretty good given that this has pretty much been the goal of the Fed, what does a wise investor do in order to take advantage of it? I have a pretty large cash position already. Sell more securities to raise more cash? Sell puts on stocks I already have my eye on?

---

I think that most people who are students of macroeconomics & markets have by now recognized the collision course that we're on.

The problem is that investing on the short side is really tricky. There's so much short interest in equities & options that we basically go from one short squeeze to another. And Capital loves nothing more than to screw the shorts.

If you want to preserve your wealth, I recommend talking with these guys: https://mcalvany.com/wealth/

IMO, they have the best cause-&-effect understanding of what's happening & what's about to happen. The most prominent expert, Doug Noland, has been writing his Credit Bubble Bulletin since 1999. Here's his latest Weekly Commentary: http://creditbubblebulletin.blogspot.com/2023/04/weekly-commentary-animals-or-lab.html

My normal Saturday morning ritual is to listen to Doug's Weekly Commentary thru a text-to-speech app while I do my household chores. Thanks to him, I was able to warn my friends about the impending "Dot-Com Bubble" in 2000 & make a sizeable chunk of change on QQQ puts (that is, before I listened to Bob Brinker & chickened out, missing out on a 5x return).

Their Tactical Short fund is just what I'm looking for -- a managed fund set up to make $$ on the long side, when warranted, and take advantage of short squeeze dynamics, but also use short positions in specific sectors.

I also have a significant position in TZA. It's a 3x Inverse Index Fund on the Russell 2000. There are only a few corporations who are in a position to get through the coming months without taking a big hit. The rest, I believe, will get creamed.

Buy precious metals. For this, use a bullion bank like Goldmoney.com -- NOT precious metals ETFs. There are way more "paper claims" on gold & silver than physical metal to back them up.

And, as DiabloWags mentioned, "6-month T-Bills are hard to beat at 5.1%." That's true. But remember that you'll be depending on impoverished U.S. Taxpayers to come up with the $$$ to pay that T-Bill at maturity. I recently bought a 1 yr CD at 5.1%. Probably better than sitting in cash, but who knows? We'll see.

Making a paper return is one thing. Actually getting paid is another.

Strap in & brace for impact.

dimitrig said:

---

So if we are going to have a recession, and the odds of a recession are pretty good given that this has pretty much been the goal of the Fed, what does a wise investor do in order to take advantage of it? I have a pretty large cash position already. Sell more securities to raise more cash? Sell puts on stocks I already have my eye on?

---

Historically, a recession is good for U.S. Treasuries because in bad times that is where money goes to find safety. The phenomenon called "flight to safety" or "risk-off".

cbbass1 said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

So if we are going to have a recession, and the odds of a recession are pretty good given that this has pretty much been the goal of the Fed, what does a wise investor do in order to take advantage of it? I have a pretty large cash position already. Sell more securities to raise more cash? Sell puts on stocks I already have my eye on?

---

I think that most people who are students of macroeconomics & markets have by now recognized the collision course that we're on.

The problem is that investing on the short side is really tricky. There's so much short interest in equities & options that we basically go from one short squeeze to another. And Capital loves nothing more than to screw the shorts.

If you want to preserve your wealth, I recommend talking with these guys: https://mcalvany.com/wealth/

IMO, they have the best cause-&-effect understanding of what's happening & what's about to happen. The most prominent expert, Doug Noland, has been writing his Credit Bubble Bulletin since 1999. Here's his latest Weekly Commentary: http://creditbubblebulletin.blogspot.com/2023/04/weekly-commentary-animals-or-lab.html

My normal Saturday morning ritual is to listen to Doug's Weekly Commentary thru a text-to-speech app while I do my household chores. Thanks to him, I was able to warn my friends about the impending "Dot-Com Bubble" in 2000 & make a sizeable chunk of change on QQQ puts (that is, before I listened to Bob Brinker & chickened out, missing out on a 5x return).

Their Tactical Short fund is just what I'm looking for -- a managed fund set up to make $$ on the long side, when warranted, and take advantage of short squeeze dynamics, but also use short positions in specific sectors.

Buy precious metals. For this, use a bullion bank like Goldmoney.com -- NOT precious metals ETFs. There are way more "paper claims" on gold & silver than physical metal to back them up.

And, as DiabloWags mentioned, "6-month T-Bills are hard to beat at 5.1%." That's true. But remember that you'll be depending on impoverished U.S. Taxpayers to come up with the $$$ to pay that T-Bill at maturity. I recently bought a 1 yr CD at 5.1%. Probably better than sitting in cash, but who knows? We'll see.

Making a paper return is one thing. Actually getting paid is another.

Strap in & brace for impact.

---

Dude has been writing a "Credit Bubble Bulletin" since 1999?

I wonder if he realizes he is just writing about wealth inequality caused demand for assets (i.e. looking for places to loan out your big piles of cash).

Another fascinating thread.

Everyone starts off saying how horrible the GOP actions will be to the capital markets and US credit and then, as could be expected, the whole thing is about exploration of labor and labels. Can the discussion of income equality be far behind? It's like you guys can't help yourself. Diablo sits their dangling candy in front of the children.

dajo9 said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

So if we are going to have a recession, and the odds of a recession are pretty good given that this has pretty much been the goal of the Fed, what does a wise investor do in order to take advantage of it? I have a pretty large cash position already. Sell more securities to raise more cash? Sell puts on stocks I already have my eye on?

---

Historically, a recession is good for U.S. Treasuries because in bad times that is where money goes to find safety. The phenomenon called "flight to safety" or "risk-off".

---

Bonds rally during Recessions because they benefit from falling interest rates.
Not just a flight to safety.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Another fascinating thread.

Everyone starts off saying how horrible the GOP actions with be to the capital markets and US credit and then, as could be expected, the whole thing is about exploration of labor and labels. Can the discussion of income equality be far behind? It's like you guys can't help yourself. Diablo sits their dangling candy in front of the children.

---

Bingo.
The income inequality discussion will start in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Another fascinating thread.

Everyone starts off saying how horrible the GOP actions with be to the capital markets and US credit and then, as could be expected, the whole thing is about exploration of labor and labels. Can the discussion of income equality be far behind? It's like you guys can't help yourself. Diablo sits their dangling candy in front of the children.

---

The Credit Bubble, and the unsustainable policies that go with it, have come to us with bipartisan support. Both political parties have embraced it and profited from it handsomely.

It's better to ignore the "good cop / bad cop" discourse between the political parties, and recognize it for what it is: a vain attempt to distract U.S. Worker/Customers from the fact that they've been getting screwed, and that it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better -- IF it ever does.

Of course, the parties blame each other for everything that's wrong with the economy, without acknowledging their own part. This is the way that Capital ensures that Labor will continue to be divided. This is the primary mission of mainstream/corporate media. Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and even NPR support the Neoliberal status quo, while any challenge to the corporate narratives is swiftly persecuted, and its messengers shot.

cbbass1 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Another fascinating thread.

Everyone starts off saying how horrible the GOP actions with be to the capital markets and US credit and then, as could be expected, the whole thing is about exploration of labor and labels. Can the discussion of income equality be far behind? It's like you guys can't help yourself. Diablo sits their dangling candy in front of the children.

---

The Credit Bubble, and the unsustainable policies that go with it, have come to us with bipartisan support. Both political parties have embraced it and profited from it handsomely.

It's better to ignore the "good cop / bad cop" discourse between the political parties, and recognize it for what it is: a vain attempt to distract U.S. Worker/Customers from the fact that they've been getting screwed, and that it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better -- IF it ever does.

Of course, the parties blame each other for everything that's wrong with the economy, without acknowledging their own part. This is the way that Capital ensures that Labor will continue to be divided. This is the primary mission of mainstream/corporate media. Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and even NPR support the Neoliberal status quo, while any challenge to the corporate narratives is swiftly persecuted, and its messengers shot.

---

Corporate news is definitely a supporter of the conservative policies we've had since Reagan. The Republican Party exists to perpetuate these policies. The Democratic Party is corrupted by this money as well, but any useful effort to combat this legacy comes from the Democratic Party, which has consistently tried to raise taxes on the wealthy and expand benefits for people. I wish the Democratic Party would do more and I push the Democratic Party in that direction.

DiabloWags said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Another fascinating thread.

Everyone starts off saying how horrible the GOP actions with be to the capital markets and US credit and then, as could be expected, the whole thing is about exploration of labor and labels. Can the discussion of income equality be far behind? It's like you guys can't help yourself. Diablo sits their dangling candy in front of the children.

---

Bingo.
The income inequality discussion will start in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1.

---

You guys are missing the point here.

The fairness or unfairness of income inequality are irrelevant. The mechanisms of it, and the politics of it, are irrelevant. There's no need to discuss it if you don't want to.

But what IS relevant is the collapse of Aggregate Demand. What happens when the vast majority of Worker/Customers can't afford to purchase the goods & services that they used to?

Whatever your political & economic views are, it's easy to see that the collapse of Aggregate Demand isn't good for businesses.

But that's exactly where Capital and policymakers are taking us, no?

BTW, this is exactly where we were after the October, 1929 market crash. Nobody had money to spend. The banks collapsed. The few who were wealthy bought up the assets of those who needed cash to survive. No reason to expect anything different this time.

So if you're Jamie Dimon or Jeff Bezos, you're probably looking forward to some bargain-hunting, and expanding your asset base for pennies on the dollar. But for everyone else, it's going to be a wipeout, with millions suffering and dying worldwide. And none of these guys care in the least.

"I want my fair share -- and that's all of it."
-- Charles Koch - oligarch / oil billionaire / co-founder of the Cato Institute / huuge donor to Americans for Prosperity, American Enterprise Institute, Ayn Rand Institute, Pacific Legal Foundation, and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)

cbbass1 said:

---

If you want to preserve your wealth, I recommend talking with these guys: https://mcalvany.com/wealth/

IMO, they have the best cause-&-effect understanding of what's happening & what's about to happen. The most prominent expert, Doug Noland, has been writing his Credit Bubble Bulletin since 1999. Here's his latest Weekly Commentary: http://creditbubblebulletin.blogspot.com/2023/04/weekly-commentary-animals-or-lab.html

My normal Saturday morning ritual is to listen to Doug's Weekly Commentary thru a text-to-speech app while I do my household chores. Thanks to him, I was able to warn my friends about the impending "Dot-Com Bubble" in 2000 & make a sizeable chunk of change on QQQ puts (that is, before I listened to Bob Brinker & chickened out, missing out on a 5x return).

Their Tactical Short fund is just what I'm looking for -- a managed fund set up to make $$ on the long side, when warranted, and take advantage of short squeeze dynamics, but also use short positions in specific sectors.

I also have a significant position in TZA. It's a 3x Inverse Index Fund on the Russell 2000. There are only a few corporations who are in a position to get through the coming months without taking a big hit. The rest, I believe, will get creamed.

---

Here's my point . . .

Even though Doug Nolan has grey hair, he's only been involved in the financial markets for 25 years. That's not a very long time in my opinion, and I say that as someone that was actively trading stock-options in between my undergrad classes at Cal in 1981.

In Q4 of last year, Nolan's fund lost 5.1% while the S&P gained 7.55%.
In Q1, it registered a 5.41% loss while the S&P registered a return gain of 7.48%
One year performance for Nolan's Fund is a gain of 5.27% vs -7.76% for the S&P.

I'm sorry, but if you're going to talk about a short-seller that knows what theyre doing and one whom you've called a prominent expert - - - then they better show performance that exceeds the decline in the S&P when the S&P heads south.

Interestingly enough, for the last six months, he's down 10.5% vs +15% for the S&P.

That tells me that he never really gets long and is primarily a Perma Bear. His short-exposure over the last six months of between 79% - 76% would seem to suggest that . . . so does his resume, which shows a 6 year stint at the Prudent Bear Fund along with 8 years with noted Perma Bear David Tice.

The fee on this Tactical Short fund is 1% annually.

Do you have the minimum investment in this Fund of $100,000?
How old are you?

DiabloWags said:

---

cbbass1 said:

---

If you want to preserve your wealth, I recommend talking with these guys: https://mcalvany.com/wealth/

IMO, they have the best cause-&-effect understanding of what's happening & what's about to happen. The most prominent expert, Doug Noland, has been writing his Credit Bubble Bulletin since 1999. Here's his latest Weekly Commentary: http://creditbubblebulletin.blogspot.com/2023/04/weekly-commentary-animals-or-lab.html

My normal Saturday morning ritual is to listen to Doug's Weekly Commentary thru a text-to-speech app while I do my household chores. Thanks to him, I was able to warn my friends about the impending "Dot-Com Bubble" in 2000 & make a sizeable chunk of change on QQQ puts (that is, before I listened to Bob Brinker & chickened out, missing out on a 5x return).

Their Tactical Short fund is just what I'm looking for -- a managed fund set up to make $$ on the long side, when warranted, and take advantage of short squeeze dynamics, but also use short positions in specific sectors.

I also have a significant position in TZA. It's a 3x Inverse Index Fund on the Russell 2000. There are only a few corporations who are in a position to get through the coming months without taking a big hit. The rest, I believe, will get creamed.

---

Here's my point . . .

Even though Doug Nolan has grey hair, he's only been involved in the financial markets for 25 years. That's not a very long time in my opinion, and I say that as someone that was actively trading stock-options in between my undergrad classes at Cal in 1981.

In Q4 of last year, Nolan's fund lost 5.1% while the S&P gained 7.55%.
In Q1, it registered a 5.41% loss while the S&P registered a return gain of 7.48%
One year performance for Nolan's Fund is a gain of 5.27% vs -7.76% for the S&P.

I'm sorry, but if you're going to talk about a short-seller that knows what theyre doing and one whom you've called a prominent expert - - - then they better show performance that exceeds the decline in the S&P when the S&P heads south.

Interestingly enough, for the last six months, he's down 10.5% vs +15% for the S&P.

That tells me that he never really gets long and is primarily a Perma Bear. His short-exposure over the last six months of between 79% - 76% would seem to suggest that . . . so does his resume, which shows a 6 year stint at the Prudent Bear Fund along with 8 years with noted Perma Bear David Tice.

The fee on this Tactical Short fund is 1% annually.

Do you have the minimum investment in this Fund of $100,000?
How old are you?

---

I'm old enough to have made close to 7 figures from Tice & Noland's Prudent Bear Fund back in the 2008 crash. Didn't sell when "Helicopter Ben" Bernanke put the printing presses into overdrive, though...

I don't think it's possible to be positioned for massive gains when the bubble bursts, but still enjoy returns that are comparable to the longs when the markets go up.

That said, I hadn't checked into their recent returns. For what that fund purports to be, those returns are disappointing. Thanks for the research & comparison.

cbbass said:

---

I don't think it's possible to be positioned for massive gains when the bubble bursts, but still enjoy returns that are comparable to the longs when the markets go up.

That said, I hadn't checked into their recent returns. For what that fund purports to be, those returns are disappointing. Thanks for the research & comparison.

---

I'd say they're terribly disappointing.
I had a hard time understanding why you were promoting it.
Might as well put your money in a six-month T-Bill at 5.1% with no state and local taxes or the 1% fee that Nolan charges.

Let me ask you something, how long do you expect to hold the TZA?
How long have you been holding your current position?

cbbass1 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

.

---

You guys are missing the point here.

The fairness or unfairness of income inequality are irrelevant. The mechanisms of it, and the politics of it, are irrelevant. There's no need to discuss it if you don't want to.

But what IS relevant is the collapse of Aggregate Demand. What happens when the vast majority of Worker/Customers can't afford to purchase the goods & services that they used to?

Whatever your political & economic views are, it's easy to see that the collapse of Aggregate Demand isn't good for businesses.

But that's exactly where Capital and policymakers are taking us, no?

BTW, this is exactly where we were after the October, 1929 market crash. Nobody had money to spend. The banks collapsed. The few who were wealthy bought up the assets of those who needed cash to survive. No reason to expect anything different this time.

So if you're Jamie Dimon or Jeff Bezos, you're probably looking forward to some bargain-hunting, and expanding your asset base for pennies on the dollar. But for everyone else, it's going to be a wipeout, with millions suffering and dying worldwide. And none of these guys care in the least.

"I want my fair share -- and that's all of it."
-- Charles Koch - oligarch / oil billionaire / co-founder of the Cato Institute / huuge donor to Americans for Prosperity, American Enterprise Institute, Ayn Rand Institute, Pacific Legal Foundation, and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)

---

Okay, you say income inequality doesn't matter. Nor do politics or media, etc. What matters is what is in bold.

Let's play your game:

Literally from the FED website:

"Aggregate Demand represents the total demand for these goods and services at any given price level during the specified period. Aggregate Demand eventually equals gross domestic product (GDP) because the two metrics are calculated in the same way. As a result, aggregate demand and GDP increase or decrease together."

So during this horrible period of capital smashing labor, show me when Aggregate Demand (which the governmet calculates as GDP) has shrunk so dramatically? Show everyone still reading this thread, the starting GDP level when labor starting losing out and where it is now as this rape of labor continues. I think you are going to find Aggregate Demand is pretty robust during the period.

cbbass1 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Another fascinating thread.

Everyone starts off saying how horrible the GOP actions with be to the capital markets and US credit and then, as could be expected, the whole thing is about exploration of labor and labels. Can the discussion of income equality be far behind? It's like you guys can't help yourself. Diablo sits their dangling candy in front of the children.

---

Bingo.
The income inequality discussion will start in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1.

---

You guys are missing the point here.

The fairness or unfairness of income inequality are irrelevant. The mechanisms of it, and the politics of it, are irrelevant. There's no need to discuss it if you don't want to.

But what IS relevant is the collapse of Aggregate Demand. What happens when the vast majority of Worker/Customers can't afford to purchase the goods & services that they used to?

Whatever your political & economic views are, it's easy to see that the collapse of Aggregate Demand isn't good for businesses.

But that's exactly where Capital and policymakers are taking us, no?

BTW, this is exactly where we were after the October, 1929 market crash. Nobody had money to spend. The banks collapsed. The few who were wealthy bought up the assets of those who needed cash to survive. No reason to expect anything different this time.

So if you're Jamie Dimon or Jeff Bezos, you're probably looking forward to some bargain-hunting, and expanding your asset base for pennies on the dollar. But for everyone else, it's going to be a wipeout, with millions suffering and dying worldwide. And none of these guys care in the least.

"I want my fair share -- and that's all of it."
-- Charles Koch - oligarch / oil billionaire / co-founder of the Cato Institute / huuge donor to Americans for Prosperity, American Enterprise Institute, Ayn Rand Institute, Pacific Legal Foundation, and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)

---

You can't really compare to 1929. The social safety net is far stronger than it was then.

cbbass1 said:

---

BTW, this is exactly where we were after the October, 1929 market crash. Nobody had money to spend. The banks collapsed. The few who were wealthy bought up the assets of those who needed cash to survive. No reason to expect anything different this time.

---

In a previous post, you've said that the economy and stock market will "crash" worse than 2008.
How low do you see the S&P going this year?
And why?

Former NY Fed President Bill Dudley weighs in on the Debt-Ceiling.

This link is a "gift" from yours truly.
Will be valid for 7 days.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2023-05-02/this-debt-limit-standoff-could-be-really-disastrous?accessToken=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJzb3VyY2UiOiJTdWJzY3JpYmVyR2lmdGVkQXJ0aWNsZSIsImlhdCI6MTY4MzEzMjQxOSwiZXhwIjoxNjgzNzM3MjE5LCJhcnRpY2xlSWQiOiJSVTBYMDZEV1gyUFMwMSIsImJjb25uZWN0SWQiOiI0QTE0NjgyRTVEQjI0RDgyOEVGOTIxMzA1M0U4NzhDMiJ9.P1Uncc0DLvg2oTjxGzeMuNrzbfyuW_N3cCsHTZSS2_Q

This place is wild …

While we wait for CB's nut job analysis as to why Aggregate Demand keeps increasing, here is something on topic of the debt ceiling:

The Debt Ceiling and False EquivalenceThe New York Timeshttps://www.nytimes.com 2023/05/03 briefing debt...

DiabloWags said:

---

Spending on seniors will reach 100% of federal tax revenues by 2040 based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, including interest expense.

Interestingly enough, the current $31 trillion US debt load doesn't account for future entitlement payments. Accounting for the present value of that burden, the debt load is more like $200 trillion.

Clearly, the big issue is entitlements such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, which without cuts today will have to be slashed in the future.

As Stanley Druckenmiller pointed out the other day in a speech at the USC Business School, worrying over the debt-ceiling is kind of like obsessing over a 30' wave that is about to hit the Santa Monica Pier, when there is a 200' wave just 10 miles offshore.

Druckenmiller says that he this current debt situation is much worse than he had previously imagined 10 years ago.

---

The combination of people retiring younger and people living longer creates an unsustainable situation. I wish I had a solution. One option is to encourage more immigration. Given the Republicans opposition to illegal immigration maybe a compromise solution is making legal immigration much easier.

However, it is not clear if immigration will solve the problem or if immigrants will end up using more than their share of social services as well when, for example, their parents are also allowed to migrate.

My parents are all on Medicare and while it is a wonderful program there aren't really any checks and balances to make sure they pay their fair share. One parent has been in and out of the hospital for anxiety mainly (keeps going to the ER every time there are heart palpitations despite a cardiologist giving the all clear) and each time the bill is thousands of dollars, sometimes tens of thousands. The out of pocket is nothing.

As a taxpayer I am not happy at this abuse of the system. There has to be a way to force a reimbursement of that medical
care or else make it a lot cheaper. The same is true for nursing homes. The government pays way more money to put someone in a home than to provide the care they need at their own home. There is a realization of this but change is slow. My parent would be a lot better off hiring a caregiver from a third world country under the table - and many people do that. It would be cheaper, too. It isn't legal but maybe there is a compromise.

Can we ship all of our elderly to India sort of like the British shipped their prisoners to Australia? Maybe a Logan's Run style euthanasia at a certain age? (I kid.)