Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Seen on money.cnn.com: BREAKING NEWS – Stocks tumbled, Dow shedding over 100 points
- This topic has 75 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 5 months ago by
trex.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 27, 2008 at 9:00 PM #177715March 27, 2008 at 9:28 PM #177746
Diego Mamani
ParticipantFed running out of money? Worrying about inflation only if certain condition is met? Sleeping in cash keeps you calm?
1. The Fed pretty much “prints” money. It’ll never run out of it! The Fed and the Treasury are happily injecting liquidity to bail out the markets. Buying toxic mortgage paper or guaranteeing (with our taxpayer dollars) $29 billion of Bear Sterns iffy assets are two examples of how the Fed is injecting liquidity by the truckload.
2. I’m already worried about inflation, regardless of Dow level.
3. How can you sleep soundly having your assets in cash? Unless your cash is in euros, your dollar stash is shrinking by the week thanks to (1) above. The more money is created, the less value it has. That we need more and more dollars to buy corn, soy, wheat, gold, silver, oil, than only a year ago is proof of the shrinking value of the greenback.
March 27, 2008 at 9:28 PM #177731Diego Mamani
ParticipantFed running out of money? Worrying about inflation only if certain condition is met? Sleeping in cash keeps you calm?
1. The Fed pretty much “prints” money. It’ll never run out of it! The Fed and the Treasury are happily injecting liquidity to bail out the markets. Buying toxic mortgage paper or guaranteeing (with our taxpayer dollars) $29 billion of Bear Sterns iffy assets are two examples of how the Fed is injecting liquidity by the truckload.
2. I’m already worried about inflation, regardless of Dow level.
3. How can you sleep soundly having your assets in cash? Unless your cash is in euros, your dollar stash is shrinking by the week thanks to (1) above. The more money is created, the less value it has. That we need more and more dollars to buy corn, soy, wheat, gold, silver, oil, than only a year ago is proof of the shrinking value of the greenback.
March 27, 2008 at 9:28 PM #177739Diego Mamani
ParticipantFed running out of money? Worrying about inflation only if certain condition is met? Sleeping in cash keeps you calm?
1. The Fed pretty much “prints” money. It’ll never run out of it! The Fed and the Treasury are happily injecting liquidity to bail out the markets. Buying toxic mortgage paper or guaranteeing (with our taxpayer dollars) $29 billion of Bear Sterns iffy assets are two examples of how the Fed is injecting liquidity by the truckload.
2. I’m already worried about inflation, regardless of Dow level.
3. How can you sleep soundly having your assets in cash? Unless your cash is in euros, your dollar stash is shrinking by the week thanks to (1) above. The more money is created, the less value it has. That we need more and more dollars to buy corn, soy, wheat, gold, silver, oil, than only a year ago is proof of the shrinking value of the greenback.
March 27, 2008 at 9:28 PM #177834Diego Mamani
ParticipantFed running out of money? Worrying about inflation only if certain condition is met? Sleeping in cash keeps you calm?
1. The Fed pretty much “prints” money. It’ll never run out of it! The Fed and the Treasury are happily injecting liquidity to bail out the markets. Buying toxic mortgage paper or guaranteeing (with our taxpayer dollars) $29 billion of Bear Sterns iffy assets are two examples of how the Fed is injecting liquidity by the truckload.
2. I’m already worried about inflation, regardless of Dow level.
3. How can you sleep soundly having your assets in cash? Unless your cash is in euros, your dollar stash is shrinking by the week thanks to (1) above. The more money is created, the less value it has. That we need more and more dollars to buy corn, soy, wheat, gold, silver, oil, than only a year ago is proof of the shrinking value of the greenback.
March 27, 2008 at 9:28 PM #177378Diego Mamani
ParticipantFed running out of money? Worrying about inflation only if certain condition is met? Sleeping in cash keeps you calm?
1. The Fed pretty much “prints” money. It’ll never run out of it! The Fed and the Treasury are happily injecting liquidity to bail out the markets. Buying toxic mortgage paper or guaranteeing (with our taxpayer dollars) $29 billion of Bear Sterns iffy assets are two examples of how the Fed is injecting liquidity by the truckload.
2. I’m already worried about inflation, regardless of Dow level.
3. How can you sleep soundly having your assets in cash? Unless your cash is in euros, your dollar stash is shrinking by the week thanks to (1) above. The more money is created, the less value it has. That we need more and more dollars to buy corn, soy, wheat, gold, silver, oil, than only a year ago is proof of the shrinking value of the greenback.
March 27, 2008 at 9:30 PM #177839trex
ParticipantAnybody notice how CNNFN/Money is running all sorts of sob stories about dumb asses that got into financial trouble? Unemployment isn’t up THAT much yet, but either they are pushing the economy because it sells and people are worried, or they have a political agenda and are trying to make the Pres race just about the economy and how we need gov’t intervention.
March 27, 2008 at 9:30 PM #177751trex
ParticipantAnybody notice how CNNFN/Money is running all sorts of sob stories about dumb asses that got into financial trouble? Unemployment isn’t up THAT much yet, but either they are pushing the economy because it sells and people are worried, or they have a political agenda and are trying to make the Pres race just about the economy and how we need gov’t intervention.
March 27, 2008 at 9:30 PM #177383trex
ParticipantAnybody notice how CNNFN/Money is running all sorts of sob stories about dumb asses that got into financial trouble? Unemployment isn’t up THAT much yet, but either they are pushing the economy because it sells and people are worried, or they have a political agenda and are trying to make the Pres race just about the economy and how we need gov’t intervention.
March 27, 2008 at 9:30 PM #177744trex
ParticipantAnybody notice how CNNFN/Money is running all sorts of sob stories about dumb asses that got into financial trouble? Unemployment isn’t up THAT much yet, but either they are pushing the economy because it sells and people are worried, or they have a political agenda and are trying to make the Pres race just about the economy and how we need gov’t intervention.
March 27, 2008 at 9:30 PM #177735trex
ParticipantAnybody notice how CNNFN/Money is running all sorts of sob stories about dumb asses that got into financial trouble? Unemployment isn’t up THAT much yet, but either they are pushing the economy because it sells and people are worried, or they have a political agenda and are trying to make the Pres race just about the economy and how we need gov’t intervention.
March 27, 2008 at 9:38 PM #177393Diego Mamani
ParticipantTrex: Have you read today’s front page WSJ article on the recent government interventions?
I agree that the financial media outlets are asking for or applauding the current bailouts. The extract below suggests that since falling house prices are the root of the problem, then we need more government intervention to keep prices up. We know that real (inflation-adjusted) house prices can’t go anywhere but down. However, nominal prices may not drop if inflation is high enough, and that can easily be achieved injecting more liquidity into the system, as is already happening.
Is it enough? Probably not. Although it’s hard to know, the downward tug on the overall economy from falling house prices persists. The next step, if one proves necessary, is almost sure to require the explicit use of taxpayer money.
The case for doing more is twofold. One is to cushion the blow to families and communities, even if some are culpable. The other is to disrupt a dangerous downward spiral in which falling prices of houses and mortgage-backed securities lead lenders to pull back, hurting the economy and dragging asset prices down further, and so on.
March 27, 2008 at 9:38 PM #177849Diego Mamani
ParticipantTrex: Have you read today’s front page WSJ article on the recent government interventions?
I agree that the financial media outlets are asking for or applauding the current bailouts. The extract below suggests that since falling house prices are the root of the problem, then we need more government intervention to keep prices up. We know that real (inflation-adjusted) house prices can’t go anywhere but down. However, nominal prices may not drop if inflation is high enough, and that can easily be achieved injecting more liquidity into the system, as is already happening.
Is it enough? Probably not. Although it’s hard to know, the downward tug on the overall economy from falling house prices persists. The next step, if one proves necessary, is almost sure to require the explicit use of taxpayer money.
The case for doing more is twofold. One is to cushion the blow to families and communities, even if some are culpable. The other is to disrupt a dangerous downward spiral in which falling prices of houses and mortgage-backed securities lead lenders to pull back, hurting the economy and dragging asset prices down further, and so on.
March 27, 2008 at 9:38 PM #177745Diego Mamani
ParticipantTrex: Have you read today’s front page WSJ article on the recent government interventions?
I agree that the financial media outlets are asking for or applauding the current bailouts. The extract below suggests that since falling house prices are the root of the problem, then we need more government intervention to keep prices up. We know that real (inflation-adjusted) house prices can’t go anywhere but down. However, nominal prices may not drop if inflation is high enough, and that can easily be achieved injecting more liquidity into the system, as is already happening.
Is it enough? Probably not. Although it’s hard to know, the downward tug on the overall economy from falling house prices persists. The next step, if one proves necessary, is almost sure to require the explicit use of taxpayer money.
The case for doing more is twofold. One is to cushion the blow to families and communities, even if some are culpable. The other is to disrupt a dangerous downward spiral in which falling prices of houses and mortgage-backed securities lead lenders to pull back, hurting the economy and dragging asset prices down further, and so on.
March 27, 2008 at 9:38 PM #177754Diego Mamani
ParticipantTrex: Have you read today’s front page WSJ article on the recent government interventions?
I agree that the financial media outlets are asking for or applauding the current bailouts. The extract below suggests that since falling house prices are the root of the problem, then we need more government intervention to keep prices up. We know that real (inflation-adjusted) house prices can’t go anywhere but down. However, nominal prices may not drop if inflation is high enough, and that can easily be achieved injecting more liquidity into the system, as is already happening.
Is it enough? Probably not. Although it’s hard to know, the downward tug on the overall economy from falling house prices persists. The next step, if one proves necessary, is almost sure to require the explicit use of taxpayer money.
The case for doing more is twofold. One is to cushion the blow to families and communities, even if some are culpable. The other is to disrupt a dangerous downward spiral in which falling prices of houses and mortgage-backed securities lead lenders to pull back, hurting the economy and dragging asset prices down further, and so on.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.