Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 18, 2009 at 4:18 PM in reply to: Dont even thing of messing with veterans health benefits #369447
equalizer
ParticipantEven the “shill” Jon Stewart was bashing the admin:
This guy has become the defacto populist, you don’t want to be in his cross hairs.March 18, 2009 at 4:18 PM in reply to: Dont even thing of messing with veterans health benefits #369733ParticipantEven the “shill” Jon Stewart was bashing the admin:
This guy has become the defacto populist, you don’t want to be in his cross hairs.March 18, 2009 at 4:18 PM in reply to: Dont even thing of messing with veterans health benefits #369900ParticipantEven the “shill” Jon Stewart was bashing the admin:
This guy has become the defacto populist, you don’t want to be in his cross hairs.March 18, 2009 at 4:18 PM in reply to: Dont even thing of messing with veterans health benefits #369941ParticipantEven the “shill” Jon Stewart was bashing the admin:
This guy has become the defacto populist, you don’t want to be in his cross hairs.March 18, 2009 at 4:18 PM in reply to: Dont even thing of messing with veterans health benefits #370057ParticipantEven the “shill” Jon Stewart was bashing the admin:
This guy has become the defacto populist, you don’t want to be in his cross hairs.ParticipantJust another lonely voice:
“We are not, however, convinced of the sustainability of the Treasury rally (ten-year yields fell about 50 basis points in response to the news — very similar to the move in the gilt market). However, the scale of the Fed’s proposed purchases of Treasuries (relative to the size of the debt and the deficit) is much smaller than the Bank of England’s purchase (it would have had to be well above $1 trillion to be comparable). In addition, we are not convinced that we are headed for deflation and we worry about the longer-term inflation implications of these purchases. “–RDQ Economics
Hey RDQ, what makes you think Ben wont double/triple down to $1 trillion?
The more the feds spend, the more worried Americans should be and the more they should save.
ParticipantJust another lonely voice:
“We are not, however, convinced of the sustainability of the Treasury rally (ten-year yields fell about 50 basis points in response to the news — very similar to the move in the gilt market). However, the scale of the Fed’s proposed purchases of Treasuries (relative to the size of the debt and the deficit) is much smaller than the Bank of England’s purchase (it would have had to be well above $1 trillion to be comparable). In addition, we are not convinced that we are headed for deflation and we worry about the longer-term inflation implications of these purchases. “–RDQ Economics
Hey RDQ, what makes you think Ben wont double/triple down to $1 trillion?
The more the feds spend, the more worried Americans should be and the more they should save.
ParticipantJust another lonely voice:
“We are not, however, convinced of the sustainability of the Treasury rally (ten-year yields fell about 50 basis points in response to the news — very similar to the move in the gilt market). However, the scale of the Fed’s proposed purchases of Treasuries (relative to the size of the debt and the deficit) is much smaller than the Bank of England’s purchase (it would have had to be well above $1 trillion to be comparable). In addition, we are not convinced that we are headed for deflation and we worry about the longer-term inflation implications of these purchases. “–RDQ Economics
Hey RDQ, what makes you think Ben wont double/triple down to $1 trillion?
The more the feds spend, the more worried Americans should be and the more they should save.
ParticipantJust another lonely voice:
“We are not, however, convinced of the sustainability of the Treasury rally (ten-year yields fell about 50 basis points in response to the news — very similar to the move in the gilt market). However, the scale of the Fed’s proposed purchases of Treasuries (relative to the size of the debt and the deficit) is much smaller than the Bank of England’s purchase (it would have had to be well above $1 trillion to be comparable). In addition, we are not convinced that we are headed for deflation and we worry about the longer-term inflation implications of these purchases. “–RDQ Economics
Hey RDQ, what makes you think Ben wont double/triple down to $1 trillion?
The more the feds spend, the more worried Americans should be and the more they should save.
ParticipantJust another lonely voice:
“We are not, however, convinced of the sustainability of the Treasury rally (ten-year yields fell about 50 basis points in response to the news — very similar to the move in the gilt market). However, the scale of the Fed’s proposed purchases of Treasuries (relative to the size of the debt and the deficit) is much smaller than the Bank of England’s purchase (it would have had to be well above $1 trillion to be comparable). In addition, we are not convinced that we are headed for deflation and we worry about the longer-term inflation implications of these purchases. “–RDQ Economics
Hey RDQ, what makes you think Ben wont double/triple down to $1 trillion?
The more the feds spend, the more worried Americans should be and the more they should save.
Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]After the largest single day upmove in price in history, the rates out to be a helluva lot lower tomorrow, 8 full points in 15 minutes. For those of you who do not trade what happened today is impossible to overexaggerate how big of a move that is, beyond belief. In the old days the daily maximum limit used to be 2 points and was rarely ever hit. 8 points in a year would be a great year trading bonds, 15 minutes is insane.
Lenders might be in shock and may wait to see if that sticks, they did settle down some off the highs.[/quote]
Chris, I’m sure you saw the Bloomberg article (Mon) about the UK Govt gild purchases lowering mortgage rates and how that may give ammo to Feds here to do the same thing. My question, besides how stupid I was not to trade, is why did bond traders not anticipate it even a little bit? I mean it was front and center on website, or do traders ignore musings of lowly reporters?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=af81EoUv7m24&refer=europe
The should be lower, but 10 year was under 2.1% in Dec, but mortgage rates didn’t go below 4.5%, so why should they go lower than Dec rate? Because Fed pumping into Fannie/Freddie?
There will be a tidal wave of refi’s today and the next month. Banks have so much business, they do not need to lower rates all the way down to match requisite T-bond drop. I have seen this over the last few months. As soon as there was a huge drop, refis skyrocketed for a day and then banks jacked up rates for what appeared to be supply/demand issues, not market rates. There will such backlog from underwriters and such that typical 30 day lock periods will expire. Stay with reputable lenders who will anticipate this problem.
Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]After the largest single day upmove in price in history, the rates out to be a helluva lot lower tomorrow, 8 full points in 15 minutes. For those of you who do not trade what happened today is impossible to overexaggerate how big of a move that is, beyond belief. In the old days the daily maximum limit used to be 2 points and was rarely ever hit. 8 points in a year would be a great year trading bonds, 15 minutes is insane.
Lenders might be in shock and may wait to see if that sticks, they did settle down some off the highs.[/quote]
Chris, I’m sure you saw the Bloomberg article (Mon) about the UK Govt gild purchases lowering mortgage rates and how that may give ammo to Feds here to do the same thing. My question, besides how stupid I was not to trade, is why did bond traders not anticipate it even a little bit? I mean it was front and center on website, or do traders ignore musings of lowly reporters?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=af81EoUv7m24&refer=europe
The should be lower, but 10 year was under 2.1% in Dec, but mortgage rates didn’t go below 4.5%, so why should they go lower than Dec rate? Because Fed pumping into Fannie/Freddie?
There will be a tidal wave of refi’s today and the next month. Banks have so much business, they do not need to lower rates all the way down to match requisite T-bond drop. I have seen this over the last few months. As soon as there was a huge drop, refis skyrocketed for a day and then banks jacked up rates for what appeared to be supply/demand issues, not market rates. There will such backlog from underwriters and such that typical 30 day lock periods will expire. Stay with reputable lenders who will anticipate this problem.
Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]After the largest single day upmove in price in history, the rates out to be a helluva lot lower tomorrow, 8 full points in 15 minutes. For those of you who do not trade what happened today is impossible to overexaggerate how big of a move that is, beyond belief. In the old days the daily maximum limit used to be 2 points and was rarely ever hit. 8 points in a year would be a great year trading bonds, 15 minutes is insane.
Lenders might be in shock and may wait to see if that sticks, they did settle down some off the highs.[/quote]
Chris, I’m sure you saw the Bloomberg article (Mon) about the UK Govt gild purchases lowering mortgage rates and how that may give ammo to Feds here to do the same thing. My question, besides how stupid I was not to trade, is why did bond traders not anticipate it even a little bit? I mean it was front and center on website, or do traders ignore musings of lowly reporters?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=af81EoUv7m24&refer=europe
The should be lower, but 10 year was under 2.1% in Dec, but mortgage rates didn’t go below 4.5%, so why should they go lower than Dec rate? Because Fed pumping into Fannie/Freddie?
There will be a tidal wave of refi’s today and the next month. Banks have so much business, they do not need to lower rates all the way down to match requisite T-bond drop. I have seen this over the last few months. As soon as there was a huge drop, refis skyrocketed for a day and then banks jacked up rates for what appeared to be supply/demand issues, not market rates. There will such backlog from underwriters and such that typical 30 day lock periods will expire. Stay with reputable lenders who will anticipate this problem.
Participant[quote=Chris Scoreboard Johnston]After the largest single day upmove in price in history, the rates out to be a helluva lot lower tomorrow, 8 full points in 15 minutes. For those of you who do not trade what happened today is impossible to overexaggerate how big of a move that is, beyond belief. In the old days the daily maximum limit used to be 2 points and was rarely ever hit. 8 points in a year would be a great year trading bonds, 15 minutes is insane.
Lenders might be in shock and may wait to see if that sticks, they did settle down some off the highs.[/quote]
Chris, I’m sure you saw the Bloomberg article (Mon) about the UK Govt gild purchases lowering mortgage rates and how that may give ammo to Feds here to do the same thing. My question, besides how stupid I was not to trade, is why did bond traders not anticipate it even a little bit? I mean it was front and center on website, or do traders ignore musings of lowly reporters?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=af81EoUv7m24&refer=europe
The should be lower, but 10 year was under 2.1% in Dec, but mortgage rates didn’t go below 4.5%, so why should they go lower than Dec rate? Because Fed pumping into Fannie/Freddie?
There will be a tidal wave of refi’s today and the next month. Banks have so much business, they do not need to lower rates all the way down to match requisite T-bond drop. I have seen this over the last few months. As soon as there was a huge drop, refis skyrocketed for a day and then banks jacked up rates for what appeared to be supply/demand issues, not market rates. There will such backlog from underwriters and such that typical 30 day lock periods will expire. Stay with reputable lenders who will anticipate this problem.
-
AuthorPosts
