That's a movie quote in a quite likeable, witty, and at times heart rending movie with Jack Nickolson: (/)
But the quote is eminently applicable to the US treasury 10 Year rate shown above: indeed, what if the multiyear trade wind brought by the Central Bank Eudoxus is about to blow against the ship?(/)
In part, that is more than understandable, since contrary to what Apostasy says in various venues, there is indeed a Zero Lower Bound: there is no <expletive> way where it's possible to rationally part with possession of money and be inclined to PAY for that.(/)
When it happens, it's not because some exotic branch of math, statistics or economic theory broke new ground: rather, laws have been twisted or ignored in order to make it happen by force.(/)
Now the question is, what's the optimal path for the common good? shall we have rates slide up, stay constantly low as in Japan, or engage in collective folly and try to push all rates in negative territory?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It has to be reminded that it did NOT work on #HongKong, where the main driver was treaty expiration, NOT Chinese pressure. Even there, economic, political and military considerations made it unpalatable.(/)
Yet treaty duly expired, since there was no way for the UK to act otherwise. If anything, what should worry #Taiwan is NOT #China. It's #Germany, which is turning into a sort of Neutral player whose goal is to displease no one.(/)
However, Since Germany is #Europe's bank it has a disproportionate influence on policy, hence the soft touch with Russia, China, Turkey, Iran, you name it. Any country where bosses have an Iron hand on trade issues get treated well.(/)
If you are an established company with a medium to big balance sheet, you not only can afford the paperwork (internal ratings, anyone?), but YOUR risk premium is compressed by Central Banks.(/)
Meanwhile, smaller companies and prospective new entrants cannot and will not find funding, since at that earlier stage there is a level of "funding cost incompressibility" given the risks involved.(/)
Dopo, dovrò continuare la mia settimana con adempimenti senza senso. E lui vuole "assumere i giovani migliori" (/)
Forse, e dico forse, potrebbero cominciare dal fare un paio di modifiche. Una, scrivere un bel #DL che renda non punibile il cittadino che ignori qualunque richiesta di dati già in possesso della #PA (/)
In più, c'è un problema "negoziale": se sei un imprenditore come @recifar , ed hai seguito la polemica su VDL - Gallina - Vaccini, hai due impressioni: 1. questi sono burocrati fissi nel presente; 2. quando sbraitano dopo urlano "penali" e se la prendono con te.(/)
Ora, ADESSO c'è un problema di scarso numero di VACCINATI. ed i politici strepitano per avere più vaccini, ma quello che secondo me Renato, @carloalberto@AlfonsoFuggetta , e tanti altri amici che stimo pensano è: (/)
"Questi vorrebbero avere ORA tanti vaccini, catena logistica in piedi e rifornita ad ogni nodo, tracciamento del processo, in e out, inclusa la fase somministrazione e richiamo."(/)
And the old man knows, because as the most perceptive of you have realised, he did NOT name banks within those investors. Because in 2008, the pick was between "banks " and investors. (/)
It's yesterday to me since I am almost 60, but people may not know how dire the situation was, especially for bond investors. Equities were smashed to a pulp. An equivalent disaster went on in bonds... with a twist.(/)