|
ansonsten weltfremde Speichellecker der Eliten.
In dem Editorial aus der NYTimes geht es darum, dass US-Politiker (aller Couleur) bei den AL-Daten allein auf die Zahlen fixiert sind und sich ansonsten keinen Deut um das dahinter steckende Elend scheren. Wenn die BLS-Statistiker ein neues Modell aus dem Hut zaubern, das die AL-Quote rein rechnerisch von 9,4 auf 9 % runterbringt, dann ist dem "Problem" bereits genüge getan. Die Politiker haben dann die "tolle Zahl" zum Anbeten, Vorzeigen und Selbstbeweihräuchern. Ob die Leute auf der Straße weiterhin darben oder nicht - d.h. die reale Welt hinter den Zahlen - interessiert sie nicht im Geringsten. DIE ZAHLEN müssen stimmen, das reicht.
February 4, 2011
Bewitched by the Numbers
By BOB HERBERT
The data zealots have utterly discombobulated themselves. (Die Datenfanatiker haben sich verzettelt.)
They were expecting something on the order of 150,000 new jobs to have been created in January. That would have been a lousy number, but they were fully prepared to spin it as being pretty good. They thought the official jobless rate might hop up a tick to 9.5 percent.
Instead, the economy created just 36,000 jobs in January, an absolutely dreadful number. But the unemployment rate fell like a stone from 9.4 percent to 9.0 percent.
The crunchers stared at the numbers in disbelief. They moved them this way and that. No matter how they arranged them, they made no sense. Nothing even close to enough jobs were being created to bring the unemployment rate down, but for two successive months it had dropped sharply. (It dived from 9.8 percent to 9.4 in December.)
A baffled commentator on CNBC said, “I think there is an improvement in the economy, though you can’t see it in today’s payroll survey.”
Mark Zandi of Moody’s Analytics, who is frequently very good at this stuff, said: “I think these numbers are meaningless. I don’t think they mean anything.”
What data zealots need to do is leave their hermetically sealed rooms and step outside, take a walk among the millions of Americans who are hurting to the bone. They should talk with families that are suffering, losing their homes, doubling up, checking into homeless shelters.
We behave as though the numbers are an end in themselves — just get the G.D.P. up or the jobless rate down — and we’ll be on our way to fat city. But the numbers are just tools, abstractions to help guide us, orient us. They aren’t the be-all and end-all. They don’t tell us squat about the flesh-and-blood reality of the mom or dad lying awake in the dark of night, worrying about the repo man coming for the family van or the foreclosure notice that’s sure to materialize any day now.
The policy makers who rely on the data zealots are just as detached from the real world of real people. They’re always promising in the most earnest tones imaginable to do something about employment, to ease the awful squeeze on the middle class (policy makers never talk about the poor), to reform education, and so on.
They say those things because they have to. But they are far more obsessed with the numbers than they are with the struggles and suffering of real people. You won’t hear policy makers acknowledging that the unemployment numbers would be much worse if not for the millions of people who have left the work force over the past few years. What happened to those folks? How are they and their families faring?
The policy makers don’t tell us that most of the new jobs being created in such meager numbers are, in fact, poor ones, with lousy pay and few or no benefits. What we hear is what the data zealots pump out week after week, that the market is up, retail sales are strong, Wall Street salaries and bonuses are streaking, as always, to the moon, and that businesses are sitting on mountains of cash. So all must be right with the world.
Jobs? Well, the less said the better.
What’s really happening, of course, is the same thing that’s been happening in this country for the longest time — the folks at the top are doing fabulously well and they are not interested in the least in spreading the wealth around.
The people running the country — the ones with the real clout, whether Democrats or Republicans — are all part of this power elite. Ordinary people may be struggling, but both the Obama administration and the Republican Party leadership are down on their knees slavishly kissing the rings of the financial and corporate kingpins.
I love when the wackos call President Obama a socialist. Wasn’t it his budget director, Peter Orszag, who moved effortlessly from his job in the administration to a hotshot post at Citigroup, beneficiary of tons of government largess? And didn’t the president’s new chief of staff, William Daley, arrive in his powerful new post fresh from the executive suite of JPMorgan Chase? And isn’t the incoming chairman of Mr. Obama’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness very conveniently the chairman and chief executive of General Electric, Jeffrey Immelt?
You might ask: Who represents working people? The answer, as Tevye would say with grave emphasis in “Fiddler on the Roof,” is, “I don’t know.”
Maybe the data zealots have stumbled on a solution. They’ve created a model in which a radically insufficient number of jobs has resulted in a sharp decline in the official gauge of unemployment. If that trend can be sustained, we’ll eventually get the jobless rate down to zero. People will still be suffering, but full employment will have finally been achieved.
www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/opinion/05herbert.html
Late last week the Obama Administration does what it often does when it's about to announce something controversial: It leaks a little bit to the news media to soften the blow. And so it was with the highly-anticipated, and currently overdue, "white paper" on reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The paper is expected by the end of this week.
As we have reported on this blog before, it will likely include several options and scenarios, playing each of them out to conclusion. We already know that the goal is to reduce the government's role in the mortgage market, which right now is 95 percent of all new originations, according to a report out today from Lender Processing Services. Republicans want that sooner than later, but most say it will take at least five years.
What leaked last week was the idea of reducing Fannie, Freddie and FHA loan limits, currently at $729,750 for high-priced markets to $625,000. I'm not sure that is going to make a whole lot of difference. Remember that the loan limit used to be $417,000, before the housing crash. It was raised because government was the only game in town. Home prices have since fallen dramatically, and depending on what report you choose to believe, are still falling. A far lower loan limit, even while the median home price in California is still , would help to jumpstart private label mortgage securitization again. The jumbo market is already coming back.
I know, but what about the soonish-to-be-announced "Qualified Residential Mortgage" standard, or the risk retention rules necessitated by the Dodd-Frank legislation. This is the standard by which lenders would not have to hold onto 5 percent of a loans risk. If it ends up being 20 percent down, which many believe it will be, then that's harder for higher-priced markets. Still, I'm not so sure someone buying an expensive home should be able to do so with little to no skin in the game.
There is no question the white paper will include plans to make Fannie and Freddie loans more expensive, reportedly by raising guarantee fees, which in turn might make private label RMBS cheaper. This could be done without legislation, so that's particularly helpful. But that makes trouble for the Federal Housing Administration.
The FHA is currently too big.
Even its commissioner, David Stevens, admits that openly whenever and wherever he can. FHA has made itself more expensive already, but it still has far too large a market share. Tough QRM standards and a pricey Fannie and Freddie system would push more borrowers to FHA, which is exempt from QRM.
So where does that leave us? Likely with more expensive mortgages, no matter how you slice them. The convergence of several storms, the GSE white paper, the QRM standards release, the budget release and continued reports of a very shaky housing recovery, necessitate creative thinking. I'm headed to the American Securitization Forum conference in Orlando later today, and that will be much of our discussion tomorrow on CNBC.
Jahrelang verkaufte die Deutsche Bank an Hunderte Firmen und Kommunen hochkomplexe Zinswetten. Am Dienstag entscheidet erstmals der Bundesgerichtshof über die Schadenersatzklage eines Mittelständlers – und womöglich darüber, ob die Bank ihre Kunden mit den Derivaten hinters Licht geführt hat. Das Urteil könnte für die Bank weitreichende Folgen haben.
http://www.handelsblatt.com/...tert-vor-dem-bundesgerichtshof;2748385
Enorme Freiheiten, ganz legal: Im Euro-Raum dürfen nationale Notenbanken notleidenden Geldhäusern mit frischem Geld aushelfen. Genau dies geschieht nun in Irland und Portugal - die Europäische Zentralbank ist alarmiert.
Die Welt der Notenbanker ist kompliziert. Deshalb fällt selbst Experten kaum auf, was aktuell in Irland und Portugal vor sich geht. Vereinfacht gesprochen drucken die Zentralbanken der beiden Euro-Länder Geld. Bei den Iren sind es immerhin 50 MilliardenEuro, bei den Portugiesen soll es weniger sein. Diese Summe soll den angeschlagenen Banken dieser Ländern stützen. Sie kämpfen ums Überleben.
Die nationalen Alleingänge sind brisant, denn normalerweise ist die Europäische Zentralbank (EZB) für die Geldversorgung der Kreditinstitute zuständig. Außerdem drohen dadurch auch dem deutschen Steuerzahler Kosten. "Das Bedenkliche an diesen Notfallhilfen ist, dass sich eine Zentralbank dabei komplett übernehmen kann.
Im Fall Irland beträgt das Engagement 30 Prozent des Bruttoinlandsprodukts", sagt Jürgen Michels, Europa-Volkswirt der Citigroup. Er befürchtet, dass im Extremfall alle anderen EU-Staaten dafür geradestehen müssen. "Die Irische Zentralbank generiert also auf eigene Kappe Liquidität", erklärt Michels. Die portugiesische Zentralbank tue dasselbe, wenn auch in geringerem Umfang.
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/geld/...-geld-fuer-marode-banken-1.1056681
Navigator.C
As commodity prices keep moving higher and bond buyers slowly head for the exits, investors are starting to give more credence to a looming inflation threat.
Through most of the recovery following the collapse of the financial system, policy makers had spent far more time warning about deflation, even as the Federal Reserve, led by Chairman Ben Bernanke, continued to flood the economy with money.
But growth in emerging markets and in the US—coupled with the trend of rising interest rates—has shifted market dialogue in a different direction. It's also changed investing trends—out of bonds and toward commodities, while stocks, particularly in the energy sector, only increase in popularity.
"What the bond market is sniffing out is higher perceived levels of future inflation," Greg Peters, head of fixed income research at Morgan Stanley, said in a CNBC interview. "While inflation today looks pretty benign, what bond investors don't like right now is the uncertainty factor around the future inflation picture."
Bond prices have fallen in six straight trading sessions, with the consensus view being that traders are reacting to inflation threats observed through the steady climb in commodities.
The benchmark 10-year note yield has gained about a third of a percentage point during that time, rising from 3.36 percent on Jan. 28 to approach 3.70 percent in Monday trading. While the level is far from suggesting serious inflation is on the near horizon, the trend suggests fear is growing.
"If you look at the markets, commodity markets see inflation, bond markets see inflation, and obviously with equities growing, they're inflating," Keith McCullough, CEO of Hedgeye Risk Management, told CNBC. "So I don't see a lot of sustenance to suspending disbelief that Ben Bernanke says there's no inflation."
In a speech last week, the central bank chairman continued to insist that inflation is below a level that would reflect a controlled gain and thus a healthier economy.
The market interpreted the remarks as signaling that the Fed will stick to its zero-interest-rate policy for the foreseeable future. Bill Gross, managing director at Pimco, figured there would be no rate increases at least until unemployment fell a full point to 8 percent.
"Given that the Fed's implicit target for core inflation is 1.7% to 2.0%, this is unlikely to prompt it to call a premature halt to its current round of purchases or to shut the door firmly on any future purchases," Paul Dales, chief US economist at Capital Economics in Toronto, wrote in a research note for clients. "Indeed, the continued low level of core inflation will mean that the Fed will look through the temporary spike in headline inflation and refrain from tightening policy."
But while previous assurances from Bernanke that the Fed's quantitative easing programs would continue triggered rallies across the markets, fixed-income investors have recoiled over fears that leaving the rates so low was risking inflation. Bonds generally languish in inflationary environments as rising rates eat away at the value of fixed income.
On the flip side, though, stocks have continued to climb higher as equity investors anticipate that the America-on-sale trend likely will continue, in which liquidity programs like QE keep US dollar values down and thus make it cheap to pick up risky assets.
"We think Mr. Bernanke is as determined as ever to create a 'wealth effect' by blowing up a stock market bubble," Trim Tabs research analysts wrote in their weekly market commentary. "Absent a spike in interest rates or a sharp decline in the dollar, we expect the Fed to announce QE3 by Labor Day. Will one of the big surprises of 2011 be how quickly inflation rises in America?"
Morgan Stanley's Peters said the trend from bonds, and particularly Treasurys, is likely to continue as commodities and food and energy prices flash inflation red flags.
"What we fear is what's happening in the emerging market world where inflation is running higher than usual," he said. "That gets imported back into the US, so we think those fears are completely just."
However, he believes that the one area of fixed income that could thrive is municipal bonds, as the market mistakenly has priced in a default scenario for America's troubled municipalities that likely is far from what will happen.
The muni landscape has been hotly contested since banking analyst Meredith Whitney forecast defaults that could number in the hundreds, drawing criticism from Gross and others that the scenario is vastly overstated.
"What's embedded into today's price is an implied default rate 11 times higher than any we've experienced in the past," Peters said.
But the strength in munis could be an anomaly among the bond markets if inflation fears continue to permeate the markets.
The concerns have swelled even as the government's principal inflation gauge—the consumer price index—shows tame inflation. Instead, market pros are worried that surging commodity prices are triggering inflation in food and energy, which are stripped out of the core CPI number, and will bleed into the broader economy.
"You have 44 million Americans on food stamps. Ask them if they see food inflation," McCullough said. "You go to the (gas) pump...it's in the tape. You have energy (stocks) outperforming consumer because it's a consumption tax. There's a lot of story-telling going on here. You can't be in this position of perpetual deflation, because you just don't have it."
U.S. outstanding consumer installment credit shot upward in December as shoppers boosted their credit-card debt for the first time in more than two years, the Federal Reserve said Monday.
Total credit outstanding climbed $6.1 billion, nearly triple the $2.3 billion that Wall Street economists surveyed by Reuters had forecast, after an upwardly revised $2 billion increase in November.
December marked the third successive month in which consumer credit outstanding grew. It had risen by a steep $7.7 billion in October before the November and December gains.
Prior to those three increases, consumer credit had contracted for 20 months in a row.
Strikingly in December, revolving or credit-card debt climbed by $3.5 billion—the first month in which this category of debt had risen since August 2008.
An improving economy has helped bolster consumer optimism, though job growth remains slow. In addition, December marks the culmination of the Thanksgiving-through-Christmas shopping season when consumers are more likely to turn to their credit cards for purchases.
|
| Wertung | Antworten | Thema | Verfasser | letzter Verfasser | letzter Beitrag | |
| 469 | 156.442 | Der USA Bären-Thread | Anti Lemming | ARIVA.DE | 21.12.25 09:45 | |
| 29 | 3.791 | Banken & Finanzen in unserer Weltzone | lars_3 | youmake222 | 19.12.25 15:09 | |
| 55 | PROLOGIS SBI (WKN: 892900) / NYSE | 0815ax | ARIVA.DE | 19.10.25 10:00 | ||
| Daytrading 15.05.2024 | ARIVA.DE | 15.05.24 00:02 | ||||
| Daytrading 14.05.2024 | ARIVA.DE | 14.05.24 00:02 |