Why QE is the Fed’s Only Weapon Left (w/ Julian Brigden)

JULIAN BRIGDEN: Thanks very much for having
me on Real Vision. Nice to be back again. For those of you who don’t know me, my name
is Julian Brigden. I am the co-founder of MI2, or Macro Insiders
2. We set the business up eight years ago. The whole intention is basically to look at
the macro space and to try and make our clients money. VOICE-OVER: How do you see the overall macroeconomic
environment? JULIAN BRIGDEN: So when we look at the world,
we’ve had this 10-year extended cycle, right? We’ve been running an economy pretty hot. We have seen some tightening of policy from
the Fed over the last year or so. That is now reversing, and we’re beginning
to discover that there are some not so pleasant things below the surface, right? In the process of generally running things
hot, which is what Trump was trying to do, and the Fed has been trying to do in the US,
we have created some quite large asset excesses. I think it’s arguable, when you look at the
US market, equity market– not necessarily in aggregate, but within pockets, whether
it’s the emblematic of WeWorks or something like Netflix, there are some very highly valued
assets. We have re-inflated house prices again to
arguably beyond the pre-global financial crisis levels. And then we tried to normalize policy. And as we’re discovering, it’s not necessarily
gone 100% smoothly. And I think one of the things that’s been
vexing me and concerning, I think, a lot of my clients is, over the years, we’ve seen
this what I would call– what I dub financialization. And by that I mean the feedback loop that
basically exists between the financial markets and the real economy. And we like to use this expression that the
tail wags the dog. OK? Now, implicitly, we all know it’s the dog
that should wag the tail. But what I mean by the tail wags the dog is
it’s the financial markets that basically drive the real economy. Where that becomes problematic is when you’ve
inflated these asset prices to such high levels. If you then step away, as the Fed’s tried
to do over the last year or so– done some QT, done some rate hikes– and we start to
see those assets start to normalize, and suddenly, you start to get this response function, whether
it’s reticent CEOs starting to look to cut costs, because their stock price is no longer
rising anymore. And it’s unfortunate, but there was a great
interview on Real Vision with one of your other clients, where he said, the product
of CEOs now is their stock price. Right? We used to put it in a slightly less PC way. But essentially, it’s the same thing. Their job is to keep their stock continuously
rising. So when it stops rising, because, say, the
Fed has done QT, their response function is to start to look to cut costs. So where have we seen cutting costs? We’re seeing faltering Capex. We’re seeing faltering signs of employment. We’re recording this particular interview
on the Friday morning of non-farm payroll. The number looked OK, but we’re definitely
seeing a loss of momentum. And when we look at all of our work, it suggests
that as we move into the end of the year, there are actually some quite significant
risks, that this was kind of the low. And what worries me is that the economies
are very sensitive. It’s all about the maintenance of this momentum
game, right? You can’t allow an economy to decelerate too
far before that that deceleration becomes selfgenerating. I tried to find it, but I can’t find it. But it was reported that Bernanke said, once
unemployment rises 0.3, you’re kind of done. Because that just becomes self-fulfilling. There are too many people losing their jobs. Their next door neighbor knows that they lost
their job. He becomes more conservative, and the whole
thing just becomes a vicious circle. We actually think it takes far less deceleration
for that before the cycle turns over. And so when we look at the world, we think
there are opportunities. We think we can extend the cycle. We wrote to MI clients this last month. We said, we can do this. You can pull this off. You can keep this game going. If that’s Powell is publicly on the record
for saying his number one priority is to extend the cycle and to keep the economic growth
going. But it takes decisive action. And we said, well, a classic example was what
they did in 2016. Late 2015, we had all the weakness that we
were seeing in Asia. We’ve had the Chinese devaluation. It came in and started to hit sentiment very
heavily in the United States. The economy started to roll over. All the central bankers went off to Davos. They sort of panicked, for want of a better
term. And we saw a policy wave after policy wave
of verbal intervention, to physical intervention, to fiscal spending from some places, and ultimately,
very heavily in the United States. So we kept the cycle going. But they nipped that one right in time. And when we look at the world, our biggest
concern is we’re not 100% sure that either it’s going to be as easy to do. We are another three years along in this cycle,
though excesses are arguably bigger. And we’re just not sure the Fed quite understands
the risk that they are taking by not delivering. We think, ultimately, they will deliver. It is one simply just a function of timing. Do they do it before the end of the year,
or do we have to wait till next year? And my fear is, is if we wait till next year,
it possibly could be too late. Or at a bare minimum, it’s going to take a
Herculean lifting to actually prevent the cycle going at that point. VOICE-OVER: How should the Fed extend the
cycle? JULIAN BRIGDEN: Enough to me, I think, when
you’re– it seems that when you talk to policy folks, the view is that, given that you’ve
got so much little ammo, you have to out-aggress the aggressor, to use that special forces
terminology, right? So I think they will probably go big, if they
see it as necessary. But you’ve only got basically 150 basis points. I think the big positive, if you can call
it a positive, is that Jay Powell seems to have ruled out the possibility of negative
interest rates. We’re not going to go down that event horizon
that the ECB and the BOJ have talked about. And we’ve explained that to Macro Insider
subscribers why we think that’s just a absolute disaster. But that does mean that you can run out of
ammo pretty quickly, and you’re going to be facing again unconventional monetary policy. I’m not saying we’re necessarily there yet. If ahead of the October meeting, if we get
some weak data, and in October, they cut 50, or at the very latest, in December, they cut
50, and then that was followed up early next year, I think you could probably keep this
game going early into you next year. And by keeping this game going, there were
three variables to me. It’s that simple. You have to drive stocks higher. Stasis is not enough. You have to keep net rates low enough that
you keep the housing market ticking over. And ideally, you want to weaken that dollar,
because that will– to the what we did in 2016, that has been the missing element. Because in 2016, we very successfully reversed
the strength of the dollar, and it encouraged some of that reflationary, true reflationary,
it, because if the dollar drops, it is a reflationary event, because it pushes up oil prices, gold,
platinum, silver, et cetera, et cetera. And that’s clearly been a strongly missing
element of the reflation attempt that we’ve seen thus far. If you can pull it off, great. I don’t think we’d have to go all the full
hog to QE. But delay things too long, lose– bleed even
more momentum in things like employment. And we’ve been looking quite a lot at this,
and we really think it takes very, very little loss of momentum in the employment market. And there are some nascent signs of that already
for it to be unsavable. The next year, we’re going to have to go the
full hog. And ahead of election, that could really be
quite problematic for the Federal Reserve. VOICE-OVER: Is QE coming whether or not the
US economy slows? JULIAN BRIGDEN: I would hope that they will
get it, and we will not have to go to QE. I think more QE is coming eventually. It’s going to be different. It’s going to look slightly different. It’s going to walk slightly different. But it will quack like a duck. So it will be QE. But I think what we’re looking at is, to use
this beautifully PC term, social QE, fluffy QE. And it’s basically going to be QE aimed at
underwriting MMT– so a Modern Monetary Theory, so directly underwriting government spending. So I think, certainly in the US, that would
suggest that’s really a 2021 kind of event. But given that we are getting to the end of
the efficacy of central bank policy, and assuming that policymakers aren’t just happy to go–
OK, we’re done now, we surrender– and watch the global economy slip gently under the waves
and into global chaos– which I’m pretty sure they are not going to be– we really are prepping
ourselves for this next stage of the cycle, which is this battle on handing over from
the monetary authorities, the fiscal authorities. You can see very, very clear signs of that. When you look at the recent speeches of Mario
Draghi, now he’s removed that ECB pen from his lapel. You could see it in someone like Larry Summers. I mean, Larry Summers is sort of the father
of all these– let’s say the intellectual backing of current central bank thought. And even he said, we’re sort of done. So we are coming, I think, to a very big phase
in the next cycle. As I said, I think we can avoid doing the
old style QE, if the Fed acts. Failing that, they’ll have to do some. I mean, people will say, and they will– I
think happy to go along with the spin, that what they’re doing in terms of the repo is
arguably some form of QE. It is certainly balance sheet expansion. I think it’s going to have to become permanent,
semi-permanent balance sheet expansion over the next few months, given the issuance calendar,
given the factors that are actually driving that demand for liquidity, which are very
domestic, quite technical in nature. But it will result in an increase in the balance
sheet. Some people, I think, will be quite quick
to say, ooh, ooh, ooh, QE. Not all QE is exactly the same. QE 1 was very different from QE 2 and QE 3. In my analogy, this is more akin to QE 1. When QE 1 was launched in late 2008, it was
really to offset a negative. If you want a simple analogy, the US economy
had a bucket of liquidity. Some of that was central bank provided liquidity. But most of it was commercial bank provided
liquidity. And the GFC just blew a bloody great big hole
in the side of the bucket. And basically, what happened is the central
bank came along, and they patched the side up. And then they filled up the bucket. And as far as they filled it up to the prior
level, that was just offsetting a negative. And that was what I saw QE 1 as. QE 2 and QE 3 were very different. They let all the liquidity spew all over the
sides, and we were net additive. What we’re doing in terms of this repo operation
is really QE 1. Left unarrested, left untackled, by forcing
more and more treasuries, particularly with the very heavy issuance calendar, onto the
balance sheets of the commercial banks and the primary dealers that are part of those
commercial banks, you’re in danger of squeezing out other bits of the lending process. So by releasing some of that pressure on the
primary dealers, then that’s offsetting a negative potentially elsewhere in the system. We’re not net pumping more cash out of the
system than we did in QE 2 and QE 3. But look, to the extent that people see that
as QE, maybe that is a mental crutch to the market. I think, probably unfortunately, that we will
need a little bit more than just a mental crutch in the market at some point. VOICE-OVER: Will the business cycle end, even
with central bank stimulus? JULIAN BRIGDEN: Look, I mean, we’ve gone through
periods in history where you’ve had hardships. It’s a bizarre world that we live in, where
you’re not allowed to have an economic cycle. But I do believe that policymakers are intent
to try and extend this cycle. What I heard from G7 was an actual fact. Despite the negativity around Trump and the
trade situation, it was much more collegiate than people would automatically have assumed. And one of the things that they could all
agree on was the necessity to try and keep this game going. So if you’re running out– which, in Europe,
you have run out of monetary bullets– and you’ve got 150 left in the US, which is far
less than we typically would need to extend the cycle, then we have to look to other parts
of policy to pick up the slack. They have the ability potentially to do it. The Europeans certainly have the ability to
spend money, if they so choose to do. The US doesn’t seem to be an issue anymore
about fiscal conservatism. There are no budget hawks out there anymore. So we just have to get to the circumstances
to create that, that decision points. In Europe, I don’t think we’re there yet. We’re starting to see the rumblings in Germany
of climate change induced spending. But of course, the Germans have offset it
with tax increases. So it’s a net zero. So that’s not an add. But you create a bit more pain, and you could
get there. The issue for the United States– and which
is why it’s likely the Fed has some ammo left– is that nothing’s really going to happen ahead
of the election. So I can sit here and pontificate and say,
we’re going to get MMT. We’re going to get our fiscal spending. I truly believe that is what we are going
to get. But that’s a 2021 issue. And for markets, that’s a long, long way away,
right? We are still at least a year away from that,
even to a decision on the election itself. And in the interim, the Fed is the only game
left, I think, globally really of all the major central banks. And I’m hoping that they realize the precariousness
and the fragility of the underlying economy. It may not appear to be that fragile, particularly
after today’s non-farm payroll number. But there is a fragility, particularly in
terms of maintaining this momentum. Because as I said, I don’t think people necessarily
understand how little a loss of momentum is necessary before the thing becomes self-perpetuating. And so I would hope the Fed will get it. I hope they’ll get it quick enough, and they
can keep us ticking over, ticking over till we get to the election. VOICE-OVER: What are the signs of a tipping
point? JULIAN BRIGDEN: So one of the things that
we’ve been looking at and working on quite a lot is employment. The unemployment rate is actually quite a
bizarre, strange, economic series. Because also, most economic series tend to
trend. But most of them are really choppy around
that trend. And yet unemployment is insanely smooth. I mean, it’s like a sort of sign wave you
studied in high school, when you were doing your math class. It falls steadily, building upon itself. And then it loses momentum, and then it reverses,
and it goes the same way. There aren’t these wild pricks, pinpricks
of prints which are all over the shop. And I think it makes sense. I mean, you get a job. You go and spend a bit of money. Someone else has to hire someone else because
of your spending and all your cohorts, and et cetera. It becomes that rolling ball until all of
a sudden, it isn’t. And to me, I think that once you start to
lose- – I mean, Bernanke was quoted once, saying that, once unemployment’s risen 0.3,
we’re done. OK? Because it just becomes self-perpetuating. At that point, you know someone who’s lost
their job. And as a result, when your girlfriend says
to you, come on, Johnny, let’s go out for dinner tonight. You go, mm-hm, Sam just lost his job. Mine’s not totally dissimilar to his. What if I lose my job? Maybe we shouldn’t go out to dinner tonight. You don’t go out to dinner. The restaurant you were going to go to closes
down. And all of a sudden, you realize you’re going
to lose your job, as well, because you were in the restaurant supply business. So it does become self-fulfilling. We actually think it potentially takes significantly
less than a 0.3 rise in unemployment. And we’ve been doing some work that suggests
that– we were not looking for a bad number today from non-farm payroll. But we’re beginning to get very worried about
the October number print and the November number print that we’ll get next month and
the month after, that we are starting to see some signs of a significant loss of momentum. The most obvious place you can look for them
are in some of these PMI prints that you’re beginning to see and some of the commentary
that goes with it, which have suggested that firms, particularly as they plan for 2020,
a lot of that planning goes on now. If you look at the manufacturing sector, there
was some very interesting comments made about, we’re in the planning phase now. We make decision over the next couple of months. We’re producing too much. We’ve eaten through our backlog of orders. At some point, you have to make a decision
about how you’re going to right-size your firm next year. And if that decision is to cut costs, employment
is going to be a key part of that as you try and right-size production. And I think we will know within the next two
to three months whether we can skirt a recession or we could get to really pretty quickly to
be on risk of a recession sometime in 2020. And at that point, I would say that the Fed’s
probably blown it, if we get to that. If we lose that much momentum– and as I said,
it doesn’t take as much as you think, it’s going to make for a really interesting election. Put it that way. VOICE-OVER: If we do get a recession, will
it be severe? JULIAN BRIGDEN: No. Look, I think that the GFC was, in that sense,
truly unique. We don’t have the excesses broadly that we
have there. We have, as I said, pockets within the equity
market of excess. You have pockets of credit, which of excess. You have pockets in the real economy of excess. And those would be house prices. I have a feeling it will be a pretty ugly
one, because we’ve pushed up a lot of these asset prices to very high levels. My sense is, though, that it won’t be as systemically
threatening as it was, I hope, I hope. But offsetting that in certain parts of the
world may be the inability of policymakers to deliver. So particularly, when you look at places like
Europe, the Fed does have some ammo and has a willingness, I think, to be pretty forthright
and aggressive, once they deem it necessary. I’m not sure the ECB is in that position. They’ve gone down a route where they’ve chosen
to prioritize negative interest rates over, let’s say, QE at this point. The program they announced thus far has been
very weak. It does very little to address the fundamental
structural issues that, say, Germany may face. So my gut says it’s not going to be a GFC. The assumption is it’s not going to be a GFC. But it could still be a pretty ugly recession. When we model Germany, for example, we think
she’s looking at, outside the GFC, the ugliest recession she’s had in 20 years. You’ve got to go back to the ERM crisis of
the early ’90s to find something this ugly. And that was a bloody ugly recession. VOICE-OVER: How should investors position
for the future? JULIAN BRIGDEN: What we said to our clients
is we think that the current state of markets is unsustainable. We have a super high equity price. We have the bond market priced almost for
perfection at the other end. And we have a dollar which is trying to push
the top end of the range. And what we really need, to keep this game
going, is we need stocks higher, bond yields lower, and a weak dollar. And the Fed can deliver those, if they so
choose. But at the moment, it doesn’t appear to me
that they’re quite ready to make that step. And so we’re watching those interplays of
those three variables without fully committing. And we’ve been looking around for trades which
we think can benefit in all– whichever one of those three starts to break. Those are less easy trades for retail investors
to play, because they tend to be relative value-esque things. So the curves steepen as their spreads in
the eurodollar curve at the front end of the US yield curve, their spread trades within
the equity market between, let’s say, growth in value stocks. It’s that sort of thing. And we’re watching the dollar very carefully. When I look out a little further, and I say,
OK, well look, if the Fed doesn’t do it now, if the Fed doesn’t deliver now, and we don’t
get those breaks now, they’re still going to have to deliver sometime next year. So if I fast-forward to early next year, and
I assume then, at that point, the Fed is getting religion– they have seen the epiphany, they
have seen the risks, they are moving now aggressively to deal with those– to me, we go back to
some of the trades that have worked really incredibly well in the last few months, which
are things like precious metals. As I look out from early next year for the
next five years, I look at valuations between– and precious metals and, let’s say, the NASDAQ
100 are just extreme examples of growth, NASDAQ 100, these growth stocks that really only
grow when nothing else is growing, that live off super cheap money and are actually part
of the problem that central banks are actually fighting against. By perpetuating this cheap money, you’ve led
to the Lyfts and the Ubers in the WeWork, these disruptors, while at the same time,
keeping the zombie firms that they’re trying to replace alive, so there’s no pricing power. But as we look out over the next four to five
years, particularly in the US, and you say, look, to keep this game going, the Fed’s got
to ease policy. They’ve got to push stocks higher. But which stocks? And if you create true reflation, you don’t
really want to be in these growth stocks. Assuming that true reflation really means
a significantly lower dollar, what you want to be in is there in some of these value type
names and/or value type places. And there’s not much more value than some
of these precious metals on a relative historical basis to some of these other things. So I mean, if any of the listeners are in
front of a screen, just go and type right in the NASDAQ 100 against platinum, and take
it back 20-odd years. And you’ll see that the ratio has perfectly
topped out, this being the third time in a row at these levels. And ask yourself, where do I want to be for
the next five years? Do I think that the Fed fails? Do I think that we go into this world where
there is an inability to deliver reflation? Even before we consider the fiscal stimulus
that potentially could come– which I think would be highly inflationary– but even before
we consider that, the Fed has failed, that we’re just awash with free money, right? Maybe not negative in this country, but it
will be incredibly, incredibly cheap. And there’s just any amount that you want. And then you can envisage a world where there’s
Uber 2.0 and Lyft 2.0 and all these super ridiculous ideas, where you can burn through
billions of dollars and never have to make any money and still be worth billions. In that environment, then, clearly, growth
stocks are where you’d want to be. Or do you want to beat the bet that the world’s
most powerful central bank– and I say that, because it controls the reserve currency. And as the denominator of all the assets that
we trade, as you push the value of that currency down– which I believe, given the interest
rate differential, given the potential to expand the balance sheet again, the Fed has
that ultimate ability. Now, the ECB won’t like it. The BOJ won’t like it, at least initially,
because it will push deflation on them, but ultimately will, because it is reflationary. Do you think they can succeed? In that environment, things like platinum,
gold, silver, and then ultimately, as the reflation starts to manifest itself, copper
and all these two industrials and soft, is that possible? And I think the answer is yes. So really, from a strategic view, I think
that’s pretty much where we’re going. I think the era of the growth stopped momentum
play, we saw last September. We had the first trend. I think we’re going through the beginning
of that unwind. It takes time to play out. These things and never smooth. It’s not necessarily an incredibly bearish
call on the broad market. Don’t forget, in 2000, during the dot come
bubble, the NASDAQ fell 40-odd percent, and the S&P was steady as a rock. I mean, March of 2000, the NASDAQ drops. The money flows into the S&P. The S&P hangs out for another six months,
until September. Then it goes. Then the money goes into the Dow. And the Dow holds up until May of 2001. And it was only when that went, 14 months
after the NASDAQ had gone, that the US economy rolled into a broader recession. So just because you have these sectors that
become out of favor, it doesn’t mean that you have to go into recession. But I think that’s where, when I look at the
world, that’s what I’m hoping. I think we’re in this period of not bleakness–
I have to retire and build my bunker up to the top of my hill. And I think there are a number of people out
there that think that that’s possible. But I do believe definitively, if we are going
to keep this game going, we need to act decisively. The thing that you should be watching in a
way is you should be watching the price action of asset prices and how they respond to policy. Because as I said, to keep this game going–
and it may be not what the Fed really wants to think about, because they’re worried about
these asset excesses. But the only way we do keep this game going
is to keep forwarding and maintaining these asset excesses. And that means higher stocks, lower dollar,
low bond yields. And if we can deliver those quickly, I think
we can keep this cycle going into 2021. At that point, monetary policy will be pretty
much globally amongst, certainly developed countries, exhausted. And then we hand the baton over to the politicians–
cheery thought, that one. But anyway, that’s how I’m mentally setting
myself up.

93 thoughts on “Why QE is the Fed’s Only Weapon Left (w/ Julian Brigden)

  1. The interesting thing will be, looking back one day,

    if the FED was right or it was a mistake & actually cause of the next crash.

  2. The FE$ is a weapon against the working class. They are printing hundreds of billions of dollars at night bailing out Bank's and corporation's, but that's not what they are doing. What they are doing is taking all this free money the FED is making up. They then take this funny money and buy up all assets, that's what they are doing. They don't care the dollar will crash because they are sacherating the world with the federal reserve note, so it's destroying ur money , deluting it , and they get all the assets the ones they don't own they do like in 2008 they raise rates on families and doubles there house payments then the banks file repo's, they do this every 10 years, but this cycle will be the last they will own enough of the assets to go bankrupt, and start a new currency, with them owning almost everything, what they don't own the government raises taxes till they get it all the greatest sceam ever.

  3. Another wrong call on employment , , commentators get it wrong on Domestic USA growth , remember its all able domestic economy not export. still rates will go lower but it will take longer than Bond Market wants.

  4. “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” ~ Henry Ford, founder of the Ford Motor Company

  5. Since you posted this two months ago, let's fast forward a couple of months: The Fed has been pumping 50 to 80 billion into banks every night for a couple of months, even though they aren't calling in QE it's being done in pure QE fashion, not announcing it, since many banks are insolvent having over-leveraged their deposits by 90%. Also, the economy is doing terribly, not great as you are saying. The market is being artificially propped up by the Fed, but actual numbers in employment and industry have been falling for the last few years. All of this artificial current QE money is an emergency propping up of the fake stock market and it's going into billionaires' pockets, while the every day person is poorer than ever and deeply indebted.
    All this is being hidden in the mainstream media of course, and actual numbers are falsified to make the public believe that all is fine and dandy. Same joke of a fiat currency/Keynesian Economics train wreck which will crash sooner than later, by design. The only way to prepare for the coming CRASH is to take ALL of your money out of the bank, stocks, IRA's, pension funds etc and buy precious metals, as only currency backed by gold, indeed physically holding precious metals themselves, as Russia, China India and other smart countries have well understood, will save you!

  6. they need new markets. all this green stuff boils down to building more wind turbines and afew electric car charging points that's about it. not enough to keep it going. the way out is space technology. they need to start building space infrastructure for transport from Mars and Asteroids. bases on the moon, unmanned space haulage, space mining.

  7. Where did the numbers come from? The Federal Reserve Website Repo Mkt and where else? There is only one man who has the code to call all this so accurately using a super computer and I think many of you read the blog :). He is not to blame he just opened our eyes, cheers.

  8. Full of contradictions and lots of waving a wet finger in the air. The fundamentals say it all. The financial system as we know it today is going to catastrophically crash within an 18 month timescale.

  9. what color will the vests be in america? all the money printing is doing is destroying society. the hatred of people who work for money against those who get it for failing big is building day by day. if the rich dont take their haircut they will have it done for them.

  10. I guess that essentially QE means that any money I have will be devalued even more. By reinvigorating reflation, I suppose he means ramping up inflation

  11. He has built a business on a 100% manipulated and controlled market – this makes it just smoke and mirrors and 100% unreliable! NOTHING will improve before the Federal Reserve and the Central bankster system is exposed and abolished!

  12. Get Real Vision Premium for only $1 for 30 days here: https://rvtv.io/YTDollarfor30
    No more waiting for the content to make it here weeks or even months after it was shot and no missing out on insights and information that move markets. Better yet…. No advertisements! Join today!

  13. Let's just pray that the world will get back onto the gold standard instead of going digital! The Fed, IMF, ALL big banks, predatory loans, credit & fiat currency should be abolished forever! Then we will have a fair, balanced monetary system once again.

  14. self fulfilling? this guy is delusional, that is how real life works, you are so disconnected from reality. if there is fire people will try to escape it in whatever way they can, you just want people to stand there and do nothing while your friends makes all the cash. perpetual growth by any artificial means seriously… it shows how much they know about economy

  15. Finally someone said it! QE = MMT.

    Only difference IMO is the Fed making corporations happy or bureaucrats happy.

    Everyone will lose in the end.

  16. Move your tray table into the upright position because the pilot and co-pilot are sick and a hedge fund manager is flying the 747.

  17. I dont see how 2020 is going to hold flat. I just dont. First of all who would stay in a market for a whole year if analysts are giving a 3- 4 % y return. I think there will be a hiccup along the way and the markets will get spooked.

  18. Incorrect basic assumption. The US economy been running hot for three years under Pres Trump and lukewarm for seven years under former Pres Obama.

  19. Worried about Jobs. No need to fear. Or haven't you heard ? We had " the best NFP report of our lives ". Everything is totally fine. Yep . I'm sure they are not fluffing up numbers. Nope .

  20. So this clown is hoping that central banks can paper over the situation to 2021, then hand over the baton to politicians? To do what ?!?
    If central bankers, that have direct control of our money and have been playing poker with peoples' wealth for decades, can't do anything constructive for the economy, they'll be handing the baton to socialists in 2021! That will shortly after that start nationalisation!!!
    With all these revolutions and rage all over the World, where will the new aristocrats be able to hide their wealth?

  21. It apears that we are now living in NO CYCLE Economy, total wild west. I guess take home message is "Death of cycles economy"

  22. Why would an "America First" President WANT to deliberatly weaken the dollar just to prop up the enconomies in the rest of the world? I get why you guys would really, really like our Fed to do that… but should we? Another way to look at it is…. if ya'll are ALL on fire…. someone needs to be in postion to put out the fire.

    Wealth is ultimatly in the tools of production, and the skilled hands to use the tools. Money is only a method to simplfy and speed up the process of trading time and skill for other human's time and skill. The World Wars proved that America really CAN feed and equip the rest of the world if we buckle down and priortize that. Should we try and delay an "inevitable" crash? Or try and make sure our factories, farmers, skilled labors and transportation infascture is in as healthy a place as possble to help other countries rebuild after an "inevitable" crash?

  23. I’m watching these videos trying to find out how the dollar can be worth anything. I’m having a hard time figuring this out

  24. And, what it is that the Fed provides in its QE? Pretend money backed by nothing, the value of which is based upon the American Tax Payer's willingness to give any meaning to debt for paper. Keep pumping money out there and sooner or later there will be inflation. There isn't any economist out there who really understands what's keeping the BS going, and it is BS.
    The economies of the West are declining, the socialists/commies have spent their countries into the literal ground, and we have helped them keep the illusion of solvency alive by pumping money into the investment banks which goes to European subsidiaries.
    Sooner or later, inflation will have its day.
    And, the house of cards will all come crashing down.
    There is nothing on the horizon that says there is any world economic recovery, because China's market is . . . the WEST. The PRC is returning to a Maoist state replete with failed economic policies. How soon that translates into war depends upon the degeneration of social order. The corruption in the PRC is on an order of magnitude that is incomprehensible to the Western mind. The PRC is a hand grenade with the pin pulled, one day it will go off and there will be a regional war to keep the lid on internal order.
    The presenter is full of BS.
    Hard assets.

  25. You can't just look at the Fed and the US in isolation without considering the rest of the world. By comparison, the US is doing great and if you're going to invest your money somewhere, this is the place to do it.

  26. Please stop this BS. I stopped watching when he repeatedly saying mmt qe mmt qe. Stop this bs pathetic propaganda. This monetary policy will collapse. Changes coming in monetary

  27. Bitcoin is the king of all fakes and fiats. I’ll take paper money any day over digits. Gold backed cash is the correct way of doing things, but sadly that is no more.

  28. I am definitely NOT an expert but anytime you begin a discussion by assuming that the FED is actually attempting to Help you are always going to end up confused and wrong.

  29. …a month plus after airing, this guy nailed it. Repo QE out the a$$ and predictions of FED rate lowering next year.

  30. 'We are sort of done' and we need a 'Herculean' effort to get out of the impending QE. US doesn't have any option than to slowly slip away into oblivion, leading to shutting down the Fed. Austerity is the future.

  31. sommi

    18 minutes ago

    🧡💛💙💚 Well, here we are… almost entering into the new paradigm decade of 2020. Only 150 days to go before the Halving.

    12 months ago, it was blood on the streets. Crashing to $4k and $3k… with no lows in sight….. we turned things around.

    With the fundamentals growing stronger every month, it's only a matter of time before we reject this zone and start reflecting these fundamentals in the price.


  32. I’m investing in the severely under valued Junior mining Gold market right now. Gold miners and explorers will be the best performing assets when the price of Gold skyrockets. Diversify and don’t be the one stuck holding onto physical metals.

  33. This just isn't true. I've heard they also have staplers, and the occasional gel pen, which may be used as weapons, as well..

  34. The US stock market is completely disconnected from economic reality and is driven by Trump's tweets -notice that when ever the markets pause or stall, he comes up with another tweet – this makes economic fundamentals irrelevant and will surely end in disaster.

  35. Corporations laying off employees to keep the stock price afloat? Then way are we hearing reports of low unemployment rates. The best in 40 years???

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *