The United Kingdom said...

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Oh, the tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive:

ECB Blows €400bn on “Brexit Black Friday” Bank Bailouts
by Wolf Richter • June 26, 2016

Excerpts:

Dealing with a Financial Crisis under cover of Brexit Chaos

Remember TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Program that the US Congress approved to bail out banks and other companies during the Financial Crisis? $700 billion were authorized, later reduced to $475 billion. The Treasury eventually dispersed $432 billion. I bring this up because the ECB bailed out the European banks with more than TARP, in just one day: on Brexit Black Friday.

With bank stocks collapsing on Brexit Black Friday, the frazzled folks at the ECB decided it was high time to start bailing out the banks – and not dabble at the margins, but pull out the whatever-it-takes money-printing machine, and do so under the cover of Brexit chaos when no one was supposed to pay attention.

And the day before Brexit Black Friday, with impeccable timing, the ECB pulled another big one: it leaked to Reuters that it was addressing the nonperforming-loan epidemic among Eurozone banks by sweeping it further under the rug.

So instead of forcing the banks to finally take the losses, raise a lot of new capital or topple, the ECB will merely give them “non-binding guidance” by the end of 2016 or early 2017, and some of this “guidance” won’t even be in writing, sources told Reuters with perfect timing the day before Brexit sank these banks.

The ECB doesn’t want to hurt fake earnings. And this leak to Reuters was supposed to have soothed the markets and helped prop up bank stocks.

The thing is, banks that need to raise equity capital must have inflated stock prices or else existing investors get crushed. If Deutsche Bank has to raise €30 billion in capital by issuing shares at €3 a share, existing shareholder will essentially be wiped out, and raising equity capital may no longer be possible. So the name of the game is to manipulate up bank stocks before issuing new shares. But it may be too late.

And this is what happened to Italian and Spanish stock markets, as banks were massacred.


European Banks Get Crushed, Worst 2-Day Plunge Ever, Italian Banks to Get Taxpayer Bailout, Contagion Hits US Banks

by Wolf Richter • June 27, 2016

https://wolfstreet.com/2016/06/27/e...get-taxpayer-bailout-contagion-hits-us-banks/

European bank stocks just experienced their worst two-day plunge ever in the post-Brexit fallout that rained down on the already blooming European banking crisis.

Healthy big banks would get over Brexit and the political turmoil it is spawning, particularly non-UK banks. But there are no healthy big banks in Europe. And non-UK banks are crashing just as hard, and some harder. This is about a banking crisis morphing into a financial crisis.
 
What is amazing to me here is the ratio of Americans to citizens of the UK here who have opinions on the matter.

That's not hard to grasp. We here in the Colonies have the First amendment to keep us warm if only we can find a suitable place to use it. :wink:
 
“The most puzzling development in politics during the last decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.” - Mikhail Gorbachev
 
I love having a nice, peaceful political internet forum to talk politics with my buddies. I gotta find me a rocketry forum talk rockets!
 
I love having a nice, peaceful political internet forum to talk politics with my buddies. I gotta find me a rocketry forum talk rockets!

You sir are one of my favorite people on these forums. All hail Cthulhu!
 
What is amazing to me here is the ratio of Americans to citizens of the UK here who have opinions on the matter.


What do you expect from a forum dominated by Americans, no opinion at all? Or do we wait until more Europeans post? Just wondering...
 
I love having a nice, peaceful political internet forum to talk politics with my buddies. I gotta find me a rocketry forum talk rockets!

Let me help you out, scroll to the top of the page, see the "The Rocketry Forum" logo/icon? Click/tap on that and you will find multiple & varied subjects on rockets:wink:

Jesus Christ is my protector & savior.
 
Jesus Christ is my protector & savior.

Daniel 2:44 / New International Version (NIV)

44 “In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever.

(Let's see if this post closes the thread...)
 
“Stocks are rebounding on the expectation that there will be a coordinated intervention by central banks,” John Plassard, a senior equity-sales trader in Geneva at Mirabaud Securities told Bloomberg. “What central banks can do is put confidence back in the market by telling everyone that they are here and ready to act. If we don’t get that sort of support, we’ll see further declines.”

Any speculation of a Fed [interest] rate hike is now dead and buried, and instead the market is now pricing in higher odds of a December rate cut than a rate hike.


A historically unprecidented seven years of virtually zero interest rates in the US and trillions of dollars worth of sovereign debt bonds and savings accounts in the EU at NEGATIVE interest rates haven't worked to do anything other that to maintain economic stagnation followed by slow decline. But since it simply can't be that their economic theory is seriously flawed, the reason for that must be that they just haven't done enough of those sort of things for long enough, right?

The shares of the top 8 European banks are down 35%-70% in the past year - a sign that nothing is seriously wrong?

https://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/MI-CQ330_BRXBAN_16U_20160627184526.jpg

And, BTW, who is ultimately in charge? Imagine the reaction if the following headline said, "UK voters vote for candidate X; 5 ways to stop him/her from entering office." That sort of headline would never be seen, but this one is somehow OK? Why?:

5 ways to stop the U.K. from carrying out an EU departure despite the Brexit vote

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/5-ways-to-stop-brexit-from-happening-2016-06-27

The economic "emperors" have no clothes, folks. None. The extreme fragility of the system has been shown by the bank equities plunge due to a Brexit which hasn't even actually happened yet. Eventually, their monetary shell games will no longer work. No one knows when that will be and anyone who claims they do is a fraud.
 
My recurring thought about the EU and many of the complaints about it from it's citizens (in the UK and otherwise) is that I always found it odd that so many of the people who held the most power and influence in the EU (an organization comprised primarily, if not entirely from nations with democratically elected governments) were un-elected bureaucrats with little or no accountability to the electorate.

I always guessed that sooner or later this was going to rub someone the wrong way.
 
Here's a very tiny example of the sort of laughable garbage used to centrally plan the world economies via the monetary manipulations carried out by central banks. They do that by their artificial adjustments to THE most important factor in economics - the price of money (as determined by interest rates):

rba-inflation-model2.png


"Don’t let the math scare you. I can explain in simple terms everything you need to know.

1. The model is based on 'inflation exceptions' a nonsensical idea in theory, and clearly in practice.
2. Constants appear in three places, any of which can be wrong.
3. Measured import prices are highly likely to have errors.
4. Unit labor cost measurements are also highly likely to have errors.
5. When the equation blows up, it is corrected by 'U', the 'error term'.
6. If you mess with the variables enough, you can derive the 'dummy model'. Of course, the error factor is highly likely to be different next year than this."


Back when their monetary manipulations were very light handed and cautious due to computer power limitations and, thus, their uncertainty about results, things didn't get so out of whack:

The Rube Goldberg Machine That Mastered Keynesian Economics

https://nautil.us/blog/the-rube-goldberg-machine-that-mastered-keynesian-economics

“It solves the equations of Keynesian macro economics using water flowing through pipes and buckets,” said McRobie.

Now, tremendous computational power gives them (UNJUSTIFIED) greater confidence in what has proven over and again to be an obviously and seriously flawed economic theory, the equally flawed models based upon it, fed with data manipulated for political reasons. As pointed out in the book, "Greenspan's Bubbles," one of the major problems is that the central banks actually use that manipulated data. So:

Garbage theory > garbage models > fed with garbage data = garbage^3.

At the same time, that computational power allows investment instruments to be created that are so complex that only the PhD mathematicians who create them truly understand them. Then, nearly instantaneous worldwide communication combined with robot trading algorithms which are now responsible for up to 80% of all market trading activity in the U.S. allow incredibly rapid market moves (flash crashes).

What could possibly go wrong?

All of that based upon this (excerpts):

The Uncertainty Of Economics: Exploring The Dismal Science

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/03/071103.asp

Why Economics Isn't Really a Science

Most sciences work through an initial explanation of a proposed phenomenon (also known as a hypothesis). The scientist then forms a model to test and scrutinize this hypothesis until only the important variables remain. These variables are repeatedly tested to determine whether they are the causes of the end result. If in fact a variable can be isolated and determined as the sole cause, then the theory underlying the hypothesis is referred to as a law. (Please keep in mind that this is a gross simplification of the scientific method.)

Economics, like science, aims to explain certain phenomenon, but for many reasons economics cannot fulfill the criteria of the experimental model.

[Examples then given]

The Uncertainty of Economics

Economics cannot ascertain any clearly defined laws because in the market some unidentifiable factor always may be influencing a particular event or phenomena. It's nearly impossible to isolate any given variable in economics, so the dismal science is mainly based on theories.

These theories may contradict each other, like efficient market hypothesis (EMH) and behavioral finance, but they may be proven true in certain cases or even at the same time. Furthermore, when studying economics, evidence often turns out to be coincidence more than a fact.

Typically, these unreliable characteristics are a result of three specific things that economists cannot control:

Un-testable Economy

Unlike other scientists, economist don't have special laboratories where they can create isolated models to test their hypotheses. A vacuum of the economy just doesn't exist and cannot be created. Because of this, economists can't verify or prove their hypotheses as easily as other scientists.

Homo Economicus

Aside from the many different assumptions that economists make when debating their theories, probably the most hotly debated one is the idea of homo economicus, or the rational human. Nearly all economic theories assume that people are rational at all times, that they always prudently allocate their resources in a predictable manner that is beneficial. Unfortunately, this doesn't always hold water in the real world.

Blind Man's Bluff

Imagine you were blind with a deck of cards laid in front of you and someone expected you to be able to sort out the three of hearts. We know that there is a one-in-52 chance of being right and that, if the cards are randomly sorted, there is no scientific methodology that can help you improve those odds. However, if you pull the right card, you might attribute it to anything: the way you reached out, how many breaths you took, the twitch in your right eye - anything.

Once again you are stuck slicing and applying variables, but you can't repeat the test with any kind of consistent controls. This is similar to economics: the number of testable variables is enormous due to the sheer size of the economy. As a result, there has been little success not only in predicting phenomena but also in proposing reasons for why observable things happen. The economy can't be controlled like a math equation or a science experiment, and there are simply too many variables to test with any sort of reliability and verifiability.

"The field of economics is not exempt from the consequences of chaos and complexity. Marketplaces are indeterminate; value is subjective; and outcomes are subject to interpretation. Economic forecasting is just as nebulous, being based on the probability of statistical information that may or may not be accurate." - In Defense of Chaos: The Chaology of Politics, Economics and Human Action by L.K. Samuels

"The mystery is how a conception that is vulnerable to such obvious counterexamples survived for so long. I can explain it only by a weakness of the scholarly mind that I have often observed in myself. I call it theory-induced blindness: Once you have accepted a theory, it is extraordinarily difficult to notice its flaws. As the psychologist Daniel Gilbert has observed, disbelieving is hard work." -- Daniel Kahneman who shared the 2002 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences with Vernon L. Smith.

"The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable."
- John Kenneth Galbraith, Canadian-American economist
 
Last edited:
My recurring thought about the EU and many of the complaints about it from it's citizens (in the UK and otherwise) is that I always found it odd that so many of the people who held the most power and influence in the EU (an organization comprised primarily, if not entirely from nations with democratically elected governments) were un-elected bureaucrats with little or no accountability to the electorate.

But this is a fallacy that is getting very tired. The parliamentary members are elected (by every member nation using methods agreed internally and not under any control of the EU) they in turn elect the council members who in turn elect the top dog. Is really daft that those in UK who have been prattling on have not managed to get their heads around some very basic stuff (instead seemed to be happy to whipped into a frenzy for others benefit).

Add insult to injury the UK held 70 odd of 700 odd seats (nearly 10%) not bad when an equal division would result in nearer 4% of the seat.
 
But this is a fallacy that is getting very tired. The parliamentary members are elected (by every member nation using methods agreed internally and not under any control of the EU) they in turn elect the council members who in turn elect the top dog. Is really daft that those in UK who have been prattling on have not managed to get their heads around some very basic stuff (instead seemed to be happy to whipped into a frenzy for others benefit).

Add insult to injury the UK held 70 odd of 700 odd seats (nearly 10%) not bad when an equal division would result in nearer 4% of the seat.

Clearly, you are in a position to know better than I. Thanks for the clarification.
 
Clearly, you are in a position to know better than I. Thanks for the clarification.

Sorry about my rather 'up and at it' response there John. Just read it back and noticed it was more than a little curt.
Am at a loss as to what will happen here next and it grieves me. It appears the nation is going down the toilet very rapidly.
 
Nothing you can do about this, but just know the true story so you aren't snowed when the finger pointing begins. From President Reagan's former Director of the Office of Management and Budget:

https://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/the-curse-of-wealth-effects-central-banking/

...not only is the current 84 month-long simulacrum of a domestic business cycle expansion coming to an end (quickly and deep or gradually and deep which is actually even worse; I'd bet on the latter - W), but so is the global super-cycle.

We are referring here to the unprecedented central bank fueled credit boom of the past two decades, which elevated the world’s debt mountain from $40 trillion to $225 trillion. Not only has that become a tremendous burden on current activity, but it also caused a massive spree of wasteful, inefficient capital spending and infrastructure building which can’t be sustained and which will eventually generate staggering losses of real capital.

The heart of this super-cycle, of course, was China’s Red Ponzi and the monumental digging, building, investing, borrowing and speculating campaign that was unleashed by the People’s Printing Press of China after 1994. But the incendiary hot house economy which resulted is now pinned under $30 trillion of unserviceable debt and the greatest eruption of malinvestment, excess capacity and sheer investment waste in recorded economic history (the Pharaohs perhaps wasted more building the Pyramids).

It was all fueled by endless state supplied credit and a build it and they will come predicate. As noted in a nearby post, for example, it appears that China even built massive wind farms on that predicate. But, alas, the winds didn’t come.

In short, the world economy is fundamentally changing gears. A two-decade long credit-fueled crack-up boom which was centered in China and which cascaded throughout its EM supply chain and its DM base of capital equipment and luxury goods suppliers, such as Germany and the US, is coming to an end. We are now entering the crack-up phase and a long twilight era of deflation, liquidation, stagnation and payback.

So the stock market desperately needs to correct and correct deeply. Today’s closing valuation at 23.8X earnings is just plain ludicrous—given that corporate profits are falling sharply and have no prospect of recovering as far as the eye can see. Even 15X or 1300 on the S&P 500 would be a sporty valuation in a world heading into the economic dumpster.


W - Mr. Stockman fails to make the very important point that besides the fact that those PE (stock price/earnings) ratios are far too high, without trickery they would be even higher. Stock buybacks by corporations are being used to reduce the number of outstanding shares, thereby artificially increasing the earnings per share not due to more production (providing jobs) or productivity, but by the fact that the same or even less profit divided among FEWER SHARES IN CIRCULATION increases the earnings per share. See:

Stock Buybacks Are Killing the American Economy
Profits once flowed to higher wages or increased investment. Now, they enrich a small number of shareholders.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...-buyback-to-save-the-american-economy/385259/

The Cannibalized Company
How the cult of shareholder value has reshaped corporate America

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-buybacks-cannibalized/

Here's What's Keeping the Stock Market Up
Even as investors big and small are selling
April 25, 2016

https://fortune.com/2016/04/25/buybacks-stock-market/

Oh, yeah, as I've previously pointed out the fundamental weaknesses of banks worldwide (especially in the EU, Japan, and China), lookee here. A post-Brexit headline from yesterday:

Most banks get Fed clearance to lift dividends and increase stock buybacks
June 29, 2016

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/m...-lift-dividends-and-stock-buybacks-2016-06-29

Back to Mr. Stockman:

And that gets us to the culprit—-the ship of fools domiciled in the Eccles Building. The stock market and other risk asset markets cannot correct because honest price discovery (being able to know what something is actually worth - W) has essentially been destroyed by what amounts to wealth effects central banking.

That is, under conditions of Peak Debt interest rate repression and massive expansion of central bank credit are pointless relative to the main street economy. That’s because the historical credit channel of monetary policy transmission is broken and done.

Other than mobilizing the last auto buyer that can fog a rearview mirror and the last young person who can scratch a signature on a student loan, cheap interest rates have done nothing to stimulate the old Keynesian “borrow and spend” gambit among 90% of the US households. The latter are either not credit worthy or have already borrowed up to the limits of their stagnant real incomes.

At the same time, the business channel of cheap credit transmission—-the cycling of borrowed funds into enhanced fixed asset investment—-has been even more badly impaired. The speculative financial market casino enabled by the Fed has turned America’s corporate C-suites into stock trading rooms and business strategy into an endless exercise in financial engineering.

Accordingly, even though non-financial business debt has risen from $11 trillion on eve of the great financial crisis to $13.5 trillion today, the entirety of that gain has been recycled into the inflation of secondary markets for existing assets, not primary investments in plant, equipment, technology and other avenues of capital enabled real investment.
(as I said earlier, that's where the money is going, into low risk financial games enabled by too-cheap (due to near zero interest rates) money rather than much higher risk investment in factories and other things that actually provide jobs - W)

In short, the Fed’s massive monetary stimulus has never really left the canyons of Wall Street. It has not rejuvenated and reflated the main street economy, but only inflated an even more gargantuan financial bubble than the two earlier busted bubbles of this century.


EDIT: This is an near perfect, concise explanation of the core problem. I say "near" perfect because he said "the problem" - singular. Keynesian economics has MANY problems in matching reality. He should have said, "A key problem."

"The problem with Keynesian economics at this point in history is he could not have foreseen either the computer or how it has changed banking on the one hand and supply-chain management on the other. Neither could he have entertained the deployment of massive amounts of capital to essentially speculative financial products – most of which would have been illegal in his time. These two things have conspired to elevate what Keynes called the “Zero Level Boundary” to a point above zero where money has been made so cheap that the actual creation of new wealth (by improving things) cannot compete with speculation and stock buy-backs for available capital. Or in other words: when the chips are free, who wouldn't gamble?"
 
Last edited:
Sorry about my rather 'up and at it' response there John. Just read it back and noticed it was more than a little curt.
Am at a loss as to what will happen here next and it grieves me. It appears the nation is going down the toilet very rapidly.

No worries.

I have great confidence in our British (and other UK) friends. The Empire did quite well on its own long before the rise of the EU and I am certain that the intelligence and resourcefulness of her people will, in the end, with or without the EU, find a way forward.
 
This EXACTLY matches David Stockman's view on China for exactly the same reasons:

This economist thinks China is headed for a 1929-style depression
30 Jun 2016

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...headed-for-a-1929-style-depression-2016-06-30

Excerpts:

Andy Xie isn’t known for tepid opinions.

The provocative Xie, who was a top economist at the World Bank and Morgan Stanley, found notoriety a decade ago when he left the Wall Street bank after a controversial internal report went public.
(He exposed that money laundering was bolstering growth in Singapore; rule #1 if you want to keep your job working within modern corrupt finance - never expose the truth - W) Today, he is among the loudest voices warning of an inevitable implosion in China, the world’s second-largest economy.

Xie, now working independently and based in Shanghai, says the coming collapse won’t be like the Asian currency crisis of 1997 or the U.S. financial meltdown of 2008.

In a recent interview with MarketWatch, Xie said China’s trajectory instead resembles the one that led to the Great Depression, when the expansion of credit, loose monetary policy and a widespread belief that asset prices would never fall contributed to rampant speculation that ended with a crippling market crash.

China in 2016 looks much the same, according to Xie, with half of the country’s debt propping up real-estate prices and heavy leverage in the stock market — indicating that conditions are ripe for a correction.

“The government is allowing speculation by providing cheap financing,” Xie told MarketWatch. China “is riding a tiger and is terrified of a crash. So it keeps pumping cash into the economy. It is difficult to see how China can avoid a crisis.”

In early 2007, he termed China’s surging markets a “bubble” that could lead to a banking crisis,” and in 2009 he likened them to a “Ponzi scheme.”

Xie, who is from China but was educated at — and earned a Ph.D. from — Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has said Chinese authorities have tried to characterize him as an American spy sent to disrupt their markets after his 2007 prediction. China’s consulate general in San Francisco and its embassy in Washington did not reply to requests for comment.

While he now works independently, Xie’s opinions on Asian affairs remain influential. He writes regularly for the South China Morning Post, among other publications, in May saying China is running a “gigantic monetary bubble that has corrupted virtually every corner of the economy.”

Xie “is a respected economist,” said Huawei Ling, managing editor of Caixin Weekly and a John S. Knight Journalism Fellow at Stanford University. “I appreciate his consistency and his analysis on China’s economic issues,” she said.

His 2007 forecast, meanwhile, turned out correct. Soon after his prediction, the Shanghai Composite Index started plunging. After hitting a peak of 6,092 on Oct. 19, 2007, it fell below 2,000 over the next 12 months.

Years before hedge-fund managers like Kynikos Associates founder Jim Chanos turned bearish and George Soros predicted a hard landing, Xie was a dissenting voice amid a chorus of prognosticators enamored with China’s late 20th Century emergence from poverty.

In an interview with this reporter more than a decade ago, Xie warned of a lack of depth in China’s dazzling rise, saying the rapid growth on the country’s coastal cities masked the fact that many inner areas of the country were stuck in the “Stone Age.”

Concerns about China’s economy are more commonplace now.

“China grew too fast,” Xie said. “The government is using its power to stop the unraveling but not address the issue. It is just buying more time.”
 
One thing that really struck me about the Leave campaign is that they were making so many promises that they just were not going to be able to keep. It was like they were getting divorced and still expected to have access to the ex-wife's brother's lake cabin. A very short list:

350M pounds/week to the NHS
Cutting off immigration while still having complete trade access

The pillows argument was probably the worst of them. "There are XX EU regulations on the production of this pillow!" Turns out that they looked at the listed regulations, and they were for "pillow-shaped cereal" and many other things completely unrelated to pillows. EU had a lot of silly regs, but leaving doesn't get you out of them if you still want to sell to the EU afterwards.
 
One thing that really struck me about the Leave campaign is that they were making so many promises that they just were not going to be able to keep. It was like they were getting divorced and still expected to have access to the ex-wife's brother's lake cabin. A very short list:

350M pounds/week to the NHS
Cutting off immigration while still having complete trade access

The pillows argument was probably the worst of them. "There are XX EU regulations on the production of this pillow!" Turns out that they looked at the listed regulations, and they were for "pillow-shaped cereal" and many other things completely unrelated to pillows. EU had a lot of silly regs, but leaving doesn't get you out of them if you still want to sell to the EU afterwards.

Sums it up.
 
Back
Top