Tonight: Jesse Walker and Paul Cantor Discuss the Economics of Apocalypse

This evening I’m going to be moderating a talk by Paul Cantor at
George Mason University. The topic is “The
Economics of Apocalypse: Flying Saucers, Alien Invasions, and the
Walking Dead
.”

The men who made America.

Everywhere we look in pop culture today, the world is
coming to an end. Whether it’s the result of natural disasters,
alien invasions, or zombie plagues, our way of life is threatened
and our institutions are crumbling, leaving Americans to fend for
themselves (or prey upon each other).

Drawing upon his new book, The
Invisible Hand in Popular Culture: Liberty vs. Authority in
American Film and TV
, University of Virginia Professor of
English Paul Cantor will discuss opposing visions of individualism
vs. collectivism in today’s catastrophe narratives.

The event will begin at 7 and end at 8:30. You can find us at
Founders Hall Auditorium on GMU’s Arlington campus, at 3351 Fairfax
Drive.

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/tonight-jesse-walker-and-paul-cantor-dis
via IFTTT

McKinsey “Finds” QE Did Not “Boost Equity Markets”

Earlier today consulting company McKinsey, which has now become the new Moody’s, released a 72 page report titled “QE and ultra-low interest rates: Distributional effects and risks” which contains the following pearls of wisdom: “The impact of ultra-low rate monetary policies on financial asset prices is ambiguous. We found little conclusive evidence that ultra-low interest rates have boosted equity markets. Although announcements about changes to ultra-low rate policies do spark short-term market movements in equity prices, these movements do not persist in the long term.” Uhh, does McKinsey have an S&P chart that goes back to 2008? One would think whoever commissioned this report can at least pay for “bigger charts.” Continuing: “Moreover, there is little evidence of a large-scale shift into equities as part of a search for yield. Price-earnings ratios and price-book ratios in stock markets are no higher than long-term averages.”

We will spare any analysis, in-depth or otherwise, of the report: it merits none, and certainly not for those who watch the farce that the “market” has become.

Sadly, by issuing such drivel McKinsey has just tarnished what little reputation and credibility it may have had.

Instead we will just point out, visually, what McKinsey is saying: namely that the chart below which shows the causation between the S&P and the Fed’s balance sheet, doesn’t exist and is purely a figment of overactive realists’ imaginations.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/3ZKVsxI5i9M/story01.htm Tyler Durden

McKinsey "Finds" QE Did Not "Boost Equity Markets"

Earlier today consulting company McKinsey, which has now become the new Moody’s, released a 72 page report titled “QE and ultra-low interest rates: Distributional effects and risks” which contains the following pearls of wisdom: “The impact of ultra-low rate monetary policies on financial asset prices is ambiguous. We found little conclusive evidence that ultra-low interest rates have boosted equity markets. Although announcements about changes to ultra-low rate policies do spark short-term market movements in equity prices, these movements do not persist in the long term.” Uhh, does McKinsey have an S&P chart that goes back to 2008? One would think whoever commissioned this report can at least pay for “bigger charts.” Continuing: “Moreover, there is little evidence of a large-scale shift into equities as part of a search for yield. Price-earnings ratios and price-book ratios in stock markets are no higher than long-term averages.”

We will spare any analysis, in-depth or otherwise, of the report: it merits none, and certainly not for those who watch the farce that the “market” has become.

Sadly, by issuing such drivel McKinsey has just tarnished what little reputation and credibility it may have had.

Instead we will just point out, visually, what McKinsey is saying: namely that the chart below which shows the causation between the S&P and the Fed’s balance sheet, doesn’t exist and is purely a figment of overactive realists’ imaginations.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/3ZKVsxI5i9M/story01.htm Tyler Durden

QEeen Yellen’s Testimony Preview

It would appear that much of the rally yesterday (and early overnight) was driven by hope (and confirmed relief) that Fed chair nominee Yellen is not about to take on a substantially less-dovish tone in today’s testimony in an effort to garner the support of the more hawkish elements of the Senate Banking Committee. There was a great deal of confirmation bias in the market’s move and interpretation but, as BofAML notes below, this may be misplaced. The more important part of today’s testimony is yet to come in the Q&A session – where we will hear likely more unscripted thoughts from the QEeen at her Senate confirmation this morning.

 

Deutsche’s Jim Reid notes that:

The market has zeroed in on the 5th and 6th paragraphs of the statement where Yellen describes the economy as performing “far short” of its potential. She goes on to say that inflation has been running below target and that unemployment is still too high. As such, Yellen concludes that the Fed will continue to use monetary policy tools to promote a more robust recovery.

 

On the question of QE, Yellen says that a strong recovery will enable the Fed to reduce its monetary accommodation and reliance on unconventional policy tools. She adds that supporting the recovery is the “surest path to returning to a more normal” approach to monetary policy.

 

So while the tones are certainly dovish, it’s impossible to infer precise policy thoughts from her remarks. She clearly views that the economy has not yet reached a strong enough trajectory but is she making a grander point that they won’t start tapering until the data is better than now?

 

Or does tapering to $70bn, $50bn, $30bn etc a month still represent supporting the recovery. Indeed, it’s difficult to infer anything concrete regarding the path of monetary policy from Yellen’s prepared comments.

So while dovish, he implies that perhaps the market is experiencing a little to much confirmation bias.

BofAML also notes that markets read her comments as dovish, inferring that she might wait some time to taper Fed asset purchases… but disagree with that interpretation.

Markets see prepared statement as dovish

 

Janet Yellen, the current vice chair of the Federal Reserve and nominee to replace Ben Bernanke as Fed chair, released a brief prepared statement (see full report for footnote) Wednesday afternoon, ahead of the Senate Banking Committee hearing that begins at 10 AM ET on Thursday, November 14. Markets read it as dovish, particularly as many commentators expected her to retreat to a “balanced” (i.e., more hawkish) position. We view her comments as supporting continued Fed accommodation, consistent with ongoing official FOMC statements but not revealing any specific policy plans. Overall we expect continuity in Fed policy following her confirmation.

 

Support for dual mandate and inflation target

 

No surprise, Yellen’s text confirms she strongly supports the Fed’s dual mandate. She acknowledges progress in the recovery (to push back against the inevitable suggestion on Thursday that Fed easing has been ineffective), but notes unemployment is “still too high” while inflation may remain below the Fed’s 2% goal for some time. Hence, she concludes, the Fed “has more work to do.” To front-run questions that presume she will be too soft on inflation, Yellen notes that she “led the effort to adopt … a 2% goal for inflation.” This, she argues, sends a “clear and powerful message” that “has helped anchor the public’s expectations” for “low and stable” inflation. Expect her to repeat this argument multiple times on Thursday.

 

The taper question, ultimately

 

Yellen states that “supporting the recovery today is the surest path to a more normal approach to monetary policy” – in other words, policy needs to remain easy now to tighten later. Additionally, “a strong recovery will ultimately enable the Fed to reduce its monetary accommodation and reliance on unconventional policy tools such as asset purchases.” Early commentary focused on the word “ultimately” as a possible signal that Yellen does not plan to taper for a while.

 

But “reduce its monetary accommodation” typically has meant rate hikes in official Fed communication, while reducing “reliance on unconventional tools” likely refers to the eventual reduction in the size of the Fed’s balance sheet rather than tapering. Recall, most Fed officials take a “stock approach” to QE; in that view it’s the total amount of assets owned and not the purchase pace that defines the degree of accommodation. No doubt she’ll get questions about the Fed’s tapering plans on Thursday.

 

On financial stability

 

Yellen further pledges to continue to support Fed efforts to address financial stability concerns. She emphasizes supervisory and regulatory tools “to reduce the threat of another financial crisis,” but notes that the Fed also is taking financial stability “into consideration when carrying out its responsibilities for monetary policy.” This suggests she may be open to tightening policy to address bubble concerns. Look for her to be questioned on whether there are bubbles now (expected answer: no, or at least not systemic) and how the Fed should respond to such risks.

One thing appears clear – QEeen Yellen will bring continuity to Fed policy once she is confirmed… but a taper may still be on the table.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/y3TfcPsxc2k/story01.htm Tyler Durden

QEeen Yellen's Testimony Preview

It would appear that much of the rally yesterday (and early overnight) was driven by hope (and confirmed relief) that Fed chair nominee Yellen is not about to take on a substantially less-dovish tone in today’s testimony in an effort to garner the support of the more hawkish elements of the Senate Banking Committee. There was a great deal of confirmation bias in the market’s move and interpretation but, as BofAML notes below, this may be misplaced. The more important part of today’s testimony is yet to come in the Q&A session – where we will hear likely more unscripted thoughts from the QEeen at her Senate confirmation this morning.

 

Deutsche’s Jim Reid notes that:

The market has zeroed in on the 5th and 6th paragraphs of the statement where Yellen describes the economy as performing “far short” of its potential. She goes on to say that inflation has been running below target and that unemployment is still too high. As such, Yellen concludes that the Fed will continue to use monetary policy tools to promote a more robust recovery.

 

On the question of QE, Yellen says that a strong recovery will enable the Fed to reduce its monetary accommodation and reliance on unconventional policy tools. She adds that supporting the recovery is the “surest path to returning to a more normal” approach to monetary policy.

 

So while the tones are certainly dovish, it’s impossible to infer precise policy thoughts from her remarks. She clearly views that the economy has not yet reached a strong enough trajectory but is she making a grander point that they won’t start tapering until the data is better than now?

 

Or does tapering to $70bn, $50bn, $30bn etc a month still represent supporting the recovery. Indeed, it’s difficult to infer anything concrete regarding the path of monetary policy from Yellen’s prepared comments.

So while dovish, he implies that perhaps the market is experiencing a little to much confirmation bias.

BofAML also notes that markets read her comments as dovish, inferring that she might wait some time to taper Fed asset purchases… but disagree with that interpretation.

Markets see prepared statement as dovish

 

Janet Yellen, the current vice chair of the Federal Reserve and nominee to replace Ben Bernanke as Fed chair, released a brief prepared statement (see full report for footnote) Wednesday afternoon, ahead of the Senate Banking Committee hearing that begins at 10 AM ET on Thursday, November 14. Markets read it as dovish, particularly as many commentators expected her to retreat to a “balanced” (i.e., more hawkish) position. We view her comments as supporting continued Fed accommodation, consistent with ongoing official FOMC statements but not revealing any specific policy plans. Overall we expect continuity in Fed policy following her confirmation.

 

Support for dual mandate and inflation target

 

No surprise, Yellen’s text confirms she strongly supports the Fed’s dual mandate. She acknowledges progress in the recovery (to push back against the inevitable suggestion on Thursday that Fed easing has been ineffective), but notes unemployment is “still too high” while inflation may remain below the Fed’s 2% goal for some time. Hence, she concludes, the Fed “has more work to do.” To front-run questions that presume she will be too soft on inflation, Yellen notes that she “led the effort to adopt … a 2% goal for inflation.” This, she argues, sends a “clear and powerful message” that “has helped anchor the public’s expectations” for “low and stable” inflation. Expect her to repeat this argument multiple times on Thursday.

 

The taper question, ultimately

 

Yellen states that “supporting the recovery today is the surest path to a more normal approach to monetary policy” – in other words, policy needs to remain easy now to tighten later. Additionally, “a strong recovery will ultimately enable the Fed to reduce its monetary accommodation and reliance on unconventional policy tools such as asset purchases.” Early commentary focused on the word “ultimately” as a possible signal that Yellen does not plan to taper for a while.

 

But “reduce its monetary accommodation” typically has meant rate hikes in official Fed communication, while reducing “reliance on unconventional tools” likely refers to the eventual reduction in the size of the Fed’s balance sheet rather than tapering. Recall, most Fed officials take a “stock approach” to QE; in that view it’s the total amount of assets owned and not the purchase pace that defines the degree of accommodation. No doubt she’ll get questions about the Fed’s tapering plans on Thursday.

 

On financial stability

 

Yellen further pledges to continue to support Fed efforts to address financial stability concerns. She emphasizes supervisory and regulatory tools “to reduce the threat of another financial crisis,” but notes that the Fed also is taking financial stability “into consideration when carrying out its responsibilities for monetary policy.” This suggests she may be open to tightening policy to address bubble concerns. Look for her to be questioned on whether there are bubbles now (expected answer: no, or at least not systemic) and how the Fed should respond to such risks.

One thing appears clear – QEeen Yellen will bring continuity to Fed policy once she is confirmed… but a taper may still be on the table.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/y3TfcPsxc2k/story01.htm Tyler Durden

“I unapologetically take my 10-year-old son to PG-13 movies and have for years”

Writing at Time.com,
Stetson University psychologist Christopher J. Ferguson disposes of
the latest study, this one in Pediatrics, denouncing the
increase in depictions of fantasy violence in TV, movies, games,
and the like.

Where the study’s authors assert a causal link between movie
violece and real world horrors (“We know that movies teach children
how adults behave…”), Ferguson trots out the same data we at
Reason have been citing for decades:
Both youth
violence
 overall and gun
violence
 specifically have declined precipitously
du
ring recent decades as movie violence
rose.”

Ferguson ends his column with this great passage:

As a media-violence researcher myself, I unapologetically
take my 10-year-old son to PG-13 movies and have for years, knowing
full well what’s in them. At the theater I see mainly families, not
hordes of unsupervised children. Moreover, there’s a vast gulf
between the cartoonish violence of PG-13 movies and real-life
violence. Beliefs in the harmfulness of PG-13 movies rest on the
notion that the human brain is unable to distinguish between the
violence of 
Thor and violence in
real life. Movie violence can sound offensive in the abstract, but
I suspect if many parents were asked if they would stop taking
their children to see 
The
Avengers 
or Man of
Steel, 
the answer would be “no.”


Read the whole thing.

Watch “Sex, Violence & Satan: 6 Unbelievably Dumb
Congressional Hearings”

 

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/i-unapologetically-take-my-10-year-old-s
via IFTTT

"I unapologetically take my 10-year-old son to PG-13 movies and have for years"

Writing at Time.com,
Stetson University psychologist Christopher J. Ferguson disposes of
the latest study, this one in Pediatrics, denouncing the
increase in depictions of fantasy violence in TV, movies, games,
and the like.

Where the study’s authors assert a causal link between movie
violece and real world horrors (“We know that movies teach children
how adults behave…”), Ferguson trots out the same data we at
Reason have been citing for decades:
Both youth
violence
 overall and gun
violence
 specifically have declined precipitously
du
ring recent decades as movie violence
rose.”

Ferguson ends his column with this great passage:

As a media-violence researcher myself, I unapologetically
take my 10-year-old son to PG-13 movies and have for years, knowing
full well what’s in them. At the theater I see mainly families, not
hordes of unsupervised children. Moreover, there’s a vast gulf
between the cartoonish violence of PG-13 movies and real-life
violence. Beliefs in the harmfulness of PG-13 movies rest on the
notion that the human brain is unable to distinguish between the
violence of 
Thor and violence in
real life. Movie violence can sound offensive in the abstract, but
I suspect if many parents were asked if they would stop taking
their children to see 
The
Avengers 
or Man of
Steel, 
the answer would be “no.”


Read the whole thing.

Watch “Sex, Violence & Satan: 6 Unbelievably Dumb
Congressional Hearings”

 

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/i-unapologetically-take-my-10-year-old-s
via IFTTT

A.M. Links: Obamacare Website Subject to Cyberattacks, Snapchat Rejected $3 Billion Deal, US Jobless Claims Fall

  • A top Homeland Security
    Department official testifying before Congress stated that
    HealthCare.gov has been subject to approximately
    16 cyberattacks
    and one unsuccessful “denial of service”
    attack. This was the first time an administration official publicly
    acknowledged that there have been any cyberattacks on the Obamacare
    website. So, it’s not just the feds who want to steal your medical
    records.
  • Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) said approval for the U.S.
    Congress is so low
    even his 101-year-old mother
    no longer supports the legislative
    branch.
  • A law banning undetectable firearms
    is set to expire
    , which has thrown federal law enforcement
    officials into hysterics about the potential security threats posed
    by 3D printed plastic guns.
  • Mobile messaging startup Snapchat
    rejected an acquisition offer
    from Facebook that would
    have valued the company at $3 billion or more.
  • A US aircraft carrier and two cruisers have arrived in the
    Philippines to help communities
    devastated by Typhoon Haiyan
    , one of the deadliest typhoons on
    record.
  • The number of people who applied for unemployment benefits fell
    by by 2,000 to
    339,000
    last week. 
  • Former German President Christian Wulff is
    going on trial
    accused of receiving and granting favors in
    office. 

Get Reason.com and Reason 24/7
content 
widgets for your
websites.

Follow Reason and Reason
24/7
 on Twitter, and like us on Facebook.  You
can also get the top stories mailed to you—
sign up
here.
 Have a news tip? Send it to us!

from Hit & Run http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/14/am-links-obamacare-website-subject-to-cy
via IFTTT

September Trade Balance Worse Than Worst Estimate; Trade Deficit With China Hits Record

Despite the great shale revolution, US exports posted a $0.4 billion decline to $188.9 billion in October driven by decreases in industrial supplies and materials ($1.3 billion), other goods ($0.2 billion), consumer goods ($0.2 billion), and capital goods ($0.1 billion). This was offset by a $2.7 billion increase in imports to $230.7 billion broken down by increases in industrial supplies and materials ($0.9 billion); automotive vehicles, parts, and engines ($0.9 billion); capital goods ($0.8 billion); and consumer goods ($0.6 billion). End result: a September trade balance of $41.8 billion, which was higher than the highest forecast of $41.6 billion among 72 economists queried by Bloomberg, and the highest deficit print in 4 months.

The major deficits broken down by grography: with China $30.5 ($29.9), European Union $8.0 ($9.8), Germany $6.1 ($5.4), OPEC $5.9 ($7.3), Japan $5.5 ($6.4), Mexico $5.3 ($4.9), Canada $3.2 ($2.4), Saudi Arabia $3.2 ($3.6), Korea $2.1 ($1.7), Ireland $1.8 ($1.9), India $1.7 ($1.6), and Venezuela $1.3 ($1.5).

This was the largest trade deficit gap with China posted on record.

More from the report:

The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, through the Department of Commerce, announced today that total September exports of $188.9 billion and imports of $230.7 billion resulted in a goods and services deficit of $41.8 billion, up from $38.7 billion in August, revised. September exports were $0.4  billion less than August exports of $189.3 billion. September imports were $2.7 billion more than August imports of $228.0 billion.

 

In September, the goods deficit increased $3.0 billion from August to $61.3 billion, and the services surplus decreased $0.1 billion from August to $19.5 billion. Exports of goods decreased $0.2 billion to $132.1 billion, and imports of goods increased $2.8 billion to $193.4 billion. Exports of services decreased $0.2 billion to $56.8 billion, and imports of services decreased $0.1 billion to $37.3 billion.

 

The goods and services deficit increased $0.2 billion from September 2012 to September 2013. Exports were up $2.1 billion, or 1.1 percent, and imports were up $2.3 billion, or 1.0 percent.

End result: Q3 GDP forecasts are about to gap down by 0.2-0.4% points.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/vA9RCv1SU3o/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Initial Jobless Claims Miss Expectations For 6th Week In A Row (More Glitches)

Following the end of the plague of system glitches last week, the Labor Department admits that 5 states estimated levels this week. The initial jobless claims print remains near 4 month-highs (adjusted to for the prior glitch unreality). At 339k vs 330k expected, this is the 6th straight week of disappointment for the ‘critical real-time indicator of the economy’s health’ that some have called this noisy data series. Last week’s ‘encouraging’ print was revised higher from 336 to 341k, we can’t wait to see how the 5 estimates affect next week’s revision.

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/vH9ITTCttc8/story01.htm Tyler Durden