The Market Wants More Stimulus

[SAT2]

The Market Wants More Stimulus: Why Oh Why Can't We Have a Better Press Corps?: Yes, Rita Nazareth of Bloomberg News, We Are Looking at You Funny Because We Know You Can Do Better Department

But if you read the Bloomberg piece carefully, what it actually says is that market players fear that the absence of a debt deal means no stimulus. So the actual fear is not that spending won’t be cut enough, it is that it will be cut too much — which actually makes sense, and is consistent with the action in stock and bond markets.

But how many readers will get that? The way it’s presented reinforces the false notion that the deficit is the problem.

More at the link.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Of course the market wants another damn stimulus?
Can we all say in unison...1...2...3.....DUUUHHH.

2008...market collapses finally under the weight of it's own corruption and miles of fake money.
Fall of 2008....stimulus.
2009...the banks and Wall Street has the best year in the history of Wall Street. Financial institutions gave record bonuses and salary hikes - also - in history...and guess where that money came from???

YOU.

Hell yeah they want another stimulus.

 

[SAT2]

All money is fake.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

All money is fake.

Whatever SAT....the markets want more stimulus because it is the ONLY thing that can maintain the false prices that they built up in 2009-10.
If you think for one second that it has anything to do with anything other than further exploitation and another round of investing in foreign banks and acquisitions....wow...

 

[SAT2]

All money is fake.

Whatever SAT....the markets want more stimulus because it is the ONLY thing that can maintain the false prices that they built up in 2009-10.
If you think for one second that it has anything to do with anything other than further exploitation and another round of investing in foreign banks and acquisitions....wow...

Money is not a real thing like a commodity. It never has been.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

All money is fake.

Whatever SAT....the markets want more stimulus because it is the ONLY thing that can maintain the false prices that they built up in 2009-10.
If you think for one second that it has anything to do with anything other than further exploitation and another round of investing in foreign banks and acquisitions....wow...

Money is not a real thing like a commodity. It never has been.

Yeah well as soon as you can take 100 cartons of Orange Juice to the bank to make a house payment -
What does this have to do with the OP anyway?

 

[SAT2]

Whatever SAT....the markets want more stimulus because it is the ONLY thing that can maintain the false prices that they built up in 2009-10.
If you think for one second that it has anything to do with anything other than further exploitation and another round of investing in foreign banks and acquisitions....wow...

Money is not a real thing like a commodity. It never has been.

Yeah well as soon as you can take 100 cartons of Orange Juice to the bank to make a house payment -
What does this have to do with the OP anyway?

You keep using the words false and fake regarding money.

DeLong isn't saying that the markets are verbally requesting money.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Money is not a real thing like a commodity. It never has been.

Yeah well as soon as you can take 100 cartons of Orange Juice to the bank to make a house payment -
What does this have to do with the OP anyway?

You keep using the words false and fake regarding money.

DeLong isn't saying that the markets are verbally requesting money.

What?
Are you reading something else?

1) 2007-08 Markets tank.
2) Fall of 2008 - stimulus.
3) 2009 - markets have the best year in history (at the same time America's economy was on a free fall) and they used the money to invest in foreign assets, to buy each other up, and gave themselves record bonuses - and loaned almost NONE of it to the American public/businesses.
4) The sheer money that Wall Street made from the 2 stimulus windfalls is staggering...and almost none of it went to the people.


OF COURSE THEY WANT IT AGAIN!!

 

[SAT2]

Yeah well as soon as you can take 100 cartons of Orange Juice to the bank to make a house payment -
What does this have to do with the OP anyway?

You keep using the words false and fake regarding money.

DeLong isn't saying that the markets are verbally requesting money.

What?
Are you reading something else?

1) 2007-08 Markets tank.
2) Fall of 2008 - stimulus.
3) 2009 - markets have the best year in history (at the same time America's economy was on a free fall) and they used the money to invest in foreign assets, to buy each other up, and gave themselves record bonuses - and loaned almost NONE of it to the American public/businesses.
4) The sheer money that Wall Street made from the 2 stimulus windfalls is staggering...and almost none of it went to the people.


OF COURSE THEY WANT IT AGAIN!!

I refer you again to Professor DeLong.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Let'em fail.

 

[expat_panama]

...the market wants another damn stimulus?...

The market is sitting right next to me here and it says it doesn't want yet another tired politically driven pork filled stimulus, it just wants to be left alone thank you.

OK, I can admit that my Mr. Market is imaginary.

Your turn.

 

[Wiseacre]

The Bloomberg piece says nothing whatsoever about a lack of stimulus, it basically said the market wants some resolution about what is going to be done about the debt. That's why the market went down today, there was no deal done. It's Paul fucking Krugman saying it's about more stimulus. There's a link inside your link to the NY Times and a Krugman op-ed talking about more stimulus, as he has done since forever.

I really don't think the market wants to see more stimulus cuz that'll just be temporsary yet increase the debt/deficits permanently.

 

[SAT2]

Fairy Tales - NYTimes.com

But if you read the Bloomberg piece carefully, what it actually says is that market players fear that the absence of a debt deal means no stimulus. So the actual fear is not that spending won’t be cut enough, it is that it will be cut too much — which actually makes sense, and is consistent with the action in stock and bond markets.

 

[Leweman]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4royOLtvmQ]CowBell - YouTube[/ame]

 

[SAT2]

The Bloomberg piece says nothing whatsoever about a lack of stimulus, it basically said the market wants some resolution about what is going to be done about the debt. That's why the market went down today, there was no deal done. It's Paul fucking Krugman saying it's about more stimulus. There's a link inside your link to the NY Times and a Krugman op-ed talking about more stimulus, as he has done since forever.

I really don't think the market wants to see more stimulus cuz that'll just be temporsary yet increase the debt/deficits permanently.

From the Bloomberg article:

“The supercommittee was expected to pave the way to extend the stimulus that is in the system,” Barry Knapp, the New York- based head of U.S. equity strategy at Barclays Plc, said in a telephone interview. If stimulus is not extended, “you get a big hit to the economy in the first quarter right at the point when the economic fallout from the European debt crisis is hitting,” he said.

 

[Stephanie]

Well Sat. I think you should take up a collection of all your liberal friends and send it to the market. cause you Dear leader has done BLED US TAXPAYERS DRY.

 

[Wiseacre]

The Bloomberg piece says nothing whatsoever about a lack of stimulus, it basically said the market wants some resolution about what is going to be done about the debt. That's why the market went down today, there was no deal done. It's Paul fucking Krugman saying it's about more stimulus. There's a link inside your link to the NY Times and a Krugman op-ed talking about more stimulus, as he has done since forever.

I really don't think the market wants to see more stimulus cuz that'll just be temporsary yet increase the debt/deficits permanently.

From the Bloomberg article:

“The supercommittee was expected to pave the way to extend the stimulus that is in the system,” Barry Knapp, the New York- based head of U.S. equity strategy at Barclays Plc, said in a telephone interview. If stimulus is not extended, “you get a big hit to the economy in the first quarter right at the point when the economic fallout from the European debt crisis is hitting,” he said.

Extend the stimulus that is in the system? What's that mean? Sounds like he's talking about the Bush Tax Cuts, which the Dems would not agree to extend. There was never even one word about spending more stimulus money as part of the Supercommittee. Your link has a link to Krugman's op-ed, HE'S the one talking about more stimulus. Which is bullshit, how stupid is it to keeping throwing good money after bad on a program that failed miserably to jumpstart jobs and the economy.

 

[SAT2]

The Bloomberg piece says nothing whatsoever about a lack of stimulus, it basically said the market wants some resolution about what is going to be done about the debt. That's why the market went down today, there was no deal done. It's Paul fucking Krugman saying it's about more stimulus. There's a link inside your link to the NY Times and a Krugman op-ed talking about more stimulus, as he has done since forever.

I really don't think the market wants to see more stimulus cuz that'll just be temporsary yet increase the debt/deficits permanently.

From the Bloomberg article:

“The supercommittee was expected to pave the way to extend the stimulus that is in the system,” Barry Knapp, the New York- based head of U.S. equity strategy at Barclays Plc, said in a telephone interview. If stimulus is not extended, “you get a big hit to the economy in the first quarter right at the point when the economic fallout from the European debt crisis is hitting,” he said.

Extend the stimulus that is in the system? What's that mean? Sounds like he's talking about the Bush Tax Cuts, which the Dems would not agree to extend. There was never even one word about spending more stimulus money as part of the Supercommittee. Your link has a link to Krugman's op-ed, HE'S the one talking about more stimulus. Which is bullshit, how stupid is it to keeping throwing good money after bad on a program that failed miserably to jumpstart jobs and the economy.

Yes, it's DeLong, linking to Krugman.

The stimulus prevented a Depression. I'm sure we all needed a good Depression to strengthen our characters.

The Bush tax cuts aren't stimulating the economy now, they are just increasing the deficit.

 

[Wiseacre]

From the Bloomberg article:

Extend the stimulus that is in the system? What's that mean? Sounds like he's talking about the Bush Tax Cuts, which the Dems would not agree to extend. There was never even one word about spending more stimulus money as part of the Supercommittee. Your link has a link to Krugman's op-ed, HE'S the one talking about more stimulus. Which is bullshit, how stupid is it to keeping throwing good money after bad on a program that failed miserably to jumpstart jobs and the economy.

Yes, it's DeLong, linking to Krugman.

The stimulus prevented a Depression. I'm sure we all needed a good Depression to strengthen our characters.

The Bush tax cuts aren't stimulating the economy now, they are just increasing the deficit.

I think you are missing the point. Nobody is talking about more tax cuts, we're talking about not raising taxes by extending the Bush tax cuts. What I think Barry Knapp is saying is that if you don't extend those tax cuts then you're inviting an economic downturn. Continuing those tax cuts is just maintaining the status quo, we're not going to get better economically if we extend them, but we are going to hurt the economy if we don't.

As for preventing a depression, that has never been proven, actually can't be proved. I think a stimulus plan was a good idea, I just think the one the democrats passed was poorly designed, with too much going to their constituents rather than to the most effective programs. I also think it was very poorly managed, and I didn't think it was funny that "some shovel ready projects weren't as shovel ready as we thought". That makes me feel like I was lied to, Obama sold the stimulus bill as an immediate boost to the economy that would create millions of jobs and it wasn't.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

All I am saying is (and I challenge anyone to refute this)...that Wall Street firms made a freaking killing off of the first 2 stimulus windfalls.
They used the money to invest, merge and acquire each other with no risk.
I have no doubt that there are a whole lot of short-term wasp that would like nothing better than to have the FED hand over another couple $100 billion for them to play with.