U.S. 30-Year Yields Drop to Year’s Low on European Debt Crisis May 21, 2010, 8:21 AM

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
U.S. 30-Year Yields Drop to Year’s Low on European Debt Crisis
May 21, 2010, 8:21 AM EDT


By Cordell Eddings and Susanne Walker

May 21 (Bloomberg) -- Treasury 30-year bond yields dropped to the lowest level this year as Europe’s debt crisis spurred an exodus from higher-yield assets into the safest government securities.

Benchmark 10-year notes are headed for their third weekly Gain as European finance ministers prepared for talks to stem a rout in the euro that prompted the biggest U.S. debt rally in 14 months yesterday. U.S. stock-index futures extended losses, driving the June contract on the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index below the lowest level reached during the May 6 crash.
U.S. 30-Year Yields Drop to Year’s Low on European Debt Crisis - BusinessWeek
 
OP
Neubarth

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
Interest rates falling means that the world is buying US 30 year bonds.

Since I am no economist, I can only speculate that the dollar keeps on going up in value because we do not have enough of them out there. We have lost 8 Trillion but have only put 3 trillion back in (something like that as I see different number values posted all over the place).

My approximation will suffice to call attention to the point. If 8 Trillion vaporize into thin air and only 3 trillion are created by the FED via electronic transaction (They are not printed.) than we do not have too much money out there. So the dollar is strong and the rest of the currencies around the world are not.

China will have to lower the Yuan soon if the Dollar keeps going up and up and up.:lol::lol::lol:
 

The Rabbi

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
67,602
Reaction score
7,864
Points
1,840
Location
Nashville
The dollar is still the world standard of currency. People are flocking to safety: Dollars, T-Bills and gold. this should tell you how bad the rest of the world is.
 

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,408
Reaction score
5,955
Points
1,830
If 8 Trillion vaporize into thin air and only 3 trillion are created by the FED via electronic transaction (They are not printed.)
Neubarth I'm going to tell you this one more time, and I hope this time you fucking grasp the concept.

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing prints the currency for the Federal Reserve System. When a bank hands you a brand spanking new crisp $100 bill, that came from the BEP at the behest of the Fed.

You keep saying new money isn't printed, but where the fuck do you think a bank comes up with the physical notes to give to you?

Not only that, but what the fuck is the point of arguing semantics regarding newly created money and the terminology behind it? Newly created money is newly created money.
 

KissMy

Free Breast Exam
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
15,848
Reaction score
2,971
Points
255
Location
In your head
Neubarth does not understand the difference between debt money (M3) & currency (M1). Just because debt money (M3) disappeared & they are replacing it with currency (M1) does not make the dollar a long term strong stable currency. Once this newly created currency gets leveraged like before in the next economic boom prices will be astronomic. This is why gold is popular even in this period of deflation.

Debt money had real value when someone promised to work to pay it back. When debt is forgiven or paid with printed money the work that was promised never gets delivered. Most of the worlds currencies are becoming worthless at the same time. The future does not look so bright for the retirement savings value of currency in your nest egg.
 

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,408
Reaction score
5,955
Points
1,830
Neubarth does not understand the difference between debt money (M3) & currency (M1). Just because debt money (M3) disappeared & they are replacing it with currency (M1) does not make the dollar a long term strong stable currency. Once this newly created currency gets leveraged like before in the next economic boom prices will be astronomic. This is why gold is popular even in this period of deflation.

Debt money had real value when someone promised to work to pay it back. When debt is forgiven or paid with printed money the work that was promised never gets delivered. Most of the worlds currencies are becoming worthless at the same time. The future does not look so bright for the retirement savings value of currency in your nest egg.
Not only that, but he's referring also to decreased asset value.

The value of homes or stocks dropping, for instance, is not the same as money such as bank reserves being extinguished.

He'll be along soon to tell us how we're disgusting liars and idiots that deserve to die at the hands of God.
 
OP
Neubarth

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
Neubarth does not understand the difference between debt money (M3) & currency (M1). Just because debt money (M3) disappeared & they are replacing it with currency (M1) does not make the dollar a long term strong stable currency. Once this newly created currency gets leveraged like before in the next economic boom prices will be astronomic. This is why gold is popular even in this period of deflation.

Debt money had real value when someone promised to work to pay it back. When debt is forgiven or paid with printed money the work that was promised never gets delivered. Most of the worlds currencies are becoming worthless at the same time. The future does not look so bright for the retirement savings value of currency in your nest egg.

You are back to your insane lies again. Why do you act so damn stupid all of the time? You and your gang of low IQ twits always post gibberish. I am the one who explained the difference between the various types of money that Economists talk about. I am also the one who explained to you that economists do not know what they are talking about.

Not one economist seemed to know that the economy was in trouble three years ago. I had been posting that it was going to crash way back then. Economists never know what is happening because they do not understand the nature of money. It totally baffles them just like it always confuses you.

All you low IQ clowns are talking about hyperinflation all of the time. I have been telling you for the past year that it might not happen. We have to see what unfolds. Remember Economics is a failed assortment of confused and insane theories. None of which seem to work, so the economists are constantly making up new theories that also do not work. Boy are they fugged up, just like you.

I presented my theory and you say that I do not know about M1 and M3 or whatever. It is not that I do not know, it is that I am making fun of all of the people who play this economics game and really do not know what they are talking about. Damn, you shitheads are stupid! I have met dumb people before, but you clowns take the cake.

Economics is not science. Tell yourself over and over again and then realize that there are factors out there that do not fit into a box and most certainly do not follow any of the economic theories.

For the time being my theory stands and your theory has failed. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

My theory is called the Net Effect of Money. I expect to get a Noble Prize for my research. We had Trillions that disappeared into thin air. Money can be created out of thin air and it can disappear into thin air. When too much has disappeared into thin air you can get Deflation. That is the reason why we had to create the FED so we can create money and forestall Deflation. Inflation is a good thing in moderation. Deflation is horrible and hurts too many people. Go to school and read all about it. Pauli especially. Damn, he is really dumb!
 
OP
Neubarth

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
Not only that, but he's referring also to decreased asset value.

The value of homes or stocks dropping, for instance, is not the same as money such as bank reserves being extinguished.

He'll be along soon to tell us how we're disgusting liars and idiots that deserve to die at the hands of God.
You do deserve to die at the hand of an angry God, because you are too damn stupid to live.

Try thinking for once in your confused life there Pauli. You say that the value of a home being extinguished is of no consequence and the value of stocks falling is of no consequence because they are not the same as real money in a bank that is held in reserve..

Now, If I sold those stocks at the peak, it is of consequence to me, because I have the money in hand and it is called cash. You bought the stocks from me because you are stupid and you lost half of your money. Now, to me that is of "no consequence" because fools like you always lose your money. That is what stupid people like you always do. But, your money loss does have an effect on the economy, even though you think it does not matter. Boy, are you both poorer and stupid at the same time.

The same thing goes for that house appreciation. I sold the house to you for $800,000. You are now trying to sell it for $400,000 and can find no borrowers. I am happy because I have over a million that you gave me for the stocks and the property, and you are broke. But, what the hell, it is of no consequence to you because it was not bank reserves. Yet, it still will have an effect on the economy. One of these days you will figure that out. Right now, you are too damn fucked up in the head to understand, but give it time and you will realize that IT DOES MATTER.
 

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,408
Reaction score
5,955
Points
1,830
Neubarth you really need to learn to quit while you're behind.
 

KissMy

Free Breast Exam
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
15,848
Reaction score
2,971
Points
255
Location
In your head
Neubarth does not understand the difference between debt money (M3) & currency (M1). Just because debt money (M3) disappeared & they are replacing it with currency (M1) does not make the dollar a long term strong stable currency. Once this newly created currency gets leveraged like before in the next economic boom prices will be astronomic. This is why gold is popular even in this period of deflation.

Debt money had real value when someone promised to work to pay it back. When debt is forgiven or paid with printed money the work that was promised never gets delivered. Most of the worlds currencies are becoming worthless at the same time. The future does not look so bright for the retirement savings value of currency in your nest egg.

You are back to your insane lies again. Why do you act so damn stupid all of the time? You and your gang of low IQ twits always post gibberish. I am the one who explained the difference between the various types of money that Economists talk about. I am also the one who explained to you that economists do not know what they are talking about.

Not one economist seemed to know that the economy was in trouble three years ago. I had been posting that it was going to crash way back then. Economists never know what is happening because they do not understand the nature of money. It totally baffles them just like it always confuses you.

All you low IQ clowns are talking about hyperinflation all of the time. I have been telling you for the past year that it might not happen. We have to see what unfolds. Remember Economics is a failed assortment of confused and insane theories. None of which seem to work, so the economists are constantly making up new theories that also do not work. Boy are they fugged up, just like you.

I presented my theory and you say that I do not know about M1 and M3 or whatever. It is not that I do not know, it is that I am making fun of all of the people who play this economics game and really do not know what they are talking about. Damn, you shitheads are stupid! I have met dumb people before, but you clowns take the cake.

Economics is not science. Tell yourself over and over again and then realize that there are factors out there that do not fit into a box and most certainly do not follow any of the economic theories.

For the time being my theory stands and your theory has failed. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

My theory is called the Net Effect of Money. I expect to get a Noble Prize for my research. We had Trillions that disappeared into thin air. Money can be created out of thin air and it can disappear into thin air. When too much has disappeared into thin air you can get Deflation. That is the reason why we had to create the FED so we can create money and forestall Deflation. Inflation is a good thing in moderation. Deflation is horrible and hurts too many people. Go to school and read all about it. Pauli especially. Damn, he is really dumb!
I knew we were in trouble in 2005 when we had major inflation. I bought gold at $559. I also bought commodities, fertilizer & oil stocks. Made big money until the crash when I gave a lot back. I bailed on gold at $975 & bought more back on election day for $715 The whole time this crazy leverage was going on people were getting screwed on their wages & savings forcing them to invest into crazy things like second or more expensive homes to keep with inflation. Now that this stupid leverage is gone you want them to create more money enriching government workers & bankers while we suffer. That is stupid, stupid, stupid.

If money needs to be created then we need to get something for it not just pay people to squat in homes they can't pay for or soak up unemployment & food stamps. Government could hand everyone money. They could give everyone vouchers worth $20,000.00 that could be used for a list of energy items we choose. We could buy solar panels, electric cars, wind mills, insulation, windows you know things we will benefit from giving us jobs, energy, reduce oil imports, continuously pay back their dollars worth & clean the environment.

Paying someone sitting home unemployment getting fat as hell on free food cost like hell to our health care system & country. De-leveraging has put a stop to this stupid inflation but Paying for nothing with printed currency & forgiving debts will cause unstoppable inflation.
 
Last edited:
OP
Neubarth

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
Neubarth you really need to learn to quit while you're behind.
PAULI, NO MATTER WHAT you SAY, YOU ALWAYS COME ACROSS AS TOTALLY STUPID.

But, remember that does not matter because it is not part of the Bank Reserve Requirement.
 
OP
Neubarth

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
If money needs to be created then we need to get something for it not just pay people to squat in homes they can't pay for or soak up unemployment & food stamps. Government could hand everyone money. They could give everyone vouchers worth $20,000.00 that could be used for a list of energy items we choose. We could buy solar panels, electric cars, wind mills, insulation, windows you know things we will benefit from giving us jobs, energy, reduce oil imports, continuously pay back their dollars worth & clean the environment.

Paying someone sitting home unemployment getting fat as hell on free food cost like hell to our health care system & country. De-leveraging has put a stop to this stupid inflation but Paying for nothing with printed currency & forgiving debts will cause unstoppable inflation.
Some of what you posted above was not as stupid as I have seen on this board. Maybe you are getting smarter? You proposed something that could actually stimulate the economy. Don't know if I would be as extravagent as you want, but some of your ideas have merit. Then you go and ruin it all and post something like, "Paying for nothing with printed currency and forgiving debts will cause unstoppable inflation."

Could you try that again with a bit of explanation? Is there an economic theory that will support that?

Remember, a year ago I said that I have never studied economics as I considered it a total waste of time. No Micro and no Macro for me. Economic theory is constantly contradicting itself, and the economists all think that the other economists are nutz. Could be that they ALL are nutz. They can't all be right if they think that everybody is wrong.

I just use elementary logic and it seems to work. If we lose 8 trillion dollars that people thought were in their accounts and we only replace three trillion of that lost money, then I see that as a net negative for the economy. We might need that other five trillion to help get the economy rolling again. Pauli says that it does not matter because it was not a reserve in a bank. but the economy seems to think it matters. Funny how that works. The economy also thinks that Pauli is a total screwball who needs serious psychiatric help.
 
OP
Neubarth

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
If 8 Trillion vaporize into thin air and only 3 trillion are created by the FED via electronic transaction (They are not printed.)
Neubarth I'm going to tell you this one more time, and I hope this time you fucking grasp the concept.

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing prints the currency for the Federal Reserve System. When a bank hands you a brand spanking new crisp $100 bill, that came from the BEP at the behest of the Fed.

You keep saying new money isn't printed, but where the fuck do you think a bank comes up with the physical notes to give to you?

Not only that, but what the fuck is the point of arguing semantics regarding newly created money and the terminology behind it? Newly created money is newly created money.
Stupid One, I am going to tell you this for the last time, the FED does not print paper currency........

The Department of the Treasury has the BEP print the money. The FED is responsible for telling the D of Treasury how much money needs to be printed to meet the circulation needs of dollars in the world economy. There is no excess money being printed.

To put it in other words, the Federal Reserve doesn't print or coin the money: that is physically done by the Department of the Treasury, which is told by the Federal Reserve how much to print.

Again for your benefit even though I know you still do not understand, The FED does not print money. Please, Stupid One, try to understand.
 

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,408
Reaction score
5,955
Points
1,830
If 8 Trillion vaporize into thin air and only 3 trillion are created by the FED via electronic transaction (They are not printed.)
Neubarth I'm going to tell you this one more time, and I hope this time you fucking grasp the concept.

The Bureau of Engraving and Printing prints the currency for the Federal Reserve System. When a bank hands you a brand spanking new crisp $100 bill, that came from the BEP at the behest of the Fed.

You keep saying new money isn't printed, but where the fuck do you think a bank comes up with the physical notes to give to you?

Not only that, but what the fuck is the point of arguing semantics regarding newly created money and the terminology behind it? Newly created money is newly created money.
Stupid One, I am going to tell you this for the last time, the FED does not print paper currency........

The Department of the Treasury has the BEP print the money. The FED is responsible for telling the D of Treasury how much money needs to be printed to meet the circulation needs of dollars in the world economy. There is no excess money being printed.

To put it in other words, the Federal Reserve doesn't print or coin the money: that is physically done by the Department of the Treasury, which is told by the Federal Reserve how much to print.

Again for your benefit even though I know you still do not understand, The FED does not print money. Please, Stupid One, try to understand.
Yo, how mother fucking retarded are you?

Go read my post again dummy. I just fucking told YOU that the BEP prints the money for the Fed.

And not only that, but you're still stuck on stupid with regards to monetary policy

It's like you just started learning about this shit yesterday or something.
 

william the wie

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
16,667
Reaction score
2,383
Points
280
The fly in the ointment here is that one dollar printed creates upto around $15 (V x M [ the lack of a number behind it make M = multiplier} x M0 = 15 most of the time because V & M vary). Bad debts on the otherhand are paid off from the float: revenues from funds lent - cost of funds borrowed. The float ranges around 0.5-4.0% so $1 of bad debt eats up the yield of $25-200 of performing loans and has that sort of negative effect on monetary growth. Keynes and the members of the Cambridge school were not bankers and were clueless about how money works.
 

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,408
Reaction score
5,955
Points
1,830
If money needs to be created then we need to get something for it not just pay people to squat in homes they can't pay for or soak up unemployment & food stamps. Government could hand everyone money. They could give everyone vouchers worth $20,000.00 that could be used for a list of energy items we choose. We could buy solar panels, electric cars, wind mills, insulation, windows you know things we will benefit from giving us jobs, energy, reduce oil imports, continuously pay back their dollars worth & clean the environment.

Paying someone sitting home unemployment getting fat as hell on free food cost like hell to our health care system & country. De-leveraging has put a stop to this stupid inflation but Paying for nothing with printed currency & forgiving debts will cause unstoppable inflation.
Some of what you posted above was not as stupid as I have seen on this board. Maybe you are getting smarter? You proposed something that could actually stimulate the economy. Don't know if I would be as extravagent as you want, but some of your ideas have merit. Then you go and ruin it all and post something like, "Paying for nothing with printed currency and forgiving debts will cause unstoppable inflation."

Could you try that again with a bit of explanation? Is there an economic theory that will support that?

Remember, a year ago I said that I have never studied economics as I considered it a total waste of time. No Micro and no Macro for me. Economic theory is constantly contradicting itself, and the economists all think that the other economists are nutz. Could be that they ALL are nutz. They can't all be right if they think that everybody is wrong.

I just use elementary logic and it seems to work. If we lose 8 trillion dollars that people thought were in their accounts and we only replace three trillion of that lost money, then I see that as a net negative for the economy. We might need that other five trillion to help get the economy rolling again. Pauli says that it does not matter because it was not a reserve in a bank. but the economy seems to think it matters. Funny how that works. The economy also thinks that Pauli is a total screwball who needs serious psychiatric help.
Your elementary logic is flawed though. If not another single dollar was created new from here on out, and whatever money was in existence was now used for trading assets, rising and lowering in those assets' values would have little effect on inflation and deflation. There is now a specific amount in the money supply that actually exists. Asset values wouldn't inflate and deflate in such vast amounts as they do these days, because there will never be any more, or any less, actual money. The reason values go so high is because of inflationary monetary pressures. Everyone knows the Fed will create new money.

The perceived value in an asset does not affect the actual money supply, absent new money creation. The money supply has a direct affect on prices, not the converse of that which is what you seem to believe.
 

Paulie

Diamond Member
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
40,408
Reaction score
5,955
Points
1,830
Listen, I don't really have any desire to argue economic schools of thought so we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

The way I see it, you trust the idea of the Federal Reserve because it's all you know. To you, it works, even though we've had a plethora of recessions and 1 or 2 depressions since they've been in existence. The recession is ultimately the correction in prices, because they got out of hand. It makes you sleep soundly at night thinking that the Fed is there to control things and make sure you don't get the raw end of the stick. But hey, the poor keep getting poorer and the rich keep getting richer. I wonder who's getting the raw end of the stick in this deal?

You like thinking that there's a bunch of geniuses sitting around coming up with ways to make sure the economy doesn't jam you in the ass.

Whatever, my man. I'm not gonna judge. I just don't agree.
 
OP
Neubarth

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
Listen, I don't really have any desire to argue economic schools of thought so we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

The way I see it, you trust the idea of the Federal Reserve because it's all you know. To you, it works, even though we've had a plethora of recessions and 1 or 2 depressions since they've been in existence. The recession is ultimately the correction in prices, because they got out of hand. It makes you sleep soundly at night thinking that the Fed is there to control things and make sure you don't get the raw end of the stick. But hey, the poor keep getting poorer and the rich keep getting richer. I wonder who's getting the raw end of the stick in this deal?

You like thinking that there's a bunch of geniuses sitting around coming up with ways to make sure the economy doesn't jam you in the ass.

Whatever, my man. I'm not gonna judge. I just don't agree.
Now, actually, I was a strong cynic about the FED. I just took the time to find out if any of the nonsense that the crazy Ron Paulites were saying were true. I realized after reading up on the charter of the FED that EVERYTHING THAT RON PAUL SAID WAS A LIE. That man is the lyingest son of a bitch in the history of Congress. Those are some powerful words, but as an historian I know of all of the shenanigans of all of the most corrupt jackasses who were ever elected to congress. Nothing that Ron Paul says is true.
 
OP
Neubarth

Neubarth

At the Ballpark July 30th
Joined
Nov 8, 2008
Messages
3,751
Reaction score
200
Points
48
Location
South Pacific
If money needs to be created then we need to get something for it not just pay people to squat in homes they can't pay for or soak up unemployment & food stamps. Government could hand everyone money. They could give everyone vouchers worth $20,000.00 that could be used for a list of energy items we choose. We could buy solar panels, electric cars, wind mills, insulation, windows you know things we will benefit from giving us jobs, energy, reduce oil imports, continuously pay back their dollars worth & clean the environment.

Paying someone sitting home unemployment getting fat as hell on free food cost like hell to our health care system & country. De-leveraging has put a stop to this stupid inflation but Paying for nothing with printed currency & forgiving debts will cause unstoppable inflation.
Some of what you posted above was not as stupid as I have seen on this board. Maybe you are getting smarter? You proposed something that could actually stimulate the economy. Don't know if I would be as extravagent as you want, but some of your ideas have merit. Then you go and ruin it all and post something like, "Paying for nothing with printed currency and forgiving debts will cause unstoppable inflation."

Could you try that again with a bit of explanation? Is there an economic theory that will support that?

Remember, a year ago I said that I have never studied economics as I considered it a total waste of time. No Micro and no Macro for me. Economic theory is constantly contradicting itself, and the economists all think that the other economists are nutz. Could be that they ALL are nutz. They can't all be right if they think that everybody is wrong.

I just use elementary logic and it seems to work. If we lose 8 trillion dollars that people thought were in their accounts and we only replace three trillion of that lost money, then I see that as a net negative for the economy. We might need that other five trillion to help get the economy rolling again. Pauli says that it does not matter because it was not a reserve in a bank. but the economy seems to think it matters. Funny how that works. The economy also thinks that Pauli is a total screwball who needs serious psychiatric help.
Your elementary logic is flawed though. If not another single dollar was created new from here on out, and whatever money was in existence was now used for trading assets, rising and lowering in those assets' values would have little effect on inflation and deflation. There is now a specific amount in the money supply that actually exists. Asset values wouldn't inflate and deflate in such vast amounts as they do these days, because there will never be any more, or any less, actual money. The reason values go so high is because of inflationary monetary pressures. Everyone knows the Fed will create new money.

The perceived value in an asset does not affect the actual money supply, absent new money creation. The money supply has a direct affect on prices, not the converse of that which is what you seem to believe.
You are spouting flawed theory from the inebriated existential dingbat wing of economics. No matter which economists arse you are kissing, there are a hundred nearby who think he is crazy and then push their keisters in your face. They all agree on one thing, everybody else in their profession is crazy so you should only listen to them. Unproven theory is not science.

That reminds me of what my father (a doctor) told me when I told him that I intended to study Psychology as my major in college. His words were, "Bad career choice! All of the psychiatrists that I have ever known since med school were either crazy as a loon, or some close relative in their family was."
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top