1. sartesian says:

    “The markets assume that the central bankers should speak directly and
    accurately about the course of the economy and their intentions.”

    I don’t think so, comrade. Greenspan, that putty-faced Randist scam artist, endorser of Charles Keating and Lincoln Savings and Loan, was considered a genius, precisely because he was a master of obscuration.

    You say the “markets are fed up with the FED.” How do you know that? How is that manifested in the markets? What are the measures that distinguish “fed up” from “enraptured”?

    I don’t think the market traders, save the ultra free-marketeers and conspiracy theorists are at all fed up with the Fed. They are taking advantage of what the Fed has offered. They realize just how dependent they are on the Fed in the bond markets, stock markets, and how the Fed is the critical link in the chains of capitalism.

  2. Welcome back. I follow most of the popular financial blogs. Blogs around CNBC for example have been using the headline Fed up with the FED. Top players on the market with a lot of experience of the FED know they are “masters of obscurantism” but the retail bottom feeders do assume the FED is straight. As a Marxist I have always discounted the importance of the FED except as the lender of the last resort. Low interest rates are not primarily due to the activity of the FED but to market conditions dominated by the growth in the uninvested surplus which dwarves QE by many factors. What the FED has done wrong is that it has added to this glut instead of cutting across it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: