It would make sense for Yellen to snug up rates by 1/2% today.

MGLICKER · October 29, 2014 12:13AM

Economy and markets would become more efficient with a fed signal that rates are beginning to normalize.

If equities and bonds tank on the news, it is a blow off of excess. Better for that to happen now than extend the charade.

Of course it ain't gonna happen as investors all have smiley faces again.

derryb · October 29, 2014 12:15AM

I don't expect a double whammy.

MGLICKER · October 29, 2014 12:17AM

<< I don't expect a double whammy. >>

Me neither. Just academic.

coinrollhunter · October 29, 2014 9:34AM

That hypothetical unexpected move would send the s&p 500 closer to your 12-18 month price target of 1,000.

MGLICKER · October 29, 2014 10:11AM

<< That hypothetical unexpected move would send the s&p 500 closer to your 12-18 month price target of 1,000. >>

That would certainly demonstrate the fragility of the market, would it not?

mariner67 · October 29, 2014 10:38AM

<< 

<< That hypothetical unexpected move would send the s&p 500 closer to your 12-18 month price target of 1,000. >>

That would certainly demonstrate the fragility of the market, would it not? >>

Kinda like the PM market which may be in another secular bear market kinda like it entered in 1980?

Justacommeman · October 29, 2014 1:37PM

It will happen soon enough. The Fed has actually done an admirable job throughout the crisis. Granted they were part of the problem to begin with.

Mark

cohodk · October 29, 2014 2:44PM

The market has already raised rates. In Jan the spread between the US 10yr and German 10yr was 108 basis points. In Sept was 160 basis points. Today is 146 basis points.

coinrollhunter · October 29, 2014 11:50PM

<< 

<< That hypothetical unexpected move would send the s&p 500 closer to your 12-18 month price target of 1,000. >>

That would certainly demonstrate the fragility of the market, would it not? >>

I suppose you have a point.

MGLICKER · October 30, 2014 12:17AM

<< It will happen soon enough. The Fed has actually done an admirable job throughout the crisis. Granted they were part of the problem to begin with.

Mark >>

We so easily sell out on Capitalism when the footing gets a bit shaky. We have little fortitude and deserve the consequences.

Justacommeman · October 30, 2014 2:59AM

<< 

<< It will happen soon enough. The Fed has actually done an admirable job throughout the crisis. Granted they were part of the problem to begin with.

Mark >>

We so easily sell out on Capitalism when the footing gets a bit shaky. We have little fortitude and deserve the consequences. >>

Capitalism is a moving target and often one of convience or fit to size. China has looked more capitalistic then us at times. It is what it. Just a word.

Mark

MGLICKER · October 30, 2014 3:19AM

<< It is what it. Just a word. >>

Not to those that are business owners and job creators.

It is difficult to navigate an enterprise when the rules change and competing ventures are advantaged by friendly politicians.

Most Americans though are employed by others and are willing to sell their birthright for a weekly paycheck.

Justacommeman · October 30, 2014 3:27AM

<< 

<< It is what it. Just a word. >>

Not to those that are business owners and job creators.

It is difficult to navigate an enterprise when the rules change and competing ventures are advantaged by friendly politicians.

Most Americans though are employed by others and are willing to sell their birthright for a weekly paycheck. >>

I'm self employed. While the rules change from time to time you just have to be nimble. Zero sense gripping about it. Time would be better served building the better mousetrap or streamlining the business via improved margins. With technology what it is there is no better time then now to be a small business owner. Have a plan, work it, be creative, be agile and having a great accountant is a huge plus.

Sometimes it seems like I'm reliving my childhood here on the forums. My dad used to take me to the Knights Of Columbus Hall every Thursday night starting when i was eight. I swear the debates and complaints are exactly the same. The market is rigged, The government sucks, the deck is stacked.That was 40+ years ago. I do miss old Polock Stanley. Old thinking does not work any more and I'm thankful for that.

Mark

MGLICKER · October 30, 2014 3:37AM

<< Zero sense gripping about it. >>

I refuse to see my nation go into economic free fall while in a bent over position.

We now mandate that 20% of the GDP is spent on medical barbarism. A family needs two full time incomes to raise a couple of kids, or no income as the taxpayers will pick up the tariff. Borders are porous and fence jumpers are rewarded with drivers licenses and a path to citizenship.

My mail in ballot was multi lingual. Is proficiency of the English language no longer a condition of citizenship?

Justacommeman · October 30, 2014 3:52AM

<< 

<< Zero sense gripping about it. >>

I refuse to see my nation go into economic free fall while in a bent over position.

>>

How exactly are you doing this? I'm not sure how complaining about it over and over and over ad nauseam on this forum is being productive. It seems to be counter productive and exhausting.

Mark

MGLICKER · October 30, 2014 4:07AM

"""How exactly are you doing this?"""

So now we are at the "what can one guy do" phase of the conversation.

Mark, if you choose to roll over and accept it, that is your business.

I see the pattern of failed economic policy to be an anchor around the future of at least the next two generations. We had exceptional opportunity and took advantage of it. The burdens of the ACA and stagnant employment growth and real income decline will most likely keep young adults tethered to a cubicle as any venture takes start up capital.

Oh sure, we will always have another Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg. We will miss the millions of small family run businesses that put food on the table for themselves and others.

Like you, I have only one vote and cannot influence the >51% of the population that believes that Socialism is a good thing.

...at least I can try to do what is right.

mariner67 · October 30, 2014 4:20AM

Other than your "one vote" and all the relentless bit&@ing over and over...what else are you or can anyone else do?
What are you specifically doing about the "stagnant employment growth and real income decline" we hear you continuously harping about?
What exactly else are you doing?
Thanx!

erickso1 · October 30, 2014 4:32AM

I posted this elsewhere (and the thread got axed).

It has been my observation that the market has priced in a rate hiker to happen sooner rather then later. This may have been the Feds goal of pricing in a "rate hike" without actually having to hike the rate.

My "evidence" of this is my observations in muni bond market.

- the yields that 2 year and in municipal paper is trading at seems to be 10 to 20 bps wider then they were on this same day last week. I first noticed it Friday. Without any other info coming out it seems to point to investors expecting a rate hike soon.

*while the muni market isn't the treasury market, for the most part the investors have the same mentality when it comes to rates.
*This widening hasn't happened before in this maturity range since I've been actively tracking it. So the last two years

MGLICKER · October 30, 2014 4:32AM

<< Other than your "one vote" and all the relentless bit&@ing over and over...what else are you or can anyone else do? >>

The Affordable Care Act was a perfect example of a bill that could have been stopped in its tracks. Though the Senate was locked in, more than a few Democratic members of Congress were on the fence.

I pretty much shut down my business for 3 weeks and contacted every potentially wavering member that I could. Phone calls, emails and yes, even letters on paper. I of course could not succeed alone, but if a fraction of those that are griping about Obamacare had, this measure would have been defeated. It was a close vote with several Democratic dissenters.

Today we get the moaning about bad websites, crappy coverage and high rates.

I am also an advocate of Second Amendment rights and have contributed extensively to those that support the Constitution.

Two of many examples.

MGLICKER · October 30, 2014 7:09AM

!!!

cohodk · October 31, 2014 12:41AM

I applaud your actions MGlicker.

My Dad said he is going to voice his opinion via the voting process. I wished him luck.

mariner67 · October 31, 2014 12:49AM

Mark, I also applaud your actions.
I only wish that I believed it makes a difference.
I lack your conviction.

MGLICKER · October 31, 2014 5:57AM

<< Mark, I also applaud your actions.
I only wish that I believed it makes a difference.
I lack your conviction. >>

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter."

Martin Luther King, Jr.

DeepCoin · October 31, 2014 10:12AM

I suspect you would have joined the folks that opposed Social Security in the 30s. The arguments are the same, yet here it is. America is prospering, but it is also changing demographics and the change in status quo sets some peoples hair on fire. If you have skills, there are jobs. The two most recent college grads I know are doing quite well. Social attitudes are changing with the times as well.

MGLICKER · October 31, 2014 10:20AM

<< I suspect you would have joined the folks that opposed Social Security in the 30s. >>

Absolutely correct that I would have opposed Social Security. You are thinking in terms of getting a job and I am thinking entrepreneurship and job creation.

Glad that your college grad friends are doing well, but some want to excel beyond doing well and create a business of their own.

Not only are grads saddled with high 5 figure student loans (fair enough), but they have 15% deducted from their income for SSI/Medicare and now another 8% for the ACA, even if they are young and in perfect health.

You are thinking cubicle for life. That is ok for many but it is a shattered American dream for others.

Baley · October 31, 2014 12:12PM

they have 15% deducted from their income for SSI/Medicare and now another 8% for the ACA, even if they are young and in perfect health.

Are the young workers supposed to be able to skate through their health without paying into the system, and then start taking benefits just when they're old and need them?

Or if they have an accident or get really really sick in their prime?

Or should nobody pay insurance and then everyone's on their own?

Please sage, solve the dilemma!

derryb · October 31, 2014 12:55PM

<< they have 15% deducted from their income for SSI/Medicare and now another 8% for the ACA, even if they are young and in perfect health.

Are the young workers supposed to be able to skate through their health without paying into the system, and then start taking benefits just when they're old and need them?

Or if they have an accident or get really really sick in their prime?

Or should nobody pay insurance and then everyone's on their own?

Please sage, solve the dilemma! >>

"paying into the system." Dilemma solved.

jmski52 · October 31, 2014 11:14PM

Why bother paying into the system? The system seems to have an uncanny knack for creating something out of nothing with no consequences. Why penalize only the productive workers when it can be had for free - by everyone?

DeepCoin · November 1, 2014 1:48AM

Lets get the numbers right for a change. Not everyone has high five figure debt. Last I saw, the deduction for SS and Medicare is 7.65 percent. I have run small businesses and operated as a consultant myself. Medical insurance is not an average of 8% of income. Everyone looks at the outliers, and not at the majorities. You can find instances to support ANY position, but one has to look at the big picture.

While some want to run their own business, it is often a fool's errand. Fifty percent of all small businesses do not make it out of the first year. Entrepreneurism is important, but just like the big companies, not for everyone.

The comment regarding Social Security demonstrates your position clearly. How many seniors today would be totally screwed if not for medicare and SS? You care not about them, only your own perspective. It took until about 1948 before people quit trying to do away with SS in any meaningful way.

Just so you know, I am an Eisenhower Republican.

MGLICKER · November 1, 2014 1:56AM

<< The comment regarding Social Security demonstrates your position clearly. How many seniors today would be totally screwed if not for medicare and SS? >>

And how many baby boomers have paid in half a million bucks to SSI (inflation adjusted) and are watching it get whittled away by a 5% understatement per year of cost of living, even before they claim the first dollar of benefits.

For those in favor of wealth redistribution, I have no argument other then theft from another is wrong.

MGLICKER · November 1, 2014 2:06AM

<< Or should nobody pay insurance and then everyone's on their own? >>

Insurance should be optional and priced on actuarial risk for those that want it. Of course that concept was destroyed by the ACA.

If we are to have socialism, why not do it 100%? Why stop with Medical care?

In 2014 America, the young healthy guy out of school is paying for the retired guys knee replacement, even though the old fellow has $2,000,000 in assets. Just share everything and let the young guy with the 1987 Volvo use the old timers Mercedes for a month while old Elmer is in rehab.

Ultimately that is where we are headed. We can kibbutz about it while waiting in a 2 hour line for a couple of Eggs and a pound of wheat.

MGLICKER · November 1, 2014 2:12AM

<< Last I saw, the deduction for SS and Medicare is 7.65 percent. >>

Apparently you have not run a small business. 7.65% is one half of the deduction. When employed the other 7.65 is paid for you by your employer. It is money that you have earned but will never see.

The self employed cover the full 15% themselves up to the ever rising max.

Those that work for others have many bills to pay as we all do. They do not need capital though to sustain an inventory and hopefully expand their business. That is stifled by a nanny state government that knows what is best for us as they tax the small businessman at 40% while Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos cannot get free money handed to them fast enough.

If you do not see a problem with this, I cannot help you any further.

cohodk · November 1, 2014 2:19AM

<< 

<< The comment regarding Social Security demonstrates your position clearly. How many seniors today would be totally screwed if not for medicare and SS? >>

And how many baby boomers have paid in half a million bucks to SSI (inflation adjusted) and are watching it get whittled away by a 5% understatement per year of cost of living, even before they claim the first dollar of benefits.

For those in favor of wealth redistribution, I have no argument other then theft from another is wrong. >>

Not a single one. But millions will withdraw more.

cohodk · November 1, 2014 2:24AM

I've owned 3 businesses in 25 years. Never worked for the man. Many, many times I wished I did though.

Paid vacation. Paid sick days. No work on weekend. No thinking about work on weekend. No worrying concern for employees. More time for family.

Working for the man don't seem so bad.

MGLICKER · November 1, 2014 2:32AM

<< 

<< 

<< The comment regarding Social Security demonstrates your position clearly. How many seniors today would be totally screwed if not for medicare and SS? >>

And how many baby boomers have paid in half a million bucks to SSI (inflation adjusted) and are watching it get whittled away by a 5% understatement per year of cost of living, even before they claim the first dollar of benefits.

For those in favor of wealth redistribution, I have no argument other then theft from another is wrong. >>

Not a single one. But millions will withdraw more. >>

12.4% x $117,000 is the max today. Multiply it by 45 years (age 21 to age 66 retirement). If you do not come up with a half million inflation adjusted you have an unusual calculator.

MGLICKER · November 1, 2014 2:34AM

<< I've owned 3 businesses in 25 years. Never worked for the man. Many, many times I wished I did though.

Paid vacation. Paid sick days. No work on weekend. No thinking about work on weekend. No worrying concern for employees. More time for family.

Working for the man don't seem so bad. >>

Been their myself Cohodk. Worked 6 weeks for someone else in the last 32 years. Loved the benefits but hated having another person dictating 50 hours a week of my life.

cohodk · November 1, 2014 5:31AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< The comment regarding Social Security demonstrates your position clearly. How many seniors today would be totally screwed if not for medicare and SS? >>

And how many baby boomers have paid in half a million bucks to SSI (inflation adjusted) and are watching it get whittled away by a 5% understatement per year of cost of living, even before they claim the first dollar of benefits.

For those in favor of wealth redistribution, I have no argument other then theft from another is wrong. >>

Not a single one. But millions will withdraw more. >>

12.4% x $117,000 is the max today. Multiply it by 45 years (age 21 to age 66 retirement). If you do not come up with a half million inflation adjusted you have an unusual calculator. >>

Not an unusual calculator, but rather accurate numbers. Add up the numbers in the right hand column. Your not gonna get close to $500,000. From 1974 to 1984 a boomer would only have contributed $14,000 ($32,000 adjusted for inflation). And only about $35,000 ($56,000 inflation adjusted) from 1984 to 1994. I could calculate the rest for you but I think you may learn more from doing it yourself.

MGLICKER · November 2, 2014 1:29AM

Kindly continue Cohodk as the link is not working on my computer. Thank you for cherry picking the easy math of the early much lower cap years. Lets see what the last two decades look like. Please make sure that you are using the employer portion of the contribution as well as it was also earned by the worker.

And please drop the argument saving Yellenesque inflation numbers. Prices have easily tripled between your 1974-84 que. Not the slightly better than double that you implemented.

I am coming in at $400,000 inflation adjusted for the 40 years to date, with 5 years to go for our dedicated worker.

Caps have risen dramatically over the last 20 years. Tax is now about $14,000 for the low six figure income earner.

1995 61,200
1996 62,700
1997 65,400
1998 68,400
1999 72,600
2000 76,200
2001 80,400
2002 84,900
2003 87,000
2004 87,900
2005 90,000

Year

Amount

2006 $94,200
2007 97,500
2008 102,000
2009 106,800
2010 106,800
2011 106,800
2012 110,100
2013 113,700
2014 117,000
2015 118,500

cohodk · November 2, 2014 2:50AM

No, im not going to add in the employers contribution because it was not earned by the worker. If the employer did not pay the money, would the worker be paid a higher wage? NO. That extra money would have gone right into the employers pocket and been subject to income tax.

6.2% of 117,000 is $7254, not $14,000. The VAST majority of boomers were not self employed.

And please drop the argument saving Yellenesque inflation numbers. Prices have easily tripled between your 1974-84 que. Not the slightly better than double that you implemented.

Lets refrain from the MGlickeresque inflation numbers. Lets use your "prices tripling" notion---that computes to a 3.7% inflation rate. Nearly 1/2 your 7% rate you so vehemently defend.

I will repeat and feel very confident that no boomers have paid into Social Security an amount of $500,000. And I will repeat that millions will withdraw amounts far exceeding $500,000.

The greatest mistake social security has made (other than being established) and continues to make is placing a ceiling on income. Those who scream income inequality should be livid about this. A worker making $70,000 has to pay 6.2% on his entire earnings. So why would someone making $234,000 need to pay on only 1/2 his income? Why the cap?

derryb · November 2, 2014 2:57AM

<< I will repeat and feel very confident that no boomers have paid into Social Security an amount of $500,000. And I will repeat that millions will withdraw amounts far exceeding $500,000. >>

The success of continuing a ponzi operation is fully dependent on those withdrawing getting more than they previously contributed at the expense of those currently contributing. Since it's a government operation it can continue until their is no more ink.

A note of interest: The largest payout of SS goes to survivor benefits, not the actual employee.

VanHalen · November 2, 2014 3:08AM

<< No, im not going to add in the employers contribution because it was not earned by the worker. If the employer did not pay the money, would the worker be paid a higher wage? NO. That extra money would have gone right into the employers pocket and been subject to income tax.

6.2% of 117,000 is $7254, not $14,000. The VAST majority of boomers were not self employed.

And please drop the argument saving Yellenesque inflation numbers. Prices have easily tripled between your 1974-84 que. Not the slightly better than double that you implemented.

Lets refrain from the MGlickeresque inflation numbers. Lets use your "prices tripling" notion---that computes to a 3.7% inflation rate. Nearly 1/2 your 7% rate you so vehemently defend.

I will repeat and feel very confident that no boomers have paid into Social Security an amount of $500,000. And I will repeat that millions will withdraw amounts far exceeding $500,000.

The greatest mistake social security has made (other than being established) and continues to make is placing a ceiling on income. Those who scream income inequality should be livid about this. A worker making $70,000 has to pay 6.2% on his entire earnings. So why would someone making $234,000 need to pay on only 1/2 his income? Why the cap? >>

There's a cap because there's "supposedly" a cap on pay-outs, at least an annual cap. i.e. If a contributor makes $1,000,000/year and pays SS tax on all of it do we then pay them $20,000/month in retirement? The cap does need to be lifted while pay-outs remain the same for the system to approach solvency. That will likely never happen with our current political structure but who knows.

The Medicare is a different animal. Never was a cap on pay-outs. These two programs are part of the problem for sure. 75% of Americans paying no taxes at all by 2030 will be a bigger problem, much bigger.

MGLICKER · November 2, 2014 3:32AM

<< No, im not going to add in the employers contribution because it was not earned by the worker. If the employer did not pay the money, would the worker be paid a higher wage? NO. That extra money would have gone right into the employers pocket and been subject to income tax. >>

Not earned by the worker? Who earned it, The Great Pumpkin?

Man we live in different worlds.

mrpaseo · November 2, 2014 3:54AM

<< 

<< No, im not going to add in the employers contribution because it was not earned by the worker. If the employer did not pay the money, would the worker be paid a higher wage? NO. That extra money would have gone right into the employers pocket and been subject to income tax. >>

Not earned by the worker? Who earned it, The Great Pumpkin?

Man we live in different worlds. >>

My simpleton mind tells me that the employee earned it by his/her actions. Had he/she not invested into the 401k, he/she would not have received the match therefore it is the actions of the employee that earned the match.

I include the match in my numbers when planning.

BAJJERFAN · November 3, 2014 3:15AM

<< 

<< 

<< No, im not going to add in the employers contribution because it was not earned by the worker. If the employer did not pay the money, would the worker be paid a higher wage? NO. That extra money would have gone right into the employers pocket and been subject to income tax. >>

Not earned by the worker? Who earned it, The Great Pumpkin?

Man we live in different worlds. >>

My simpleton mind tells me that the employee earned it by his/her actions. Had he/she not invested into the 401k, he/she would not have received the match therefore it is the actions of the employee that earned the match.

I include the match in my numbers when planning. >>

He was talking about the employer match for social security, not 401K. It's probably safe to say that the employee's efforts in either case made it possible for the employer to earn sufficient profit and pay the match.

MGLICKER · November 3, 2014 3:24AM

<< Lets use your "prices tripling" notion---that computes to a 3.7% inflation rate. Nearly 1/2 your 7% rate you so vehemently defend. >>

Current rate is 7%. I never claimed that it was the inflation number that goes back 35 years.

Personal experience..... 2 Bedroom apartment in 1979, $285 a month. Today $900

New car, 1979, $9000. Today $30,000

Health insurance, 1979, $0, Today $0 ....at least that did not go up!

Baley · November 3, 2014 3:54AM

Current rate is 7%

No it isn't

MGLICKER · November 3, 2014 3:57AM

<< Current rate is 7%

No it isn't >>

Opps, there may be some feebleminded blue state SSI recipients lurking.

Ahem, yes, yes indeed, inflation last year was 1.7%.

Baley · November 3, 2014 4:03AM

<< 

<< Current rate is 7%

No it isn't >>

Opps, their may be some feebleminded blue state SSI recipients lurking.

Ahem, yes, yes indeed, inflation last year was 1.7%. >>

"There" may be some...

When insulting folks' intelligence, it's usually best to spell your comment correctly.

MGLICKER · November 3, 2014 4:14AM

<< 

<< 

<< Current rate is 7%

No it isn't >>

Opps, their may be some feebleminded blue state SSI recipients lurking.

Ahem, yes, yes indeed, inflation last year was 1.7%. >>

"There" may be some...

When insulting folks' intelligence, it's usually best to spell your comment correctly.

>>

Looks like my edit beat your post. I get no economic benefit from lying about the rate of inflation DC cronies do.

I make errors, but none that ruin a nations economy.

Baley · November 3, 2014 4:18AM

What's the "current" year over year rate of inflation of the price of gasoline?

Baley · November 3, 2014 4:22AM

My point is, you keep repeating that 7% number as if it were a fact, and saying that the 1.7% number is a lie. How is your number calculated?

It would make sense for Yellen to snug up rates by 1/2% today.

Comments