4 more weeks till Janet Yellen is Federal Reserve Chair!

MGLICKER · January 4, 2014 3:37AM

1. What effect may it have on precious metals?

2. What effect may it have on interest rates?

3. What effect may it have on equities?

4. Which Wall Street Firm will Bernanke head for $30,000,000 per annum?

My thinking is that Wall Street will successfully ease Ben out on a silk carpet of high stock prices.

Wall Street has been an old boys group for 200 years and may not warm up to a lady fed chair.

With the ten year note rate now a touch over 3%, stock market will get rocky a bit later this quarter.

derryb · January 4, 2014 4:41AM

business as usual, the snowball is already halfway down the hill. FED will need to keep foot on the gas pedal.

Bernanke will most likely freelance as a consulting agency.

These three guys think they know what's coming

secondrepublic · January 4, 2014 7:19AM

my prediction: she will surprise in the direction of even more monetary loosening than Helicopter Ben. Yellen will be good for PMs.

jmski52 · January 4, 2014 8:50AM

The 2007 meltdown, the financial crisis of 2008 and the ensuing recesson were all Bush policy fallout that just happened to occur under a Bush appointee. Nothing's been fixed

What's coming under Yellen has already been cooking under Obama's destructive policies for 5+ years, so I'm thinking that the gestation period is about over.

RGJohn · January 4, 2014 10:15AM

<< 1. What effect may it have on precious metals?

2. What effect may it have on interest rates?

3. What effect may it have on equities?

4. Which Wall Street Firm will Bernanke head for $30,000,000 per annum?

My thinking is that Wall Street will successfully ease Ben out on a silk carpet of high stock prices.

Wall Street has been an old boys group for 200 years and may not warm up to a lady fed chair.

With the ten year note rate now a touch over 3%, stock market will get rocky a bit later this quarter. >>

In re:
#1. Rh up.
Au down.
Ag down.
Pt and Pd maintain.

#2. Up.

#3 Way up.

#4. None.

"With the ten year note rate now a touch over 3%, stock market will get rocky a bit later this quarter."
I can't make the connection here, but no the stock market is poised to zoom.
------
And I guarantee that all of this is worth exactly what you paid to receive it.

ricko · January 5, 2014 12:07AM

My prediction for a gold/silver rally at the end of 2013/beginning of 2014 has - so far - only shown a ripple.... and for the most part, the guru's do not predict that what I predicted will be a prediction realized. Oh well.... so much for my financial gut....

Cheers, RickO

cohodk · January 5, 2014 1:28AM

The "markets" are bigger than any Fed Chief or Central Banker. The human in charge only reacts to these markets.

MGLICKER · January 5, 2014 1:52AM

<< The "markets" are bigger than any Fed Chief or Central Banker. The human in charge only reacts to these markets. >>

Quite true. Though the central bank has been able to hold short term rates at 0, much to the dismay of Bernanke, the longer rates have climbed substantially in the last year.

Side note: The media has been fawning over the glowing Wall Street performance of 2013. Bonds make of the other part of the street and performed poorly in 2013.

derryb · January 5, 2014 2:00AM

<< The "markets" are bigger than any Fed Chief or Central Banker. The human in charge only reacts to these markets. >>

Tell that to 25,000 unemployed realtors.

cohodk · January 5, 2014 5:34AM

<< 

<< The "markets" are bigger than any Fed Chief or Central Banker. The human in charge only reacts to these markets. >>

Tell that to 25,000 unemployed realtors. >>

What does that mean? Most of those jobs were the product of excess anyway. How about all the mortgage brokers? Or even the bankers themselves--about a million of them lost their jobs.

Maybe we should complain about the loss of carburetor manufacturing jobs also? Or elevator operators, or milk delivery men?

derryb · January 5, 2014 6:04AM

<< Most of those jobs were the product of excess anyway. >>

A Fed fueled excess, thanks to easy credit and low rates leading up to the last bust. Let's see if they can do it twice in a row.

bronco2078 · January 5, 2014 6:25AM

<< 

<< The "markets" are bigger than any Fed Chief or Central Banker. The human in charge only reacts to these markets. >>

Tell that to 25,000 unemployed realtors. >>

In 2005 every halfwit and their brother had a real estate license. If 25,000 of them are belly up no one will lose any sleep over it.

cohodk · January 5, 2014 6:36AM

<< 

<< Most of those jobs were the product of excess anyway. >>

A Fed fueled excess, thanks to easy credit and low rates leading up to the last bust. Let's see if they can do it twice in a row. >>

Then they shouldnt have had those jobs in the first place. The FED does not dictate lending standards or practices. The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces).

MGLICKER · January 5, 2014 7:36AM

<< 

<< Most of those jobs were the product of excess anyway. >>

A Fed fueled excess, thanks to easy credit and low rates leading up to the last bust. Let's see if they can do it twice in a row. >>

Bust is close, but this time it will be equities and debt instruments.

Next bailout will be much tougher. printing money with rising interest rates is a death spiral.

derryb · January 5, 2014 9:07AM

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey

VanHalen · January 5, 2014 9:26AM

<< 

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey >>

That modest growth has been +10%/year over what it would have been (2008-2013) with market forces allowed to prevail. We would have had a cleansing depression with most of the dead wood burned by now without all this "intervention". We have delayed the evitable and can continue to do so for several more years if we choose to create more money.

cohodk · January 5, 2014 9:59AM

So are you expecting a cleansing depression Van Halen?

MGLICKER · January 5, 2014 10:02AM

<< 

<< 

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey >>

That modest growth has been +10%/year over what it would have been (2008-2013) with market forces allowed to prevail. We would have had a cleansing depression with most of the dead wood burned by now without all this "intervention". We have delayed the evitable and can continue to do so for several more years if we choose to create more money. >>

We have a few generations now that have not experienced double digit inflation. Keep printing $1,000,000,000,000 a year and we will soon return to 10% bond yields which will destroy every facet of the economy.

There is no free lunch.

derryb · January 5, 2014 10:40AM

By design, the new money is only free to a select few. With the unchecked power they wield, central banks are very potent, and are currently a devastating force to those dependent on a stable currency and a stable economy. Unfortunately this includes most people in the civilized world.

If the FED issued $200 rebates on new computers, what do you think would happen to the demand and to the price of new computers? Fortunately the electronic industry remains unadulterated and continues to offer us better products at cheaper prices - something only a free market can do. The Fed is currently issuing .25% rebates to banks that keep excess reserves (that were created by the FED) on FED deposit AND allowing these funds to be used as collateral for leveraged Wall St. investments.

cohodk · January 5, 2014 11:02AM

We have a few generations now that have not experienced double digit inflation

Nor have they experienced deflation. Gravity, while the weakest natural force, is not easily conquered.

cohodk · January 5, 2014 11:05AM

<< 

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey >>

Great response!!!

derryb · January 5, 2014 11:14AM

<< 

<< 

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey >>

Great response!!! >>

crude, but accurate.

Baley · January 5, 2014 11:43AM

All the sages who have it all figured out should prosper accordingly, this year and next and the one after that

cohodk · January 5, 2014 2:14PM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey >>

Great response!!! >>

crude, but accurate. >>

I learn more about you everyday derryb.

derryb · January 5, 2014 2:19PM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey >>

Great response!!! >>

crude, but accurate. >>

I learn more about you everyday derryb. >>

Keep your eye on the ball, not the carrier

VanHalen · January 5, 2014 5:11PM

<< So are you expecting a cleansing depression Van Halen? >>

Most definitely. Could be this decade but we'll likely need 10 years to spend ourselves into oblivion and then have to allow our economy to reset to it's real level. That level is far below the $16 trillion/year currently being propped up by QE, ZIRP, and $2 trillion/year in deficit spending by local/state/federal gov'ts.

Factoring in state and local governments, total government spending in 2013 was $7 trillion in the U.S. $5 trillion of that was covered by revenue. Another $1 trillion+ in QE, ZIRP for 5 straight years? Yeah, we're propping up a significantly smaller economy than the $16 trillion one we're purportedly "growing" at 2%/year.

cohodk · January 5, 2014 10:59PM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey >>

Great response!!! >>

crude, but accurate. >>

I learn more about you everyday derryb. >>

Keep your eye on the ball, not the carrier >>

So you are just the carrier for the "horse dookey" comment?

cohodk · January 5, 2014 11:06PM

Van halen, are you then expecting inflation?

DoubleEagle59 · January 6, 2014 12:37AM

A little algebra...

B x B = Y

An easy equation to figure out for us 'goldbugs'.

derryb · January 6, 2014 12:52AM

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< 

<< The FED can only react to the market, hence my original comment. It should be obvious by now that the FED does not control the economy--all this "free" money and only modest growth. The FED and all other Central Banks are impotent. Once in a while they find a little blue pill, but overall their effectiveness is limited to nature (market forces). >>

Horse dookey >>

Great response!!! >>

crude, but accurate. >>

I learn more about you everyday derryb. >>

Keep your eye on the ball, not the carrier >>

So you are just the carrier for the "horse dookey" comment? >>

Attempting to make the thread about me does not erase your ridiculous statement.

secondrepublic · January 6, 2014 1:20AM

In my view gold prices never topped out in this bull run at $3500+/ounce -- as some had predicted -- because the expected big wave of inflation fizzled out. All that monetary printing hasn't really crept into what we're buying on a day to day basis, at least not in a big way. Is gas really more expensive than it was 3-5 years ago? Food? Maybe a little bit, but we're not paying double or triple what we paid in 2007-2008 before all this began. The problem is not too much money chasing too few goods. In fact, the problem is that most people don't seem to have any spare money laying around. So what does this all mean for Janet Yellen? My personal prediction is that she's going to try to make a big splash and jump start the economy with what she thinks will do the trick -- more inflation. The media has been laying the groundwork for this already. Don't be surprised when it happens. At the end of the day Bernanke was a Republican, Bush appointee, and for all of the QE and money printing that happened, he was always signaling some level of prudence in pulling back the reins. I don't see that with Yellen at all. The Economist magazine -- about as mainstream as it gets -- describes her as "the first acknowledged dove" to run the Fed. As the Economist explains, in the old days, "Presidents once felt compelled to appoint monetary-policy hawks such as Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan to reassure markets that the Fed would not succumb to the political system’s inflationary bias. In appointing Ms Yellen Mr Obama has implicitly acknowledged how much the world, and the Fed’s priorities, have changed." With somebody at the helm who wants more inflation, how could that not be a net positive for gold?

cohodk · January 6, 2014 1:24AM

Im glad you accept my thoughts. Perhaps I should have placed more credence towards your numerous comments to buy silver 100% higher than current levels.

It is you, not I, who turned the conversation towards yourself with a comment that did nothing to forward the debate. You expect me to accept your carrier while you refuse to accept mine. Thats very hypocritical, but then again you have proven this behavior many times over.

I cant wait till the broken clock strikes your hour for then you will finally you will have your peace.

derryb · January 6, 2014 1:34AM

<< Its "ridiculous", but im glad you accept my thoughts. Perhaps I should have placed more credence towards your numerous comments to buy silver 100% higher than current levels.

I cant wait till the broken clock strikes your hour. >>

and it will.

derryb · January 6, 2014 2:10AM

Back to the OP. . .
I see it as TEPCO or BP being in charge of not only the economy but also the mis-information being fed to the public.

Baley · January 6, 2014 3:04AM

<< 

<< Its "ridiculous", but im glad you accept my thoughts. Perhaps I should have placed more credence towards your numerous comments to buy silver 100% higher than current levels.

I cant wait till the broken clock strikes your hour. >>

and it will.

>>

Every day, I wake up and shout "Earthquake!, today's going to be the Big Earthquake, so prepare yourselves! prepare, for you are forwarned!"

One of these days, we'll have a big earthquake, and I'll say, "See! I was right all along, just early!"

VanHalen · January 6, 2014 4:22AM

<< Van halen, are you then expecting inflation? >>

In the long run yes, of course. The prices for goods and services in the U.S. will be outrageous in 2025. Only the top 10% will be much above what we now consider low income.

Baley · January 6, 2014 5:10AM

<< 

<< Van halen, are you then expecting inflation? >>

In the long run yes, of course. The prices for goods and services in the U.S. will be outrageous in 2025. Only the top 10% will be much above what we now consider low income. >>

Heh, so let's think this through... the prices for "goods and services" are expected to be much MUCH higher than they are now, but wages will not also rise with this expected "inflation"? The value skilled labor and of homes and stock portfolios will not "inflate" along with the prices for "goods and services"?

Let me guess: gold and silver will be much higher in this PM-ers dreamland? Will the members of this forum get to be the kings of the world and wear golden crowns?

VanHalen · January 6, 2014 5:15AM

You think my 3ozs of gold and 150ozs of silver will make me rich? Thanks!

Reality is we are headed for deep trouble. Whether you choose to look forward or not is not my concern.

MGLICKER · January 6, 2014 5:47AM

<< You think my 3ozs of gold and 150ozs of silver will make me rich? Thanks!

Reality is we are headed for deep trouble. Whether you choose to look forward or not is not my concern. >>

Deep, deep, trouble. As a nation we have done absolutely nothing to curb runaway spending. How can printing $3 Trillion ever fix any problem. If Bernanke had been captain of Titanic, he would have frantically tried to lower the ocean.

derryb · January 6, 2014 6:27AM

Reality check from ZeroHedge:

"Why do we continue to keep the faith with gold (and silver)? We can encapsulate the argument in one statistic.

Last year, the US Federal Reserve enjoyed its 100th anniversary, having been founded in a blaze of secrecy in 1913. By 2007, the Fed’s balance sheet had grown to $800 billion.

Under its current QE programme (which may or may not get tapered according to the Fed’s current intentions), the Fed is printing $1 trillion a year.

To put it another way, the Fed is printing roughly 100 years’ worth of money every 12 months. (Now that’s inflation.)

Conjuring up a similar amount of gold from thin air is not so easy."

Cakes · January 6, 2014 8:20AM

<< Will the members of this forum get to be the kings of the world and wear golden crowns? >>

Baley that is a great comment. It brought a smile to my face.

MGLICKER · January 6, 2014 9:46AM

Official. Yellen approved. Next month should be real interesting.

Obama's destructive policies will have Janet Yellen and Katherine Sebelius in group therapy by Easter.

derryb · January 6, 2014 10:33AM

"Ultimately the power of monetary policy to engineer a real economy will be proven to be just as ridiculous as the claims that housing prices must always go up." - Peter Schiff, 1/6/14

renman95 · January 6, 2014 10:55AM

<< 

<< You think my 3ozs of gold and 150ozs of silver will make me rich? Thanks!

Reality is we are headed for deep trouble. Whether you choose to look forward or not is not my concern. >>

Deep, deep, trouble. As a nation we have done absolutely nothing to curb runaway spending. How can printing $3 Trillion ever fix any problem. If Bernanke had been captain of Titanic, he would have frantically tried to lower the ocean. >>

comrade mg, I know that you know that we know that Fed policy is to digitise us "into Bolivian*."

Oh, and I had my suspicions that Big Ben was a global warmest.

*

MGLICKER · January 6, 2014 11:50AM

<< comrade mg, I know that you know that we know that Fed policy is to digitise us "into Bolivian*." >>

Iron Mike only wanted the ear. DC wants the gizards.

MGLICKER · January 6, 2014 10:58PM

<< It’s not the Fed’s job to prop up equities. >>

interesting statement from Yellen, yesterday.

derryb · January 7, 2014 12:10AM

<< 

<< It’s not the Fed’s job to prop up equities. >>

interesting statement from Yellen, yesterday. >>

sounds liike an admission of guilt

MGLICKER · January 7, 2014 12:19AM

<< sounds liike an admission of guilt >>

..and a warm up to an irrational exuberance declaration!

derryb · January 7, 2014 2:15AM

<< 

<< It’s not the Fed’s job to prop up equities. >>

interesting statement from Yellen, yesterday. >>

also sounds like a hidden message - more taper. Or could be intentional misdirection.

Baley · January 7, 2014 1:40PM

They'll likely taper off $10B every month or two, with the goal of being done buying new bonds by the end of 2014.

derryb · January 7, 2014 2:01PM

<< They'll likely taper off $10B every month or two, with the goal of being done buying new bonds by the end of 2014. >>

or divert bond money to mortgage securities and call it a taper

4 more weeks till Janet Yellen is Federal Reserve Chair!

Comments