Investing

[ewsieg]

8 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Worth noting that his pick to run BLS hasn't been seated yet and that the leadership is still interim.

Worth noting that the current interim will likely be the past interim by next week.

[Deleterious]

 

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, Deleterious said:

 

the old line is that when the US sneezes, Canada catches cold. When the US catches cold, Canada gets pneumonia. Driving it over a cliff is not exactly what Trump is doing to the US economy yet, but at this point he's run over the curbs and is tearing up the neighborhood lawns.

[chasfh]

14 hours ago, Deleterious said:

 

I remember as a teenager working **** jobs where they said they wanted “hard workers”. One guy said he wanted somebody who wouldn’t “**** around”. Turns out that was code for things like “do this terrible thing that’s not part of your job description”, “my ride’s not here, drive me home”, or “punch out and keep working”.

[gehringer_2]

30 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I remember as a teenager working **** jobs where they said they wanted “hard workers”. One guy said he wanted somebody who wouldn’t “**** around”. Turns out that was code for things like “do this terrible thing that’s not part of your job description”, “my ride’s not here, drive me home”, or “punch out and keep working”.

I used to talk to kids about engineering ethics now and then, what I should have have to them but never did was that best way to have ethical courage on the job is to have a spouse with a job good enough to support the household if need be. 😉

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

I used to talk to kids about engineering ethics now and then, what I should have have to them but never did was that best way to have ethical courage on the job is to have a spouse with a job good enough to support the household if need be. 😉

I thank god every day I married well. And believe it or not, so does she. 😉

[Screwball]

12 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

I used to talk to kids about engineering ethics now and then, what I should have have to them but never did was that best way to have ethical courage on the job is to have a spouse with a job good enough to support the household if need be. 😉

There are no ethics. You lie or you die. So I guess your right. You work for some slime POS ladder climbing dickwad, not the corporation you were thrilled to to get a job with. He knows all the other dickwads.

[Deleterious]

Barrons ran an article saying Trump has narrowed his Fed Chair choices to 3 candidates.  

Trump Confirms Finalists for Fed Chair: Hassett, Waller, and Warsh

Quote

President Donald Trump confirmed on Friday that National Economic Council director Kevin Hassett, Federal Reserve governor Christopher Waller, and former Fed governor Kevin Warsh are among the finalists to be appointed Fed chair after Jerome Powell.

I used ChatGP to rate each one a dove or hawk on a scale of 1-10.  Here is the prompt I used and the results.  Kevin Hassett had the least amount of data.  ChatGPT actually used interview comments because he has written so little.

Not sure I would take this all that serious, its just to get an idea.  Plus, what one writes vs what one tells the President could be very different.  People grovel when they want a job.  I just thought it was interesting to see.  

The prompt, name changed each time obviously:

Quote

find all public speeches and writings from Christopher Waller in the past 5 years. Then rank him on a scale of 1-10 if he is dovish or hawkish with dovish being 1 and hawkish being 10

Quote

Christopher Waller

Hawkish vs Dovish — my rating

Rating: 6 out of 10 (closer to hawkish than dovish, but shifting toward easing in 2024–25).

Why 6/10?

• Early/medium period (2021–2023): Waller repeatedly emphasized the risks from inflation and argued policy needed to respond — that is a more hawkish posture (pushing for tighter policy or earlier tightening in 2021–2022). Examples: his 2021/2022 reflections and conference remarks where he discussed how the Fed “fell behind” on inflation and the need to act. FRASER+1

• Late period (2024–mid-2025): Waller publicly argued that inflation had come down sufficiently and by mid-2025 he was explicitly calling for near-term rate cuts (multiple 2025 speeches and interviews urging that the FOMC “get on with” cuts). That move reduces the pure-hawk reading of his record. Federal ReserveReutersBarron's

• Net assessment: He spent a substantial portion of the 2021–23 period with hawkish positions (raising the score), but his clear, public shift toward advocating cuts in 2025 pulls him back from the high end. Overall, that places him modestly hawkish (6/10) rather than strongly hawkish (8–10) or neutral/dovish (1–4).

Quote

Kevin Warsh

Dovish↔Hawkish rating (1 = dovish, 10 = hawkish)

My rating for Kevin Warsh: 8.5 ≈ 9/10 (hawkish).

Why (short justification with sources)

1. Consistent emphasis on price stability and criticism of easy policy. His WSJ pieces (2021, 2023) and subsequent public remarks emphasize that loose policy and large balance sheets caused misallocation and higher inflation — a hallmark of hawkish thinking. Muck RackThe Wall Street Journal

2. Calls for institutional change to constrain Fed discretion. In 2025 lectures and interviews he argued the Fed “strayed from its core mandate” and needs reforms — that’s a stance favoring tighter, rule-like policy and a reduced role for aggressive accommodation. Hoover Institution+1

3. Public statements urging earlier/more forceful action to prevent inflation. He argued that the cost of bringing inflation down would have been lower with earlier action — again consistent with hawkish preference for pre-emptive tightening to maintain credibility. The Wall Street Journal

4. Advocacy for fiscal discipline and concern about money-printing. He links inflation to fiscal and balance-sheet expansion and urges limiting those channels — consistent with a hawkish emphasis on avoiding inflationary financing. Business InsiderBloomberg.com

Score explanation:

• He is clearly not at the extreme (10) because he has not called for panic-style aggressive hikes at all times — he frames arguments in institutional/regime terms and sometimes defends orderly Fed independence — but his overall public record in the last five years is strongly tilted toward fighting inflation, limiting Fed accommodation, and restoring credibility. That places him near the top end of the hawkish scale (≈ 9/10). Reuters+1

Quote

Kevin Hassett

Dovish ↔ Hawkish rating (1 = very dovish; 10 = very hawkish)

My rating: 7 / 10 (leans hawkish).

Why I gave 7/10 — evidence and reasoning

• Recent public statements emphasize concern about inflation and the dangers of political interference in the Fed. In a 2025 Reuters interview Hassett warned that political control of central banks tends to produce inflation and “misery for consumers,” and stressed that the Fed must be independent — a line commonly used by policymakers more comfortable with resisting political pressure to loosen policy. That signals a willingness to defend tighter policy if inflation risks appear. Reuters

• Media and analyst coverage place him nearer the inflation-fighting side of the spectrum than the dovish side. Financial Times coverage on Fed chair contenders groups him with other figures discussed in the context of inflation discipline, contrasting styles across candidates. That context supports a hawkish tilt. Financial Times

• Institutional affiliations and past writings (AEI, Hoover) frequently emphasize growth, fiscal concerns, and skepticism of easy monetary or fiscal policy that could stoke inflation. AEI/Hoover work historically tracks with more market-friendly, anti-inflation positions — again consistent with a hawkish leaning. American Enterprise InstituteHoover Institution

• Countervailing signals: Hassett’s public role at times focuses on growth and jobs (CEA, NEC), and he has argued for policies to boost supply and output — those are not automatically hawkish or dovish. Also, public TV appearances sometimes focus on communications and policy nuance rather than explicit rate calls. That keeps him from being scored an extreme 9–10. Examples: C-SPAN / White House press remarks focus on jobs and policy communication. C-SPAN

Bottom line interpretation

He is more hawkish than dovish — cautious about political pressure to cut rates, concerned about inflation's costs, and aligned (in public remarks and institutional background) with a tendency to defend price stability even if that means tighter monetary settings. That justifies a 7/10 rather than a 4–6 (centrist) or 9–10 (hardline hawk).

 

[gehringer_2]

3 hours ago, Deleterious said:

Barrons ran an article saying Trump has narrowed his Fed Chair choices to 3 candidates.  

Trump Confirms Finalists for Fed Chair: Hassett, Waller, and Warsh

I used ChatGP to rate each one a dove or hawk on a scale of 1-10.  Here is the prompt I used and the results.  Kevin Hassett had the least amount of data.  ChatGPT actually used interview comments because he has written so little.

Not sure I would take this all that serious, its just to get an idea.  Plus, what one writes vs what one tells the President could be very different.  People grovel when they want a job.  I just thought it was interesting to see.  

The prompt, name changed each time obviously:

 

All bankers hate inflation, it transfers wealth from the banks to the borrowers. If that's the pool of people most of the candidates start from, the result isn't surprising. 

[Screwball]

3 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

All bankers hate inflation, it transfers wealth from the banks to the borrowers. If that's the pool of people most of the candidates start from, the result isn't surprising. 

Yea, I'm sure they do. That's some funny stuff right there. Inflation is created by printing money - and finding other ways to create more - aka credit (see M2). The bigger the pie, the bigger the piece. Since they are the swine banksters, they get it first. Cha-ching.

They don't lose, they run the world.

And when they **** it up they get bailed out. And will again.

[Deleterious]

Revised down 911,000 jobs for April 2024 through March.  Revised down 818,000 April 2023 through March 2024.

 

[Deleterious]

 

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, Deleterious said:

Revised down 911,000 jobs for April 2024 through March.  Revised down 818,000 April 2023 through March 2024.

 

And Trump is so economically illiterate - he probably thinks this is great since now he might even get a 50 basis point interest cut. And inflation will wipe out his party by the end of the next cycle.

[Deleterious]

2nd estimate of Q2 GDP adjusted up to 3.3% from 3.0%.  The Atlanta Fed is also predicting 3.0% growth for 3Q.  But that fluctuates quite a bit.

Gross Domestic Product, 2nd Quarter 2025 (Second Estimate) and Corporate Profits (Preliminary)

Unless inflation drops on Thursday, I don't see how a rate cut happens.  But Fed Watch predicts a 25 BPS cut at 91.8% probability and a 50 BPS cut at 8.2%.  

 

[Hongbit]

40 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

2nd estimate of Q2 GDP adjusted up to 3.3% from 3.0%.  The Atlanta Fed is also predicting 3.0% growth for 3Q.  But that fluctuates quite a bit.

Gross Domestic Product, 2nd Quarter 2025 (Second Estimate) and Corporate Profits (Preliminary)

Unless inflation drops on Thursday, I don't see how a rate cut happens.  But Fed Watch predicts a 25 BPS cut at 91.8% probability and a 50 BPS cut at 8.2%.  

 

A rate cut happens because our king wants a rate cut.  Technicals don’t matter anymore.

The only analysis needed is What the king wants, the king gets. 

Edited September 9 by Hongbit

[Deleterious]

It would have happened six months ago if that was true. 

[ewsieg]

1 hour ago, Deleterious said:

2nd estimate of Q2 GDP adjusted up to 3.3% from 3.0%.  The Atlanta Fed is also predicting 3.0% growth for 3Q.  But that fluctuates quite a bit.

Gross Domestic Product, 2nd Quarter 2025 (Second Estimate) and Corporate Profits (Preliminary)

Unless inflation drops on Thursday, I don't see how a rate cut happens.  But Fed Watch predicts a 25 BPS cut at 91.8% probability and a 50 BPS cut at 8.2%.  

 

So, I'm at the point that I doubt whatever BLS says.  I know they regularly look back at data and revise, but it does kind of feel like Trump feeling that if he can't have the numbers he wants for now, let's find a way to make Biden look weaker.

Regardless, the Fed will go based on all the economic indicators and while inflation is still high, fed rates aren't in place just for inflation.  These job numbers are horrible and the revised data seems to match up with anecdotal stories I have from friends/family that have been looking for jobs in the last year.

I keep on repeating to myself that we are still largely a service economy thus the tariffs aren't as bad as many make them out to be, but we seem to be going in the direction of the doomsday economists that felt the tariffs would destroy the economy.  

If you don't have a good chunk of savings on hand, probably a great time to try and build that up.

[Tigeraholic1]

Housing market is at a standstill. No one is buying at 6.5% and everybody else is sitting on a bloated upside down mortgage.

Edited September 9 by Tigeraholic1

[Hongbit]

54 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

It would have happened six months ago if that was true. 

It wasn’t true six months ago.  It is now.

[Deleterious]

7 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

It wasn’t true six months ago.  It is now.

They only do what he wants every six months?  Who knew my girlfriend was a FOMC member.

 

[Hongbit]

22 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

They only do what he wants every six months?  Who knew my girlfriend was a FOMC member.

 

A cycle repeats.  This isn’t a cycle.  He’s getting stronger and stronger the more time that passes and the more he’s allowed to get away without any pushback.  He’s becoming more brazen by the day.

These are uncharted waters we are in now, my friend.  Things in the past have never been what they are today. 

[Hongbit]

1 hour ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Housing market is at a standstill. No one is buying at 6.5% and everybody else is sitting on a bloated upside down mortgage.

Affordability has become almost as much of a hinderance to housing as the rate.  

Skyrocketing unemployment and higher average debt to income also make it  harder for many average people to qualify.     

[gehringer_2]

8 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

Affordability has become almost as much of a hinderance to housing as the rate.  

absolutely. In historical terms, 6.5% is a little high, but not any worse than rates often were in the 70s-80s-90's in periods when housing boomed. But people then were buying houses at maybe 2-5X annual income. Now 10x is as likely.

Edited September 9 by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

2 hours ago, ewsieg said:

So, I'm at the point that I doubt whatever BLS says.  I know they regularly look back at data and revise, but it does kind of feel like Trump feeling that if he can't have the numbers he wants for now, let's find a way to make Biden look weaker.

Regardless, the Fed will go based on all the economic indicators and while inflation is still high, fed rates aren't in place just for inflation.  These job numbers are horrible and the revised data seems to match up with anecdotal stories I have from friends/family that have been looking for jobs in the last year.

I keep on repeating to myself that we are still largely a service economy thus the tariffs aren't as bad as many make them out to be, but we seem to be going in the direction of the doomsday economists that felt the tariffs would destroy the economy.  

If you don't have a good chunk of savings on hand, probably a great time to try and build that up.

But don't the people providing the services often have to buy things (things that may have tariffs) that help them provide the services?  

[Deleterious]

Our factory production is up against 2024.