COPOM Votes

Antoninho (me) = 25%
X (my bro)       = 50%
CESG              = 25%
FK                   = 50%
The Anchor      = 25%
Gargamel          = 50%
Boyolo             = 50%
Bloomberg        = 43.44%
CAG                = 43.44%

HOKEY POKEY

YOU PUT THE FLATTENER ON, YOU TAKE THE FLATTENER OFF,

YOU WATCH YOUR CARRY ROT AND YOU SWEAT THE WHOLE TRADE OUT.

YOU DO THE HOKEY POKEY & THE FED JERKS YOU   ALL AROUND.

THAT'S WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT!

YOU PRICE THE QE IN, YOU PRICE THE QE OUT.

YOU DISSECT EVERY FRIGGIN WORD, & THINK YOU'VE GOT IT FIGURED OUT.

YOU DO THE HOKEY POKEY...

YOU PRICE DEPOSIT LEVIES IN, YOU PRICE DEPOSIT LEVIES OUT,

CYPRIOTS HIDE FROM   RUSSIAN THUGS, WHO WANNA TEAR THEIR TOENAILS OUT. YOU DO THE HOKEY POKEY...

WE PRICE ABENOMICS IN, EACH TIME THE BOJ MEETS.

THE FORCED BUYING NEVER SHOWS, & I THINK PRDC FLOWS ARE BOOSHEET.

YOU DO THE HOKEY POKEY...

WE PRICE A GREEK EXIT OUT, WE PRICE THE EU IN.

10YR MONEY TO COLUMBIA SUB 3%, THE NEXT TIME WE'LL TAKE IT ON THE CHIN.

YOU DO THE HOKEY POKEY...

ITS AN EARLY CLOSE TODAY, ITS THE LONG WEEKEND NOW.

I OBVIOUSLY NEED A BREAK FROM BONDS, SO I'M GONNA SAY PEACE OUT.

YOU DO THE HOKEY POKEY & THE FED JERKS YOU ALL AROUND,

IS THAT WHAT ITS ALL ABOUT?"  (GOD I HOPE NOT)

Stop calling Laurence Ball stupid

If you are among those calling Ball an idiot simply because he said a 4% inflation rate for the developed world is optimal, well then YOU are stupid.

Go search in the literature the terrible costs of a 4% inflation rate...you wont find. There is no such evidence out there, sorry.

The benefits are clear: from the Fisher equation, nominal interest rates rise with inflation one-to-one, which allows countries to avoid the zero bound if a strong recession kicks in. In sum, there is more room for traditional monetary policy to deal with the recessionary scenario. Oh, it is not unlikely, it is not a one in 100 years event!

In the last 70 years, it may be, but that means nothing because it is only recently that countries have been focusing on the 2% target. And in two and a half decades we reached the zero bound twice, in japan 20 years ago, and in many countries now.

Genta's friend does not speak chinese

Genta is worried about China, extremely so. To some extent enveryone is. One argument i dont buy which has been put forth by these more pessimistic economists is that Chinas BC cant lower rates if push really comes to shove. They say China BC has its hands tied because of rising property prices. But why cant the CB cut rates and simultaneously impose regulatory restrictions on the housing market, on mortgage loans? It sure can!

Genta has a very close friend who travels frequently to China in order to understand the contry better. This old fellow is pessimistic and he has influenced young Genta. But boy, he does not speak chinese. I do. He probably misunderstood what they told him (in case he really did go there)

25; 50; 25; 50; 25; 50

o X disse num comentário que tombini chancelou 50 ontem
X, esse bc já disse e desdisse tantas vezes, é o bc do cavalo-de-pau, lembra? nao chancela nada, precisa a dona lá estar de acordo, rapaz
a razão ruido/sinal desse pessoal é a mais alta da história dos bcs desde 1500 (na época da presidência tupinambá) entao cuidado em ler a última fala grossa como determinante
claro, você pode acertar, mas se eu jogar uma moeda pro alto e apostar "cara" eu acerto com 1/2 de chance; quero apostar um almoço, X, lá na Suécia, que vem 25 de novo (temo que com recuo de alimentos venha 12,5)
lembrei daquele paper que lemos juntos, do Vickers, no qual o bc joga mixed strategies, voce lembra, lá nos EUA ? eu achei far-fetched na época....pas plus!

Aplicando o GT10 (treasury de 10 anos) a 2.03

Se chegar a 1.80 eu ganho, se for a 2.20 eu perco. Contra parte alguém?

Preço do vinho

Em cidades onde custo do aluguel é muito alto, como Londres, os supermercados são cheios de promoções do tipo: "leve muitos que eu te dou um puta desconto". Comprar mais sai, por unidade (kg, ml), mais barato porque o custo de armazenagem é bizarro.

Mas isso não parece explicar o puzzle do novo título gráfico desse blog. Note que não é apenas que o preço do ml do vinho da maior garrafa é menor; o total cobrado é menor! Aí não dá!

Foi só um erro de marcação, ou posicionamento. Não merecia sequer esse post.