Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 671 posts

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#371

Post by tzakrajs »

SkyBelow wrote: post #234
tempguy9999 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nicely put, but a real drunken master doesn't get repeatedly decked. Look at trump's financial record, that should have been quite enough (6 bankruptcies was it?) Those who were fooled, were fooled because they chose to be.

Why should the number of bankruptcies matter if the person is still rich? It shows that they are using it as a tool, which might inform us we need to consider how bankruptcies work, but that doesn't make someone incompetent. If you want to see someone who is incompetent with money, look at lottery winners who within 5 years end up worse than before they won.

Because he's a grifter who profits from other peoples losses.

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#372

Post by zanny »

tlogan wrote: post #116
throwaway5752 wrote: post #109

Everyone serious knew that a trade war would set a recession in motion, and that it would be a trade war the US would lose because of the directionality of the trade. The thought has always been that the president was using a high leverage negotiating strategy (see https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/for-trump-diplomacy... , for example) to extract maximal concessions from PRC. But in the end, most of the people…

And things will be worse because China is also heading into recession. You know, you need sell all these products to somebody... And when US consumer stops buying new iPhones (or what ever) combined with recession then situation is going be really really tough. So this will be worse that 2008. Much worse. Back in 2008, China was growing and helping to ease the recession. I do not think China's economy will grow durin…

> So this will be worse that 2008.

2008 was bad because the collective banks of the US realized trillions in mortgages were money on the books that wasn't real and was never going to be real. The correction involved resetting said books and taking a few banks and a trillion dollars of US taxpayer money along the way.

What is the correction this time? All it would really be is a run on confidence in global financial markets. This has happened many, many times (and did happen in 2008 but it was a response to the insolvency of banks). It happened in 2000, it happened in 1993, it happened in 1980, etc.

If its just a correction in overvalued stocks, futures, and a contraction in loans and interest rates thats just a normal recession. We're due to have one, they happen all the time, and since there shouldn't be an influx of millions of displaced / homeless suddenly because this isn't the result of mass foreclosures on defaulting home loans it shouldn't be as disruptive this time. A lot of theoretical stock value gets wiped out, some people lose a lot of money, and then you get to start the cycle over again with rates back under 1% and the DOW down a a few thousand points from its current cresting highs.

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#373

Post by ben_jones »

dobleboble wrote: post #355
JeremyNT wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of the man himself, historically the "deep state" (for lack of a better phrase) has so much inertia that radical changes (even if desired) by the White House end up moderated. I think it's more correct to say that people are realizing that the old order under the president is gradually eroding and its moderating effects are weakening, which adds compounding risks (directly in the trade war stuff but also h…

"federal government" is probably a better term than "deep state" unless you're intentionally trying to be inflammatory...

I think the rational definition of Deep State is just the government “lifers” who stay in significant spheres of influence for most of their career. I.e. key defense, intelligence, financial, etc positions.

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#374

Post by tdons »

datpuz wrote: post #141

I asked this in a similar thread a couple of weeks ago, but I feel like the sentiment is a lot more pessimistic today than it was then. Anyway, I've been holding way too much cash for the last two years in anticipation of a recession. Everyone was telling me that trying to time the market is a bad idea and that I should just invest and forget about it, but given the current signals, might it be a good idea for me to…

You're not alone, I did this as well.

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#375

Post by [deleted] »

dobleboble wrote: post #355
JeremyNT wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of the man himself, historically the "deep state" (for lack of a better phrase) has so much inertia that radical changes (even if desired) by the White House end up moderated. I think it's more correct to say that people are realizing that the old order under the president is gradually eroding and its moderating effects are weakening, which adds compounding risks (directly in the trade war stuff but also h…

"federal government" is probably a better term than "deep state" unless you're intentionally trying to be inflammatory...

[deleted]

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#376

Post by bduerst »

ethbro wrote: post #344
bduerst wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nepotism vs. Meritocracy (or at least a rationalized investment)

The VC game seems a bit more... suspect than to clearly label it as a meritocracy. Particularly for serially bankrupt founders.

VC firms still rationalize it though. Also, how many serial bankrupt founders keep getting investments from the same VC?

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#377

Post by munificent »

JeremyNT wrote: post #265
empath75 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the thought has always been that the president was using a high leverage negotiating strategy Whose thought? The people who didn't know that trump was an incompetent nutjob?

Regardless of the man himself, historically the "deep state" (for lack of a better phrase) has so much inertia that radical changes (even if desired) by the White House end up moderated. I think it's more correct to say that people are realizing that the old order under the president is gradually eroding and its moderating effects are weakening, which adds compounding risks (directly in the trade war stuff but also h…

I think what people have (I hope) learned in the past few years is that intertia is based on all participants respecting basic norms of political interaction. But if you let a participant in who doesn't respect those and has no concern for consequences, things can change very quickly for the worse.

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#378

Post by pfranz »

ummonk wrote: post #260
throwaway5752 wrote: post #109

Everyone serious knew that a trade war would set a recession in motion, and that it would be a trade war the US would lose because of the directionality of the trade. The thought has always been that the president was using a high leverage negotiating strategy (see https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/for-trump-diplomacy... , for example) to extract maximal concessions from PRC. But in the end, most of the people…

and that it would be a trade war the US would lose because of the directionality of the trade I expect the US to lose the trade war simply because China will have the fortitude to outlast it, but why would the direction of trade favor China in the trade war? Shouldn't China have more to lose due to being a net exporter?

Not that I'm confident or knowledgable enough to put money on any of this, but I believe it's assumed that the US has a privileged position in the world because of its relative stability (the US infrastructure wasn't ravaged during the World Wars) and has the world's Reserve Currency. If things were more "equatable" the US would have a less privileged position. That also means any losses will be difficult or impossible to get back.

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#379

Post by zanny »

frankbreetz wrote: post #94
alkonaut wrote: post #72

It will be interesting to watch a recession that hits with zero or near zero (or even negative) central bank rates together with ongoing market disruptions such as the US/China trade conflict and Brexit. By “interesting” I mean terrifying.

I agree with this, also will we try to pass another tax cut to try to stimulate the economy. It seems to me should use tax cuts, large increases in government spending, and rate cuts to stimulate the economy on a "rainy days". Doing these things during a good economy seems foolish to me.

Nothing about the intent behind the 2018 tax cuts was about them being good for the economy. They were good for the corporate sponsors of the legislation and administration that pushed for them and bad for the long term solvency of the country and bad for the working class as a whole.

Re: Yield Curves Invert in U.S., U.K

#380

Post by munificent »

SkyBelow wrote: post #234
tempguy9999 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nicely put, but a real drunken master doesn't get repeatedly decked. Look at trump's financial record, that should have been quite enough (6 bankruptcies was it?) Those who were fooled, were fooled because they chose to be.

Why should the number of bankruptcies matter if the person is still rich? It shows that they are using it as a tool, which might inform us we need to consider how bankruptcies work, but that doesn't make someone incompetent. If you want to see someone who is incompetent with money, look at lottery winners who within 5 years end up worse than before they won.

> Why should the number of bankruptcies matter if the person is still rich?

If.

Did Trump ever put more effort into anything in his campaign and Presidency than he put into preventing his tax returns from getting out?

Post reply on HN