Jun 022013
 
 June 2, 2013  Posted by at 1:13 pm Finance


It's sort of funny to see a wider – though still faint – recognition developing in the financial world that perhaps it's true that the more stimulus is applied in today's global economies, the faster it will hit a wall. Some may finally even begin to see one or more inbuilt mechanisms at work. I personally think it all harks back to what I've long said, that stimulus by governments and central banks may have a function in certain economic cycles, but that applying it without across the board and thorough debt restructuring is a borderline criminal and useless use (and waste) of present and future taxpayer money. Still, we all know by now what will happen when stimulus starts to stutter: ever more will be blindly thrown at that wall.

News that Japan's main pension fund will increasingly be allowed to move from bonds into – domestic – stocks was received as a piece of real good news this week, after the Nikkei lost some 15% in a few days time. It's still up over 30% for the year though, and that should have all of us wondering, especially the fund managers – and its beneficiaries-: What are the chances that the fund's move into stocks coincides with the Nikkei having surpassed its top? That the increased purchases may perhaps lift it for a few days, but the downward move is in regardless? It's hard not to chuckle a little when you see that the Tokyo government and the fund want to execute the move because bond yields are so low, and at the same time they announce it, those yields triple.

Pensions funds – and non-financial institutions in general – (tend to) always lag behind developments. Needless to say, being always behind can be a very expensive quality to have. Millions of ageing Japanese may not be terribly happy if their pension money is moved into the stock market and it retraces it gains right back to where it came from, for a 30% loss.

And the desperate game of Abenomics will have repercussions throughout the world. Not just in emerging markets, South Africa, Brazil, Thailand et al, that already see a lot of damage from investment banks, who float freely on cheap profits from various QEs, recalibrating their Abezombie money away from emerging economies. No, Abenomics will hit the US and Europe even harder. Because, as our roving reporter VK phrased it: "JGBs are the base of the pyramid in the global bond markets. Risk is priced in JGBs. So Abenomics has destabilized the base of the pyramid in global bond markets. Risk is being repriced accordingly."

Japan is the world's largest creditor. A little over a year ago, Bloomberg wrote :

Investments abroad grew 3.3% to 582 trillion yen ($7.3 trillion) in 2011, rising for the third year, the Finance Ministry said in Tokyo today. Currency gains cut the value of existing holdings but encouraged increased investment abroad. Foreign investors increased Japanese assets by an extra 17 trillion, leaving the net creditor position of the country little changed at 253 trillion yen ($3.25 trillion), the world’s largest, the data showed.

At today’s exchange rates 582 trillion yen is $5.77 trillion, and net credits are $2.51 trillion. A lot less. But both are still the same in yen. Today's $64,000 question: did Japan win or did they lose? One thing's for sure: it takes a lot more yen to buy Treasuries. And if you're Uncle Sam and one of your biggest investors runs into that sort of conundrum, it's hard to keep smiling. Moreover, the Japanese financial system could well be forced to sell off many of its foreign investments (i.e. bonds) and thereby substantially drive down their prices.

Japan is both the world's largest creditor and its largest debtor – when measured in debt to GDP , which is reported to be 245% – (its debt in dollars at almost $14 trillion is second only to the US). But since a lot of that debt is owed to Japanese citizens, it seems to matter less. Except perhaps when you're an ageing Japanese grandma, who will see her pension invested in a falling domestic stock market, and her government issue such enormous amounts of sovereign bonds as part of its miracle Abenomics program that the bonds she holds will plunge in value; a matter of when, not if.

But it's not just in Japan that stimulus goes awry. The US "silly recovery" remains in full swing. QE has facilitated another housing bubble, driven by large investors but marketed as a sign of solid growth. David Rosenberg reported this week that US real personal income fell at a 5.8% rate in Q1 2013. The Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) reported real per capita disposable income was revised lower again for the quarter. Real per capita disposable income contracted at a -9.03% annualized rate, while the personal savings rate was adjusted down to 2.3% (global rate is 25%). What recovery?

Even the UK blows another real estate bubble. Have you looked at your numbers at all recently, guys? Really, a housing recovery? English media report that incoming BofE chief Carney is expected to drive the sterling's value lower by about 15%. Hmm.. wonder what the others will do, sit by idly?

As we at The Automatic Earth have said since this crisis started, there's only one possible outcome to the beggar thy neighbor to the bottom race that is now taking shape: the US must and will lose it. The prettiest horse in the glue factory will receive so much capital in flight, it's going to wish it had played down that recovery story by a substantial margin. So when this plays out, what should Bernanke do, taper or go full throttle forward?

Never mind, it makes no difference. Perhaps it's more useful to talk about how the way down is not some unfortunate accident, that there are indeed inevitabilities, mechanisms even, involved. For instance, ominous data from Bloomberg indicate that in China last year, each $1 in credit added the equivalent of 17 cents in GDP, down from 29 cents last year and 83 cents in 2007. In the US and Europe, that number's on (or past) the verge of turning negative. Perhaps then, in today's toxic financial environment, stimulus is simply self-defeating?!

It's not just an abstract question. Here, for example, is an intriguing note from Comstock Partners:

If you believe, as we do, that economic growth will remain tepid at best and that the Fed, therefore, will not slow down its purchasing program anytime soon, S&P 500 earnings will fall far short of the big second-half increases that the “Street” is forecasting. If, on the other hand, you think that organic economic growth will be strong enough to enable the Fed to reduce its purchases, long-term rates will climb by enough to stop the economy in its tracks and result in the same negative outlook.

The bullish case for the market rests on continuing massive easing by the Fed, supposedly reasonable valuation for stocks, big increases in second half earnings and a more rapidly growing economy. The result has been a market that is overbought and overvalued.

Damned if you do, doomed if you don't. A market that cannot survive without stimulus. A principle illustrated perhaps even more poignantly, from a different angle, by Bruce Krasting:

Bond Vortex In The Works?

I got an email from a friend who runs money for a hedge fund that got my interest:

… may want to take a look at convexity vortex in mbs market and implications…

“Convexity vortex’? What’s that about? A bit more from this fellow, I’ll call him ‘MP’:

… Some familiar with it say the vortex is 19 bps away .. 2.2% on ten year treasury, 3% on the CMM .. if breaks, MBS holders subject to extension and duration risk. Would now have to increase convexity hedging. Would lead to price gaps and significant selling. With shortage of treasuries due to bernank and co. and low liquidity, could be very disruptive.

A layman’s explanation of convexity:

When mortgage interest rates fall, the probability that an individual will re-finance a mortgage increases. When mortgage interest rates increase, the likelihood of a re-financing of the mortgage goes down. Therefore, in a rising rate environment, the average life of a pool of mortgages increases. For example, if a bond fund held Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) with an assumed 10-year average life, AND interest rates rose, the average life of the MBS portfolio would be extended for a few years. This is convexity.

The last thing that a bond manager wants in a rising rate environment is to have the average maturity of the portfolio extended, as this adds to the losses. As a result, MBS players hedge their portfolios against “duration risk” by shorting Treasuries (ten-year paper). The higher rates go (and the speed that rates are increasing) forces more and more of the convexity selling.

So: if – as in when – mortgage interest rates rise, bond funds must sell Treasuries to cover their shorts. And since the US is busy fooling itself into a housing recovery, of course interests rates are rising (the markets at work, don't you know). They were at such a historic low until recently that people even started suggesting you were a fool for having missed the "opportunity" to buy at those rates. So rates only had one place to go from there. Ergo: as Bernanke tries to convince America that things are getting better, and if they're not he'll spend trillions of dollars more of your kids' money to make sure they are anyway, he at the same time forces institutional investors to start selling their Treasuries in huge quantities. Which runs counter, at an exact 180 degrees, to what he claims he's trying to accomplish. Krasting:

MP believes that there is a magic number of around 2.2% on the ten-year bond that will bring out an avalanche of convexity selling. The 2.2% tipping point is very close to where the T-bond sits today.

The fellow who brought this to my attention is a perm-bear on bonds. Given that, I sought out a confirmation from another guy (call him JH) who has been bullish on bonds for many years. JH sits on the bond desk of a big international bank. When I posed the question to the Bond Bull I got a surprising response:

… I don’t disagree – I would guess we have a huge concentration of mortgages that would go out of the money at 2.25% 10yr UST, slowing prepays, extending servicer portfolios, bringing on longer duration UST selling ……

So there is a vortex risk in front of us. The weaker the ten-year gets (higher yield), the more selling is required. [..]

Bernanke has recently said that the Fed is in the process of changing the monthly QE purchases. He has said that the amounts of POMO (QE) that is completed on a monthly basis will vary based on “incoming information”. From this I conclude that the Fed will, in the coming months, announce a taper of its purchases. When this happens, it’s likely that the bond market will “spike/knee-jerk” higher in yield – and when that happens the convexity selling will bring even higher yields.

The Fed isn’t going to like that result. They do not want to lose control of the long end of the yield curve. So, if and when the convexity selling hits post a QE Taper, the Fed might respond by increasing the next month’s QE in an attempt to drive long rates back down. Bernanke has basically promised to do just that. [..]

The bond bear, MP, had this to say about the Fed ramping up monthly QE in response to a market correction in yields:

… if Fed has to increase buying to stabilize, I would argue it is a very negative development for all markets.

The fact that two guys who trade bonds for a living are well aware of the ‘vortex risk’ as rates approach 2.2% tells me that all of the bond guys are watching this. So, to some extent, the news is already in ‘today’s print’ for bond yields. The opposite could also be the result. When a market understands that there will be forced selling at a certain level, the market always tries to push to the level where the stop-loss selling has to occur. To me, this suggests that the bond market is going to try to test the 2.2% rate.

US 10-year yields started off the week at 2.01%. On Tuesday they were briefly 2.23%, then closed out the week at 2.13%.

[..] if the bond market gets soft, the Fed will respond with a very large dose of monthly QE. [..] The inescapable conclusion from this scenario is that QE is FOREVER. Taper talk will prove to be just talk. When players come to understand that the only leg the markets are standing on is endless/massive QE, there will be a shudder of fear.

Yes, "QE is FOREVER" means that the financial world has – deliberately – positioned its wagers so that it will collapse without constant infusions of taxpayer money. Consider it a form of blackmail, Too Big To Fail 2.0. So what will governments and central bankers do? They will provide the infusions. Which will end up pushing bond yields up, not down. Which requires them to provide more. Rinse and repeat. Self-defeating. Rinse and defeat.

And then Krasting pulls us right back down into Japan (you can never ignore the world's largest creditor):

I would normally say that the ‘worst case’ will not happen. But there is something else going on in bond land that is running parallel to the Taper/convexity selling that the US is facing. Japan is looking at a very similar outcome (for much different reasons). As Kyle Bass pointed out last week, the promise of 2% inflation and 1% bond yields doesn’t have a happy ending. In an effort to cap Japanese bond yields, the Bank of Japan will respond with ever higher amounts of QE. The BOJ has to do this – the entire Abenomics goes up in smoke if the Japanese bond markets puke.

And draws the inevitable conclusion: if and when central banks and their policies end up stuck between a rock and a hard place, they lose control, and the markets will see that Ben Bernanke is just another naked emperor:

There are forces developing over the next few months that may push the BOJ and the Fed to take some extraordinary actions. That these two big CBs are facing the same potential outcome, at the same time, is troubling for me. I see this evolving story as a possible turning point. The key CB’s will have gone from Offense to Defense. For five years the CBs have enjoyed being on the offense. They have successfully controlled things so far. But I can’t imagine how they can continue to be “successful” when they are forced to defend (versus lead) the bond markets.

Perhaps today's stimulus is self-defeating simply because it is unleashed in a toxic financial environment, ridden with hidden debt. Perhaps it can only function when debts are properly restructured, defaulted upon, their holders bankrupted where applicable. And there's no chance of that: the most prolific debt holders are Wall Street banks, and their debts have been made more secret than the latest whereabouts of Jimmy Hoffa.

As long as that stays the way it is, QE is nothing but a very expensive – and very temporary – stop gap. Short term profits for the financial world, long term losses for you and me. There are no ifs or buts involved. There may never be a one on one piece of proof that QE, or stimulus in general, is self-defeating in some – or most – circumstances. But this comes very close. If ever there were a stage where the laws of physics meet the world of finance, it is right here. Anything other than this you can put down to either optimism bias or attempts to fool the greater sucker and suck in the greater fool.

We may be forced to conclude then that in today's world stimulus is self-defeating because it's stimulus itself that reveals the weak spots in an economy, and more stimulus reveals more weak spots. So maybe it's a better idea to stop applying it. Only, that will wreck the present financial system, which cannot survive unless QE is forever. To repeat myself: the more stimulus is applied in today's global economies, the faster it will hit a wall.

Photo top: Samuel H. Gottscho New York Financial district from Hotel Bossert 1933

 


Home Forums What If Stimulus Is Self-Defeating?

This topic contains 0 replies, has 0 voices, and was last updated by  Raúl Ilargi Meijer 6 years, 4 months ago.

Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #8379

    It's sort of funny to see a wider – though still faint – recognition developing in the financial world that perhaps it's true that the more st
    [See the full post at: What If Stimulus Is Self-Defeating?]

    #7645

    Golden Oxen
    Participant

    As we at The Automatic Earth have said since this crisis started, there’s only one possible outcome to the beggar thy neighbor to the bottom race that is now taking shape: the US must and will lose it. The prettiest horse in the glue factory will receive so much capital in flight, it’s going to wish it had played down that recovery story by a substantial margin.

    Not defending their insane policy by any means, merely trying to anticipate their next move.

    Perhaps this particular problem will be addressed by a return back to fixed exchange rates, with the bringing out of Gold from the closet to stabilize the currency trading madness that is harming everyone at his juncture?

    Necessity is the Mother of Invention and there are many, myself included, waiting for the Genie to be let out of the bottle.

    #7646

    bluebird
    Participant

    Ilargi said “So when this plays out, what should Bernanke do, taper or go full throttle forward?”

    It is rumored that Bernanke is leaving this year. I think he will want to keep his legacy intact and will leave sooner rather than later. So it most likely that his replacement will have to decide what to do. Either option won’t matter, it will all collapse anyway.

    #7647

    And we’re off!

    SOCGEN: This Week’s Jobs Report Is Going To Be Strong, And The 10-Year Treasury Is Heading To 2.75%

    Stimulus makes the economy grow, and we’ll see an avalanche of selling US 10-year. Bernanke slows down stimulus, and we’ll see more selling. Just another naked emperor.

    #7648

    Same story (as mine today), different tack: “The Bank for International Settlements said central banks’ policies of record low interest rates and monetary stimulus had helped investors “tune out” bad news — every time an economic indicator disappointed, traders simply took that as confirmation that central banks would continue to provide stimulus.”

    Easy money policy from leading central banks boost markets, but investors ignore warning signs.

    #7649

    BIS records startling collapse of eurozone interbank loans

    Cross-border lending is falling drastically across the western world as banks slash exposure to Europe and bend to tougher capital rules, according to data from the Bank for International Settlements. [..]

    The Basel III rules demand higher capital ratios, fewer risky assets, and less reliance on wholesale borrowing. “Pressure to make banks safe is paradoxically causing a contraction of their risk assets and therefore of the money supply, perpetuating feeble demand and high unemployment,” he said. Mr Congdon said quantitative easing in the US and the UK had helped to offset the tougher rules but the European Central Bank is constrained by the lack of a genuine fiscal union

    So QE is used simply to offset plans to give banks healthier balance sheets. Question is: are they still healthier afterwards? Or does QE defeat Basel III?

    #7650

    Rates for the US 30-year fixed, courtesy of BI:

    #7651

    Ken Barrows
    Participant

    After reading the SOCGEN headline, I think the 10 year UST will be at 1.80% in a month or sooner. Deflation wins the battle.

    #7676

    gurusid
    Participant

    Hi Illarghi,

    Even the UK blows another real estate bubble. Have you looked at your numbers at all recently, guys? Really, a housing recovery?

    Its all ‘funny money’ buying in London, with retiring boomers selling out big time to buy in the ‘counties and shires. Otherwise its Poundland:
    in Liverpool, Stoke-On-Trent and Kensington (sorry had to tease you there its Liverpool – again, not London.)


    Run down Briton, coming to an ex-industrial city near you – cue Coronation Street titles:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=b299-MuAWO4&feature=endscreen

    Of course we Brits never do anything by halves, having a psychotic obsession with house prices helped with government [strike]debt slave[/strike] loan schemes. Just wait till interest rates wobble… :dry:

    Still, somewhere to put your pension pot I suppose:

    Buy-to-let: Brilliant money making scheme or a path to ruin?
    By Lana Clements & James Andrews | Yahoo! Finance UK – Tue, Jun 4, 2013 12:40 BST

    More workers approaching retirement are considering a buy-to-let property to supplement their income.

    The number of buy-to-let mortgages has increased by nearly 50% since 2007, with rental yields consistently beating inflation.

    Meanwhile, annuity rates have dropped to record lows and savings pay a pittance.

    The arguments against

    What people frequently forget when they look at buy-to-let property is the scale of the risks.

    Buy-to-let isn’t about buying somewhere you want to live, it’s about making the most cash from your money. And it’s an expensive way to do it.

    Think of it this way: You’re taking out a very large loan that accrues interest to buy something that then requires more money every year to maintain (either in letting agency fees, insurance, maintenance costs or advertising for tenants), with an uncertain income stream (it might not be let the whole time, after all) with no diversification.

    etc. Yeah, like that’s going to stop the grandlords

    Update:
    Ha, talk about synchronicity. Last night on News Night the veritable Jeremy Paxman grilled his guests who were variously a representative of the building industry, an MP and a worried person (investment consultant). Apparently the new government loan scheme to help [strike]boost the house builders pockets[/strike] the housing shortage will be available to foreign investors. So that’s right, to keep ‘ole blighty afloat they are handing our ‘tax payers money’ (JP’s words) to anyone including ‘foreigners’. building rep man has smug grin as JP says this money goes to him, while he says people need to focus on housing to live in and not to speculate on. Meanwhile worried person mentioned first time buyers saddled with both private and gov’t debt sitting in (sharp intake of breath) negative equity! MP was obviously covering for the fact that they know if the housing market crashes so do the banks and with it what remains of the economy – negative equity works both ways apparently. The government ‘loan’ for 20% has a clause saying you cannot sublet – like that’s going to stop them. :unsure:

    Next up was a discussion on benefits with a new threesome for JP to grill, especially the ballooning housing benefits (tax payers money) for rocketing rent going to private landlords (same people buying the houses in the ring a ring a roses – sneeze and yer dead housing ‘market’). Amongst the banter the term ‘rent cap’ was heard. Along with ‘rent controls’ and other coded words for ‘well what do you expect when you ‘privatise’ the ‘housing market’ leaving it open to ‘unbridled capitalism’… 😆 (remember the UK has always had trouble housing the serfs) 🙁

    Rent controls? Still want that London penthouse to let now Mr Global Investor? :dry:

    L,
    Sid.

    #7677

    Gravity
    Participant

    I’ve had enough of the avarice of political economy, they can go misallocate themselves.
    Representative government has failed to seize monetary policy and take it away from the malicious mismanagement of banking technocrats, therefore guaranteeing financial, commercial and political collapse in swift succesion.
    Its no longer profitable to pretend that megabanks and political parties are opposing power parasites, both are now reduced to feeding off the host society by similar mechanisms; inextinguishable debt and structural poverty as means of violent coercion. The average credithead political party is not trying to fix the problem, its more profitable for bloated bureaucracy to perpetuate the dying system to the point of toxic debt-shock. Even if politicians understood the monetary disease, they’re themselves ideologically insolvent, products of multigenerational misallocation.

    The dutch senate recently gave the central bank here a multi-billion euro bailout, explicitly guaranteeing future losses by maximising moral hazard. The cartels trashy investments in southern europe might expose their precious profits to systemic risk, our representative cowards couldn’t help but collaborate in funding the private exploitation of the money supply with public funds.
    Afterwards, the central bank’s analysts managed to argue that the banking sector does not contribute to the rising public debt.
    Bless their insolvent souls!

    Financial oligarchy is everywhere reverting to its natural adaptive state of criminal oligarchy to optimise extraction of the dying host’s vital fluids before coagulation and rigor mortis sets in.
    Mediawise psychological warfare brutalises the population into pliant submission, while financial feudalism and corporate fascism works through the legislative to rob them blind. Technotronic tyranny is being compiled to enforce paralytic poverty and murder democracy during the collapse the money malice has accidentally precipitated, so enabling criminal overrule by the most guilty and facilitating any means of orderly killoff of the unpacifiable citzenry lest wrathflation overtake them.

    Some day, publicly advocating the very idea of central banking will be considered incitement to genocide.
    I heard Bernanke is writing his autobiography entitled ‘Obsolete Assumptions’, including a chapter on ‘Monetary Megadeath’.
    Ben did teach me the meaning of charity, though. Go figure.

    #7678

    Professorlocknload
    Participant

    Amusing. At the bottom of this page, I found a “Greenlight Mortgage” Loan offer of 2.75 apr 10 year fixed. Ha!

    That aside;

    What the Fed is doing here is nothing new. It’s simply decided to destroy the currency involved.

    ‘Quoting the great Austrian economist, Ludwig von Mises,

    ” There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as the result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved.”

    In other words, the Bernanke bust is coming, sooner or later, one way or another.’ Michael Pollaro

    No, it didn’t come “sooner,” been years now, so it inevitably must come “later.”

    No other way. Central Banks just don’t do Deflation for any longer than it takes to clear cut the woods and create paper blizzards.

    Watch October! New C-Notes introduced, most likely a new QE that
    could just purchase not only Securities, but Stocks, Charge Card Paper, Junk Auto Paper, Student Loans, and a tax credit of, oh, say $25,000 per household? Or, if necessary in the convoluted logic of these idiots, $50,000 coupled with a raise in the Minimum Wage to $25 an hour? $50?

    Think it impossible? Of course it isn’t, it’s the stuff of Crackup Booms!

    All here https://mises.org/

    #7680

    Professorlocknload
    Participant

    @Gravity.

    Yup. Dishonest Money Corrupts. US Treasury/Federal Reserve Bank/US Congress/Coroporatocracy…all in it together. It would be no different if the Fed vanished and Con-gress issued Fiat. Every election year would be Shangri La. Every inauguration the beginning of misery.

    Centralized Representative Government is not representative at all. It becomes a power source to be manipulated.

    After the Euro is gone, it might be a good idea for the US States to look into a little more exertion of sovereign rights.

    Local control is better for…well, the locals.

    #7681

    william
    Participant

    Its a strange time but more and more I believe people might be getting it. Another site I follow has the same theme as here TIPPING POINTS

    https://m.podshow.com/media/13207/episodes/329708/randompodshowcom-329708-06-05-2013.mp3

    Anyway I think people are misdirected into thinking something else can happen here. NO we are not going to buy are way out of this mess (code word buy American) we will not pay down the debt we will not work our way out this mess. What is going down is a historical species drive collapse and possible extinction.

    I don’t consider anything short of many dieing part of the solution. Further the cogs are slowly turning in a very predictable method. Stimulus will continue with less effectiveness. The next cog will be the cheap food policy failing. Finally institutions to big to fail will fail and cause so much violent government policy and warfare.

    I predict a hyper inflation / deflating. Savings and consumer hard assets will fall dramatically in value. Taxes will inflate to deafening heights. In Manitoba the government has taken all assets out of the local hydro forcing them to take on debt. The debt level of this utility can never be paid off. So the province now collects taxes through electric bills, gas bills, auto insurance, sales tax, income tax, water bills, and even municipal school tax. Increasingly we are taxed past 75% when everything is taken into consideration.

    So why would one think gold will drop to $1000 if it is a hedge against governments printing and loaning to much? Well it is not that simple. Although a hedge it also depends on available people ready to purchase. Now speculators can purchase but in the end they are only short term. Real manufacturing matters more in this case. If a real manufacture can not sell the product at the mark up, they slow down and eventually stop until inventory shrinks. You will notice oil does this and that is why gold will too. Silver does not follow gold as well as it has in the past because it is vital to manufacturing.

    So when things fail some things will rise excessively and somethings will fail. My father purchased a Jag because during the depression things like that had no value. A loaf of bread on the other hand had much higher value. So don’t expect fair devaluing and learn how to make your own quick foods from scratch.

    The trick to doing well is perspective. If you knew how bad it is going to be – lets say you went on a time machine and saw, then when you don’t experience the same level of pain as others, THEN … then things aren’t so bad.

    Its about the bear thats attacking you. You are not out running the bear just your friend … nice knowing you

    #7689

    Gravity
    Participant

    Under global hyperbolic marketing,
    price functions are composed of two value gradients; equity and novelty.
    The principles of equity and novelty govern all value in the universe,
    integrating analytic and dialectic utility of all possible ontological mutables in the eternal cycle of revaluation.
    All utility functions are bounded by value gradients of equity and novelty. Equity is compiled from fairness/justice, all equity is fair, otherwise its plunder.

    Relativity of equity predicts price dilation and utility contraction at sufficiently accelerated velocity of money, yet price curvature of a monetary surface allows no ideal free market to exist at sub-infinite monetary velocity.
    In an actual market-fluid, a single penny in circulation produces hyper-inflation at infinite velocity, yet infinite money causes no inflation at zero velocity. Price curvature is relative to velocity, delineating supply/demand ratios. Money becomes unmoveable at sufficiently high equity, unmarketable waste at sufficiently low equity, money has zero novelty value inherently, except in pricing power.

    Due to the relativity of equity, death can only be a marketable product if assigned a constant value of sufficient novelty, thus completing the set of marketable mutables as countably infinite, yielding universal fair value.

    Assume a spiral rotating in a circular motion,
    with the centre everywhere and the parameter everywhere on average, especially intersecting the centre.

    You are feeling very recursive.
    When you awaken, you’re a mortal living algorithm.

    #7775

    Mark T
    Member
    #7776

    Mark T
    Member
    #7818

    gurusid
    Participant

    Hi Folks,

    For those interested in giving feedback on how the site ‘looks and feels’ please go to this thread:

    TAE 3.0: What do you want to see?

    Thanks,

    L,
    Sid.

Viewing 17 posts - 1 through 17 (of 17 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.