My afternoon train reads:

Eisinger: Heartening Moves Toward Real Progress in Bank Regulation (DealBook) see also Elizabeth Warren Tackles Wall Street (Nation)
• How Far Should Fed Go to Pop Potential Bubbles? (Real Time Economics)
• What Has Happened to PIMCO All Asset All Authority? (And should you stick with it?) (Institutional Imperative)
• Is Germany Repeating American Errors at Bretton Woods? (Echoes)
• The ultimate buy-and-hold strategy (MarketWatch) but see Critical Warning No. 17: Dow 5,000, crash of 65% (MarketWatch)
• Unexpected Drop in Starts Curbs U.S. Housing Rebound (Bloomberg)
• Germany’s Gold Delusion (Project Syndicate) see also Golden Slumbers (Project Syndicate)
• While Washington Sleeps, a Nation Crumbles (HuffPo)
• With warming seas, lobsters become an abundant bargain (Boston Globe)
• 10 mindblowingly futuristic technologies that will appear by the 2030s (io9)

What are you reading?

 

Stock Market Rallies
Chart
Source: Chart of the Day

Category: Financial Press

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

14 Responses to “10 Mid-Week PM Reads”

  1. S Brennan says:

    Maybe you already posted this, but it does show how endemic corruption is in financial institutions…and how easily “energy markets” are manipulated to extract consumers dollars through illegal action.

    http://www.ferc.gov/media/news-releases/2013/2013-3/07-16-13.asp#.UecD16xn1SM

  2. morning_star says:

    Roughly one year ago you had a post requesting help with the mosquito problem you have around your home. I recall you were showing interest in bats to eat them. The NY Times has a safer and simpler solution – an electric fan: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/science/a-low-tech-mosquito-deterrent.html?_r=0
    Several strategically placed fans would likely keep even your largest parties free from mosquitoes.

  3. Moss says:

    More examples of God’s work. The banksters have no conscience.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/jpmorgan-talks-settle-energy-manipulation-194424539.html?l=1

  4. bear_in_mind says:

    IMHO, this is right up your alley: “The Real CSI: How Reliable Is The Science Behind Forensics?” on PBS’s FRONTLINE.

    The report focuses on cognitive and confirmation biases, and they examine a number of instances where innocent citizens were accused, and in some cases imprisoned, due to “experts” who gave court testimony claiming their protocols and fingerprint analysis comported with scientific standards of inquiry and were 100 percent reliable.

    Turns out that when these assertions are challenged to provide evidence of their claims, it’s akin to watching a replay of the 14th Century’s Flat Earth Society.

    Man, at times we humans are some full-tilt stupid primates… and that reference is probably insulting to squirrel monkeys.

    SOURCE:
    FRONTLINE – The Real CSI
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/real-csi/

    • rd says:

      I was just having a conversation yesterday about an expert somebody has pulled into a project. His comment was that he didn’t understand the technical issues that the expert was talking about but the expert certainly seemed confident which gave him confidence.

      My response to that was that the expert’s confidence should cause some worry as the natural system (which I have expertise and experience in myself) they are working in is very complex, highly variable, and difficult to characterize. It would take a great deal of investigation and data to generate a lot of confidence in any predictions. Since the original design done by others hadn’t worked, despite those experts’ opinions, it shouldn’t be assumed that a simple explanation and solution would be in the offing. The site should be engendering a lot of head scratching and “hmmmms…”

      • bear_in_mind says:

        To my way of thinking, it’s logical to employ a healthy dose of skepticism – the “trust but verify” approach to assessing the world. Evaluate. Test. Re-evaluate. Remain open-minded and flexible.

        But what I too often observe is when individuals are elevated to “expert” status (esp. by the MSM), there’s a distinct risk that: 1) An expert becomes blinded by the demands and distractions of celebrity; 2) The ego-distorting effect that comes from sycophantic whores (er, “ball-garglers”) who glom onto the media darling du jour.

        What we need are more possessing wisdom in the mold of people such as Paul Volker, Art Cashin and Leon Panetta, all of whom have the intelligence and experience to know ‘right’ from ‘wrong’ but are also humble enough to acknowledge that they don’t have all the answers, but when confronted with a unique situation, they damned well will work to find the most reasoned answer possible.

  5. cowboyinthejungle says:

    What I see in that chart is the lack of any “better/longer” rally (vs. current one) in the last 25 years. Is that just randomness in a small sample? Could it reflect instability associated with a massive reliance on credit over roughly that same timeframe? Other explanations?

    • We have data going back a century.

      Come around in 3013 when we have a bigger data set and we will revisit the issue

    • hack says:

      My issue with the chart is the skew the “1942″ plot has on the “average.” The median is closer to 1,250 and excluding the outliers (<99 days and 7,000 days) gives you an average of roughly 1,500. We are just over 1,000 currently.

      That said, this is just a snapshot of the past. Why would it offer any hint to how long this rally will last. Each plot had its on set of circumstances that influenced it's length and magnitude.

  6. intlacct says:

    Interested in hearing thoughts on PAUIX. Is it a reasonable significant holding for clients heading toward retirement… (say 10-15 years out or less)?

    Also interested in reducing manager risk by possibly ‘rolling my own’. Is there a collection of MFs/ETFs that would semi sort of mimic its performance (at a much lower expense ratio). Note – Arnott has 40 something holdings in there and is actively rebalancing so it would not be anywhere close to a perfect fit. But maybe holding six to ten would attain 90% of the results…

    Thoughts welcome!