My afternoon train reading:

• Wall Street’s leading bear David Rosenberg turned more bullish, riling some longtime clients (WSJ)
• The Inefficient Market Hypothesis (NY Times) see also The kinda-eventually-sorta-mostly-almost Efficient Market Theory (TBP)
• Jack Bogle on the Cost Matters Hypothesis (CMH) (The Reformed Broker)
• Forget fundamentals, Fed liquidity is king  (FT) but see Fed QE Taper Seen Delayed to March as Shutdown Bites (Bloomberg)
• Beware Distorted [Mutual/Hedge Funds] Returns (Barron’s)
• What is Happening with China Home Prices? (World Property Channel) see also Stop Being Wrong About China Buying Our Bonds (Slate)
• Magnetar Goes Long Ohio Town While Shorting Its Tax Base (Bloomberg) see also Why Does The World’s Richest Country Have So Many Failed Cities? (Forbes)
• Are Bear Stearns and WaMu Still Steals for J.P. Morgan? (WSJ)
• Republican Civil War Erupts: Business Groups v. Tea Party (Bloomberg) see also Can we afford citizen-funded elections yet? (Lessig)
• It’s Time for Amazon to Open Its Black Box (Barron’s)

Whats for dinner?


The Couch Potato Subsidy

Source: Priceonomics

Category: Markets

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.

20 Responses to “10 Monday PM Reads”

  1. Iamthe50percent says:

    Interestingly, all those high priced channels are channels I never watch. Although I used t9o watch “Law and Order” reruns on USA. So my cable bill,which has been growing by leaps and bounds, is mostly driven by Sports coverage that I have zero interest in. An e-mail from WOW!’s CEO said much the same.

    • rd says:

      We dumped our cable years ago. There are a number of HD over the air channels we can get for live events. Most shows we can watch on those if we want to program our lives around the TV. Otherwise, Netflix, RedBox, and the public library are good sources of a wide range fo shows to watch. Other than some live sports events on ESPN, I have missed very little of what is on cable, although it does mean catching up on some shows a year or so after they originally aired.

      • Iamthe50percent says:

        Web delivery is definitely the way of the future. We have a Samsung Smart TV and it would be great if the web interface was not so clunky. I’ve been working on software to use a PC with a TV card as a smart TV. I’ll be testing it soon on the old dinosaur 20 inch Panasonic analog CRT television when my wife finally makes room for it in the spare room. I don’t have an infrared receiver so I’m using a wireless keyboard with trackball. One you you can be sure of, namely that I like the interface. Just can’t keep an old hacker away from code.

      • winstongator says:

        Where are you, and what type of antenna do you have? I can only pick up NBC (and PBS and WCWG) over the air. This was bad this past Saturday when the football games I wanted to see were CBS and ABC, and the baseball has been on Fox. I had tried inside, and Sunday lugged a TV outside to try there. No improvement outside.

        I would pay > $25/mo for access to watch ESPN. It is what is tethering me to current cable system. I don’t think Disney knows how powerful a brand ESPN is.

      • Conan says:

        Iamthe 50percent – I have been using for a few years now a Dell PC hooked to my 42 inch LCD TV via the monitor cable. I hooked the sound up via an amplifier coming out of the headphone jack on the PC . Works good for me using the various streaming channels available on the web. It cost me $100 for a used Dell on ebay, $80 for the amplifier. I already hand the TV and the speakers from my home theater. I bought a wireless key board and mouse on Amazon for about $30. So any way you slice it, still cheaper than one year of cable bills….Works very good for me, I’ll never go back to cable!

  2. rd says:

    Re: Magnetar in Ohio

    Possibly we should consider switching the national anthem to something more culturally relevant, such as “Sixteen Tons”

    • theexpertisin says:

      Too Fat Polka is my choice.

      Arthur Godfrey made it a big hit back in the day. Probably is on You Tube somewhere. .

  3. ancientone says:

    But come on, guys, ESPN sells EXCITEMENT! It’s certainly worth more than the other networks for sports fans! Rah, rah, rah!

  4. mpetrosian says:

    Rosenberg has pissed off subscribers because he spent months and in some cases years making his case
    for deflation, gold mining stocks, etc. only to pull a 180 on those issues overnight and back peddle his way out by insisting readers misunderstood his clearly articulated and often passionate positions. You cant have spent four years telling clients to “keep the gun powder dry’ and not take a little heat. He’s also made some awesome calls and is still worth the $1000 annual pricetag.

  5. Born Again says:

    Two articles about Chinese coal consumption.

    Coal to outweigh oil in five years’ time
    World Coal Consumption To Surpass Oil By 2020 Due To Rising Demand In China And India

    By the end of this decade, world energy consumption from coal will be greater than oil. According to BP’s 2013 Statistical Review, China accounted for 50% of the world’s coal consumption and 22% of the world’s total energy consumption. It is as though the US is exporting pollution and energy consumption, and importing a clean environment and energy efficiency.

  6. willid3 says:

    stock holder value?

    bogus? was it really just a way to game the stock market (and ‘investors’) so that executives with options could make more?

  7. Jack McHugh says:

    There is no safe harbor for those willing to make forward-looking statements about the economy and markets. As long as someone is true to their analytic framework and can defend their views, then we as readers should champion — not attack — those who are willing to flexibly sail the rough waters of making predictions.

  8. S Brennan says:

    Something we already knew, but further evidence on why economists views should considered self-serving junk.

    Less charitable giving:
    More deception for personal gain:
    Greater acceptance of greed:
    Less concern for fairness:
    Hearts of darkness
    1. Altruistic values drop among economics majors
    2. Economics students stay selfish, even though their peers become more cooperative
    3. After taking economics, students become more selfish and expect worse of others
    4. Just thinking about economics can make us less caring

  9. RW says:

    The Inefficiency of the Market Isn’t an Open Question

    …there’s a danger that some readers may come away from …news coverage of the [Nobel] prize, with the impression that the issue of whether financial markets are efficient remains unsettled. It isn’t. …we can be quite sure that financial markets are sometimes chronically inefficient. The only outstanding question is how far this inefficiency extends. …

    One of the reasons for this failure in the market for economic analysis was the hegemony of the efficient-markets hypothesis, and the sunny view of finance it embodied. In choosing to honor Shiller and Fama at the same time, the Nobel committee has, wittingly or unwittingly, obfuscated this history. To prevent another policy disaster in the future, it needs telling and retelling.

  10. Willy2 says:

    “Republican Civil War Erupts: Business Groups v. Tea Party”

    I was wondering why the US business community was so silent. Because when the gov’t shuts down then businesses suffer as well. No incomefrom the gov’t anymore. But it seems businesses are “not (completely) on the same page” with the TEA party movement.

  11. winstongator says:

    Less than 150 years ago, Rome had less than 250k residents. This is 1/6th the number in 100 AD.

    US cities like Buffalo & Detroit were lifted by very specific industries. Buffalo was its proximity to the great lakes & Erie canal. St. Louis was its location on the Mississippi. As those industries waned, the cities lost the key part of their importance.

    It is not helpful to compare them to London, Paris or Rome. First, they are national & somewhat Impreial capitals which carry with it a large economic base of the government. Second, they are close to the largest cities in their country. Stack New York or LA up against them for overall dynamism. A better comparison would be Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle. Cities that grew with the industrial revolution in England and then declined when those industries moved.

    Cutting taxes and regulation will not help those cities. What keeps people out of Detroit is not its taxes, but its crime. That is a much more complicated problem to deal with.

  12. Willy2 says:

    Rosenberg getting more bullish ? Yes, there’re certainly a number of positive signals

    but my indicators are a “mixed bag”. Not every indicator is on the same (bullish) page.