I posted about all the other games, so I'll chime in about the finale also. From the outset, Miami continued the theme of playing harder than Oklahoma City. Or at least more consistently hard. So, Lebron gets the allusive ring and the accolades that come with playing, throughout these playoffs, better than we have ever seen him before.
If there's anything in the aftermath that has annoyed me, though, it is the way that so many sports media members are trying to paint this redemptive picture of James. That we should all embrace him now for playing without the chip on his shoulder and stepping up when it mattered most.
I'm happy to credit him for playing as well as he did. He led his team to victory. But, that doesn't mean I have to like him and feel satisfied that he won. Maybe I'm petty. I tend to think I'm just consistent.
Friday, June 22, 2012
Reading the Source, Part 2
The next Post Keynesian “idol” that I have chosen to read is Hyman Minsky, tackling his book John Maynard Keynes (1975).
It covers Minsky’s explanation of how economists have misinterpreted and misapplied the core ideas of The General Theory. In particular, how they did not understand Keynes’ use of “uncertainty”, especially its impact on finance and investment decisions. This story is told in a world where disequilibrium is the natural state of things and there is not a tendency towards full employment once things head south (making use of Fisher’s debt-deflation theory in establishing that point). But, to start closer to the beginning, Keynes understood that portfolio allocation is largely made under a fog of uncertainty. Nevertheless, in times of stability, as prosperity becomes the norm, an expectation develops that growth can only perpetuate, as yields and capital gains go up, fostering a belief that the resulting increase in borrowing power should be put to use. And as that happens, the margin of safety decreases – cash reserves decline as liability structures become more heavily indebted. But with that transition, at a certain point, rather than having the reserves to cover all liabilities, assets will actually need to be sold. And when a lot of people are forced to do it at the same time, the debt-deflation story takes hold. Minsky (channeling Keynes) believes that the problem is in large part due to a system that caters to private investment above all else and permits disparities in wealth, thereby leading to a rentier state where the propensity to consume declines.
Minsky attributes these problems to capitalism, because it encourages conspicuous consumption and a scarcity of capital for productive ends. In Keynes, he saw a theory that promoted larger government to combat the problems of inequality and risky speculation. Namely, it called for attempts to decrease dependence on private investment, constraints on the liability structure of business firms, and increases in transfer payments. To my ear, it sounds unrealistic, it sounds pretty socialist, it sounds like a nanny state, and it sounds like an environment where a favored class can still get ahead. So, on that basis, I’m not sure this guy is the best advertisement for Keynesian economics.
It covers Minsky’s explanation of how economists have misinterpreted and misapplied the core ideas of The General Theory. In particular, how they did not understand Keynes’ use of “uncertainty”, especially its impact on finance and investment decisions. This story is told in a world where disequilibrium is the natural state of things and there is not a tendency towards full employment once things head south (making use of Fisher’s debt-deflation theory in establishing that point). But, to start closer to the beginning, Keynes understood that portfolio allocation is largely made under a fog of uncertainty. Nevertheless, in times of stability, as prosperity becomes the norm, an expectation develops that growth can only perpetuate, as yields and capital gains go up, fostering a belief that the resulting increase in borrowing power should be put to use. And as that happens, the margin of safety decreases – cash reserves decline as liability structures become more heavily indebted. But with that transition, at a certain point, rather than having the reserves to cover all liabilities, assets will actually need to be sold. And when a lot of people are forced to do it at the same time, the debt-deflation story takes hold. Minsky (channeling Keynes) believes that the problem is in large part due to a system that caters to private investment above all else and permits disparities in wealth, thereby leading to a rentier state where the propensity to consume declines.
Minsky attributes these problems to capitalism, because it encourages conspicuous consumption and a scarcity of capital for productive ends. In Keynes, he saw a theory that promoted larger government to combat the problems of inequality and risky speculation. Namely, it called for attempts to decrease dependence on private investment, constraints on the liability structure of business firms, and increases in transfer payments. To my ear, it sounds unrealistic, it sounds pretty socialist, it sounds like a nanny state, and it sounds like an environment where a favored class can still get ahead. So, on that basis, I’m not sure this guy is the best advertisement for Keynesian economics.
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Meh
The Fed decided to extend its Operation Twist program through the end of the year, versus some larger easing program. I will be curious to see how the markets react -- I am expecting disappointment.
It's Done
I feel no need to watch Thursday's game because this series is over. OKC did not play the full 48 minutes that they needed to. Westbrook was a champ tonight. Unfortunately, he didn't get much help.
Monday, June 18, 2012
The Heat in Perspective
Another post about the Miami Heat.
When the Big 3 came together in Miami, I am on record on this blog as writing that while it may be wishful thinking to believe that the team won't win any titles, that the idea of some sort of dynastic run was just as far-fetched. Two years in and I am still comfortable with that position. A few reasons:
1) Wade is like an NFL running back. He is an incredibly physical player, but the wear and tear of playing that way is catching up to him. If you were looking at his career arc, he is far closer to the end of his dominant years than the beginning or middle.
2) Chris Bosh is not the right third wheel. They need a defensive anchor down low. Someone like Tyson Chandler.
3) My view was that Miami was imbalanced and that someone else would overtake them as a more complete 1 to 9. Well that team is playing them in the Finals right now. Whether they win this year or not (and I'm not conceding anything yet), the Thunder have a far better shot of being like the '90s Bulls than does anyone else at the moment (barring injuries and salary cap issues).
So, in closing, I think this year might be Miami's best shot. Again, I am not handing them a title yet. Game 4 is crucial, and as Game 3 was OKC's first road game in their first Finals appearance, and came on the heels of a very disappointing loss at home, the outcome should not be a shock. If the Heat can hold Durant down again, then it might be time to schedule the parade. But, let's at least wait until Tuesday night to see if that happens.
When the Big 3 came together in Miami, I am on record on this blog as writing that while it may be wishful thinking to believe that the team won't win any titles, that the idea of some sort of dynastic run was just as far-fetched. Two years in and I am still comfortable with that position. A few reasons:
1) Wade is like an NFL running back. He is an incredibly physical player, but the wear and tear of playing that way is catching up to him. If you were looking at his career arc, he is far closer to the end of his dominant years than the beginning or middle.
2) Chris Bosh is not the right third wheel. They need a defensive anchor down low. Someone like Tyson Chandler.
3) My view was that Miami was imbalanced and that someone else would overtake them as a more complete 1 to 9. Well that team is playing them in the Finals right now. Whether they win this year or not (and I'm not conceding anything yet), the Thunder have a far better shot of being like the '90s Bulls than does anyone else at the moment (barring injuries and salary cap issues).
So, in closing, I think this year might be Miami's best shot. Again, I am not handing them a title yet. Game 4 is crucial, and as Game 3 was OKC's first road game in their first Finals appearance, and came on the heels of a very disappointing loss at home, the outcome should not be a shock. If the Heat can hold Durant down again, then it might be time to schedule the parade. But, let's at least wait until Tuesday night to see if that happens.
Game 3
I listened to the first half in the car and then watched the second half at home. There are two takeaways rattling around my head.
1) In making my prediction that the Thunder would win, I think I took for granted just how young they are. Which is to say, I discounted the fact that the Heat are a veteran team who were in the Finals last year, and arguably took something away from that experience, even though they lost. And tonight, it just seemed like OKC was not playing with the sense of urgency that you need to pull out these sorts of games. On a dime, they would cut a 7-point lead down to 3, but then settle back into bad decisions and an unexpected lack of chemistry. It's not too late, but there is an on/off button with this team that needs to get set to "on" for a full 48 minutes.
2) The Heat are up 2-1, but we have yet to see a vintage Durant offensive explosion. I'm sure Miami's defense has something to do with it, but I think he's due.
And with that said, this series comes down to Game 4. I just don't think the Thunder can win 3 straight if they go down 3-1. The button better be "on" on Tuesday night.
1) In making my prediction that the Thunder would win, I think I took for granted just how young they are. Which is to say, I discounted the fact that the Heat are a veteran team who were in the Finals last year, and arguably took something away from that experience, even though they lost. And tonight, it just seemed like OKC was not playing with the sense of urgency that you need to pull out these sorts of games. On a dime, they would cut a 7-point lead down to 3, but then settle back into bad decisions and an unexpected lack of chemistry. It's not too late, but there is an on/off button with this team that needs to get set to "on" for a full 48 minutes.
2) The Heat are up 2-1, but we have yet to see a vintage Durant offensive explosion. I'm sure Miami's defense has something to do with it, but I think he's due.
And with that said, this series comes down to Game 4. I just don't think the Thunder can win 3 straight if they go down 3-1. The button better be "on" on Tuesday night.
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Reading the Source
I have set about lately to read the work of some of the key inspirations for the Post Keynesian school of economic thinking. In that vein, you may recall my appreciation for Debunking Economics by Steve Keen as a recent example from this group.
First up is Irving Fisher. He was the standard neoclassical economist until the crash of 1929 nearly wiped him out. In fact, he was quoted in the newspapers as saying that the market was at a "permanently high plateau" just three days before the crash. All of which got him to re-think his stance. The results of that pondering are summarized well in the two works that I read: Booms and Depressions (1932) and The Debt-Deflation Theory of Great Depressions (1933).
The former lists out 9 factors that contribute to the tendency towards booms and busts in a market economy. The latter focuses on a sub-set of the two most important elements: over-indebtedness and deflation. The general sequence is that debt liquidation leads to distressed selling, which leads to loans getting paid off and a declining velocity of money, which begets a deflation in prices, lowering of net worth, a fall in profits, and thus a reduction in output, causing a loss of confidence, hoarding of money, a still greater decline in the velocity of money, and then disturbances in interest rates. Generally, when the overindebtedness is great enough, the liquidation does not keep up with the fall in prices, and the cycle feeds on itself and can go on for years. It very much resembles the spiral down that Keynes describes in The General Theory.
The way to deal with this debt-deflation scenario is an effort to reflate and stabilize prices. But, Fisher is more monetarist than Keynesian, so he focuses on the MV=PT driven approach, which means monetary versus fiscal policy. And while he seems to understand how inflation is problematic, his preference to maintain price stability over time is not a gold standard, but some technocratic commission of experts to inflate and deflate as circumstances dictate. I think we have first hand evidence lately of how well those technocrats perform.
The obvious question is how he thinks everything gets out of whack from the start -- that is, what drives everyone to lever up in the first place? His answer: new investment opportunities. In other words, it is innovation and technology that get everyone all revved up to speculate on projects with dreams of huge returns. I think the problem of "hope" certainly contributes, but the idea that easy money doesn't play an even bigger role just strikes me as willful blindness. To his credit, Fisher does seem to understand the idea of uncertainty and how markets never attain equilibrium. Nevertheless, while his type get it more clearly than the typical neoclassical Keynesian, I still think there is a choice to overlook what is blatant when it comes to the Federal Reserve and managing interest rates and the money supply.
First up is Irving Fisher. He was the standard neoclassical economist until the crash of 1929 nearly wiped him out. In fact, he was quoted in the newspapers as saying that the market was at a "permanently high plateau" just three days before the crash. All of which got him to re-think his stance. The results of that pondering are summarized well in the two works that I read: Booms and Depressions (1932) and The Debt-Deflation Theory of Great Depressions (1933).
The former lists out 9 factors that contribute to the tendency towards booms and busts in a market economy. The latter focuses on a sub-set of the two most important elements: over-indebtedness and deflation. The general sequence is that debt liquidation leads to distressed selling, which leads to loans getting paid off and a declining velocity of money, which begets a deflation in prices, lowering of net worth, a fall in profits, and thus a reduction in output, causing a loss of confidence, hoarding of money, a still greater decline in the velocity of money, and then disturbances in interest rates. Generally, when the overindebtedness is great enough, the liquidation does not keep up with the fall in prices, and the cycle feeds on itself and can go on for years. It very much resembles the spiral down that Keynes describes in The General Theory.
The way to deal with this debt-deflation scenario is an effort to reflate and stabilize prices. But, Fisher is more monetarist than Keynesian, so he focuses on the MV=PT driven approach, which means monetary versus fiscal policy. And while he seems to understand how inflation is problematic, his preference to maintain price stability over time is not a gold standard, but some technocratic commission of experts to inflate and deflate as circumstances dictate. I think we have first hand evidence lately of how well those technocrats perform.
The obvious question is how he thinks everything gets out of whack from the start -- that is, what drives everyone to lever up in the first place? His answer: new investment opportunities. In other words, it is innovation and technology that get everyone all revved up to speculate on projects with dreams of huge returns. I think the problem of "hope" certainly contributes, but the idea that easy money doesn't play an even bigger role just strikes me as willful blindness. To his credit, Fisher does seem to understand the idea of uncertainty and how markets never attain equilibrium. Nevertheless, while his type get it more clearly than the typical neoclassical Keynesian, I still think there is a choice to overlook what is blatant when it comes to the Federal Reserve and managing interest rates and the money supply.
Friday, June 15, 2012
Recap
Simply a fantastic game. As well as Miami played in the first 24, I felt they should have been up by much more at the half, which left me believing that OKC would stage a comeback. And it came in the fourth quarter. Kevin Durant is just a remarkable offensive player. But, between a bad no-call at the end and Lebron hitting a huge shot and some free throws, Miami gets the split and heads home. From beginning to end, they played the better game. But, in context, they had to leave everything out there.
Van Gundy and Breen were talking about human nature -- perhaps Oklahoma City did not come out with the same determination, still feeling good about the first win, while Miami was playing like everything was at stake. And I don't disagree. But, losing this game, no longer being able to take anything for granted, I think it's the wake-up call that was needed, if such a thing is possible in the last series of the season. They nearly came back from 17 down on a night where they were terrible through the whole first half, Miami was desperate, and James/Wade/Bosh all played well.
Now the scene moves to South Beach. As they say, it becomes a series once someone loses at home. The Heat did what they needed to. Let's see how the Thunder bounce back. I think they will.
Van Gundy and Breen were talking about human nature -- perhaps Oklahoma City did not come out with the same determination, still feeling good about the first win, while Miami was playing like everything was at stake. And I don't disagree. But, losing this game, no longer being able to take anything for granted, I think it's the wake-up call that was needed, if such a thing is possible in the last series of the season. They nearly came back from 17 down on a night where they were terrible through the whole first half, Miami was desperate, and James/Wade/Bosh all played well.
Now the scene moves to South Beach. As they say, it becomes a series once someone loses at home. The Heat did what they needed to. Let's see how the Thunder bounce back. I think they will.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Game 2
I think the Thunder demonstrated the other night that they are the better team. And after battling through the nerves in the first half of Game 1 en route to a victory going away, I expect the difference in teams to become even more obvious with each passing game. Nevertheless, and in spite of the fact that I am not a big Lebron James fan following his free agent performance, I know that he is quite capable of being simply effervescent on the court. And you never know when that might show up.
Update to the Update
Last time we looked at a daily chart for the Japanese Yen, going back to April 2011. My view is that a nice cup and handle formation has been setting up, leading to an eventual move to 92 and beyond. Today, I am providing a hourly chart for the past month. We can see a fairly well-developed inverse head and shoulders that speaks to the same directional trend, just on a shorter time frame. I think the time is nigh.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
NBA Finals
Lebron James is on the precipice of eradicating his demons. He is 4 wins away, in fact. Having said that, I don't think he will. The OKC Thunder will beat the Heat in 6. As compared to the Celtics, this team is deeper and more athletic. They have a generationally-prolific scorer, a point guard who will run rough shod over anything Miami puts out there, the best 6th man in the league, and the frontcourt depth to protect the rim and rebound. That seems like enough to me.
Yen Update
I pay attention to the Japanese Yen. I think it will be a good short because the BOJ will eventually have to choose between higher interest rates or a weaker currency. In my estimation, the latter will precede the former. The last couple times I've posted about it, the emphasis has been on a head and shoulders in the chart which largely came to fruition. However, as the exchange rate against the dollar has moved down (implying strength in the Yen), it has seemingly hit a resistance point at 78 and is now suggesting that the trend may start to move the other way (as in, you could initiate a short position). Below is a USD/JPY chart that goes back to roughly April 2011.
What I'm seeing is something that looks like a cup and handle formation. Given it's size, the target would be a move from the current 79.50 to at least 92. It is not yet fully formed, and if the Yen convincingly goes below 78, I will have to re-assess. But, while my diagnosis a couple months back was against any near-term short, I am now starting to believe that the tides may have shifted.
What I'm seeing is something that looks like a cup and handle formation. Given it's size, the target would be a move from the current 79.50 to at least 92. It is not yet fully formed, and if the Yen convincingly goes below 78, I will have to re-assess. But, while my diagnosis a couple months back was against any near-term short, I am now starting to believe that the tides may have shifted.
Monday, June 11, 2012
Same Old, Same Old
I went to an alumni event last week for one of the schools that I went to. The "keynote" speaker was a banker from one of the bulge brackets and the crowd in attendance ran the gamut in terms of age. Nothing in particular that was said was terribly memorable or important or innovative. But, what I did take away from the experience is that people generally continue to operate from the same set of assumptions. In spite of the problems of recent time, lots of folks (and forgive me for extrapolating from the small set that I was with) subscribe to the same talking points that get thrown around the mainstream media. Whether left or right, though, where they seemed to converge was that the government should come to the rescue. Which means that the position that I have taken in my investing is still the contrarian voice (I say "contrarian" because I think it will turn out to be right).
A couple of other sidebars that stuck with me:
-The conversation with the lev-fin banker who called gold a "speculation" and nothing else. He meant it in the most pejorative way possible.
-The wanna-be quant who called deregulation the problem, whereas I think it is just bad regulation. Had I thought of it at the time, I might have suggested the Friedman/Kraus book.
Lastly, my posting has gotten sparse. When something profound happens, I expect it will inspire more from me.
A couple of other sidebars that stuck with me:
-The conversation with the lev-fin banker who called gold a "speculation" and nothing else. He meant it in the most pejorative way possible.
-The wanna-be quant who called deregulation the problem, whereas I think it is just bad regulation. Had I thought of it at the time, I might have suggested the Friedman/Kraus book.
Lastly, my posting has gotten sparse. When something profound happens, I expect it will inspire more from me.
Saturday, June 9, 2012
More From the Pile
A few more books...
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator by Edwin Lefevre. I felt long overdue in reading this one. Tells the tale of famed trader Jesse Livermore. At heart, it provides great insights into the mentality that is required. Such as follow the trend and don't let the noise and fluctuations distract you. But, the best nugget, it's okay to take a loss, it's just not okay to be wrong.
The Little Book that Beats the Market by Joel Greenblatt. Largely a tip of the hat to Benjamin Graham and value investing. The key is to look for companies that combine high ROAs and high earning yields to generate a margin of safety. And that the market can get it wrong in the short term, but generally figures it out in the end, Not much else to say about it.
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator by Edwin Lefevre. I felt long overdue in reading this one. Tells the tale of famed trader Jesse Livermore. At heart, it provides great insights into the mentality that is required. Such as follow the trend and don't let the noise and fluctuations distract you. But, the best nugget, it's okay to take a loss, it's just not okay to be wrong.
The Little Book that Beats the Market by Joel Greenblatt. Largely a tip of the hat to Benjamin Graham and value investing. The key is to look for companies that combine high ROAs and high earning yields to generate a margin of safety. And that the market can get it wrong in the short term, but generally figures it out in the end, Not much else to say about it.
Thursday, June 7, 2012
What Came to Mind
On the heels of Bernanke talking down any more easing today, I offer the following:
One day, a scorpion looked around at the mountain where he lived and decided that he wanted a change. So he set out on a journey through the forests and hills. He climbed over rocks and under vines and kept going until he reached a river. The river was wide and swift, and the scorpion stopped to reconsider the situation. He couldn't see any way across. So he ran upriver and then checked downriver, all the while thinking that he might have to turn back. Suddenly, he saw a frog sitting in the rushes by the bank of the stream on the other side of the river. He decided to ask the frog for help getting across the stream. "Hellooo Mr. Frog!" called the scorpion across the water, "Would you be so kind as to give me a ride on your back across the river?" "Well now, Mr. Scorpion! How do I know that if I try to help you, you wont try to kill me?" asked the frog hesitantly. "Because," the scorpion replied, "If I try to kill you, then I would die too, for you see I cannot swim!" Now this seemed to make sense to the frog. But he asked. "What about when I get close to the bank? You could still try to kill me and get back to the shore!" "This is true," agreed the scorpion, "But then I wouldn't be able to get to the other side of the river!" "Alright then...how do I know you wont just wait till we get to the other side and THEN kill me?" said the frog. "Ahh...," crooned the scorpion, "Because you see, once you've taken me to the other side of this river, I will be so grateful for your help, that it would hardly be fair to reward you with death, now would it?!" So the frog agreed to take the scorpion across the river. He swam over to the bank and settled himself near the mud to pick up his passenger. The scorpion crawled onto the frog's back, his sharp claws prickling into the frog's soft hide, and the frog slid into the river. The muddy water swirled around them, but the frog stayed near the surface so the scorpion would not drown. He kicked strongly through the first half of the stream, his flippers paddling wildly against the current. Halfway across the river, the frog suddenly felt a sharp sting in his back and, out of the corner of his eye, saw the scorpion remove his stinger from the frog's back. A deadening numbness began to creep into his limbs. "You fool!" croaked the frog, "Now we shall both die! Why on earth did you do that?" The scorpion shrugged, and did a little jig on the drownings frog's back. "I could not help myself. It is my nature."
One day, a scorpion looked around at the mountain where he lived and decided that he wanted a change. So he set out on a journey through the forests and hills. He climbed over rocks and under vines and kept going until he reached a river. The river was wide and swift, and the scorpion stopped to reconsider the situation. He couldn't see any way across. So he ran upriver and then checked downriver, all the while thinking that he might have to turn back. Suddenly, he saw a frog sitting in the rushes by the bank of the stream on the other side of the river. He decided to ask the frog for help getting across the stream. "Hellooo Mr. Frog!" called the scorpion across the water, "Would you be so kind as to give me a ride on your back across the river?" "Well now, Mr. Scorpion! How do I know that if I try to help you, you wont try to kill me?" asked the frog hesitantly. "Because," the scorpion replied, "If I try to kill you, then I would die too, for you see I cannot swim!" Now this seemed to make sense to the frog. But he asked. "What about when I get close to the bank? You could still try to kill me and get back to the shore!" "This is true," agreed the scorpion, "But then I wouldn't be able to get to the other side of the river!" "Alright then...how do I know you wont just wait till we get to the other side and THEN kill me?" said the frog. "Ahh...," crooned the scorpion, "Because you see, once you've taken me to the other side of this river, I will be so grateful for your help, that it would hardly be fair to reward you with death, now would it?!" So the frog agreed to take the scorpion across the river. He swam over to the bank and settled himself near the mud to pick up his passenger. The scorpion crawled onto the frog's back, his sharp claws prickling into the frog's soft hide, and the frog slid into the river. The muddy water swirled around them, but the frog stayed near the surface so the scorpion would not drown. He kicked strongly through the first half of the stream, his flippers paddling wildly against the current. Halfway across the river, the frog suddenly felt a sharp sting in his back and, out of the corner of his eye, saw the scorpion remove his stinger from the frog's back. A deadening numbness began to creep into his limbs. "You fool!" croaked the frog, "Now we shall both die! Why on earth did you do that?" The scorpion shrugged, and did a little jig on the drownings frog's back. "I could not help myself. It is my nature."
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
Injury Update
Some weeks back (actually, 10), I made mention of the diagnosis on my right tibia that I had a stress reaction. The doctor told me that the down time would be 8 weeks. About 6 weeks in, there was still a persistent discomfort, so I went back and was sent to get another MRI. That was last week, and the diagnosis was to take another 6 to 8 weeks off. I am healing, but perhaps slowly (I think I probably have been walking too much, which is a big no-no). Essentially, if this next "rest" period is the end of it, and there's no guaranteee that it will be, I will have gone without running for about a third of a year. It's been rough and I find myself struggling to motivate to exercise in other ways. To make matters worse, my vigilance when it comes to eating healthy has also broken down a bit.
At some point, I will get past it and I will run again. But, as with a lot of things in life, even if you know you'll get where you want to go eventually, some times it just becomes a matter of hurry up and wait.
At some point, I will get past it and I will run again. But, as with a lot of things in life, even if you know you'll get where you want to go eventually, some times it just becomes a matter of hurry up and wait.
Saturday, June 2, 2012
From the Pile
What I’ve read lately…
Decision Points by George W. Bush. Underwhelmed by his Presidency, but always liked him for some reason. This book reinforced the latter for me. While his chief speechwriter assisted in the writing, you could still hear his voice in the wording. And in this format, he is much more coherent about his ideas and why he did what he did.
The Little Book of Emerging Markets by Mark Mobius. Only an okay primer on investing in these markets (specifically through equities), and I found myself highlighting very little. And, at that, mostly his ideas on being a contrarian.
The Hilliker Curse by James Ellroy. A bizarre memoir from the successful crime novelist. His writing style is unique, so you either like it or it can get tiring. Sign me up for the latter camp.
Decision Points by George W. Bush. Underwhelmed by his Presidency, but always liked him for some reason. This book reinforced the latter for me. While his chief speechwriter assisted in the writing, you could still hear his voice in the wording. And in this format, he is much more coherent about his ideas and why he did what he did.
The Little Book of Emerging Markets by Mark Mobius. Only an okay primer on investing in these markets (specifically through equities), and I found myself highlighting very little. And, at that, mostly his ideas on being a contrarian.
The Hilliker Curse by James Ellroy. A bizarre memoir from the successful crime novelist. His writing style is unique, so you either like it or it can get tiring. Sign me up for the latter camp.
Friday, June 1, 2012
Quote of the Day
“A government always finds itself obliged to resort to inflationary measures when it cannot negotiate loans and dare not levy taxes, because it has reason to fear that it will forfeit approval of the policy it is following if it reveals too soon the financial and general economic consequences of that policy. Thus inflation becomes the most important psychological resource of any economic policy whose consequences have to be concealed; and so in this sense it can be called an instrument of unpopular, that is, of antidemocratic policy, since by misleading public opinion it makes possible the continued existence of a system of government that would have no hope of the consent of the people if the circumstances were clearly laid before them. That is the political function of inflation. When governments do not think it necessary to accommodate their expenditure and arrogate to themselves the right of making up the deficit by issuing notes, their ideology is merely a disguised absolutism."
-Ludwig von Mises
(h/t Marc Faber)
-Ludwig von Mises
(h/t Marc Faber)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)