.

{2} GoogleTranslate (H)

English French German Spanish Italian Dutch Russian Portuguese Japanese Korean Arabic Chinese Simplified

Our New Stuff

{3} up AdBrite + eToro

Your Ad Here

Monday, November 25, 2013

The Big Picture

The Big Picture


Kiron Sarkar Weekly Report (11/25/13)

Posted: 25 Nov 2013 02:00 AM PST

Summarised below are some of the key events of last week.

The Australian Central Bank continues to talk down the A$ – the governor suggests that the country may consider intervening to reduce the relative value of the A$. The IMF reported that the A$ is relatively overvalued. In addition, Australia is materially dependent on the Chinese economy and, as I believe that China's fixed asset expenditure will  be reduced, Australian exports of basic materials should decline, which in turn will hurt its economy.

The most recent Chinese PMI data, whilst positive, was below October levels, with new orders and employment lower. However, the major news was the release of broad details of their proposed economic reforms. Essentially, the goal is to allow markets a "decisive" role in allocating resources. A number of sensible policy objectives were announced, including, a loosening of its 1 child policy, some easing of the Hukou system, (which restricts the internal mobility of the Chinese population), the introduction of property taxes and spending more (30%, up from a maximum of 15% at present) on social infrastructure, through allocating more of the profits of SOE's. Furthermore, the Chinese leadership announced that the private sector would be allowed to invest in the SOE's. The PBoC announced a number of reforms, including liberalising the level of deposit rates that banks can pay, effectively legitimising the Chinese shadow banking market, allowing more competition in the financial sector, withdrawing from its current intervention in the currency markets and to allow the Yuan to trade freely (initially by widening the trading band)  and introducing much needed financial regulations and reforms. Once again, no timetable was provided.

The above proposals are sensible policies. However, there was no real detail and the changes are expected to take many years to formulate into actual policy/legislation. A number of vested interests, who will be hurt by these proposals, are likely to oppose these reforms. Furthermore, the Chinese bureaucracy is renowned for being extremely slow. It is clear that the new leadership recognises the need for structural and financial reforms and understands that it has to move away from its previous dependency on fixed asset expenditure as the main engine for economic growth. China has to increase domestic consumption as a greater proportion of its economy. The above proposals, if implemented, will certainly go a long way to achieving these goals. Markets responded positively to the news, though tempered their gains as they began to understand that these reforms will take a long time to implement and could well face resistance. In addition, the proposed reforms, if implemented, will have negative effects in the short to medium term, though will clearly benefit the country in the longer term.

The true level of Chinese provincial debt remains uncertain. The total is likely to be scary number to say the least, assuming that the central authorities can actually quantify the amount. Furthermore, the PBoC is allowing SHIBOR rates to rise. As a result, the level of bad debts is bound to rise and some financials will certainly be under pressure. Manufacturers are being squeezed by both a stronger Yuan and increasing labour costs – China's ability to produce cheap goods in volume for export is declining. There is evidence that an increasing amount of foreign manufacturing businesses are moving out of China. Output prices are declining, which is bad news for Chinese manufacturing companies, as a number of these businesses survive on thin margins.

The Japanese October trade deficit came in at just below US$11bn, a record and the 16 consecutive month of deficits. The closure of its nuclear electricity programme has forced the country to import energy which, together with the weakening Yen, is a major reason for the increasing trade deficits. At present, Japan benefits from a surplus of investment income, which ensures that it maintains a current account surplus. However, investment income is expected to decline as the population, which is getting older, increasingly uses up its savings. At that stage, Japan will need to access capital from the international markets. The impact on its bond yields will be dramatic, in particular given the government’s significant level of debt and the very low yields on Japanese bonds at present – the 10 year bond is yielding just 0.62%. The BoJ's massive bond buying programme is, in effect, monetising Japan's debt which should continue to have a material negative impact on the Yen. The government must introduce structural, including labour reforms – however, the government seems unwilling to tackle these issues. The Nikkei continues to appreciate as the Yen weakens, but I can’t help feeling that the current policy has serious flaws.

The issue as to the ownership of the disputed islands in the South China seas has been escalated by China – it has announced "defensive emergency measures" against aircraft that don’t identify themselves. Neither China nor Japan want direct confrontation, but these measures increase the risks of an accident. The Japanese PM, Mr Abe has played the nationalistic card and it will be difficult for him politically to back down. This issue is serious and needs to be monitored carefully, in particular as China and a number of countries in the region have competing claims over territory in the South China seas.

The Eurozone (EZ) continues to debate the vexed question as to who is to act as the Single Resolution Authority in respect of the largest of the EZ banks. In addition, whilst the potential use of funds from the ESM to recapitalise banks has been "agreed", the German Parliament has a veto right. The lack of a government in Germany has not helped – the CDU and the SPD continue to negotiate to form a coalition government.The ECB takes over as the supervisor of the largest EZ banks as of January. It has made it clear that its asset quality review and the subsequent stress tests will be credible, clear and consistent. The results of the stress tests are due next November and at that stage the EZ must have a structure in place to deal with banks that fail the stress tests – it is highly likely that some will fail. Creditor bailins are likely, as EZ politicians are not going to want the taxpayer to contribute. It is unlikely that the private sector will provide the capital necessary to recapitalise all the banks. Whilst the EZ is likely to create a fund, to be financed by levies on banks, it is still to be established and, in any event, is unlikely to have sufficient capital to fulfill its role next year. At the end of the day, the ESM or something similar will have to be used as a backstop to recapitalise banks directly but, as has been the case in the past, agreement will be slow and only when a crisis is imminent. The only good news is that the ECB will have forced the politicians to fix the banks at long last.

Bloomberg carried a story which suggested that the ECB is considering the introduction of negative deposit rates. Whilst Mr Draghi has certainly talked about negative deposit rates in the past, I feel that he is not keen on the idea – it does have a number of negative effects. The ECB next year will almost certainly cut its main refi rate by 10/15 bps and, in addition, announce another LTRO, most likely with a longer duration – 5 years rather than 3. However, I remain unconvinced that such measures will be sufficient. QE remains an option, but will be strongly resisted by the Bundesbank and its allies. Furthermore, QE in the EZ will require the ECB to buy the bonds of all the countries that use the Euro. However, QE or something similar will have to be introduced – the EZ cannot live with the current strength of the Euro, especially as disinflationary trends look set to continue.

The material economic differences between the major countries in the EZ is clear. Germany seems to have recovered from its slight slowdown in summer. The German flash November PMI reading came in stronger than expected, as did the confidence reports from both investors and industry. Domestic demand, construction and investment were the main contributors, though there are some signs that exports are being hit – the stronger Euro?. German manufactures/exporters have focused on emerging markets for growth in recent year. If, as I expect, these emerging markets slow, the strong Euro, combined with its high energy costs, will negatively impact German exports.  The weaker Yen is also a threat to a number of German manufacturing/export sectors. I will be following comments by leading German industrialists very carefully. Having said that, the Bundesbank reports that Germany is on a "solid growth path".

However, unlike Germany, the flash November PMI's for France – both manufacturing and services – came in below 50, at 47.8 and 48.8 respectively. A reading below 50 signals contraction and suggests that Q4 French GDP will be negative. If so, France will technically be in recession, as Q3 GDP came in at -0.1%. The French government continues to dither and backs off taking the necessary steps to reform its economy. The economic situation in France is, in my humble opinion, a major problem for the EZ.  The EU have repeated that the Italian and Spanish 2014 budgets look like failing the debt and budget deficit rules, which should come as no surprise. Both countries have rejected the EU's conclusions, though I suspect that the EU is almost certainly right. However, I do not see these countries bowing to EU pressure. The slight economic stabilisation/pickup over the past few months has really been as a result of these countries ignoring their budget/austerity targets. The continued problems in the EZ remain one of my major concerns, though markets are ignoring these problems at present.

The UK continues to perform strongly. The services sector is rising rapidly – services PMI expanded at the fastest rate since 1997. However, its not just the services sector -  manufacturing is also expanding, rising by the fastest in 18 years. The improvement in the UK economy will increase the tax revenues and reduce budget deficits, allowing the Chancellor to announce tax cuts ahead of the next general election. Sterling has been resilient, though will be impacted by any problems in the EZ. The BoE has no desire to strengthen Sterling and the Governor, Mr Carney has confirmed that  rates may be kept lower, even if unemployment hits its previous threshold of 7.0%. The decline in inflation will help the BoE to remain accommodative.

With Mrs Yellen set to become the next Chairperson, the FED is agonising over its asset purchase programme. It seems clear that the FED would like to start tapering, as they put it, "in coming months"  – my view remains March next year. However, they will want to avoid the sharp rise in rates earlier this year which followed  the mere suggestion that the FED could start its tapering programme. As a result, the FED has stressed that tapering will still mean that the FED will be buying treasuries and mortgage backed securities, albeit at a reduced rate. In addition, Mr Bernanke and Ms Yellen have emphasised that the FED accommodative policy would be maintained for an extended period – indeed they have stated that it could continue even if unemployment hits their target of 6.5% ie the 6.5% rate is no longer deemed a threshold for the FED to raise rates. The 10 year bond yield did rise to around 2.80%, though backed off to close at 2.75%.

Whilst there was some weakness in the US industrial/manufacturing data, Philly FED for example, October retail sales came in higher than expected. The disinflationary trend in developed markets has spread to the US, with CPI declining by -0.1% in October, as compared with +0.2% in September. However, the lower inflationary trends allow the FED to take a more dovish position. Higher inventory levels suggest that Q3 GDP may be revised higher, though the improvement will reverse in Q4. Analysts have increased their 2014 forecasts and are now predicting GDP of around 2.75%. Employment data is also improving.

The 6 world powers announced that they had reached a 6 month interim agreement with Iran over its nuclear programme, during which time a more comprehensive agreement is to be negotiated. The terms of the agreement allows Iran to enrich uranium up to the level necessary to generate electricity from nuclear power stations. Some sanctions have been lifted, though Iran has to meet its commitments. The main financial sanctions and those on oil are to remain though Brent may well decline on the news.

Overview
Bond funds continue to witness outflows, with money being redirected into equities, rather than into money markets and the housing sector, as was the case previously. In addition, margin debt has risen materially. Generally, these kind of indicators are good contrarian indicators. However, markets traditionally perform better at this time of the year and market momentum is positive. My concerns over the EZ (France for example) continues, but market momentum has resulted in the Dow closing above 16,000 and the S&P above 1,800. The Nasdaq looks as if it will test the 4,000 level. In Europe, the German Dax is trading at record levels. However, I remain cautious, though it is difficult to short the markets, other than some momentum stocks which have been bid up to ridiculous levels. I continue to believe it sensible to buy protection, especially in respect of Q1 and later next year. In addition, I believe that the risk profile of equity portfolios, should be reduced.

The markets have delivered outstanding returns this year which, even if you are bullish, are highly unlikely to be replicated next year. I continue to believe that risk is rising. In the EZ, Germany seems to have shrugged off its recent slowdown, though France, Italy and Spain, the next largest EZ economies, are suffering and there is little evidence of any meaningful rebound. Analysts are promoting European equities, as the markets are cheaper than the US – yes they are, but I have to say, with the exception of the UK and possibly Germany, together with some more internationally focused (US, in particular) large caps, I would not do so. I simply do not believe in Abenomics, especially in the medium to longer term. The Japanese policy is limited to devaluing the Yen and increasing inflation. Much needed structural reforms have not been introduced. In general I believe that stock picking will become much more important in coming months. The one area I would avoid are the emerging markets, especially those countries with current account deficits. A number of these countries have not introduced the economic and structural reforms and will be the first to decline materially if markets turn. Their currencies continue to look vulnerable.

My preferred theme continues to be to increase US$ exposure – it certainly has worked against the Yen (currently over Yen 101 to the US$) and the A$ (the A$ is below 0.92 to the US$) and I expect both these currencies to weaken further. The Euro has declined, but has bounced back from its lows (currently around US$1.3560), though not quite to its recent highs. The much better UK data has supported Sterling, though Sterling is susceptible to problems in the EZ. A number of forex analysts talk about the Euro rising to US$1.40. All I can say is that I remain amazed at the Euro's resilience, given the real problems of a number of the major countries in the EZ. I continue to believe that the Euro will have to weaken materially, though it may well be more of a 2014 play.

Kiron Sarkar
24th November 2013

Failure To Punish Wall St Weighs on Economy

Posted: 24 Nov 2013 10:30 PM PST

Government Excuses for Letting the Banksters Off Scot-Free Are Bogus; Failure To Punish Wall Street Criminals Is The Core Cause Of Our Sick Economy

 

 

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said:

I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions [banks] becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if you do prosecute, if you do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy

As we've repeatedly noted, this is wholly untrue.

If the big banks were important to the economy, would so many prominent economists, financial experts and bankers be calling for them to be broken up?

If the big banks generated prosperity for the economy, would they have to be virtually 100% subsidized to keep them afloat?

If the big banks were helpful for an economic recovery, would they be prolonging our economic instability?

In fact, failing to prosecute criminal fraud has been destabilizing the economy since at least 2007 … and will cause huge crashes in the future.

After all, the main driver of economic growth is a strong rule of law.

Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz says that we have to prosecute fraud or else the economy won't recover:

The legal system is supposed to be the codification of our norms and beliefs, things that we need to make our system work. If the legal system is seen as exploitative, then confidence in our whole system starts eroding. And that's really the problem that's going on.

***

I think we ought to go do what we did in the S&L [crisis] and actually put many of these guys in prison. Absolutely. These are not just white-collar crimes or little accidents. There were victims. That's the point. There were victims all over the world.

***

Economists focus on the whole notion of incentives. People have an incentive sometimes to behave badly, because they can make more money if they can cheat. If our economic system is going to work then we have to make sure that what they gain when they cheat is offset by a system of penalties.

Nobel prize winning economist George Akerlof has demonstrated that failure to punish white collar criminals – and instead bailing them out- creates incentives for more economic crimes and further destruction of the economy in the future.

Indeed, professor of law and economics (and chief S&L prosecutor) William Black notes that we've known of this dynamic for "hundreds of years". And see this, this, this and this.

(Review of the data on accounting fraud confirms that fraud goes up as criminal prosecutions go down.)

The Director of the Securities and Exchange Commission's enforcement division told Congress:

Recovery from the fallout of the financial crisis requires important efforts on various fronts, and vigorous enforcement is an essential component, as aggressive and even-handed enforcement will meet the public's fair expectation that those whose violations of the law caused severe loss and hardship will be held accountable. And vigorous law enforcement efforts will help vindicate the principles that are fundamental to the fair and proper functioning of our markets: that no one should have an unjust advantage in our markets; that investors have a right to disclosure that complies with the federal securities laws; and that there is a level playing field for all investors.

Paul Zak (Professor of Economics and Department Chair, as well as the founding Director of the Center for Neuroeconomics Studies at Claremont Graduate University, Professor of Neurology at Loma Linda University Medical Center, and a senior researcher at UCLA) and Stephen Knack (a Lead Economist in the World Bank's Research Department and Public Sector Governance Department) wrote a paper called Trust and Growth, showing that enforcing the rule of law – i.e. prosecuting white collar fraud – is necessary for a healthy economy.

One of the leading business schools in America – the Wharton School of Business – published an essay by a psychologist on the causes and solutions to the economic crisis. Wharton points out that restoring trust is the key to recovery, and that trust cannot be restored until wrongdoers are held accountable:

According to David M. Sachs, a training and supervision analyst at the Psychoanalytic Center of Philadelphia, the crisis today is not one of confidence, but one of trust. "Abusive financial practices were unchecked by personal moral controls that prohibit individual criminal behavior, as in the case of [Bernard] Madoff, and by complex financial manipulations, as in the case of AIG." The public, expecting to be protected from such abuse, has suffered a trauma of loss similar to that after 9/11. "Normal expectations of what is safe and dependable were abruptly shattered," Sachs noted. "As is typical of post-traumatic states, planning for the future could not be based on old assumptions about what is safe and what is dangerous. A radical reversal of how to be gratified occurred."

People now feel more gratified saving money than spending it, Sachs suggested. They have trouble trusting promises from the government because they feel the government has let them down.

He framed his argument with a fictional patient named Betty Q. Public, a librarian with two teenage children and a husband, John, who had recently lost his job. "She felt betrayed because she and her husband had invested conservatively and were double-crossed by dishonest, greedy businessmen, and now she distrusted the government that had failed to protect them from corporate dishonesty. Not only that, but she had little trust in things turning around soon enough to enable her and her husband to accomplish their previous goals.

"By no means a sophisticated economist, she knew … that some people had become fantastically wealthy by misusing other people's money — hers included," Sachs said. "In short, John and Betty had done everything right and were being punished, while the dishonest people were going unpunished."

Helping an individual recover from a traumatic experience provides a useful analogy for understanding how to help the economy recover from its own traumatic experience, Sachs pointed out. The public will need to "hold the perpetrators of the economic disaster responsible and take what actions they can to prevent them from harming the economy again." In addition, the public will have to see proof that government and business leaders can behave responsibly before they will trust them again, he argued.

Note that Sachs urges "hold[ing] the perpetrators of the economic disaster responsible." In other words, just "looking forward" and promising to do things differently isn't enough.

Robert Shiller – one of the top housing experts in the United States – says that the mortgage fraud is a lot like the fraud which occurred during the Great Depression. As Fortune notes:

Shiller said the danger of foreclosuregate — the scandal in which it has come to light that the biggest banks have routinely mishandled homeownership documents, putting the legality of foreclosures and related sales in doubt — is a replay of the 1930s, when Americans lost faith that institutions such as business and government were dealing fairly.

Indeed, it is beyond dispute that bank fraud was one of the main causes of the Great Depression.

Economist James K. Galbraith wrote in the introduction to his father, John Kenneth Galbraith's, definitive study of the Great Depression, The Great Crash, 1929:

The main relevance of The Great Crash, 1929 to the great crisis of 2008 is surely here. In both cases, the government knew what it should do. Both times, it declined to do it. In the summer of 1929 a few stern words from on high, a rise in the discount rate, a tough investigation into the pyramid schemes of the day, and the house of cards on Wall Street would have tumbled before its fall destroyed the whole economy.

In 2004, the FBI warned publicly of "an epidemic of mortgage fraud." But the government did nothing, and less than nothing, delivering instead low interest rates, deregulation and clear signals that laws would not be enforced. The signals were not subtle: on one occasion the director of the Office of Thrift Supervision came to a conference with copies of the Federal Register and a chainsaw. There followed every manner of scheme to fleece the unsuspecting ….

This was fraud, perpetrated in the first instance by the government on the population, and by the rich on the poor.

***

The government that permits this to happen is complicit in a vast crime.

Galbraith also says:

There will have to be full-scale investigation and cleaning up of the residue of that, before you can have, I think, a return of confidence in the financial sector. And that's a process which needs to get underway.

Galbraith recently said that "at the root of the crisis we find the largest financial swindle in world history", where "counterfeit" mortgages were "laundered" by the banks.

As he has repeatedly noted, the economy will not recover until the perpetrators of the frauds which caused our current economic crisis are held accountable, so that trust can be restored. See this, this and this.

No wonder Galbraith has said economists should move into the background, and "criminologists to the forefront."

The bottom line is that the government has it exactly backwards. By failing to prosecute criminal fraud, the government is destabilizing the economy … and ensuring future crashes.

Earlier this month, a prominent New York Federal Court Judge – and former Chief of the fraud unit for the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (Jed Rakoff) – said:

Not a single high level executive has been successfully prosecuted in connection with the recent financial crisis ….

[If] the Great Recession was in material part the product of intentional fraud, the failure to prosecute those responsible must be judged one of the more egregious failures of the criminal justice system in many years.

***

The stated opinion of those government entities asked to examine the financial crisis overall is not that no fraud was committed. Quite the contrary. For example, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, in its final report, uses variants of the word "fraud" no fewer than 157 times in describing what led to the crisis, concluding that there was a "systemic breakdown," not just in accountability, but also in ethical behavior. As the Commission found, the signs of fraud were everywhere to be seen, with the number of reports of suspected mortgage fraud rising 20-fold between 1998 and 2005 and then doubling again in the next four years. As early as 2004, FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker, was publicly warning of the "pervasive problem" of mortgage fraud, driven by the voracious demand for mortgage-backed securities. Similar warnings, many from within the financial community, were disregarded, not because they were viewed as inaccurate, but because, as one high level banker put it, "A decision was made that 'We're going to have to hold our nose and start buying the product if we want to stay in business.'"

The prevailing view of many government officials (as well as others) was that the crisis was in material respects the product of intentional fraud.

[The Department of Justice doesn't disagree.] Attorney General Holder himself told Congress that "it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if we do prosecute – if we do bring a criminal charge – it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy."

***

No one that I know of has ever contended that a big financial institution would collapse if one or more of its high level executives were prosecuted, as opposed to the institution itself.

***

The Department of Justice has never taken the position that all the top executives involved in the events leading up to the financial crisis were innocent, but rather has offered one or another excuse for not criminally prosecuting them – excuses that, on inspection, appear unconvincing. So, you might ask, what's really going on here?

***

[Deferred prosecutions - the current government approach of letting big banks off easy and leaving the individual fraudsters alone - are not the way to go.] Although it is supposedly justified in terms of preventing future crimes, I suggest that the future deterrent value of successfully prosecuting individuals far outweighs the prophylactic benefits of imposing internal compliance measures that are often little more than window-dressing. Just going after the company is also both technically and morally suspect. It is technically suspect because, under the law, you should not indict or threaten to indict a company unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that some managerial agent of the company committed the alleged crime; and if you can prove that, why not indict the manager? And from a moral standpoint, punishing a company and its many innocent employees and shareholders for the crimes committed by some unprosecuted individuals seems contrary to elementary notions of moral responsibility.

These criticisms take on special relevance, however, in the instance of investigations growing out of the financial crisis, because, as noted, the Department of Justice's position, until at least very, very recently, is that going after the suspect institutions poses too great a risk to the nation's economic recovery.

Rakoff thoroughly debunks the government's other lame excuses for failing to prosecute Wall Street criminals as well, such as the "difficulty" of proving "intent" or the "sophistication" of the counter parties.

Unfortunately, the government made it official policy not to prosecute fraud, even though criminal fraud is the main business model adopted by the giant banks.

Indeed, Judge Rakoff notes that the government had a large hand in creating the fraud in the first place.  In fact, the government has done everything it can to cover up fraud, and has been actively encouraging criminal fraud and attacking those trying to blow the whistle.

The failure to punish the fraudsters is the core cause of our sick economy.

Know Yourself: Your Decision-Making Process via Kahneman

Posted: 24 Nov 2013 02:00 PM PST


Source:100 Women in Hedge Funds

This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

Putting Time In Perspective

Posted: 24 Nov 2013 09:00 AM PST

give it a moment to load, then click play

10 Sunday AM Reads

Posted: 24 Nov 2013 05:30 AM PST

My Sunday morning reads:

• Some Stock Bulls Tread Lightly Into 2014 (WSJ) see also Economist Robert Shiller is waving a warning flag on stock valuations. Some call his methods misleading (WSJ)
• Surveys of retirement spending (Bogleheads)
• BlackRock: JPMorgan settlement undermines mortgages (Housing Wire) see also $13 Billion, Yes, but What Took So Long? (NYT)
• ETF Investors Ignore Growth Stocks  (Barron’s)
• How Do You Make Money Off Stolen Art? (Priceonomics)
• Blame the NSA, not Facebook and Google (USA Today)
• A War Over Solar Power Is Raging Within the GOP (New Republic) see also How Much Do Americans Blame Washington for Their Economic Woes? – Emma Green (The Atlantic)
• Are Bitcoins the Criminal’s Best Friend? (Bloomberg)
• There’s a Whole New Way of Killing Cancer (Esquire)
• You Can't Take a Bullet for Someone Hollywood-Style, Because Physics (Scientific American)

What is for brunch?

 

Democrats Rein In Senate Filibusters

Source: WSJ

 

The Human Microbiome

Posted: 24 Nov 2013 05:00 AM PST


Source: NPR

Country Club for Collectible Cars

Posted: 24 Nov 2013 03:00 AM PST

It’s a car aficionado’s paradise: Collectors Car Garage, a high-end vehicle storage facility chock full of dream cars from classic Porsches and Alfa Romeos to the hottest modern supercars. Father-son team Robert and James Machinist envision their growing business as a “country club for car people,” where car lovers of all stripes can store their babies securely and meet others who share their passion. They gave Bloomberg a guided tour of the world’s coolest garage.


Source: Bloomberg Nov. 21 2013

Surprise and Uncertainty Indexes: Real-Time Aggregation of Real-Activity Macro Surprises

Posted: 24 Nov 2013 02:00 AM PST

.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

previous home Next

{8} chatroll


{9} AdBrite FOOTER

{8} Nice Blogs (Adgetize)