[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
leftypol archives

File: 1608680398363.jpg (62.28 KB, 775x514, DOWn.jpg)

 No.213072[Last 50 Posts]

💰️DOW/Market Watch Thread💰️
monitoring the market, trends, fluctuations, etc.


the dewritos diet is probably over 50% corn flour and corn syrup.

I would like to take this opportunity to say to USA inhabitants:
>zomg mexican cola tastes so much better than
Same with chocolate (putting butyric acid in it) and all the sugary candies.


>but imagine if someone engineered an anti-corn, [], anti-soybean [] nanotechnology
Ask a biologist about crop diseases and pests.


File: 1666001466753-0.png (55.47 KB, 263x143, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1666001466754-1.png (82.53 KB, 380x211, ClipboardImage.png)

>Safeguarding Democracy section
not even cyberpunk authors could have predicted this absurd crap


It's not real anon….


File: 1666002897684-1.jpg (26.34 KB, 480x480, oh no.jpg)

>Since I believe in working smarter, not harder, I am going to directly quote Superstonk contributer delicious_manboobs:
I wonder if there is any academic literature where a breakthrough, importnat part can only be credited to some immature pseudonym. Kind of like the /sci/ anon who derived a proof for a lower bound of superpermutations back in 2011 to answer a meme question, which got them credited in a formal mathematics paper.
< • Anonymous 4chan Poster; Houston, Robin; Pantone, Jay; Vatter, Vince (October 25, 2018). "A lower bound on the length of the shortest superpattern" (PDF). On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences.




Man imagine proving a mathematical problem of lower bounds, from a meme question. Getting it called the Haruhi Problem in a formal paper. That is the power of being an autistic image board user only to be credited as anon.

Still find this funny that this actually happened and like it be forever be referred to the Haruhi Problem.


File: 1666015506644.jpg (29.52 KB, 800x480, Book of Armaments.jpg)

I wish to consult the holy documents; where exactly did Marx predict this current crisis?


It's a joke post lol.
But we are going to see some real shit like that when consumers are blamed for not consooming enough.


All beef is “grass fed” during %95+ of its life, even in the shittiest factory farms. The only differentiation is with how the cattle are finished in their remaining few months (grain vs grass).


File: 1666049693551-0.png (31.71 KB, 960x138, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1666049693551-1.png (52.88 KB, 466x213, ClipboardImage.png)

>All beef is “grass fed” during %95+ of its life,
It looks like you're overestimating but you're right generally.


I can tell you that the “grass-fed” milk tastes much different than the other regular milk for whatever reason. It tastes like grass.


Realy? I thought that was normal thing for cows to eat. crazy.


Didn't Bloomberg say recession in a year?
Probably earlier.


In nature it is, but it's cheaper to factory farm cows who stand in their little compartment all day chowing on corn slop.


the real recession hasn't even begun.


File: 1666107414899.png (42.04 KB, 804x772, ClipboardImage.png)

>mfw the world's largest economy has been jumping around like a fucking crypto shitcoin for the past month


File: 1666110860439.png (84.76 KB, 880x721, ClipboardImage.png)

the fucks goin on man


people continue to lose confidence in democrats


Dow isn't at 100k yet? Were truly in a recession.


You're thinking of a depression.


I can’t really tell a difference dairy wise, but Grassfed beef definitley tastes much better.
That’s probably due to the fact that the lipid nutrition of Grass finished/grain finished milk doesn’t alter very much compared to the adipose tissue on flesh.


According to me, a paradigm shift in economic rhetoric is happening. Third article in a row with similar rhetoric bashing neoliberalism and calling for something new. Although, it may only be to appease people into voting democrats.

"Skills gaps will force companies to do right by their compatriots"


The only people lucky enough to be benefitting from wage increases are engineers, lawyers, doctors, and similar skilled jobs, most people are worse than ever.



I've also fantasized about a microbe that eats fossil fuel and turns it into biowaste that takes more energy to burn than is produced by burning

Wasn't some fungus discovered that eats plastics? Not too far a leap with a little genetic tinkering..


File: 1666233255432.jpg (98.77 KB, 719x719, jpg.jpg)

You're not my therapist.


Hey. Theoretical question. What would happen if someone shorted Ruble before whole "special operation" anticipating massive drop in value?




Wouldn't that mean it just doesn't burn at all, like how can you have an exothermic reaction when it just won't give off energy


if you've been holding onto it this long you're fucked


short term they would have made money, long term would be a big loss


File: 1666571549475.png (245.08 KB, 1430x420, 0kTPeKQd.png)

Worst since the American revolution


The First American Revolution*


I don't know much about economics, but I'm assuming the biggest spikes are:
- [end of American Revolution]
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panic_of_1837
- [1860s.. ? ]
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_1980s_recession
- This year.


What does this mean?


It's ogre.


File: 1666590438195.gif (1.51 MB, 498x465, 1658411497180543.gif)

I'm rubbing my chin trying to find something to invest in besides canned goods. Even treasuries look bad if the FED is going to keep raising interest rates, plus the yield curve has been inverted for months. plus we are probably in a recession. help me out what to buy here. I like small cap food plays with proven dividends and agl companies i think we are head for a food shortage,


i mean AG companies, like agricultural materials.


If I understand it is rate of change of price on government treasuries or in other word the bond market is collapsing and yields are rising at a faster pace than has been seen in years.




look at how increasingly volatile this has become since 1920


Can someone explain to a retard like me what a government bond is and how it works and how is it relevant to nobodies like me ?


You give money to goberment by buying it and they pay you back with interest


(I'm going from what I know, and I'm no expert, so if any comrades see any mistakes please do point them out).
In essence, pretty much what >>1236915 said. A few things should be noted, though: first, though government is the most notable issuer of bonds, corporations can also issue them, and often do; it's just a way to borrow money. Secondly, the thing with bonds is that they are assets which you can resell; this means their price fluctuates depending on the market, more or less following general supply-and-demand dynamics (the more people want it, the more the price goes up, etc.) Bonds, on the moment they are issued, have an interest rate which the issuer must pay.

Say, for example, that the bond is issued at the price of $1000 and with an interest rate of 10% per year, which means the issuer must pay the bondholder $100 every year until the bond "matures" (i.e. reaches its expiration date). This may be an attractive investment if other forms of investment have lower interest rates; this means that you can resell your bond for maybe, say, $1100 for someone else who feels that this is a good investment (the bond issuer would still pay $100 per year to the new holder). This means, in practice, that the return on the bond (or "yield") has lowered to 9.09%, whilst the price of the bond has rised by 10% (or $100). This is a fixed relation; if people feel that the bond is a good investment, they will be willing to pay more for it and thus its price will rise, which by definition makes its return lower; conversely, if the bonds looks shaky (i.e. if the bond issuer may fail or the annual return is not attractive) the price of the bond will fall, since you'll have to lower the price to sell it, which automatically causes its yield to rise (if, say, it falls to $900, it's interest rate would become 11%).

On the whole this is just bourgeois economics shit; this is relevant (insofar as one does not own any bonds) because bonds, especially government bonds, are usually seen as safe investments (its unlikely the government will fail to pay the bond back; that would require it collapsing). So if the price of government bonds is rising a lot, this is usually seen as a signal that porky is getting pretty nervous, and is starting to park their money on something safer with lower returns than stocks or something like that. There are a few points which make financial analysts nervous, like the bond curve inversion: when bond curves invert, that is, when the yield of short-term bonds is higher than long-term ones. Recall how I said above that bonds' yield is defined by their price. Normally short-term bonds would have a higher price and thus a lower yield, since there is less time for their maturity, so their risk is smaller, whereas on a long-term bond you don't really know what will happen, so in theory to compensate you'll have to sell them cheaper, which makes their yield higher; if long-term bonds suddenly have lower yields, this means porky is afraid of what's coming soon, and is preferring to park their money on long-term investments even if the returns are minimal, just as a form of insurance for their money.


How do annual interest payments work if a bond gets sold every month, for example? Does the person who happens to hold it at the anniversary of issue collect interest only?


I don't think it pays out yearly


Coupons. The holder of the coupon gets the money at coupon maturity.


You only get payments if you own the bond when payments are made.


So you're saying if I give the government some of my money that they'll give me more money?


yea but inflation is outpacing bond yields so you'll actually lose $$ if you invest


Yeah but technically you lose less money than if you just let the money sit in the bank (unless the bank has it in some kind of investment account that outperforms bonds).


How would I lose more money? I either earn back what I invested or earn a small profit, and with inflation id lose only what I put in.

Let me put it more simply: I put 10 dollars in bonds, normally of I haven't earned no more in profit I could just get my 10 dollars back. If times are good I can earn 12 or 14 or even 15 dollars so 5 dollar profit. If times are bad I won't lose more than I put in, I'll lose my 10 dollars, that's it.


You already got answers, but I can recommend investopedia.com if you come across other financial mumbo-jumbo you don’t understand. They do a surprisingly good job at explaining terms and concept in a way which is relatively easy to understand without formal financial education.


You may also want to check out the blogs of Michael Roberts (https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com) and Michael Hudson (https://michael-hudson.com), which offer easily digestible critical macroeconomic analysis. Roberts is a British Marxist economist while Hudson is an American “Marxian” economist. Hudson specifically focuses on fictitious capital, debt and the financialization of the economy, which is particularly interesting.


What's this rivalry between stocks and government bonds?


The Federal Reserve is in the middle of deciding to either crash the stock market or bond market.



Both, then to raise money just raise money on the poor through taxes then cut taxes on the rich.


Which is worse?


NTA, but the interest rate is typically fixed on government bonds, so the payouts may not keep pace with inflation. Same goes for the principal. So the real yield may be negative, especially since yield rates on government bonds are already low. Of course, just keeping money in a bank account would be worse. Unless I’m misunderstanding you.


File: 1666663002365-0.png (32.79 KB, 274x123, ClipboardImage.png)



No. Interest rates will be raised again soon, which means any bond you buy now will drop in price. albeit your yield would increase but high yields present a large amount of risk. there are better ways to hedge inflation.


File: 1666690282904.jpg (240.46 KB, 1267x1082, 8kgxq4bll1151.jpg)

There are a few good sources out there, Bogleheads is another.
They're all American, but the CORE is the same.


File: 1666690488621.jpg (38.56 KB, 387x600, vol1.jpg)

only book on investing I need

and the other 3 volumes


I'm not sure if you can call it a "rivalry" per se, given they are just different financial instruments, but the general idea is that stocks are the quintessential "high-risk high-reward" investment: you don't really know for sure what will happen to the company, but you're betting that the stock price will go up (or down if you short it, which is a another whole can of worms – see CPUSA anon for more detail). There is absolutely no guarantee for this, and if you get fucked there is very little you can do but cut your losses.

Bonds, on the other hand, are typically "low-risk low-reward": returns are nearly always small, since it is in essence a way of lending money, which means that the rates can't really be too high or the borrower won't be able to repay (or just will prefer to go bankrupt). This is mitigated by the fact that a bond is a financial obligation: the borrower must repay the bondholder at time of maturity and during each interest installment. This means that theoretically you can't lose money, since at the end of the bond you'll necessarily get back what you invested in. This, of course, is not guaranteed: in real terms bonds can often have negative returns, since the accrued value of interest+principal might be below the inflation rate, and thus it devalues over time. The thing is, if you're concerned about bank runs or something like that, a (government) bond is more or less a fail-proof way of parking your money. (Company bonds, of course, are far riskier; there is no guarantee a company won't go under, whilst on the case of the government the Central Bank can just do asset swaps and underwrite just about anything).

The idea of it being a "rivalry", if I understand it, is that as a policy the government either focus on high-risk or low-risk investments. If you focus on QE and pumping stocks, bonds become shit investments, since their return is complete garbage in comparison to the shit that happens on the stock market (leaving aside dividends and stuff, which make stocks even better); on the other hand, if the government doesn't prop the stock market it is notoriously prone to crashing and burning, which makes bonds, though less exciting, far more secure and thus relatively a good investment.


Source on image?


All shares are stocks anon. Stock is more general term, while a share is tied to specific company.


Shares are stocks. It's the same thing. I'm no porky, but the idea is that you can buy stocks to flip them, or to get dividends (or both). People weren't buying TSLA (as far as I gather) because their dividends were great; it's because it was "going to the moon", so you buy it cheap and sell it dear and make a profit. It's a short-term investment (as was GME, which, when the shorts finally implode people will sell their shares, instead of keeping them for a very long time).

More stable stocks on something like, say, Toyota, are unlikely to spike or do crazy shit, so buying them is more akin to buying a bond, it'll give you returns (the difference being that once the stock is issued the company has, afaik, no more financial obligations to the stockholder besides dividends; on the other hand, the stockholder theoretically gets a say on how the company is run, if they have enough shares).


calm b4 the storm. shit gets real bad after ze midterms.



File: 1666740287575.png (314.96 KB, 474x355, ClipboardImage.png)



often, markets improve after elections because it derisks the markets. They often plunge before the elections.

Source: someone who was trading during the Trump election, after which markets spiked because Trump kept making pro-business decisions. There's plenty of people who loved Trump simply because he was giving them money.


So with the paper dollar being made dear on the international market gold prices have fallen, but this has always been the case before a recession (the fed loves to do it). So y'all think it's a decent investment going into 2023 or should I just find bonds since the stock market is so fucking bad that the elites aren't even bankrolling it anymore out of fear.


probably true for presidential but midterms are different. stocks crashed in late 2018 after the midterms. the red wave brings more uncertainity as we'll have a bunch of new wackos and there's a chance republicans will let the US debt default.


the worst of the great recession was in Q4 2008, after Obamna was elected


honestly if the repubs just let the debt to china default i dont know what will happen internationally but it sounds like a recipe for a huge clusterfuck.



>So why don't people instead invest in long term dividends and earn a passive income?
Because you need a lot of shares to earn good dividend. A lot of shares is a lot of money. People who are "dirt poor, on low minimum wage" usually don't have enough capital.
Rich and middle class usually do invest in both dividend stocks and the other one.


>So why don't people instead invest in long term dividends and earn a passive income?
My parents do. I think they have a lot of money in a long-term investment fund.

I would have too but until my job change last month, I didn't have savings on-hand in case of job-loss or a medical emergency. I'm almost financially secure so at that point I should look into maybe 5-year investments.


also, I don't know if you are the same anon, but I will say it regardless, because I forgot.
Both long-term investement funds and ETFs with dividends exists precisely for that reason. To earn passive income. But you don't hear much about them, because well, compared to shorting stock, it is pretty boring.


(I'm not, first post in the last week, but thanks for sharing.)


Dividend is just translated to a yield in most cases, particularly in ETFs. Non-dividend yielding stock in theory yield the same by stock buyback or simply being worth more.

To make money on the stock market for real, you need to at least make yearly on interest alone close to what you spend. Say you spend 50k yearly, assuming a "conservative" yield of 5% yearly, you'll need 1 million invested.

The best you can do now, assuming you don't have 1MM invested already, is to save as much as possible. Some of your savings can go to investing on a stock ETF, other should go to some stable ETF that is unlikely to crash but is low yield, like a bond ETF.

There's lots of uncertainty in the market right now, so who knows what can happen.

Saving 1 million on a shit salary is hard and perhaps unrealistic to most, but anything you can save is good and really beneficial to one's security. Doing a record of what you spend on can be a good way to figure out where your money is draining. Eating out and nights out is a common one.

So comrades, you need to save as much as possible. It is good for you. Just don't let yourself be consumed by becoming obsessed with saving.


>Volume IV of Capital


Adding to this: Sometimes it's not what you do, but the order in which you do them.
Like saving now to get an advantage later.
Or spending now to get an advantage later.



And Democrats don't make business deals concerning the US? You were just experiencing a catalyst for change on a technical basis. That movement would have happened sooner or later, it was just accelerated.



Tax cuts, easy money; Trump knew what he was doing and how to get the support of the booj until he fucked up with COVID.


Amazon shares plummet after dismal sales forecast
>Amazon issued bleak revenue forecasts for the remainder of the year, sending its stock price tumbling 20 per cent in after-hours trading.

>The ecommerce and cloud group said it expected revenue of between $140bn-$148bn for the October to December period. Investors had been expecting more than $155bn, according to data from S&P Capital autism score.


-18% in aftermarket lol


Amazon bros…wtf? I thought they cornered not only shipping but also the tech industry with their cloud?


Looks like a correction from the covid mega boost free money.


File: 1666910908986.jpg (36.83 KB, 700x700, 1437787837307.jpg)

>stock price tumbling 20 per cent


Do the pink wojaks start coming in when billion dollar multinational companies are as volatile as shitcoins?


People are probably cutting back on "discretionary" purchases in response to a potential depression, higher interest rates on credit.


>GME can't go too high or else shorts risk failing margin calls.
>GME can't go too low or else Apes immediately buy up the float and lock it via DRSing
>Shorts can only lock GME in a sideways channel for weeks
>Literally just means during a market crash GME can stay relatively stable.
Honestly I hope the economy crashes soon, but I've got a feeling it won't happen until after midterms.


>GDP grew 2.6%



damn I shoulda jumped on the meme train and bought the stonk


you still can though if you have any money available, it's still not too expensive


>according to data from S&P Capital autism score.
lel the wordfilter sometimes.



How to analyse the NZDJPY (interest rate differential forex) though Das Kapital?


Does Meta do anything other than money laundering?


no they also spy on you


if your talking about facebook


File: 1666988738230-0.jpg (199.97 KB, 1080x2400, Hype.jpg)

File: 1666988738230-1.png (236.06 KB, 748x400, 1536273210771.png)

I mean nothing's stopping you, it's still pretty affordable.
>GME is at $28.17
>See this



FOMC is next week.

Anyone else day / swing-trading right now?

Any impression on market action up to Wednesday, and after Wednesday?

Markets seem to have broken out of their bearishness, and we have a real bear-market rally.

There's some "good" news, for instance, PCE inflation is approaching normal levels now, and I guess we're above 50SMA on S&P 500.


Historically, it appears that the S&P 500 actually tends to rise into a rate hike cycle, before eventually crashing as the rate hikes cut into the economy.

We haven't seen that this time, but to an extent this implies that "normality" under higher rates is going to come soon and we'll see a bounce, perhaps over ATH, before a real crash occurs in a Wiley E Coyote moment.



Poisons of choice:

UVIX (2x VIX options ETF)
UVXY (1.5x VIX options ETF)
HIBS (-3x S&P 500 high beta index)
HIBL (3x S&P 500 high beta index)

Where beta refers to correlation to S&P 500.


should I put all my savings into it


No. 95-99% of day traders lose all their money within 6 months.

Leveraged ETFs are extremely reliable value destroyers.

Hoi polloi do not understand the difference between trading and investing; investment is based on fundamentals and intrinsic value, while traders seek to profit off fluctuations off prices.

The securities I'm talking about are ultra-high risk in any reasonable span of time and are basically intended to sucker retail investors who cannot afford options.


You're more likely to see traders than investors on leftypol, tbh, because investing requires accepting the fundamental basis of capitalism.

Trading is more critical; efficient markets theory suggests all traders should blow up, but the fact that only the vast majority (99%) die implies that a few select people have figured out how to hack capitalism.


File: 1666995339671.jpg (129.08 KB, 1265x838, 1666993802176072.jpg)

communism cancelled
capitalism remains


File: 1666995357456.png (292.22 KB, 640x765, best ever.png)

oops, wrong pic


File: 1666995526101.png (756.69 KB, 897x546, ClipboardImage.png)

Always gets me how "populism" is a pejorative.

Lel went to wiki to refresh myself on the definition and history of the word and this was right at the top.


The term serves the same ideological function in the 21st century as the term "totalitarianism" served in the 20th.


I put about 10% of my savings into it but I'm also living with my parents.



Yeah, I think the fear is out of the markets and we're probably going to be seeing a post-hike bubble soon.

Ever heard of the Halloween strategy? It states, buy after Halloween, then sell after May. Usually performs well, when it doesn't, well, there's a market crash.


Does anyone have data on the average "shape" of a market session, intraday? I'm wondering if there are frequent patterns like the price going up within the first half hour, then dropping a bit at lunch time or something.



I can give some data:

One, during morning session you tend to have trades dominated by traders, as well as retail investors.

Two, during afternoon session, larger traders, investors, etc tend to play due to higher volumes making it easier for them to get good prices on transactions.

Remember, charts are surrogates for order books, not order books themselves.


Why would larger traders step in only in the afternoon? And the highest volume is right at the start and end - a chart of volume makes a curved shape where the lowest volume is in the middle.


I wouldn’t. Don’t put anything you’re not prepared to lose into the market. Even if you’re 99% sure it’s a safe bet.

I put a huge portion of my money into GME, the majority even, but that’s mostly because I’m willing to take the risk and relatively safely employed.



it depends on the day, I suppose, and this was the old trend I read about; it's standard for afternoon trading.

Start of day also shows higher volatility; the way I understand it, end of session trading tends to be definitive, whereas start of session trading is speculative.


>my anarchist friend started trading stocks because he can't cope with his office job and working under a boss
Is… is he a bourgeois? Don't tell me…


The bourgeoisie own the means of production but do not labour under it.
The proletariat labour under the means of production but do not own it.
If you seriously want a slur call them petty bourgeoisie.
If your friend reads theory, he is merely gros proletariat. Even Marx speculated.


File: 1667030810557.jpg (49.92 KB, 626x626, 1667026931527555.jpg)

remember to buy a candle oven before it's too late


Why buy? A person can make that


Why can't you just have a candle


File: 1667056110135.jpg (56.24 KB, 816x640, depressed rich evans.jpg)

Can't wait for the youtube video talking about all the people it's killed/homes it's burned down…


File: 1667058946181.jpg (155.04 KB, 1083x741, 1666983014489.jpg)

I have 120k to invest and I'm tired of being proletariat. How do I turn this into passive income and become petit bourgeois


Move to the third world and live like a king.


What countries are best if I want a qt brown harem and not having to work


Buy cheap property in woods. The end


Cocaine and hookers in a cheap country, hire an accountant too


What country


Probably somewhere in SEA. Maybe even bolivia. In Bolivia you can get free rent by doing a deposit of around 10k I think. It's not bad.


Not to mention Bolivia is an AES country if you're not in Santa Cruz


I'd say south america or SEA like the other anon said. Basically anywhere away from Europe, Africa or North America.


come to mexico city so i can murder you with impunity


but why


because i can, mostly


well I'm gonna be in tijuana this weekend if you wanna come get drinks and kill me with impunity


next weekend*
forgot what day it was


Are you capable of understanding a simple OP?



Do your research before you invest.
You're probably better off following Instagram "investors" then this place.


I'm not sure that's true, this board is primarily about economics


Literally pay someone to give you advice.
Financial advisors are paid to answer this question.
t. i know some as family members and they gave me good advice



…How common are convenient deaths in the business world?


Somehow I don't think some shitcoiner is the number one target of the glowies, sounds more like he just was having a mental breakdown


Lmao why would you want to get away from a secure and passive income into the risky business of business ownership? No wonder the bourgeoisie make fun of you losers as well as finance advisers make fun of absolute retards taking a risk with their money and not putting it in a secure mutual fund.


you can't live off a $120k mutual fund


ROFL! (That stands for : "Rollin' on the floor laughing", for those of you not up to date with the latest MEME's!) I am LOL (Laughing out loud) at all the proles in this thread! Do you really think you will ever stop being a wagie? Hahahahaha never losers, get back to the factory I need to buy myself a fourth yacht….. BY TOMORROW!!!


That's what a mutual fund or ETF is for. You get a check either annually or quarterly based on their yield.


How is today and tomorrow's FED meeting going to go guys? Probably 75bps hike but if Powell were serious it'll be 100bps.


Yeah but you won't get anywhere near enough to live on which is my point…


Persistence, don't be lazy and save enough to keep adding and increasing what you earn. You can definitely earn up to 10,000 a year with only a 30,000 yearly salary over time. If you live with parents or family that handles the bills this gets even easier. Stop trying to think how to build a large passive income short term and plan instead to build it up over time like 20 years until you are earning like 20,000 every year on top of your work salary. 30 +20? And now you're earning 50,000 which is way better than just wage salary.


I'm pretty sure that's what the original anon was saying tho…


50k in 20 years is going to be like 20k today lmao you are crazy if you are planning to cope with this system


.75 bps. Dovish tone. Markets will rally into 2023. Crash in 2023 as reality re-emerges.


>doesnt take into account inflation
anon i…


better save up enough to afford a one way ticket to a suicide clinic in Switzerland, thats more realistic than this boomer advice


The elders of Brahma keep taking good positions.
First the engines of the 4th industrial revolution, then its wicked master and finally the world


Who gives a fuck? I'm earning a passive dividend income of 10,000 bucks and i add more every year I save from my yearly wages. That 10k goes a long ass way beyond my regular wages which would be untenable especially because of inflation. Are you stupid?


File: 1667327888513.png (185.91 KB, 480x360, ClipboardImage.png)

t. grindset believer


Im not a grindset believer either. Do you know what a passive income is? It's money you earn while you aren't working. A safe way that isn't investing in stocks and playing the stock market. The grindset meme isn't about security, it's about getting rich, I'm not looking to get rich but a secure income I can earn if I ever lose my job.


What's with US diesel reserves? Conservatives are freaking out about only a month of diesel left in US.


What passive income is there that's better value than stocks? Other than landlording.


>It's money you earn while you aren't working.


Being a bouj


File: 1667415532714.png (25.94 KB, 254x198, ClipboardImage.png)



Unless you're a mortgaging landlord or someone who takes car loans, I don't see why that matters. Critical support to Powell for increasing interest payments of landlords!


Jerome Powell won't stop until he is satisfied. They are FAR from lowering interest rate hikes. If anything it sounded like he had to be talked down from a full 1%.

December approaches…

He was talking like it was 2023 already today. Hikes won't chill until March most likely.


>Powell: Slow-down in pace of rate hikes could come as soon as December
Is he bluffing?


He literally said wages and employment are too high. And Americans are heavily indebted so anyone carrying variable debt is going to get fucked. Do you think car loans are only for the rich or something? Property owners are fine because they have fixed rate loans.


>Do you want the rates high or low


>Too bad.


>even the super defensive stocks are down

Powell taking absolutely no shit


Documents show Facebook and Twitter closely collaborating w/ Dept of Homeland Security, FBI to police “disinfo.” Plans to expand censorship on topics like withdrawal from Afghanistan, origins of COVID, info that undermines trust in financial institutions.- TheIntercept



I am so fucking whateverpilled, Id be surprised if thatd not be the case.
I know it doesnt help, but I never expect but the worst.


They're just being retarded. There was a report recently saying the US had a 25-day supply of Diesel, and while that is lower than usual, that's only if production stopped, which it hasn't. They just interpreted it as a prediction that we'll run out before Thanksgiving.


How high do you think they'll push interest rates? The total, I mean.


One interesting phenomenon that I'm noticing is all these shit purchases and investments that big tech is META is investing in a shitty second-life clone, Musk purchased a dying twitter and the NFL scammed the fuck out of Amazon by giving them shit games on Thursday Night Football. It really does prove to you that the falling rate of profit is a real thing.


Lel so appearently they are getting scared of colour revolution


> Imagine being worse then rdrama's carp or Pizzashill.


Investing in a shitty second life clone they think people want to speculate assets in.


SiliCON valley is running out of steam with its shell game of pitching "the next totally awesome mind-blowing tech thing dude!" The halcyon days of delirious optimism in tech have faded after countless scandals, ripoffs, atrocities (such as terrorists live streaming violence) and amplifying of political chaos. Zuckerberg with his fortunes now on the wane and reputation damaged and the illusion broken that he is some kind of wunderkind rather than just lucky seems to be grasping desperately for a last ditch big idea that will revive his standing.

Musk is just a sociopathic man-child with infinite money whose only real interest appears to be to amuse himself.

Crypto was a huge pump and dump operation billed as a get rich scheme



I don't get it. Maybe I'm dumb. How the hell is "money printer go brrrr" the cause of high inflation? It is the prices of goods that is being inflated, not the money itself. Transportation companies are making superprofits which of course "trickles down" to everything. Seriously.


if commodities rise in price, money's value is lowered


File: 1667522013463-0.png (61.54 KB, 1168x450, fredgraph.png)

File: 1667522013463-1.png (837.96 KB, 1400x985, ClipboardImage.png)



What assets?


Thoughts on UnlearningEconomics on YT?


File: 1667556476277.png (233.04 KB, 1451x1963, ClipboardImage.png)

Assets bought and owned by the Federal Reserve


Someone commented here: >>1251513
I've seen some of their videos and they're ok, particularly on deconstructing neoliberal economics. Apparently, unfortunately, he doesn't go the full mile of unlearning economics to then learn classic political economy + contemporary marxism.


File: 1667561853077.png (1.27 MB, 736x884, ClipboardImage.png)

>SiliCON valley is running out of steam with its shell game of pitching "the next totally awesome mind-blowing tech thing dude!" The halcyon days of delirious optimism in tech have faded after countless scandals, ripoffs, atrocities (such as terrorists live streaming violence) and amplifying of political chaos. Zuckerberg with his fortunes now on the wane and reputation damaged and the illusion broken that he is some kind of wunderkind rather than just lucky seems to be grasping desperately for a last ditch big idea that will revive his standing.

The cult of Sci-Fi is collapsing. Wait until people wake up and realize that sci-fi technology won't save them from climate change.



We see this in the elites' drive to renew the space program with private companies to try and escape and colonize other planets because they fucked this one.


File: 1667582565599.png (110.65 KB, 943x473, ClipboardImage.png)

central banks are stockpiling gold big time
>the amount of gold being purchased this year is at its highest level since 1967
And this is only REPORTED gold buying. Most countries central banks (like china) don't publish numbers like this.


File: 1667583782060.jpg (142.19 KB, 1300x976, fan-wennan-orbital ring.jpg)

>The cult of Sci-Fi is collapsing. Wait until people wake up and realize that sci-fi technology won't save them from climate change.
But actual scifi technology literally could save people from climate change.
The silicon valley scam was that they didn't make scify-tech.

I would rather people continue trusting technology for solving problems, but loose their trust in capitalism instead.


People need to realize that scifi tech doesn't have to be glass towers and plastic widgets, but also includes bioengineering and clever use of the environment. The idea that technology has to be assembling a machine in a factory is a product of the capitalist mode of production, as that is the form of production that is most suited to this mode of production.


File: 1667587305400.jpg (116.18 KB, 888x1266, big mashine complexe.jpg)

Bio-engineering is going to create massive industrial tech with enormously large machine complexes.
Because bio-tech is powered by chemical energy and it needs copious amounts of it. Biology can create more complex structures than traditional manufacturing, but it is very energy in-efficient in comparison. 2/3 of bio-engineering is going to be creating massive chemical cycling rigs for supplying power and gigantic cooling radiators.

Maybe picture a cross-over of a massive chemical plant with a offshore oil-rig, just 20x larger. It's going to be put into the ocean because of cooling needs. And maybe because shipyards are the only factories that can build structures at the necessary scale.


so should I buy gold ?


>Bio-engineering is going to create massive industrial tech with enormously large machine complexes.
The point is you can have both, and that traditional assembly line manufacturing is not the only option, not that it's either/or.


Is the only reason why central banks buy gold is because they are predicting hyperinflation?



The Biden Junta is currently keeping fuel prices lowered by draining the SPR. This will reverse into a refilling after the voot. Fill up now!


It helps maintain confidence in their currency

There won't be hyperinflation, that is lolbert autism


How do I make money off the market? I'm pretty fucking dumb but I make a lot of money from onlyfans. Should I wait for a crash then buy Blackrock stock? I have 6 figures in my account but I'm too scared of a complete market crash to invest in anything but land and farming equipment


>I make a lot of money from onlyfans.


Either the FED will go sicko mode on the interest rates, causing DEFLATION, but confidence in the dollar will remain compared to the rest of the world.

Or, they'll pivot and hyperinflation will skyrocket, but the banking system is saved.

Jerome Powell seems pretty hawkish now so I honestly have my money on deflation.


do have to wonder if the blatant robbing of foreign reserves being planned by the eu has anything to do with it, might want to lower those and just buy gold which you can bring closer home


For retail investors, picking stocks and especially options are essentially gambling. It leads to the same kind of wrong feedback loop and it’s why you see so many totally delusional traders on Twitter and Reddit who think they’re Ozymandius because they got lucky and won. They have a system (unlike all the other guys at the track).

Most people just buy an index fund and let the money sit in it for 30 years. If you have 2 million dollars invested, you will make a livable income every year entirely on gains and dividends.


The dialectic appears to be evolving towards a major convergence of criticality. An endlessly convolutional interconnected globe results in every relatively local crisis feeding back into a reactive perturbative circuit which amplifies agitations with ever growing informational omnipresence . Errors propagate at conspiratorial light speed, silicate assassinations course through electric grids of compromised systems , AI phantoms stalk the channels. Brain waves are coopted by engines of captivation, mathematicians are slavers of the mind and thrive in an atmosphere of silent crime. Data becomes profits becomes bullets in the outputs of empire . The mind-scape is broken into unreassembleable bits and bytes, and the terminal planetary immune response is guided by the golden hand of hidden elites

Can you feel the future contracting? Can you sense how optimistic possibilities shrink and terrible misfortunes more probable? Do you know how to make use of a crisis? Are you prepared not with guns and food, but with faith that it's not all for nothing?


File: 1667632052266.png (420.79 KB, 638x588, ClipboardImage.png)

you cant just drop this info without sharing with us anon


File: 1667646521056.jpg (23.52 KB, 316x237, 651844-todd-sampson.jpg)

Post a link, if you're cis male or FtM.


Incoherent word salad at the beginning.
If you think there is nothing but despair, why are you here?


Shut up I felt like writing like Nick Land. Schizo-prose is a refined taste I don't blame you for not comprehending my majesty


Thank you anon! Is there a reason why index funds are safer than normal stocks?



Index funds basically track the market in aggregate instead of one specific company.
For example, the S&P 500 is calculated based on the 500 biggest companies on the stock market, weighted by market cap. If the economy is doing well, then the 500 biggest companies are doing well.

An index fund like SPY is weighted in the exact same way as the S&P 500, meaning that if the S&P 500 goes up by 5% then the value of SPY goes up by 5%. Index funds are a safe bet because the rule of the US stock market is that line goes up, forever.


I don't buy the hype


File: 1667840637249.png (224.36 KB, 960x597, ClipboardImage.png)


What does that mean? New loans?




Wells Fargo mortgage staff brace for layoffs as U.S. loan volumes collapse

>Mortgage volumes at Wells Fargo slowed further in recent weeks, leaving some workers idle and sparking concerns that the lender will need to cut more employees as the U.S. housing slump deepens.

>The bank had about 18,000 loans in its retail origination pipeline in the early weeks of the fourth quarter, according to people with knowledge of the company’s figures. That is down as much as 90% from a year earlier, when the Covid pandemic-fueled housing boom was in full swing, said the people.
>Employees are on edge after the bank began cutting workers in April and internal projections point to more departures.


File: 1667841324303.png (220.71 KB, 960x565, ClipboardImage.png)


Crypto is literally dying lmao


Tsla too… Might be a precursor to something


Meta Lays Off More Than 11,000 Employees
>Meta said it was laying off more than 11,000 people, or about 13 percent of its work force, in what amounted to the company’s most significant job cuts.


tech unions when


File: 1668032325517.jpg (114.55 KB, 730x720, autoschwitz.jpg)




lucidchads on the comeup let's get it

when the venture capital dries up they all get fired and are forced into other less profitable industries


File: 1668035075960.png (97.2 KB, 200x334, sickos.png)

>rich bay area PMCs that harvest people's data and help the CIA and FBI maintain imperialist narratives over billions of people are getting shitcanned


Hah, you don't think those are the 13% getting shitcanned, do you?


>thinking the most powerful men (and women) in the world would ever really lose to the benefit of a bunch of stinky do-nothing neets
you will never be winners. your cheering is pointless..


File: 1668038651103.jpg (77.02 KB, 960x540, OH FUCK.jpg)

who are you quoting?


this whole thread lmao, all your silly, pathetic posts about how supposedly capitalism is actually falling apаrt


Love to see it, hope the trend continues.



I can confirm from a person who got fired that engineers are indeed getting fired.


Any bets on when Bitcoin will drop below $10k?


oh shi-

I'm unironically gonna buy low. Not as a real investment, just a hundred to see how it goes. Plus I gotta by a vpn and donate to places that I'd rather not do with a credit card.


will never go under 12k


Damn, and here I thought I had it bad when roofers were getting laid off, sorry comrade


give me attention you pieces of shit or ill start arguing with myself


I mostly hold onto crypto since I know it never goes up when I'm holding it, so if I can't profit then no one can.
That floor's a bit generous. How does your charts look?


>I know it never goes up when I'm holding it, so if I can't profit then no one can.


File: 1668047212294.png (322 KB, 1531x1054, ClipboardImage.png)

japan dumping U.S treasury bonds to prop up the yen
>japan is the largest foreign holder of american bonds
>selling in the worst year for bonds ever


File: 1668050682626-0.jpg (310.78 KB, 1015x661, sc0003864f~2.jpg)

File: 1668050682626-1.jpg (73.1 KB, 1225x531, maxresdefault~2.jpg)


Hedge-fund giant Elliott warns looming hyperinflation could lead to ‘global societal collapse’
<Elliott contends markets have not fallen far enough and the world is hurtling toward the worst financial crisis since World War II
<That’s executives at leading hedge-fund firm Elliott Management Corp. warning that the world is heading toward the worst financial crisis since World War II.
<In a letter sent to investors, and reportedly seen by the Financial Times, the Florida-headquartered firm told clients that it believes the global economy is in an “extremely challenging” situation that could lead to hyperinflation.
<Elliott did not respond to MarketWatch’s request for comment.
<The firm, led by billionaire Paul Singer and Jonathan Pollock, told its clients that “investors should not assume they have ‘seen everything’ ” because they have been through the peaks and troughs of the 1987 crash, the dot-com boom and bust, the 2008 global financial crisis, and previous bear and bull markets.
<It added that the “extraordinary” period of cheap money is coming to an end and has “made possible a set of outcomes that would be at or beyond the boundaries of the entire post-WWII period.”
<The letter reportedly said the world is “on the path to hyperinflation,” which could lead to “global societal collapse and civil or international strife.”
<Elliott reportedly argued that markets have not fallen enough yet and that an equity-markets decline of more than 50% would be “normal,” adding that it couldn’t predict when that would happen. The S&P 500 SPX, -2.08% has dropped 19% from its peak at the beginning of the year.
<Elliott executives warned clients that the idea that “ ‘we will not panic because we have seen this before’ does not comport with the current facts.”
<They blamed central-bank policy makers for the current global economic situation, saying they had been “dishonest” about the reasons for high inflation. They said lawmakers had shirked responsibility by blaming it on supply-chain disruption caused by the pandemic instead of citing the loose monetary policy imposed two years ago during the COVID-19 peak.


Asian Stocks Down After US Midterms Turn Global Markets Red
>Asian stocks started down on Thursday after inconclusive US midterm election results and a turbulent cryptocurrency market left Wall Street and European markets in a sea of red.
>The uncertainty, especially about how the midterm results would impact inflation, transferred to Asia overnight.
>Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Seoul, Jakarta and Taipei were all trading lower.
<"A purple dilemma might be the best way to describe the red-blue tangle that emerged Wednesday. It'll be gridlock, that's for sure," Stephen Innes of SPI Asset Management said of the US midterms.
<"Perhaps not the friendliest kind for market participants, many of whom were hoping for a more resounding rebuke of Democrats given inflation realities."
>All eyes are expected to turn to US inflation data, due later Thursday, to gauge the speed of future rate hikes by the Federal Reserve.
<"US growth looks still too strong to bring inflation down," Tapas Strickland of National Australia Bank said in a note.
<"The ongoing resilience in the (consumer prices) data and stickiness in inflation continue to point to the Fed hiking rates closer to 5.0 percent or higher."
>Fed officials have raised their policy rate to a range of between 3.75 to 4.0 percent.



Schizo tier, the markets will never collapse


agreeing with the capitalist lately, the economy grew 4% even while the Fed was trying to fuck it with a chainsaw. We'll have to see if the Credit Suisse shit turns out to be anything, as it stands every other nation is facing collapse while the US coasts for at least the short term.



so usa just gets to win by default because the rest of the developed world agreed to shoot their own ballsacks off with a shotgun? are you fucking serious mate??? this is how things ended up?????? the blackest reaction does not even begin to describe how the world unfolded after the collapse of the soviet union.


this just in: communism eternally DEBUNKED!


the whole point of the US cannibalizing the EU was to do exactly this.
>the blackest reaction does not even begin to describe how the world unfolded after the collapse of the soviet union.
honestly shut the fuck up you spectacle obsessed moron.


>US cannibalizing the EU
How exactly does this happen? Aren't they comparable in terms of economy/population size?


File: 1668092142247.png (73.1 KB, 874x689, ClipboardImage.png)

the war has truly been lost, lads


You live i n it fucking pseud. now shut the fuck up and lurk moar.


the collapse is vastly overpromised, it's going to be tediously protracted over decades in the future, it's not going to be a cathartic apocalypse like the whackjobs here are hoping. you'll know shit has collapsed in retrospect.


File: 1668096913854.jpg (21.26 KB, 366x153, 23-o.jpg)

Collapses rarely come to a close like they did in the USSR When there is not a hot war. I do believe that the US basically killed or wounded itself when it struck down the USSR.


The US and USSR traded their killshots, the US is just luck enough to take it's last few steps before death.


It's only the beginning, though. Next we'll see a drastic drop in real QOL in the West in order to make labor force competitive against the rest of the world and China. Fascists will come out of all the woodworks at once to beat workers up


Today's closing numbers


File: 1668115677436.jpg (4.59 KB, 299x168, powell.jpg)

Once again



capitalism is finished bro, its going to collapse any day now


Dem bonds looking pretty sussy.

Enjoy your big pump, porky. There will be consequences.


Deindustrialization only accelerates. West has only so many resources to cannibalize


stupid commie doesn't know how basic eocnomics works
industiral jobs were offshored so americans can take on higher-value service type jobs
if the USA didnt 'deindustrialize' the country would be a lot poorer and have less technology
did you even think about htis for a second?


You should talk to more working people, it kinda already has. I had a 3 hour conversation with my differential equations professor about his life out of the blue and he was telling me just how ridiculously stressed he is and how jaded and blackpilled he's becoming due to the increasing CoL that even his salary can't keep up with.

He told me he feels fucking awful because as a tenured professor and union negotiator he is constantly advocating for increasingly progressive reforms in favor of the other professors (adjunct especially) and he says that the majority of his coworkers do not give a fuck and just want to keep everything as it is because a lot of them have inherited wealth or what have you

he also told me he feels really bleakly about his students future prospects just because he's spent so much time thinking about how fucked up everything is that even with a degree there is not much future for most young people now and that he feels kind of pointless and that he realized the ultimate goal of society is to just have one class of slaves and a class of people dumping shit on the slaves and that people like him are stuck in the ugly middle as people who reproduce that ideology

I also talk to my coworkers at my shitty service jobs and most people live in fucking bleak ass conditions. Multiple roommates, rickety arrangements with family members, having to live four hours away, barely able to afford rent…

It's already gotten really bad for lots of people and here in the Bay Area there are really obvious signs of decay and delapidation in all but the very richest enclaves and you should keep in mind that the average incomes here are very high - the fact that the state and local governments refuse to fix anything except for the moneyed class of tech moguls who own real estate and large shares is emblematic of how ludicrously corrupt and rotten the government has gotten. Tons of money paid into taxes and they can barely even make a dent in homelessness because not only do they not want to, they'd rather just funnel it into grants for real estate.

I honestly don't know how longer this can go on. Tons of people I've talked to seem like they're being ground into dust. Even one of the managers are my retail job who made six figures was complaining about how it's just way too expensive to live or do anything anymore. I've noticed a lot of smaller business have gotten killed off in the COVID wave as well. There's just a general air of malaise and exhaustion everywhere, can you not feel it?


real estate is a ponzi scheme. and the small businesses were crushed by covid while big corporate mcdonalds stayed open. as if it even makes sense to funnel all the people into the few businesses allowed to be open how does that stop a virus wouldn't it just increase the spread by forcing everyone in town into the one store (walmart) thats allowed to stay open. big corporations made big money during covid from that


Yeah, and China will squeeze Americans dry doing Covid-justified reductions in outputs of it's factories. No industries means no technologies


File: 1668172552725.jpg (42.57 KB, 1200x595, doubt-ushanka.jpg)

>industiral jobs were offshored so americans can take on higher-value service type jobs
>if the USA didnt 'deindustrialize' the country would be a lot poorer
wages for US workers stagnated or declined

>and have less technology

rate of technological advance began reducing from the 70s onwards


Indeed, it's almost as if this is just the intrinsic greed that's baked in to capitalism


So when and how did the US "solve" it's supply chain problem?


>rate of technological advance began reducing from the 70s onwards
would have been worse if indsutry stayed in america
btw offshoring gave chinese and indians slighltly better jobs bc otherwise they would not chose that and go back to rice farming and dying at 60 and having even less opportunity in life


They didn't, the US has off-loaded the burden of infrastructure just as the tax burden is laid out onto the people who shouldn't be responsible for the bad decisions being made. But the proles have no say on what the government or Bezos does for shits and giggles.


>I honestly don't know how longer this can go on. Tons of people I've talked to seem like they're being ground into dust.
I gotta be honest anon, it's because you live in the bay area. Homeless people in California are widely known to be the dumbest breed of homeless person, because if they lived literally anywhere else in the country they wouldn't be homeless. When the median home value is $1.2 million and the median rent is $2k a month, you have to have some level of brain damage to think you can ever escape homelessness. Just move to Milwaukee.


Crypto and tech are the first dominoes to fall as stimulus liquidity dries up, says this money manager. Here’s what could happen next.
>But fighting for the limelight with CPI this past week has been cryptocurrencies, while still unclear midterm results lingrer in the backdrop.
>Markets probably didn’t need another more brick on the 2022 wall of worries, but got one anyway as FTX, the world’s third largest crypto exchange, ultimately filing for bankruptcy by the end of the week. The financial world has been worried that crypto drama will upend already shaky broader risk appetite.
>JPMorgan is predicting a “cascade of margin calls, deleveraging and crypto company/platform failures” linked to FTX that could last for weeks, and another 25% drop for bitcoin. On the bright side, strategist Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou says the overall crypto hit will likely be smaller than post Terra, given previous deleveraging.
>Our call of the day from Stock Traders Daily and portfolio manager at Equity Logic, Thomas H. Kee Jr., links up the latest crypto selloff and selling of tech names this year to drying up of stimulus-related liquidity.
>“When excessive amounts of liquidity flood the economy excessive risk-taking is a natural byproduct, but when the liquidity spigot dries up those assets that experienced irrational exuberance often reprice to more prudent levels quickly,” Kee told MarketWatch in emailed comments on Wednesday.
>“Two obvious groups that benefited from the excessive liquidity influenced by stimulus were big tech, and cryptocurrencies. Each of these is being repriced now, because each of these were excessively valued due to stimulus, but these do not represent the overall market,” he said, adding that that selling could be a “precursor to conditions ahead.”
>“Although crash conditions are isolated to stocks like Amazon AMZN, 3.23%, Tesla TSLA, 0.49%, Meta META, 0.45%, etc., and virtually all cryptocurrencies, the reason this is happening can affect other asset classes too, just not as acutely or immediately. The broader market, housing, private equity, bonds, all of these assets rely on new money inflows to appreciate too, and the new money from stimulus is gone,” said Kee.
>What connects them all is that “new demand for these assets has dried up.”
>And with central bank stimulus no longer reliable for providing new money inflows, asset demand is now dictated by natural flows. The amount of fresh cash invested in the economy measured by the so-called Investment Rate, he said.
>Dating back to 1900, that marker indicates what happens when liquidity peaks and troughs. Kee notes that the peak marks the best time to sell and troughs vice versa, for the purposes of longer-term investing.
>“The immediate conditions in our economy today are not crash-like, but the excessively priced assets, those with little or no value, and those that have been hyped, are no longer able to be supported by fabricated demand. That is why big tech is down, that is why crypto has been crushed, but that does not constitute a market crash,” he said.
>Kee’s proprietary Evitar Corte Model, designed to flag market crash conditions, isn’t suggesting an imminent meltdown environment right now. But he says the repricing of risk he flagged in his Dec. 21, 2021 Global Liquidity Report has happened. That report also outlined higher volatility associated with low-liquidity environments, also seen this year though it’s “not a market crash, at least not yet.”
>“I expect this to spread eventually, but thus far the economic data doesn’t support a need for concern. I will be watching the FOMC and economic data for signs that this will spread. I do expect deflation to exist in retail,” he said.



File: 1668182204047.jpg (88.03 KB, 1080x876, 20221111_095545.jpg)

I decided to look at the picture in the OP, just to see how the collapse has been going.
The OP picture is the red arrow. Fucking lol.


Why are you here?



File: 1668182712580.png (99.67 KB, 375x375, dfg1.png)


I swear to that "GDP" was solely created to trick people into "trickle down economics". All this is is money goes up on investment and the economists say that because the number is going up this magically means that the wealth is "trickling down" but this form of economics has already been proven as absolute bullshit from the "supply side" economics of Bush to way back then with Reaganomics. Like if even liberals like Bill Maher call out how bullshit this form of mythical magical economics is why the fuck so we still use this as a marker for a "good economy"? The best marker for wealth we have right now and in capitalist "free market" societies is the fuckin PPP but if we used that then that would fuckin force corporations to accept higher taxes and more equitable redistribution of incomes. I don't fuckin get why these economists are so God damn antiquated.



> I don't fuckin get why these economists are so God damn antiquated.
I don't know myself, but I know the first thing that comes to my mind on this is that saying. "If it ain't broken, don't fix it." Obviously the system is fucked, but it was designed that way.




How did the US kill itself? I want to believe but need elaboration. As far as I can tell American imperialism has only spread since the soviet dissolution. Obviously this will collapse eventually due to the falling rate of profit but it seemingly hasn’t yet. I was hoping Ukraine would be crushed for example, instead we have a protracted slog fest back and forth where neither side makes significant headway.


Inflation Tends to Linger. Could It Last a Decade This Time?
>Winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing, according to the sports cliché. But now, just beating expectations seems to be enough to declare victory.
>A company tops earnings estimates after management lowers its guidance; “Great quarter,” analysts cheer on the conference call. Your team is beaten by less than the point spread; you collect on your wager. Your political party loses fewer seats than predicted in congressional midterms, but likely surrenders control of at least one chamber; it’s a win, crow the party’s leaders.
>And if inflation runs a bit cooler than economists’ forecasts, but still at a multiple of what the Federal Reserve deems acceptable, markets go into a bullish frenzy. Bonds and stocks rally massively, as investors conclude that the Fed could be close to ending its aggressive interest-rate increases because inflation is subsiding quickly from its recent four-decade high
>But analyses of current price pressures and the history of inflation cycles suggest otherwise.
>News this past week that the consumer price index for October climbed less than economists had forecast spurred a huge rally. Overall prices at the retail level increased 0.4% last month, while “core inflation,” which excludes food and energy costs, rose 0.3%. Both increases were 0.2 of a percentage point less than forecast. Compared with its level a year earlier, total CPI was up 7.8%, short of the 7.9% forecast and September’s 8.2%. Core CPI was up 6.3% in October, year over year. That was shy of the 6.5% consensus estimate and September’s 6.6%.
>There has been some progress in slowing the jump in prices of goods, write Mizuho economists Alex Pelle and Steven Ricchiuto in a research report. While supply-chain problems and sharply higher commodities tabs, especially for energy, have lifted global inflation, they argue that the inflation problem in the U.S. is a result of excess demand, not just supply. The Fed still has a lot of work to do to rein in consumer spending, the pair conclude.
>The markets reacted to the CPI data by significantly reducing their expectations of future increases in the central bank’s federal-funds target rates.
>On Thursday, following the release of the CPI report, the fed-funds futures market priced in an 85% probability that the key policy rate will rise by 50 basis points—a half-percentage point—at the December Federal Open Market Committee meeting, according to the CME FedWatch tool.
>A week earlier, the futures reckoned that it was a coin flip between 50 basis points or 75—the number by which the central bank had boosted rates at the past four FOMC meetings.
>The new, lower expectation for a fed-funds target range of 4.25%-4.50% next month squares with the median year-end estimate in the Fed panel’s most recent Summary of Economic Projections, released in September.
>The Fed and the markets alike anticipate inflation pressures abating significantly in 2023. However, history is not on their side, according to a paper from Rob Arnott, Research Affiliates founder and chairman, and Omid Shakernia, a partner at the firm who heads its multi-asset strategies.
>They find that when year-over-year inflation rises above 8%, as has happened with the CPI this year, it doesn’t recede quickly but tends to accelerate 70% of the time, based on data from 14 advanced economies dating back to January 1970. That doesn’t mean inflation necessarily will hit new highs in coming months. But, given the previous consensus that price pressures would be transitory, they write, “we dismiss that possibility at our peril.”
>The real problem is that when inflation crosses the 8% threshold, it becomes more intransigent and requires more restrictive monetary policy for a longer period, Arnott and Shakernia contend. Given that U.S. inflation has run above 6% for the past year and over 8% for the seven months through September (before dipping to 7.8% in October), history indicates that the median time it will take before inflation eases below 3% is 10 years. That’s not a typo.
>The exuberance with which stocks and bonds greeted the latest CPI reading indicates that they’re dismissing history. The Fed evidently is, too.


If stagflation lasts a decade than the 2030s is the uber depression and the 2040s the end of porky.


File: 1668185937262.jpg (Spoiler Image, 559.08 KB, 1600x900, cover4.jpg)

>If stagflation lasts a decade than the 2030s is the uber depression and the 2040s the end of porky.


So, wait, crypto is actually fucked? Kek


Sell Intel Stock, Analyst Says. The Chip Maker’s Market Share Losses Are the Concern.
>An analyst at J.P. Morgan says sell Intel stock, citing concerns about the company’s loss of market share amid ongoing competition and softening PC demand.
>Following a period of restriction, J.P Morgan analyst Harlan Sur resumed coverage of Intel (ticker: INTC) with an Underweight rating and cut his 12-month price target to $32. The rating is down from his previous Overweight rating and $64 price target prior to restriction. Sur is concerned that other companies have performed better in this current macroeconomic environment, and Intel will struggle to regain its footing in the coming months.
>“After several years of server CPU [central processing unit] share loss to Advanced Micro Devices and continued product execution missteps, we believe it will be several years before Intel is able to reverse the tide to reclaim technology leadership in hopes of regaining market share,” Sur wrote in a research note.
>Sur said that as of the second quarter of this year, Intel’s revenue share of the server CPU market was about 77%, losing 1,000 basis points of share year over year, and 1,700 basis points over the last two years. On the opposite end, Sur expects AMD (AMD) to continue to gain share moving forward.

"We believe Intel will be an underperformer relative to the group over the next 12 to18 months," says J.P Morgan analyst Harlan Sur. DREAMSTIME
An analyst at J.P. Morgan says sell Intel stock, citing concerns about the company’s loss of market share amid ongoing competition and softening PC demand.
>Following a period of restriction, J.P Morgan analyst Harlan Sur resumed coverage of Intel (ticker: INTC) with an Underweight rating and cut his 12-month price target to $32. The rating is down from his previous Overweight rating and $64 price target prior to restriction. Sur is concerned that other companies have performed better in this current macroeconomic environment, and Intel will struggle to regain its footing in the coming months.
>“After several years of server CPU [central processing unit] share loss to Advanced Micro Devices and continued product execution missteps, we believe it will be several years before Intel is able to reverse the tide to reclaim technology leadership in hopes of regaining market share,” Sur wrote in a research note.
>Sur said that as of the second quarter of this year, Intel’s revenue share of the server CPU market was about 77%, losing 1,000 basis points of share year over year, and 1,700 basis points over the last two years. On the opposite end, Sur expects AMD (AMD) to continue to gain share moving forward.
>Overall PC demand weakness isn’t helping Intel either, Sur added. Multiple tech companies have cited demand weakness for personal computers, including AMD and Microsoft (MSFT) in their latest earnings reports.
>“The PC/server compute market is anticipated to be weak over the next 12 months with PC units down 14%/5% in 2022/2023,” Sur said, citing J.P. Morgan research. He added that this will be a further pressure on Intel’s financials and continue to be an overhang on the stock as the market continues to be concerned over the sustainability of dividend payments.
>Intel declined to comment on individual analyst opinions, but referred Barron’s to recent statements made by management during the company’s latest earnings release.
>“Despite the worsening economic conditions, we delivered solid results and made significant progress with our product and process execution during the quarter,” Pat Gelsinger, Intel CEO, said in the company’s third-quarter earnings report. “To position ourselves for this business cycle, we are aggressively addressing costs and driving efficiencies across the business to accelerate our IDM 2.0 flywheel for the digital future.”
>Intel has underperformed the broader markets this year, which also discourages Sur. Coming into Friday trading, the stock has fallen 43% in 2022 while the S&P 500 has declined 17%. Shares of Intel were down 0.4% Friday to $29.64.
>“Given the market has time to gain confidence on Intel’s ability to execute in its core compute and diversification initiatives, we believe Intel will be an underperformer relative to the group over the next 12 to18 months,” Sur said.


I guess so, not that I had much faith in it to begin with
‘A lot of people have compared this to Lehman. I would compare it to Enron’: Larry Summers comments on FTX bankruptcy


Anyone been following the Bang energy drama? The CEO might genuinely be an idiot with a personality disprder


Would you be willing to tell us/me anon? I personally don't know what you're referring to


/biz/ is on fire today.



File: 1668190840487.jpg (61.59 KB, 500x500, Jack-Owoc.jpg)

The CEO of Bang claimed that Bang had "super creatine" which doesn't exist and Bang doesn't even have regular creatine in it's recipe. Monster sued now they're filing Chapter 11. This is how he chooses to dress.


the more the stock market goes up the harder leftards post pessimistic stories 😂😂😂


What the hell? Thanks anon, dude seems nutty indeed


My personal theory is that the US and the EU would've collapsed without neoliberalism because all the Keynesian economic shit was lagging behind the power of the soviets, however they made a fustian bargain that caused the degregation of their society and pilfered all of their government programs to feed various independent businesses. Basically they shed their life force to destroy the USSR by pumping out an endless deluge of worthless crap that caused their GDP to spike and create a feint that would cause the USSR's citizens to be envious of the west and to cause the USSR's economy to collapse from all the money spent on their own worthless military programs.
Now what is left for porky's to cannibalize? Social Security? Not even the most reactionary of boomers would want that cut.


>Now what is left for porky's to cannibalize? Social Security? Not even the most reactionary of boomers would want that cut.
I don't disagree but I'm curious on your thoughts about >>1263210
<Plan for the worst-case scenario of lower expected Social Security payments by finding income elsewhere


I agree with you abstractly. That read on neoliberalism makes sense. The part I'd contend if it's implied–and it may not be, you may be speaking abstractly aswell; is that I don't think the west is "intelligent" enough to have implemented neoliberalism as premeditated deliberate policy specifically aimed at the USSR.
Rather, I think neoliberalism was a reaction to the 70s profitability crises, and would have happened even if the USSR hadn't existed at all.
That said, your read is absolutely correct in terms of practical effect. The west did kill itself through neoliberalism internally and the USSR was affected by the rise of mass consumerism.
It's also possible I'm wrong and it was both, but I do sincerely believe that the profitability crises was a driving factor in neoliberalism's rise in the west.
I'll add to what this anon is saying. I think it's possible that neoliberalism turns into outright fascism before the revolution in some countries. Which would involve a failed attempt at even more privatizations alongside overt slave labor through the use of private and state slave labor camps. America specifically already has infrastructure for this and its prison system already employs slave labor.
Which is why it's so important we actually organize because pure accelerationism and pure negation in absence of organization only makes it easier for fascists to take advantage of neoliberal collapse.
Should the fascists win initially, their attempt at returning to a slave economy won't work because the contradictions present in the current mode of production would still be present, the gears of history do not run in reverse. Even so, I personally don't want to live through the decades it would likely take for that "experiment" to fail.


>Should the fascists win initially, their attempt at returning to a slave economy won't work
They might overcome the tendency for the rate of profit to fall by carrying out mass nationalizations however, where there would be pretty much no competition. I don't think socialism is an inevitability in general; it's something to be worked for and achieved only if the right conditions are exploited.


First I thought it's not ushanka but tinfoil. Was funnier


What does /crisis/ think about this? >>1263366


Wow thanks for linking the most annoying site ever. How can they block the copy paste function from working? I feel violated. Anyways dragging still works fags.

>By individual brand within Monster's portfolio, sales of Reign increased 11.8% sales of Monster increased by 11.4% over the same period, NOS was up 13%, and Full Throttle increased by 7.1% for the 4-week period through October 2022.

Lol they have 4 different energy drinks?


File: 1668215629398.png (530.12 KB, 1242x682, ClipboardImage.png)

The Eli Lilly gag also took some other pharma companies with it.


>btw offshoring gave chinese and indians slighltly better jobs bc otherwise they would not chose that and go back to rice farming and dying at 60 and having even less opportunity in life
this is actually kind of tru tho, neoliberlism unleashed capital on the third world in a new way, which was direly needed. I mean revolution would have done just as well. But this certainly is a change from the old form of exploitation, which involved intentionally stunting foreign production to preserve local monopolies. When the whole world is the US's backyard, there's no need for that


In Marxist terms this is unleashing the forces of production.


sure but specifically capital, since colonization worked to hamper development of national capitals in colonized countries, and so capital deciding to divest itself from the too powerful first world proletariat (which just so no one misinterprets, this necessitated projection of military power all over the world, destruction of whole economies, and dictatorial rule to implement) and moved to develop previously undeveloped opportunities world-wide

So yea, but i did mean specifically capital, since the proletariat is also a force of production but was very much still shackled, in most cases even worse off than before


Are people really that confident the shitpost was the actual reason?


>$8 and a couple of minutes
>take trillions out of companies
Now that's what i call investment!


PPPpill me, why is that better than CPI or GDPPC?


File: 1668233453492-0.png (786.62 KB, 1216x1108, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1668233453492-1.png (168.67 KB, 640x697, ClipboardImage.png)

Porkies better kneel.


This is actually incredible, shareholders must be malding




Lmao, Musk did a good thing, afterall


Idk what a GDPPC or a CPI is. I just know that PPP shows purchasing power and GDP only shows you how much money is in circulation.


File: 1668351520619-0.png (1010.58 KB, 1079x1083, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1668351520619-1.jpg (336.38 KB, 1200x1850, 1668345118249924.jpg)

File: 1668351520619-2.png (180.01 KB, 400x411, ClipboardImage.png)

> We have information that the tens of billions of dollars going to Ukraine were actually laundered back to the US to corrupt Democrats and elites using FTX cryptocurrency. Now the money is gone and FTX is bankrupt. Earlier today we reported that the FTX cryptocurrency appeared to be used in a ponzi scheme involving the Democrats and Ukraine. The word is now out. The Democrats sent tens of billions to Ukraine and then laundered this money back to Democrat pockets and funds in the US. Now the company is bankrupt and the funds are nowhere to be found.
> March 2022, Zelensky presented and promoted investment/donations via crypto exchange FTX. Hundreds of millions meant for struggling Ukrainians ended in the exchange which is now FULLY collapsed with a debt of 50 billion euros and zero equity. Have you had enough of the clown yet?
The FTX crypto slush fund run by now-disgraced Sam Bankman-Fried (and his MIT college buddies) laundered money for Ukraine into nearly $40 million worth of campaign donations for Democrats in the 2022 mid-term elections.
> Over the last year, Joe Biden and the Democrats have pushed through well over $50 billion in funding for Ukraine, using US taxpayer money. Internationally, over $100 billion has been donated to Ukraine, according to Devex.com which has compiled worldwide donations and grants to the Ukrainian cause.
> FTX simultaneously processed donations to Ukraine by using its crypto infrastructure. As CoinDesk.com reported in May of this year, “Ukraine Partners With FTX, Everstake to Launch New Crypto Donation Website.”
> In other words, the corrupt Ukraine regime partnered with a corrupt crypto slush fund to take dollars from the corrupt US government and funnel them into the hands of corrupt Democrat candidates to win rigged mid-term elections.
> According to data published by OpenSecrets.org, Sam Bankman-Fried donated nearly $40 million to political candidates in the 2022 mid-term elections. Only $235,200 went to Republicans, with the rest going to Democrats. FTX, in other words, was a Democrat slush fund money laundering operation that helped Democrats win mid-term elections (on top of their obvious cheating, ballot stuffing and ballot harvesting operations).
> It begs the obvious question: Which Democrats took this dirty money from FTX, which had stolen the money from its own customers? We know that Fetterman received substantial financial support from FTX, for example.
< “Aid for Ukraine,” which has the backing of crypto exchange FTX, staking platform Everstake and Ukraine’s Kuna exchange, will route donated crypto to the National Bank of Ukraine, Everstake’s Head of Growth Vlad Likhuta told CoinDesk. Ukraine’s crypto-savvy Ministry of Digital Transformation is also involved.
< The country’s collective efforts have already raised some $48 million in bitcoin (BTC), DOT, ether (ETH), SOL, tether (USDT) and other cryptocurrencies, according to the website. Other estimates place the amount closer to $100 million, but totals vary with market swings and exactly which websites are included.
> Here’s the propaganda pushed by the Ukraine regime to help narrate the cover story for all this:
< The central bank is using donations to support “humanitarian aid programs” as well as Ukraine’s armed forces, according to the website. “The people will continue their fight for freedom, but they need more ammunition and necessities,” the website read.


File: 1668352367629-0.png (691.16 KB, 647x1280, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1668352367629-1.png (119.31 KB, 919x634, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1668352367629-2.png (482.56 KB, 1114x527, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1668352367629-3.png (3.28 MB, 1972x2048, ClipboardImage.png)

> The day AFTER the FTX scam starts operating in Ukraine, Zelensky (aka US State Dept) legalized crypto.
Massive “self-hack” has drained another nearly $1 billion from FTX accounts
> Late last night, the FTX app was auto-updated and transformed into a Trojan Horse app that logged into user accounts and stole their money. We covered this in a previous story on NewsTarget.com. So far today, we know that around $1 billion in remaining funds has been looted from FTX. This is widely believed to be a “self-hack” of FTX by its founders or insiders who are attempting to take the money and run, Mt. Gox style.
> Documents uncovered last week by CoinDesk showed that Alameda Research – a trading and investment juggernaut founded by SBF – had its finances deeply intertwined with those of FTX.
> FTX was supposed to be a separate company from Alameda, but Alameda apparently held a disproportionate amount of its balance sheet in FTX’s exchange token, FTT. That token was illiquid, with Alameda and FTX owning a vast majority of all of the tokens in circulation. Selling them would have meant crashing the price of FTT, meaning their value on Alameda’s balance sheet was likely overstated.
> When documents showed that Alameda had been borrowing millions of dollars against FTT, rumors spread across Twitter that FTX was loaning out user funds to Alameda and using its own illiquid FTT token as collateral – essentially printing money so it could lend user funds to itself.


File: 1668352955671-0.png (1.39 MB, 1170x2048, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1668352955671-1.png (4.79 KB, 279x85, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1668352955671-2.png (10.62 KB, 248x83, ClipboardImage.png)

> Many are former co-workers from quantitative trading firm Jane Street, others he met at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, his alma mater. All 10 are, or used to be, paired up in romantic relationships with each other. That includes Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison, whose firm played a central role in the company's collapse – and who, at times, has dated Bankman-Fried, according to people familiar with the matter.
> “The whole operation was run by a gang of kids in the Bahamas,” a person familiar with the matter told CoinDesk on the condition of anonymity.


File: 1668355344732.png (457.19 KB, 550x1024, ClipboardImage.png)




Idpol is one hell of a drug.


What's the materialist explanation for black anti-semitism?


It's largely a new york thing. I believe that there is quite a few raising black porkies who are trying to ingrain themselves in the reactionary american public sphere by being "Based" on some issues and as such they can gain the protected minority status that Gusanos in Florida have.


Use the "search for" function then copy-paste from the search bar


Bourgeoisie competing against each other and when some fails they look from other races to blame. Marcus Garvey and his ilk were the most notable originators.
> Garvey was furious with the verdict, shouting abuse in the courtroom and calling both the judge and district attorney "damned dirty Jews".[267] Imprisoned in The Tombs jail while awaiting sentencing, he continued to blame a Jewish cabal for the verdict; in contrast, prior to this he had never expressed anti-semitic sentiment and was supportive of Zionism.[268]


>Idk what a GDPPC or a CPI
GDP per capita
Consumer Price Index


Morning-evening /crisis/


>tfw stock market COLLAPSED to 4k
truly the recession this thread has been harping about for years



ACK a sliver below 4k, this really is the apocalypse


It's not stable meaning the fed is working overtime to keep this speculation economy from crashing


God when will you losers realize that anything that doesn't instantly destroy 100% of the market and fed is just a commie coping mechanism for Marx's dumb rate of profit prediction. Stop celebrating, you're embarrassing yourselves.


I have no idea how this shit works but can we just short twitter stock?


Sadly it's been delisted. I would want to find a good proxy for twitter stock though, I want to see how it's doing.


Third union rejects deal with nation’s freight railroads
No strike is imminent, but deadline looms next month
>OMAHA, Neb. — A third railroad union has rejected its agreement with the nation’s freight railroads, increasing the chances that Congress may be called upon to settle the dispute and block a strike.
>The small International Brotherhood of Boilermakers union on Monday voted down the contract even though it includes the biggest raises workers have seen in more than four decades. The union represents just a few hundred of the roughly 115,000 rail workers involved in the contract dispute with Union Pacific UNP, -0.25%, Norfolk Southern NSC, +0.31%, Berkshire Hathaway’s BRK.B, -0.26% BNSF, Canadian Pacific’s CP, -0.86% Kansas City Southern , CSX CSX, -0.44% and other railroads.
>All 12 rail unions must approve their deals to prevent a strike, although no strike is imminent because all the unions have agreed to keep negotiating even if their members vote no, until a deadline early next month.
>Seven other unions have ratified the five-year deals that include 24% raises and $5,000 in bonuses. The focus now is on the three unions that have voted down their agreements and the remaining two that haven’t finished voting.
>Workers’ quality-of-life concerns about demanding schedules and the lack of paid sick time in the industry have threatened to derail the agreements even with the sizeable raises railroads are offering.
>Contract talks with the two unions that rejected their deals last month remain deadlocked over the issue of paid sick time. So it is looking increasingly likely that Congress will have to step in to settle this dispute
>“If we can’t improve the agreement by getting some sort of sick leave, I think Congress is going to have to intervene because I think the railroads are just too stubborn to give us what we want unless we are able to strike,” Tony Cardwell, president of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division union, said Monday.
>The railroads have said they want these contracts to closely follow the recommendations made this summer by a special board of arbitrators that President Joe Biden appointed. Offering sick leave on top of the raises and bonuses that are already in the deal would require the railroads to spend more.
>Congress is expected to block a rail strike and impose contract terms on both sides if they can’t come to an agreement before next month’s deadline. That’s because the stakes are so high for the economy with so many businesses relying on railroads to deliver their raw materials and finished products.
>When they’re not at the negotiating table, the railroads and unions will be lobbying Congress over the next few weeks about what should be included if lawmakers do decide to impose contract terms on the freight
>If the two biggest unions that represent conductors and engineers also reject their deals when they release the results of their votes next Monday, that would put additional pressure on the railroads. But Cardwell said he doesn’t think even that would be enough to get the railroads to budge on sick time.
>The railroads declined to comment Monday on the status of the talks with the BMWED and Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen unions, but they have been adamant about not offering paid sick time. They say they believe the unions agreed to forego paid sick time over the years in favor of higher wages and strong short-term disability benefits.
>One reason the unions object to the railroads’ refusal to offer sick time is because federal contractors are required by an executive order to give that to their employees. The railroads insisted they were federal contractors last year when they required employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine but now they say the sick time requirement doesn’t apply to them.
>Hundreds of business groups have written letters to Biden and members of Congress urging them to be prepared to intervene in the contract dispute, if necessary. Labor Secretary Marty Walsh has said he is in daily contact with the railroads and unions urging them to work out a deal.


File: 1668503018455.png (1.91 MB, 1242x2242, ClipboardImage.png)

Would you join her polycule leftypol?


Another day of the fed trying to keep from sinking and drowning


jesus christ the absolute phenotype on this bitch, she looks like a /pol/ meme




No thanks.


>gets perma-laid from crypto
>reads theory
hmm tempting




the pic where he's getting his ass (heh) ate by that mcdolands worker is the hottest one I have seen


Closing numbers for the day


Who tf is junko and why are you losers obsessed with her?


Uh, /pol/ is not the "American public", no matter what they tell you.


Long-standing namefag that revealed herself to be a Zionist, and got banned for it. And she's jewish, I think.


I like the one of the donkey and elephant sharing a voter on the podium


This is the chart that rattled U.S. financial markets on Thursday
>One chart is all it took to move financial markets on Thursday.
>That chart was presented by St. Louis Fed President James Bullard as part of a presentation in Louisville, Ky., and it shows where he sees “the sufficiently restrictive zone” for the central bank’s main policy rate target. Bullard put the zone somewhere between 5% to 7%, up from the current fed-funds rate range of between 3.75% to 4%. That was enough to cause investors to sell off stocks and bonds in tandem, push the dollar higher, and rewire expectations around how high interest rates could go.
>Bullard’s zone was based on estimated policy levels recommended by Taylor-type rules, one with generous assumptions and the other with less-generous assumptions. The “Taylor rule” is a widely accepted equation, or what former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke described as “a rule of thumb,” developed by economist John Taylor of Stanford University for where the central bank’s policy rate ought to be relative to the state of the economy.
>Right now, the economy’s current state includes an annual headline inflation rate from the consumer-price index that’s at 7.7% as of October, falling below 8% for the first time in eight months. Though policy makers favor other inflation indicators, the annual headline CPI rate matters because it can impact household expectations.
>Variations of the Taylor rule can produce different results depending on the numbers being used, and the upper range of Bullard’s zone is much higher than what traders and investors currently envision. As of Thursday, fed-funds futures traders, for example, were nudging up their expectations for a 5%-plus fed-funds rate next year, but not yet pricing in a significant chance of a 6% policy rate.
>A team at Goldman Sachs Group GS, -0.67% revised its 2023 expectations slightly upward in a new forecast this week, saying that the highest level at which the Fed will likely raise rates next year is between 5% and 5.25%. On Thursday, though, Bullard described 5% to 5.25% as the minimum level for the fed-funds rate.
>After Bullard’s presentation on Thursday, U.S. stocks DJIA, -0.02% SPX, -0.31% ended the New York session with a second straight session of losses. The ICE U.S. Dollar Index DXY, -0.07% advanced 0.3%. And Treasury yields jumped — pushing the policy-sensitive 2-year rate TMUBMUSD02Y, 4.454% up to 4.45% and the benchmark 10-year rate TMUBMUSD10Y, 3.766% to 3.77%.
>The possibility of a 6% fed-funds rate has existed since April, but is one that hadn’t been accepted broadly by financial markets. October’s softer-than-expected readings on the CPI and producer prices gave investors reasons to hope that the Fed might ease off aggressive rate hikes, though money managers and economists said financial markets were underestimating the risk that inflation would fail to fall toward 2% fast enough.
>Bullard is a voting member of the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee this year, but falls off the voting roster in 2023.
Dow drops 300 points as U.S. stocks open down after Bullard's remarks
>U.S. stocks opened lower Thursday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average falling around 300 points, as investors weighed remarks from Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis President James Bullard and a report showing that weekly jobless claims fell slightly. The Dow DJIA, -0.02% was down 0.9% soon after the opening bell, while the S&P 500 SPX, -0.31% fell 1.2% and the Nasdaq Composite COMP, -0.35% dropped 1.6%, according to FactSet data, at last check. The Department of Labor reported Thursday that initial unemployment claims dipped to 222,000 in the week ending November 12. That’s below the 225,000 of new claims forecast by economists polled by the Wall Street Journal. Bullard said in a speech Thursday that the Fed's benchmark interest rate will need to be increased further to bring down inflation, with a chart accompanying his remarks suggesting that the rate could rise to somewhere around a 5%-7% range.


People knew she was a zionist for months or years, it's just eventually enough people called out the mods double standards and so she got banned


File: 1668973781460.png (579.92 KB, 1079x1281, proofs.png)

Bumping the thread in case we see another crypto collapse soon.

Also in GME related news: still stuck in the ~$25 channel. It's boring as all hell. Wish it'd either crash or moon. CNBC seems to be removing videos related to it (including one where a Billionaire porky says it'll put the whole financial system at risk) so it seems to me that they're prepping for some kind of happening. All so they can claim "No one could have foreseen this."


The worst rout on the swedish market since the 1990
The swedish housing market price has gone down 18% since the war started
Bigger than when the 2008 crisis
This can perfectly deep Sweden into a financial crisis, from which it can, and will, infect the rest of Europe.


FOR THE LOVE OF GOD stop talking about your GME bags, nobody cares, im sorry for your loss but it is literally a nothingburger


>im sorry for your loss
How's it a loss when I've only got unrealized gains?


KEK we hit 4k today, so happy made so much money 😀😀😀😀😀 took profit 😀 will celebrate with a pinot noir tonite….. a toast to capitalism!


How would you react to the Fed Reserve board dropping dead right now?


What's this about FTX?



Oil price sinks as talks continue over Russia price-cap plan
>Oil futures traded sharply lower Wednesday as investors kept tabs on Group of Seven talks on a price cap for Russian oil.
>The U.S. and its allies could agree on a price cap for the warring nation’s crude, The Wall Street Journal reported, with officials discussing a level around $60 a barrel. The cap still could be set as high as $70, according to the report.
>Natural-gas prices, meanwhile, gained on predictions for increased demand that’s likely to come with December’s colder weather.
Market drivers
>The Journal said U.S. officials want to set the cap high enough to provide Russia incentive to keep selling crude on to the global market, with prewar prices of around $65 a barrel for Russian crude seen as a potential benchmark. Russian oil has traded at around a $26 a barrel discount to Brent in recent days, the report said, citing Refinitiv data.
>Bloomberg reports that the average price of Urals oil from Oct. 15 to Nov. 14 was $71.10 a barrel, with global oil prices sliding significantly since then.
>“The higher the price cap, the easier it will be for buyers in India and China to access shipping, insurance and other services from Group of Seven nations,” said analysts at Mizuho in a daily report, stressing that is the intent of the G-7 intervention.
>Because production costs are estimated at around $20 per barrel, the cap would still make it profitable for Russia to sell its oil and in this way prevent a supply shortage on the global market. A senior U.S. Treasury official said on Tuesday that the price cap will probably be adjusted a few times a year, Reuters reported.
>Oil remains rangebound “between $78 and $93 (on a closing basis) with Russia’s response to the European Union and G-7 policies a bullish wild card to watch in early December,” said analysts at Sevens Report Research, in a Wednesday note.
>“At this time, Russia has said they will not sell oil to any nation cooperating with the price cap and the impact of that on global markets is unclear,” they added.


File: 1669235959879.jpg (457.97 KB, 3876x2100, 3M_Yields.jpg)

In related news, 10Y - 3M yields just passed the lows of '07, allegedly this is the most accurate indicator that there's a recession.

Happy Thanksgiving!


File: 1669238526592.jpg (164.13 KB, 1280x720, maxresdefault-2.jpg)

How big and just how soon?


>How big and just how soon?

No idea when. Wall Street is great at kicking the can. I think Michael Burry shorted the Housing Market for 2 years or so before it actually blew up, because the signs were always there.
Credit Suisse meanwhile is projecting something like a $1.3bn loss this quarter. Plus you've got a possible rail strike in the U.S.. And winter is going to be brutal on Europe now that Russia shut off the gas.

If I had to spitball a projection, we could be anywhere from 3 weeks to 3 months away. Thing is these things are usually quiet until they're suddenly loud. Like when Bear Stearns blew up


>The 10 Year-3 Month Treasury Yield Spread is the difference between the 10 year treasury rate and the 3 month treasury rate. This spread is widely used as a gauge to study the yield curve. A 10 year-3 month treasury spread that approaches 0 signifies a "flattening" yield curve. Furthermore, a negative 10 year-3 month spread has historically been viewed as a precursor or predictor of a recessionary period. The New York Fed uses the rate in a model to predict recessions 2 to 6 quarters ahead.
So, we've got 6-18 months from now? Somewhere between May 2023 to May 2024?


>If I had to spitball a projection, we could be anywhere from 3 weeks to 3 months away. Thing is these things are usually quiet until they're suddenly loud. Like when Bear Stearns blew up
Just like lighting and thunder, one or a thousand bolts of lightning is a spectacle and a warning, only taken seriously when the spectators are rocked by thunder. Clearly pieces keep falling into place but what can be done? Is it better to sit and wait or to push the teetering balance off it's perch?


Glad to see it's that time of year again when the crash seems close. Hope it sticks this time.


German Democratic People's Party Congress
Center for Political Innovation








File: 1669277288851.png (138.05 KB, 1161x646, BUY THE DIP RETARDS.png)

Who else
Anyways I exited my position already since I know nothing about the company fundamentals besides it suddenly becoming undervalued due to twitter shitposters. Best of luck to y'all if you're still holding.


Fuckkk I thought about buying but I got busy and forgot about it.


so are we shorting Hong Kong Dollar it's pinned to us dollar but people think it will fall because of the aggressiveness of the feds rate hikes.


'F.U.D.' is a hyperstitious attack against the highest order of usurious and financial capital.
As Marx himself would point out, Financial and usurious capital - disconnected by an order of effect from actual commodity production and resource extraction is fuelled by 'speculation' [we can take this as a double-meaning, both speculation in the economists terms, and literal mental speculation about future conditions] - This, as Marx also pointed out, would lead to the situation where financial markets would report 'all-time highs' even as factories shuttered and actual economic output in terms of commodity production slowed [which with some exceptions is now the norm in the west today.]

'F.U.D.' assaults the stock-market by taking advantage of the aforementioned double-meaning of 'speculation', the 'speculation' of the humans typing away at their keyboards and using their binance apps about the future state of the economy.
The logic is simple, In an economy built upon human speculation, When humans believe the economy can 'only get better' or is in a 'long boom' - The economy [at least the F.I.Re sector] will find itself in a 'long-boom' i.e 'investor confidence' - Their belief in the economy being in the process of a 'long boom', despite not initially being grounded in a provable reality, created it in real time.

F.U.D. obviously works in the opposite fashion, F.U.D. leads to 'low investor confidence', fears of imminent stock-tanking or recession, inevitably leading to mass stock/share-self offs and the market tank, which very well could have initially be an unfounded fear, becoming an actualised reality.
Take FTX as a current example. Can we be certain that without CZ's meddling, the public announcement that he was selling [certainly with the knowledge it would destroy said tokens value] binances reserves of FTX's token, without CZ's F.U.D. being uploaded into the public sphere, that the effective 'digital bank-run' we saw, which was the definitive nail in the coffin, would have actually occurred? we will obviously never know, but it's interesting to think about.


Feels like a lot of words to say "fear, uncertainity and doubt lower investor confidence. I think CZ intentionally stirred it to cause a run on FTX.".


I don’t give a fuck about stocks
When are the commodity bubbles gonna pop


did any of you read into the links between FTX and "Effective Altruism"? Because that seems like an underappreciated, yet hilarious undercurrent to this whole fuckup.

Basically: Effective Altruists don't think you should push for political change if you want to make the world better, nor should you go for a conventional "be a good person" kind of route where you can't fix the world, but you can choose not to work for Lockheed Martin. No, they think you should get really rich and then give money to charity, even if that means doing bad things like working for an arms company. then after you funnel in the money, the charity'll solve the problems. Even funnier still, they tend to do this in ass-backwards west-coast-dickhead kinds of ways where giving money to mitigating the risk an AI kills us all for not making it sooner, or freezing the dead so we can reanimate them, or (most comically of all) promoting Effective Alturism itself, all tend to trump more banal concerns like poverty or disease or whatever.

You can see Sam Bankman-Fried getting his dick sucked by them here: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/topics/sam-bankman-fried (he starts with some real concerns like animal welfare, but by the end he's giving money to promoting EA and ""Longtermism"") they don't seem to have scrubbed it yet on account of his comical megafraud, but word elsewhere (like from Slate Star Codex, another effective altruist simp) is that a lot of charities got their fingers burned as he went "what'd you do if you had loadsamone? great, go do it, i'll write a cheque", and now they're noticing the cheques aren't coming. Beautiful!


You can have the commoddity bubble pop once you finish your stock market crash first


this is just the delusion behind philanthropy and classical liberalism in general (“the invisible hand”)
it’s not that novel


The guys over at /r/EffectiveAltruism (I know it's Plebbit but that's what every Californian Bayoid uses) are in full cope mode right now and trying to dissociate SBF from EA as much as possible.


Weekly FED remittances to the US treasury plummeted into the red. Will try to explain more when I get off work.

So far people examining it are saying the FED is gonna be faced between either saving the financial system or the dollar.


File: 1669609015175.jpg (164.13 KB, 1280x720, maxresdefault-2.jpg)

I eagerly await your report anon, god speed


Okay here's the pic in question, I think the fellow who pointed it out goes by the username "Peruvian Bull" he's been writing some Due Diligence for the meme investor crowd called "The Dollar Endgame" and I think he's the one who brought to attention "The Dollar Milkshake Theory" some economists have been warning about.

Now to give the TL;DR of both those things I mentioned. Due to events caused in large part by complete negligence in actually regulating Capitalism/Wall Street, The Federal Reserve is faced with an impossible choice: Let the Financial System collapse, or The Dollar. Essentially the only viable solution the Fed has is to let inflation go wild, take on more debt, and then render that debt worthless via inflation.

Confusing, I know. I might not be doing it justice.

Anyways: Weekly Remittance to the Treasury. Wazzit mean? Essentially the Federal Reserve makes a "Profit" (Leftover Revenue after subtracting Operating Expenses) that it gives to the Treasury.

That big red drop there? According to Peruvian Bull, the implication is that the Treasury is completely underwater. Some people are corroborating that by saying they're noticing similar trends in the Canadian Treasury. According to Bull, the "True" interest expense that Capitalists and Politicians are trying to hide is 111% of Tax Receipts.

Now to explain that as best as I can: it seems to imply America might just end up defaulting on its National Debt. And hoooo boy it's gonna be a shitshow when that happens.

I think the Fed was just toying with a "Digital Dollar" recently too, yeah?

Even if Bull is completely wrong, it's still interesting to see Remittances drop. I don't think it can be said this is necessarily a good sign for the economy, even if it isn't a killing blow.

Link to some of the DD, it's "The Dollar Endgame"


I think this is the relevant part to what we're witnessing, too.



Source: the actual whitehouse https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2021/10/06/life-after-default/

>A default would fundamentally hinder the Federal government from serving the American people. Payments from the Federal government that families rely on to make ends meet would be endangered. The basic functions of the Federal government—including maintaining national defense, national parks, and countless others—would be at risk. The public health system, which has enabled this country to react to a global pandemic, would be unable to adequately function.

>Furthermore, a default would have serious and protracted financial and economic effects. Financial markets would lose faith in the United States, the dollar would weaken, and stocks would fall. The U.S. credit rating would almost certainly be downgraded, and interest rates would broadly rise for many consumer loans, making products like auto loans and mortgages more expensive for families who are subject to interest rate changes or taking out new loans. These and other consequences could trigger a recession and a credit market freeze that could hurt the ability of American companies to operate.

>In an accompanying blog post, we explain what the debt limit is. In this post, we go further, and lay out the risks that Americans and the U.S.—and global—economy will face in the days, months, and years after a default.

>The Federal government would be immediately impaired from carrying out its basic functions, including providing the financial assistance that tens of millions of Americans rely on.

>Everyone in America would feel the effects of a default. If the United States were to default, tens of millions—including families with children, retirees, and veterans—would quickly, even overnight in some cases, face the prospect of losing the regular Federal payments that help them to make ends meet.

<Note how they start, first of all, explaining how all social care would be inmediately cut off.
>In 2020, almost 50 million residents received retirement benefits through Social Security, and 6 million received survivors benefits. In 2015, around 12 million people relied on Social Security as their sole means of support.[1] As shown in Figure 1, the average retired Social Security recipient counts on receiving almost $1,600 per month. Among households receiving any Social Security benefits, those benefits make up more than half of household income on average.[2] And yet, if we default, these Americans may not receive their Social Security payments on time, or even at all.

>Health coverage during a pandemic would also be in doubt. Over 60 million people across America are on Medicare, 75 million are enrolled in Medicaid, and almost 7 million children receive coverage through the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). Net Medicare payments, alone, amount to about $1,100 per recipient. Although affordable health care is vital, particularly during a pandemic, millions could find themselves without coverage.

>A default threatens veterans’ programs as well, with over 9 million veterans relying on physical and mental care, in addition to other supports. For a single veteran with a 50 percent disability rating and no dependents, the average disability benefit is around $900 per month; veterans with families or with greater disability ratings receive more.

>If the Federal government ended up missing or delaying payments, millions would be unable to put food on the table or pay rent. Before the full weight of the Federal pandemic response had come to bear, the hardships experienced early on—exemplified by families going hungry and waiting in food lines—remind us of the raw misery that inadequate Federal support brings in the wake of an economic shock.

>Examples of other important forms of Federal assistance that would also be at risk are outlined in the table below. This is an underrepresentation, of course, as the Federal government is responsible for funding many programs on which Americans rely—from childcare, to cash assistance, to aid for small business owners.

>The Federal government’s ability to provide for the national defense, pandemic response, and day-to-day services would likely be severely hampered.

>There are many other functions of the Federal government that we often take for granted and that would be in peril after a default. For example, the Federal government keeps our country safe by paying the salaries of 1.4 million active duty military personnel and their families. The deployment of personnel, the maintenance of equipment, the procurement of supplies, and other support activities would risk being frozen after a default, hampering the defense of the country at a time when there are ample threats to national security. The same holds for expenses related to counter-terrorism and intelligence measures, which could leave America more vulnerable to potential threats.

>The Federal health response to COVID requires inspections and certification of medications that could halt without funding, including vaccine and therapeutic approvals through the FDA, just as the COVID vaccine for American children is going through the approval process. Other critical day-to-day services would also be under threat, including the operation of our national parks, mail delivery, consular services in other countries (which support American residents abroad), and air traffic control—which could potentially ground passenger and cargo planes.

>There are also services that, many Americans probably do not realize, depend on Federal support. For instance, in the event of a default, the National Weather Service might struggle to deliver important weather information to families, local news stations, and businesses. The ability to listen to and communicate via radio would be at risk, as the radio telecommunication system is organized by the Federal Communications Commission. Even the official time of the United States is maintained by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which is crucial to computing and travel, since GPS devices are reliant upon accurate official clocks.

>The effects of a default go far beyond the lack of financial assistance to those in need. Everyday services crucial to a functioning society—many of which seemingly run in the background of our lives—would be at risk. An inability to pay for these services would cause large disruptions for the entire country.

>Markets and consumers would be hurt by even the threat of a default, much less an actual default.

>Finally, a default—or even just the threat of one—would have a devastating impact on our economy. In the run-up to and aftermath of the 2011 debt ceiling crisis—where the country ultimately avoided a default—market risk measures rose persistently, and measures of consumer confidence and small business optimism weakened. Mortgage rates rose by between 0.7 and 0.8 percentage point for two months after that year’s debt ceiling crisis passed, and only declined slowly thereafter.[4] For a family taking out a $250,000 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, an extra 0.8 percentage point means more than $30,000 in additional interest payments over the life of the loan. Rates for auto loans, personal loans, and other consumer financial products also rose in the wake of the 2011 crisis,[5] and these increases often lasted for months. This all happened despite the fact that Congress acted to avoid default in time, before the U.S. Treasury exhausted its cash on hand and its other means of financing.

>While past experiences can help us put a floor on what to expect if the Federal government failed to meet its obligations, they likely underestimate the effects of what the United States would face. An actual default—even if resolved quickly—would very likely have even more pronounced effects and deeper financial scarring.

>The consequences of a default could accelerate rapidly if not resolved, potentially inducing a global financial crisis and a recession.

>If the United States does default, the consequences could escalate rapidly and profoundly. The timeframe of these impacts is unclear, since the United States has never defaulted; moreover, the effects of a default would not be confined to the United States. The global economy, which relies on a strong U.S. economy, would begin to slide into a financial crisis and likely, a recession. U.S. Treasury debt is the world’s benchmark safe asset, and its interest rates act as the basis for the pricing of countless financial products and transactions around the globe. The U.S. dollar is also the world’s premier reserve currency. A default would send shock waves through global financial markets and would likely cause credit markets worldwide to freeze up and stock markets to plunge. Employers around the world would likely have to begin laying off workers. The 2008 financial crisis had ripple effects throughout the global economy that ricocheted back to U.S. shores, causing firms to lay off workers and cut private investment.[6] A financial crisis driven by a default has the potential to be even worse, in addition to hitting a global economy not fully recovered from the pandemic.

>In the United States specifically, past simulations by the Federal Reserve[7] and the Peterson Foundation[8] that look at the possible month-long default in 2013 suggested that unemployment would increase and remain elevated for at least two to four years afterwards. Projections in a recent report released by Moody’s are even more dire, suggesting that under a prolonged 4-month default, real GDP would fall by 4 percent, unemployment would rise to almost 9 percent, and the U.S. economy would lose nearly 6 million jobs. For context, during the two years of the Great Recession, real GDP fell by 4.3 percent, unemployment rose to 10 percent, and the economy lost almost 9 million jobs.

>Compounding the damage of a default is the fact that the Federal government would be immobilized in responding to the very economic crisis a default would likely create. It would likely not be able to implement relief of the type that proved so vital to helping families during past economic crises, and more recently, during the coronavirus pandemic. Instead, the Federal government could only stand back, helpless to address the economic maelstrom.


>In short, the United States has never intentionally defaulted on its obligations for one reason above all others: the self-inflicted economic ruin of doing so would be catastrophic. Just the threat of a default has negative effects on the U.S. economy, and an actual default for any amount of time would inflict a devastating blow that would be felt by families, businesses, and the economy here and globally for decades to come. The debt ceiling is not and should not be used as a political football. The consequences are too great.

>A previous version of this blog post mentioned that maintenance of the power grid through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) would be under threat in the event of a default. While FERC does have a role in implementing reliability standards for the bulk power system, the Commission does not have a role in operating the grid itself.

Not my fault it's reddit spaced, it was already like this, which confirms that whoever wrote this was a redditor.



File: 1669627171950.png (256.67 KB, 618x848, Donovan.png)

All furries deserve Hell.


so GME hodlfags
has the squeeze been squozen
if it ever k k


File: 1669628608461.gif (1.08 MB, 320x240, brent.gif)

opinion discarded.


File: 1669629132152.gif (157.02 KB, 500x281, sadball.gif)

>whoever wrote this was a redditor
I was devastated when I discovered Karl Marx was a redditor.


The Squeeze has not yet been Squozed.

Memes aside, a short squeeze is a specific term beyond "Stock sees a sudden ramp up in price." Shorts are "squeezed" when they're forced to buy to cover their short position. If you need an analogy, it's the difference between asking someone for $20 and they give it to you, and grabbing them by the balls and saying "Give me money."

There's been zero evidence of shorts buying to cover their short position. The ramp up back in January of 2021 was stated to be because of the massive increase in buying volume. The short positions aren't closed because they're simply too large to close and survive.


Jesus fucking christ, if the US defaults it's legitimately gonna collapse the country. finally.


File: 1669665538102.png (319.04 KB, 1593x3433, Possible Happening.png)

Was going to post this in the Ukraine thread, but I felt this was more appropriate here.

Make of it what you will.


>if the US defaults it's legitimately gonna collapse the country.
its going to destroy the entire fucking world, dollar hegemony always had global annihilation as one of its tricky little caveats


Is there a way to read this without the insane line breaks every sentence? A tldr or a link could work


Yeah, that's a small detail. If this does come to pass this will be the greatest single moment in history for revolutionary possibilities. Global markets denominated in dollars will crash; stocks will become worthless; commodities will become untradeable. Demand will implode and unemployment will rise to levels not seen in a hundred years. Interesting times indeed.


Here's the original source if that helps


The world, actually. As >>1284341 says here.
Kind of interesting to see what happens with GME. We might get a brief "honeymoon" period where the stock squeezes and we have tons of wealth. I'd probably throw money at the CPUSA quickly in that case.

Either way, interesting times and all that. Should be crazy. I hope everyone makes what preparations they can. Stay safe. Maybe have a stockpile of food and water (and other things) when the time comes.


Would it be a good idea for each country to have its own currency then, so as to be able to carry out economic plans like this, as opposed to being part of a monetary union?


The US won't default dude. If stagflation didn't kill this nation, this won't either.


>the world
global capitalism actually, countries are free to switch to planned economies whenever they want, the us cant go to war with the entire world (actually they can, but it wont end too good for them)


they survived by spreading neoliberalism and turning up exploitation into overdrive, thats not an option anymore


I'm not the author of this post nor an economic expert if that's what you're thinking, just a messenger spreading the word.


I was wondering if anyone here knew. Here's another question: in the conversion from capitalism to socialism, should there be created an internal currency for planning if the country doesn't have its own currency? Say, if it uses either of the African Francs, or the Euro, or Dollar - if they can't make their own currency altogether they could create some internal accounting instrument for economic planning, right?


This Peruvian Bull fella says there are one QUADRILLION DOLLARS worth of derivatives based on a world economy worth 88 trillion. I'm literally aghast. I knew things were bad, but this is like the worst catastrophe capitalism has ever seen by such a wide margin that it boggles the mind and stupefies any attempt at thinking. This is beyond the world economy collapsing, it's on the level that the very idea of "capitalist economy" might just become impossible overnight – i.e. no way to trade anything at all, no way to invest, no way to buy or sell. I'm kinda starting to freak out a bit. Maybe I should actually start some prep work and get the folks at an org to do the same.


stagflation was a walk in the park in comparison to 2008, when the world economy almost actually collapsed, just barely managing to survive through unbelievable QE. What seems to be coming is 2008 to the power of a million. No 20% Volcker interest rates can fix much when all the fucking banks have defaulted from cascading derivatives and the dollar is worth so little as to make trade impossible.


Yes, much thanks. Interesting. It very well could be. In fact I agree that they either do something like that or die.


They do have options and are currently executing them: rentiers economy, or another neo-feudalism. The highest amongst the highest are subscribing to this "alternative" that isn't strictly neoliberalism or social democracy. They're doing fine, some porks finances are getting hurt but they're sitting very comfortable overall/generally. This adaptation came off the 2008 recession and has been the plan since at least 2015.
And 1929-1933 made '08 look like a walk in the park with some massive poltical consequences that reverberated throughout the world culminating in WW2/Bretton Woods/Revolutions. Just because you never lived through 1929 doesn't mean you can't understand how huge the GD was. 2008 was bad and did have it's poltical waves of a new interest in socialism and anti-capitalism but it hasn't collapsed entire states or forced states into revolution or had dictatorships arise to protect capital. Don't let naivety drive your analysis even if you are Marxist you cannot let it make you believe we're on the cusp of something major because we aren't. 2008 is more comparable to 1970s stagflation and or 1979 recession and oil crisis, especially now with the 2020s inflation.


Comrade, the Great Depression was catastrophic – I'm not underselling it; but the level of exposure now is so unfathomably larger, that it literally boggles the mind. The Great Depression caused a good chunk of the world banking system to fail; if this crisis being prognosticated comes to pass, it'll mean ALL OF THE WORLD'S BANKING SYSTEMS FAILING. I'm almost forced to use caps because I just can't even begin to process the scale of the collapse. Ironically the best places to be will be sanctioned countries since they'll have the least exposure to the insane derivatives nightmares.

I don't know if this will cause a revolution; but if this does come to pass it'll cause the end of capitalist as we know it. And no "neo-feudalism" will salvage it. What will come afterwards, no one knows.


File: 1669677753327.gif (3.6 MB, 300x300, 1452382298041.gif)

Impressive, very nice, let's see the logarithmic chart


You have a point but let me counter it with this. With the advent of the GD and the lengths western governments went towards stabilizing, they discovered that this little thing called the progressive tax was actually more of a boon to capitalism than the horrific "stealing" they thought it would be, rather actually it was indeed stealing, stealing the taxes of the working class. I want to use history for a little second, in history in ancient and medieval times, when empires would heavily tax their population to try and shore up it's treasury, it would lead to massive unrest and rebellion. Basically the new tax system (which was great btw especially for the workers who was suffering) allowed the state to build up it's state coffers but then realizing that all this shit can be used to eventually bail out the rich. Or another they can put out a shit ton of loans and public debt that the people would have to carry. Basically what I'm saying is, the capitalist class used the very tax system they resisted against to then use it to protect their wealth. This is a point I've heard ancaps make which is a good criticism that have absolutely crap conclusions and solutions and it is that under the rules of fair competition, it makes sense that the losers must lose because they were beaten in (fair)market competition. Truth is this isn't how things work in the real world and "too big to fail" is quite a real thing in this era.

So basically you said that the largesse and interconnected nature of the modern system would cause collapse on an unimaginable scale, and this is true but the truth is that the governments have multiple ways to shore up and protect not just themselves but the banks and big bourgeoisie from such a collapse that the worse of the worse could only ever be recession levels, not full on depression.


Basically the running theme of people studying GME is them coming to the realization of just how deeply imaginary the market is. It started with people realizing that buying through brokers means you aren’t buying real shares, then hedge funds creating more shares than possible, then branching out to just how much grift is keeping the market afloat.

I think one of the more interesting conclusions people came to was saying that 2008 never really “ended”. You just had the people responsible for it bailed out, then straight back to doing what they were before. The can was kicked, the crisis wasn’t resolved.

No idea how the bourgeoisie intend to get out of this mess.


Not global capitalism, western hegemonic western capitalism. There's no reason to assume that poor countries will eat shit long term if shit goes south. If there aren't international buyers, then they'll go inwards. Sure, there might be a global crisis the world has never seen before, but all these peripheral countries are industrialized, while the US and Europe are not as much.


You are missing context, comrade. As Michael Roberts points out (and one may disagree with him, though I do believe he is generally correct in his analysis), economic conditions are wildly different nowadays from the 30's, 40's and 50's: profit rates are fucked. 100 years of capitalism have risen the organic composition of capital and worker productivity to such a degree that there really isn't that much easy room to grow anymore (that is leaving aside the obvious continent-sized elephant in the room: climate catastrophe).

This means that the growth in the creation of actual value, on which the economic is predicated (something you must agree, comrade, if you consider Marxism to be correct and not the insane metaphysics the bourgeoisie worships and calls "economics") is tremendously hampered by existing conditions. This means that macroeconomic policy, such as progressive taxation or banking regulation, won't be able to produce the same results as before, since those beneficial results were predicated on a world economy that 1. was drastically smaller and thus had a lot more room to grow; 2. had been obliterated by ww2, which made the creation of new capital not only possible but greatly profitable; 3. there still was a ton of natural resources unexplored and countries not integrated into the world economy (a good example is the fact that most rural to cities migration happened from the 70's onwards, greatly increasing the size of the world proletariat, derived from previous subsistence agricultural producers which were outside the economy to a great degree, so to speak).

This, of course, leaves aside questions of imperialism, which are obviously tremendously important. That being said, what are the possibilities going forward? 1. an attempt at kicking the can even further. This is possible until it isn't, at which point it explodes in exponentially worse ways (i.e. >>1284603). 2. a crisis so tremendous that enough capital is destroyed (namely "zombie companies" and the like) that enough space gets cleared for new accumulation to begin. This assumes that the world ecology can actually withstand a new cycle of capitalist accumulation, which is doubtful. 3. The end of capitalist, either to socialism, communism, some form of local production anarchism (which may or may not be reactionary i.e. peasant based) or just plain collapse and society kind of survives in remnants.

I can't see capitalism surviving, at least not in its current form. Of course, I may be wrong, but the scale of this disaster is so great that it might just be the greatest crisis in human history, period.


File: 1669682940353-0.png (188.58 KB, 500x573, 1664581388674.png)

Regardless if this is The End or a period of great depression or just another 2008, it needs to be said that non of it matters if nothing is done. The situation under Heaven is in chaos, everything is all according to the plan.


what does it mean that buying through brokers isnt owning shares? Source?


I’ll explain after work. The long and short of it is that you’re buying what amounts to IOUs. The actual shares are being managed “on your behalf” through a private entity. Which basically means the stock market most retail investors are using is purely imaginary.

In essence, even if you bought every single free share of a company, you’ll witness shares still being bought and sold on the market by other investors. Shares that shouldn’t technically exist.


correct me if I am wrong but that is not the case on custody accounts , right?


thats…the definition of a custody ? of course it's held by someone else on your behalf.


I really hope you are right, but ive been following this thread for years and the predictions have only brought disappointment so far


Well I'm good and buzzed now, so I hope you'll forgive me if I'm brief.
When you buy a company's stock, you're supposed to own part of that company, right? A microscopic part, but a part nonetheless.
What do you think the company sees on their books? Do they see, for example, "John Smith at 742 Evergreen Terrace: 1 Share of Stock"? No, they don't. Because of the DTCC/Cede & Co.

What's the DTCC? Well, let me put it like this. Let's say you want to buy 1 share of Company X for $100; you go on E*Trade, you buy 1 share, you think you own a bit of Company X, right?

Well, not quite. As soon as you deposit your money and put in the buy order, the broker then sends the order to the DTCC, who places it and holds your stock "on your behalf." You get that shiny "1" next to Company X on your investment portfolio, and you think you own a share of the company.
But here's the thing: the DTCC is a black box. Everytime you're buying stock, you're putting your money in this box, when you sell, the box spits some money out. You have no idea what goes on inside the box, it's simply there.
The DTCC is essentially a monopoly that manages the majority of stock traded through brokers. When you buy stock in a company, the only thing that happens is this private entity says you're entitled to so-and-so amount of stock. But on the company books you don't appear.
So, with GME a lot of DD writers figured out that essentially, the reason Hedge Funds could short more shares of GME stock than there are in existence is because of the complicity of the DTCC. It's this black box after all, money goes in and out of it, but most people aren't even aware it's there. To short a stock, you need to borrow it from somewhere and the DTCC is essentially in the position where it can create stock from thin air. And considering it reaps a hefty profit from major finance institutions, why would it care that short hedge funds open up positions that they can't possibly close? After all, everyone knows GameStop is gonna die out. What's the worst that can happen from betting on an inevitability?
In essence, when a company issues stock, there's literally nothing stopping the DTCC from saying "Well you issued 1,000,000 shares but we're gonna say you've got 10,000,000 to loan out." They're a monopoly. What's the worst that can happen, some middle class retail investor actually tries to sue them?

So what the GME investors have been doing is DRSing their shares. Essentially so their names appear on the company books and they're the direct owners of their shares. As opposed to other stocks where the DTCC is holding it "on your behalf".


but in my country the left is doing counter-protests against rightoid "yankee go home demos"
Globalism is dying but theres nobody here to bury it for the left


File: 1669716858363.jpeg (Spoiler Image, 110.04 KB, 602x591, bWVkaWEvRmR4bkNSeFhFQVlGO….jpeg)





File: 1669723862366.png (116.14 KB, 1453x712, ClipboardImage.png)

hmm i feel like this graph is not good


I like the updates :/
Why do you hate them so much?



unfortunately i am also 5, which is why i said i was going off my feelings, but what i THINK it is saying is that the remittances to the US treasury (which is basically like, 'profit' after the fed govt does its things with, taxes and income streams? again im a fucking brainlet sorry) has not only slowed, but now is in terminal velocity and has shot down into negative space, which is both unprecedented (at least on this graph; it only went back to 2011), but is also severely in the negative. this means the treasury literally needs to fork over cash to keep the government running, and that this scale of payments is unprecedented within this data set


The question I want to ask is how much money do they need to hand over? And if they do hand it then what are likely scenarios to play out, like handing the money and it's fine? Or the Dollar implodes kinda thinking


Whatever you think about GME it is undeniable that CPUSA anon is one of the few posters on this shithole that actually tries to get a debate going and posts interesting sources, which, though they may be bourgeois, are still of value. You on the other hand are shitting the thread by complaining, so just go post in your designated containment thread and go away please.


File: 1669741036678-1.jpg (27.46 KB, 323x432, 1669578299632.jpg)


The Bond Market’s Recession Signal Is the Loudest in 40-Plus Years
The U.S. Treasury yield curve recently inverted to a point that hadn’t occurred since the early 1980s, signaling that a recession is on the way.

Yields on short-dated debt are usually lower than those on securities maturing over longer periods because investors demand higher yields to cover the risk of holding the debt for longer. But on Tuesday morning, the 2-year Treasury ‘s yield was 4.46%, compared with 3.70% for the 10-year note, a spread of about 76 basis points, or 0.76 percentage point.

On Friday, the gap was 77.8 basis points, the biggest differential since Oct. 5, 1981, according to Dow Jones Market Data. That was when interest rates were in double digits as the Fed sought to fight the stagflation of the 1970s, triggering a recession in the process. The inversion back then was 79.4 basis points.

“The yield curve is confirming a growing consensus view that the economy is in trouble and that the Fed is going to blow it,” says Gibson Smith, founder and chief investment officer of the fixed-income boutique Smith Capital Investors.

Peter Boockvar, chief investment officer at Bleakley Financial Group, says that the wider inversion is “a bet that it’s an inevitability that with a higher cost of capital, the U.S. economy has to slow and most likely contract.”

A shrinking economy likely would mean that the Fed would cut interest rates in response, bringing yields down. The fact that yields are lower on long-dated debt than on short-dated securities reflects that expectation.

Edward Yardeni, president and chief investment strategist at Yardeni Research, pointed out in a note Tuesday that while an inverted yield curve has tended to lead to recessions, that isn’t necessarily the case this time.

“The credit system remains resilient, as evidenced by the small increase in the allowance for loan and lease losses at commercial banks,” he observed, adding that commercial bank loans increased recently.


I keep not being sure whether I should pull my stocks out, I know people keep saying it will be a recession but stocks have already gone down for the last 12 months, shouldn't they be due to go up soon/eventually?


U.S stocks sag for second day as investors gauge China zero-COVID policies and await Powell speech

U.S. stocks were trading lower Tuesday, as investors gauged the chances that Beijing may ease its COVID-zero policies which provoked widespread protests over the weekend and added to investor worries about global economic growth.

Domestically, they are weighing downbeat data on consumer mood, the housing market and are staying tuned for more talk from the Federal Reserve on future interest rate hikes.

How are stocks are trading
S&P 500 SPX, -0.39% declined more than 13 points, or 0.3% to 3950
Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, -0.33% declined nearly 116 points, or 0.3% to 33,733
The Nasdaq Composite COMP, 2.04% dropped 59 points, or 0.5% to 10990

On Monday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 498 points, or 1.45%, to 33849, the S&P 500 declined 62 points, or 1.54%, to 3964, and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 177 points, or 1.58%, to 11050.

What’s driving markets
Asian stocks recovered Tuesday as unrest across China declined and hopes rose that Beijing might ease Covid-19 restrictions.

“Police in China have quashed mass COVID demonstrations for now, helping stocks regain their footing,” said Susannah Streeter, senior investment and markets analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown.

Equities, bond yields and industrial commodity prices fell at the start of the week on concerns a wave of anti COVID-lockdown demonstrations would cause a crackdown by Beijing, further hobbling activity in the world’s second biggest economy and slowing global growth.

However, on Tuesday China’s National Health Commission said it would ramp up COVID vaccinations for the elderly, a move that may allow less draconian COVID restrictions to be imposed.

I honestly couldn't tell you since I barely understand stocks as is, but hopefully this may help


lmao, zero-covid is tanking the western economies? I thought the papers were just crying about it as an excuse to hate on China


File: 1669741853586.png (503.4 KB, 860x911, 1669345658175.png)

Well, considering how for the past few decades and so the West has shipped manufacturing overseas, I can't say it's too surprising. But still funny altogether


All these narratives are pulled out the ass post-facto.
Stocks go down: new fears of zero-covid policy, slowing production, and rising interest rates shake market.
Stocks go up: investors gauge lower rate of Fed rate increases on the market, strong earnings report buoy market


File: 1669743545326.png (337.32 KB, 383x364, 16523585082280.png)

China is partially using zero-covid as a way to legally/sneakily use it's monopolist producer of all kinds of goods to force Western markets into submission. Just like they can start finding bugs in Australian wood and deny imports from Australian wood, so China can use Covid as a pretext for decreased or postponed exports, causing economic damage to the West. Obviously, porkies know what's going on and really hate zero-covid


Pretty hilarious porkoid mouthpiece journalists tacitly admitting that the market demands a blood sacrifice from China in the form of more COVID infections.


File: 1669745697632.gif (1.79 MB, 450x254, 1518967394097.gif)

Holy cope batman, are you really saying these protests are in China's favor or something? Or they were even engineered and that Xi is really playing 4D chess?


he didn't say that?


I'm pretty sure the point was that this latest Covid news is supposedly a tool of China to mess with Western imports - and not just a legitimate misstep of the party.


When China needs to punish someone economically, they don't need to actually lockdown anyone, though, just put some pressure on factories so that those stop the work for N days. Or there being a security or covid check in the block, or shit like that. Protests are a different thing.

At least I don't believe that CPC would be punishing their own people like that. They weren't punishing them when there were troubles with australian wood or taiwanese pineapples, lol


How is zero-COVID punishing them when they have the public funds to compensate them?


Powell stamps out hopes of early rate cuts in hawkish speech
>Jay Powell tried to dampen investor expectations the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates any time soon in a hawkish speech that signalled the US central bank has a long way to go in its fight against inflation.
>“I will simply say that we have more ground to cover,” the Fed chair said in prepared remarks to be delivered at the Brookings Institution on Wednesday. “History cautions strongly against prematurely loosening policy. We will stay the course until the job is done.”


watching powell talk about the need for wages to be lower and unemployment higher is really something.



Short summary as for why? They want to drop down wages to make economy competitive? US is turning textbook fascist, jeez


File: 1669834571930.jpg (102.77 KB, 1170x1139, bourgeois economics.jpg)


To reduce inflation. I'm only half-paying attention so I can't give a good summary. It's worth watching though.
The interviewer even asked something like: "why can't wage increases come from corporate profits instead of causing inflation" and the response was something muddled about… the need to reduce inflation.


>The interviewer even asked something like: "why can't wage increases come from corporate profits instead of causing inflation" and the response was something muddled about… the need to reduce inflation.

He could have said that high wages make economy uncompetitive, jeez. What's so controversial about this so that they need to evade answering


>What's so controversial about this so that they need to evade answering
The answer is simple. Modern politics is not about solving problems with policy. Modern politics exists solely as a controlled system in order to prevent change. Saying that "low wages makes the economy uncompetitive" implies that "the economy being competitive is a priority for us" which would set precedent (which is extremely important in liberalism) for future policy decisions. For example making the economy competitive might mean making 4 day work weeks standard, because shorter work weeks might invite skilled labor immigrants to the country for better working conditions. The united snakes does not currently rely on having a "competitive economy" because, in fact, the united snakes has a global trade monopoly via the petrodollar world reserve currency. Having a competitive economy is not current policy and is not precedented.


This is PragerU-tier conjecturing

Would capitalists really not want a 4-day week? Many around the world, even in the most developed places, are trialing it, and it's becoming an increasingly popular idea. If it really doesn't hurt their bottom line then the proles might just be allowed to work 4 days after all as a measure to alleviate their build-up rage a bit.


>Would capitalists really not want a 4-day week?

USA is facing a manufacturing giant that outproduces USA in every category. Imagine whatever you will, but the trajectory of Western capitalism has been "good conditions for tech employees, employ low wage migrants or outsource for other labor", and 4-day week seems possible from it - but let's not forget that all it took to make tech migrants start leaving USA was racism against Chinese


Like i said, it's precedent that liberals look at alongside narratives. Normalizing a 4 day work week might be allowed in europe, but in america it sets a narrative that workers can have better quality of life without disturbing productivity. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy thoughever, because it gives workers the idea that their quality of life can be improved. This is why capitalists have also been regretting covid concessions, and shitting/farting about work from home, because while it didnt damage productivity, it also allowed people to work without boss breathing down their necks, and this led to "quiet quitting", and people quitting for better jobs, and expecting more for their work, and higher wages…



File: 1669973237751.png (165.81 KB, 1118x553, ClipboardImage.png)


This kinda reads like listening to a dying child deliriously rambling about how they’re gonna be a famous movie star when they’re gonna grow up


File: 1669981620492-0.jpg (218.39 KB, 1920x1080, mpv-shot0022.jpg)

File: 1669981620492-1.jpg (221.85 KB, 1920x1080, mpv-shot0023.jpg)

File: 1669981620492-2.jpg (226.79 KB, 1920x1080, mpv-shot0024.jpg)


File: 1669984118827.png (25.1 KB, 459x409, comfused.png)

>Communism is Soviet power plus the electrification of the whole country.
For like the past two years I assumed that quote was just a metaphor for invigoration.


>>1284603 fascinating how they seem to be reinventing marxist analysis from scratch over there.
funny how that happens.


Midwit question here: but how would socialism fix an inflation crisis?


This is basicially what most post-keynesians advocate for. I think especially MMT is HUGE on this concept.


>h.g. wells' comments on electrification 'utopianism'
Reminds me of that "CHINA IS DYING IN 2 WEEKS" guy who says something similar about fast rail beyond the initial few lines.


this is `combat liberalism` means `combatative and agressive kind of liberalism` tier of understanding stuff.


File: 1669987450006.png (128.7 KB, 1811x496, ClipboardImage.png)

You might be interested in book "why china has no inflation" which responds precisely to that in second section called "How the Consequences of the Inflation Were Eliminated".

In short, they just did huge currency reform
>On May 28, 1949, the day after the liberation of Shanghai, a proclamation was posted throughout the city: “In all liberated areas, as from today, Renminbi issued by the People’s Bank of China shall be the only legal tender. It shall be the sole medium for all tax payments, private and public transactions and price quotations…. The use of Kuomintang gold certificates, gold, silver, or foreign currencies for accounting and clearing is henceforth prohibited….”
Established a central bank, centralised tax collection, etc (To be 100% honest renminbi was pegged to a dollar). And after all that, since they used central planing, just centraly planned all spending, credits, tried to produce in line with demand.

I am not sure 100%, but given the fact that text boasts about no income tax, I am sure Maoist China had some kind of VAT in place, where govt revenue was (price - cost of production). And this is important to remember, because taxes reduce amount of money in circulation.


File: 1670269065192.png (34 KB, 459x287, ClipboardImage.png)


File: 1670269836851-0.png (68.81 KB, 623x502, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1670269836851-1.png (42.07 KB, 612x591, ClipboardImage.png)

Shitting the bed is just a thing the economy does now. New feature unlocked, thanks marx.


Wast there like MASSIVE demand destruction? Like a 40% collapse?


File: 1670274373067-0.png (48.58 KB, 652x324, Habbening_Man.png)

File: 1670274373067-1.png (122.54 KB, 1508x792, SPY_2008.png)

File: 1670274373067-2.jpg (68 KB, 750x765, 80_Trillies.jpg)

Thanks dudes.
Anyways here's another tweet that Burry tweeted and deleted. Honestly, take it with a grain of salt because it's so fucking vague. If I were to speculate as to why he might be tweeting "It's Happening", well… here's the current SPY overlaid with 2008 (the grey line) and the Volkswagen Squeeze.
Also I'm seeing some (admittedly Bourgeois) sources on social media saying that Pension funds may be fugged. $80 Trillion in off-balance sheet debts. Looks like Wallstreet had a little whoopsie-doo.
See, there is a reason for the economy shitting the bed. Problem is we'll never really learn it until it's already shat itself. It was the same in '08 (and it's why I give Burry a bit of leeway when he keeps predicting a crash) where the underlying risks were still there, people still noticed them, but because this is some horribly ungainly machine with so many parts dependent on each other that no one gets a full picture and everyone's interest is in covering it up.

>The big finance papers don't want to report on it, because it's almost always the fault of Wall Street Greed and calling them out on such causes them to lose access to interviews and the like.

>Regulators don't want to regulate because they've got a lucrative career in the industries they're regulating and they don't want to step on any toes.
>And Wall Street institutions don't want it getting out because retail investors are the sacrificial lamb they can use to save themselves.


Oh, and in more financial news (and jumping off what I said that we won't know the reasons for the crash 'till after it) it looks like retirees might be the bagholders for the next recession. Don't think I can explain it well, but here's some Autist going through a Fed and FDIC proposal.



File: 1670362938173-0.jpg (309.85 KB, 3886x2096, 10Y_3M_Inversion.jpg)

File: 1670362938173-1.png (1.15 MB, 2000x2177, 881.png)

New economy update: We've broken through the ATL on 10Y-3M yield inversion.


Allegedly this is another sure sign of a recession. "One of the most accurate" supposedly. If the 3 month yield is higher than the 10 year one for 10 days, supposedly, you've got a sure sign you're about to enter a recession.
So far it's been 21 days.
Additionally, people are saying this is the exact signal that predicted the ‘55, ‘59, ‘69, ‘74, ‘80, ‘81, ‘89, ‘99, ‘07, and ‘19 crashes.
>"We've never had a recession without this inverse."
What does it mean? Who knows! If I've learned anything recently, it's that Wall Street can see a skyscraper on fire and think "THIS IS GREAT FOR BUSINESS!" So Stonks pump. We'll see what happens.


Yes, I'll concede that, but the original quote is… kinda dumb.

>communism is when stronk and huge electricity network

It's like saying socialism is when you have high-speed rail.


you're forgetting the part about soviet power
just remember these simple equations anon:
soviet power + electrification = communism
communism - electrification = soviet power
communism - soviet power = electrification


economy still has growth from last quarter and unemployment barely budging. All these superstructure metrics are just that an indication of how much changes to credit the fed is making.

I remain bullish on the idea of a recession through first quarter of '23 right now.


His point about electrification of the country was that electricity is a universal labor multiplier. Electricity is capable of being both a type of raw energy as well as an intelligent mover that can act selectively. Universal labor needs a universal tool.


just look up happyroadkill


it would be a bad idea to invest in gamestop


can double on that. just grab an s&p like index fund (such as fxaix) you aren't warren buffet, nor do you want to be analyzing company valuations into the future is extremely time consuming and boring. You may consider waiting until it drops 15% or so.

Also some index funds in energy or other raw materials will be probably doing pretty well.



which broker?


I’ll be honest, you shouldn’t try to invest in “short term squeeze plays”; namely because they’re rare market events that, to be frank, you’d usually stumble onto by accident or FOMO in on the way up. Namely because companies don’t go out of their way to advertise their short positions, when these hedge funds do legitimately open short positions, it’s because they legitimately believe that the company’s financials are shit, or their performance is poor, or they just got a round of rotten luck.

It also requires a degree of illiquidity in the stock itself. You have to have a huge short position + not many sellers to cause a short squeeze.

If you see major finance outlets advertising a stock, it probably won’t squeeze.

That said I still think the GME squeeze is will happen for reasons I outlined before. But it’d probably be best for a “normal” investor to wait for the market to crash before investing.


Roberts keeps arguing exactly that: https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2022/12/05/powells-pivot-and-the-impending-slump/

> One of the most reliable indicators of an oncoming recession is the so-called inverted bond yield curve. That’s where the rate of interest on long-term bonds (ten-years) falls below the rate of interest on short-term loans (3 months or 2 years). That should not happen if an economy is growing ‘normally’. Then the interest charged on long term bonds would be higher because you get the loan for a longer time. The yield curve inverts only when central banks raise short-term interest rates and investors rush to buy long term bonds because they fear a recession coming.

It makes sense, insofar as bourgeois shit makes any sense. Normally you'd be rewarded for holding a bond for a long time, which would mean a lower bond price and thus a higher yield. If porky is buying long it's because they want a surefire way to park their cash without the bond maturing beforehand. (i.e. they'll only get their cash back when shit is a bit calmer, or they'll wait until the market is better to sell those bonds). The extremely strong inversion indicates then that no one actually believes in the stock market, and they're just waiting for it to crash. Problem is it won't crash until the fed stops pumping cash. I find that Peruvian Bull is way too neoclassical in his approach (he cites the phillips curve as if it were relevant, which it obviously isn't >>1286981) and by not being a marxist conflates the current inflation not as a lack of supply issue, namely production insufficiencies (which it is), but as an excess of printing money. There is a serious crisis of value production going on, tapered over by debt spending (both in the household and government sense), and a crisis of profit.

That being said it seems they are right in pointing out that the longer the fed pumps the worse it's gonna be when it crashes. For all the heterodox MMT fellas say, it is very upsetting to find out that the interest on the US debt is higher than all the US tax revenues combined (not to mention the principal, obviously).

It might take a catastrophic moment to actually crash the economy, as in a 2020 (when it did effectively crash, those were some good times when the price of oil went negative). If I had to bet I'd wager on the conflict which China finally becoming "hot" (in the economic sense, though maybe in the military as well) , by them dumping all their treasury holdings and maybe stopping exporting shit to the US. It's hard to predict, though.


God I wish I was smart enough to fully grasp what you just took the effort to write :(


Nice post. China is already dumping US bonds, no? Maybe not en-masse but significantly? The US could simply not recognize Chinese owned bonds at some point. With the way US sanctions are going, I wouldn't put it off the table.


NTA, but here is my tl;dr:
>Bonds used to be a safe haven to park cash, but arent anymore
>which indicates a recession is incoming
>one reason the (stock) market hasn't crashed yet is the FED's printers going BRRR
>this just delays the crash…
>…and when it comes, it will be even worse
>if it wasnt for the dollar being the world's reserve currency and thus the US were not able to print away their debt, the US would have defaulted on it's debt for a long time


>porky about to cream himself over line go down


>a sure sign you're about to enter a recession
didn't we already have 3 consecutive negative quarters?


This dude makes my blood boil.


File: 1670546244210.png (101.88 KB, 978x599, ClipboardImage.png)

>China is already dumping US bonds, no? Maybe not en-masse but significantly?
Chinas holdings of american treasury bonds is at a 12 year low
Another thing, notice the top three holders of american debt in picrel. The japanese and UK economies got fucked hard this year, imagine if they were forced to dump it all right before china does. 👀


File: 1670546614947.jpg (25.86 KB, 958x340, yield.jpg)

Sorry, I wrote it in a bit of a hurry and it ended up not too terribly clear. It isn't exactly that bonds aren't safe, it's more that there are two kinds of bonds: bonds that will expire soon (1-4 years) and bonds which will take longer to expire (think 10, 20, 30 years). Bonds have a price when they're issued by the government (or by a private company): say, $1000. People buy those bonds, which then have to be repaid at the expiration date, when the bond "matures". This, essentially, is a loan: government (or a private company) gives you a piece of paper promising to pay you back, and you give government money.

Bonds, as most loans, have interest rates. These rates are fixed as to the value of the bond when it was issued. Say our bond had a 10% interest rate; this means every year the government would have to pay you back (in installments, over the course of the year) $100. This is nice. You don't have to do anything and you'll get money. Obviously interest rates are typically shit, which means bonds are a shit investment, because gambling on Tesla will probably give you better immediate returns (or, more realistically, an index fund, which is nothing but a collection of different investments bundled together).

Bonds, once issued, become property; they can be resold to someone else. Their "yield" is based on this. Say a bond is close to expiring: this means it'll pay back its value soon. This makes it a more desirable bond, since it probably will be repaid and this you'll get your money back. This typically make short-term bonds worth more, say $1100, on the market. Thing is, the bond still pays only $100 every year. This means its yield has (relatively) gotten lower: to 9.09% (since you paid more). The higher the bond price, the lower the yield; it's a simple relation. As such, long term bonds are usually cheaper, since there is a bigger chance something will happen before the bond matures which could make it fail (i.e. not pay its value back). They are, as such, "riskier".

Thing is, some porkies aren't dumb; they can see the writing on the wall (maybe they read a bit of marx when they were young…) This means they know the stock market is looking a bit shaky; maybe parking a bunch of cash on Tesla right now is a bad idea. They look for a safer place to put their money, even if it means smaller returns, just to insulate themselves from the crisis. Short-term bonds are nice, but maybe the crisis will last longer than the bond has before expiring, which would leave you with a bunch of cash which is gonna need to look for an investment, which may be more difficult or more expensive. Long-term bonds guarantee you'll have a nice, solid thing for a while, which you can then resell if you feel like things are better, or just wait for it to mature and get your money back.

You can now see the usual framework: on a direct relation, short-term bonds are usually more expensive than long-term bonds; their yield is lower, therefore, that that of the long-term bonds. But before every single recession, apparently, something happens: the yield on short-term bonds goes higher than that of the long-term bonds, or, as they call it, "the curve inverts" (which is based on the yield curve graph, as can be seen annexed to this post). This is, essentially, porky's own measure of confidence on the near-future of the market: they think it'll go bad soon, so they're parking their money so that papa government will guarantee it no matter what. For marxists this is essentially a good enough indicator that it isn't just crazy communists that think shit's gonna hit the fan soon: porky also thinks that as well. And if porky thinks shit's gonna hit the fan, they you better bet it will.

As a side note, the Fed keeps doing Quantitative Easing (QE), which essentially amounts to buying (technically swapping) a bunch of assets (usually shit assets in the balance sheets of banks and companies) with money they can technically print by doing this. This has caused enormous hyperinflation in the stock market (and also bitcoin, most notably), since porky just takes this money, makes some stock buybacks and gives itself in dividends, which is a tidy little business. Problem is the Fed is getting enormously swamped with shit assets (i.e. debt), and the stock market has gotten so crazy that any crash is gonna be so volatile as to devastate the economy (since a great deal of companies that should have died in 2008 are still alive as "zombies"). Until the Fed stops doing this, a crash is unlikely; the question is when will their hand be forced (since they cannot decide to crash the market, for obvious reasons).

As for China dumping bonds, they probably are, but as Peruvian Bull noted on the posts shared by GME Anon, they have massive dollar surpluses since the US buys their shit (and all other shit) in dollars. They have to do something with those dollars, otherwise their currency will devalue (from having too many dollar holdings, because the dollar is the de facto reserve currency of the world) which would fuck their export economy up. So they usually just give them back to the US and get shitty bonds in return, which is better than holding dollars. It seems like they're buying gold from Russia https://thedeepdive.ca/the-de-dollarization-frenzy-china-covertly-buying-gold-to-reduce-us-dollar-exposure/, but it's hard to say how relevant it is right now. It's tough to de-dollarize. (Yves Smith has a great article about this: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2022/12/dethroning-the-dollar-why-the-alternatives-are-not-ready-for-prime-time.html). The moment will come, but it's probably not too soon just quite yet, unless some crisis (cough cough Taiwan) forces their hand, like the Ukraine crisis forced Russia's hand).


Sorry, about the China currency, I mean "appreciate" (it'll be worth more) instead of "devalue". This would make it stronger and thus their goods more expensive, which is bad if you want to export them.


I've been using him as barometer for how porky is feeling about the bond market.


Is this financial anarchy?
Like, just don't pay taxes and use the debt to fund local orgs?


File: 1670559917333.png (799.33 KB, 1280x720, ClipboardImage.png)

>Is this financial anarchy?
Like, just don't pay taxes and use the debt to fund local orgs?
No that's based Enric Duran



The third quarter was positive, though the state of the market is still not good.
It could be a dead cat bounce.


…we have also had you people preaching about "sure signs of recession" for days/months/years here now. Any day, comrades!


What's your opinion on Saudis, as well as Iran and Israel, switching sides to China?


All in my pocket since forever


File: 1670608597915.jpg (101.38 KB, 962x801, Lenin & Stalin.jpg)

>Your question might at first sight appear to be correct. Actually, it will not stand the slightest criticism. It should be easy to understand that when Lenin says that "Soviet power plus electrification is communism," he does not mean by this that there will be any kind of political power under communism, nor does he mean that if we have seriously set about electrifying the country we have thereby already achieved communism.

>What did Lenin mean to say when making this statement? In my opinion, all he meant to say was that Soviet power alone is not enough for the advance towards communism, that in order to advance towards communism the Soviet power must electrify the country and transfer the entire national economy to large-scale production, and that the Soviet power is prepared to take this course in order to arrive at communism. Lenin's dictum implies nothing more than the readiness of the Soviet power to advance towards communism through electrification.

>We often say that our republic is a socialist one. Does this mean that we have already achieved socialism, done away with classes and abolished the state (for the achievement of socialism implies the withering away of the state)? Or does it mean that classes, the state, and so on, will still exist under socialism? Obviously not. Are we entitled in that case to call our republic a socialist one? Of course, we are. From what standpoint? From the standpoint of our determination and our readiness to achieve socialism, to do away with classes, etc.

>Perhaps, Comrade Kushtysev, you would agree to listen to Lenin's opinion on this point? If so, then listen:

>"No one, I think, in considering the question of the economy of Russia has ever denied its transitional character. Nor, I think has any Communist denied that the term Socialist Soviet Republic signifies the determination of the Soviet power to achieve the transition to socialism, and not at all that the new economic order is a socialist order" (Vol. XXII, p. 513).

- Joseph Stalin

Unique IPs: 253

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]