About Me

Name: halthouse1
Email: exetertraining@aol.com Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
[Click to edit me]

Major Sell-off In Bonds and North Korea Verbal Spanking (Not)

The Political and Financial Markets Commentator (http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com)
 

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Major Sell-off In Bonds and North Korea Verbal Spanking (Not)

But First An Update On The North Korea Crisis From Hillary Clinton

As I had surmised, the Obama administration's answer to the crisis of a madman firing missiles and setting off nuclear tests is as expected: reliance on trying to get the madman to a negotiating table so that he can agree to terms he has no intention of abiding by and some more of those tough U.N. resolutions and sanctions. Read:

Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton visits United States Army Garrison (USAG) Yongsan, Seoul, South Korea - 20 Feb. 2009

(Fox)"North Korea will have to pay a price for its aggressive actions, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday, and she urged Pyongyang to return to the six-party talks that it abandoned in favor of nuclear weapons.

"North Korea has made a choice, chosen to violate the specific language of the U.N. Security Council (Resolution) 1718. It has ignored the international community, abrogated the six-party talks and continues to act in a provocative and belligerent manner," Clinton said during remarks with Egyptian Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit.

"In the United Nations, as we speak, discussions are going on as to the consequences that North Korea will face coming out of the latest behavior, trying to rein in the North Koreans and get them back into a framework they have chosen where they fulfill their obligations," she said..."

Pyongyang must be quaking with fear. As I have said many times before these are hopefully Obama's words for public consumption with covert action behind the scenes. This leader is a grave danger to the entire world, and mere table talk will unfortunately be an utter failure.

What Does A Steep Yield Curve Mean...If Anything In This Case

When I was a bond analyst for a sell side firm out of business school, a steep yield curve was a way to get retail investors into long bonds which in turn translated into more revenue for the firm. That is because the "spread", or the amount that a firm can make, is typically greater the further out on the maturity spectrum that you go. Back then for the purposes of Wall Street the steep yield curve proved to be a great marketing ploy.

Lend your money to your government Buy a United States government bond, second Liberty Loan of 1917, U.S. Treasury will pay you interest every six months. 1917

What Is This Steepness I Speak Of?

The steepness of a yield curve is the difference in yield between short-term bonds like the two year, and longer-term bonds like the 10 year. The yield of the 10 year treasury is currently 3.66%, and the yield of the treasury 2 year is .92% for a difference of 274 basis points which is close to record steepness.

Typically, a yield curve will steepen when the Fed lowers short term interest rates (it has no control over long rates other than open market operations)to stimulate the economy, and investors in fixed rate securities such as treasury bonds sell to move into the stock market, pushing yields up.

Is This Time Different?

In this case, could the rise in long term rates signify something other than economic expansion? Could it be inflation fears fueled by the amount of stimulus that has been injected into the economy? Could it be a normal adjustment in the level of rates due to that age old concept of supply and demand?

The federal government will be borrowing in the neighborhood of $2 trillion (with a t)in 2009, and the foreign governments that are providing this liquidity definitely have something to say about where rates will go from here.

China is the single largest foreign owner of treasuries, and without it's participation in new auctions, or worse yet if they decided to be sellers, yields will rise significantly.

What if the "green shoots" as the pundits on T.V. love to call them are really stink weeds, and the economy is not beginning to come out of recession? What will the trillions of dollars of stimulus money injected by the government chasing too few goods do to the level of interest rates due to spiking inflation?

We can only hope that President Obama and his band of merry men led by Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke have some semblance of a clue as to what it is that they are doing. God help us if they do not! Sphere: Related Content
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

North Korea Nuclear Test AND Missile Test: What Now President Obama?

From The Political and Financial Markets Commentator (visit to sign-up for your free daily feed or email delivery of new articles: http://politicsandfinance.blogspot.com)
 

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

North Korea Nuclear Test AND Missile Test: What Now President Obama?

The Intelligence Community Did Not Have A Clue

Just more Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk....


Rocket Science

President Obama, this is on you. This is not a situation that can credibly be blamed on the Bush administration although I am sure that you will try. No more crap about failed policies of the last 8 years.

This is not about micro-managing the auto industry. This is not about telling bankers how much they can make. This is not about pandering to Americans by attempting to vilify capitalism and capitalists.

This nuclear test the size of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima is because of the weakness that you are showing and your endless rhetoric about 6 party talks and your reliance on the United Nations to serve as the linchpin of our foreign policy.

This is no longer the campaign where your empty words that sold well across the country will work with terrorists around the world. This is your 3:00 AM call. What are you going to do.

Is the danger that Iran poses to the world in any way connected with North Korea? You bet it is!

WHAT IS THE PLAN? NOT THE TALK. NOT THE WORDS ABOUT THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE SITUATION. We know the seriousness of the situation. We know it for us, for Israel, for Europe and for the entire world.

You really want to sit down and have diplomatic negotiations with these guys? All that will do is buy them time to continue doing what they are doing, and provide you with cover to make no real moves. They will then sign whatever is "negotiated", ignore and violate it, and buy themselves even more time while we sit there and wring our hands about how they are violating the terms and proclaim that we are getting mad about it.

Stop the charade and understand who we are dealing with if your underlings haven't figured it out yet.

North Korea thinks that there will be no ramifications for what they do beyond threats of the Saturday Night joke of United Nations sanctions. Just rhetoric. Stop relying on international consensus. Stop worrying about how your base will react. Stop worrying solely about how you can turn the United States from a capitalistic force to just another European economy.

Start listening to smart people like Ambassador John Bolton who know what is going on and what must be done about it. Stop listening to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid for direction because that will lead us down the path to disaster.
Sphere: Related Content
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

Monday, May 4, 2009

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

When the crisis and danger is finally recognized by The New York Times, it becomes even more apparent that the situation is in fact dire. The articles below had been written by me back to March, when the level of the problem in Pakistan became obvious, to all except the Obama administration which continues to tell us that the situation is being monitored and the Pakistani government is on top of things. Hillary Clinton remains the invisible Secretary of State.

"The officials emphasized that there was no reason to believe that the arsenal, most of which is south of the capital, Islamabad, faced an imminent threat."(see below)

Funny, as a concerned outside observer I feel there is an iminent threat.

The problem is that we do not really know who is in charge of the government, or more to the point who do those in charge of the government (and by extension the nukes) hold allegiance to. All this as Pakistan remains our "reluctant ally"


Guest Blog: Pakistan: Time for Contingency Plannin...
Pakistan, the Taliban and Islamabad: Is Anyone Out...
Does President Obama Know About the Goings On In P...
Yesterday Pakistan, Today North Korea
Is Anyone Keeping An Eye On Pakistan?

Pakistan Strife Raises U.S. Doubts on Nuclear Arms (New York Times)

By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: May 3, 2009
WASHINGTON — As the insurgency of the Taliban and Al Qaeda spreads in Pakistan, senior American officials say they are increasingly concerned about new vulnerabilities for Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, including the potential for militants to snatch a weapon in transport or to insert sympathizers into laboratories or fuel-production facilities.

The officials emphasized that there was no reason to believe that the arsenal, most of which is south of the capital, Islamabad, faced an imminent threat. President Obama said last week that he remained confident that keeping the country’s nuclear infrastructure secure was the top priority of Pakistan’s armed forces.

But the United States does not know where all of Pakistan’s nuclear sites are located, and its concerns have intensified in the last two weeks since the Taliban entered Buner, a district 60 miles from the capital. The spread of the insurgency has left American officials less willing to accept blanket assurances from Pakistan that the weapons are safe.

Pakistani officials have continued to deflect American requests for more details about the location and security of the country’s nuclear sites, the officials said.... Sphere: Related Content
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

The Political and Financial Markets Commentator

Monday, May 4, 2009

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

Pakistan: Country and World in Crisis

When the crisis and danger is finally recognized by The New York Times, it becomes even more apparent that the situation is in fact dire. The articles below had been written by me back to March, when the level of the problem in Pakistan became obvious, to all except the Obama administration which continues to tell us that the situation is being monitored and the Pakistani government is on top of things. Hillary Clinton remains the invisible Secretary of State.

"The officials emphasized that there was no reason to believe that the arsenal, most of which is south of the capital, Islamabad, faced an imminent threat."(see below)

Funny, as a concerned outside observer I feel there is an iminent threat.

The problem is that we do not really know who is in charge of the government, or more to the point who do those in charge of the government (and by extension the nukes) hold allegiance to. All this as Pakistan remains our "reluctant ally"


Guest Blog: Pakistan: Time for Contingency Plannin...
Pakistan, the Taliban and Islamabad: Is Anyone Out...
Does President Obama Know About the Goings On In P...
Yesterday Pakistan, Today North Korea
Is Anyone Keeping An Eye On Pakistan?

Pakistan Strife Raises U.S. Doubts on Nuclear Arms (New York Times)

By DAVID E. SANGER
Published: May 3, 2009
WASHINGTON — As the insurgency of the Taliban and Al Qaeda spreads in Pakistan, senior American officials say they are increasingly concerned about new vulnerabilities for Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, including the potential for militants to snatch a weapon in transport or to insert sympathizers into laboratories or fuel-production facilities.

The officials emphasized that there was no reason to believe that the arsenal, most of which is south of the capital, Islamabad, faced an imminent threat. President Obama said last week that he remained confident that keeping the country’s nuclear infrastructure secure was the top priority of Pakistan’s armed forces.

But the United States does not know where all of Pakistan’s nuclear sites are located, and its concerns have intensified in the last two weeks since the Taliban entered Buner, a district 60 miles from the capital. The spread of the insurgency has left American officials less willing to accept blanket assurances from Pakistan that the weapons are safe.

Pakistani officials have continued to deflect American requests for more details about the location and security of the country’s nuclear sites, the officials said.... Sphere: Related Content
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »