Facade of the Eccles building of the Federal Bank of the United States, on a bright and sunny day in Washington, DC, United States, July 24, 2017.
Getty pictures
Purchases are information. It is constantly pricing of the well -known and unknown, with “purchases” a completely appropriate descriptor, since no one agrees for the known and unknown.
Consider this with the Hoover Foundation visiting the recent claim by colleague Mickey Levy that “the Fed should ignore the markets (and the president) and carefully examine the dangers of reducing rates”. Most of us can’t understand the desires of the next door, but Levy knows what the markets want? Hopefully, readers see the question the sense of Levy’s proposal for monolithic quality in the markets. It is the integration of disagreement.
From there, and assuming for a second that what is not true is actually true, that the Fed can create a cheaper or more accurate credit by decree, it is not absurd to point out that what Levy imagines is true is not. The “markets” want the Fed to cut, but Levy implies the markets and the president is stupid. Hmmm. Both;
Does it ask a question: Apartment owners, butchers and Ferrari representatives want to achieve fair market value for what they bring to the market or not? The question raises more questions about what Levy could mean. It is associated with Hoover, an institution that leans in favor of market forces without government involvement. This means that Levy and his associates would probably move the comment that if the New York housing sets the monthly rental price for apartments at $ 1,000, the market impact would be the lack of apartments.
Someone’s weakening that Levy et al would agree that what is true for the lack of apartments would also be revealed if the steaks, beef and Ferraris had been artificially cheaply ordered. Markets always speak and often speak noisy when governments replace their limited knowledge of market.
It’s something it’s worth remembering with Blithe’s LEVY comment on what the “markets” want from the Fed. Not to forget, no one borrows money, they probably lend the money that can be exchanged: Think of goods, services, inputs that create goods and services, work, etc., which reminds that, unlike the provision of a central power, the market is produced … on the market.
To read Levy is to imagine that he disagrees with the above. This credit is right there, only for central banks to decide how little or how little they should flow to the economy and at what price. No, he couldn’t believe that. Maybe she thinks the Fed knows how much or how little faith is inflationary? This seems to believe, but then why would he want to empower a creation of governments that have supervised inflation so much to protect us from government creations? They would not have credit or have access to it, would it be better to decide when and when not to offer it?
Someone is visiting that Levy would also be shaking for the power of composition, but if so, the latter would contradict his comments about what the “markets” want. Since the composition is so elemental to the health of savings and if saves are a large part of the market, they want what Levy imagines the Fed can offer: lower credit costs? Let’s hope that this question answers similarly, or maybe not?
Perhaps Levy means that the stock market wants lower rates than the Fed, but then the stocks increased in the midst of 525 basis points on interest rates that started in 2022, but fell in January 2001 and September 2007 and beyond the strong Fed.
So, once again, what do the “markets” want? If we knew that we would all be trillions because markets are us. What seems to end up with us that while markets are personalized knowledge, those who write about them really and really are not.
