Brad Setser

Follow the Money

Cross border flows, with a bit of macroeconomics

Print Print Cite Cite
Style: MLA APA Chicago Close


Open thread — I’ll be back on Friday

by Brad Setser
May 24, 2005

I am going to be away from my desk for a few days, and am not sure I will have internet access — I’ll try to check in, but if not, I am sure that you will find plenty to discuss.


  • Posted by Stormy

    Anne and jm,

    On the Cape, wrapped and preserved in the seawrack, we found delicate and nearly translucent tiny baby horseshoe crabs, around an inch or two in size. They are beautiful.

    So much is being lost. Those buried in concrete cities have no idea of what is happening. As long as the food is on the table, all is right with the world. And those growing up now will never know. What they see now will be the new yardstick. Who in the financial world will speak for the trees and the birds and even the lowly horseshoe crab?

  • Posted by anne


    “On the Cape, wrapped and preserved in the seawrack, we found delicate and nearly translucent tiny baby horseshoe crabs, around an inch or two in size. They are beautiful.”

    Imagine 🙂 A beautiful passage.

  • Posted by anne

    Steve, Stormy, JM,

    I am thinking about all of your interesting points.

  • Posted by DF

    The boss is gone, let’s have some fun.

    Here are some general thoughts :

    Overoptimism leads to over pessimism.
    That’s a general law, Buddha made it clear some 2700 years ago.

    This is the roots of bubbles.
    Of course bubbles are also the product of markets.
    When the all forms of plannification are destroyed in an economy, anticipations are free,
    people then make selffulfilling prophecies, that create those booms and bust.

    Lesson 1, out of the coming crisis, more plannification will follow.

    When as a country are poorer than your neighbour, the best option for growth is running an export surplus toward it in manufactured growth, and help it go on with an undervalued currency and policies favoring low wages (no union allowed etc.).

    Thus, investment flow towards you and increase your industrial base, productivity increases, while wages keep low, thus allowing for large savings by corporations immediatly reinvested.

    Soon the rich countries you export to have some difficulty to absorb all your production, then subsidize it through cheap credit.

    Of course, sooner or later. BUST. You have a too big industrial base for your consumers at home.

    Merge the two countries and what you have is a classic tale of boom bust through overinvestment, lagging wages lead to a boom in profits, asset prices, demand can only follow through increased credit.

    Lesson 2 : If wages do not keep up to productivity, then productivity (via production) will fall till it matches wages. (It might fall below wages indeed for a time being)

    Lesson 3 : Since China is the cause for lagging wages in the USA-Europe, since USA-Europe are destabilizing factors for China (think unfair subsidies to western farmers that speed up the rural transition in CHina by reducing agricultural prices world wide), since there is no world body to organize some world plannification (call it orderly disruption of BWII if you like, that’s plannification).
    Then expect protectionism on the rise in order to allow for some plannification at home.
    Protectionnism will prove very costly. But again, the only other way would be world plannification. ANyone ready for it ?

    4 you start in 1950 and 50 % of money is bills and coins, money created by the central banks.
    Fast forward 2005, 5% of money supply is issued by the central banks (the fed in the USA). 95% is then backed on the expansion of credit, on debt.

    Thus we have fantastic debt levels. Debt/GDP ratio is higher than 1929. And government debt is underscored by public accounting methods.

    With a fall in production, wages, overindebted consumers stop to increase their level of debt, they start to save more : money supply then falls, deflation. Debts become very expensive. Bankrupties. Deflation. Etc.
    If say the amount of debt falls by 2%, then the FED would have to double its money supply to compensate for this. They sure will need many helicopters. They might buy all the US bonds, with a deficit at 6% of GDP that’s equivalent for the FED as doubling its money supply. Therefore even if the FED was very agressive in its inflationnist stance, it would need to act a lot if debt levels are to fall back to long term levels.
    There’s a long way to go from 5% of money supply being the central banks money until we reach 50%.
    It took 50 years to move from 50 to 5%. I doubt it could move in 2 years from 5 back to 50, but if it was possible it would be great. Imagine : 80% of debts would be cleared by money creation, all those lenders would end with worthless cash. Don’t count on it.

    That’s it. Here we have : plannification, fall in production, protectionism, deflation depression.

    Where’s the hope ?
    Well I bet, most of the oncoming successes will come through network cooperative production. Where’s all the hype now ? It’s called linux, creative commons, social entrepreneurship.
    That’s the new path.

  • Posted by Stormy

    Arnold meets his match

    As I said earlier, there is a growing anger.

    For now, all the clever arguments against “big government” have had held sway–and they will for a while yet. But people are starting to see the con job. The real special interests are finally coming into focus.

  • Posted by anne

    There there is the answer to Australia’s trade deficit, after a while of data hunting. Australia has a government budget surplus and a trade deficit, how and why? The answer is that Australia has negative household saving and has long had negative household saving. Then, there is symmetry as there had to be with an America with slightly positive household saving and a government budget and trade deficit.

  • Posted by Movie Guy


    The following post by Anantha Nageswaran was originally posted under the Bernanke thread. Reposted here with permission:

    A visit (or Visits) to Brad’s BLOG is a daily ritual for me. For the most part, I tend to agree with his lucid analysis and conclusions. With such a rigorous analysis behind his statements, it is but natural that his conclusions are robust.

    Nonetheless, let me be bold (Or, foolish) enough to venture to differ. There is a tendency to run down the Americans or hold the country and its macro-economic policies largely responsible for the global imbalances. Part of it must be because most of the regular commentators on the BLOG are not necessarily sympathisers of President Bush and his policies.

    I am an Indian living in Singapore for the last six years and I had lived in Zurich for five years before that. So, I presume I could claim some neutrality in this debate.

    Until very recently, I was a bear on the US dollar citing the twin deficits and their likely continuation. However, I have had a re-think. Of course, it is not that I enrolled in the Republican Party in the US. I have no interest in that.

    It must be said that exchange rate determination models are hard to pin down. It is not often the case that current account deficits explain exchange rate movements. Also, sometimes interest rate differentials do a good job and on other occasions they break down. Hence, it is not necessarily automatic that a rising current account deficit should necessarily result in a weaker dollar.

    In hindsight, there are some explanations for the USD rebound and that it need not be a disaster for the US current deficit. First, the near universality of dollar bearishness at the turn of the year – and I was part of it – is part of the explanation for dollar’s recent strength.

    Further, the dollar’s recovery against the Euro need not necessarily result in a higher current account deficit, for its weakness over the last two years has not necessarily resulted in a surge in US exports to the region. Aggregate demand in the Eurozone has become so weak that exchange rate competitiveness in the exporting countries might not help at all.

    For every piece of evidence on America’s structural imperfections, Europe has matched it with more than one piece of evidence of its own economic malaise. With the return on holding American dollar exceeding that on the Euro by a full percentage point and rising, the saga of the Euro is well and truly over. More importantly, I do not believe that it is bad news for the US current account deficit.

    The keys to the US current account deficit are therefore two: Asian exchange rates and the housing bubble induced consumption. On the former, there are stop-and-go signs that Asians are beginning to get the message. Korea is a recent example although it is far from clear that there is a consensus in the country on not intervening in the foreign exchange market.

    But, the point is that more than what happens to the Euro-USD, what happens to Asian currencies against the USD is going to be far more important. If that happens, unlike Brad, I would not worry even if the USD were to strengthen against the Euro.

    He has been focusing on the Asian Reserve accumulation since 2002 and has therefore tended to question Bernanke’s statement that the ‘savings glut’ was an outcome of the Asian crisis.

    Honestly, he is right. Whether it is a savings glut or inadequate domestic investment opportunities relative to domestic savings is hair-splitting. The link below shows that it excess of savings over investments was there from 2000 onwards and it had become worse of course, lately.

    Prior to the crisis, East Asian economic formula was about investment spending (Mostly real estate) and export growth through competitiveness achieved through fixed exchange rates and low wages in the export sector. Now, it is all about exports only.

    This can also be seen in the Investment/GDP ratio in most Asian economies in the web site of the Asia Regional Information Centre of the Asian Development Bank:

    One cannot minimise the role of Asian mercantilism in the global imbalance. Faced with an asset price deflation and a geo-political shock (911), America did what text books suggest. It is a different matter that IMF conditionalities did not allow Emerging economies to follow the same prescription. It is also a different matter that the Bush administration used the opportunity to push ideologically driven fiscal measures rather than cyclically driven measures. But, the need for monetary and fiscal stimulus was unquestionable.

    Hence, it was very unavoidable that American current account deficit would rise. Europe was and is dead and Asia had lost confidence in itself. So, the only global economic growth engine was the American consumer. Yes, it was not the US and China. China was growing because of the US. Even the most ardent China admirer, Stephen Roach, concedes the absence of domestic demand drivers in that country. Further, look at the mess that Thailand and Korea have created for themselves with experiments in domestic consumption. They still are cleaning up the credit card mess. There goes through the window, claims of natural Asian thrift. It is, perhaps, more policy induced.

    So, why blame the American consumer instead of being grateful to him? Who knows what the world would have endured had America decided to belt up from 2003? So, is it also fair that Mr. Martin Wolf wants the American Treasury Secretary to crawl on his knees before his Chinese counterparts? At the minimum, Communist Party of China Central Committee members should be down there below the table, first.

    If Asian economies begin to face up to the costs of their exchange rate management, then it is half the battle won, for America, on the current account deficit and global rebalancing. The other half is in dealing with the housing market that has supported American consumption.

    One needs as much luck as skills in handling that. America might be close to getting that stroke of luck. China might be beginning to count the cost of its ‘growth at all costs’. The weekly ‘Greed and Fear’ news letter of Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia Equity Strategist (CLSA) Mr. Christopher Wood dated May 19th and titled, ‘Kamikaze capitalism’ is a very good read on China’s darkening economic clouds and its economic strategy that is beginning to outlive its usefulness.

    Therefore, the pressure exerted by China on the global price of crude oil has a good chance of abating. If the price of crude oil stays below USD 50, then there is a good chance that corporate spending in the US would revive. That might also give a more solid underpinning to household income and Networth than home price gains through a pick-up in hiring. The unambiguous all-round solidity and strength in the April employment report could be the harbinger of things to come.

    Then, with a gentle rise in the long-term interest rates, the housing market could correct so ‘smoothly’ as is happening in the UK without triggering any major economic slowdown. Let us face it: even if there is a recession, the American democracy and its USD 12 trillion economy could handle its consequences far better than the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party and its USD1.6 trillion economy.

    So, the battle against its imbalances is not over for America. But, the signs are more encouraging than they have ever been in the last few years. Further, our distaste for the ‘absolutes’ of the neo-cons should not blind us to the reality that America has been playing its geopolitical cards quite adroitly, regardless of whether we agree with the tactics used. After China did not rule out the use of force against Taiwan, both America and Japan declared Taiwan as their strategic concern in the region. Then, China’s orchestrated anger against Japanese ‘non-acceptance’ of its wartime atrocities backfired. Now, China has been forced to impose 400% export duty on its Textile exports. The European Union has not only been impotent but its hypocrisy in dealing with Iran and China too has been exposed.

    Hence, America might be beginning to get it right. I know that this has been a provocative exercise – if only in an intellectual sense (I hope) more than an analytically tight exercise. But that is the purpose. We all are vulnerable to the feeling of comfort that comes from sticking to familiar and entrenched positions. If this piece just forces us to re-examine our comfort zones, then it would have been a useful exercise, even if the conclusions are not changed.

    Posted by: Anantha Nageswaran at May 23, 2005 03:11 AM

    An excellent post.

  • Posted by anne

    What should immediately be asked is why do Australians feel no qualms about having negative household savings? The answer is excellent widespread pension plans. Australians have a security in retirement that neither the British nor Americans have.

  • Posted by Stormy

    I am impressed with the spirit and content of Anantha Nageswaran’s post.

  • Posted by Guest

    But even after reading the post a number of times, I am not convinced that long-term prospects are good. While it may be true that the Fed policies were the smart ones to play—maybe the only ones to play–, the housing bubble is being played by speculators and the newly found wealth of a very few. On the other hand, the polices of the White House and Congress are as much responsible for the housing bubble as is the Fed. Keeping taxes on the wealthy would have helped mute the bubble.

    From Anantha’s point of view, if we have the housing bubble to thank, then we indeed are indebted to the very well off for buying those second and third homes.

    Regarding the euro, the dollar, and the yuan—all three are tightly linked .

    Euro/dollar :: Euro/Yuan; the peg keeps it mathematically there.

    What happens to the euro when the dollar and yuan are de-linked? And how will that affect the euro/dollar? The euro/yuan? In fact, it is not only the euro that will be affected, it is every other currency in the world. People talk about a simple readjustment in the dollar/yuan. That will not be the case.

    It is true that the U.S. is a gigantic economy, and maybe the world should be thankful for it’s spending its wealth in lean times. But what I hear in the background are shudders rippling through its body politic. It takes a long time for giant to fall.

  • Posted by gillies

    i bought $50 today in my local small town bank, which cost me euros 41.

    i bought $50 early december as a christmas present for a daughter which cost about euro37.50.

    this is to put my money where my mouth is. transaction fees would eat into any gain if you did this as an investment. this is just for the hell of it. the gain or loss would perhaps buy a cup of coffee.

    anne. you look at the rationality of the bond market from your own perspective. imagine my $50 purchase were $50 billion. now give me 4% interest for the year. now add 5% more for the appreciation of the dollar (so far) since new year, and then some percentage for the rise in the values in the bond market. are we getting ten per cent plus per annum ? now if i am japanese and borrow the money at zero per cent. am i getting ten per cent of $50 billion – for next to nothing ?

    then there is the added bonus – by moving in packs we foreigners actually boost the dollar by what we are doing. it is going up because it is going up. we don’t go because it’s a party – it’s a party because we go.

    these markets are being shifted as by weight of money – not fundamentals nor academic theory. and by short term operators forcing longer term operators to come to heel. and by the dealers’ need for volatility so as to turn a profit. you know all that.

    now add in a bit of DF’s philosophy. all you need now is a name –
    ‘pendulum economics.’

    drive the market down ruthlessly. that is how to make it easier to drive it up ruthlessly when the time comes.

    daily forex turnover $1500 billion.
    u s short term securities $200 billion.
    daily NYSE equities $20 billion.

    these figures from a book may be out of date. in fact they are . . .but you get the general picture. that weight of money is too big to end up anywhere.( instant bubble instant bust.) so it is going back and forth like a tiger in a cage, or a pendulum.

    why is the dollar going up ? because it went down.

    i have read today somewhere that the weight of money now leads the fundamentals, not the other way around.

    all of this may lack precision – but may stimulate new ways of looking at things for those more at home with the figures and the detail.

    this side of limited nuclear war, i do not think america will permit an iranian oil bourse operating in euros. but even if dollar hegemony succumbs, i think it would have to be to a basket in which the dollar would be about 60 per cent, in any case.

    so is my 50 dollar bet safe ?

    for the moment it might be exactly as safe as the 50 renminbi small change in the pocket of brad setser’s other suit.

  • Posted by Stormy

    When you look at the graph of the euro/dollar it matches exactly the graph of the euro/yuan.

    The reason is the peg. Mathematically it makes the euro/dollar exactly the same as the euro/yuan; it a simple proportion.

    Releasing the yuan has a significant effect or the euro/dollar. But which way? Whole lot of betting going round on this one…every currencies’ relationship to the dollar and yuan is up for grabs.

    Am I missing something here?

  • Posted by Alexis

    Excuse a few typos of yesterday & barometric changes headache.

    Do not appreciate admonishment from a few for advocating middle-class values. Strength of some of those values go back to Greeks and Romans. Such commenting displays arrogance and myopia in thinking that some of don’t know more when in reality we have rejected theoretical hot air from our univ educations for best choice pragmatic solutions.

    So, as the question was posed yesterday: what are the solutions for resolving American trade deficit?

    A country that does just moves hot air around, plays with funny money schemes, allows foreign interests to buy up trillions of its companies[including utility cos] and assets, and takes on huge debt cannot long endure. It will become a third world type country. It’s only a matter of time. Many of us are not sunshine patriots.


    Since this is a far reaching site, there may be more than a few who have other vested interests.

    Also, might question the Indian observer and his objectivity regarding American citizens long-term interests?

  • Posted by anne

    Notice that the high yield bond market has stabilized.

  • Posted by aeolius


    I am stuck with the throwaway line used by Jack Crooks at Atimesyou quoted the other day. It was suggested that Kissinger and Carlyle were pushing a 10% Yuan revaluation for their own profit.
    I went and took a google-look at both of these groups and suddenly for the first time I began to believe in a Conspiracy.
    Do you think that there is a “They” who has enough weight to stand in the middle of the see saw and push the dollar up and down and cash in on both ends?
    Pynchon in “Gravities Rainbow” suggests that sometimes when you believe that someone is manipulating your life it is not paranoia. It is because someone IS manipulating your life.

  • Posted by MC3

    After living a crash in a “3rd world country”, i found a lot of similarities in the economic conditions from that moment with the current US status.
    I dont know if all of these elements were important in the final implosion, but i believe that these elements cannot be present all at the same time without negative consequences:

    – Huge domestic credit expansion.
    – Huge twin deficits.
    – Relaxed tax controls.
    – Disconnection between the real and the financial economy.
    – An economy based on services rather on production, that affected the type of employment in the labor market and forced a reconfiguration.
    – Dissapearing industry (i.e., the cheap chinese textil).
    – Increasing gap between rich & poor people.

    The end of the illusion came when the external financing was stopped. Consequences were all from text books: saving people lost their money (in these moments you learn that the money is just the promised money), borrowers went into bankrupcy, banks were saved by the government, inflation soared, poverty reached the half of population, etc.

    An american friend cannot understand why his house today has a value of 0.5m when he purchased it at 120k. Neither me, to be honest, but i know the end of history, so i told him maybe a good moment to sell and wait…

  • Posted by anne

    Interesting post, Susan, among a raft of interesting posts. How nice that there is so much to think through 🙂

  • Posted by anne


    Voyeur nonetheless, do post. What is especially nice is to have people with such dissimilar backgrounds contribute to the ideas and arguments.

  • Posted by anne

    A Red Knot
    However can this bird migrate 20,000 miles?

  • Posted by anne|20|…

    Northern Cardinal in a Snowbank
    New York City–Central Park, The Oven.

    My mom has several times seen a Cardinal settle on a sill of the house as a snow storm moves in and allow itself to be buried through the storm, emerging when it is over.

  • Posted by anne

    What is driving the weaker European economies is still American imports, America is surely not the cause of European slowness of growth. American long term interest rates are surprisingly low despite 8 increases in short term rates by the Federal Reserve, and surely our mix of interest rates is not preventing Europe from lowering short term rates. By growing below potential, Europe is not providing for the future nor preventing inflation but needlessly limiting living standards.

  • Posted by Guest

    “So, the battle against its imbalances is not over for America. But, the signs are more encouraging than they have ever been in the last few years.”

    Actually, the signs are looking worse than ever, especially for consumer debt. There’s no stopping it now.

  • Posted by DOR


    One of the solutions to the US trade deficit has to be returning American standards of living to sustainable levels. It requires shifting household outflow from consumption to debt repayment and savings. This would likely cause a recession, and considering the level of imbalances in the economy, a bad one.

    It also involves boosting government savings dramatically, to reduce the capital account surplus. Again, recession-making stuff.

    It hurts, it isn’t fun and it isn’t optional.

  • Posted by MTC

    anne –

    Thank you for your pounding away at bond market behavior. If you had not been so insistent, I might have relegated the 10 year’s downward drift to the category of “just one of those things” (or “‘shoganai,” as we say over here).

    The FT’s “Short View” column today tackles the 10 year bond. Ignore the first observation–it is distracting. Pay attention to the part about the Fed:

    “But might the bond markets be rational? Eric Lonergan, the Cazenove strategist, says bond investors watching the US economy are looking in the wrong direction. ‘There are increasing signs of global integration at the long end of the bond market,’ he says. ‘Bank of International Settlements data suggest Japanese banks were the biggest buyers of global government bonds in 2004.’

    As a result, Mr. Lonergan believes US yields are being dragged down by bond markets elsewhere. ‘The market has been fixated by the Fed funds rate when it should have been looking at eurozone rates,’ he argues.”

    If Lonergan is right then globalization has deepened to the point where the Federal Reserve can no longer rely on the funds rate as instrument to manipulate the tempo of the U.S. economy.

    Someone enlighten me.

    First, if the Fed Open Market Committee can no longer rely on funds rate to guide the U.S. economy, what exactly is going to be discussed at the Committee’s meetings?

    Second, can anyone think of any historical precedents, instances where the actions of the world’s other central banks trounced the Fed’s attempts to steer the U.S. economy?

  • Posted by MTC

    gillies –

    Thank you for your “i bought $50 today in my local small town bank, which cost me euros 41” comment. In thinking about currency movements, the devil is in the details.

  • Posted by anne

    Thank you, MTC 🙂

    There has evidently been no comparable period for us, and I know of no period in which a central bank repeatedly raised short term interest rates while receiving enough of a capital inflow to actually lower long term rates.

    “Shoganai,” a nice term.

  • Posted by touche

    “If Lonergan is right then globalization has deepened to the point where the Federal Reserve can no longer rely on the funds rate as instrument to manipulate the tempo of the U.S. economy.”

    There has been quite a few comments on these blogs saying exactly this.

  • Posted by anne

    Buffett Pays $5.1 Billion for Utility and Promises More Deals

    LONDON – Warren E. Buffett struck a deal on Tuesday to buy the electric utility PacifiCorp for $5.1 billion from Scottish Power, his largest purchase in eight years. Sounding a bullish note for the energy industry in general, he promised to buy similar assets in the future.

    Mr. Buffett, whose investing style has been scrutinized this year because of an investigation into the insurance industry, one of his longstanding favorites, said Tuesday that energy companies were a good fit with his company, Berkshire Hathaway, because they need capital and provide steady returns.

    He also trumpeted an eagerness to do big deals and a willingness to look outside the United States….

  • Posted by jm

    MTC, touche, anne: Have you read this Richard Duncan piece?

    Duncan’s “The Dollar Crisis” is a very serious and complete discussion of the problem. I have the first edition. An updated paperback editionis now out.

  • Posted by jm
  • Posted by MTC

    touche –

    “There have been quite a few comments on these blogs saying exactly this.”

    Perhaps, but then do we not still hang on Chairman Greenspan’s Delphic pronouncements? Why do we bother, if he and his cohorts are only pushing on strings, not pulling them?

    Remember, it was not so long ago that Time magazine put Greenspan, Rubin and Summers on its cover as “The Committee to Save the World.” Now Greenspan cannot even nudge U.S. interest rates in a desired direction–which, to speak in the vernacular, is sort of the reason why the Federal Reserve was set up in the first place.

  • Posted by anne


    Thank you, I will read the essay this morning.

  • Posted by DF

    The best way for the USA to solve its deficits is for the FED to officially target an inflation level of 5-6%
    For a start it should monetise a huge part of the US deficit.
    And for the US governement to favor union laws a high minimum wage etc.

    This should :
    Move asset prices down immediatly.
    Move interest up.

    If the FED is very agressive it might :
    Erase debt with inflation. Which is good
    Prevent debt deflation by issuing lots (I said lots) of cash.

    Let’s sum it up, the only way to prevent a recession is to stop to pour money from poors and middle class to upper class useless interest earners and invert flows.

    That’s pendulum economics indeed.

  • Posted by Movie Guy


    I posted my discussions of trade and trade policy on the second open thread.


  • Posted by gillies

    the precedent for not being able to use interest rates as a lever lies here. ireland has a currently thriving economy – but the basic interest rates are now the euro interest rates. we have no choice. our housing market is a bubble – possibly partly because our interest rates are set by the e c b to stimulate the stagnant and huge german economy. the vigorous and small irish economy might prefer less stimulation, but has to live with it.

    i also think the japanese near zero interest rates ‘export’ interest rate downward pressure to america.

    i also say, at the risk of repeating – that the ratio of loose return-seeking money to genuine business transactions is drowning out the fundamentals.

    the investment of the moment has a lot in common with media celebrity. you know, those people who are famous because they are famous. the power of the loose funds in a world without serious borders is massive. the current hot investment is anywhere the loose money chooses to go. perhaps the climactic bubble will be in tulip bulbs.

    the price of oil has far less to do with o p e c than with these leveraged loose money ‘pendulum economics’ scenarios.

  • Posted by gillies

    aeolius –

    the bush gang ( exlude bush himself – as he would only be in it via proxies) the bush family interests, the cheney/halliburton/rice/oil industry interests, the kissinger associates ‘consultancy, the carlyle group, those who control the arab oil money in the u s stock market, and buffet plus gates (just a passenger?) are a network, definitely.

    a conspiracy is just a network you don’t like the smell of.

    it is as simple as that.

  • Posted by DOR

    MTC, think of the Fed as an aging gunfighter in a Western movie. He can’t draw as fast as he used to, his eyesight isn’t nearly as sharp and his aim is a bit less steady. However, his reputation means he doesn’t need to pull his gun.

    Shoganai: Mei banfa in Putonghua (emphasis on the “ban”)


  • Posted by Alexis

    Agree re the network cited and effects of, gillies.