Comments on: Counterparties http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/08/13/counterparties-203/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: hsvkitty http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/08/13/counterparties-203/comment-page-1/#comment-17272 Sat, 14 Aug 2010 01:35:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=4926#comment-17272 Quants: The Alchemists of Wall Street 26:25 was very telling about ‘changing the maths to make it look less risky’ and hide risk.

37:36, and how to modify the speed of light?

Thanks for adding that… it interesting.

]]>
By: TFF http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/08/13/counterparties-203/comment-page-1/#comment-17251 Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:26:12 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=4926#comment-17251 The concept of “Teenager Backed Bonds” is likely a spoof, but investing in our youth makes a lot more practical sense than investing in our retirees. We’ve seen a huge transfer of wealth (on paper at least) from the younger generations to the “Me Generation” popularly known as the Baby Boomers.

The Boomers need to wake up and realize that no matter how much they have saved and invested (and when you add in the federal debt built over the last thirty years, it really isn’t much), THEIR CONSUMPTION IN RETIREMENT RELIES ON SOMEBODY ELSE PRODUCING.

Invest in teens today and you’ll have a booming economy in fifteen years. Suck the life out of education and training programs and the Boomers Social Security benefits will be resting on a foundation of sand.

]]>
By: Greycap http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/08/13/counterparties-203/comment-page-1/#comment-17250 Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:20:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=4926#comment-17250 Except that Nemo also forgot to add back the option premium when trying to infer a real yield from a TIPS yield. Once you do that, you find the real yield is not negative. But that hasn’t stopped anybody from “explaining” it!

]]>
By: TFF http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/08/13/counterparties-203/comment-page-1/#comment-17249 Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:14:42 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=4926#comment-17249 The risk to cash is inflation. (We could see inflation, could see deflation, who really knows?) That is why TIPS are attractive.

Of course the risk to government bonds is fiscal imprudence and sovereign default. That is why gold is attractive.

Except gold does nothing but sit there and look pretty, backed by nothing but the collective fears of the world. If the economy stabilizes, gold will fall. That is why stocks are better.

But stocks are vulnerable to economic health. Even major corporations could run into trouble if the global economy stagnates. Bonds are safer.

Bonds, on the other hand, are sensitive to rising interest rates. And with interest rates at record lows, what else can they do? So stick with cash.

Oops… Think I’ve come full circle now? Isn’t any course of action without risk, so you might as well blow it all on one big party and go out in style.

]]>
By: fresnodan http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/08/13/counterparties-203/comment-page-1/#comment-17248 Fri, 13 Aug 2010 11:07:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=4926#comment-17248 “The negative TIPS yield is a rational reaction to the lunatic casino that has infested every market in the world”

I agree. The stock market hasn’t gone anywhere in 10 years, and may go substantially lower. Housing may go substantively lower also. Holding actually cash has the potential of theft or loss. We may be in a situation where there is no growth, and the very best one can do is to lose small amount of value slowly.

]]>