It seems like just several months ago that Wall Street "Talking Heads" were lamenting the collapse of the Dollar and how the "Dollar carry trade" was just beginning and could last for many years. It's amazing how quickly sentiment can change, eh? The DXY has witnessed a huge rally and the shorter term technicals are still bullish. However, I'm now a "leery" long, with only 20% of a Max long position dedicated to the DXY, mostly because it seems like there is far too much bearish sentiment towards the Euro. Seriously, is there anyone that doesn't KNOW or believe that the Euro is going the way of the DoDo bird? As with the DoDo bird, the longer term picture for the Euro is clear, but it's probably not going to happen tomorrow. (The 20% Core position is there just in case my "gut" is wrong on the short term call.)
I've included only one S&P page here. It was a bad week for the stock market. The pattern is clearly corrective off the lows, exhibiting a "I've fallen and can't get up" look. I'm not in the camp that we're definitely going to crash, but there's a good chance we'll see at least 1,000 in the next few weeks.
The bears are clearly "in charge" right now and are the stronger team. So, why bet against them?
DXY Update With Some SP500 6 Jun 2010
43 comments:
Thanks AT
It has been pretty quiet on financial news. Hungary declares we're fine, G20 decides to pull back on stimulus and the Fed has an emergency discount rate meeting on 6/7. The weekly 3LB is now trending down and the lower close is further confirmation of the monthly 3LB reversal.
@Amen/Andy T
"It has been pretty quiet on financial news... Hungary declares we're fine, G20 decides to pull back on stimulus and the Fed has an emergency discount rate meeting on 6/7"...
---
With regards to the BOLD... CV has already prepared his classic "adjunct" (which will accompany Andy's great charts - tomorrow morning)...
ADJUNCT
Main Entry: ad·junct
Pronunciation: \ˈa-ˌjəŋ(k)t\
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin adjunctum, from neuter of adjunctus, past participle of adjungere
Date: 1588
1: something joined or added to another thing but not essentially a part of it
2: a) word or word group that qualifies or completes the meaning of another word or other words and is not itself a main structural element in its sentence
b) an adverb or adverbial (as heartily in “They ate heartily” or at noon in “We left at noon”) attached to the verb of a clause especially to express a relation of time, place, frequency, degree, or manner
...and so on... It has, INDEED, been pretty quiet on financial news... "ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT" (so to speak)...
Though the eye is by far the calmest part of the storm, with no wind at the center and typically clear skies, over the ocean it is possibly the most hazardous area. In the eyewall, wind-driven waves are all traveling in the same direction. In the center of the eye, however, waves from all directions converge, creating erratic crests which can build on each other, creating rogue waves. The maximum height of hurricane waves is unknown, but measurements of Hurricane Ivan, when it was a category four hurricane, estimated that waves near the eyewall were in excess of 40 meters (130 ft) from peak to trough.[26]
A common mistake, especially in areas where hurricanes are uncommon, is for residents to wander outside to inspect the damage while the eye passes over, thinking the storm is over. They are then caught completely by surprise by the violent winds in the opposite eyewall. The National Weather Service strongly discourages leaving shelter while the eye passes over.
@AmenRa
"None of them knew the color of the sky. Their eyes glanced level, and
were fastened upon the waves that swept toward them. These waves were of
the hue of slate, save for the tops, which were of foaming white, and
all of the men knew the colors of the sea. The horizon narrowed and
widened, and dipped and rose, and at all times its edge was jagged with
waves that seemed thrust up in points like rocks. Many a man ought to
have a bath-tub larger than the boat which here rode upon the sea. These
waves were most wrongfully and barbarously abrupt and tall, and each
froth-top was a problem in small-boat navigation."
"This tower was a giant, standing with
its back to the plight of the ants. It represented in a degree, to the
correspondent, the serenity of nature amid the struggles of the
individual--nature in the wind, and nature in the vision of men. She did
not seem cruel to him then, nor beneficent, nor treacherous, nor wise.
But she was indifferent, flatly indifferent. It is, perhaps, plausible
that a man in this situation, impressed with the unconcern of the
universe, should see the innumerable flaws of his life, and have them
taste wickedly in his mind and wish for another chance. A distinction
between right and wrong seems absurdly clear to him, then, in this new
ignorance of the grave-edge, and he understands that if he were given
another opportunity he would mend his conduct and his words, and be
better and brighter during an introduction or at a tea."
THE OPEN BOAT - Stephen Crane, 1897
Joey Heatherton or we'll strike.
thanks Andy-
good observation regarding the Euro-
funny comment however I saw earlier today- regarding the Fed and ECB-
Everything they've done is failing now, quicker than ever. The trillion dollar bailout from Europe helped for ten hours; so that's $100,000,000,000 per hour.
which I think is another good observation- lol
Great insights as usual, Andy. Thank you.
I'm not buying this as a crash. I prefer to use 1040.78 as the end of minor 1 and we are starting a C very shortly to end minor 2. The problem with the charts right now is both crash and melt-up are both very possible and realistic options.
Given 1219.8 to 1040.78 was 21 days, I'm inclined to think we will rise hard until next Monday - which would be 13 days. I like 1115-1126 range with 1123 being a=c but only if 1060.50 was the low i.e. end of a B wave.
Other reasons besides boredom playing with Fibo's this week:
1) We could be witnessing the end of a diagonal in a bear market (EWP p.37). "An ending diagonal occurs primarily in the fifth wave position at times when the preceding move has gone 'too far too fast', as Elliott put it.... In all cases, they are fond at the termination points of larger patterns, indiciationg exhaustion of the larger movement."
2) Fifth wave extension of fifth wave extension quite possible with the chart action on Friday.
3) EWP p.40 "fifth wave extensions, truncated fifths and ending diagonals all imply the same thing: dramtic reversal ahead. At some turning points, two of these phenomena have occurred together at different degrees, compounding the violence of the next move in the opposite direction."
4) EUR/USD and DXY all looking ready for an end of something.
The unfortunate part is looking at the charts, all of these scenarios can be found for both (short term) bullish and bearish interpretations.
Based on what I've been looking at:
Break of 1040.78 confirms minor 3.
Break of 1105.67 confirms in a C wave.
Break of 1091.81 confirms something ended at 1060.50 (unless we go to lower lows early Monday) at which point that would be the new end of minute 1 or B.
Monday will be interesting regardless of which count is correct.
@ahab
Speaking of comments...
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5255208&categoryid=2378529
(Obama, on the passing of Jihn Wooden, feels the need, [through his PRESS SECRETARY Robert Gibbs], to turn the light on himself, and offer his comments)...
I'm telling you I'm growing weary BY THE DAY of this, um, "great man"...
...NOT John Wooden, mind you
I posted something on the last thread from this weekend about public pay being 77% ahead of private pay. DL said this was silly. OK.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-04-federal-pay_N.htm
Overall, federal workers earned an average salary of $67,691 in 2008 for occupations that exist both in government and the private sector, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. The average pay for the same mix of jobs in the private sector was $60,046 in 2008, the most recent data available.
CHART: Federal salaries compared to private-sector
These salary figures do not include the value of health, pension and other benefits, which averaged $40,785 per federal employee in 2008 vs. $9,882 per private worker, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
67+41=108k
60+10 =70k
108/70=1.54
So DL was right. Federal employees only enjoy a 54% lead over their private pay bitched slapped companions...
Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., made federal pay an issue in his successful campaign to fill Edward Kennedy's seat and is fighting for a pay freeze.
The federal government spent about $224 billion in 2008 on compensation for about 2 million civilian employees.
"The data flip the conventional wisdom on its head," says Cato Institute budget analyst Chris Edwards, a critic of federal pay policy. "Federal workers make substantially more than private workers, not less, in addition to having a large advantage in benefits."
How does one spell STFU in STFU-ese?
Note: CV fully realizes that the same question can AND SHOULD be pointed at himself either:
- From time to time
- Pretty Damn Often
- All the effin time
But hey, I didn't run for POTUS now did I? All I did was perpetuate a blog effort (in accordance with my FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS & MUCH TO THE CHAGRIN of some)...
So therefore, all I'm doing is exercising my rights...
As ALL COMMENTATORS ("family-ish" or not) are willing to express AT WILL & AD HOC... Here...
Those rights are granted forever... So FEEL SAFE... (even if CV, in one of his FIRE BREATHING fits of INTENSITY, makes you feel otherwise from time to time)...
Technical Note... I'd suggest you COPY & PASTE that declaration (so you can USE IT AGAINST ME in a time of peril)... :-)
@Privately Employed
LOL...
It happened to happen... IN ORDER...
My (8:21) was NOT to you... Instead, it was a knock-on to my (8:09) to AHAB...
EURUSD has broken below 1.1900
TSIHTF
CV:
Lakers?
Easy to pick as horses?
@Privately Employed
Nonetheless... Regarding yours (&BinTN) argument... I'll re-paste the argument that I made to DL in the last thread...
---
@DL
"they would be that much worse if you cut their salaries by 50%"
Oh great... Let's follow that logic out further... Instead, let's DOUBLE their salaries (so as to "incentivize" them NOT to watch porn all day)... That ought to work!
OR
"Another misconception out there is that Federal employees receive exorbitant pension benefits. They don't."
DL... Are you PURPOSEFULLY attempting to be annoying as hell this afternoon? Normally I wouldn't bother, but there are thunderstorms rolling thru so I have a spare moment...
Let me take THAT argument a step further...
Now just think for a MOMENT... Just THINK... If NO HUMAN BEING on the planet were granted or guaranteed ANY type of pension or assistance for any of the work or toil that they'd worked hard to produce during their productive years...
It ought to "change" ones attitude no?
- Less BORROWING for things they didn't need, dererve, or could afford...
- Less corruption from entities scribed with the task of "inflating" so called SAVINGS to meet the new standard...
- More honesty and TRUE REWARD (overall)...
I guess that type of system might SUCK to you...
It'd be harder to trade E-Mini-s off of...
June 6, 2010 4:07 PM
---
OK... So CV is "mellower" now (4 hours thereafter)... But my point is the same...
Which is...
The VERY NATURE of FEDERAL EMPLOYEES (especially when extrapolating pension & subsidy benefits)... IS INHERENTLY "wasteful" and "non-productive" (AS APPLIED TO HUMAN BEHAVIOR)...
It's "anti-Darwinistic"
@Bruce
Yes... I'll take the Lakers to win this series...
re public (federal) vs private workers-
one observation from working at the IRS 20 years ago as a Revenue Officer-
private workers are fired at will- a RIF in the federal force is a very rare occurrence-
I have to agree w/ DL though regarding pay- starting pay blows for federal workers- even highly educated Phd level-
the plus is once you are hired- your pay check is as good as gold- and you can work your way up the government pay scale- never one worry about ever being fired
Ahab:
But the data says otherwise. The USA Today article is just one of many you can find that say the same thing. Public employees do the same work for 54% greater pay and benefits. Just because they work for uncle.
It damn sure ain't right.
@ahab
That's all well and good...
But I guess we are arguing about TWO DIFFERENT THINGS then...
1. What "candy-ass" system seems to be in place
2. What OUGHT NOT TO BE (in a society that desires to NOT be fiscally BANKRUPT over time)... Unless their society happens to abide over a "geographical territory" that contains the only "UNOBTANUIM" mining deposits on the planet...
This is FUCKING "Logan's Run" dude... :-)...
CV is only happy that he can chase after JENNY AGUTTER as he goes... :-)
http://www.racycostumes.com/racycostumesblog/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/jenny-agutter-logans-run.jpg
BinT-
go to USA Jobs and look at an entry level job posting-
lets say GS7/9 level-
probably about 35K to 40K a year or so-
you can get the job w/o experience at the PhD level-
but seriously would someone w/ a jurisprudence degree or a PhD in finance work for the federal government out of college for $40,000 when they can get paid much more elsewhere?
@ahab
or do you prefer the "Farrah/Jenny" look?
http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/090406/Farrah-Fawcett/logans-run_l.jpg
If you just look at "triangle" dynamics, the target of the Euro thrust lower should be around 1.18. I think Goldman Slacks was talking 1.18 a few weeks ago.....
@ahab
Either way... Here's foto of TWSWB chasing after that "TYPICAL RECOVERY"...
LOL
sorry... forgot the foto (in my dementia)
http://makeiteighteh.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/logans-run.jpg
CV-
you crack me up dude-
love the picture- of course(-:!!!!
@Andy
correct...
OLDEN SLACKS "did" take the 1.18 (even tho 1.15 and change is the FIBO)...
I "opined" on that day that, "hey - 4th call on Euro movement? gotta be the charm, right?"...
@ahab
I'm just trying to be ENTERTAINING...
This is all just like a "Chris Rock" concert to me... :-)
CV does this NOT for profit... But for ENTERTAINMENT... :-)
@ahab
But let me qualify that...
It is not I REPEAT... IT IS NOT entertaining for me to LOSE any amount of money...
Thus the perspective... (that you can count on)...
CV-
re BR- the way I envision it-
I see ol' BR sitting around in his smoking jacket- puffing on a nice dominican cigar- unless he can get cubans of course- ascot loosely tied- 911 convertible out front- sail boat moored neatly in its slip- sipping some cognac-
wondering what could possibly go wrong-
w/ no clue that maybe it's a bit darker and scarier than he imagined
@ahab
& BTW
ANYBODY can get Cubans...
That's the biggest joke of all mankind...
That was some serious momentum changing at the half by Kobe.
CV-
dude- I don't smoke cigars- so what do I know?
I'll take the other side of that argument-
If I am not mistaken, most of the new federal jobs are in the anti-terrorism (security theater) related areas. We can't be scrimping on our security now can we?
Most federal employees live in the greater DC area. Yes, there are federal employees all over the country, but the majority are in and around DC. The cost of living there is not the same as say, Ohio.
Most federal employees are also, when the are not working in DC, in other high cost of living areas. They don't have too many federal offices in the middle of nowhere, Iowa. NYC is one example where there are tons of federal employees.
And what were Lloyd's benefits worth when he was an employee of the Federal Government? What are/were Lloyds benefits (including use of the private jet and expense account) worth at any time during his tenure as the head of GS? Salary? An old fried of mine said he would work for free in exchange for an unlimited expense account. I am betting they are not part of the private sector numbers.
Expense accounts are benefits, but they don't get counted as "benefits". Add the sales staff "expense accounts" of one mega drug company and I bet those number would change a lot. I know several sales people in health care related fields that are still being encouraged to "expense everything". It seems that in the press they lump "selling expenses" in with R&D, and then use the resulting figure as the "research budget".
And 10k in benefits is not something to be proud of, I am paying over 10k a year for health insurance as a 30 something.
There is a lot more to that story than the math that is presented.
CV,
Regarding Federal employees, pensions, etc…
Point #1 is that I would like to see Federal spending reduced by at least 30%. (So I’m no socialist). And firing significant numbers of Federal workers is one of the ways in which savings can be realized (although, ultimately the big money is in defense and entitlements).
But I would pose the question to you, is there ANY Federal agency for which you would NOT want to see a decline in productivity and quality? Surely there must be SOMETHING the Federal government does that you think is worthwhile. Cut the salaries & benefits enough, and you’ll wind up with high turnover, and low quality.
Personally, I’d rather not have a pension at all. I’d rather just get a higher salary instead. From the management perspective, however, eliminating pensions would mean a much higher turnover rate.
Manny,
It was a good game, however, officiating was sketchy both ways (leaving it here to avoid David Stern's, er, I mean CV's fine/suspension).
I'm glad to see Boston didn't roll over. I don't really care who wins as long as it is a good series.
Ray Allen was insane in the first half.
AmenRa,
But S&P futures may be finding a bottom in the 1050-1055 range (a "bottom" from the perspective of the next 24 hours, anyway).
I'm not sure what it would mean but the .786 retracement of 1040.78-1105.67 is 1054.67.
There is no impulsive wave from 1040.78 so I will have to chalk it up to coincident unless someone can tell me something different.
AmenRa,
I have a question.
Do you think that the E-mini contract makes its move in the wee hours of the morning?
Just wondering.
@Amen
I went in and took off that string of messages that evidently got hung up, then posted all in a line...
I'm sure you're OK with that...
NEW THREAD UP
http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc100607.htm
There is a chart in today's letter. GDP growth minus federal deficit spending. Since 1961. Have a look at this thing....
It will take the hair off your chest.
from http://www.annaly.com/blog/
The number of workers moving from the “unemployed” bucket to the “not in the labor force” bucket is at a new record during May, which tells us that potential workers are getting frustrated with their job search and giving up. Couple that with the fact that the duration of unemployment in the US has risen to a high of 34.4 weeks in May, and this is not a pretty picture.
Post a Comment