Liquidity is an immediate issue for the banking system, but the long term issue is solvency caused by the imbalances that have grown, and continue to grow, within the European economy. Deflationary policies that have been pushed onto the periphery are making that worse….
via Europe solves the wrong problem – macrobusiness.com.au | macrobusiness.com.au.
The Aussie dollar recovered above parity, breach of the declining trendline indicating that the correction is over. Breakout of the CRB Commodities Index above 325 would be a bullish sign, suggesting another test of $1.08 against the greenback. Breakout above $1.08 remains unlikely, but would offer a long-term target of 1.20*.
* Target calculation: 1.08 + ( 1.08 – 0.96 ) = 1.20
CRB Commodities Index is headed for another test of the descending trendline. Upward breakout would be a bullish sign, indicating that the down-trend is weakening — especially if accompanied by a 63-day Twiggs Momentum cross to above zero. Reversal below primary support at 293, on the other hand, would signal another decline with a target of 265*.
* Target calculation: 295 – ( 325 – 295 ) = 265
Spot gold rallied off support at $1670 as the dollar weakened. The primary trend remains upward and breakout above $1800 would signal a test of $1900*. Declining 63-day Twiggs Momentum warns that the trend may be weakening, but only a cross below zero would confirm.
* Target calculation: 1800 + ( 1800 – 1700 ) = 1900
The Dollar Index is retracing after a strong rally over the last few weeks. Respect of support at 78.00 would indicate buying pressure, favoring a breakout above 80.00. Breakout would signal another primary advance — with a target of 85.00*.
* Target calculation: 80 + ( 80 – 75 ) = 85
Dow Jones Industrial Average rallied strongly in response to news of a European rescue by major central banks. Sharp rallies are typical of shorts covering in a bear market. Strong volume indicates resistance — if you look back over the last few months (ignore triple-witching at [W]) volume above 200 million normally precedes a reversal. Expect selling pressure at 12000 to 12300, leading to a reversal. Breakout above 12300 is unlikely but would be a strong bull signal, indicating that buyers have overcome resistance.
David Weidner, Marketwatch: “Give me a swap line on currency and I will bet the farm….I am shocked that the market is rallying this much today on this news [European markets up about 10pc in dollar terms].”
[gigya src=”http://s.wsj.net/media/swf/VideoPlayerMain.swf” bgcolor=”#FFFFFF” flashVars=”videoGUID={AD7BEC4D-CBC8-43CB-BB27-480E104899E9}&playerid=1000&plyMediaEnabled=1&configURL=http://wsj.vo.llnwd.net/o28/players/&autoStart=false” width=”512″ height=”363″ seamlesstabbing=”false”]
David Weidner interviewed by Evan Newmark of Mean Street.
The idea of free trade is of course based primarily on David Ricardo’s 1817 theory of ‘comparative advantage’. Comparative advantage is a lovely little mathematical proof that even if one party is better at producing everything, the greatest efficiency in production can be attained, and all parties can benefit, if each trading party focuses on producing what they are relatively best at, and they trade freely with one another for the rest of what they need.
….comparative advantage does not take into account the costs associated with shifting a regions productive infrastructure from where it is now to producing what it is relatively best at producing.
Neither does comparative advantage take into account the costs of trade; the ports, the ships, the rail lines, the petrol. As well as the economic costs, we can also look at social and environmental costs in relation to both this and the above point.
….Considering these problems, I think it is fair to say that all that the mathematical proof of comparative advantage tells us is that it is possible for all parties to benefit from free trade, not that they necessarily will.
via Free trade's not free, bring back the tariff – On Line Opinion – 1/12/2011.
Hillary Clinton has urged developing nations to be “smart shoppers” when accepting foreign aid from China and other new donors, as she became the first US secretary of state in more than 50 years to visit Burma on Wednesday.
In Rangoon, Mrs Clinton warned that powerful emerging economies may be more interested in exploiting natural resources than promoting real development.
“Be wary of donors who are more interested in extracting your resources than in building your capacity,” she said. “Some funding might help fill short-term budget gaps, but we’ve seen time and again that these quick fixes won’t produce self-sustaining results.”
Need a reason to explain the massive central bank intervention from China, to Japan, Switzerland, the ECB, England and all the way to the US? Forbes may have one explanation: “It appears that a big European bank got close to failure last night. European banks, especially French banks, rely heavily on funding in the wholesale money markets. It appears that a major bank was having difficulty funding its immediate liquidity needs. The cavalry was called in and has come to the successful rescue.”
via Did A Large European Bank Almost Fail Last Night? | ZeroHedge.
