I watch The Ed Show so you don’t have to, plus it is the least informative “news show” in the history of fake news shows. Seriously, you would be more informed if you watched nothing at all and smoked pot all day long than if you get your information from Ed Schultz. It isn’t even good junk TV and it is beyond me how he has an audience. He consistently misinforms, spins or lies and passes it off as the “truth”, maybe as he sees it, but it is not the truth.
Schultz equates the equity markets with the economy or the economies strength which is not how it works. I know, it makes sense that of the markets are doing great the economy must be doing great, but that is not always the case. The equity or stock markets performance is a function of several different factors and many claim the markets look forward 6 months in terms of the economy, which I don’t buy either. Think about it, if the markets were so forward looking would we ever have a sudden market crash? Unlikely, not to mention there is no way to look into the future, not even psychics can do that.
Good Ole Eddie Schultz says that since the market went up some 200 points the day the debt ceiling cleared the house that it proves Obama is God and that if the GOP does what Obama wants it is all ice cream and cake forever. Well, first of all, the house passed the bill after the market closed, so, whatever. Second of all, this guy wants you to believe the market clawing its way back to 16,000 is fantastic even though we are still down some 500+ points from January 1, 2014. I guess Obama gets the up days while the GOP is responsible for the down days, in Ed Schultz world.
Look, since 2009 the markets have reacted differently than at any other point in history. Yes, the government spent loads of money, but those were one time items that do not reflect the current market in any way shape or form. Not to mention the move down during the crisis was way overdone to the tune of thousands of Dow points and was irrational. The rebound in equity prices is complex, so stick with me on this, all will be explained.
The rapid rise in equity prices were a result of a dead cat bounce, at first, but then the federal government spent hundreds of billions which fueled the bounce further. In conjunction with the government the Federal Reserve Bank, the Fed, also stepped in and began to use new and different tools to help boost the economy. First, they moved interest rates to zero, as you know, which was designed to push investors out of bonds and into risk assets, stocks.
Second, when zero bound interest rate policy was losing its luster the Fed began quantitative easing, QE, to the tune of about a trillion dollars. What this did was buy securities, government bonds, from banks giving these banks excess cash to, supposedly, loan out at interest in order to boost banks profits and open up credit to the people. Well, that didn’t work the way they wanted it, but banks had more cash they had to do something with so it went to their proprietary trading desks which, in turn, bought stocks. The first QE program also lost its luster so they launched QE 2,3 and now an ongoing bond buying program that was expanded to include mortgage backed securities as well.
The ongoing QE program the Fed started out buying $85B worth of bonds a month, a month! All of these programs helped open credit lines, but the real beneficiaries were the banks who put the work into equities, basically. In the meantime, the Fed has increased its balance sheet, creating money from nothing, from $800B in 2008 to its now robust and unprecedented $4T+ level, scarry. The bottom line is that this free cash from the Fed has fueled the markets higher regardless of what Ed Schultz or anyone else thinks.
How do I know this? Well, the Fed in January decided to cut their monthly spending by $10B a month and the markets sanks. In February they cut another $10B and the markets cut a total of 1800 points from its high. However, the evidence goes further back because after each initial QE program stopped the markets sank, each time, which is why the Fed went nuts and did the huge $85B per month program.
I am not saying the economy hasn’t done better, it has, marginally. Corporate America also ebgan to have massive productivity gains from a smaller workforce, not a good thing because businesses learned they could do more with less. Which is why the labor participation rate is at 35 year lows which is awful and has nothing to do with Baby Boomers retiring as most Boomers are now working LONGER than they anticipated. I see this everyday, the media wants it both ways, the economy is strong so stop complaining, but we need more unemployment insurance and food stamps because the economy is so weak… HUH?
Corporate profits are up, but growth is so-so, last year we had 4% corporate earnings growth but the Dow went up 27%, how does that make sense? It doesn’t until you factor in what the Fed has done. In fact, this “recovery” is the weakest recovery ever and the 3-4M jobs Obama takes credit for is pitiful and called a jobless recovery, not good.
So, Ed Schultz gives Obama credit for all that is good, even though the GOP who “obstructed” him for the last 4 years have “obstructed” him for 4 years! See, they want it both ways, drives me nuts. How can he point to the markets only during the up period and say how great things are, even though stock ownership is down for the middle class, and when the markets tank he ignores them? Are you getting this? It makes zero sense in the real world.
This is why MSNBC viewers are consistently uninformed people out there versus other networks, source. This also explains why the network can’t get more than the same 6 or so people on as guests, EJ Dion, Karen Finney, Eugene Robinson, Joy Reid, David Axelrod (surprise-surprise), and a few others. They live in an echo chamber, not one conservative, I’d hardly call Steve Schmidt a conservative as he has an axe to grind, not one opposing opinion. Even the non-analyst guests are prominent democrats, Ed Randell, etc.
This guy outright lies and is proud of it. He even takes money from unions, has the union leaders on and doesn’t disclose he is paid by them to do events. It is also rumored that there is a domestic abuse in his past, records were sealed in North Dakota, here or is he just a hotheaded asshole, here? Why can’t I run into Eddie when he feels tough? Then again me larger than normal stature might end the debate without punches… yeah, I am a big guy at 6’ 5” and, well, a gentleman never tells…
When you know someone watches MSNBC then you know they are uninformed, low information voters which is so sad. MSNBC used to be good, kind of, but better than this. We deserve better, the country deserves better even if they are progressive idiots.
Ed Schultz, Perhaps The Dumbest Man Alive
No comments:
Post a Comment