Morning Report – Private entities trying to force something with Fan and Fred 11/15/13

Vital Statistics:

Last Change Percent
S&P Futures 1791.2 3.5 0.20%
Eurostoxx Index 3057.4 3.7 0.12%
Oil (WTI) 93.88 0.1 0.13%
LIBOR 0.238 0.000 -0.15%
US Dollar Index (DXY) 80.88 -0.141 -0.17%
10 Year Govt Bond Yield 2.70% 0.01%
Current Coupon Ginnie Mae TBA 105.7 -0.2
Current Coupon Fannie Mae TBA 104.6 -0.1
RPX Composite Real Estate Index 200.7 -0.2
BankRate 30 Year Fixed Rate Mortgage 4.34
Markets are higher on no real news. Bonds and MBS are down small.
The Empire Manufacturing Survey came in lower than expected and import prices fell. Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization fell.
Bill Ackman has taken a 10% stake in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and may seek talks. This comes on the back of Fairholme’s bid to buy the insurance units of Fan and Fred. Fairholme’s bid would probably be denied by the government. Many in the financial community view the government’s changing the terms of the bailout just as Fannie and Fred became profitable as dirty pool. The government owns 80% of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s stock and doesn’t have to do anything it doesn’t want to, but it certainly cannot relish the thought of dueling in the press with guys like Ackman, Pauson, and Berkowitz.
Housing affordability fell in the third quarter as prices rose and interest rates increased, according to the NAHB.
Janet Yellen’s testimony was pretty much as predicted. She is a dove. Reading the tea leaves, however it appears she is in no rush to begin tapering. Punch line:  I don’t know how you could have come out of that meeting thinking “I gotta short some bonds, right here.” Here is my longer take on it from yesterday: http://thenadtearsheet.blogspot.com/2013/11/janet-yellen-data-dump_14.html

32 Responses

  1. Yes, this will help. Especially if he again mentions Big Foot Amputation and the Tonsil Nazi’s!

    http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/11/14/lehigh/g5Cw1soDELna79BBaHey3I/story.html

    I hope he doesn’t forget to Reccommended that Granny get the pain pill rather than a pacemaker.

    Like

  2. With not only a hat tip but a full curtsey to yello, this list is too good to miss. Stupid things finance people say (my favorite, which made me think of Brent immediately)(not that Brent says stupid things, but that he avoids them):

    “The Dow is down 50 points as investors react to news of [X].”

    Stop it, you’re just making stuff up. “Stocks are down and no one knows why” is the only honest headline in this category.

    Like

  3. So, now paternalism is good?

    @NBC_Tom_Curry: Sen. Bill Nelson: “Some people who have health insurance don’t realize how much better it could be with much more comprehensive coverage”

    Like

  4. “Some people who have health insurance don’t realize how much better it could be with much more comprehensive coverage””

    A fine argument to make. in 2009.

    Like

  5. Hmmmmmm.

    “Presumably they will also not enforce the mandate against people who have grandfathered plans. But that raises an interesting legal issue. Remember that in 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that the mandate was a tax. And as a lawyer of my acquaintance points out, taxes have to be enforced uniformly; the Internal Revenue Service can pick and choose who it audits, but it cannot pick and choose who has to obey the law. If it declines to enforce the mandate against grandfathered consumers, it’s conceivably opening itself up to a bunch of legal challenges.”

    http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-14/obamacare-is-whatever-obama-says-it-is.html

    Like

  6. Happy thought for the day. Nothing better than receiving that first check of the year where you have escaped FICA’s gravity well.

    Like

  7. and it’s only mid Nov!

    Like

  8. Ds who voted for Upton bil

    • Ron Barber (Ariz.)
    • John Barrow (Ga.)
    • Ami Bera (Calif.)
    • Tim Bishop (N.Y.)
    • Bruce Braley (Iowa)
    • Julia Brownley (Calif.)
    • Cheri Bustos (Ill.)
    • Jim Costa (Calif.)
    • Peter DeFazio (Ore.)
    • Suzan DelBene (Wash.)
    • Tammy Duckworth (Ill.)
    • Bill Enyart (Ill.)
    • Elizabeth Esty (Conn.)
    • Bill Foster (Ill.)
    • Pete Gallego (Texas)
    • John Garamendi (Calif.),
    • Joe Garcia (Fla.)
    • Ron Kind (Wis.)
    • Ann McLane Kuster (N.H.)
    • Dave Loebsack (Iowa)
    • Dan Maffei (N.Y.)
    • Sean Patrick Maloney (N.Y.)
    • Jim Matheson (Utah)
    • Mike McIntyre (N.C.)
    • Jerry McNerney (Calif.)
    • Patrick Murphy (Fla.)
    • Rick Nolan (Minn.)
    • Bill Owens (N.Y.)
    • Gary Peters (Mich.)
    • Scott Peters (Calif.)
    • Collin Peterson (Minn.)
    • Nick Rahall (W. Va.)
    • Raul Ruiz (Calif.)
    • Brad Schneider (Ill.)
    • Kurt Schrader (Ore.)
    • Carol Shea-Porter (N.H.)
    • Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.)
    • Filemon Vela (Texas)
    • Tim Walz (Minn.)

    Like

  9. I guess the million cancellations in CA clarified the mind.

    @TheH2: Obamacare: insuring thousands by canceling the insurance of millions. Nice work, Democrats.

    Like

  10. It’s just that Obama loves the uninsured so much he wants more of them.

    Like

  11. The Matheson vote tells you everything you need to know about that group of people.

    Like

  12. What’s it say about Carol Porter Shea?

    Like

  13. Will someone ask them why they think it’s a problem?

    and we believe it’s a solution to a problem that has clearly arisen that the president wants addressed.”

    Me neither. Why do you think it won’t be asked?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/16/business/after-meeting-health-insurers-question-proposals-workability.html?smid=tw-share&_r=2&pagewanted=all&

    Like

  14. Who here beleive’s in a JFK asasination conspiracy?

    What if it were the Russians, you had proof and you were LBJ, what would you do?

    Like

    • McWing:

      Who here beleive’s in a JFK asasination conspiracy?

      I do not. After spending an unhealthy amount of time actually reading about it all (I’ve read pretty much all the conspiracy books, as well as Posner’s and Bugliosi’s conspiracy de-bunking books, and I have an abridged copy of the Warren Commission report) I am firmly in the lone nut camp.

      Funny you ask about this…on my trip last week I did a poll of all the guys on the trip and the lone nut was a clear winner.

      Like

      • The only testimony that ever gave me pause on the lone gunman was Big John’s. An experienced hunter, he said he heard shots from two directions. Still, modern forensics says lone nut.

        Like

        • Mark:

          The only testimony that ever gave me pause on the lone gunman was Big John’s. An experienced hunter, he said he heard shots from two directions.

          I thought Connolly’s belief in a second shooter derived not from the direction from which he heard the shots, but rather from his conviction that he heard a first shot before he got hit by a second shot. The Warren Commission theory was that Kennedy got hit by the first shot, and since there were only three shots and we know that one of them missed while the third was the fatal head shot, that meant that Connolly had to be hit by the same first bullet that hit Kennedy. Connolly was always firm about the fact that he heard a shot, turned to see where it was coming from, and only then got hit, meaning that if the first shot hit Kennedy, Connolly must have gotten hit by a different, 4th shot. Four total shots implied a conspiracy.

          But Posner suggested that the Warren commission had it wrong, ie that the first shot missed, and the second shot hit both Kennedy and Connolly. This theory has two things to recommend it. First, it reconciles Connolly’s (as well as others’) perception of the order of events with the single bullet theory that must be true in the absence of a second shooter. And second, it widens the time period over which all of the shots took place, increasing the plausibility of a lone shooter getting all three shots off.

          Like

  15. What I think about is what if there was firm evidence that the Russians were behind the assassination. What should Johnson have done? I know it’s purely hypothetical here and I’m in the lone nut category, but if there was credible evidence that the Russians were behind this, should Johnson have shared it with the public?

    I keep seeing that the Kennedy assasination is where the country lost it’s innocence. What about the slaughter of the Civil War? WWI? The Great Depression? WWII? I have to admit I get utterly disgusted at baby boomer ethnocentrism. History did not start in 1946 for God’s sake.

    Anyhoo, would you, if you were Johnson. have revealed to the public that you had strong evidence that the Russians were behind the assassination?

    Like

    • McWing:

      Anyhoo, would you, if you were Johnson. have revealed to the public that you had strong evidence that the Russians were behind the assassination?

      I think so. How can not making it public be justified? In order to avoid action that might lead to war? I don’t see how a president could justifiably not act on information that a foreign power had assassinated the president.

      Like

  16. Scott, I don’t disagree, but it’s not just *a* foreign power, but *the* foreign power. I just cannot fathom what the public reaction would be and what the appropriate response from the US would be. Everything I envision leads to a nuclear exchange.

    Just as a side note, Kruschev was removed from power slightly less than a year from the assassination. Coincidence or result of?

    Like

    • McWing:

      Coincidence or result of?

      Coincidence, if only because after the collapse of the USSR we would have heard otherwise if it wasn’t.

      Like

  17. “The Matheson vote tells you everything you need to know about that group of people.”

    Can you explain? I’m not following.

    Like

    • Off topic: I have successfullycategorized all posts since May 26. Looking back, I have about 400 more to do since the beginning of time as we know it.

      Like

  18. Can you explain? I’m not following.

    DINOs! Like Porter-Shea!

    Like

  19. Scott, how does Posner account for the bystander getting hit with concrete from the errant shot?

    Like

    • McWing:

      Scott, how does Posner account for the bystander getting hit with concrete from the errant shot?

      If I remember correctly, he proposes that the first shot was taken just as the car emerged from behind the tree in front of the Book Depository, and that it hit a branch of the tree, deflecting it further down Elm, hitting the curb.

      Like

  20. So Posner is saying 1st shot missed and only 3 shots?

    Like

Be kind, show respect, and all will be right with the world.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: