<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: quick macro update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/16/quick-macro-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/16/quick-macro-update/</link>
	<description>St Croix, United States Virgin Islands</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 04:52:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: warren mosler</title>
		<link>http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/16/quick-macro-update/comment-page-1/#comment-11282</link>
		<dc:creator>warren mosler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 12:25:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8971#comment-11282</guid>
		<description>yes, looks like it.  sovereign risk is being priced differently in different currencies for some reason.  could be a tax reason, or a difference in investor preferences for some other reason such as pension fund rules, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yes, looks like it.  sovereign risk is being priced differently in different currencies for some reason.  could be a tax reason, or a difference in investor preferences for some other reason such as pension fund rules, etc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: knapp</title>
		<link>http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/16/quick-macro-update/comment-page-1/#comment-11186</link>
		<dc:creator>knapp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:12:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8971#comment-11186</guid>
		<description>&quot;Germany and Austria led governments and companies in Europe selling $21.7 billion of bonds in the U.S. currency this week to take advantage of the reduced cost of exchanging the proceeds back into euros.&quot;

Is the dollar bond issuance by Germany and Austria as innocuous as this headline suggests?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Germany and Austria led governments and companies in Europe selling $21.7 billion of bonds in the U.S. currency this week to take advantage of the reduced cost of exchanging the proceeds back into euros.&#8221;</p>
<p>Is the dollar bond issuance by Germany and Austria as innocuous as this headline suggests?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: warren mosler</title>
		<link>http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/16/quick-macro-update/comment-page-1/#comment-11144</link>
		<dc:creator>warren mosler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:44:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8971#comment-11144</guid>
		<description>debt will be reduced as a function of the increased deficit spending, no matter how high or low actual spending is, to the penny, by identity, in fact.

so spending might be down in spite of increased savings, not because of it.  and it&#039;s down because the savings desires still exceed actual savings even at the higher levels of deficits/savings.

when spending picks up you&#039;ll know savings desires have been met, at least for the moment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>debt will be reduced as a function of the increased deficit spending, no matter how high or low actual spending is, to the penny, by identity, in fact.</p>
<p>so spending might be down in spite of increased savings, not because of it.  and it&#8217;s down because the savings desires still exceed actual savings even at the higher levels of deficits/savings.</p>
<p>when spending picks up you&#8217;ll know savings desires have been met, at least for the moment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Baird</title>
		<link>http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/16/quick-macro-update/comment-page-1/#comment-11141</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Baird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 15:34:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8971#comment-11141</guid>
		<description>Knapp - 

Exactly.  The point is, when consumers are as overleveraged as they are currently, any fiscal adjustment is going to be used mostly for savings and debt paydown - and that&#039;s a feature, not a bug.  The natural conclusion is just to increase the adjustment until savings desires are met and spending picks up.  But since virtually everybody, including so-called &quot;Keynesians&quot; thinks that fiscal adjustments &quot;cost&quot; something that needs to be &quot;paid back&quot; instead of just being changed numbers in a spreadsheet, they get caught up in these absurd arguments about &quot;bang for the buck&quot; and &quot;multipliers&quot;...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Knapp &#8211; </p>
<p>Exactly.  The point is, when consumers are as overleveraged as they are currently, any fiscal adjustment is going to be used mostly for savings and debt paydown &#8211; and that&#8217;s a feature, not a bug.  The natural conclusion is just to increase the adjustment until savings desires are met and spending picks up.  But since virtually everybody, including so-called &#8220;Keynesians&#8221; thinks that fiscal adjustments &#8220;cost&#8221; something that needs to be &#8220;paid back&#8221; instead of just being changed numbers in a spreadsheet, they get caught up in these absurd arguments about &#8220;bang for the buck&#8221; and &#8220;multipliers&#8221;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: knapp</title>
		<link>http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/16/quick-macro-update/comment-page-1/#comment-11138</link>
		<dc:creator>knapp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:31:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8971#comment-11138</guid>
		<description>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204731804574385233867030644.html

Warren,

I&#039;d love to get your comments on today WSJ editorial &quot;The Stimulus Didn&#039;t Work&quot;.  

My own two cents is that critics of the stimulus ignore or downplay the deflation-mitigation effects of increasing private sector savings and instead obsess over the multiplier.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204731804574385233867030644.html" rel="nofollow">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204731804574385233867030644.html</a></p>
<p>Warren,</p>
<p>I&#8217;d love to get your comments on today WSJ editorial &#8220;The Stimulus Didn&#8217;t Work&#8221;.  </p>
<p>My own two cents is that critics of the stimulus ignore or downplay the deflation-mitigation effects of increasing private sector savings and instead obsess over the multiplier.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Baird</title>
		<link>http://moslereconomics.com/2009/09/16/quick-macro-update/comment-page-1/#comment-11071</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Baird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:04:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8971#comment-11071</guid>
		<description>&quot;U.S. President Barack Obama has failed to appoint advisers and regulators who understand the complexity of financial systems&quot;

Actually, the problem is that he has failed to appoint advisors who understand the simplicity of financial systems.  They think they are more complex than they are...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;U.S. President Barack Obama has failed to appoint advisers and regulators who understand the complexity of financial systems&#8221;</p>
<p>Actually, the problem is that he has failed to appoint advisors who understand the simplicity of financial systems.  They think they are more complex than they are&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

