Profile - To The Moon

DavidChung

Posts · 8Posts · 8
Following · 0Following · 0
Followers · 0Followers · 0

- DavidChungDavidChung
  ·2021-08-01
  Really ?
  The worst "season" of U.S. stocks is coming
  在经历了7月1日到7月15日历史数据统计的“史上最强劲两周”后，美股即将迎来统计数据上的最糟糕月份——八月。正如高盛信贷策略师Scott Rubner所统计的那样，整个八月份市场趋势都在走低，这是
  The worst "season" of U.S. stocks is coming
  2.26K Comment
  1
  Share
  Report
- DavidChungDavidChung
  ·2021-07-30
  Hi
  Sorry, this post has been deleted
  3.36K 1
  3
  Share
  Report
- DavidChungDavidChung
  ·2021-07-27
  Good
  What happened to the Fed? Is there inflation or not?
  最近在思考一个问题，外部在通胀，价格持续上涨，为什么美联储就是不承认通胀呢？一直说是暂时的，而且，最近一直关注劳动力市场，也一直在推迟政策转向找各种理由，所说的进一步迹象也没有答案。最近看了几本书，《
  What happened to the Fed? Is there inflation or not?
  2.36K Comment
  1
  Share
  Report
- DavidChungDavidChung
  ·2021-07-21
  Hi
  Sorry, this post has been deleted
  2.79K Comment
  Like
  Share
  Report

Most Discussed

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"isCurrentUser":false,"userPageInfo":{"id":"4088510584208570","uuid":"4088510584208570","gmtCreate":1625407855360,"gmtModify":1627179540510,"name":"DavidChung","pinyin":"davidchung","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1790a1450aa7bdec104690967e1c814f","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":76,"tweetSize":8,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"init","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-2","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Master Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 100","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ad22cfbe2d05aa393b18e9226e4b0307","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/36702e6ff3ffe46acafee66cc85273ca","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d52eb88fa385cf5abe2616ed63781765","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"80.62%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"page":1,"watchlist":null,"tweetList":[{"id":802569832,"gmtCreate":1627788765726,"gmtModify":1703495892143,"author":{"id":"4088510584208570","authorId":"4088510584208570","name":"DavidChung","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1790a1450aa7bdec104690967e1c814f","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4088510584208570","authorIdStr":"4088510584208570"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Really ?","listText":"Really ?","text":"Really ?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802569832","repostId":"2155894163","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2155894163","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1627778319,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2155894163?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-01 08:38","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"The worst \"season\" of U.S. stocks is coming","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2155894163","media":"华尔街见闻","summary":"在经历了7月1日到7月15日历史数据统计的“史上最强劲两周”后，美股即将迎来统计数据上的最糟糕月份——八月。\n\n正如高盛信贷策略师Scott Rubner所统计的那样，整个八月份市场趋势都在走低，这是","content":"<p>After the \"strongest two weeks in history\" of historical data statistics from July 1st to July 15th, US stocks are about to usher in the worst month in statistics-August.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ce4aa20635c056c2425c903c7bfa9919\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"360\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>just as<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GS\">Goldman Sachs</a>As credit strategist Scott Rubner counts, market trends have been lower throughout August, one of the worst times of the year, culminating and inflecting at the Jackson Hole Global Central Bank Meeting. For now, it is expected that Powell will announce taper at this conference.</p><p>Specifically, the S&P 500 has gained more than 10% in the first half 19 times in 72 years since 1950, but after a strong first half, the median return in August is typically down 51 basis points.</p><p>Rubner also noted that there was no dramatic plunge in the first half of the year, with the S&P 500 rising for the sixth consecutive month, its longest rally since 2018. However, this is not a good thing to echo the above observations, after all, there have been declines in six of the previous 11 August months since August 2010.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ca60b07fac07ccd13faa80796c2df34d\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"278\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Nevertheless, Rubner points out that even without looking back at history, this year's situation can draw the same conclusion, and the Fed's balance sheet should be explained very clearly. With the gradual rollout of Fed policies, markets will be more illiquid, so the downside effect in August will intensify and any negative news will be amplified.</p><p>Additionally, Rubner reviews two previous \"August crises,\" which occurred in 2011 and 2015:</p><p><ul><li>2011 coincided with the debate over the debt ceiling in the United States. While the issue was resolved in early August, S&P subsequently downgraded the U.S. credit rating from AAA to AA +. Meanwhile, concerns about Europe's sovereign debt crisis continued to ferment, eventually leading to a sharp fall in the stock market in August.</li><li>In 2015, there was turmoil in emerging markets, which in turn spread to other regions, including the United States and Europe.</li></ul>For the coming August, Rubner said the focus will be on the Jackson Hole global central bank meeting, as well as changes in macro variables, especially inflation. He also said that we need to be alert to any surprises in the market.</p>","source":"wallstreetcn_api","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The worst \"season\" of U.S. stocks is coming</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe worst \"season\" of U.S. stocks is coming\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">华尔街见闻</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-01 08:38</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>After the \"strongest two weeks in history\" of historical data statistics from July 1st to July 15th, US stocks are about to usher in the worst month in statistics-August.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ce4aa20635c056c2425c903c7bfa9919\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"360\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>just as<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GS\">Goldman Sachs</a>As credit strategist Scott Rubner counts, market trends have been lower throughout August, one of the worst times of the year, culminating and inflecting at the Jackson Hole Global Central Bank Meeting. For now, it is expected that Powell will announce taper at this conference.</p><p>Specifically, the S&P 500 has gained more than 10% in the first half 19 times in 72 years since 1950, but after a strong first half, the median return in August is typically down 51 basis points.</p><p>Rubner also noted that there was no dramatic plunge in the first half of the year, with the S&P 500 rising for the sixth consecutive month, its longest rally since 2018. However, this is not a good thing to echo the above observations, after all, there have been declines in six of the previous 11 August months since August 2010.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ca60b07fac07ccd13faa80796c2df34d\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"278\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Nevertheless, Rubner points out that even without looking back at history, this year's situation can draw the same conclusion, and the Fed's balance sheet should be explained very clearly. With the gradual rollout of Fed policies, markets will be more illiquid, so the downside effect in August will intensify and any negative news will be amplified.</p><p>Additionally, Rubner reviews two previous \"August crises,\" which occurred in 2011 and 2015:</p><p><ul><li>2011 coincided with the debate over the debt ceiling in the United States. While the issue was resolved in early August, S&P subsequently downgraded the U.S. credit rating from AAA to AA +. Meanwhile, concerns about Europe's sovereign debt crisis continued to ferment, eventually leading to a sharp fall in the stock market in August.</li><li>In 2015, there was turmoil in emerging markets, which in turn spread to other regions, including the United States and Europe.</li></ul>For the coming August, Rubner said the focus will be on the Jackson Hole global central bank meeting, as well as changes in macro variables, especially inflation. He also said that we need to be alert to any surprises in the market.</p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3636809\">华尔街见闻</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/37d43f47ff4637f33c2675f14c1cc937","relate_stocks":{"161125":"标普500","513500":"标普500ETF博时","DXD":"两倍做空道琼30指数ETF-ProShares","SQQQ":"纳指三倍做空ETF","QID":"两倍做空纳斯达克指数ETF-ProShares","IVV":"标普500ETF-iShares","SPXU":"三倍做空标普500ETF-ProShares","PSQ":"做空纳斯达克100指数ETF-ProShares","QQQ":"纳指100ETF","OEF":"标普100指数ETF-iShares","SSO":"2倍做多标普500ETF-ProShares","UDOW":"三倍做多道指30ETF-ProShares","OEX":"标普100","SDOW":"三倍做空道指30ETF-ProShares","DJX":"1/100道琼斯","SH":"做空标普500-Proshares","QLD":"2倍做多纳斯达克100指数ETF-ProShares","TQQQ":"纳指三倍做多ETF","SDS":"两倍做空标普500 ETF-ProShares","DDM":"2倍做多道指ETF-ProShares","UPRO":"三倍做多标普500ETF-ProShares",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","DOG":"道指ETF-ProShares做空"},"source_url":"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3636809","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2155894163","content_text":"在经历了7月1日到7月15日历史数据统计的“史上最强劲两周”后，美股即将迎来统计数据上的最糟糕月份——八月。\n\n正如高盛信贷策略师Scott Rubner所统计的那样，整个八月份市场趋势都在走低，这是一年中最糟糕的时节之一，并在杰克逊霍尔全球央行会议上达到高潮和拐点。目前，人们预计鲍威尔将在这次会议上宣布taper。\n具体来看，自1950年以来，标准普尔500指数在72年里有19次在上半年上涨超过10%，但在强劲的上半年之后，8月份的回报率中值通常会下降51个基点。\nRubner还指出，今年上半年没有出现戏剧性的大跌，标准普尔500指数连续第6个月上涨，创下2018年以来最长的上涨时间。然而，与上述观察相呼应这并不是什么好事，毕竟自2010年8月以来，此前的11个8月中有6次下跌。\n\n尽管如此，Rubner指出，即便不回顾历史，今年的状况也能得出同样的结论，美联储的资产负债表就应该能解释得很清楚清楚。随着美联储政策的逐步推出，市场将更加缺乏流动性，因此8月的下跌效应会加剧，任何负面消息都会被放大。\n此外，Rubner还回顾了此前的两次“8月危机”，这两次危机分别发生在2011年和2015年：\n\n2011年，恰逢美国在债务上限问题上的争论不休。尽管这个问题在8月初得到了解决，但标准普尔随后将美国信用评级从AAA下调至AA+。与此同时，对欧洲主权债务危机的担忧持续发酵，最终导致8月股市大跌。\n2015年，新兴市场出现了动荡，进而蔓延到包括美国和欧洲在内的其他地区。\n\n对于接下来的8月，Rubner表示，人们关注的焦点将集中于杰克逊霍尔全球央行会议，以及宏观变量（尤其是通胀）的变化。他同时表示，我们需要对市场中的任何意外保持警惕。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"161125":0.9,"513500":0.9,"SDS":0.9,"SPXU":0.9,"DXD":0.9,"NQmain":0.9,"IVV":0.9,"DOG":0.9,"MNQmain":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"OEF":0.9,"DDM":0.9,"QLD":0.9,"SQQQ":0.9,"TQQQ":0.9,"UDOW":0.9,"SSO":0.9,"QID":0.9,"QQQ":0.9,"PSQ":0.9,"DJX":0.9,"OEX":0.9,"UPRO":0.9,"ESmain":0.9,"SH":0.9,"SDOW":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2261,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":806842872,"gmtCreate":1627651454796,"gmtModify":1703494108892,"author":{"id":"4088510584208570","authorId":"4088510584208570","name":"DavidChung","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1790a1450aa7bdec104690967e1c814f","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4088510584208570","authorIdStr":"4088510584208570"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/806842872","repostId":"1144748764","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3360,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":809694530,"gmtCreate":1627363515020,"gmtModify":1703488423831,"author":{"id":"4088510584208570","authorId":"4088510584208570","name":"DavidChung","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1790a1450aa7bdec104690967e1c814f","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4088510584208570","authorIdStr":"4088510584208570"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/809694530","repostId":"2154602599","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2154602599","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1627363025,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2154602599?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-27 13:17","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"What happened to the Fed? Is there inflation or not?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2154602599","media":"格隆汇","summary":"最近在思考一个问题，外部在通胀，价格持续上涨，为什么美联储就是不承认通胀呢？一直说是暂时的，而且，最近一直关注劳动力市场，也一直在推迟政策转向找各种理由，所说的进一步迹象也没有答案。最近看了几本书，《","content":"<p>Recently, I am thinking about a question. There is external inflation and prices continue to rise. Why does the Federal Reserve just not recognize inflation? There are no answers to the further signs that have been said to be temporary and, lately, have been paying attention to the labour market and have been finding reasons for delaying the policy shift. I have read several books recently, \"Return on Capital\", \"Principles of Money and Credit\", and \"Human Behavior\", and I have some inspiration, so I will record it.</p><p>Economic crisis is like a cycle, basically inevitable, under the cycle, constantly repeated. However, the US government has not made effective predictions for the crisis or adopted effective policies to identify it.</p><p>What's the reason for this?</p><p>The economic prosperity brought by credit expansion will eventually collapse. This is the view of the Austrian School of Economics. If the debt crisis is avoided, then we can only give up the debt expansion or use the stimulus of monetary policy to make the crisis come later, and finally a greater crisis will break out.</p><p>Eventually the Great Depression supported this view.</p><p>With the stimulus of the economy and the decline of interest rates, a large valuation premium will be formed for assets with better liquidity. This is a simplified logic.</p><p>Therefore, the spread between 10-year bonds and 1-year bonds in the United States can intuitively count the accuracy of the economic crisis:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/402b576b3c1c9b3ba8531861c0fc5afe\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"531\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Then why didn't the central bank, which clearly knew the result, make a good defense? From academic argument and practical operation, if the central bank has this ability, we may not see any changes made by the central bank. Before the economic crisis of 1929, Hoover also kept saying that the economy was fine. Including before 1990, there were similar remarks before the Great Recession in Japan.</p><p>In 2008, after further credit expansion stimulated the economy, American debt actually grew faster. And why would the central bank do this?</p><p>Consider the huge destructive power of market sentiment after the resonance of asset prices. If the central bank objectively states the facts and risks, the asset price fluctuation caused by the central bank may be something that the government is unwilling to bear. At the same time, it also concerns its own future, which is applicable to any country. And the market is more willing to listen to positive remarks. This is in line with the inner expectations of investors, and this is human nature. Even if the price is maintained with a very small probability, it will be executed without hesitation.</p><p>So, is the market rational? Not necessarily. The so-called rationality should be based on certain information, and even artificially created certain information is OK.</p><p>If this time, the Fed says that inflation is long-term and the government is going to tighten, how should this record high index be adjusted? Maybe from the overall perspective, it is not a better choice. If central banks show certain confidence in this uncertainty in the economy, then markets must be more welcoming, so this reverse incentive will make officials say contrary to the facts.</p><p>Contemporary economists discuss economic problems, use a large number of mathematics and formulas, and use numbers to prove facts, and there is no doubt.</p><p>Judging from the results of past academic arguments, the central bank's prediction of crisis has never been correct. In order to play against it, the central bank will inevitably lead to theories to prove that its judgment is correct. Or in line with policy logic. Such as further signs, such as labor country market factors. To support the logic of policy.</p><p>These also include models, mathematics, authorities, scenario analysis, and stress tests. The same calculation reached the opposite conclusion. So who's correct?</p><p>Perhaps the central bank itself thinks these proofs are scientific.</p><p>The Austrian School of Economics has another view:</p><p>When injecting liquidity into the economic operation, it will first cause inflation on the asset side. In the initial stage of inflation, the price of consumer goods may fall, because funds will concentrate into certain assets, causing prices to rise and then withdraw. At this time, inflation is not visible. Consumer goods did not rise, but industrial goods rose, and housing stocks and bonds rose.</p><p>As prices get higher and higher, some price depressions will gradually fill. After that, the price of consumer goods will rise.</p><p>When the price of consumer goods is rising, it may cause the price of other assets to pull back. If the central bank did not notice that after the liquidity injection, these invisible inflation, the asset bubbles generated by inflation concentrated in the market, it is likely that the real interest rate is lower than the natural interest rate. By the time the central bank reacts to consumer goods, it will be too late.</p><p>So can the central bank see it? I think it can be seen that the central bank's response to inflation is too late, which may be based on the discussion of policy advantages and disadvantages and the period of hesitation.</p><p>Back to the present, in June, inflation in the United States exceeded expectations, reaching a 13-year high. Inflation expectations are constantly strengthening. The core CPI reached a 20-year high, and the PPI also reached 7.3%. However, the Fed still thinks that this is only temporary.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/97940456ed81feecba7a8676f5e7010c\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"478\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Why is this?</p><p>As a global policy, central banks guide global expectations, and consensus expectations will make asset prices go higher and higher. However, in the asset prices that are constantly reaching new highs, the vulnerability is getting stronger and stronger, and a little disturbance will cause shocks.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4a04217e1d9fdb32c05a8656f397171a\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"461\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>In this case, as long as a few people turn around and go short, it may lead to a price turn. If it causes its bulls to follow up, the final result will be the bursting of the bubble, causing a crisis.</p><p>Of course, if the bubble of the previous asset price blows bigger, the higher the degree of this correction, and the greater the damage involved in it. Look at the current main asset prices:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/38acee39105389299807c86e25bc7edc\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"624\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>House Price:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1bacce7fe96d81af007de1abfc7169e2\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"537\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Commodities:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/49a7e99789ee50296f251f90fe50a9ec\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"515\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>At this time, if the policy suddenly turns, that is, it starts to tighten, then the prices of these assets may explode.</p><p>So, if you tighten it now, then it's basically over.</p><p>If there is no tightening, asset prices will continue to hit new highs. Without substantial reform of production relations, the economic efficiency will remain low, and the prices of assets will get higher and higher. After reaching a certain level, it will be found that consumer goods have a depression in price, and overvalued assets will be sold and low-priced consumer goods will be bought. Then overvalued assets, the price will also collapse.</p><p>Therefore, in the case of a dilemma, monetary policy can only hold on. To maintain the fragile balance of the economy by interfering with expectations.</p><p>When Powell spoke, the first question the market asked was that inflation had exceeded expectations, and he did not respond. Before, Ye Milk talked about the risk of high inflation, but later he changed his mouth, saying that it was temporary.</p><p>They expressed their expectations for the economy in obscure language, such as the inflation anchoring effect and the supply-side constraints.</p><p>In short, the policy is not in a hurry to turn.</p><p>Therefore, after the interest rate rose in the first quarter, it began to continue to decline, and now it is maintaining a downward trend.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5197b8bce798425385d994ae4576f787\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"490\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>All inflation is a monetary phenomenon.</p><p>While controlling inflation, we should maintain the price of assets. Therefore, when the price rises to a certain extent, it will be a decline. Capital itself is profit-seeking. If the price of assets increases less, then capital will change to another place.</p><p>At present, the lack of demand may curb inflation, but have you considered the fundamentals when the U.S. stock market has risen in recent years? It has not considered the actual demand, and so has the rise of house prices, which is itself the result of excessive currency issuance.</p><p>If monetary policy turns now, then demand will be stimulated? This one is even more ridiculous. Therefore, as long as the assets can't rise, the excess money will push up the price. Because more money is the most essential reason.</p><p>Moreover, this wave of high prices can't be maintained, and the United States is bound to withdraw its liquidity, and eventually the bubble bursts. Then as the global central bank, other countries can't be immune to it.</p><p>Printing money is not sustainable. Therefore, the mouth cannon now is to stabilize expectations.</p><p>At present, it is only showing a small subdivision problem, which is only the tip of the iceberg.</p>","source":"gelonghui_highlight","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>What happened to the Fed? Is there inflation or not?</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhat happened to the Fed? Is there inflation or not?\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">格隆汇</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-27 13:17</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Recently, I am thinking about a question. There is external inflation and prices continue to rise. Why does the Federal Reserve just not recognize inflation? There are no answers to the further signs that have been said to be temporary and, lately, have been paying attention to the labour market and have been finding reasons for delaying the policy shift. I have read several books recently, \"Return on Capital\", \"Principles of Money and Credit\", and \"Human Behavior\", and I have some inspiration, so I will record it.</p><p>Economic crisis is like a cycle, basically inevitable, under the cycle, constantly repeated. However, the US government has not made effective predictions for the crisis or adopted effective policies to identify it.</p><p>What's the reason for this?</p><p>The economic prosperity brought by credit expansion will eventually collapse. This is the view of the Austrian School of Economics. If the debt crisis is avoided, then we can only give up the debt expansion or use the stimulus of monetary policy to make the crisis come later, and finally a greater crisis will break out.</p><p>Eventually the Great Depression supported this view.</p><p>With the stimulus of the economy and the decline of interest rates, a large valuation premium will be formed for assets with better liquidity. This is a simplified logic.</p><p>Therefore, the spread between 10-year bonds and 1-year bonds in the United States can intuitively count the accuracy of the economic crisis:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/402b576b3c1c9b3ba8531861c0fc5afe\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"531\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Then why didn't the central bank, which clearly knew the result, make a good defense? From academic argument and practical operation, if the central bank has this ability, we may not see any changes made by the central bank. Before the economic crisis of 1929, Hoover also kept saying that the economy was fine. Including before 1990, there were similar remarks before the Great Recession in Japan.</p><p>In 2008, after further credit expansion stimulated the economy, American debt actually grew faster. And why would the central bank do this?</p><p>Consider the huge destructive power of market sentiment after the resonance of asset prices. If the central bank objectively states the facts and risks, the asset price fluctuation caused by the central bank may be something that the government is unwilling to bear. At the same time, it also concerns its own future, which is applicable to any country. And the market is more willing to listen to positive remarks. This is in line with the inner expectations of investors, and this is human nature. Even if the price is maintained with a very small probability, it will be executed without hesitation.</p><p>So, is the market rational? Not necessarily. The so-called rationality should be based on certain information, and even artificially created certain information is OK.</p><p>If this time, the Fed says that inflation is long-term and the government is going to tighten, how should this record high index be adjusted? Maybe from the overall perspective, it is not a better choice. If central banks show certain confidence in this uncertainty in the economy, then markets must be more welcoming, so this reverse incentive will make officials say contrary to the facts.</p><p>Contemporary economists discuss economic problems, use a large number of mathematics and formulas, and use numbers to prove facts, and there is no doubt.</p><p>Judging from the results of past academic arguments, the central bank's prediction of crisis has never been correct. In order to play against it, the central bank will inevitably lead to theories to prove that its judgment is correct. Or in line with policy logic. Such as further signs, such as labor country market factors. To support the logic of policy.</p><p>These also include models, mathematics, authorities, scenario analysis, and stress tests. The same calculation reached the opposite conclusion. So who's correct?</p><p>Perhaps the central bank itself thinks these proofs are scientific.</p><p>The Austrian School of Economics has another view:</p><p>When injecting liquidity into the economic operation, it will first cause inflation on the asset side. In the initial stage of inflation, the price of consumer goods may fall, because funds will concentrate into certain assets, causing prices to rise and then withdraw. At this time, inflation is not visible. Consumer goods did not rise, but industrial goods rose, and housing stocks and bonds rose.</p><p>As prices get higher and higher, some price depressions will gradually fill. After that, the price of consumer goods will rise.</p><p>When the price of consumer goods is rising, it may cause the price of other assets to pull back. If the central bank did not notice that after the liquidity injection, these invisible inflation, the asset bubbles generated by inflation concentrated in the market, it is likely that the real interest rate is lower than the natural interest rate. By the time the central bank reacts to consumer goods, it will be too late.</p><p>So can the central bank see it? I think it can be seen that the central bank's response to inflation is too late, which may be based on the discussion of policy advantages and disadvantages and the period of hesitation.</p><p>Back to the present, in June, inflation in the United States exceeded expectations, reaching a 13-year high. Inflation expectations are constantly strengthening. The core CPI reached a 20-year high, and the PPI also reached 7.3%. However, the Fed still thinks that this is only temporary.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/97940456ed81feecba7a8676f5e7010c\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"478\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Why is this?</p><p>As a global policy, central banks guide global expectations, and consensus expectations will make asset prices go higher and higher. However, in the asset prices that are constantly reaching new highs, the vulnerability is getting stronger and stronger, and a little disturbance will cause shocks.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4a04217e1d9fdb32c05a8656f397171a\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"461\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>In this case, as long as a few people turn around and go short, it may lead to a price turn. If it causes its bulls to follow up, the final result will be the bursting of the bubble, causing a crisis.</p><p>Of course, if the bubble of the previous asset price blows bigger, the higher the degree of this correction, and the greater the damage involved in it. Look at the current main asset prices:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/38acee39105389299807c86e25bc7edc\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"624\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>House Price:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1bacce7fe96d81af007de1abfc7169e2\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"537\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Commodities:</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/49a7e99789ee50296f251f90fe50a9ec\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"515\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>At this time, if the policy suddenly turns, that is, it starts to tighten, then the prices of these assets may explode.</p><p>So, if you tighten it now, then it's basically over.</p><p>If there is no tightening, asset prices will continue to hit new highs. Without substantial reform of production relations, the economic efficiency will remain low, and the prices of assets will get higher and higher. After reaching a certain level, it will be found that consumer goods have a depression in price, and overvalued assets will be sold and low-priced consumer goods will be bought. Then overvalued assets, the price will also collapse.</p><p>Therefore, in the case of a dilemma, monetary policy can only hold on. To maintain the fragile balance of the economy by interfering with expectations.</p><p>When Powell spoke, the first question the market asked was that inflation had exceeded expectations, and he did not respond. Before, Ye Milk talked about the risk of high inflation, but later he changed his mouth, saying that it was temporary.</p><p>They expressed their expectations for the economy in obscure language, such as the inflation anchoring effect and the supply-side constraints.</p><p>In short, the policy is not in a hurry to turn.</p><p>Therefore, after the interest rate rose in the first quarter, it began to continue to decline, and now it is maintaining a downward trend.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5197b8bce798425385d994ae4576f787\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"490\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>All inflation is a monetary phenomenon.</p><p>While controlling inflation, we should maintain the price of assets. Therefore, when the price rises to a certain extent, it will be a decline. Capital itself is profit-seeking. If the price of assets increases less, then capital will change to another place.</p><p>At present, the lack of demand may curb inflation, but have you considered the fundamentals when the U.S. stock market has risen in recent years? It has not considered the actual demand, and so has the rise of house prices, which is itself the result of excessive currency issuance.</p><p>If monetary policy turns now, then demand will be stimulated? This one is even more ridiculous. Therefore, as long as the assets can't rise, the excess money will push up the price. Because more money is the most essential reason.</p><p>Moreover, this wave of high prices can't be maintained, and the United States is bound to withdraw its liquidity, and eventually the bubble bursts. Then as the global central bank, other countries can't be immune to it.</p><p>Printing money is not sustainable. Therefore, the mouth cannon now is to stabilize expectations.</p><p>At present, it is only showing a small subdivision problem, which is only the tip of the iceberg.</p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"http://www.gelonghui.com/p/477601\">格隆汇</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/85a8b00918342fa05f981d941cbe303d","relate_stocks":{"161125":"标普500","513500":"标普500ETF博时","PSQ":"做空纳斯达克100指数ETF-ProShares",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","SPY":"标普500ETF","SH":"做空标普500-Proshares","OEF":"标普100指数ETF-iShares","QQQ":"纳指100ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SSO":"2倍做多标普500ETF-ProShares","UDOW":"三倍做多道指30ETF-ProShares","SDOW":"三倍做空道指30ETF-ProShares","DOG":"道指ETF-ProShares做空","QLD":"2倍做多纳斯达克100指数ETF-ProShares","TQQQ":"纳指三倍做多ETF","DDM":"2倍做多道指ETF-ProShares","SDS":"两倍做空标普500 ETF-ProShares","UPRO":"三倍做多标普500ETF-ProShares","DJX":"1/100道琼斯","IVV":"标普500ETF-iShares","OEX":"标普100","DXD":"两倍做空道琼30指数ETF-ProShares","SQQQ":"纳指三倍做空ETF","QID":"两倍做空纳斯达克指数ETF-ProShares","SPXU":"三倍做空标普500ETF-ProShares"},"source_url":"http://www.gelonghui.com/p/477601","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/6b8fa6424aebe95f6781d04ef17a1852","article_id":"2154602599","content_text":"最近在思考一个问题，外部在通胀，价格持续上涨，为什么美联储就是不承认通胀呢？一直说是暂时的，而且，最近一直关注劳动力市场，也一直在推迟政策转向找各种理由，所说的进一步迹象也没有答案。最近看了几本书，《资本回报》、《货币与信用原理》、《人的行为》，有一些启发，记录一下。\n经济危机像是周期一样，基本是必然的，在周期下，不断的重复。而美国政府并没有为危机进行了有效的预测或者采取有效的政策来识别。\n这是什么原因呢？\n信用扩张带来的经济繁荣，最终会实现崩溃，这是奥地利经济学派的观点，如果避免债务危机，那么就只能放弃债务的扩张或者使用货币政策的刺激让危机晚点到来，最终爆发更大的危机。\n最终大萧条应证了这样的观点。\n经济的刺激，利率下行，对于流动性较好的资产，就会形成较大的估值溢价，这是一个简单化的逻辑。\n所以， 美国10年债与1年的利差就可以很直观地统计了经济危机的准确性：\n\n那明明知道结果的央行为什么没有做好防御呢？从学术的论证加上实践的操作，央行有这个能力的，可能我们并没看到央行做出的任何改变。在1929年经济危机爆发前，胡佛也一直说经济没有问题。包括1990年前，日本大衰退前也有这种类似的言论。\n在2008年，进一步的信用扩张，刺激经济之后，美国的债务增长其实更快的。而央行为什么要这么做呢？\n考虑到市场情绪对资产价格共震之后，产生的巨大破坏力。如果央行客观陈述了事实与风险之后，引发的资产价格波动，可能是政府不愿承受的。同时也关系到了自身的前途，这点，放在任何国家都是适用的。而市场更多的愿意倾听积极的言论。这符合投资者内心的期待，这就是人性。哪怕以极微弱的概率去维持价格，那也会义无反顾地执行。\n所以，市场是理性的吗？也并不见得。所谓的理性，要建立在确定的信息之上，而哪怕是人为制造出来的确定信息也是可以的。\n如果这次，美联储说通胀是长期的，政府要进行紧缩，这个创新高的指数，该如何调整？可能从全局的角度看，并不是更好的选择。如果央行表现出对经济这种不确性而营造出确定的自信，那么市场的欢迎程度必然更高，所以，这种反向的激励，会使官员说出违背事实的言论。\n当代的经济学家去论述经济学问题，运用大量的数学和公式，用数字去证明事实，且不容质疑。\n从过去学术论证的结果看，央行对于危机的预测从未正确过。为了与之博弈，央行必然会引出理论去论证自己的判断是正确的。或者符合政策逻辑的。比如进一步迹象，比如劳动国市场要素。去支持政策的逻辑。\n这些手段也包括了模型，数学，权威人士、情景分析，压力测试。而同样的测算却得出了相反的结论。那谁是正确的呢？\n可能这些证明，央行自身也觉得是科学。\n奥地利经济学派还有一个观点：\n当向经济运行的过程中，注入流动性，首先使资产端产生通货膨胀，在通胀初始阶段，消费品的价格可能下跌，因为资金会集中进入某些资产，引起价格上涨之后回抽。这时候，通胀是看不出来的。消费品不涨，但工业品涨，房股债涨。\n随着价格越来越高，一些价格洼地也会逐渐的填满。之后，会使消费品价格上涨。\n当消费品价格在上涨时，可能会使其他资产价格出现回调。如果央行没有注意到注入流动性之后，这些看不见的通胀，集中在市场上的通胀产生的资产泡沫，很可能，实际利率低于自然利率的情况出现了。到央行对消费品做出反应时，已经太迟了。\n那么央行能看到吗？我觉得是可以看得见的，央行对于通胀做出的反应太迟，可能基于政策利弊的讨论及犹豫期。\n回到当下，6月美国通胀超预期，13年新高，通胀预期不断在走强，核心CPI创20年新高，PPI也达到了7.3%，但联储仍然认为这只是暂时的。\n\n这是为何？\n作为全球的政策的央行，引导着全球的预期，而一致的预期，将使资产的价格越走越高。而在不断创新高的资产价格，脆弱性越来越强，稍微一点风吹草动，就会引起震荡。\n\n这种情况，只要少数人调头做空，那么可能导致价格的转向，如果引起其多头的跟进，那么最终的结果就是泡沫的破灭，引起危机。\n当然，如果前期资产价格的泡沫吹的越大，这种回调程度就越高，这里面蕴含的破坏就越大，看看现在的主要资产价格：\n\n房价：\n\n大宗商品：\n\n这时候，如果这时候，政策突然转向，也就是开始走向紧缩，那么这些资产价格可能就炸了。\n所以，如果现在收紧，那么基本就是玩完了。\n那如果没有紧缩，资产价格会不断的创新高，生产关系没有大幅度改革的情况下，经济效率维持低位，资产的价格会越来越高，而高到一个程度之后，会发现消费品有价格洼地，就会卖出高估的资产，买入低价消费品。那么高估的资产，价格也会崩溃。\n所以，在进退两难的情况下，货币政策只能硬撑。通过干扰预期，去维持经济的脆弱平衡。\n当鲍威尔讲话时，市场第一个问就是通胀超预期了，他并未进行回应。之前耶奶说了一下高通胀的风险，结果后面也改口了，说是暂时的。\n他们用晦涩难懂的语言表达了对经济的预期，比如通胀锚定效应，还有就是供给侧的约束。\n总之，政策并不着急转向。\n所以，利率在一季度走高之后，开始持续的下行，现在也维持在下行的趋势。\n\n一切通胀都是货币现象。\n一边要控制通胀，一边要维持资产的价格。所以，价格上涨到一定程度，就会是下跌。资本本身就是逐利的，如果资产价格增值越少，那么资本就会换一个地方。\n当前基于需求不足可能会抑制通胀，但这几年的美国股市上涨，有考虑过基本面吗？也没有考虑过实际需求，房价上涨也是，这本身就是货币超发的结果。\n如果现在货币政策转向，那么需求就会刺激出来了？这个就更扯了。所以，只要资产涨不动了，货币的超量就会去推高价格。因为钱多就是最本质的原因。\n而且这波的高价维持不住，美国势必要收回流动性，最终泡沫的破灭。那么作为全球的央行，其他国家不可能独善其身。\n印钱不可持续。所以现在打的嘴炮也就是稳住预期。\n当前只是显示一部小分问题，那只是冰山一角。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"161125":0.9,"513500":0.9,"SDOW":0.9,"QQQ":0.9,"TQQQ":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"DOG":0.9,"DDM":0.9,"SSO":0.9,"ESmain":0.9,"DXD":0.9,"QID":0.9,".DJI":0.9,"DJX":0.9,"UDOW":0.9,"SQQQ":0.9,"SPXU":0.9,"OEX":0.9,"OEF":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,"SPY":0.9,"NQmain":0.9,"PSQ":0.9,"MNQmain":0.9,"SH":0.9,"UPRO":0.9,"SDS":0.9,"QLD":0.9,"IVV":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2360,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":176013361,"gmtCreate":1626844679953,"gmtModify":1703766286650,"author":{"id":"4088510584208570","authorId":"4088510584208570","name":"DavidChung","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1790a1450aa7bdec104690967e1c814f","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4088510584208570","authorIdStr":"4088510584208570"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/176013361","repostId":"1110268139","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2791,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"defaultTab":"posts","isTTM":true}