Lo leyo aca primero - Cuando las papas queman somos todos mercantilistas

Cuando empezo el lio, alla por el 2008, en algun lugar dijimos que iban a parecer las guerras comerciales, etc etc

Tambien, a lo largo de muchas discusiones, todo el mundo se queja de la politica proteccionista sui generis de dolar por dolar, obligando a exportar mani a cambio de dejar importar autos, por ejemplo (tampoco era mani, pero bueno, es otra discusion)

Luego empezaron los lios con Brasil, y, ahora la primer muestra de que lentamente, ahora, estan apareciendo

The EU is redesigning its rules on preferential trade access for developing and emerging economies. This column outlines the likely winners and losers and argues that in order to help developing countries integrate into the world economy much more creative policies are needed.

http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/6815

En lenguaje lindo, lo de arriba, en lenguaje feo, a ver que dejamos entrar y que no

Como siempre, cuando las papas queman, somos todos mercantilistas

En que anda el mundo?

Dana Gas is possible target for Vallares

Dana Gas, the Abu Dhabi listed oil and gas company, has emerged as one of the possible bid targets for Vallares, the £1.35bn acquisition vehicle backed by Nat Rothschild and Tony Hayward that was listed on the London Stock Exchange last month.

Representatives of both companies met in recent months, but prior to the IPO, according to people with knowledge of the meeting. Vallares is understood to have been particularly interested in Dana’s upstream gas assets in Egypt and Kurdistan.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/055f3436-b850-11e0-8d23-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1TL3mNBZl

Despues se quejan de La Salada

a) Kunming
lugar de China, lejos de la costa

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunming

http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=25.05,102.7&spn=0.1,0.1&t=m&q=25.05,102.7

b) Apple Store

Lugar donde venden cosas de Apple, son muy visibles y famosos por como atienden, etc etc

c) a) y b) no existen juntos

salvo que o Kunming sea trucho, o el negocio de Apple sea trucho, la segunda es la correcta

To address the main issue that people have been getting all bent out of shape about: the stores I photographed do not appear to be authorized Apple sellers. The list of resellers in Kunming that Apple’s website has published does not include the locations that I photographed. An employee at the main store photographed has confirmed that it is not an authorized reseller. Apple itself has confirmed that it is a fake.

http://birdabroad.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/are-you-listening-steve-jobs/

en fin

Legos

Uno es lego en estas cosas, y, siempre se aprende algo

1ro Taylor rule

What is Taylor's rule and what does it say about Federal Reserve monetary policy?

Taylor's rule is a formula developed by Stanford economist John Taylor. It was designed to provide "recommendations" for how a central bank like the Federal Reserve should set short-term interest rates as economic conditions change to achieve both its short-run goal for stabilizing the economy and its long-run goal for inflation.

Specifically, the rule states that the "real" short-term interest rate (that is, the interest rate adjusted for inflation) should be determined according to three factors: (1) where actual inflation is relative to the targeted level that the Fed wishes to achieve, (2) how far economic activity is above or below its "full employment" level, and (3) what the level of the short-term interest rate is that would be consistent with full employment. The rule "recommends" a relatively high interest rate (that is, a "tight" monetary policy) when inflation is above its target or when the economy is above its full employment level, and a relatively low interest rate ("easy" monetary policy) in the opposite situations. Sometimes these goals are in conflict: for example, inflation may be above its target when the economy is below full employment. In such situations, the rule provides guidance to policy makers on how to balance these competing considerations in setting an appropriate level for the interest rate.

Although the Fed does not explicitly follow the rule, analyses show that the rule does a fairly accurate job of describing how monetary policy actually has been conducted during the past decade under Chairman Greenspan. This fact has been cited by many economists inside and outside of the Fed as a reason that inflation has remained under control and that the economy has been relatively stable in the US over the past ten years.

2do Economist

DAVID BECKWORTH directs us to a new Economic letter from the San Francisco Fed's Fernanda Nechio, which examines the appropriateness of euro-zone monetary policy. First, have a look at ECB policy relative to a Taylor rule for the euro-zone as a whole:

Here it seems as though the ECB is essentially following the Taylor rule (though by this rule, at any rate, the recent increase looks a little unnecessarily aggressive). When one disaggregates the euro data, however, the true absurdity of the current policy becomes clear:

A few things really stand out here. In the first chart, ECB policy seemed a little loose from 2001 to 2005. From the second chart it's clear what was going on; the ECB stood idly by while the periphery overheated because it was making policy with an eye toward the core nations. Now that the peripheral booms over which the ECB presided have collapsed, the central bank is...continuing to pursue a policy that's most appropriate for the core economies.

Now perhaps the ECB thinks it isn't responsible for managing divergent economic cycles within the euro zone. Indeed, the ECB may well be trying to force core nations to take on this responsibility and move toward closer fiscal union. If the ECB is unsuccessful in winning such progress from core governments, however, we shouldn't be surprised if peripheral economies find euro-zone policy intolerable and—eventually—drop out of the system entirely.

3ro, ya casi de la divulgacion y casi para nerds

Four illegal ways to sort out the Euro finance crisis

Comment Saving the euro isn't the easiest of things: solving the current problems actually would be quite easy, if expensive, except for all the laws and regulations that rule out all of the easy ways.

The basic problem is well explained here. Don't worry too much about what the Taylor Rule is: just accept that if you're going to have a well-functioning currency across an area then the interest rate derived from the Rule should be the same for all the parts of that area.

And Europe, the eurozone, simply fails this test. Interest rates were about right in the boom and are about right now for the eurozone as a whole. But they were waaaaay too low for the periphery (most especially Ireland and Spain) in the boom, and they're similarly way too high for Portugal, Spain, Greece and Ireland now. They're just fine and toasty for France and Germany though: which is the very problem that the currency area faces. Because the different areas are so out of whack, partly for structural reasons, partly because they're on different cycles of boom and bust, the necessarily single interest rate associated with a single currency just won't be right for some areas all of the time.

In the jargon, the question is: "is the eurozone an optimal currency area?" And this result from looking at the Taylor Rule (which is by no means the only such test that gives a negative result) tells us that the answer is "No". Thus the current eurozone should not be the current eurozone; many of the countries that are in it should not be in it.

La duda es;

Si Greesnpan era un mostro, como termino como termino todo, y, si aca la aplicamos (estadisticas mediante) como daria?

Fuentes:

1. http://www.frbsf.org/education/activities/drecon/9803.html

2. http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/06/europes-europe-crisis

3. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/22/saving_the_euro/

O sea, Remes, tenes laburo en las Europas, maybe

Hacia donde van las cosas

Algo habia visto de impresiones 3D, pero esto es una muestra clara

Aha, ahora me lo dicen?

Privatizar, la panacea

Bueno, no tanto, pero, ahora me lo dicen?, ah, Economist, o tempora o mores

The privatisation illusion

A SMART note from Societe Generale points out what ought to have been obvious, that privatisations are unlikely to cure European state solvency. What is the value of a business? The discounted sum of all future cash flows. So when you sell a business, you lose access to those cash flows, which could have been used to service the debts. Or, as Socgen puts it

privatisations merely front-load future receipts into a single lump-sum as a state asset is sold.

Now it is possible that buyers of the asset might overestimate the cash flows, or apply the wrong discount rate. The seller might get a boost to their solvency if the buyer overpays. But that is unlikely in the current circumstances, when governments are being forced into sales; it is more likely that buyers will underpay.

Of course, privatisation might have virtues for other reasons. The business may be run inefficiently in state hands. Better management in the private sector might improve the running of the economy and, in the long run, this will improve solvency. But it is hardly a cure-all for the debt crisis.

Un poco de inflacion no es mala

No, no es ningun politico argentino, tampoco es un inimputable, menos aun algun economista de un paraiso bananero.

El ultimo parrafo de la nota

Oh, and a modest rise in inflation would, of course, actually be a good thing, because it would help resolve our debt overhang.

Van adivinando?

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/inflation-day/

Con lo cual, a los botes

Truman vs Dewey

The United States presidential election of 1948 is considered by most historians as the greatest election upset in American history. Virtually every prediction (with or without public opinion polls) indicated that incumbent President Harry S. Truman would be defeated by Republican Thomas E. Dewey. Truman won, overcoming a three-way split in his own party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1948

Mayoria silenciosa

http://www.retoricas.com/2009/08/discurso-nixon-la-mayoria-silenciosa.html

sera el preanuncio?

Yo vote en blanco

Por?
Facil, vivo en un barrio de capital llamado no hay

No hay subte (ni va a llegar en 20 años)
No hay tren
No hay transporte facil (salvo catalogar al Metrobus como eso, pasa en el borde)
No hay hospital
No hay CGP (el que corresponde esta a 2 lineas de colectivo)
No hay Codigo Urbano (estan construyendo dos torres de mas de 8 pisos juntas)
No hay candidatos que lo conozcan (hasta los que volantearon mencionaban los barrios vecinos)

por eso, vote en blanco, y, lastima que el barrio no lo hizo