patrick.net

Why do so many smart people have so much faith in regulation? It’s been the bane of our existence.

A little regulation may work out well, if it is local and preferably temporary. However, it most often produces a worse result than the free market over time. This is most true for national regulation that one can’t easily escape.

China is a great example of what can happen with less regulation.

Spectator Says:
August 1st, 2007 at 4:08 am
"Why do so many smart people have so much faith in regulation? It’s been the bane of our existence."

I don't understand comments like this. Just a blanket assertion with little to back it up other than an immediate eqivocation in the next paragraph. We enjoy an incredibly safe standard of living which gives us the luxury of dwelling on the notable failures, and mistakes.

With no regulation there is a good chance you or any one of us would be dead from anything from food contamination to medical concoctions. These deaths were very common in the 'golden age' of little state intervention in commerce. Our society has finally evolved to the point where the optimum balance is where government sets boundaries and standards, and the free market then allowed operates to everybody's betterment.

changed tense midstream, sorry, 'then operates to everybody's betterment."

The last 20 minutes surge of 180 pts going from negative territory to positive 150 was most definitely an act of PPT.

Why would anybody, with absolutely no news to cheer about and plenty to lose sleep over, plunge in when the whole day was clearly a zig-zag, tug-of-war territory?

Will the PPT buying fund count towards the M3 growth?

@Malcolm,

Agreed. I think the problem with discussing government "regulation" in general is that most people tend to mentally equate the term REGULATION with SUBSIDY.

Everyone,

Just to be completely clear, let's review our definitions here:

REGULATION:
Government setting ground rules and basic operating limits for "free markets", so they will operate in a socially beneficial way that (hopefully) discourages fraud, theft, coercion, cartels and information hiding, while encouraging "fair" competition that occasionally allows even small, non-politically connected players to succeed.

Examples: Sarbanes-Oxley, Glass-Steagall, OSHA, FDA food inspection, child labor laws, immigration enforcement (haven't seen too much of the latter lately).

SUBSIDIES:
Government picking market "winners" or "losers", either directly, by paying certain industries/companies large sums of taxpayer money, awarding no-compete federal contracts, or indirectly, by giving that industry preferential tax breaks/credits.

Examples: oil & gas and corn/ethanol/sugar subsidies, non-negotiable Medicare drug prices for big pharma, no-bid military contracts for Halliburton/Bechtel, tax breaks for RE flippers.

OO, no ppt required. Permit me to quote from another site:

the code goes if yen is less than dollar, then buy spy,qqqq, dia. Else endif.

That's in response to suspicions of coordinated ppt or fx in Calculated Risk comments. Sounds about right to me.

Another non-ppt scenario from CR comments (thanks to Yal/Karl):

"It's called a 'Mark on Close' order and is institutional. Often used by mutual funds. The specialist is free to execute them any time they'd like, but they price to the person ordering them at the close.

Remember, mutual funds give you the price at the end of the day,

So on an up day, the specialist will run 'em early and pocket the difference.

On a day when you might get whipsawed he is not going to do that because it will roach him. So he puts them through at the close and you get exactly what you saw."

2:27p post in Moderation? What in blazes did I say?

2:27p post in Moderation? What in blazes did I say?

"specialist" --> contains the string "cialis", which is flagged for automatic moderation. Try 'special1st' instead.

Bruce,
You didn't yell "PPT!" at the top of your lungs. :D

Is the first a typical time for 401s/etc to buy? I expected most of the lumbering funds to buy yesterday.

Here's yet another financial entity, this time insurance co. AIG, with subprime-related securities bag-holding angst:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aWGOYSOtQz44&refer=home

Thanks, HARM. I was agnostic 'til now.

sfbubblebuyer, I did see the end-of-the-month 401k idea ... but then why so near market close?

I agree, there is no conspiratorial "PPT". I doubt the government or some other clandestine organization could buy enough to move the DOW that much without notice. In a volatile market like this they'd quickly end up holding way too much % of outstanding.

And the first sniff some of the hedge funds got something like this was happening they'd be all over it, and the gov't would just be paying the hedge funds at the end of the day.

I have no idea why it peaked so hard. I would have thought that euphoria would have been beaten out of the herd last week. It would be interesting to see WHO was buying so much at the end.

Or what was being bought at the end.

I think it was Buffy. Or Biff.

A bunch of Trustafarian bank accounts swelled today. Heh.

Oh, the "PPT" (formally known as the "Working Group on Financial Markets") exists alright. The question is, is it really the invisible hand behind recent "buy the dip" come-backs? And, does it really have the ability to single-handedly prop up equity markets by itself?

Bruce,

I like the Mutual fund's mark-to-close explanation. So I should have taken advantage of it and sell my mutual funds at close when a day like this happens?

I seldom trade in and out my funds, so I am wondering if the same day order can be executed by market close?

Of course there is government intervention.

Hong Kong, Singapore government OPENLY bought back shares with taxpayer's money when stock market tanked during the 97 crisis. Since the Fed has literally unlimited USD printing ability, and given the credibility and ways of operation of this particular administration, PPT operation is not entirely unreasonable.

I myself never believe in a true China wall between the different government operations, especially when so much is at stake.

HARM,

I just tried pen1s enlarge-ment, my comment was immediately sent into moderation.

Sorry, OO, you get the price at closing, right? Executor has dinner on you.

Think of it as karma.

"Or what was being bought at the end."

There are only 30 stocks in the DOW....If I wasn't so lazy I could figure out which components went up right there at the end. I know INTC went up 50 cents in the last few minutes because I follow that stock.

"History has not dealt kindly this vast increase in the market value of asset claims is in part the indirect result of investors accepting lower compensation for risk. Such an increase in market value is too often viewed by market participants as structural and permanent."
“To some extent, those higher values may be reflecting the increased flexibility and resilience of our economy. But what they perceive as newly
abundant liquidity can readily disappear. Any onset of increased investor caution elevates risk premiums and, as a consequence, lowers asset
values and promotes the liquidation of the debt that supported higher asset prices. This is the reason that history has not dealt kindly with the aftermath of protracted periods of lowrisk premiums.”

Above quote from "A Froth-Finding Mission" by HSBC Global Research on Randy's website. Was looking at it recently to see where we could be heading if we go back to "historic norms". Still trying to reconcile their Penninsula and East Bay data. They claim:
Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA (MSAD) Q3 2005
Median Income: $69,572
Median Home Price: $804,363
San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City, CA (MSAD) Q3 2005
Median Income: $68,087
Median Home Price: $767,777

In fact, East Bay beats the Penninsula in their historic data too. Doesn't seem right to me.

I think that low-class Redwood City skews the data downward.

Our first CA home is in Redwood City. We paid $365K in 1996. It now comps for about $1.1mm. There's skewing going on there alright, not sure which way though.

The Fed's OMC does buy and sell on the open market, but not equities. They buy and sell government paper.

Who could coordinate the thousands of buyers it would require to bid up prices of massive DOW stocks, sopping up all the sell pressure, without being noticed? Unless you think the PPT controls all the mutual funds or something like that, then it just ain't happening.

I don't believe these type of things can be pulled off. Managing complex arrangements is already harder than herding cats. Add in something sinister and there's no way you're going to pull it off without being outted.

I'm sure there's some manipulation going on. But I'm afraid it's the old fashioned kind of manipulation for the old fashioned reasons: greed. Like the examples cited above. Or like when the hedge funds break an ETF like OIH from its underlying index. No complex explanations needed. A single "$" will suffice.

Thanks Harm, I think defining it clearly helps, and your examples were along the same tangent I was going down.

The last 20 minutes surge of 180 pts going from negative territory to positive 150 was most definitely an act of PPT.

Yes, I agree. M3 will increase since government is now giving free money via plunge protection team.

Can you guys tell us, specifically, how the hell this shadowy "PPT" is able to do these trades, even though apparently wiki and everyone in the blogosphere knows about it? Yet they mystically defy arbitrage? If this is true, then it's too good to be true. I'll go raise a couple billion and start my own macro hedge fund.

>> I’ll go raise a couple billion and start my own macro hedge fund.

If you do that, you will be rewaded by Federal Reserve with billions of dollars of free money.

Can you guys tell us, specifically, how the hell this shadowy “PPT” is able to do these trades, even though apparently wiki and everyone in the blogosphere knows about it?

This shadowy group uses shadowy methods including, but not limited to, black magic, voodoo, and animal sacrifices.

Members of this elite group are also known to travel in black helicopters.

from CNBC,

trader: Merril Lynch & Goldman did the buying y'day. he said, there were a lot of shorts and they were forced to buy.

i didn't understand exactly what he meant.if someone here could explain what he meant, i would appreciate.

maybe something to do with Bohemian Grove or the skull and bones...