July 29, 2018, Bob Brinker's Moneytalk: Summary and Commentary

July 29, 2018....Bob Brinker mostly hosted Moneytalk live today.....

STOCK MARKET...Brinker commented that he is still for having 100% of your stock allocations fully invested, and for dollar-cost-averaging new money.   He said that in spite of the auto companies complaints, the stock market had a "reasonable week" with the S&P 500 making fractional gains.

FINANCIAL  MARKETS NOW

OIL: WTI crude oil lost $0.92 to $68.69 per barrel and wholesale gasoline shed $0.01 to $2.11 per gallon.

GOLD: The Bloomberg gold spot price inched $0.72 higher to $1,223.41 per ounce.

DOLLAR: The Dollar Index—a comparison of the U.S. dollar to six major world currencies—was down 0.1% at 94.66.

STOCKS:  The DJIA rose 1.5% (@ 25,451.06);  the S&P 500 Index was 0.6% higher (@ 2818.82);  the Nasdaq Composite declined 1.1% (@ 7737.42).

FACEBOOK HIT THE SKIDS THIS WEEK - not mentioned on Moneytalk today. 

BRINKER SAID 4% GDP COULDN'T BE DONE, BUT THIS IS WHAT HE IS SAYING NOW....Brinker said:  "Well some good economic news.  Okay, it was expected. Okay, we said it would happen. We'll take it. Some good economic news in the second quarter of 2018. Total GDP had a very good second quarter. We talked about a nice bounce off that first quarter. We got that nice bounce.  The first quarter was slightly revised to 2.2% annual growth. But the second quarter was the headline number coming in at 4.1% annual growth.  And that brings the first half annual growth rate up to 3.1%. The advance  estimate for Q2 GDP to one decimal, came in at 4.1% (4.06% to two decimal places), an increase from 2.2% for the Q1 Third Estimate. Investing.com had a consensus of 4.1%."

Honey: LOL! as I typed that. :)

LISTEN TO THE REST OF BRINKER'S ECONOMIC REPORT....==> dRahme's Audio Clip

BONDS, INTEREST RATES...No changes in Brinker's advice to stick to duration of one year or less in bond funds.

ROTH VS REGULAR IRA.... Brinker told a caller today that the only reason he would recommend paying taxes to transfer money from a regular IRA to a Roth IRA is if he was convinced his tax rate would be higher in the future.

HOUSING MARKET....Home prices are at high levels, and likely to stay high because there is a scarcity of available homes. There has been "under building for years," so there is a low inventory.

==> > dRahme Audio Clip: home prices; mortgage rate changes; durable goods gains;

CRYPTO-CURRENCIES - BITCOINS.... Lots of advertising because they are not regulated....extremely volatile....."CAVEAT EMPTOR"

NEXT WEEK IN THE CANYONS OF WALL STREET....dRahme's Audio Clip: pending home sales; PCE Index (watched by FOMC); ADP new jobs estimates. 

FRANKJ'S ORIGINAL SUMMARY OF THIRD-HOUR REPEAT GUEST-AUTHOR AND BOOK FROM  APRIL 2017. No new information was added in today's interview:

Bob’s guest today, April 2, 2017 was William D. Cohan, author of the book “Why Wall Street Matters.”  Today was a repeat appearance for Mr. Cohan on the StarShip.   He is a financial journalist and former banker.   Mr. Cohan said the book is short, easy to read and it is his hope that people will gain a better understanding of Wall Street’s importance to their everyday life.   (Editorial comment in italics as usual.)

A blurb on Amazon books describes this offering as,  “A timely, counterintuitive defense of Wall Street and the big banks as the invisible—albeit flawed—engines that power our ideas, and should be made to work better for all of us.”

Mr. Cohan thinks Wall Street is bashed unfairly by politicians of all stripes and mentioned Bernie Sanders and President Trump in this regard.    He cited an example of Elizabeth Warren blocking the appointment of Antonio Weiss to a government position simply because he once worked on Wall Street.  Mr. Cohan said he knew Mr. Weiss was well-qualified for the job.

The guest believes Wall Street’s compensation model is to blame for financial disasters that result (naturally) in Main Street’s dislike and distrust.   For decades, Wall Street investment firms were partnerships, meaning it was the partners’ capital that was at risk if investments went south.  That changed in the 1970’s when Donaldson, Lufkin and Jenrette was the first firm to go public.  Many more followed suit and the result was that risk was no longer confined to the partners, now it was spread among the shareholders at large.  

He referred to the “bonus culture,” wherein employees of the firm take outsized risks with other people’s money, hoping for that big bonus at the end of the year.  

Bob asked if he blamed Wall Street for 2008?  The guest gave a long answer, beginning with the statement that there was a lot of blame to go around.   Government policy and the actions of Wall Street, mortgage brokers and real estate agents pushed home ownership up from 61% to 70%  (presumably these are percentages of households).   As MoneyTalk regulars well know, there were a lot of people who had no business buying a home during this bubble, but they were accommodated by a greedy lending sector.  

The bottom line was, no one on Wall Street was held responsible.  The Dept. of Justice under President Obama did little or nothing to go after those responsible.  Preet Bharara, former US Attorney in New York City has gone after hedge fund operators but not Wall Streeters involved in the housing debacle.  Mr. Cohan said Bharara told him “stupidity and greed” are not grounds for prosecution and there is a lack of evidence that Wall Street firms acted illegally.  

The guest pointed out that Dan Turillo, a former member of the Fed pushed regulations on Wall Street firms, “trying to turn it into a utility.”   Because they tend to be monopolistic over broad geographical areas, utilities are tightly regulated.  

The result of this regulation is that small and medium sized businesses on Main Street have found it difficult to borrow.   He cited Larry Summers as someone who thinks these regulations are the reason we are stuck at about 2% growth of GDP.   

Keith from Rochester called in.  He’s getting to be a regular on the StarShip.   Normally he is strident and argumentative and makes more of a statement than asks a question.  But today his call fed right into what the guest said about the difficulty of getting capital flowing to Main Street.   Keith cited the hit Rochester took when Kodak folded.   The guest gave a long answer which basically agreed with what Keith said.

Bob wrapped up about 3:55.  

Honey here: Thank you, FrankJ.  I have never before known Brinker to have an author on to discuss the same book he had him on to discuss over a year ago.  And as you pointed out to me, Brinker actually said the book was new. The book is available in paperback on Amazon for $1.30. 

Mr.  Cohan took a cheap shot at President Donald Trump today (something he didn't do a year ago, but that was just three months after inauguration).  Very near the beginning of the interview, Mr. Cohan said that the reason people aren't much interested in the problems on Wall street was because they have a short memory and are focused on what's happening in the White House, where there is "a very strange individual who happens to be our President."

I would like to tell Mr. Cohan  three things: 1. Of course President Trump seems strange to you. He's a genius and you're not. 2. If there was any chance of my buying any of your books, you did away with that with one word "strange." 3.  You slam  most investors with your "short memory" insult, but is your memory long enough to explain why on your prior Moneytalk appearances, you never once had a negative word for Obama. Why is that, hmmm?

Listen Talk Radio:
TALKOFCONNECTICUT;  

READ AND POST COMMENTS

July 22, 2018, Bob Brinker's Moneytalk: Latest Advice and Commentary

July 22, 2018....Bob Brinker was live on Moneytalk today.....(comments welcome)

EDIT: Due to severe weather issues in his area, dRahme was limited on making audio clips from Sunday Moneytalk.  dRahme's Audio Clip: Brinker's comments on Fed, Economy and Debt

CURRENT STOCK MARKET NUMBERS: July 20th, the Dow closed at 25,058; the S&P 500 Index at 2802; and the Nasdaq at 7820.

BRINKER'S STOCK MARKET COMMENTS....."S&P 500 sitting in about the 2800 level, and since reaching its all-time-historic-peak close in January this year which was at 2872, it's basically been bouncing around. We had a 10.1% pullback over a period of only nine days when there was an inflation scare back in the first quarter. And since that time, its just bounced back and forth a number of times  - and basically been in a trading range since January. And that trading range has been - there was a short time in the 2500 - but mainly, it's been in the 2600s, the 2700s, even a little bit around that 2800 level. It's bounced around a lot if you go back to January of 2018.

Honey's EC: Brinker has always defined a bear market as a decline of 20% or more, a major correction between 10% and 20%,  and a "noisy" correction as 10% or less.

Based on Brinker's "Special Bulletin" in February 2018, he considered 10.1% a correction and was waiting for retest to issue a new buy-signal. Here are some excerpts: 

In the February edition of Marketimer we continued to recommend a dollar-cost-average approach for investing new stock market money, especially during periods of market weakness. We also observed that we expected increased volatility this year, and noted that in every mid-term election year since 1962 the market has experienced a decline of at least 7.4%. We also noted that in seven of the last eight mid-term election years dating back to 1986, the decline has been within the category of a correction of less than 20%. 

The initial stage of the current correction carried the S&P 500 Index into the mid-2500s range during the February 9th trading session as the index searches for the area of an initial bottom. Following the completion of the initial correction phase, we expect the S&P 500 Index to stage a short-term rally which is likely to run out of steam and roll over into a retest of the developing initial bottom area. For subscribers looking to add to stock market positions, our view is that the potential for a Marketimer buy signal would be highest in the event we see a successful test of an initial bottom area.

 (SNIP)

Going forward, if all goes well, we hope to reach a point at which we can upgrade the market to "attractive for purchase" at a level close to the eventual closing correction low. However, this can only occur on a successful test of the initial bottom area, accompanied by confirmation based on our analysis of the technical market internals at that time. 

(SNIP)

There are no changes to our model portfolios at this time and we continue to recommend a dollar-cost-average approach for investing new money, especially during periods of market weakness. 

BOND FUND PERFORMANCE ACCORDING TO BRINKER.....Caller Jim asked about continuing to hold his Vanguard intermediate and long bond funds: Brinker replied......"We certainly have seen lousy performance from the intermediate and long term bond market since this whole thing (rate increases) has gotten under way in the summer of 2016.....Since then, the Federal Funds rate has gone from 3/8% average to 1 7/8%. So that's 150 basis points. And during that time, the ten-year has also gone up 150 basis points...…

Honey EC: The funds that Brinker sold beginning in 2013 with Vanguard Ginnie Mae Fund have done very well. 

Jim sums it up well with these comments today:

Since Bob Brinker enjoys explaining to people how duration works with bonds maybe he could be so kind to explain to us how the Vanguard Long-Term Treasury Index (VLGSX) which has a duration of 17.2 years is only (-0.36%) over the past 12 months, after all the Fed rate hikes and after the yield on the 10 year Treasury has risen 150 basis points. I guess Vanguard must be lying about performance since Bob has said recently that long term bond funds are "getting taken to the woodshed".

July 22, 2018 at 5:52 PM

FEDERAL RESERVE....Brinker comments: The Federal reserve has  a tremendous challenge ahead of it and we don't know yet how it's going to turn out.....The most difficult task that the Fed has had to deal with is how to move from accommodative policy to a normalized equilibrium policy.....One of the terms used in the Canyons of Wall Street to describe this is Managing a Soft Landing. …..

ECONOMY EXPANDING.... BB continued: Because we have an economy that has been expanding for many years...… (Honey Editorial Comment: Mostly the economy was clinging to about 2% for "many years." Now some are expecting Q2 to be up to 4%.)

INFLATION..... BB continued: "One of the triggers for raising rates is inflation. We already see inflation figures higher than we'd like to see them. Year-over-year headline Consumer Price Index number 2.9 - that's higher than we'd like to see.

EFFECTS OF TARIFFS SO FAR.... At least twice today, Brinker pointed out that so far, the effects of "tariffs have been very small - and no big deal." 

SILVER COINS FOR INVESTMENTS.... Brinker strongly advised a caller against buying numismatic coins because of the exorbitant mark ups on them.  

HOW MANY RATE HIKES ALREADY....BB continued: "They are watching all of this at the Federal Reserve, and at the same time, they are in this rate raising posture which started in December 2015. We've already seen seven rate hikes - with more to come.....They are also doing Quantitative Tightening. They are taking money off the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve - the money they piled up when they bought all those Quantitative Easing securities. On a maturity basis for now, they are taking these things and putting them back into the open market - where they to be absorbed...." There is no history for a combined program of raising rates and Quantitative Tightening - never happened. We are very early in QT - have to do $trillions. 

UNEMPLOYMENT BELOW 4%....BB continued...."We've gone three years now with basically record low. It's been amazing...."  

Honey EC: Brinker ignores his prior reports about the very high under-employment rate, and the huge numbers of workers that were cut to part time because of the ACA and gave up looking altogether, which increase welfare, food stamps and SSI (disability) claims.   And he never mentions the racial demographics that have drastically changed this past year.  Black and Hispanic unemployment are at HISTORIC LOWS.

ESCAPE VELOCITY.....BB continued: "Economic policy reaches a point that his described in the Canyons of Wall Street by the economic mucky-mucks as Escape Velocity......They are talking about the economy being able to grow on its own in a granular fashion without having the Federal Reserve driving it with low interest rates and highly accommodative monetary policy and financial liquidity....The prevailing wisdom is that we have already reached Escape Velocity.  (Honey EC: So it looks like the current President is not going to have the Fed's help maintaining "Escape Velocity.")

WORKFORCE TRAINING PROGRAM....Brinker continued: "Right now, we have more job listings than qualified applicants.....Now you know that the government has a dreadful historical record of training citizens to take jobs - training citizens to get them to the level that they can qualify to take jobs. The government is pretty dismal. So there's not a whole lot of hope that is suddenly going to  be solved overnight...."

Honey EC: Who's talking about Government doing it, Mr. Brinker?! You  must not have heard about President Trump's plan that gets corporations to commit to training STUDENTS AND WORKERS for the jobs that need to be filled.

The White House said the "Pledge to America's Workers" would provide at least 3.8 million new career opportunities for students and workers over the next five years, including apprenticeships, work-based learning and continuing education.

Some of the companies signing the pledge include Apple, Boeing, General Motors, FedEx, The Home Depot, IBM, Lockheed Martin, Microsoft, Northrop Grumman and Walmart. Several trade associations also committed to the job training initiative, and Trump welcomed several members of Congress and state and local officials, including Wisconsin Republican Gov. Scott Walker.

FRANKJ'S MONEYTALK-GUEST SUMMARY:

On Sunday July 22, 2018, Bob piloted the MoneyTalk Starship back in time to September 2008 (once again) to discuss the economic meltdown with Lawrence Ball, a prof at Johns Hopkins University and author of “The Fed and Lehman Brothers: Setting the Record Straight on a Financial Disaster.”

The guest thus joins a long conga line of authors who have made a cottage industry out of writing books on this general subject.   The book was issued in June 2018 and checking on Amazon (which is where I usually go for the subtitle) I see it has one review.  Someone gave it 5 stars. 

Bob pointed out that Moneytalk was on the air the weekend it became clear that Lehman would be allowed to go under.  The Fed did not toss a life ring to Lehman Brothers like they did with Bear Stearns and AIG.  (With Bear Stearns they helped broker a buyout).   The powers-that-be claimed they did not have legal clearance to help Lehman.  The guest said this “reasoning” came about after the fact;  Lehman did in fact have collateral of sufficient quality to pledge against a loan from the Fed.

We know what happened next.  Credit markets froze.   Did it have to happen?  No, was the guest’s answer.  Lehman could have been saved by a loan from the Fed.  The guest decried widespread use of the term, “bailout.”  It implies free money.  In fact, firms who received help from the Fed paid the loans back with interest.   Bernanke, Paulson and others realized their mistake in not helping Lehman after they failed.   The Fed help to major banks followed shortly thereafter in the interest of avoiding one bank failure after another which is what the guest speculated would have happened. 

(Some banks took Fed money because to not do so it would appear to Wall Street that they were beyond help – the source on this is a banker I know).

Bob brought up the Dodd-Frank act.  The guest said some parts of it are in need of revision but they probably won’t be, while parts that will be revised don’t need to be revised. 

The guest did not completely agree with Bob on the risk of inflation.  He does not see the labor market as being as tight as reported by Bob.  Therefore he said it would be premature for the Fed to take actions that would slow the economy.  He said the Fed should do less and/or do it more slowly.

Callers:  Martin from Fairbanks asked the guest if he saw the movie, Too Big To Fail?  The guest didn’t see it.  Martin also asked what the guest thought of Larry Kudlow’s appointment as an economic advisor.  Bob cut in after the guest answered the first question so we didn’t hear his opinion of Mr. Kudlow.   Bob segued into tariffs. 

Nathan from San Jose country seemed more interested in making a short speech about bailouts and telling us that he once wrote a paper on the Chrysler bailout.  Did the guest think that this started a trend? 

Paul in Louisiana asked if the reason Lehman didn’t get help was because Henry Paulson did not like Dick Fuld, head of Lehman.  The guest said there have been a lot of stories to that effect but they’re somewhat exaggerated.   Bob interjected that Paulson, etc. made the wrong call which was to let the firm go vs. making an emergency loan. 

Bob wrapped up at 3:51.     

Listen Talk Radio:
TALKOFCONNECTICUT;  

READ AND POST COMMENTS

July 18, 2018: Honey's Moneytalk Communique to Bob Brinker Not Heard on Air

July 18, 2018: Bob Brinker likes to get Communiques if they sing his praises. How about one that has some criticism?

Last Sunday during and after Moneytalk, the comments from listeners began pouring in to this Blog. Here are some of the best:

==> From Terry Steinbridge:

Bob is live and really mad at the world today it seems to me. He should just tell everyone how badly he dislikes Trump, and how mad he is at people who like him. Trump and everyone who supports him are "fools and losers" and other insults. The same "fools and losers" who thought Trump might create GDP growth and see the tax cuts result in wage increases.

Bob also harps on the deficit growing because of the tax cuts. He fails to mention that revenues to the government are up by many, many billions

==> From Jim:

Brinker is sure showing his Globalist colors today, calling those who favor protectionism idiots and morons. I guess I'm an idiot then because I think we should look out for #1. He said how low the unemployment rate is but if more people started looking for work again it would be much higher. That statistic is skewed. Brinker didn't want to let the caller make his point about NATO defense spending by saying that's politics. I'm sure the caller wanted to draw a parallel between NATO defense spending and trade. It may be politics but it's also financial too, just like trade that Brinker always talks about.

==> From MK:

Regarding Bob's comment about tariffs: If fools, morons and idiots are the only ones who are in favor of tariffs (or other protectionist trade policies) then at worst we are on a level playing field with other countries since other countries (particularly China) readily employ tariffs and other protectionist trade policies in their dealings with us.

I also suspect that Bob equates protectionism with isolationism.

I also suspect that China has more to lose in a trade war than do we since the balance of trade is currently in their favor. However in China the people really have no say in whether or how aggressively their government would conduct a trade war. They can't vote Xi out of office for making their lives miserable. In the USA on the other hand if we decide we don't have the intestinal fortitude to endure a little hardship in order to strengthen ourselves, we can vote our leaders out of office and elect an appeaser who will bow down to foreign powers.

==> From Tom Logue:

I am wondering if bobbrinker.com is a secure website. Bob states that all websites are now suspect in this digital age. Has he had his own checked? Has he paid for an hour’s time with a cyber security professional or penetration tester to evaluate it?

He also somehow conflates cyber security with free elections. The voters are free to look at any information and determine for themselves its credibility. Each political party for security reasons can elect NOT to use digital media connected to the Internet to store their sensitive information. Or decide NOT to use email for sensitive communications. They don’t have to store emails on personal servers. Eric Snowden showed us the folly in assuming security can be backfired onto the IPv4 network of protocols.

==> From TFB:

Da Brink has a liberal economics background. By that I mean people like Da Brink likely never actually read the primary source materials that macro economics is often predicated upon. What they learned was the Cliff note versions. By that I mean they learned a narrow subset of economic theory that seemed to model the economy of past times and seemed relevant at the time.

I have made this point before, but for those who never read it before: Free Trade is often credited to David Ricardo. It is sort of a Columbus discovered America thing. Ricardo essentially popularized the collective theory of economic theorist before him and added his own organization and insight. Hence he is credited with origination. 

What is significant about Ricardo’s work is the entire theory of free trade. It covers comparative advantage and absolute advantage. What people were taught in college is free trade under the auspice of comparative advantage NOT absolute advantage. And what happened is, over time, by standing down on trade issues as the U.S. has up until Trump, comparative advantage economics morphed into free trade with nations who held an absolute advantage with predictable results.

Hence Da Brinks animist. You think you have an economics education only you find out what you were taught and believed does not have salient predictive power in the world around you. The issue is, you only learned part of the theory.

==> From Seattle Doc:

Wow! I've long written Bob Brinker off as irrelevant with a subpar return newsletter. His newsletter has been basically the same month after month. He is too lazy to offer opinions about why he recommends certain funds, their strategies, or what sets them apart. So, BB doesn't earn any of my time or money.

I followed your link this week and was shocked by his dialogue. The guy has turned into a mean old man. His treatment of callers that don't praise him is terrible and embarrassing. I wonder if his personality has been affected by his age and rather than addressing caller's concerns he talks over them and cuts them off. I never met the guy or listen anymore. When I played the cut for my wife she said he's the type of guy that tells Junior someone coming into his house and stealing his underwear while he sleeps. Mean Bob can you tell us what you had for dinner last night?

Disclaimer: no medical diagnosis is implied or assumed. I’m not that kind of doc anyways. As always this is just my humble opinion.

==> From Bluce:

Regarding Frank's guest summary on the front page, Honey wrote: Honey here: Thanks Frankj….It is a little scary when unelected people and bureaucrats have so much control over our lives, because there is no way to vote them out. And worse, it's almost impossible to get them fired.

It seems this practice is also seen running wild in the "justice" system.

Back to basics: The Constitution grants "specific, enumerated powers" to the government.

The Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) were included because some of the framers worried that liberties could be infringed upon because they weren't mentioned in the Constitution -- which was, and is not -- the point of the Constitution. But they made their case and won the argument, and as we see now, they were absolutely right. Too bad a piece of paper doesn't stop "the devoted advocates of power."

So to make clear that the purpose of the Constitution was to grant specific, enumerated powers to the federal government -- and not to list specific rights of the people -- the Bill of Rights was included.

They knew they could not possibly list all natural rights held by "the people," so the Ninth Amendment says: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

And the Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

So the question: Where in the Constitution is the power granted to the federal government to set the price of money, resulting in the endless manipulation of the economy by government bureaucrats?

Here is the key: If free markets (as in the price of money) are regulated, then they are no longer free and fall under the idea of "central planning," a massively failed idea that never works in the long run, as the history of socialism and other authoritarian regulated economies show.

Freedom -- if it can be retained -- always works.

==> From Stinky:

About your communique -  Dissent is clearly not tolerated in Brinkerland.

==> From Trees:

From what I've read on HB, Bobbies market timer is unreliable and to date doesn't work. Nor does anyone else have a reliable market timer. However, I do like his VTI choice for a general stock fund, but that is common knowledge. His other portfolios? My guess not really worthy of the monthly entrance fee. Has anyone concluded Bob's portfolios are unique and above average? A hidden gem that continues over time to beat the markets?

Bob does have a huge political bias. This will always spill over into investment advice. Not good to mix the two. There is so much of this going on currently. Notice how the partisan financial experts are willing to risk your money for their politics. It is very common. This is a big reason why investment advisors are a poor choice. I want to see their portfolio. What are they risking their wealth on?.....

From J. Wales:

The housing markets are on fire nearly everywhere. I don't think a down turn is immenent. The fed is normalizing rates as they call it. BBs fear of bond fund duration is probably prudent but he was about 3-4 years early ringing the alarm. No value added that I can see. Its wellesley a CD ladder & Ibonds for me.

==> From Daddy Paul:

Honey thanks for your blog. I want to know what Bob says but can't stand to listen to him anymore.

==> From Irwin in Skokie:

Brinkers opinions, contentions and tariffs op-eds make for a better show. Rather hear some debate than the rich callers worried if their 5 million will last IRWIN in Skokie 

==> From Frankj:

Irwin, I think the millionaire callers are a stealth advertisement for his newsletter insofar as they mention they have been a subscriber.

==> From Birdbrain:

After reading Schwab's "What Happened to the Bond Bear Market?" this may be a good time to revisit Mr B's low duration bond recommendation. It has been close to five years (Honey will correct) since the old standby Vanguard GNMA was pushed aside in favor of Double Line Low Duration Bond due to Cap'n Starship's fear of impending rising interest rates.

So, with figures from Morningstar, let us view the annualized five year returns of said funds, shall we?

Growth of $10000:

VFIIX 11280
DLSNX 10866

Only over the last year and a half the price of Vanguard GNMA has declined 5.6% from 10.85 to its current 10.24 NAV. Granted, the Fed may raise rates two more times this year and beyond. Eventually this switch may prove profitable but I suspect nowhere near the magnitude the host imagined at the outset.

I guess you could say that as of now, Mr B's love of low duration has suffered from (ahem) premature infatuation.

==> From Ken Branson:

I've detected a conspiracy.

For the first time, the radio host's screener-producer-shill allowed well-grounded callers to present and debate a little. Apparently, the host was not ready for that.

So why the change? Is the network time slot more valuable to the media company as a paid infomercial for vitamins? Are they trying to gracefully convince the old man to quit?

Seems the host is flipping the bird to many fans of the current President. Fair enough. He has that forum, and can retire comfortably at a moment's notice.

But I think the host's sourness toward the chief executive might be personal.

I can imagine a moment in time when both were traversing "the Canyons of Wall Street" and the host was inadvertently shoved into a deep freezing slush puddle in January near the corner of Wall and Broad as Trump Sr. and Jr. hustled past in the brisk winter wind.

The host might still have the scars on his shin and his water-logged wingtips to prove it. He's kept them in a cold tub of ice-water all these years to preserve the evidence, in case it goes to trial.

Pure irony that Mr. Host's greatest claim to fame is as a NYC financier but he can't stand another of the same who has done it better than him.

Honey here:  Here's the link to  all of these and other interesting comments about last Sunday's Moneytalk. 

READ AND POST COMMENTS