Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Igy yes I know. People used to not care which way the market went because there was money to be made in both directions...the problem is that requires actual work, insight, and some alacrity. Govs loathe such qualities, and the more individuals are fragmented, the more gov carries the day. They rig it one way, and over time exclude everyone else from the game.
I disagree with the ruler-on-end analogy. I think it will take something seismic to disturb the equilibrium.
I pray you are wrong since it would be a world I would loathe.
Are you not the same guy who constantly bemoans the effect central banks have on the markets? Surely you realize the governments are stirring the pot.
Sure, but it is quite a bit different to think that it has create an equilibrium that is justified, lasting, or for the greater good. Some writers have linked the rise of populism to income inequality created by these same central bank policies. I interpret Maserati’s view requiring a revolution of sorts to derail the regime of rising debt and asset prices. My view is a rise in Vix to 20, or it’s historic average could do the trick.