I presented the weakest possible way of finding exiting-QE materials possible, and there were still a couple of hits. You went ad hominem on one, he's been "discredited here", lmao! (There's that megalomania again. Some cranks on ET's P&R have "discredited" someone? Lol.) You don't even try. So I made a bit longer tail search string and found this: http://www.chiltoncapital.com/curre...nfinity and Beyond.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,0,563 That one's new, it's not the piece I found earlier. This is nearly without trying. But clearly more than you. And get your lips of lukie's cock, lol.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/INmqvibv4UU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Right, so the guy/s who got it so fucking wrong "consistently"in the past are going to perfectly time their action in the future??
Obviously you fail to grasp the implications of the graphs and just like a good muzzie supporter you project your specific failings onto others.
Dude, just because you enjoy fellatio with other men (I'm guessing you give rather than receive, it seems your type) doesn't mean the rest of us are into that. But back to your article and the next round of Ricter pummeling. First, you continue to post articles that take the place of you answering my question, because you don't have the ability to comprehend what the Fed's exit strategy could possibly be. You have no clue as to the mechanics of how it would work. Zero. Zip. Nadda. You're fucking clueless, and everyone here can see it. Instead, all you do is try to obfuscate (your M.O.) with random links you hope will deflect the conversation away from that one simple fact - that you're fucking clueless on this topic. You claim I'm a megalomaniac, but how does ego come into the picture when all I'm doing is telling you that you're fucking clueless? I'm not saying I'm the smartest guy to walk the planet, or that I'm the pinnacle of wisdom on Federal Reserve policy. Never once did I make any of those statements. All I said is that I am brilliant in comparison to you. But then, on this topic, so is a hamster. In regards to the article you posted, it explains what QE is, points out the valid concern about inflation, states that QE has been successfully exited in Japan and Sweden (which is only half correct because Japan is still doing it, in fact accelerating it) and then ends with this quote: Great, "who knows" is the answer. Sure, Sweden exited correctly, but that was a crisis typical to our S+L crisis, nothing at the magnitude of this. They doubled their balance sheet. The Fed is way way beyond that point. This is not comparable to the Sweden model, and the author knows it, which is why he - just like you refused to provide any specifics on how an exit would be done without causing distortions. So what's next, Palooka?