Crowknowsbest
| Favorite team: | Georgia  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 26503 |
| Registered on: | 5/11/2012 |
| Online Status: | Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Limestone University (SC) will close down after 179 years
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/30/25 at 12:26 pm
quote:
There might be some surprises in the coming years. Some fairly big names could be headed for trouble. Sarah Lawrence is one that gets mentioned frequently.
I could see that. Acceptance rate is not great, endowment on the smaller side, etc. The cost of attendance issue is even more acute for urban schools due to cost of living.
0
re: Limestone University (SC) will close down after 179 years
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/30/25 at 10:45 am
quote:
Just like Birmingham Southern. Would not be surprised to see places like Millsaps and Rhodes die in the next 10 years.
I don’t know much about Millsaps, but Rhodes and Sewanee are right on the edge of my hypothetical cutoff. I don’t know enough about the balance sheet of either to comment with any confidence, but Sewanee at least has carved out a pretty significant niche for itself, even if it isn’t as selective as some higher ranked places.
Maybe the demise of some schools will help some others hang on, as there is definitely demand for the smaller, more personal academic experience. With less options, maybe it will be a boon for some places.
re: Limestone University (SC) will close down after 179 years
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/30/25 at 10:14 am
It appears to me that any liberal arts school without a very strong regional (at least) academic reputation is in some danger over the next decade. Cost of attendance for these places has gotten way out of line for a lot of them relative to nearby public options and their employment networks. The NESCACs, W&L, Davidsons, etc. of the world have the donor base and reputations to be fine, but anything below that tier could be in trouble.
re: Bill's disastrous interview actually worse...edit, BB Statement Pg 4
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/29/25 at 1:01 pm
quote:
What would you do at 74?
I would like to think I will still be sane enough to know that if a 24-year old is trying to date me, they probably have motivations that aren’t in my or my family’s best interest.
Lots of rich old dudes manage to steer clear of these types.
re: Hot take? Joey Aguilar has a better chance at the Heisman than Nico
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/22/25 at 12:46 pm
Don’t think that’s a super hot take
re: How can we let activist judges take away an elected President's Executive Power ?
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/21/25 at 9:36 am
I don’t know the specifics of many of these cases, but if Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act is determined to be constitutional, they’ll be deported. It’s going to take time for that to be sorted out.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 4:16 pm
quote:
So you are not active in the markets?
I am very active, but I don’t pretend to have extreme confidence in any one stock, company, property, etc. I do have confidence in the aggregate of the capitalist economy to create value over time.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 4:13 pm
quote:
That would put you in a very limited group. Your preference for acting on yesterday's news notwithstanding, the Fed's dual mandate demands a different responsibility.
I don’t think any human beings are capable of reliably “reading the tea leaves” on something as complex and massive as the US (and global) economy. Pretending that they can or should is very irresponsible, in my opinion.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 4:11 pm
quote:
If I'm reading the tea leaves, there is not yet a sign of change re: MMT in that body.
That’s because they are heavily incentivized to agree with MMT. It’s easier to justify excessive spending when you can finance it cheaply.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 1:12 pm
quote:
You may be unfamiliar with an arm of the US government known as the Legislative Branch. But within that body, MMT is as commonly accepted as immorality in a brothel
I don’t respect the economic understanding of the legislative branch.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 1:12 pm
quote:
To the extent, as you've observed, that unemployment and inflation are trailing indicators, reacting to inflation and unemployment instead of anticipating them will always leave us behind the eight-ball.
I’d rather have a reactive Fed using actual data than have them try to react to the whims of flavor-of-the-month politicians while also trying to predict aggregate consumer behavior. I’d rather them be a few months late than guess wrong, basically.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 12:06 pm
quote:
Why? Because we are not in a 4%+ FFR economy by recent standards.
Recent standards are the outlier, historically. We had cheap money from 2010-2023 despite a strong economy, and it resulted in extreme asset price growth (and now a housing affordability crisis in many areas) and ultimately severe inflation when faced with a shock to supply chains ignited further by stimulus.
Modern monetary theory has largely been discredited as a result.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 12:03 pm
quote:
Then they'd be making a costly mistake, for several reasons.
The Fed’s mandate centers around inflation and unemployment. If both are near target, they have no reason to lower rates.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 10:44 am
quote:
If, in Year-1, tariffs bump CPI from 320 to 335, then Year-2 ends with a CPI of 335. What is the inflation rate for Year-2?
0%. Nothing I said above disputes that.
quote:
Further, insofar as tariffs bump price, which in turn dampens demand, they would be expected to be disinflationary in subsequent years. What should the Fed response be under those conditions?
That would depend on a myriad of other factors. If the dampened demand did not cause a rise in unemployment, the Fed would probably keep rates constant.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 10:27 am
I said nothing about the impact being dollar-for-dollar or easily quantifiable. Of course there will be market changes to adjust, but you can’t project those changes any better than the “anti-tariff” bros.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 10:23 am
quote:
Put differently, which Fed policy could unwind the price differences subsequent to a tariff hike?
There isn’t a fed action to specifically counter the effects of tariffs, but to counter any inflationary side effects, you would raise rates. To counter job and/or productively loss, you would lower rates. Therein lies the conflict for the Fed with tariffs.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 10:21 am
quote:
You don't understand what you're addressing. There is a difference between a price delta and inflation. E.g., Goods were approximately 9% more expensive in 2015 than in 2010, representing a 9% bump in price through 2015. Yet inflation in 2015 was just 0.12%
Inflation may have been 0.12% in 2015, but it would have to be higher from 2010 to 2014 to for goods to have been 9% more expensive, which it was (1.6, 3.2, 2.1, 1.5, and 1.6% respectively).
quote:
and if they held pat from that point, inflation would be zero. Do you follow.
It would be zero on a go-forward basis, but definitely not zero on a T-12 basis. Economic metrics don’t just ignore shocks.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 8:46 am
quote:
They aren't in the intermediate term. Arguably they aren't at all. They are a one-off bump. Inflation, or the inflation rate, refers to a sustained rate of increase in the general price level of goods and services over time.
That initial bump doesn’t just “not count” in the inflation calculation over a period of time. Producers don’t drop their prices back down after the initial shock, so the higher prices are sustained from that point forward. Even if Trump gets his way and more products are manufactured domestically, that will have to be done at higher costs and prices to the American consumer. The exception would be if the shock of tariffs caused a significant decline in productivity (recession or depression) and the broader impacts of that downturn on employment, income, etc. caused deflation in spite of the tariffs, and that would be devastating in itself. That possibility is all the more reason for the Fed to hold off now to keep the rate-cutting tool in its arsenal in case of a downturn.
It’s to his personal and political benefit because lower rates will increase equity values (both his own and his constituents) and lower the cost of borrowing. That doesn’t mean it’s a prudent economic policy in the aggregate.
re: Trump calls on FED to cut rates; hints at Powell being fired soon
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/17/25 at 8:04 am
quote:
Powell's comments yesterday were indeed a mess.
Powell inexplicably linked tariffs and inflation in the intermediate term. Inflation is a continual upward price pressure. Tariffs do not cause that. Economists, including Powell, are screaming about how bad tariffs are for the economy and GDP while simultaneously claiming inflation risks are increased.
I'm normally not a fan of a POTUS going after the Fed, but in this instance Trump is right. The Fed is a mess.
Tariffs are inflationary. No serious person argues otherwise, and that includes the minority of economists who are in favor of targeted tariffs.
Trump just wants cheap money as a personal and political benefit. I would also love lower interest rates, but making the economic case for lower rates while simultaneously adding cost to a huge amount of consumer products through tariffs is an exercise in mental gymnastics.
re: Starting think that ol Gunner was worth the wait
Posted by Crowknowsbest on 4/16/25 at 8:18 pm
quote:
All we know of gunner is his play versus two playoff teams, one that went to the finals. Hard to tell in early action much.
I get that it’s a difficult sampling but those are also exactly the type of teams UGA needs good QB play to beat.
I agree with others saying that his release is an issue, and he’s not really a running threat. He’s a willing runner, but no one will be scared of that part of his game.
Popular
30
