2,756
edits
Talk:Economic Outlook: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
Also I dont think the market is pricing rate cuts due to the FED projections, the markets at the moment are pricing very different outcomes compare to the FED projections, especially pricing rate cuts already in 2023. Unfortunately, the FED credibility is still not good. | Also I dont think the market is pricing rate cuts due to the FED projections, the markets at the moment are pricing very different outcomes compare to the FED projections, especially pricing rate cuts already in 2023. Unfortunately, the FED credibility is still not good. | ||
I will probably rewrite the whole part so it is best understood. --[[User:MagaNH6|MagaNH6]] ([[User talk:MagaNH6|talk]]) 21:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC) | I will probably rewrite the whole part so it is best understood. --[[User:MagaNH6|MagaNH6]] ([[User talk:MagaNH6|talk]]) 21:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC) | ||
[[User:MagaNH6]] I think i understood the whole part well. My overall point is that we should not get into academic/theoretical but practical discussions and predictions. | |||
Your goal should not be citing an article and presenting different possible correlations but analyzing the weight and importance of correlations and present the most meaningful ones. This is different compared to Wikipedia at which the author of the Wikipedia article does not present his opinion and research and is just citing sources. | |||
In this case the argument is completely meaningless as there is a standing reverse repo facility. | |||
I think once we have a bit more time we could study the financial system a bit more to understand short term liqudity options better (See also [[Federal funds rate]] but not now as this is low prio. --[[User:PirateCaptain|PirateCaptain]] ([[User talk:PirateCaptain|talk]]) 23:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
== Wrong Correlation == | == Wrong Correlation == | ||