- PayPal is shilling crypto on the internet
- Nigel Farage is shilling gold and silver on the internet
- We don’t want to call the top but . . . (Vision Fund edition)
- Nikola/Hindenburg: gravitational spin
- Is GMO’s Montier right on ‘absurd’ US stocks?
- ‘Commerzbank has confirmed its top position in German equity research, sales and corporate access’
- Once again Kodak pivots, and the share price explodes
- Blockchain: it really is a tough sell
- Sterling has not become an emerging market currency
- Jeff Ubben/ESG: flip flop
- Is this the nuttiest risk factor of all time?
- The tech start-up that wants to “validate” the female orgasm
- It’s a great time for conspiracy theories to thrive
- Let’s call Trump out, but let’s get our facts straight too
- Today, in efficient markets
- We can’t blame all the indirect health damage on the lockdown
- Weirdly, blockchain can’t help combat coronavirus
- Leading ‘UK’ start-ups want a handout too
- China’s PMI print doesn’t mean much
- Let’s flatten the coronavirus confusion curve
Can we really measure what GDP was when the Magna Carta was signed? And do we really need to care?
Janet Yellen’s speech on Friday to the Boston Fed conference was like a greatest-hits collection of the frustrations long expressed by advocates of more-stimulative demand policy. One of those frustrations has been rooted in the belief that a more aggressive counter-cyclical response to recessions doesn’t merely jumpstart the economy again, but also prevents semi-permanent damage to the economy’s very capacity for growth — in other words, weak demand now can damage potential supply into the future.