DragonKing
2021-10-19
Ok. Like Please.
Powell Trading Controversy Is a False One. Why It Might Still Matter.
免责声明:上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点,不构成本平台的任何投资建议。
分享至
微信
复制链接
精彩评论
我们需要你的真知灼见来填补这片空白
打开APP,发表看法
APP内打开
发表看法
2
5
{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"detailType":1,"isChannel":false,"data":{"magic":2,"id":859092310,"tweetId":"859092310","gmtCreate":1634635208789,"gmtModify":1634635236635,"author":{"id":3580988274582448,"authorId":3580988274582448,"authorIdStr":"3580988274582448","name":"DragonKing","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/999074a932b6e7b44c07fcebc581aacb","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":34,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body><p>Ok. Like Please.</p></body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body><p>Ok. Like Please.</p></body></html>","text":"Ok. Like Please.","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/859092310","repostId":1174008635,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1174008635","pubTimestamp":1634634996,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1174008635?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-19 17:16","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Powell Trading Controversy Is a False One. Why It Might Still Matter.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1174008635","media":"Barrons","summary":"The Twittersphere is abuzz, again, about Federal Reserve officials’ trading activity. This time, the","content":"<p>The Twittersphere is abuzz, again, about Federal Reserve officials’ trading activity. This time, the controversy is a faux one.</p>\n<p>On Monday, the publication The American Prospect ran an article saying that Fed Chairman Jerome Powell sold between $1 million and $5 million worth of stock from his personal account on Oct. 1, 2020. The article said the sale of shares from a Vanguard Total Stock Market Index fund hadn’t been previously reported, and it said the sale occurred “right before the Dow Jones Industrial Average suffered a significant drop.” It also noted that some entries on Powell’s forms don’t provide exact transaction dates.</p>\n<p>At first blush, it sounds juicy. The attention on Powell’s personal transactions comes after two Fed regional bank presidents, Eric Rosengren of the Boston Fed and Robert Kaplan of the Dallas Fed, stepped down from their posts after reports of extensive securities trading prompted calls for their departures. More recently, reports said Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarida moved between $1 million and $5 million out of one mutual fund and into two other funds on Feb. 27, 2020–a day before the Fed issued a statement signaling a potential interest-rate cut in response to the worsening pandemic.</p>\n<p>Earlier this month, after the Clarida news, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate whether personal financial investments by senior Federal Reserve officials, including Clarida, violated insider-trading rules. In a letter to SEC Chairman Gary Gensler, Warren said the agency should determine the legality of “ethically questionable transactions” by those three Fed officials.</p>\n<p>But Powell doesn’t seem to have the problems his colleagues have had. “This story is very disingenuous,” Roberto Perli, head of global policy research at Cornerstone Macro, tweeted with regard to the American Prospect article. “The stock market dropped 5.6% in a week 23 days after Powell sold his stocks. If you know anyone who can reliably time the market a day in advance, let alone 23, please let me know.”</p>\n<p>Perli went on to note that stocks are “way up now.”</p>\n<p>Powell had 19 purchases and seven sales in 2020, based on a disclosure form. One transaction was a smaller sale a month earlier of the same fund in question. A Fed representative told The Wall Street Journal that Powell’s financial transactions squared with central-bank rules and were signed off on by government ethics officers. The representative said that transactions without specific date information were reported under rules that allowed things like regular reinvestments to be lumped together. (Powell’s disclosure lacks dates for some purchase transactions).</p>\n<p>Perli also addressed an argument in the American Prospect article that Powell sold stocks before Federal Open Market Committee minutes revealed the Fed’s concern about lack of new fiscal stimulus. That’s silly, Perli said, because Powell revealed those same concerns at the September 2020 press conference.</p>\n<p>Jason Furman, an economic policy professor at Harvard who was chair of President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, similarly threw cold water on the idea that Powell’s personal trading in 2020 is controversial. The article “makes a lot of tendentious points but none as tendentious as the insinuation that Jay Powell was selling stocks based on inside info,” Furman tweeted Monday. His tweet included a chart of the cumulative returns Powell missed out on by selling when he did.</p>\n<p>There are good arguments for or against reappointing Powell, Furman says. It’s “just that this one does not belong on the list. It has zero resemblance to the day-trading by Robert Kaplan and Eric Rosengren, for example.”</p>\n<p>Even if the claims that Powell did something unethical are flimsy, contrived or something else, it may not matter to some critics. The progressive wing of the Democratic party wants Powell replaced when his term ends early next year. A controversy–fake or not–around him personally and in the wake of outrage over trading by Rosengren, Kaplan, and Clarida probably isn’t helpful to his renomination prospects.</p>\n<p>Powell’s odds of another term as Fed chair took a hit Monday, with the site PredictIt showing 64% odds in the late afternoon. That is down from 79% a day earlier. Fed Governor Lael Brainard’s odds were steady at 21%, while Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic’s odds rose to 10% from 5%.</p>\n<p>Prior to a lambasting in late September by Warren during his appearance before the Senate Banking Committee, Powell’s odds had hovered between about 80% and 90%. During that hearing, Warren said he has “acted to make our banking system less safe, and that makes you a dangerous man to head up the Fed.”</p>\n<p>While Warren’s threat to oppose Powell’s renomination is easy to dismiss–he’d easily be confirmed–the perception that he too has a trading controversy may bolster the case she is making that he not get the renomination in the first place. Strategists say an announcement either way by President Biden could come any day, although Powell’s term doesn’t expire until February 2022.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Powell Trading Controversy Is a False One. Why It Might Still Matter.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nPowell Trading Controversy Is a False One. Why It Might Still Matter.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-10-19 17:16 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/powell-trading-controversy-is-a-false-one-why-it-might-still-matter-51634614931><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>The Twittersphere is abuzz, again, about Federal Reserve officials’ trading activity. This time, the controversy is a faux one.\nOn Monday, the publication The American Prospect ran an article saying ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/powell-trading-controversy-is-a-false-one-why-it-might-still-matter-51634614931\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/powell-trading-controversy-is-a-false-one-why-it-might-still-matter-51634614931","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1174008635","content_text":"The Twittersphere is abuzz, again, about Federal Reserve officials’ trading activity. This time, the controversy is a faux one.\nOn Monday, the publication The American Prospect ran an article saying that Fed Chairman Jerome Powell sold between $1 million and $5 million worth of stock from his personal account on Oct. 1, 2020. The article said the sale of shares from a Vanguard Total Stock Market Index fund hadn’t been previously reported, and it said the sale occurred “right before the Dow Jones Industrial Average suffered a significant drop.” It also noted that some entries on Powell’s forms don’t provide exact transaction dates.\nAt first blush, it sounds juicy. The attention on Powell’s personal transactions comes after two Fed regional bank presidents, Eric Rosengren of the Boston Fed and Robert Kaplan of the Dallas Fed, stepped down from their posts after reports of extensive securities trading prompted calls for their departures. More recently, reports said Fed Vice Chair Richard Clarida moved between $1 million and $5 million out of one mutual fund and into two other funds on Feb. 27, 2020–a day before the Fed issued a statement signaling a potential interest-rate cut in response to the worsening pandemic.\nEarlier this month, after the Clarida news, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate whether personal financial investments by senior Federal Reserve officials, including Clarida, violated insider-trading rules. In a letter to SEC Chairman Gary Gensler, Warren said the agency should determine the legality of “ethically questionable transactions” by those three Fed officials.\nBut Powell doesn’t seem to have the problems his colleagues have had. “This story is very disingenuous,” Roberto Perli, head of global policy research at Cornerstone Macro, tweeted with regard to the American Prospect article. “The stock market dropped 5.6% in a week 23 days after Powell sold his stocks. If you know anyone who can reliably time the market a day in advance, let alone 23, please let me know.”\nPerli went on to note that stocks are “way up now.”\nPowell had 19 purchases and seven sales in 2020, based on a disclosure form. One transaction was a smaller sale a month earlier of the same fund in question. A Fed representative told The Wall Street Journal that Powell’s financial transactions squared with central-bank rules and were signed off on by government ethics officers. The representative said that transactions without specific date information were reported under rules that allowed things like regular reinvestments to be lumped together. (Powell’s disclosure lacks dates for some purchase transactions).\nPerli also addressed an argument in the American Prospect article that Powell sold stocks before Federal Open Market Committee minutes revealed the Fed’s concern about lack of new fiscal stimulus. That’s silly, Perli said, because Powell revealed those same concerns at the September 2020 press conference.\nJason Furman, an economic policy professor at Harvard who was chair of President Barack Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, similarly threw cold water on the idea that Powell’s personal trading in 2020 is controversial. The article “makes a lot of tendentious points but none as tendentious as the insinuation that Jay Powell was selling stocks based on inside info,” Furman tweeted Monday. His tweet included a chart of the cumulative returns Powell missed out on by selling when he did.\nThere are good arguments for or against reappointing Powell, Furman says. It’s “just that this one does not belong on the list. It has zero resemblance to the day-trading by Robert Kaplan and Eric Rosengren, for example.”\nEven if the claims that Powell did something unethical are flimsy, contrived or something else, it may not matter to some critics. The progressive wing of the Democratic party wants Powell replaced when his term ends early next year. A controversy–fake or not–around him personally and in the wake of outrage over trading by Rosengren, Kaplan, and Clarida probably isn’t helpful to his renomination prospects.\nPowell’s odds of another term as Fed chair took a hit Monday, with the site PredictIt showing 64% odds in the late afternoon. That is down from 79% a day earlier. Fed Governor Lael Brainard’s odds were steady at 21%, while Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic’s odds rose to 10% from 5%.\nPrior to a lambasting in late September by Warren during his appearance before the Senate Banking Committee, Powell’s odds had hovered between about 80% and 90%. During that hearing, Warren said he has “acted to make our banking system less safe, and that makes you a dangerous man to head up the Fed.”\nWhile Warren’s threat to oppose Powell’s renomination is easy to dismiss–he’d easily be confirmed–the perception that he too has a trading controversy may bolster the case she is making that he not get the renomination in the first place. Strategists say an announcement either way by President Biden could come any day, although Powell’s term doesn’t expire until February 2022.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":82,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"CN","currentLanguage":"CN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":14,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ZH_CN"},"commentList":[],"isCommentEnd":true,"isTiger":false,"isWeiXinMini":false,"url":"/m/post/859092310"}
精彩评论