comparison the current rally with one happened on the tech buble.

Just want to share some of my thoughts with u. Read ur site everyday. thanks for your good work.

Part one

Where the market goes in the future will mostly depends on where the dollar goes and where the dollar goes will be determined by the policies made in DC. So the Capital Hill and the White house will dictate over any chart reading on the path of the market direction. I don't know how high or how low $spx will go in the next few months or next few years but I am pretty much sure about one thing that is if the current policies (both fiscal and monetary) are not the right cure the prices of all kind of assets will respond accordingly and the market forces eventually will push politicians and American people to make the right decisions no matter they like it or not.

The fundamental root cause of the current problem as we all agree is overspending in governmental. corporational and personal levels. The correct cure is to control spending within its means. The Consumer is doing it (by foreclosure, default on credit card debt and spending less while saving more) and corporations are doing it accordingly (by layoffs and cutting capital investment) but the government is doing the opposite due to political considerations. The market will respond to the government policies in different stages which could be treated as a scoreboard for the outcome between the forces of government and the forces of the market:

Stage 1. from Oct. 2008 to March 6 2009: The market forces won. Market's primary concern was deflation: therefore we saw equity , commodity drop sharply while bond and dollar rallied even though Fed injected tremendous amount of liquidity into the system and Government is bailing out everybody.

Stage 2: from march 6 to a near future (most likely to Sept. 2009): The Government wins. Market's primary concern is government spending when the financial system is seemingly stabilized ( which is not and we will see the financial system collapses again in stage three) therefore dollar weakened, bond yield jumped, equity rallied. Although the government policies win so far the market is giving warning signals to the government by testing the limit of how weak the dollar can go and how much weak dollar induced inflation the US economy can withstand. The yield of 10 year treasury note and crude oil will keep climb (my guess is 10 year yield around 5 to 5.5% and 30 year mortgage around 7.25 to 7.75%. as for oil little bit hard to project but it could go to 105 to 110 level) until the economy turns into a nose dive mood again. I don't know the exact time frame but I suspect b4 Labor Day we will see oil peaked by then and all the economic indicators pointing to deteriozation in a fast pace.

Stage 3: market forces win again. $SPX down another 50% or so from its peak in stage 2 (probably around 1050 as its peak). Commodities tank again. Dollar and bond rally again. Unemployment rise above 12% and heading to 15%. The second wave of foreclosures(mostly prime loans) and credit card defaults and commercial real estate defaults will hit the banks harder once again. Now what the government will do will once again determines the outcome of next stage.

If by this time the government could adopt the correct policies and let those should fail fail then the healing process will start from here and we will see a start of a bull market pretty soon or at least the market low reached in this stage will be the LOW.

If the government instead does not learn the lessons and increase the magnitude of the wrong polices implemented in the stage 2 (more spending and more bailout), we will see a repeat of stage 2 with hyperinflation this time. The dollar could lose its reserve status and there will be large scale social and political unrests until American people really wake up and decide to take bitter medicines that they should take at the first place. I was so mad at the politicians at DC and their stupid policies that I was too biased to think the American Century is gone and this country will end up falling apart. However I strongly believe we human beings are able to learn from our own mistakes and are adaptive to the new challenges. The American people may not be able to convince themselves now that less government spending and live a simpler life is the best solution but they will realize they have to to do so when they see otherwise their country will be falling apart and they will have no life instead of a simpler life. The market dynamics will force American people to adopt the correct policies in the end and will rebuild the great American experience. It's just too sad to foresee the Americans could go through this tough period with less cost and pain instead the luck of the will of both its citizen and their leaders will cause them to go through much bigger ordeal.

Watch California. What happens in California will indicate what will happen to the whole country.

For short term, just watch dollar, bond yields, commodities and be ready to short the stocks.

Just remember there is no green shoots. Also remember the run on oil, bond yields and commodities will not be sustainable because their own rise will lead to their own free fall. They are used as a pressure by the market dynamics to force government to revert back to correct policy making. Buy them when government issues wrong policies and sell them when the bad outcomes from these policies become obvious to everybody.

I believe a large part of the slopers will share the same view as I described above and hope this could make you feel better about the big picture and will not be confused or frustrated by the daily market fluctuations.

frank zhao

JUNE 14, 2009 1:58 PM

Next Monday:
gld-->spx down
TLT-->spx down
USD-->spx up
cpce-->spx up
vix-->spx up
TNX-->spx up

Elliott Wave Guru Sees Dark Days Ahead

By TIERNAN RAY | MORE ARTICLES BY AUTHOR
One of America's most famous market forecasters thinks that investors should play it safe with their investments.

ROBERT PRECHTER, THE market forecaster who told investors to sell their stocks weeks before the October 1987 crash, is back in the news.

Prechter, head of market-forecasting firm Elliot Wave International and author of several books, including Conquer the Crash (available from Amazon.com), has been quoted recently as saying that the current recession could last for a long time and even force stock markets back down to levels seen at the market bottom reached in March of this year.

Barron's caught up with Prechter by phone this week to understand the technical trading signs he looks at to draw conclusions about investor sentiment.

Barrons.com: You've said that today's recession represents a very deep and prolonged decline, akin to the 1929-1932 depression. What's your reason for viewing things as so dire?

Robert Prechter: My model is that naturally occurring waves of optimism and pessimism, which result from unconscious herding, are the driver of financial and macroeconomic trends. Upon rare occasion, waves of very large degree come to an end. In the financial realm, when people get more pessimistic, they sell stocks and curtail credit. They also take fewer risks in the realm of production, which causes the economy to contract. Taken together, these changes -- at very large degree -- portended a downward revaluation of the stock market, a deflation in credit and a depression.

Q: By what measure are you judging this pessimism?

A: Aside from price patterns per se, we track waves of social mood by way of psychological indicators. At large degree, we use things such as price/dividend, price/book and bond yield/stock yield ratios, mutual fund cash percentages, the number of investors bullish vs. bearish, credit spreads, savings rates, consumer sentiment, duration of optimism, and so on. From 1998 to 2007, these measures set records. P/E is still setting records. Optimism occurs at tops, and the more extreme the optimism, the bigger the degree of the top.

Q: Some observers allege that steps taken by President Roosevelt during the early part of the Great Depression ended up prolonging the depression. Will policy decisions being enacted now ameliorate or exacerbate the current decline?

A: Governments' policy decisions hamper and ruin economies all the time, but their meddling does not affect waves of social mood. On the contrary, waves of social mood generally spur governments to act. The 1929-1932 collapse caused the government to get restrictive and separate commercial and investment banks in 1933; this was after the bust it was designed to prevent was over. The 1990s boom caused government to get frisky and repeal the act in 1999; this was just as the boom it was designed to foster was ending. These policy decisions did not cause any changes in social mood, but the social mood trends predicted the character of the policy changes. Government herds, just like everyone else, but it is at the tail end of the herd, because it takes time for a consensus to develop so extensively that government has the public support to act.

Q: While the Federal Reserve's FOMC Wednesday said the slump will be worse than originally expected in the next three years, others are convinced that the "less bad" data points could lead to a recovery in the second half of this year.

A: Social actions result from social mood change. When we recognized a temporary low in pessimism in late February/early March, we were able to predict changes that would result: stocks would rally, credit spreads would narrow, housing sales would pick up, and authorities would take bows for effective "liquidity" and "stimulus" programs. If it goes high enough, a consensus will probably develop that the bear market and recession are behind us. Then it will be time for the next wave down.

Q: You've been quoted as suggesting people invest in Treasuries, considering them "safe cash proxies," but you've also said skeptical things about Treasuries given massive borrowing and the threat of deflation. Which is it?

A: It's a matter of short rates versus long. The best investment stance for conservative investors has been simple: safety. My primary recommendation is safe-cash equivalents. This means Treasury bills, Swiss money-market claims, some New Zealand bonds, some gold and some cash. There has been no change there. Cash has been good. Today you can buy twice the house, twice the stock shares and twice the gasoline that you could a short while ago.

But long term, Treasuries are different. After 28 years of rising prices for T-bonds, the Fed announced in December that it would buy them. Part of the downturn in prices relates to an anticipated pick-up in the economy, which should in fact occur for part of this year; part is due to hyperinflation fears, which I think are misplaced; and part is due to early fears of eventual government default, which I think are not misplaced. If government rates go up, bond investors will lose money, while we bill investors will make money, at least until it's time to bail out of government debt entirely.

Q: Do you prefer dollars to other currencies?

A: My position is that the dollar is the most inflated currency in the world, so it has the furthest to deflate. In other words, because it is so sick, it is the currency most likely to rise during the deflationary period as dollar-denominated IOUs collapse. Regardless, my currency mix includes what I consider to be very safe foreign debt and some gold. You have to realize that almost everyone loses in a deflation. The key is to lose a lot less than everyone else. Market opinions are one thing; safety is another.

Q: Your remarks as quoted in the press seem to refer essentially to the U.S. economy. What is your view of the rest of the world's economic prospects?

A: It's a developing global depression. Economies and societies are so closely entwined in the modern world that social mood is much more pervasively shared than it was centuries ago. So the world had a boom together, and it's having a bust together. The canary in the coal mine was Japan, which reached impossible-to-maintain extremes of debt and investment values a decade earlier than other countries did.

Q: So in spite of this market run-up, there's more misery ahead?

A: If you stay safe, it's the opposite.

郎咸平：高盛如何绑架美国政府

www.cnfol.com　2009年03月24日 10:34　新世纪周刊　查看评论

　　在200多年前，亚当·斯密出版了他的《国富论》，其中有一段是这样写的：大英帝国的统治者在过去的100多年里，让他的子民愉快地幻想他们在大西洋的西端，拥有一个伟大的帝国。但是，这个帝国到现在为止只是一个幻影而已，它不是一个帝国，而只是一个项目，一个计划。它不是一座金矿，而只是一座金矿的计划，一项需要持续、永久地支付费用的计划。这是一个非常昂贵的计划，如果情况照这种情势发展下去的话，为了维持殖民地的费用将难以估量。亚当·斯密认为正是那些大资本家绑架了大英帝国，广阔的殖民地不会给英国人民带来任何的实惠跟利益。对于占人口大多数的大英帝国的人民而言，他们只有损失而没有利润。

　　到了今天，这种大资本家绑架政府的行为再度上演了，只不过这一次，操作这种绑架行动的不再是产业资本，而是金融资本。

　　无奈的救市

　　美国7000亿救市资金的分配曾经备受关注，2008年12月，美国财政部终于决定：向银行注资2500亿美元，向保险公司AIG注资400亿美元(最终救助额达到850亿美元)，向美国联邦储备委员会的消费者融资计划提供200亿美元，向花旗集团提供250亿美元，另外还拨款234亿美元来救助美国汽车业。短短几个月的时间里，美国财政部已经将国会划拨的3500亿资金分派一空。于是在2009年2月，奥巴马不得不又一次提列8190亿美元的救市方案来振兴美国经济。

　　救了金融机构之后结果是什么？太有意思了。2008年他们搞得这么差，但他们2008年总共拿到的奖金是184亿美元，这和牛市的2004年一样。此外，花旗银行拿了这么多钱以后，我们发现，花旗银行的老总们准备拿出5000万美金去买私人飞机。AIG接收了850亿的补助之后，AIG的高管们花了500万美金，去世界的顶级海滩会所度假，气得美国参议院破口大骂。所以奥巴马总统就在2月初讲了一句话，他说华尔街的那些人不负责任到了极点，令人感到耻辱。我们应当做的，是让那些华尔街不断向政府伸手寻求救援的人表现出你们的克制、自控和责任感来。

　　奥巴马只能骂骂他就算了，他还能做什么呢？因为同样辱骂的语言，同样训斥的语言，也同样存在于19世纪的英国。我记得亚当·斯密就在《国富论》里面，也用同样的口气骂了当时的那一批资本家。亚当·斯密强烈地谴责资本家的贪婪，因为它摧毁了资本家的灵魂。这句话和奥巴马是不是有异曲同工之妙？花旗银行的老总拿出5000万美金给自己配备私人飞机，AIG拿出500万美金去顶级会所度假，2008年他们发给自己的花红高达184亿美金。他们从来就不在乎老百姓，因为他们已经绑架了美国政府。

　　由于金融海啸会使得大量的金融机构面临倒闭的风险，而这些金融炒家所孕育的金融机构一旦倒闭之后，将会冲击第二张骨牌，那就是打击美国人消费的信心，再冲击第三张骨牌，使得消费下降。再冲击第四张骨牌，企业倒闭破产。再冲击第五张骨牌，失业上升。再冲击第六张骨牌，消费下降。从而形成一个由金融海啸慢慢地冲击到实体经济的这么一个可怕的结果。

　　这就是为什么美国国会不顾那么多美国老百姓的反对，最终还是通过了7000亿美金的救市方案。然后美国政府就拿这笔钱，去帮助这些金融机构，希望把他们都救活了，救活了之后就不会影响到经济实体面了。

　　高盛，实在是高

　　我发现，在这一系列救助行动背后，有一个身影反复出现。

　　美国财政部要求美国银行收购美林，收购美林之后，马上换掉一把手，这个一把手是谁？名叫约翰·赛恩。他是谁？他就是一个最可怕、最大的国际金融炒家--高盛集团的人。还有，AIG注资850亿美金后也换人了，它的首席执行官也换成高盛的埃德·李迪。一个叫Wachovia的银行，注资之后它的主席也换成了高盛的罗伯特斯·蒂尔。也就是说，当美国政府拿老百姓的钱去救助这些受到重创的银行之后，他们的一把手或者主席全部都换成了国际金融资本的炒家--高盛集团的员工。

　　高盛甚至掌控了美国的政策。花旗银行的董事长鲁宾，就是美国前财政部长，他也是高盛的人。甚至美国政府注资解救的公司，这些人事的任命权，它不是在美国政府手中，而是在高盛集团的手中，由他们派人去担当要职。就是高盛这个集团，它是国际金融炒家最大最厉害一个，他们的人密布全国，掌控着财政、经济、政府、基金甚至股票交易所、证监会、期货交易所。

　　高盛在美国政府中一直保持着较好的声望，也在悄悄地操控着美国经济。而在与各大公司的交手中，高盛也多数处于获利的位置。华尔街曾经盛传，是高盛的背后操纵导致竞争对手雷曼兄弟的破产，《石油战争》的作者恩道尔也在书中多次提到高盛如何操纵石油价格。汇丰银行股价的连续下挫，以及很多中国企业损失惨重的交易中都有高盛的身影。那么到底是什么原因让这么多家企业失手于高盛？ 高盛又是用什么手法从全世界席卷大量资本的呢？

　　无处不在的高盛

　　我们不要认为高盛跟我们无关。任志刚，就是香港金管局总裁在2009年2月2日暗指汇丰银行遭到操控。被谁操控？下面是我的分析。高盛写了一个研究报告，说汇丰银行的坏账准备应该会高达301亿美元，亏损会高达15亿美元。因此这家银行的价格会从七八十块跌到49块。这个报告一出来，这个公司一周内就跌了四分之一的市值，股价一周内下跌25％。

　　高盛又写了一份研究报告，高度看空中国石油，虽然包括申银万国、中信证券、海通证券大力推荐中石油，可是以高盛为首的国际金融炒家发布相反的报道。因此香港的中石油H股一周跌了12.82％。那么高盛等银行在2004年，在国有银行要改制的时候，相继发表一些文章跟看法，诋毁中国的国有银行，说不值一点钱，说坏账太高了，不值钱，你们都别要。结果谁要了，高盛自己去买了。所以这就是为什么他们占有的美国银行以一块多钱的价格收购了建行上市的股权。结果在2007年下半年，美国商业银行对外宣布，由于次债危机，他们遭到重大损失，可是建行的上市呢，他们赚到了1300亿。100块乘以13亿人口就等于1300亿，就被这些大行席卷一空，相当于每人出了100元。

　　各位还记不记得越南危机？发生在2008年4月的越南危机是越南的大悲剧。可是我们注意到了，这个国家在2007年出了问题，可是到了2008年3月之前，以高盛为首的国际投行一再地呼吁大家买入。他们对越南的评价有八个字，叫做：越南概念，亚股新宠。这篇文章是2007年5月14日发表的，文中讲到高盛把越南纳入新钻石11国。在它的力捧之下，越南的股价、楼价拉高，最后到2008年4月呢，不知道什么原因，所有资金全部撤出，股价大跌，楼价大跌，只有一个不跌，就是通货膨胀高达25％。这就是高盛。

　　所以我完全有理由这么说，以高盛为首的这些国际金融资本，他们就是这一场金融海啸的真正背后操纵人。

Big picture from EW point of view by Prechter

Intraday TICK Divergences and Structure May 13

May 14, 2009: 9:49 AM CST

There were some interesting lessons to learn via the intraday action on May 13, 2009.  Let’s see some of them - particularly three TICK divergences and a fractal Elliott Wave pattern on the trend day.

First, we had a large-scale overnight gap (not scaled) which signaled that odds could be favoring a trend day.  The strongest trend days will gap down strongly and not even try to retrace a portion of the move, so the fact that Wednesday retraced a portion of the gap meant that odds for a “Type 3″ Tend Day were reduced… but we still got a powerful move.

A Bearish Rising Wedge formed (notice the 5-wave internal structure - classic textbook pattern) into the intraday highs on our first TICK Divergence.  I want to underscore the importance of TICK Divergences to you.

Price then ejected to the downside to retest the prior lows, and yet another TICK Divergence formed… which was good only for a small scalp as it was a counter-trend move (lower chance of profit).

Price then rolled back to the downside and formed another counterswing up into noon which then led to the strongest down-move of the day.

I’ve subdivided this wave into an Elliott Wave 5-wave Fractal, but more importantly, notice the positive TICK Divergence that formed once the five fractal waves had finished.  You’ll often see powerful inflections or reversals - often times absolute intraday lows - when you see this pattern:  An observable 5-wave structure that terminates into a TICK and/or Momentum Divergence.

Price did reverse, though not impressively, again because the overall structure was calling for a Trend Day Down.  Price chopped its way into the close.

On a separate note, the Breadth (net advancers minus net decliners) continued to trail lower all day (save for the end) which served as a strong confirmation of the continuation of the Trend Day down.

Review your intraday charts for similar lessons in order to better your skills at pattern recognition and intraday confirmation/non-confirmation (similar to what I’ll be advocating and teaching at the Los Angeles Trader’s Expo in early June).

Corey Rosenbloom, CMT

4/29/2009

3/18/2009 FOCM day

Blame Direxion

MONDAY, APRIL 20, 2009

Blame Direxion

Now I know many prefer the notion that a cabal of a few Big Evil Hedge Funds control the close each day. But perhaps it's something even more sinister, Big Evil Leveraged ETF's? Or rather, the rebalancing of swaps thereof. This, from the Journal(hat tip Don Fishback andAbnormal Returns).

At 3 p.m., do you get queasy just thinking about the toll that the final hour of trading might take on your portfolio?

New research suggests that on days when the indexes make big moves, leveraged exchange-traded funds could trigger a trading cascade, turning the market close into a buying or selling frenzy.

........The excessive trading set off by releveraging is perfectly legal -- but upsetting to many people. "The market doesn't seem like a fair, level playing field," says Andrew Brooks, head of U.S. equity trading at T. Rowe Price in Baltimore.

Now a respected analyst -- Ananth Madhavan, head of trading research at Barclays PLC's Barclays Global Investors -- has released a report arguing that the potential ripple effects of releveraging have been underestimated.

Leveraged ETFs usually generate a multiple of the market's daily return by using something called a "total-return swap." Imagine a fund with $100 million in net assets and 200% leverage, meaning that it seeks to deliver twice the market's daily return. That requires the fund to maintain $200 million in swap exposure.

In a long swap, a counterparty like a bank or brokerage firm agrees to pay the fund $2 for every $1 rise in the closing value of a market index that day. On the other hand, if the market falls, the fund must pay the counterparty 2-for-1.

Now let's say the fund's net assets grow by $10 million during the day, to $110 million. The fund must raise its swap exposure from $200 million to $220 million to honor its 2-for-1 investment objective. That is $20 million in extra buy orders, all coming into the market after 3:30 p.m., typically in the final 10 minutes.

An inverse fund also must buy on a day when the market is up; since the value of its hedge has gone down, the fund must increase its exposure to keep its leverage ratio constant. Thus, all these ETFs buy in lockstep in the last few minutes of an up day for their index -- and sell in a swarm at the end of a down day.

I had heard this was a factor in why moves often snowball late in a day. But what I hadn't heard, but should have just known, was something like this.

Further amplifying the ETFs' actions: Every day, trading desks at big banks and brokerage firms blast out customized spreadsheets to favored clients. These tools, linked to live data feeds, predict whether the leveraged ETFs will be buying or selling as 4 p.m. approaches. That enables hedge funds and other big investors to trade ahead of the ETFs.

So while it's "comforting" to know these funds aren't causing the melt downs or melt ups, good to know they're still using a stacked deck to profiteer off it.

As always with these sort of shenanigans, you'll go broke waiting for the SEC to reign it in. The best tack is to know it's part of the backdrop, and trade accordingly. If it walks like a trend day and talks like a trend day, it's probably a trend day. Which means you likely get a low and last, or high and last, sort of close. And in a world of popular Leveraged ETF's, and hedge funds getting The Look, it's probable that move will get exascerbated. So it pays to just trade accordingly.

http://adamsoptions.blogspot.com/2009/04/blame-direxion.html

Delta Neutral Options Strategy

http://www.thepitmaster.com/options/deltatrading.htm

The delta of an option is the rate of change in an option's price relative to a one unit change in the price of the underlying asset. For example, if a call option has a delta of 0.35 and the price increases by one dollar, the option's price should increase by 35 cents.

In the example above, the option has a delta of 0.35. Traders and brokers refer to that as "35 deltas." Simply multiply the delta by 100 to make it a percentage. Please be aware of that common convention. However, make sure you understand that "35 deltas" really means 0.35.

For the purpose of our discussion, whenever we mention the delta of an option, we are referring to the actual decimal value because that is what's actually used in all mathematical models. --The PitMaster

What exactly is Delta Neutral?

The term "Delta Neutral" refers to any strategy where the sum of your deltas is equal to zero. For instance, if you buy 10 call options, each having a delta of 0.60, and you also buy 20 put options, each having a delta of -0.30 you have the following:

(10 x 0.60) + (20 x -0.30) = 6.00 + -6.00 = 0

Your position delta (total delta) is zero, which means you are delta neutral.

The technique you are about to learn, is just one application of delta neutral. It is a general trading approach that is used by some of the largest and most successful trading firms. It allows you to make money without having to forecast the direction of the market. You can use it on any market (stocks, futures, whatever), just as long as options are available and the market is moving. It doesn't matter whether or not the market is trending, but it won't work if the market is really flat.

The principle behind delta neutral is based upon the way an option's delta changes as the option moves further in or out of the money.



Consider the following example:

Statistical Volatility 25.00%
90 day Tbill rate 05.00%
Option Strike Price 100
Days remaining 30
Price Call Put Delta
of option option of
underlying delta delta underlying

80 0.0013 -0.9987 1.0000
85 0.0148 -0.9852 1.0000
90 0.0843 -0.9157 1.0000
95 0.2668 -0.7332 1.0000
100 0.5371 -0.4629 1.0000
105 0.7805 -0.2195 1.0000
110 0.9226 -0.0774 1.0000
115 0.9795 -0.0205 1.0000
120 0.9958 -0.0042 1.0000

You will notice the following characteristics of an option's delta:

The absolute value of the delta increases as the option goes further in-the-money and decreases as the option goes out-of-the-money.
At-the-money call and put options have a delta that is right around 0.50 and -0.50 respectively.
Put options have a negative delta, which means if the price of an asset goes up, the price of a put option on that asset goes down.
Deep in-the-money call options have a delta that approaches +1.00. Conversely, deep in-the-money put options have a delta that approaches -1.00.
Deep out-of-the-money calls and puts have deltas that approach zero.
The delta of the underlying asset itself always remains constant at 1.00.
All of the deltas mentioned above assume that you are buying the options or the underlying asset, that is, you have a long position. If instead, you sold the options or the asset, establishing a short position, all of the deltas would be reversed. In the example above, if you sold a call option with a strike price of 100, and the price of the underlying asset was 110, the delta would be 0.9226 x -1 = -0.9226.
If you short the underlying, the delta would be -1.0 instead of +1.0.
Keeping all of this in mind, we can construct the following delta neutral trade:

Tbond futures price 110
Statistical Volatility 8.00%
90 day Tbill rate 5.00%
Option Strike Price 110
Days remaining 30
Price Option Option
of theoretical delta
underlying price

108 2.14 -0.73
109 1.43 -0.58
110 0.91 -0.42
111 0.53 -0.28
112 0.28 -0.16
Buy 2 Tbond futures at 110
Buy 5 Tbond futures put options (110 strike price) at 0.91 each

Delta of Tbond futures 2 x 1.00 = -2.00
Delta of put options 5 x -0.42 = -2.10
Total position delta 2.00 + -2.10 = -0.10

How it works:

If Tbond futures increase from 110 up to 112:
Profit on Tbonds = 2 x 2.00 = 4.00
The put options will decrease from 0.91 down to 0.28 (each)
Loss on put options = 5 x (0.91 - 0.28) = 5 x 0.63 = 3.15
Net profit = 4.00 - 3.15 = 0.85


If Tbond futures decrease from 110 down to 108:
Loss on Tbonds = 2 x 2.00 = 4.00
The put options will increase from 0.91 up to 2.14 (each)
Profit on put options = 5 x (2.14 - 0.91) = 5 x 1.23 = 6.15
Net profit = 6.15 - 4.00 = 2.15

We can summarize this delta neutral approach as follows:

If you buy the underlying and buy put options so your position is delta neutral:
When the market goes up, you have a profit on the underlying and you have a smaller loss on the options (because their delta decreased), so you wind up with a net profit.
When the market goes down, you have a loss on the underlying but you have a bigger profit on the options (because their delta increased), so again you have a net profit.


If you sell (short) the underlying and buy call options so your position is delta neutral:
When the market goes up, you have a loss on the underlying but again you have a bigger profit on the options (their delta increased), so you have a net profit.
When the market goes down, you have a profit on the underlying but once again, you have a smaller loss on the options (their delta decreased), so you still have a net profit.


When you do this kind of delta neutral trading, you need to follow a few rules:

Always initiate the position with a total position delta of zero or as close to zero as possible. So, your starting position is "delta neutral."
When the market moves enough so your total position delta has increased or decreased by at least +1.00 or -1.00 delta (or more), you make an "adjustment" by buying or selling more of the underlying asset to get your position back to delta neutral. You can also sell off some of your options to get back to delta neutral. But the point is, you make profits consistently by making these adjustments.
If the price of the underlying asset doesn't move around much, close out the entire position. You need some price action for this approach to work. If the market just sits there, time decay will eat away at this position.
Keep an eye on the implied volatility of the options you're using. If it moves toward the high end of its 2 year range, stay away from this position for a while. Otherwise, you might have excessive time decay in your options when the implied volatility starts to drop.
The options you buy should have at least 30-60 days remaining before expiration. Remember that time decay accelerates as the option's expiration date approaches, so if you allow more time, you minimize the time decay.
As you have seen, these trade positions benefit by price movement in the underlying asset. It puts you in the enviable position of being able to take full advantage of big price moves, in any direction. In fact, when the Dow dropped 171 points recently, delta neutral positions in the S&P 500 did extremely well.

Note:
USO: US Oil Fund (Ticker: USO) holds long positions in West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures contracts, and rolls these contracts forward each month.

OIL: the IPath crude Oil ETN (exchange traded note),similar to USO which involves negative roll yields in a contango market,but also credit risk. With ETNs, you are an unsecured creditor of Barclays (the issuer of the note), so you have credit risk overlaid on the risk of the commodity.

DBO: Rather than select a new futures contract based on a predetermined schedule (e.g., monthly), each Index Commodity rolls to the futures contract which generates the best possible ‘implied roll yield.’ The futures contract with a delivery month within the next thirteen months which generates the best possible implied roll yield will be included in each Index. As a result, each Index Commodity is able to potentially maximize the roll benefits in backwardated markets and minimize the losses from rolling in contangoed markets.

A example of using tick to identify intraday bottom/top

TICK Divergences Yield Promising Signals for SPY April 7

I wanted to focus again on today’s intraday report on the simple TICK divergences that gave us powerful trading signals all through the choppy trading of April 7, 2009. Let’s see them up close.

To me, a TICK Divergence is far more powerful than a standard oscillator divergence, due to the fact that we are looking at a portion of the Market Internals and comparing high/low readings with prior price swing highs or lows.
The TICK takes a snapshot of stocks that traded that second on an up-tick vs those trading on a down-tick, and can be plotted any way you want - I prefer bar or candle charts because you can focus on absolute highs and lows. I also like to plot a 5-period Simple Moving Average of the TICK to smooth out the spikes and then compare MA highs/lows as well as absolute highs/lows.
We started the day with a powerful gap down and then price formed a TICK divergence right out of the opening bell, which was combined with a powerful hammer candle signal as price tested the day’s S2 Pivot. Notice the green sloping arrow on the TICK when compared to the arc reversal on the price candles.
The second divergence came as price sauntered up to challenge the falling 50 EMA and the S1 Pivot. Look very, very carefully at where the new Tick High formed: it formed on the second large up-bar as price cracked above the 20 EMA. As price spiked yet again to test the 50 EMA, we saw a distinct TICK divergence set-up (which was even clearer on the 1-min chart). Given the TICK divergence and price coming into two levels of overhead resistance, odds distinctly favored a down move that steadily occurred.
Notice that a New TICK Low occurred at 12:30 (CST) which hinted that a lower price low was yet to come, which did form both 30 minutes and one hour later… though those new intraday lows formed on a distinct Positive TICK (and momentum) Divergence - so many times a daily price low/high is formed on a key divergence.
This time price surged off the lows, breaking again above key EMAs with two powerful pushes, the second of which formed two bearish long upper shadows… and more importantly the day’s final Negative TICK Divergence. Price collapsed through the roof into the close, leaving only very aggressive and quick-thinking traders able to profit.
If you’re not following the TICK on your intraday charts, begin looking specifically for how you might incorporate TICK Divergences into your trading. Continue studying today’s action for additional insights to prepare you better for the future.

Corey Rosenbloo

《新货币战争》：浏星雨 PK 宋鸿兵


《货币战争》已经被翻译成多种文字，发行量超过了100万册。宋鸿兵和他的《货币战争》证明：国际神秘大银行家阴谋策划了美联储，拥有美联储并控制着美联储，从而牢牢地掌控了世界货币的发行权。这几个国际大银行家认为金本位货币体制是他们攫取超额垄断利润的羁绊，所以在七十年代初颠覆了金本位制度，从而得以毫无节制地滥发美元货币，掠夺全世界人民。宋鸿兵先生断言，信用货币体系必将失败，人类必然重回金本位，因而购买和储备黄金是王道。


==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 这么神秘和隐蔽的事情，宋鸿兵先生自己在电视上也说他不知道。当然，我就更无从知道了。但是，对于一些具体的，有据可查的事实还是可以做些评论的。下面笔者就依据有关官方的资料，做些评论）

宋鸿兵和他的《货币战争》的立论有两大支撑点：其一，几个国际大银行家掌控美联储，垄断世界货币发行权，攫取超额利润；其二，世界货币体系将回到金本位，购买并储存黄金才是王道。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 这两点可以说是宋鸿兵和他的《货币战争》的左右两条腿，打掉了这两点，就等于打断了宋先生的双腿，他也就无从站立了）

一，宋鸿兵对于第一个支撑点的论据为：

宋鸿兵： 1，有关美联储的性质，在新闻媒体，比如在《华尔街日报》，你从来看不到讨论美联储性质的问题，或者《福布斯》杂志，或者这些杂志，他们就基本上回避这个问题。西方媒体，或者教科书过滤了这个问题。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 事实上，这个所谓的秘密，只是无知者的秘密。因为谁也没有替这个“秘密”守秘。更因为这个压根儿就不是一个值得正规报刊讨论的问题。宋鸿兵自己在中央电视台中说中国金融界一位元老级人物在85年就知道美联储的私人股份制了，想必这位老先生也在替美联储对他的学生和下属保密了（详细参见《深入浅出地介绍美联储的神秘性和私有性》一文）。

论据：

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 1），出版于1948年的《经济学新论》，是一本经济学基础入门教科书，其中文版本也已经出过多次了。书中早已详尽地叙述了美联储的私有成分，更遑论大量的经济杂志和文章了；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 2），主持宋鸿兵先生在凤凰卫视的《世纪大讲堂》演讲的曾子墨当着宋先生的面替美国教科书澄清说：“不过这里我得给美国的教科书说一句话，我记得我在大学修金融的时候，它的教科书里面还是非常明确地写着这个美联储是由多少家银行，是怎么组成，它当时成立的历史是什么”

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 3），美联储的性质，是《联邦储备法》所规定的，这个法案条文全世界的人都可以免费看到，而且美联储的性质和结构，在美联储的章程，年报（从1914年以来共出版过94期，完全免费）和《美联储目的和任务》（从1939年以来共出版了9次，完全免费）中都有详细的描述；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 4），另外在美国的国会网站，甚至在美联储自己的网站上，美联储的性质和结构，功能和职责，股东和分红，发钞和铸币税都一目了然地呈现在读者面前。）

宋鸿兵： 2，美联储是私人股份制，是少数几家大银行拥有，股份只能家族继承，（不能外传）。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 1），美联储的性质，宋鸿兵心里是知道的，他在凤凰卫视的世纪大讲堂中夹杂着英文说：“这个联邦储备委员会本身，它是叫政府的“Governmental Agency”，说明他是查阅过有关美联储的法律和官方文件，联邦法律和美联储章程以及数十个年报中的叙述“联邦储备管理委员会”是一个“Central Governmental Agency”；而宋鸿兵为了其商业利益欺骗了读者和观众。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 2），私人股份制指的是美联储12个联邦储备地区银行，但是它的股份不是几家大银行拥有，而是几千家大小不一的商业银行拥有，而且假如你在美国联邦政府注册成立银行，你就必须缴纳股本认购金，被迫成为美联储股东，假如你在州政府注册成立银行，你就可以自由选择是否成为美联储的股东；本人可以帮你代办成为美联储的股东，有意者请联系我。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 3），宋鸿兵先生自称曾工作过的机构就是一个美联储股东（Member Holding Company），作为98年就开始探索金融奥秘的宋鸿兵先生应该是知情的，宋鸿兵却为了其商业利益而欺骗了读者和观众。

==============(浏星雨评论：======= 4），美联储股票不可转让性和不可抵押性，不是对股东权利的保护，而是对股东权利的限制。当然，你的开联邦储备银行的股东银行的老子死了，你子承父业，你就天然地继承他的股份了，但这个“祖传秘方，传男不传女”式的家族继承毫不相干。

宋鸿兵： 3，这几个国际大银行家决定美元货币发行，制定货币政策，拥有市场先知权。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 1），美国宪法规定发行货币的权力在国会，而国会则以法律的形式将发行权授予美联储，所以美联储发行美钞是有法律依据的；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 2），《联邦储备法案》规定美联储发行货币需要有至少等值的抵押物，也就是说法律规定美联储至少要有1美元的资产才能发行1美元货币，并非凭空发行；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 3），美元纸钞由美国财政部下属的印钞局印刷，美联储以美国国债作为资产抵押获得货币，美元纸钞归美国国库，美国国债归美联储持有；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 4），美元硬币的发行权在美国财政部，美元硬币由美国财政部下属的铸币厂铸造，美联储用等值的美元货币购买，比如用1美元的纸币购买20枚5美分的硬币，用以满足商业银行的兑换需求；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 5），对于美联储来说，美国国债和美元硬币才是它的资产，而它所发行的美元是美联储的负债，发行1000亿美元就得“交送 ”给美国国库1000亿美元。我们知道，美元的信用根本上来自于美国国债这个“最可靠的资产”，但是“政府发国债，美联储购国债发美钞，国会控制国债规模以掌控发钞终审权”的制衡设计保证了美元不会被滥发。美元纸钞每年几百亿规模的发行量，全部美元基础货币不到8500亿的事实保障了美元的长期信誉（详细参见《美联储是如何发行美元的？》和《深入浅出地介绍美联储的神秘性和私有性》两篇文章）

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 6），货币政策的制定权在于“联邦储备管理委员会”，它属于国家中央机关，它的7名核心成员全部为国家公职人员，不得兼职于赢利机构，也不能拥有股票，更不能打理自己的生意，

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 7），再大的商业银行也不可能拥有市场先知权，因为这是违法犯罪行为；当然你可以说，就连美国总统和美国国会都是大银行家，大资产阶级的代理人或傀儡，何况美联储主席乎！）

宋鸿兵： 4，美国联邦储备银行行长由这些商业银行直接任命，美联储完全脱离政府的监管和国会的监督。美国百姓没有一点知情权。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 1），《联邦储备法案》和美联储组织章程规定12个联邦储备银行行长和副行长全部由各自的“主任委员会”投票选举产生，由国家中央机构---“联邦储备管理委员会”审核批准；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 2），这些行长全部为国家公职人员，不得兼职于赢利机构，也不能拥有股票，更不能打理自己的生意；当然你可以说，就连美国总统和美国国会都是大银行家，大资产阶级的代理人或傀儡，何况美联储主席乎！）

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 3），美联储在美国国会指导下展开工作，并在联邦政府的经济和金融目标框架内运作；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 4），美联储出月报，季报，年报用以报告运行和操作情况，并随时应召出席听证会。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 5），每年，美联储的收支帐目和操作明细都将由公共机构进行审计，并接受美国财政部下属的政府审计办公室审查。审计和审查结果按照法律公开并送交国会并接受听证和质询。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 6），假如美国百姓真的没有一点知情权，那么宋鸿兵先生的信息从哪里来的？我浏星雨笔下的信息是从哪里来的？

宋鸿兵： 5， 如果（ 美联储股票）能实现全流通，而不是家族之间的继承，我认为它就是公正的。如果你能满足这两条，我同意，我的观点都是错的。

==============( 浏星雨评论：=======由此，宋鸿兵已经承认他的观点都是错的了，宋粉丝们该泪流满面了。但是，冥冥中，我收到了宋鸿兵先生给我发来的手机“短信”，他说：他的观点没有错。第一，他说他那个美联储由几家大银行拥有的说法是对的，因为他用的是中文的“几”字，而不是英文的“Several”，而中文的“ 几”字含义包含了几千家（银行）的意思，所以几千家在中文里面就是“几家”银行。况且，美联储股票确实是不能全流通的呀，不在美国开银行的人怎么能得到美联储那个“只赚不赔”的股票的呢？第二，他说他的那个美联储股票家族继承的说法就更没有错了，你浏星雨不是也说了“你的开联邦储备银行的股东银行的老子死了，你子承父业，你就当然地继承他的股份了”吗？所以啊，我宋鸿兵“认错”的两个条件都没有满足啊，因此我宋鸿兵的观点都是对的。

二，宋鸿兵对他第二个支撑点的论据为：

宋鸿兵： 1，金融危机中，美国缺钱，欧洲缺钱，都说缺少流动性。但美国不肯从它的8100吨黄金中拿出一点点出来换钱救市；欧洲有2万吨黄金，他们也不拿出一点点黄金出来换钱救市。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 1），黄金容量有限：卖出黄金换取的现钞数量太少，不足以救市。宋鸿兵在中央电视台中说如果美国和欧洲卖出一半的黄金来救市，他就会信黄金没有用。一半的黄金是多少钱？按2008年10月份价格算，美国一半的储备黄金是1050亿美元，全部欧洲一半的黄金储备是2600亿美元。事实上，即使美国和欧盟卖掉所有的黄金，大约也只有7300亿美元；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 2），而事实上，国际黄金相对于股票，债券和外汇来说市场很小（请参阅《Gold Exchange-traded Funds》 ，如此大规模地在短时间内抛售黄金会造成金价大跌，那么全部的黄金能兑换到的现金就更少了，对于救市更无济于事；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 3），发行国债的容量可以比黄金大很多，国债由于有政府税收担保，其价格会在金融危机中走强，而且国债本身也具有流动性，所以发债救市比卖黄金更有效。

宋鸿兵： 2，我只提一个问题，什么时候美联储，或者欧洲中央银行，把他黄金储备减低，减低到1/4，就是减少3/4的时候，甚至哪怕只减少一半，你再跟我说这个问题我就信，他如果一克都不减少，一克都不卖，你让我相信黄金没有用，我不信。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 1），如果黄金是如此的重要，那么美国为什么不靠发行美元纸钞来购买黄金作为储备呢？如果黄金如此的重要，那么世界各国为什么不增加他们的黄金储备呢？

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 2），美国央行黄金储备在1920年为1994吨，以后逐年增多，在三，四十年代快速增加，于40年代末达到顶峰为 17992吨。但从50年代开始起逐年下降，到1971年时跌入低谷为7464吨。后来又有小幅回升，在1977年达到第二个顶点为 8631吨。以后逐年小幅波动（波幅为5%上下），到前年，也就是2006年跌入30年来的低谷8134吨。2007年和2008年10月份数字也是也是8134吨。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 3），在2008年10月，全世界的官方储备黄金总量约3万吨，时价7727亿美元；全世界已开采黄金总量约15万吨，时价4万美元。事实上，60年来，世界各国官方的黄金储备一直维持在3万吨左右，既没有增加也没有减少。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 4），而英国央行在1999年至2002年间，分17次拍卖400吨黄金，占黄金储备量的一半以上，平均成交价275美元（此条信息由网友提供，笔者未加核实）。英国现有黄金储备为310吨，低于中国的600吨。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 5），在2008年9月，日本的黄金储备为765吨，略高于中国的600吨。而英国为310吨，俄罗斯为472，西班牙 282，沙特143，瑞典143，澳大利亚80，科威特79，韩国14，香港2吨。如果黄金是如此的重要，这些比较富裕国家和地区为什么不增加储备呢？特别是沙特，科威特和俄罗斯近年来可是大赚了石油美元的啊。特别特别是，如果黄金是如此的重要，那么《货币战争》一书中呼风唤雨的国际神秘大银行家罗斯柴尔德家族的老巢所在地英国，为什么要卖掉黄金，将其储备将至中国的一半呢？难道经营了几百年的大银行家罗斯柴尔德家族不知道黄金的战略意义吗？
续集见下：

接上，第一部分。

三，宋鸿兵的最后结论： 美元体系要崩溃，也许5年，也许10年，也许20年，也许更长时间，但是他一定会崩溃。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 地球都有爆炸的那一天，人类都随时可能遭受来自外星的毁灭打击，何况美国与美元乎！老马早就说了万物都有生老死的过程的，美元和美国也当然不能列外了）

四，宋鸿兵最后结论的论据：美国总体负债53万亿美元，加上潜在亏空，再加上它的负债一共160万亿美元。而美国GDP才13万亿美元。GDP增长3%，而债务的国债利息起码是 5%。美国GDP的年增加值，抵不上债务利息。非但永远无法偿还，而且这个债务总量会越来越大。美元体系最后走向崩溃，不存在任何争议性。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 著名金融学者宋鸿兵先生看来没有搞懂基本的政府和国家债务概念。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 先说几个概念：1），美国政府国债，指的是美国政府因发行国债而欠（1）美国政府内部（约占40%）；（2）美国机构和公众（约占34%）；（3）外国政府和民众（约占26%）的债务，以支付债息的方式偿还。2），美国净外债，指的是外国人在美国的资产减去美国人在世界各地的资产，这是一个国际投资净头寸的概念，这种债务多数无关利息和偿还，因为投资有盈有亏天经地义。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 再说几个事实：1），对于美国政府来说，至2008年11月，美国政府国债余额为10.6万亿，其中4.3万亿为政府内债，其余的6.3万亿才是公债；6.3万亿公债中，只有2.7万亿为外国人持有，也就是说美国政府的外债为2.7万亿美元。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 3），考虑到美国政府资产也高达10万亿美元，所以美国政府的全部净债务为不足1万美元，对外净债务更少；

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 4），美国政府的月债息支出从来没有超过200亿美元，这对于一个岁入2.6万亿美元的“小白领”来说，会因负债而破产吗？如果这样的政府要破产，那么世界上的政府早就倒下一大片了。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 5），至2008年6月，全美国（包括政府）的净外债约为3万亿美元，而同期美国国民总收入为近14万亿美元，如果这样的国家会破产的话，那么世界上多数国家早已经破产了。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 最后对宋鸿兵先生的言论进行评论。 1），有人用“Corporate-style Accounting Standards”计算出美国政府总负债为53万亿，我是听说过的，但是，按照这一标准，中国政府的负债将高达530万亿（详细请参考《美国政府欠债 53万亿，中国会破产吗？》一文）；只是我至今还不知道宋鸿兵先生的160万亿是怎么来的？

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 2），有金融知识爱好者对我说，经过累加计算美国政府已经为救市投入将近2万亿美元了，所以美国在发行了7000亿美元的救市国债后，一定又印刷了1万多亿美元。我告之他算错了，因为他没有搞懂基本概念。他从报纸上看到今天投几百亿，明天投几千亿美元的救市资金，其实大多是重复循环使用，这些资金投出去长的几个月，短的为几天。这样的道理作为著名金融学者的宋鸿兵先生应该懂吧。宋鸿兵更应该知道，美国政府发行国债只是一部分用于财政消耗性开支的，还有一大部分是作为投资的，这部分是可以获得收益的。比如，投向“两房”和“AIG"的资金可能会有高回报，当然也有可能亏损，但不会全部有去无回。根据美国国债使用历史上看，回报相当不错（详细请参见附录《表格1：10年来美国政府国债总额和实际需要付出的年债息》。


五，宋鸿兵先生精彩言论集锦：

（一），有关美联储部分

宋鸿兵： （1-1）：什么叫阴谋？也就是不可告人之事，（一些事情）不想告诉对方的时候，不想公之于众的时候，这个可以被定义成阴谋，社会中每一分每一秒每一个时刻，每一个单位都存在这种东西。这个阴谋论在我看起来其实就是一个利益博弈。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 哈哈，这正是宋鸿兵先生撰写《货币战争》一书的写照。宋鸿兵先生宋鸿兵为了其商业利益，故意说谎造假，制造轰动效应，忽悠政府购买黄金，为黄金炒家做托，欺骗了读者和观众。

宋鸿兵： （1-2）：许多年以来，究竟谁拥有美联储一直是一个讳莫如深的话题，美联储自己总是含糊其辞。美联储对股东情况严守秘密。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 宋鸿兵先生自称曾工作过的机构就是一个美联储股东（Member Holding Company），作为98年就开始探索金融奥秘的宋鸿兵应该是知情的。

宋鸿兵： （1-3）：那么美国的教科书呢？事实是，各种以国际银行家们的名字命名的基金会，在为美国的下一代挑选着“内容健康”的教科书。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 在凤凰卫视的《世纪大讲堂》主持宋鸿兵先生演讲的曾子墨当着宋先生的面替美国教科书澄清说：她在大学学习金融学的时候，她所用的教科书就讲述到美联储的私有股份制结构等。

宋鸿兵： （1-4）：你根本找不到“大道无形”的超级富豪们的身影，因为他们早已严密地控制了西方主要的媒体。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 但是宋鸿兵先生找到了，而且能呼风唤雨刺杀多个总统，发动世界大战的罗斯柴尔德家族却任由宋大仙“大放獗词”而束手无策。再说这个以罗斯柴尔德家族为代表的银行家也控制了我们中国的新 华 社和解 放军报？？？也控制了俄罗斯《真理报》，法国《解放报》，西班牙《起义报》，伊朗《广播电台华语台》？我们国务院新闻办公室每年对美 国 人 权 状况都能了解得那么清楚，却会对关系着中国万亿美元外汇安全的隐患毫不知情？

宋鸿兵： （1-5）：美联储的账目从来就没有被审计过。它完全在国会控制的范围之外运作，它操纵着美国的信用（供应）。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 美联储帐目每年被审计，我可以提供这些审计报告。

宋鸿兵： （1-6）：这个（美联储）系统是私有的，它运作的全部目的就是利用别人的金钱来获得最大限度的利润。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 美联储发行再多的美元，也是负债。美联储赚再多的钱，联邦储备银行的股东也只能领取股本金6%的股息。

宋鸿兵： （1-7）：众议院的银行委员会主席冈萨雷斯，这位众议员还提出12家联邦储备银行行长或者董事长都是商业银行自己来任命的，那能不能由国会直接任命？克林顿政府仍然说：不，这些（行长或者董事长）就是要商业银行自己来任命。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 这是著名金融学者宋鸿兵先生在电视上赤裸裸地对千百万观众撒谎，除非众议院的银行委员会主席冈萨雷斯和法律出身，高智商的克林顿总统的政府都成了法盲加白痴。他们对《联邦储备法》和美联储宪章的规定一无所知。

宋鸿兵： （1-8）：美联储完全脱离政府监管和国会监督。独立到这种程度，谁的监督你都不接受。对谁也不负责，没有任何人知道你在做什么？对于美联储，老百姓一丁点儿的知情权都没有了。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 没有知情权的宋鸿兵先生却知道了。我浏星雨却知道得比著名金融学家宋鸿兵先生还多。

宋鸿兵： （1-9）：通货膨胀问题，很多人强调货币供应和通货膨胀没有关系。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 强调“货币供应和通货膨胀没有关系”的很多人，一定是和宋鸿兵先生一样的著名金融经济学家。要不就是宋鸿兵又说谎了。

宋鸿兵： （1-10）：央行部分准备金制度的不公平和不道德的，它只为了银行的好处，不考虑储户的利益。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 中国的中央银行系统模仿了美联储的结构和功能，从美联储引进了“部分准备金制度”，不知著名金融学者宋鸿兵先生作何评论？


（二），有关黄金部分

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 1），“黄金天然是货币，但货币天然不是黄金”。黄金的开采速度大大跟不上社会总财富和流转资金需求的增长，无法满足信息时代的经济发展需要。所以在当今的国际金融体系下，黄金已经失去了金本位体制下的最终偿付手段的地位。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 2），中国可以储备黄金，但黄金容量不够。全世界官方黄金只能容纳中国现有外汇储备的三分之一，余下的大量外汇还得购买美国国债和企业债。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 3），黄金不能满足外汇储备的流动性，安全性和保值性的要求。一旦中国主权基金大量买进黄金的时候，黄金价格将被人为抬高；等中国急用美元大抛黄金的时候，黄金将被狠狠地压价，导致中国手里的大量外汇化为乌有。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 4），当然你可以说，中国黄金拥有量达到一定程度的时候，黄金定价权就属于中国。诚然，你可以定价1克黄金等于1万美元，但笑的是南非金矿老板，中国人民从此改替金矿老板打工了。诚然，你可以买下全世界的全部黄金，但是，只要世界主要经济体之间的贸易仍然用美元欧元或日元结算，那么你就捧着一大堆黄金自个儿玩去吧。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 5），中国决策高层幸好没有轻信宋鸿兵等所谓的著名金融学者的妄言，否则在这次金融危机中就吃大亏了。


（三），有关美元的结论部分

宋鸿兵： （3-1）：美元货币体系是全世界一起进行的一次伟大的信用货币实践，而这次伟大实践，我最后下结论它必然失败。

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 见上：

宋鸿兵： （3-2）：美国总体负债53万亿美元，加上潜在亏空一共就是负债160万亿美元。美元体系最后走向崩溃，不存在任何争议性。
==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 见上：

宋鸿兵： （3-3）：美国都守不住自己货币信用，我能相信欧洲吗？我能相信日本吗？我能相信德国吗？

==============( 浏星雨评论：======= 风景这边独好啊！

以上观点和言论，取自宋鸿兵在“思想的盛宴，学术的殿堂”------《世纪大讲堂》中的四集演讲，在中央电视台经济频道《面对面---预言于真相》节目以及他的著作《货币战争》一书。宋鸿兵先生开拓了我们的视野，给我国成功对抗国际资本，赢得金融战争提供了一个很好的思路，希望中央在决策时予以参考。

===============( 浏星雨评论：======= 谣言止于智者。在色鬼多的地方，春药销量好；在傻瓜多的地方，《货币战争》销量最好。我们中国不是造假国度，我们中国不是山寨社会，我们不能再沉默，我们不能容忍象宋鸿兵这样的骗子继续横行下去，我们必须做点什么。所以，我倡议成立《货币战争》消费者索赔团，因为宋鸿兵涉嫌商业欺诈。

===============( 浏星雨评论：======= 宋鸿兵的支持者们，请好好地想一想：去年“正龙拍虎”之时，你们是否也心潮澎湃？你们是否也把打假者视为看不得“虎啸震国威”的汉奸网特？你们是否曾热烈讨论去镇平听虎？可当你得知“盛世出国虎”只是一个纸老虎的时候，当你得知“虎照事件”是一个商业欺诈，你们是否觉得自己受到了愚弄？请再好好地想一想。

浏星雨
于2008年12月14日 星期一

参考文献：
1，《美国政府负债53万亿，中国会破产吗？》
链接：http://club2.cat898.com/newbbs/dispbbs.asp?BoardID=3&ID=2587526
2，《“美国破产论”可以休也！》
3，《深入浅出地解读中国政府增持美国国债的行为》
链接：http://club2.cat898.com/newbbs/dispbbs.asp?BoardID=1&ID=2511248
4，《中国是债权国还是债务国？》
链接在：同上
5，《深入浅出地介绍美联储的神秘性和私有性》
链接：http://club2.cat898.com/newbbs/dispbbs.asp?boardid=1&star=1&replyid=4740426&id=2554399&skin=0&page=1
6，《美联储是如何发行美元的？》
链接：http://club2.cat898.com/newbbs/dispbbs.asp?boardid=1&star=1&replyid=4740426&id=2554399&skin=0&page=1

附录：
====================================================================================
表格 ：10年来美国政府国债总额和实际需要付出的年债息
-------------------------------------------------------------
年份--------国债总额-----总债息----国债投资收益---实付净债息
----------------------------------------------------------------
1997年 5.4万 3558 1118 2440
1998年 5.5万 3638 1227 2411
1999年 5.6万 3535 1237 2298

2000年 5.6万 3619 1390 2229
2001年 5.8万 3595 1533 2062
2002年 6.2万 3325 1615 1710
2003年 6.8万 3181 1650 1531
2004年 7.4万 3217 1614 1603

2005年 7.9万 3523 1683 1840
2006年 8.5万 4060 1794 2266
2007年 8.9万 4300 1929 2371
2008年 10.6万 4592 2152 2440
2009年 11.3万 4873 2271 2602
========================================================