Are you bullish on the soybean and corn charts I posted? How about lumber? Please explain the bull case. Don't just make some Nostradamus prediction.
- Thread starter Hobo Hilton
- Start date
Are you sure you that in the past month that you joined you have been reading the thread you just posted in? That's all that has been discussed in here. Some very educated as well as simplistic comments, but its hard to miss the main theme.
I don't know if I would give the thread that much credit. lol. In truth there have been some good points made, and some good analyses, even if those analyses end up being incorrect. I enjoy when people post well thought out stuff.
On the other hand there has been an almost surreal bias toward a political doomsday explanation of inflation, which I think is generally silly. As I've posted many times in this thread, Joe Biden doesn't give a shit if conservatives get poor because they are angry at his policies. And I sincerely hope nobody has been caught in this huge retrenchment in commodity prices. It's easy to get slaughtered in these markets.
That breeze you felt in your hair? That was my point going right over your head.
I never said it was a sign of weak demand or potential recession. If you read what I said at the time regarding lumber, wheat, corn and soybean futures was that the market action looked like professional traders and not necessarily like organic demand. Bear markets and recessions are not inextricably linked. As the saying goes, the market has predicted 10 of the last three recessions.
So my comments then, and now, were about people in this thread misreading market signals and coming to the wrong conclusions. But that lumber market is in an ugly place technically right now. Not that I put much faith in technical analysis, but commodity traders definitely do, which is one reason you see big breakouts and corrections in those markets. And looking at that chart there is no support in the lumber market for a long way if it breaks down just a little bit more. Corn also looks really bad, and soybeans have broken down completely.
But now as then, I will tell you the same thing. Risks are balanced between softness and inflation. They are high, though, in general. The vix coming way down is clearly a good sign as to what people are thinking, but my personal feeling is that the market is overly complacent about volatility right now. I don't see how it is justified to be at a one year low, approaching "normal" for the past five years. Just my opinion, though.
So again, all I was saying then was that people were reading prices incorrectly when looking to justify what they already thought, and all I am saying now is that, for the short term, neener neener neener, I was right, and I was the only one in this thread who was. Maybe a month from now I'll have egg on my face, but as I have been saying since the beginning of this. Balanced risk up and down. And shit, if I am going to listen to everybody in here tell me I am a moron and wrong about everything, you can damn well bet I will point it out.
Again, I say that lumber and other commodity prices are the symptom, not the problem. Lumber had to go down as there were multiple factors contributing to the rise. However, its the monetary inflation that will keep it permanently elevated. The tarriffs that Biden is trying to put on Canadian lumber will also keep it higher than it otherwise would be. This will continue to contribute to housing input costs which will also contribute to rising rents. More disposable income gone, but the real worry regarding housing is that with purchase prices increasing there isn't really any room to move the interest rates down - people are going to get caught with high principal and rising rates if they aren't careful, although admittedly the Fed doesn't seem to be too concerned inflation.
Blackrock is one of the many "Investment Firms" that is buying up houses... Their plan is to corner the available housing and turn it into rental housing.
Real Estate - Institutional | BlackRock
BlackRock Real Estate is deeply positioned across major markets in North America, Europe and Asia Pacific with 210+ professionals in 16 offices.
www.blackrock.com
So there is a problem with a strict logical view, or Austrian view, of economics. First, to say what is good, the logic of economics is a really good way to go through life, to understand decision making, what might happen and why it might. It is a fantastic backbone for almost anything having to do with public policy. It makes sense, it is easily explicable, doesn't require a lot of math. These are all good things. The problem, though, is that very often the predictions it might make don't end up being reflected in the data that comes out, and rather than asking themselves why, they basically revert to "Mises was right before WWII and if you give it enough time, he will be right again." You know what, he might be, but it is the same bullshit logic of ten year plans that you see in most fringe economics, be it Austrian or Marxist. It is also why Hayek remains an important economist while Mises does not, and Rothbard is a crank. That reason is that there is no sense of urgency to figure out what is going on when data and information do not correspond to theory. There is simply no empirical element, and that makes it much less useful than it could be. If you contrast that with overly empirical economics, the kind of shit that tells you that the ratio of people farting to GDP growth and then suggests farting as policy, Austrian economics might win. At least it isn't based on correlation masquerading as causation, but instead it doesn't try to explain what is actually happening at all.
Sure there is. If the question is between whether risks tend toward inflation or recession, they can also be balanced. In structuring a portfolio, if you took the point of view that risks were highly tilted toward inflation, and went into the commodities market, you would be very poor now. Don't try to retcon every fucking person in this thread getting it wrong. And rather than fixating on lumber, look at food commodities. It's the same story. Head and shoulders describes a chart formation, and it is a very common analytical tool commodities traders use. I think it is bullshit, but since they use it, if you are looking at commodity prices, you have to understand it.
And you clearly don't understand what futures do. People didn't get that lumber would be cheaper in June and July. If they did, they wouldn't have been buying July contracts for exorbitant prices.
Seriously, you are not a dumb dude, you are actually pretty smart from what I can tell, but sometimes, especially with this shit, it pays to learn from the experience of people who have been looking at these prices for a long time. And if you have been, you can see when you are looking at a momentum trade in a sector that got hot, and when you are looking at something that is describing a significant fundamental issue.
I think you correct with the sawmill assessment. Scarce resources meeting high demand will cause price inflation without monetary inflation and in my opinion will cause a higher price spike than monetary inflation could dream of in the short term, and will have impacts to the national savings rate for more than 30 years (mortgages and re-financed mortgages). And not just new home mortgages - also the existing ones that were sold to buyers during this period of high home valuations.
The sawmill issue really is a flow-down macroeconomic lesson. The tariff plan proves that politicians are not economists or good a reasoning through even simple cause and effect algebra. The ONLY thing I can see with the tariffs that may be beneficial is that it allows the US sawmills to raise prices to cover the decreased output, thereby helping to remain profitable. How much this is in play I don't know, but it is still at the expense of the rest of the population that needs a 2*4.
Last edited:
It reflects a little more than that. It kind of reflects that the momentum traders are done with a particular position. The price goes up, they try to make a new high, it is not meaningful, it drops down, they try to rally, it fails. It's a pretty particular pattern, and it basically says get out, and once they do there is little support in the particular market below that price, because they were the ones buying it up.
The buyers are a mix, of course, but financial buyers have a lot more money, which is how you can tell what is driving the market. So you might be right about insiders understanding the price changes, I have no idea, I will take your word on it.
But to be clear, this is not one market, this is across many commodity markets that you are seeing the same thing. And it is important, because people were making inflation predictions based on wheat, corn and soybean prices in this thread. That is what I am remarking upon. That those assumptions were not only wrong, but obviously wrong at the time.
It's one of the big problems with commodity futures that the financial markets tend to encroach on real life more than they ought to, but they do. Knowing which one is which is a good skill to have.
Who said anything about Keynes or Mises? This shit is common sense at this point. Although I will concede the Keynes absolutely lacked any common sense and only got an ear because he showed the way to using government debt to smooth over economic cycles, albeit on the backs of future generations.
Keynes had the philosophy of OPM - other peoples money - the taxpayers via the printing press. He was somewhat of a socialist in his economic thoughts.
Last edited:
We've not seen significant inflation by any means, at this point. We've seen some prices rise. It might happen, but if this is the extent of it, or it goes on another couple of months, then it is fair to say it was a tempest in a teapot.
I do agree about asset inflation being more significant. And generally more correlated to monetary expansion.
The timing of market decreases tends to precede business declines, in about 15 out of 4 instances. It is rarely cotemproal. So I wouldn't read too much into the timing right now other than a sort of sector rotation, but I didn't read much into the rotation in to these commodities either. It could also be that even though we are seeing increased economic activity, the increases are far less strong than expected, especially jobs wise, so you would expect to see some of these prices drop, as they can be guesses as to future activity, and up less than expected is generally a losing bet dollar was.
Last edited:
Well, if you think it is simply common sense that monetary inflation has a strong correlation with price inflation, the last twenty years want their data back. This is exactly the problem I am talking about with deductive economics, no matter who does it. Keynes was wrong about most things, but his most famous quote, "in the long run we are all dead" rings true here. You may very well be right that all this common sense stuff will come to a head. If I were a betting man, I would bet with you, but if it takes 20-30 years to come to fruition, it isn't trenchant analysis. It has literally spanned a generation, and that makes it almost useless for understanding what is actually going to happen.
Last edited:
I pretty much agree, with this proviso. The question really should be whether these are transitory effects with some odd y/y noise from lockdown and startup, or whether it is persistent. We can certainly handle y/y 5% for a couple of months, but not much longer than that. IMO the monetary explanation for inflation would suggest that without significant pain, we would see persistent inflation. If it does not persist, we have to assume other causes.
inflation matters less today than it did 15-50-100yrs ago. demand side economics and technological innovation has held inflation in check. 5% is nothing and I believe this will only present a problem once leverage to consumers in constrained and to date, it's the opposite
this is not to say I don't think it bears ignoring but it's not keeping people away. Rates should not be this low by any standard of analysis
this is not to say I don't think it bears ignoring but it's not keeping people away. Rates should not be this low by any standard of analysis
Dude, seriously.
Monetary inflation DOES have a strong correlation to price inflation. If it were not the case prices would not have been rising since, like, forever. It is especially true since we left the gold standard. One of the main purposes of monetary inflation is to make old debt cheaper with more dollars in the system. This in turn pushes out to a dollar that is worth less relative to assets it is used to purchase. This can be readily seen with the price of food and everything else - compare the prices of items that have had no technological advancements since the 80s - using them as a constant you can see the prices increasing. Bread, cornmeal, baling wire, etc. If the money supply had stayed the same the prices would not have materially increased since then.
The spanning of a generation is because of a slow and measured increase in the money supply. People don't notice it really. What is happening today is a sudden increase in the money supply and the effects are thereby compressed in the timeline as well. People will notice that, especially because the lagging nature of wage increases to match the increase. This short timeframe is what makes this spike so readily observable and dangerous.
Examples of sudden monetary inflation increasing prices: Venezuela, Germany post WW1, the list goes on. Its a real thing.
The Fed is using low interest rates to induce demand side economics - IOW, encouraging people to take on cheap debt. The equation is principal plus interest. Just because interest rates are low doesn't mean price inflation is irrelevant. It simply means that the purchase prices are more acceptable with a lower interest rate. Inflation always matters.
Inflation being held in check by technology may have a bit of truth with respect to automation of the production processes. However, I suspect that its more appropriate to say that prices have been held in check by offshoring a lot of production and then importing it at lower prices than can be done here. That doesn't get rid of inflation, but it does offset it some.
So is May 2021 inflation that bad, or were prices in May 2020 really low for some reason that I can't recall at the moment? Hmm...
Interesting, though, that the prior comparable era was 2008.
So is May 2021 inflation that bad, or were prices in May 2020 really low for some reason that I can't recall at the moment? Hmm...
Interesting, though, that the prior comparable era was 2008.
massive government spending was happening in 2008. TARP bailouts. and a new president was coming in, likely to be a Democrat would tax and spend. which he did.
The inflation we're speaking of took place prior to those events. Then the market crashed for a number of reasons, and it was only afterwards that we attempted to prop it up with stimulus.
My point is that the last time we were clutching at pearls about inflation, the problem didn't last long. There were substantial differences between them and now, so I'm not predicting that we're heading down the exact same path so much that I'm suggesting we keep an open mind about how the current situation will play out in the coming months.
Seriously? Did you see the long term food price charts I posted? There is literally nothing in this world that technology doesn't affect.
I understand your logic. I certainly understand the theory of monetary inflation. I completely believe in it, just not to the strong form that you do. And because what I see is that money supply has outpaced price inflation to such an astounding degree over the long term that there is no way to support the strong form of it. Now, does that mean that quadrupling the money supply overnight would have no hyperinflationary effects? Of course not. That's ridiculous. But the fact remains that the correlation is not what we would expect given the theory, so either we toss the data, or we rethink the theory. Or, if we aren't so intellectually honest, we just say it hasn't happened yet.
To follow up on @E. Bryant , in 2009 I was ringing the same fucking bell you are now, but I wasn't right, we didn't see what I predicted. So I had to rethink the way I understood things. Likely I will be wrong this time too, though I am not sure in which direction. In that case, I will rethink again. Probably until the day I die.
But don't paint me as disagreeing about Venezuela and Germany, understand that I am saying that, apparently, edge events are so different from standard events that different logic applies. Think of it as general vs special relativity.
Amazon's Prime Day results were more muted than usual this year
Amazon's messaging around Prime Day results lacked the kind of sales superlatives it usually offers, indicating the event may have been lackluster.
www.cnbc.com 
Jobless claims hold above 400,000 for the second week in a row
First-time claims for unemployment insurance were expected to total 380,000 for the week ended June 19.
www.cnbc.com Here we go again.
45%, but generally people don't make year over two years ago comparisons. They were disappointing compared to assumptions, which is the real issue.
I think the main issue here is not the y/y or y/2y, as much of the absolute growth has as much to do with public adoption of Prime Day as a "thing." It's not like Black Friday that has been an event for decades and where you can get real y/y comps. The real issue is that the sales were worse than people were expecting. I mean, at least that is the real issue when looking at markets. You certainly may be able to divine something else from these numbers.
I don't think the economy is sinking, and I don't think I've ever suggested such. I think there is a lot of growing evidence that some metrics are lagging where we expected them to be, much in the way they lagged during the Obama years, and a lot of that is, I think, due to common policies between the two eras which disincentivize employment. As I have said many times in here, I think that is a bigger issue than actual fiscal irresponsibility, particularly in the short term. I also have said, and still believe, that the other issue in balancing softness and inflation is whether they continue to hand out checks.
But there is little doubt right now that anti currency trades have shit the bed everywhere. That leads me to believe that inflation expectations are more tempered among professionals than they were a couple of months ago. Now, they are wrong as much as everybody else, but there is no getting around the fact that the forecast, according to the market, is more tepid than it was. Perhaps, even, dare I say, balanced as far as risk. I realize you think that is a meaningless statement, but, as far as risk management in finance, it is absolutely not.
I mean this with zero snark...
The nice thing about predictions, as opposed to opinions, is that we can figure out if we were right or wrong. My confidence level in this is low, which is why I say risk is elevated, for a lot of reasons, including the ones @NoDopes mentions above. But if I am wrong, or where I am wrong, I'll hopefully be able to do better next time. Like I have said, one of the reasons for my skepticism about the high inflation argument is that I made it so strongly myself the last time policy looked similar, and that prediction shat the bed. Thankfully, my professional investing career was always rather economy neutral, except in the most edge cases, so it was only a personal failure.
The inflation rate is currently 10% using the 1979/early 1980 formula. So apples to apples we are heading that way.
It'd be ncie to get another 15% out of the S&P this year. Beers will be on me.
Down the Rabbit Hole we go:
• Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the U.S. could run out of room to pay the government’s bills in August unless Congress raises or suspends the debt ceiling, The Wall Street Journal reported. Congress in 2019 suspended the federal borrowing limit through July 31, 2021. If allowed to expire, the Treasury Department won’t be able to sell government securities to raise additional cash and would need to use emergency measures to keep paying the government’s obligations. “Failing to increase the debt limit would have absolutely catastrophic economic consequences,” Yellen told a Senate Appropriations subcommittee, noting that the U.S. has never defaulted on its legal obligations. “I believe it would precipitate a financial crisis. It would threaten the jobs and savings of Americans at a time when we’re still recovering from the Covid pandemic.” Without congressional action, the U.S. government could begin missing payments on its obligations, including to bondholders, Social Security recipients or veterans, triggering a default on the national debt she called unthinkable. Such a breach could significantly impact the financial markets.
• Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the U.S. could run out of room to pay the government’s bills in August unless Congress raises or suspends the debt ceiling, The Wall Street Journal reported. Congress in 2019 suspended the federal borrowing limit through July 31, 2021. If allowed to expire, the Treasury Department won’t be able to sell government securities to raise additional cash and would need to use emergency measures to keep paying the government’s obligations. “Failing to increase the debt limit would have absolutely catastrophic economic consequences,” Yellen told a Senate Appropriations subcommittee, noting that the U.S. has never defaulted on its legal obligations. “I believe it would precipitate a financial crisis. It would threaten the jobs and savings of Americans at a time when we’re still recovering from the Covid pandemic.” Without congressional action, the U.S. government could begin missing payments on its obligations, including to bondholders, Social Security recipients or veterans, triggering a default on the national debt she called unthinkable. Such a breach could significantly impact the financial markets.
Oh please. If you want blowhards guessing index numbers go on CNBC where they are trying to sell you their book. Economic predictions are only as specific as they can be.
you guys were diddling yourselves to hyperinflation, pretty obviously because you don’t like the new administration, and I kept pointing out counter factual. You don’t want to own that, I’m not going to be the one getting poor on it.
eta: sorry that is kind of dickish but sell side jackasses on tv have given a really shitty view of what financial projections look like, not to mention they are basically always wrong. You’d get annoyed if pop culture did that to your business too.
Last edited:
That's not completely unfair, though there have been a lot of very strong "predictions" in this thread, to the point of going on about how it isn't even up for debate anymore. Not one, not two, but many. Not you, as far as I can tell. I do think there is a difference between prediction and opinion, at least in the way I am using it. With those two words, I am using opinion as I would in regard to the value of policy, that something is good or bad, just or unjust and why. With prediction I am talking about the likely outcomes. Not the exact outcomes, but what the most likely scenarios are. You are correct that these are also opinions.
Once again, though, I think it is unwise to ask for a level of specificity in predictions that is greater than what is possible. So super or hyperinflation is a prediction, even without a CPI number, and balanced risk is also one. It is less specific, but that is simply a representation of the belief that the data available is much less clear than to be able to say one way or the other is extremely likely. I get you think that is a hedge, and I get why. I consider it a cautious stance in the face of conflicting data.
folks, we have a spending problem!
This feels like a vinyl record that plays and jumps back, plays and jumps back, every year.
To counter this view, I remember the talking heads on almost every station telling us everything was just fine right up to the edge of the housing crisis. After that kind of a bust it is easy to see how people can get gun-shy. Cramer on Mad Money telling everyone to buy buy buy until it blew up was pretty amazing. To be fair, there were only a couple of voices that called it, but i don't think you have to be a genius to make bets on how things are going to go with the current policy changes and the crazy ass debt we are accruing.
Where do you run out of room to kick the can? What are some signs that might show the jig is up? Other people cashing out of dollars? Crypto making a run? High unemployment? Trade deficits? Importing energy rather than being a net exporter? Sure seems like we have a few indicators of bad times ahead, but I am old enough to have called it wrong several times so far at 50. Our ability to kick the can down the road is pretty damn impressive.
Just to be clear, I was saying the same thing as your first paragraph. CNBC basically has people on to sell you their book. To tell you to buy what they are already holding. So if they are too long housing, you can bet your ass they will tell you things are OK, and it's a buy. And you know what, since stocks usually go up, they are usually right. But in general these are guys with something to sell, and if you are getting it for free, you are probably paying a little more than it is worth.
As to the second, I don't really know what that strong signal is. One of the things little spoken about in this thread, or really anywhere, is that there has basically been no move in thirty years in the dollar index. Sure, people scream and scream about how it is going to cease being the reserve currency, but I don't notice that much ever changes. So a big change in the dollar index could be a sign. But what if everybody is engaging in the same bullshit spending? Then the dollar index shouldn't change, but everything that is an anti-currency bet should. So you would see gold, ag, crypto all move in unison, but no significant change in exchange rates, or a change that only reflects the attempt to exchange in order to more easily get out of cash. I think those are some of the signs you would see that the end is nigh, but they would also be combined with significant, sustained real events, like difficulty in selling bonds, weird bond prices that reflected actual risk in the system rather than just interest rate risk. Conceptually, in an inflationary situation there would be a flight to bonds, but if the bet is that the dollar was dead, I think you wouldn't see that. I think that is kind of an answer to the first part of the second paragraph.
As to whether things like trade deficits are sustainable, I think they are much, much more sustainable than people think. They aren't inherently bad, and they can support a lot of growth, and even price stability. Energy importation is a bit different because energy demand is so inelastic, and the net producers so corrupt that while importation isn't bad per se, being dependent on "enemies" for importation of an inelastic product is pretty risky. I think, right now, the nightmare scenario is falling employment combined with bad energy policy, since we have no safeguards for either at this point. But that scenario, bad as it is, is less daunting than spiraling inflation, which I see as a very low percentage risk, given the amount of policy we have available in that direction.
I'd also add that, in my opinion, the biggest risks aren't necessarily debt related or spending related, but related to an attempt to reform the economy in a way that is altogether less competitive, be that through tariffs, handouts, bad employment law, bad energy policy etc. A growing economy can hide a lot of sins, but once an economy is not growing, and a lot of that is dependent on policy, you get to see who is swimming with his pee pee out.
all I know is that consumer debt, minus mtg/rent, is now at 25%. We have never had a major correction once the 25% was breached. Within 12-24mos I would expect a major correction in the mkts and unless credit is expanded, would pay close attention to swap spreads as there is no way we can continue this spending. Don't forget how many people are behind on rent and mtgs and those chinese virus restrictions and modifications are coming to an end
You must be reading BlackRock's play book.
The BlackRock saga sounds grotesque. At a time of maximal desperation in the U.S. housing market, giant investment banks, such as BlackRock, are buying up some of the few houses left on the market, boxing families out of the American dream. They’re turning these homes into rental units that they will, in some cases, leave to decay. Such faceless institutional investors are reportedly more likely than ordinary “mom and pop” landlords to aggressively raise rent—and evict people who can’t afford it.
BlackRock Is Not Ruining the U.S. Housing Market
The real villain isn’t a faceless Wall Street Goliath; it’s your neighbors and local governments stopping the construction of new units.
www.theatlantic.com nope but know about the this endeavor and others doing the same. I spent my career on wall st as a very successful bond trader and still dabble. I started as a mbs trader so know this mkt well. Housing is the single most important part of our economy and leads to the greatest wealth creation, spending, and communal growth. What Black Rock and other buying groups are doing is terrible for our future should it gain a significant percent of the American dream.You must be reading BlackRock's play book.
The BlackRock saga sounds grotesque. At a time of maximal desperation in the U.S. housing market, giant investment banks, such as BlackRock, are buying up some of the few houses left on the market, boxing families out of the American dream. They’re turning these homes into rental units that they will, in some cases, leave to decay. Such faceless institutional investors are reportedly more likely than ordinary “mom and pop” landlords to aggressively raise rent—and evict people who can’t afford it.
BlackRock Is Not Ruining the U.S. Housing Market
The real villain isn’t a faceless Wall Street Goliath; it’s your neighbors and local governments stopping the construction of new units.
Do you remember the Hunt brothers were going to corner the silver market? Do you remember Bob Citron (Orange County Treasurer) when Orange county went bankrupt? There is always someone going to cut a fat hog in the ass......... IMHO, less than 5% of Blackrocks employees have their personal money tied up in BlackRock... they are too savvy. So, BlackRock is using other people's money (Pension funds, 401k money, college's money, etc) to corner the rental market. If this grand experiment falls flat on it's face..... The BlackRock people will walk away with their salaries, bonuses, etc.... This is happening more and more every week.....
Nobody is cornering the rental market. Stop taking something that is true, that Blackrock bought HPA and is making other investments in the sector, and make it into something that it isn't. It's nuts.
And how the fuck do you have an opinion on the percentage of Blackrock employees invested in their various funds or in the company? I can guaranfuckingtee you it is a lot higher than 5%. What a fucking joke.
And how the fuck do you have an opinion on the percentage of Blackrock employees invested in their various funds or in the company? I can guaranfuckingtee you it is a lot higher than 5%. What a fucking joke.
There are some very interesting "extreme" conditions coming into play.
USDA - National Agricultural Statistics Service - Charts and Maps - 2021 Crop Progress and Conditions
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service Information. NASS publications cover a wide range of subjects, from traditional crops, such as corn and wheat, to specialties, such as mushrooms and flowers; from calves born to hogs slaughtered; from agricultural prices to land in farms. The agency...
Using 30% of crops for Fuel definitely needs to stop and places like California need some nuclear powered desalination plants ASAP
Up 87% for the year...
oilprice.com
Oil Prices Hit 3-Year High On Draining Inventories
Oil Prices Hit 3-Year High On Draining Inventories | OilPrice.com
A new optimism is entering the market, with oil prices ending higher on Thursday at what is a nearly 3-year high
oilprice.com Related:
According to the researchers, the cell will probably need $5 of electricity to extract 1 kilogram of lithium from seawater. This means that the value of hydrogen and chlorine produced by the cell would end up offsetting the cost of power, and residual seawater could also be used in desalination plants to provide fresh water.
Scientists Find Cheap And Easy Way To Extract Lithium From Seawater | OilPrice.com
Researchers at King Abdullah University of Science and Technology developed what they believe is an economically viable system to extract high-purity lithium from seawater
oilprice.com 
Key inflation indicator posts biggest year-over-year gain in nearly three decades
A key inflation indicator that the Federal Reserve uses to set policy rose 3.4% in May, the fastest increase since the early 1990s.
www.cnbc.com Well as long as personal income losses didn't meet expectations everything is good?
Similar threads
