FinTwit Anons retweeted
Tu viens de résumer la théorie de la valeur-travail de Marx. Je vais t’expliquer pourquoi elle a été réfutée il y a 130 ans, sans méchanceté.
L’idée que la valeur vient du travail a un problème fondamental. Si je passe 400 heures à construire une chaise moche que personne veut acheter, elle vaut pas plus qu’une chaise construite en 2 heures que tout le monde s’arrache. La valeur ne vient pas du temps passé.
Elle vient de ce que quelqu’un est prêt à payer. C’est la révolution marginaliste de 1871 (Menger, Jevons, Walras), confirmée par Böhm-Bawerk en 1896 qui a formellement démoli la théorie valeur-travail.
C’est pas un débat ouvert. C’est réglé depuis plus d’un siècle dans la littérature économique.
Maintenant “le propriétaire extorque la plus-value”. Extorquer implique une contrainte. Or un contrat de travail est volontaire. Personne te force à signer. Tu peux partir demain. Tu peux monter ta propre boîte. Tu peux devenir freelance.
Et surtout, le propriétaire ne “prend” rien. Il prend un risque. Il avance le capital. Il paie les salaires AVANT que le produit soit vendu. Si la boîte fait faillite, le salarié touche son chômage. Le propriétaire perd tout.
Ses économies, son temps, parfois sa maison.
La “plus-value” que tu décris, c’est la rémunération de ce risque. Sans quelqu’un pour avancer le capital et organiser la production, le travailleur produit rien du tout. Demande à n’importe quel freelance : le plus dur c’est pas de faire le travail, c’est de trouver le client et de structurer l’offre.
Dernier point. Si le travail seul produisait la richesse, les pays avec le plus de travailleurs seraient les plus riches.
L’Inde et le Bangladesh auraient un PIB par habitant supérieur à la Suisse. C’est évidemment pas le cas. Ce qui fait la différence c’est le capital, l’innovation, l’organisation, et les institutions.
Je te dis ça sans animosité.
La théorie valeur-travail est séduisante parce qu’elle est simple et qu’elle a un héros (le travailleur) et un méchant (le patron). Mais la réalité économique est plus nuancée que ça.
Replying to @brivael
Ce qui produit de la richesse c'est le travail.
Quand il est privé il est juste plus cher vu que un propriétaire extorque de la plus value.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
Replying to @retaox
"Instead of sending the cash to shareholders via dividends or share buybacks, why not send it to total strangers in exchange for funny tokens?"
FinTwit Anons retweeted
Just to summarize what’s happened in the last few weeks:
They concocted this whole thing based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the global economy. They think manufacturing jobs will come back (they won’t). They think free trade made us poor, when it actually made us rich. They think the current account deficit is unsustainable when it’s a rounding error in our aggregate net worth and also accretive to our net worth. They think being the reserve currency is bad when it’s a sign that everyone wants to do business with us. And they think poor foreigners were taking advantage of us when we’re the richest economy in human history.
And to "fix" all of these "problems" they implemented the one policy idea that almost every economist alive says is bad.
And then when they implemented that idea they misunderstood the math behind the rationale and came up with numbers that were irrationally huge. So they had to backpedal.
And when bond yields moved a tiny bit higher they panicked and "fixed" all of this by making the numbers slightly smaller, but they clearly hadn't done the math again because the numbers are still way bigger than any economist would ever recommend they be. Then they patted themselves on the back because of intraday moves in stocks while an economic hurricane continues to barrel towards us because they have no idea what they’re doing.
Amazing stuff.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
Replying to @EconomPic @SamRo @GonzoFinance @midtown_rob @ActuallyFinance @thecashman22 @JoeBiden @SMTuffy @choffstein @Brian_Riedl @DadInvest @TheStalwart @MonocleMan1 @jfreed23 @MikeDonnellyJr @bauhiniacapital @digitalturtle_ @AdvisorMikeL @willis_cap @coloradotravis @erinarvedlund @millerak42 @VolaTim @lhamtil @CathieDWood @BullandBaird @LizSimmie @tola2252 @Matt_Wiens @marketplunger1 @Inv_Ecosystem @AdamSinger
A new all-timer just dropped
HT @Matt_Wiens
FinTwit Anons retweeted
There is a lot of capacity for US households and businesses to lever up in response to the Fed's expected aggressive easing cycle.
After years of a recession-like pace of borrowing, debt could be the rocket fuel that extends this cycle.
Thread.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
On 3/17/22, the Fed started raising rates. They continued to raise 500 bps in 12 months, an amount that's never been seen before in such a short time in the history of the markets. The S&P 500 is up over +29% since that date and you want to fight this market?
FinTwit Anons retweeted
come on folks, it is only pre open but have I not entertained you with my input regarding the Fed and the economy and this resulting 5700 in SP500.
give me some due - go subscribe to The Monetary Frontier.
you are an idiot to take any investment advice from me, by the way.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
Financial conditions remain ultra easy, which is one reason I don't see any need for a 50 bps cut tomorrow.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
REMINDER: When the Fed started the current rate hike cycle they kicked it off with a 25 bps increase, then followed up with 50, 75, 75, 75, 75, 50, 25, 25, 25, 25.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
Chart of the Week - Renewable Energy
Everywhere I see triangles…
Across some of the major macro markets (e.g. oil, USD, treasuries) we’ve seen some key triangle patterns playing out (compression trades — moments of indecision where the market is notching up lower highs and higher lows; often resolving with explosive breakouts).
Most of those have been shorter-term, still important, but still on the small side. And to be fair, if you get a relatively small and short-term technical pattern playing out at a key moment it can still mark a major turning point.
But technicians can agree on one thing (and they usually don’t!) — the bigger and longer-term the pattern, the more meaningful it is …and the more significant the subsequent moves are likely to be in terms of duration and magnitude.
This brings us to the chart below…
Global renewable energy sector equities have found a higher floor following the bursting of the Biden Bubble (there was a surge of enthusiasm on renewable energy stocks back in 2020/21 thanks to the promise of pro-clean energy policies + pandemic stimulus).
The bursting of the bubble saw a series of lower highs as optimism gave way to skepticism and then outright pessimism.
And now? It’s a battle between bulls who see the reset in valuations to cheaper levels and better entry price, the major strides China is making with clean energy, and the longer-term theme of the energy transition and energy demand growth… vs the bears who see ESG fatigue, doubts and mixed messages on clean energy —along with growing storm clouds on the macro/market outlook.
And who will win this battle? If I had to guess I would say the green line is going to win out in the end, renewable energy and the socio-political trends underpinning the energy transition are no flash in the pan — meanwhile, energy demand is only going to increase; probably exponentially in years to come, and renewables are going to need to be a part of meeting that demand.
In the immediate term though, realists will see that red line and be waiting and ready to pounce should global renewable energy stocks breakout… because if there’s one thing that sticks out on that chart it’s the procession of bubbles.
Financial media often talks of bubbles as a source of fear and gloom, but you know what? Learn to stop worrying and love the bubble. Have a strategy and study the cycle to be a victor not a victim of bubbles and cycles.
Key point: Global renewable energy stocks are approaching a major breakout.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
What's interesting above is MSFT traded at 14.2x sales now 12.3x. For NVDA to achieve street (nosebleed) growth targets -- requires even more capex overdosing from Mag7 players. But 2 years into AI this January, there is ZERO visibility of RIOC (return on invested capital)!!!
FinTwit Anons retweeted
Replying to @EconomPic @SamRo @GonzoFinance @midtown_rob @ActuallyFinance @thecashman22 @JoeBiden @SMTuffy @choffstein @Brian_Riedl @DadInvest @TheStalwart @MonocleMan1 @jfreed23 @MikeDonnellyJr @bauhiniacapital @digitalturtle_ @AdvisorMikeL @willis_cap @coloradotravis @erinarvedlund @millerak42 @VolaTim @lhamtil @CathieDWood @BullandBaird @LizSimmie @tola2252 @Matt_Wiens @marketplunger1 @Inv_Ecosystem
HT @AdamSinger
FinTwit Anons retweeted
Matt Levine has a good take that he periodically returns to which is something like "crypto markets are speedrunning the last 200 years of finance" in terms of market structure, regulation, etc. Classic case of tech bros trying to reinvent the wheel from first principles.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
You should ignore all the opinions of people who don’t know the difference between price and total return.
'In gold terms, the S&P 500 is exactly where it was in August 1971. The significance of that date is that it was the moment when President Richard Nixon severed the dollar's link to gold.' bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
FinTwit Anons retweeted
If you think the Fed needs to get to neutral to support growth (my view), and if you think neutral is 3.5% (who knows), then stringing out 25’s doesn’t get you to neutral until next June, a whole school year away. It’s too slow.
FinTwit Anons retweeted
Inflation is back to normal levels, violent crime is near record lows, and the job market is still doing great.
It's time to say it: It's Morning in America.
noahpinion.blog/p/at-least-f…































