It's based on common sense. If you think it's a coincidence that the Fed's policies have correlated with massive asset price inflation and a merger wave, I can't help you.

From WH official on Iran deal: 1. Nuclear material will be destroyed and removed 2. Nuclear program will be dismantled 3. None of their money released until they perform 4. Strait of Hormuz will be open 5. No Iran funding of terrorist groups Official adds: "This is what they agreed to. This is a performance based deal."

CAN ANYONE PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME, IN SIMPLE WORDS, WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON WITH BITCOIN??

Here's the full exchange: Q: How big an issue is the balance sheet? Is it too big and what difference does it make anyways? Bernanke: Well, on good economics, it's irrelevant. I mean, it's relevant. It should be big again on good economics because it's a very good way to manage the short-term interest rate and assure that banks have enough reserves, and that's a good thing for financial stability. It's a good thing. Milton Friedman would like it because it keeps the cost of transactions low. Money should have a zero opportunity cost and all those things. Kristin's reason is that—and this thing about having a large footprint, that you often hear, that's a meaningless statement, really, because what—is there not enough Treasuries in the market? Is that the problem? I'm not sure I understand that. So I think from an economic point of view that the balance sheet is pretty much okay where it is. Now Kristin's point is that it's got a bad optics, that the Fed is too involved somehow in fiscal policy by holding all this debt. Again, the only real effect of holding the large balance sheet is that it potentially exposes the public to fiscal gains and losses, which that would go away if the Fed mimicked the Treasury's maturity structure or just held Treasury bills or something or coordinated with the treasury on that, which is what Kevin says he wants to do. So … that would eliminate that problem. Again, it's just really a question of optics. I don't know how to quantify that particular issue. Anyway, so if you ask me as an economist, I think that incurring the significant costs and risks involved in trying to shrink this beyond the point where banks don't have enough reserves is of questionable value. But again, I don't know how to judge the purely optical aspects of it.

Austin-based podcaster Joe Rogan reportedly being considered for 60 Minutes role. statesman.com/news/politics/…

What a headline.

How a bad book, a bogus formula, and a hunger for favor led Kevin Hassett to discover that he could lie his way up the ladder as a career, and it would pay. Republican politicians and journalists call it “economic advising”. But that really is the wrong phrase, isn’t it?... 1/