Debates are raging about whether big data still holds the promise that was expected or whether it was just a big bust. The failure of the much-hyped Google Flu Trends to accurately predict peak flu levels since August 2011 has heightened the concerns. In my mind, there is no doubt that data analytics will one day help to improve health care and crime detection, design better products, and improve traffic patterns and agricultural yields. My concern is about how we will one day use all the data we are gathering—and the skeletons it will uncover. Think about how DNA technology is being used to free people who were wrongfully imprisoned decades ago. Imagine what supercomputers of the future will be able to do with the data that present-day data gatherers haven’t yet learned to use. Over the centuries, we gathered data on things such as climate, demographics, and business and government transactions. Our farmers kept track of the weather so that they would know when to grow their crops; we had land records so that we could own property; and we developed phone books so that we could find people. About 15 years ago we started creating Web pages on the Internet. Interested parties started collecting data about what news we read, where we shopped, what sites we surfed, what music we listened to, what movies we watched, and where we traveled to. With the advent of LinkedIn, MySpace, Facebook, Twitter and many other social-media tools, we began to volunteer private information about our work history and social and business contacts and what we like—our food, entertainment, even our sexual preferences and spiritual values. Today, data are accumulating at exponentially increasing rates. There are more than 100 hours of video uploaded to YouTube every minute, and even more video is being collected worldwide through the surveillance cameras that you see everywhere. Mobile-phone apps are keeping track of our every movement: everywhere we go; how fast we move; what time we wake. Soon, devices that we wear or that are built into our smartphones will monitor our body’s functioning; our sequenced DNA will reveal the software recipe for our physical body. The NSA has been mining our phone metadata and occasionally listening in; marketers are correlating information about our gender, age, education, location, and socioeconomic status and using this to sell more to us; and politicians are fine-tuning their campaigns.
UBS On Japan - Are You 'Abe'liever? Submitted by Tyler Durden on 05/23/2013 13:42 -0400 Apple Bank of Japan Demographics European Union Germany Gross Domestic Product Japan Authored by Duncan Wooldridge via UBS, We totally get why many are excited by the recent cyclical improvement in the Japanese economy. However, just because industrial production is turning up on the back of exports and 1Q GDP grew more than expected doesn’t mean Abeconomics is working . Our colleague, Paul Donovan, correctly pointed out these improvements occurred before the Bank of Japan aggressively started to ramp up base money and there’s been no structural reform to date. Hence, most of the improvement in Japan is probably best described as a standard cyclical improvement in the aftermath of very depressed growth that was also heavily influenced by last year’s downturn in global trade. Recent positive momentum in the economy will likely be sustained for a few more quarters and then of course later this year and early next year consumption should accelerate ahead of a consumption tax hike scheduled for April 2014. So for Abe-believers there will be fuel to support their optimism. However, once you move beyond that and think about what comes afterwards things look more challenging. Can Japan sustainably lift aggregate demand above supply? If that cannot be done then it’s hard to see deflation resolved in a fundamentally positive way. Aggregate demand is heavily influenced by demographics and exports. We published chart 1 recently and it shows that historically the growth rate in Japan’s labour force is an excellent indicator for inflation. That’s because the growth in the labour force affects the level and growth of aggregate wages since total wages equal the number of workers multiplied by wages per worker. That has an affect on consumption and aggregate demand. We did some back of the envelope calculations that suggest even with wages per worker growing by 1% the aggregate wage level might not rise. Meanwhile the consensus is busy writing report after report on what Japan means for Asia. In our view, the more interesting question is what does Asia mean for Japan? Exports will play a vital role in Japan’s efforts to raise aggregate demand above supply. So here’s the problem. We’ve argued consistently that Asia is 5 years into building a credit bubble in an effort to substitute credit-led domestic demand to offset trend weakness in external demand. Our central thesis back in 2009 was that Asia’s willingness to increase leverage would be helpful to growth, asset prices and profits in the region, and by extension intra-Asian trade. But we also argued that with time and higher leverage Asia’s credit-led growth would suffer from diminishing marginal benefits of taking on more debt. That is arguably where much of the region is today and partly explains why Chinese growth is beginning to disappoint expectations. It’s highly likely that Asian economic growth a few years from now will slow significantly as the region’s credit-led growth policies become progressively less effective and produce untoward headwinds for growth. After all, there is always a significant slowdown in growth waiting for you on the other side of any aggressive credit expansion. The problem for Japan is that over 50% of her exports go to Asia. Hence, improving exports are currently helping cyclically but a slowdown in exports – led by weakening Asian demand -- a year or so out is likely. A slowdown in exports to Asia along with a shrinking Japanese consumer base will make it more difficult for Japan to sustainably inflate aggregate demand relative to capacity or supply. This is especially true since capacity is sticky and Japan arguably has too much capacity. A country’s capital stock, along with labour, allows it to provide goods and services to the population; i.e., to meet aggregate demand. Japan has the highest per capita capital stock in the world despite having a shrinking population that is expected to accelerate over the next few decades. The only country in our sample that presently looks similar to Japan is Germany. However, that’s not an apple to apple comparison. First, it’s true that Germany’s capital stock is high, far higher than the US, and its population is shrinking. But in Germany’s case its internal demographics are far less important because it is part of the European Union and importantly labour can move freely between Germany and other EU members. Hence, even though Germany’s population is shrinking its labour force continues to grow unlike Japan , and as we mentioned earlier that affects aggregate demand. Secondly, Germany shares the same currency with its major trade partners, which gives it a competitive advantage in many respects. So we sum it all up like this. There are definitely signs that Japan’s economy are improving cyclically. However, structurally demographics remain a major headwind to raising aggregate demand. We feel many investors have not yet considered what slower growth for Asia will mean for Japan in the medium term. This will make it more difficult to raise aggregate demand above supply since capacity is sticky and Japan already has excess capacity. Average: 4.5 Your rating: None Average: 4.5 ( 2 votes)
A Sudden Rumbling In The Repo-sphere Sends 10 Year Treasury Shorts Scrambling Submitted by Tyler Durden on 03/15/2013 15:10 -0400 10 Year Treasury Bank of New York Barclays Bond Consumer Sentiment Fail Federal Reserve Federal Reserve Bank Federal Reserve Bank of New York Lehman POMO POMO Shadow Banking Curious why Treasury yields have ground lower this morning, considerably more than would perhaps be expected given the consumer sentiment data, and in the process have prevented the intraday "rotation" out of bonds into stocks, pushing the DJIA higher for the 11th consecutive day? The answer comes from the Fed which tipped its hand earlier and scared a few big bond shorts by issuing a Large Positions Reports from those entities which own more than $2 billion of the 2% of February 2023 (CUSIP: 912828UN8 auctioned off in February and reopened on Wednesday). In an unexpected request, and on the back of a surge in fails to deliver earlier in the week and the huge apparent buyside demand in the latest 10Y auction (Primary Dealers getting only 22.3% of the takedown in the UN8 vs typical 40-60%) which settles today, MNI reports that the Fed is now inquiring who has large chunks of the bond: something it has not done since February 2012 . From MarketNews : The Treasury is calling for Large Position Reports from those entities whose reportable positions in the 2% Treasury Notes of February 2023 equaled or exceeded $2 billion as of close of business Monday, March 11, 2013. Entities with reportable positions in this note equal to or exceeding the $2 billion threshold must report these positions to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Entities with positions in this note below $2 billion are not required to file Large Position Reports. Reports must be received by the Government Securities Dealer Statistics Unit of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York before noon Eastern Time on Thursday, March 21, 2013, and must include the required position and administrative information. Large Position Reports may be faxed to (212) 720-5030 or delivered to the Bank at 33 Liberty Street, 4th floor. Details on Call for Large Position Reports Security Description: 2% Treasury Notes of February 2023, Series B-2023 CUSIP Number: 912828 UN 8 CUSIP Number of STRIPS Principal Component: 912820 B3 0 Maturity Date: February 15, 2023 Date for Which Information Must Be Reported: March 11, 2013 as of COB Large Position Reporting Threshold: $2 Billion (Par Value) Date Report Is Due: March 21, 2013, before noon Eastern Time More evidence of a sudden shortage of safe paper was today's $5.199 billion POMO in the 2017-2018 space, which was covered at a record low 2.54 times (with the previous record QE3-low of 2.67 occurring on February 13 in the 2036-2042 space), showing Primary Dealers are suddenly very leery of handing over their bonds to the Fed. Adding further mystery to what appears a sudden 10 Year collateral shortage, is that repo rates in the Tuesday-Thursday period have averaged between -2.543% and -2.838%, which have been abnormally low even accounting for the Wednesday UN8 reopening. While "it is not uncommon for the new issue to trade super rich in repo ahead of settlement," specialness has not exceeded -1.00% for current 10Y notes recently, Barclays strategist Joseph Abate said. As Bloomberg adds, repo specialness is effectively capped at -3.00%, equal to the 3% penalty that since 2009 has been assessed on cash lenders that fail to deliver borrowed securities. Feb-23 10Y, reopened for $13b, did trade at rates below 3.00% this week, presumably “because some desks did not want to be seen failing" though it would have been cheaper to do so, TD strategist Richard Gilhooly said. So while most (interested) people know that in a world in which real assets and collateral are becoming increasingly scarce, and only the tenuous connection between the unfunded shadow banking system and deposit-fed traditional liabilities is allowing the perception of a status quo to persist by keeping asset prices rising, what many may not know is that without the creation of real assets but merely through the injection of some $85 billion in claim-dilution courtesy of the Fed every month (and as a matched $85 billion in safe assets is pulled away by the same Fed), the market may be reaching its saturation point on how much securities the Fed may be buying. If the ongoing repo super-specialness persists, beware: as it will be the first time since Lehman that cracks have appeared in the very fragile shadow banking system. And shadow banking is perhaps the one key aspect of financial markets that has remained untouched since the great financial crisis, and also happens to be the critical nexus that allows Dealers to transform reserves into risk-asset purchasing dry powder. Should systemic weakness suddenly spread through repo, and thus shadow banking, run. Average: 4.833335 Your rating: None Average: 4.8 ( 6 votes)
data FLOWERS; length Type $ 5 Color $ 11; a=5; input Type $ Color $;/*不加一行会显示lost card,不会有输出*/cards;daisyyellowyyuuuio; run; proc print data=FLOWERS; run; NOTE: LOST CARD. RULE: ----+----1----+----2----+----3----+----4----+----5----+----6----+----7----+----8----+----9----+----0 132 ; Type=daisy Color= a=5 _ERROR_=1 _N_=1 TRUNCOVER causes the DATA step to assign values to variables, even if the values are shorter than expected by the INPUT statement , and to assign missing values to any variables that do not have values when the end of a record is encountered.
Job Creation Under Barack Obama: Less Than Meets The Eye? Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/03/2012 18:34 -0500 Barack Obama BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics President Obama Recession In the aftermath of yesterday's better than expected jobs number there have been many analyses in the media on both sides of the aisle, either attacking or defending Obama's track record in creating jobs. All have come up with arguments which according to their authors, are solid and defensible. There is one analysis, however, which is missing, and that is a follow up of what we showed yesterday in " Chart Of The Day: America's Geriatric Work F(a)rce ." In it we demonstrated the very much "under the radar" schism of America's workforce since the NBER-defined official end of the recession in June 2009 into the " haves ", or those above 55, who have been able to get a job since the end of the recession, and the " have nots ", or all those in the labor force who have not been able to find a job. So how does this data look when extended to the beginning of Obama's term, or the 46 full months starting with his inauguration in January 2009, and continuing through the latest, October 2012 data point. The chart is presented below; you decide. And for those wanting a more granular breakdown, here it is by all the age categories tracked by the BLS. In summary: while those in the 55-69 age group have gained nearly 4 million jobs under President Obama, everyone else has lost just over 2.5 million. In other words, those aged 55 and over should be scrambling for "4 more years." Everyone esle... perhaps not so much. Average: 4.117645 Your rating: None Average: 4.1 ( 17 votes) Tweet Login or register to post comments 18339 reads Printer-friendly version Send to friend Similar Articles You Might Enjoy: Guest Post: Why I Don't Vote Presenting America's Political Apathy: Voter Turnout Rate 50% The CEO Letter Heard Around The World "Vote Obama; Lose Your Job" Guest Post: Want More Tax Revenue? Increase Jobs Not Rates Charles Ferguson: "Standing Behind Every Great Con Artist Is Someone Like Glenn Hubbard "
标签: Expected经管大学堂：名校名师名课
京公网安备 11010802022788号
论坛法律顾问：王进律师
知识产权保护声明
免责及隐私声明
