You're asking some good questions.
> But the fed is the monopoly supplier of US dollars.. I think it is disingenuous to say that repo markets are the sole decider of liquidity.
It's a common misconception that the "fiat" US dollar is the reserve currency of the world. Because you are correct; the US government is the sole supplier of the "fiat" US dollar.
But the world hasn't run on "fiat" dollars for a long time. The vast, vast, vast majority of dollars in circulation are not created by the US government. They are created by banks and their ledgers.
As a simple example, consider how much you use ledger money in your daily life compared to physical money. Personally, I get paid in ledger money. I would never want to get my paycheque in actual physical dollars. It would be a huge hassle.
And I can't even remember the last time I used physical money to pay for something. The vast majority of my spending is all done via ledger money. I swipe my credit card or have a bill payment automatically debit my bank account. The vast majority of transactions in the world don't involve any physical exchange of cash; it's ledger money basically all the way down.
>All of that private liquidity relies on the Fed’s willingness to backstop that system.
The fed is a very poor lender of last resort. You could even argue that they aren't even a central bank for this exact reason.
The vast majority of money has nothing to do with the fed. It's created and destroyed in offshore markets (originally called eurodollar markets) by bank ledgers.
As an example, check the graph for M2 money supply from say 2006 to 2011. It went way up, right? The fed was "printing money" (not really) via QE and adding tons of money into the system. Except they weren't! We had huge liquidity crises time and time again in that period. And it had nothing to do with the fed. It had everything to do with offshore dollar markets drying up.
>I do still believe government shutdown affects liquidity in a macro sense. Maybe not ‘directly’, but downstream for sure.
Sure, if you're talking about the context of people getting paid, spending their money on rent, groceries etc. But that's all very far removed from the stock market.
The real liquidity is provided by banks and shadow banks. That's the liquidity that matters for the stock market and other much larger markets like the bond market or the swap market.
The whole blowup back in 2008 all came back to the repo market. When the mortgage-backed securities that were used for collateral for repurchase agreements were found out to be nearly worthless, banks were suddenly not willing to enter repo agreements with anything except the highest quality collateral. So, repo liquidity absolutely dried up, treasuries skyrocketed (because they could still be used as collateral for repo), and people got margin called and blown up because they couldn't get money.
I get what you are saying here. And no need to apologize I was genuinely confused.
But the fed is the monopoly supplier of US dollars.. I think it is disingenuous to say that repo markets are the sole decider of liquidity.
All of that private liquidity relies on the Fed’s willingness to backstop that system. Which is supported by Bernanke in the linked article himself.
I do still believe government shutdown affects liquidity in a macro sense. Maybe not ‘directly’, but downstream for sure.
I'm not saying there is no sexism. I'm saying it is far more relevant that she was Speaker for 8 years and that she is the most powerful California Dem. That's the primary reason she gets so much attention. And I mean, she IS a corrupt pos who doesn't care about you. That's true even if it is also true about the other guys
Omg then you call me a bootlicker for NOT blindly defending a politician. The projection is off the charts. Whose boots am I even licking? They are all corrupt scumbags.