I missed the midpoint of 2009. My diary reveals that on June 30 I trotted off to the Centre for Conflict Resolution (Africa's premier think-tank) for the launch of Terry Bell's self published book on Moses Mayekiso. Both were in attendance. Barbara pimped the book loyally at the door. She also distributed postcards for Terry's no-VAT-on-books campaign. And so forth.
But I should have delivered an interim report on my "Whip out the Bubbly" blog. Well...
1. The JP Morgan US Bond Index is down 5% for the year. A fizz, more than a pop, but there's more of the year left yet. We were on queue with the order, as this one cracked even as the note was written. Arguably, the top was in the last week of December.
2. The presidential popping has been pretty well covered in recent weeks. Zogby had him breeching 50% (southward!). Who would've thought? (Actually, I did - see the Inauguration Special.) It's early, and you could see him tease 60% again, but that's going to require a special event. So I stick with my earlier remarks. Again, we were right in placing this second in order. The only thing I got wrong was that Healthcare woudld be implicated in the softening.
3. And then there was China. It's arguable whether this bubble is going to pop. Immediately this means that I was right on the order. But there'll be egg-eating unless something interesting happens between now and year-end. The data is mixed. China is at what I call the fore-hindisight phase: all the stuff we'd cite in an I-told-you-so are in evidence (e.g. export collapse, reserve risk) but the negatives have been tempered by positive data coming from reporting domains that the Chinese authorities are able to manipulate.
Spring threatens. Let's sit out the rest of the year.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
(This blurb has not been left blank intentionally.)
2 comments:
Hey Mr true cents, have you watched beyond the rainbow? if so, what do u think of it?
Hi Shalin. I saw it during the screen run last year. My comments to Markowitz were that the doccie tried to cover too much ground. And so it rehashed lots of stuff that's familiar to anyone who's read a newspaper in the last few years. Consequently, it failed to provide the definitive account of how the Polokwane coup was hatched. On the other hand, they succeeded in getting remarkable commentary from difficult sources (like M&Z). Anyway, it's pretty dated now, and should be of broad interest any longer. What did you think?
Post a Comment