Courtesy of ZeroHedge. View original post here.
Submitted by Tyler Durden.
There was a time when the Fed's unofficial mouthpiece, WSJ's Jon Hilsenrath, who eagerly and promptly put to print anything the Fed deemed worthy of leaking to the access journalist, was relevant. Perhaps the only positive side effect with the advent of QEternity, which essentially took away the "surprise function" from the Fed as everyone now knows what will happen in perpetuity or until hyperinflation arrives, whichever happens first, was making such leaks as Hilsenrath completely irrelevant. After all, when the Fed has shown its cards to everyone, even as it keeps doubling down and pulling jokers out of its sleeve, those who "share" the Fed's thoughts have become completely marginalized.
Today was one of those days when Hilsy strove to regain some of his former glory releasing the Fed's his take on today's NFP, which said absolutely nothing new. Yes we know even 500K jobs created a month will not end QE, and neither will 1MM, or more: after all the US still has $1+ trillion deficits needing monetization as far as the eye can see. In fact, the only thing remotely useful in Jon's article was at the very end…
From the WSJ:
The Fed is beginning to consider other matters, which could come up at its next meeting, though officials are unlikely to yield quick decisions.
Officials are starting to discuss a new strategy for winding down their easy money policies. It would involve holding on to their securities for longer-than previously planned. They also have been talking about tapering off the amount of their asset purchases once they decide to stop the bond buying. But they haven't fully weighed pros and cons or neared a decision.
So was all the FOMC minutes posturing in the past two sessions actually real? Or is this latest Hilsenrath plant merely one more attempt at "headfaking", and pushing the DJIA ever furher into the stratosphere. And if not, will the next Fed statement really stun the market when Bernanke brings up brand new language discussing the wind down of "easy money" – a statement that would send the ES lower by 100 points in milliseconds.
Who knows.
Frankly, does anyone care what the centrally-planned policy vehicle once upon a time known as the market does going forward?
The bottom line is this: as long as the Fed has control over reality and people's perceptions, it will go up.
Once the Fed loses said control, as it always has done sooner or later in the past, the market will collapse.
Do we really need someone overcomplicating it far more than this?
