
Buffett Says Stock Ownership Became More Attractive With Tax Cut - rayuela
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-10/buffett-says-cryptocurrencies-are-certain-to-come-to-bad-ending
======
littlestymaar
I have a lot of friends investing in crypto-currencies recently, and here's
the fun thing: most of them are well aware this is a speculative bubble, but
it didn't stop them investing. Quite the opposite actually, they believe this
is the beginning of the bubble, and they can make a several hundred percent
investment in a short timespan. And they are quite right, in every speculative
bubble, no value is ever destroyed, it's merely a transfered from some
speculators to others, all they need to do is _sell at the right time_.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _in every speculative bubble, no value is ever destroyed_

Public trust is destroyed by bubbles. That takes time to rebuild. In the
meantime, it leaks into the political system.

I was in an Uber the day Bitcoin hit $19,000. My driver was proud he'd just
taken out a second line on his house to buy. There is a non-negligible chance
he, and people like him, will end up on the public balance sheet as a result
of these wealth transfers.

~~~
littlestymaar
That's right, problems occur when people bet more that what they can lose. I'm
convinced that's why the regulators don't like crypto-currencies. Not because
they will lose their power, like some people seams to believe, but because
they don't want a huge number of ruined people when the bubble collapses.

------
workthrowaway27
The best part of the article was where Buffett said he'd buy put options on
cryptocurrencies if he could, but wouldn't short them. I bet most investors in
cryptocurrencies don't understand his reasoning there, and that's frightening.

Note: I'm not saying they have to agree with it, but if you don't understand
his point and are invested in cryptocurrencies you should really be asking
yourself how much you really know.

~~~
jm_l
I hate asking for spoilers but could you explain what the reasoning is?

~~~
advisedwang
If you short 1BTC, you get the current value of 1BTC and pay the future value
of 1BTC. If you buy a 1BTC put option, you pay a premium for the option to get
the current value of 1 BTC (the usual "strike price") and pay the future
value.

So for a short: Max loss: Unlimited. if BTC rises to $x, you have to pay $x
Max Gain: The current value of 1BTC. If BTC drops to zero. you pay nothing but
were given the start value.

For a put option: Max loss: The premium, as you don't have to exercise the
option Max Gain: strike price minus the premium.

Shorts have a fixed period and put options expire, so if the drop you predict
doesn't happen in the time you predict, you can get wiped out even if the drop
does happen later.

So In effect buffet is saying he believes it's going down, but either isn't
confident about when or admits there is a chance he's wrong.

------
frgtpsswrdlame
>If I could buy a five-year put on every one of the cryptocurrencies, I’d be
glad to do it but I would never short a dime’s worth.”

Hmm, in that way you could see it as the market around cryptocurrencies
lacking the financial complexity that could bring their volatility back down
to more normal levels.

~~~
panarky
During the 2008 crisis Buffett bought a $5 billion stake in Goldman Sachs. He
didn't buy shares on any exchange, he dealt directly with Goldman.

Buffett doesn't need complex financial markets because he does custom
transactions directly with companies.

A Winklevoss could easily sell him a billion-dollar five-year put, but he
wouldn't like the price.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _he wouldn 't like the price_

For fun, let's try pricing a Bitcoin put option using the Black-Scholes-Merton
model [1]. This model is a simplified version of real-life options models, but
our parameter uncertainty will dominate the model's anyway.

I'll use the $14,400 Coinbase price [2] for both our S and K inputs, _i.e._
we're pricing a European put struck at spot. Term is 5 years. This site [3]
says Bitcoin's historic 252-day volatility is 5.21%. Sure. We want the 5-year
365-day volatility, _i.e._ 14.0% [4].

The real shit show in this example is the rates component. If we use this 57%
number [5], the put is worthless. We're using a Bitcoin-dollar price for the
stock and strike, so let's assume U.S. dollar funding (since Bitcoin does not
natively support rates in the way modern currencies do). The 5-year Treasury
yields 2.25% [6].

BSM says...$1,037.01.

(Rho dominates tau, or in English, the rates component is about 2.5x more
meaningful than the volatility component.)

Raising our rate to the call money rate [7] we get $792.84 with rates
continuing to dominate volatility.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black–Scholes_model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black–Scholes_model)

[2] [https://www.coinbase.com/charts](https://www.coinbase.com/charts)

[3] [https://bitvol.info](https://bitvol.info)

[4] _sqrt([5 x 365] / 252) x 5.21_

[5] [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-09/keynes-
wo...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-09/keynes-worked-out-
the-bitcoin-interest-rate-it-s-57)

[6] [https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-
center/i...](https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-
center/interest-rates/Pages/TextView.aspx?data=yield)

[7] [https://www.bankrate.com/rates/interest-rates/call-
money.asp...](https://www.bankrate.com/rates/interest-rates/call-money.aspx)

~~~
bluedevil2k
You didn't finish pricing out the put option. I calculate $475 for a put. But
think about this a second. That's a crazy low price for this kind of
investment. You're only paying a 3.3% premium to hold a put I can exercise at
any point in the next 5 years. At any point in the next 5 years, if BTC goes
down by rougly 7% I'm in the money. That's a daily swing for BTC in a normal
week.

I think the volatility input in this equation is way off.

~~~
bluedevil2k
And anyone who thinks this is a fair price for a PUT on BTC, please contact me
as I will buy unlimited amounts of puts if you're willing to put up 50% as
collateral.

~~~
FabHK
Me too! Depending on your credit, that is. Finally a get-rich-quick-scheme I
can get behind.

------
unknown_apostle
He's right about the shorting: to short it using futures is, in a way, to side
yourself with potential ruin. Only through put options can you safely do this.

~~~
comboy
Can you elaborate? Why shorting wouldn't work?

~~~
dmm
A short has an unlimited downside. A put contract has a fixed downside, the
price of the contract, which is paid regardless of whether you exercise the
option or not.

~~~
perseusprime11
Can you explain this further? Is a put contract essentially saying that this
stock is not worth it and will lose its value in the next few months?

~~~
workthrowaway27
A put allows you to sell an asset at a certain price in the future. So, say I
bought a put option with a strike price of 10k USD for bitcoin 5 years from
now. If in 5 years the price of BTC is less than (10k - the price I paid for
the put option) I can buy a BTC for whatever it currently costs, sell it at
10k to whoever took the other side of the option and make a profit.

The risk is that if the price of BTC is above 10k, then I'm out the money the
put option cost me.

~~~
perseusprime11
Interesting. Thanks for the example. Looks like Put option limits the risk so
if bitcoin becomes 15K then I have to shell out 5K from my pocket.

~~~
workthrowaway27
Actually, if bitcoin becomes 15k then you don't have to pay anything. The put
option gives you the "option" to sell a bitcoin for 10k (in this example), but
you're not required to do so. In practice you only sell it if you'll make a
profit. So in the case where bitcoin is 15k after 5 years your put option is
worthless and you've just lost whatever the put option cost when you bought
it.

~~~
perseusprime11
Is there any good literature that makes it easy to learn this aspect? How much
does a put option cost typically?

------
brndnmtthws
It's always good to see the same hot takes rehashed over and over on HN. I'm
sure Bloomberg appreciates the ad revenue.

Buffett (with all due respect, and I have a lot of respect for him) doesn't
understand Bitcoin, and doesn't add anything of value to the discussion. He's
never been much of a technology investor, so this should surprise no one.

~~~
samfisher83
Crypto currency is an asset. He has bought and sold a lot of assets over time
and has done pretty well. Google Tulip mania. The whole point of bitcoin was a
form a digital currency. However due to the high transaction fees and
volatility you can't really use it for that. I have no idea where it is going,
but to dismiss a guy who has experience buying and selling things for a long
time seems foolish.

~~~
DennisP
Tech stocks are assets, but Buffett has always said he purposely avoids most
of them because he doesn't understand them well enough. Taking him at his own
word, we shouldn't put all that much weight on his cryptocurrency opinions.

~~~
diab0lic
Cryptocurrency is comparable to a tech stock because computers? That's about
the extent of what they have in common.

~~~
dominotw
I was always curious about his stance with tech, why "he doesn't understand
them well enough." ? What about them that he doesn't understand that he can
with non-tech stocks.

~~~
diab0lic
His game is identifying undervalued assets. If you're not confident you know
how to value the asset you can't identify undervalued ones. I guess the point
I was getting at was valuing a tech stock and valuing a crypto have little to
do with one another. One is a business (which might be used as a speculative
vehicle) while the other is a speculative vehicle.

EDIT: More specifically anything with as much hype as crypto (and tech to a
lesser extent) is not really in the value investing camp in which Buffet is
trading. Avoiding them entirely is a very useful heuristic for him.

------
dmichulke
There are two types of investors. Those that don't understand cryptocurrencies
and just ride the hype train; and those that do.

To those that do, some rich guy's opinion doesn't mean a lot. It's just
another opinion floating in the infinite opinion space. Authority means
nothing to them.

To all others: Sell!

~~~
beberlei
Technical Understanding of cryptocurrencies has nothing to do with financial
understanding.

It feels to me a fallacy to think because you understand the tech, you are
magically a good investor in it.

Buffet is historically one of the most successful investors in assets, and
that usually didn't require him to "technically" understand every detail of
the inner working of the offered product.

~~~
dmichulke
I know it can be read as "technical understanding" but I mean both technical
and financial understanding.

It helps your investment

\- if you are able to distinguish good code from bad (technical skill)

\- if you understand whether a blockchain (or tangle or whatever) is
appropriate for the coin's use case (technical skill)

\- if you understand how fiat money works (financial skill)

\- how hyped and bubbly markets work (financial skill)

\- ...

So it's good to know both and if you do, you arrive at your own opinion /
take, regardless of what Dimon, Thiel or Buffet say.

------
KasianFranks
Buffet, someone that says they don't invest in technology because they lazily
"don't understand it" then advises clients not to invest in it. Also misses
big run ups. Techs are on the top billionaires list for a reason.

------
oliwarner
I've seen plenty of people calling this a FOMO craze and that may well be the
case, and demand may eventually fizzle out. But I think it's far more likely
investors get spooked.

Compared to market investors, relatively few of the people investing in
cryptocurrencies understand the technical underpinnings. All it's going to
take is a spate of high value hacks, another central service provider going
down (MtGox v2) and thefts, or even an act of terrorism funded by Dogecoin...
and you'll see a run. It may not be sustained, but I think this is an
important difference from standard investment theory.

------
legulere
The way this looks this bubble just started to gain access to way more people:
There's kodakcoin and the long blockchain company (formerly long island
icetea): [http://www.wired.co.uk/article/kodak-coin-ico-
cryptocurrency...](http://www.wired.co.uk/article/kodak-coin-ico-
cryptocurrency-crypto)

Poor souls that invested/going to invest and don't manage to jump of the ship
before the bubble bursts.

------
brndnmtthws
Something to consider is that people like Buffett stand to lose the most from
a completely egalitarian financial system, as is professed by Bitcoin
idealists (such as myself). Another perspective here is that Buffett does
understand Bitcoin, and wants to protect his own interests by maintaining the
status quo.

------
perseusprime11
I think except for Bitcoin, most altcoins have no infrastructure or developers
working on it and hence doomed to fail. There is definitely a bubble and
individual investors not knowing how to time the market will fail and lose
lots of their hard earned money.

------
austenallred
>If I could buy a five-year put on every one of the cryptocurrencies, I’d be
glad to do it but I would never short a dime’s worth.”

Interesting to think what five year puts on a cryptocurrency would cost.
Probably more than Buffett or anyone would want to pay.

------
nautilus12
All i could focus on was the statement increase of 20% and how ambiguous that
statement is whether you are referring to the original percentage or a
percentage of that percentage (which is what he meant here).

------
api
Cryptocurrency is currently in the silly phase of bubble. It looks exactly
like the peak of dot.com mania. A crash is coming fairly soon. My top end
estimate for time remaining would be a year, but I'd warn anyone contemplating
a shorting strategy that bubbles have a way of going far higher than anyone
can predict. Many people lost serious money trying to short dot.com and
housing. Still we are definitely in the fragile tail end and the crash could
come literally any second now.

I lived through dot.com and housing mania and I'm having serious deja moo
right now. Deja moo is when you've seen this bull before. On a recent flight I
saw a long format in-flight advertising video for DASH, an altcoin. I repeat:
_airline advertisements!_ If you still have doubts that we are in gibbering
flapdoodle land, head over to YouTube:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXRhIXp4idM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXRhIXp4idM)

We have _celebrity endorsements_ and _music videos_. Run away.

I think the crash is going to look a lot like a bank run. There will be some
piece of news that triggers it (exchange collapse, policy change, who knows)
and then everyone will scramble to cash out. It will quickly become obvious
that there is insufficient USD/EUR/etc. on hand to actually back the current
market cap of the top ten coins. At that point exchanges will halt trading.
Lawsuits will be filed. Exchanges will go into receivership. More lawsuits
will be filed. Criminal charges may start getting filed. You get the picture.

Most of the crime and financial fraud that will happen in this bubble is
happening now or will happen during the crash itself. Most financial fraud is
driven by frantic attempts to cover one's ass. My guess is that top people at
all the exchanges know they are in serious trouble and there are many frantic
meetings going on debating what can possibly be done. Since a bubble is
basically a naturally occurring emergent Ponzi scheme, the only way "out" is
to get more dumb money in so smart money can exit... hence the airline
advertisements and Facebook ads to buy coins. I am currently seeing a _lot_ of
the latter.

Sadly a lot of naive people will lose tons of money. People have been dumping
their life savings and mortgaging their houses to get into this. It could have
follow-on effects on the economy. Some of the big Bitcoin exchanges are
privately insured, so I wonder if it could drag down a few insurance
companies. The rest of the economy is fragile so it's not impossible that this
could trigger a recession.

Cryptocurrency will not go away post-crash any more than the Internet went
away post dot.com crash. We're just approaching the irrational exuberance peak
of the new technology adoption hype cycle.

After the crash it will go back to being a semi-underground niche thing for a
while. Valuations will return to sanity. Those exchanges and other businesses
that do survive will gain a lot of experience and a reputation for stability.
Ironically sometimes the best technical work gets done post-crash, so I wonder
if after the crash we will finally see useful applications built on this tech
beyond its core currency use case.

If you really believe in the long term promise of this technology, after the
crash would be the time to buy in.

P.S.

I really wish high schools would teach a class on finance, and if they did it
should include a lesson on bubbles and a study of a few recent ones like
dot.com and housing. People should be educated about what a bubble looks like
and how to avoid getting ruined by one.

It wouldn't stop everyone. The allure of herd behavior and gambling is strong.
But it would save a few folks from losing their life's savings.

~~~
jsutton
Why does seeing an ad for an established cryptocurrency signal a crash? Do you
think the same thing about tech stocks when you see an ad for a new tech
company?

~~~
api
Have you lived through a bubble before?

One ad in isolation doesn't mean much. It's the whole picture. Bubbles have a
certain look and feel.

I am 39 which is like 80 in programmer years. I've seen a lot of fads and
bubbles in my lifetime. The downside of being older is that you're not quite
able (for many reasons including lifestyle and family) to work like a 20 year
old, but the upside is that you've had a chance to develop a ton of meta-meta
pattern recognition. Your neural net has accumulated a lot of training data.

Like I said I've lived through two mega-bubbles: dot.com and housing. This
looks exactly like the tail end of those.

Deja moo, man. Deja moo.

If I held a lot of Bitcoin I would start dollar cost averaging out, like
yesterday. It's better to miss out on some of the last waves in a bubble than
to get caught in the monster riptide when the crash comes.

Edit: if you _do_ get caught in the crash, do this:

If you can't convert to USD/EUR/etc., take your Bitcoin or whatevercoin and
transfer it _out of an exchange_ and into a private wallet that you control.
If the transaction fees are high just eat it. Better to get it out of an
exchange that could collapse at any second. Then just sit on it. Be prepared
to sit on it for years. It may eventually regain at least some of its former
value. In the meantime buy popcorn and watch the show.

~~~
lurr
You know you have many, many 20-something year old people agreeing with you
right?

~~~
api
I didn't intend to be reverse-age-ist. Was just pointing out that bubbles are
more obvious if you've seen a few, and I must admit that I assumed the parent
to have _not_ seen many since this one is so damn obvious.

~~~
lurr
> I didn't intend to be reverse-age-ist.

No one ever does.

also it's not reverse-ageism, it's just ageism.

------
adamnemecek
“Now when it happens, or how or anything else, I don’t know”. Oh, ok then.

~~~
cjensen
Determining that something is overvalued is vastly easier than determining
when the overvaluation ends.

I was one of those who saw the housing bubble for what it was in 2003. Among
people who saw it, the causes of the bubble and the bubble psychology among
buyers was well-understood. I had zero clue as to when or how the housing
bubble would end. It lasted far longer than I anticipated.

In other words, a smart investor can see when something is priced wrong. But
only a foolish investor will tell you when or how the price will correct.

------
viach
Like everything is, including life?

------
tboyd47
Paradoxically, reading Buffett's essays on investing was one of the major
inspirations for me to invest in crypto in the first place. Buffett typically
only invests in things he understands well, that produce a solid return, and
that are undervalued. These are good principles for anyone to follow.

But when he buys, he either buys _all_ of a company, or enough of it to have
some level of control over it, and that's only possible these days if you're
wealthy as he is. The rest of us are pretty much just betting on horses.

I think I would agree with him about crypto if I was an older person who
already had enough wealth to purchase a significant stake in a real business.
For investors like that, the world is their oyster. For people who are young,
familiar with technology and largely without _any_ wealth, Bitcoin is much
more attractive. It's risky, sure, but to many of us, the entire economy looks
just as risky, and with lower growth potential. This statement would sound
insane to someone like Buffett, but it's the reason why Bitcoin exists in the
first place.

Edit: I'm not advising people make any investments in Bitcoin. Just providing
a counterpoint. Invest in what you know.

~~~
bluedevil2k
> For people who are young, familiar with technology and largely without any
> wealth, Bitcoin is much more attractive.

This is a crazy way for young people to think though and the opposite of how
they should be thinking. If they don't have much wealth, they certainly
shouldn't put it in something so incredibly risky as Bitcoin. They would be
really hurt if/when BTC tanks. Someone who's rich wouldn't really notice 10%
of their net worth gone.

> It's risky, sure, but to many of us, the entire economy looks just as risky,
> and with lower growth potential.

The entire economy is definitely not as risky as BTC. The economy doens't see
50% swings in value week-to-week.

~~~
christophilus
I have a friend who's been investing loads of cash into BTC and doing well. My
advice to him (and others) is to take a certain % out every time it spikes and
transfer it to a more stable currency, while leaving enough in that it can
continue to snowball. This is doable.

For instance, he took $2k and turned it into $12k in a few months. I told him,
"Take 4k out and put it into an index fund." That way, he comes out ahead no
matter how you slice it, even if he loses the rest of what he has in BTC. If
what he has remaining in BTC goes up to $18K, I'd take another $4K out and
move it into an index fund. Rinse and repeat.

It's not as risky if you run it that way.

~~~
mrep
Except you are assuming it will just magically go up. If you are the unlucky
person to do that at the peak, then you will lose most if not all of your
money.

~~~
charlesdm
Which is why you put $2k in, and don't bet your house on it. Or if you do bet
the house, be aware you could lose it all (or be set up for life, of course)

~~~
antisthenes
The overwhelming majority of Americans do not have $2k lying around for a
risky investment, nor do they understand the risks associated with crypto
(especially the speculative coins).

In order for someone to invest in crypto as diversification, on the order of
5-10%, they'd need to have $20-40k lying around.

Needless to say, outside of the tech bubble that situation is quite rare.

------
tromp
I believe that 98% of the roughly 1400 coins listed on coinmarketcap will come
to a bad ending, because the vast majority cannot has no good enough reason to
exist. That includes all bitcoin clones with a few parameters tweaked and a
different hash flavor of the hashcash PoW.

Bitcoin continues to evolve, and will find more use cases with 2nd layer
scaling solutions like Lightning. Ethereum continues to experiment with proof
of stake and sharding solutions. Both will explore ways to increase privacy,
hopefully in ways that do not impair scaleability.

Those two are the only ones I am reasonably sure will still list near the top,
10 years from now.

~~~
sfifs
You're betting around 30 will survive? What would be the reason for survival
of so many?

~~~
saosebastiao
If I'm an american and want to buy something in china, I need to pay renminbi.
Typically this happens via some proxy financial institution, who will process
the transaction through the various distributed global currency markets.

The same could be true in the future of crypto, although national borders may
not be the defining trait, but rather the relative properties of a currency
and preferences of the sender or recipient. There are enough nuances between
crytpocurrencies that there is room for more than a handful.

------
scottmsul
I've heard smart people say bitcoin will plummet because it has no intrinsic
value. Well of course it doesn't! It's a currency. Currencies are an
abstraction for value.

Sure, right now bitcoin is not a good day-to-day currency because of high
transaction fees and slow verification speeds. But there are new altcoins that
have solved both of these, that exist right now!

The real win for cryptocurrencies, in my opinion, is that it's public-key
internet money, while debit cards are private-key internet money. With debit
cards, you have to give someone your private key (16 digit combo+exp
date+security code) in order to transact. Giving away your private key is
prone to fraud, and the fraud-protection mechanism is to give a centralized
authority access to everything you've ever purchased, and they look for
anything "suspicious". On the other hand, with public-key money, when you give
someone funds, there's no risk of them exposing you to fraud or unwanted
transactions afterwards. Even though I understood the public-key mechanism for
bitcoin early on, I didn't realize the full implications for the financial
system until recently.

~~~
bradleyjg
In the old days, government issued currencies had value because you could
trade them in for gold or silver. In contemporary times, they have some value
because everyone that lives in a particular country is legally required to pay
taxes and those taxes can only be paid in the relevant government issued
currency.

Gold is just about the only thing around that acts somewhat like money but
isn't premised on much of anything except social constructed value. Though
even there, there are jewelry and electronic uses.

I could believe that we could could get something else like gold that would be
bootstrapped into having a relatively stable purely social constructed value.
But as you point out, there isn't just one altcoin that has solved (some of)
the problems of bitcoins, there are lots.

There are huge incentives to issue new altcoins and for speculators to buy new
altcoins in hopes of being the winner. And those speculators and creators are
all hoping for this huge volatility (albeit in one direction) while what's
strongly preferred for a medium of exchange is value stability.

I don't see how we get there from here. What process or trends out there look
convergent and stabilizing to you?

~~~
digi_owl
Gold, and silver, was nice metals for making durable tokens off back in the
day. What made said tokens currency was not the metal, but the stamp.

That said, daily, local, transactions were likely done either using simpler
copper tokens or basically a verbal or written IOU.

~~~
Chaebixi
> What made said tokens currency was not the metal, but the stamp.

No, at least not always.

IIRC, in Ancient Greece the money was the precious metal itself and its value
of a coin was reckoned based on its weight and purity. The stamp was just an
indicator of purity. The very largest amounts of money were measured using
weight units (e.g. talents).

It would have been impossible for it to be otherwise, since there were so many
competing coin standards (e.g. a drachma in one city could be made to a very
different standard to another, with standard weights possibly varying by as
much as 50% or something).

~~~
bradleyjg
Right. If it was all about the stamp, the Gresham's law wouldn't exist.

------
pmarreck
Fuck Buffett.

Allow me to rephrase: No one is an oracle. Take everyone's perspective with a
grain of salt. Warren Buffett is completely clueless when it comes to
computers, much less cryptocurrencies.

~~~
dang
Please don't post unsubstantive comments here.

------
polskibus
I wonder if he shorted it if he meant it.

------
at-fates-hands
Wasn't this part of the lure with BTC to begin with? To be decentralized so it
would be outside the bounds of manipulation by guys like Buffet?

~~~
slivym
No. Not at all. The theory was to avoid government manipulation. It's actually
much more susceptible to market manipulation due to the lack of regulation.

------
ghostbrainalpha
Everything that ends, basically comes to a bad ending. Otherwise it wouldn't
have ended.

------
MollyR
That will only happen if fiat doesn't fail first, and its not looking good for
fiat due to inflation and negative interest rates right now.

~~~
nxsynonym
I've seen literally zero evidence that fiat is failing. If you have any,
please provide it.

~~~
koonsolo
This article puts a big question mark of the quantitative easing done in 2008
on the dollar:

[http://www.heritage.org/monetary-
policy/report/quantitative-...](http://www.heritage.org/monetary-
policy/report/quantitative-easing-the-feds-balance-sheet-and-central-bank-
insolvency)

