Archives: October 2010

Intended Consequences?

As was generally expected, this morning’s employment situation report gave another bundle of evidence to suggest that there is in fact no recovery, never was, and that several trillion dollars of ‘stimulus’ has disappeared down a rat hole of greed. In typical fashion, the mainstream press tried yet again to put a positive spin on a negative reality, pointing to the fact that we should rest easy; the Fed is going to buy government bonds to save the day. It is in total wonderment that I listen to these happy expectations and can only guess if these people know what they’re even wishing for. Let’s look at a few examples.

AP Business Writer Stephen Bernard writes:

“High unemployment remains a major hurdle as economic growth continues to be sluggish. The Labor Department’s report, considered the most important on the economic calendar, did little to alter anyone’s perception about the strength of the economy.

While the job growth remains scarce, there could be a silver lining. Expectations are growing that the Federal Reserve will try to stimulate the economy through the purchase of government bonds. The gloomy jobs report could give the Fed more incentive to act.”

While this is certainly true, do we really want the private, non-government Federal Reserve buying more bonds? It is bad enough that the Chinese already own massive portions of our future economic output in the form of Treasury Bond holdings. They own scads of mortgage bonds as well. Does anyone out there feel comfortable about the Chinese holding the note on your house? How about the Fed? Do we really want them owning the notes on any more of our homes? I asserted years ago that the housing bubble was nothing more than a property-grab and all indications are that it has been little more than just that.

Let’s look at another news outlet and their thoughts. Greg Robb at Marketwatch writes:

“There is little in the data to suggest further easing measures aren’t up the Federal Reserve’s sleeve. Prior to the report, economists had said that a strong U.S. payrolls number would be needed to take pressure off the Fed to deliver a second round of quantitative easing.”

Essentially the same pabulum from another ‘independent’ media outlet. The fancy term quantitative easing (QE) must be explained to the masses. We’ll try to sum it up in a few sentences so everyone is clear. QE entails the printing of money. It is what happens when interest rates are already at zero. The Fed cannot reasonably pay people to borrow money (negative interest rates) and expect this charade to continue. So QE is the printing of money, which is then used to buy certain strategic assets such as stocks, bonds, etc in the hopes of goosing markets and giving the Treasury ill-gotten cash with which to continue ‘stimulating’ the economy. QE is, in essence, declaring a fire sale on America, then creating the money from nothing to take advantage of the sale.

To make an analogy, it is kind of like you and I lending a bunch of money to a store, getting the store hooked on easy credit, etc. etc. then when it breaks, walking into the store with a pile of Monopoly money and buying the entire inventory. This is robbery and needs to be called for what it is.

And now, perhaps my favorite, coming from Reuters:

“Expectations the Fed, which has already pumped $1.7 trillion into the economy by buying mortgage-related and government bonds, would announce a second phase of quantitative easing at its Nov. 2-3 meeting have buoyed U.S. stocks and prices for shorter-dated government debt and have undercut the dollar.”

There is QE again. Sounds mighty fancy to the untrained ear, doesn’t it? Notice that even Reuters gives the truth almost as an afterthought. QE, and/or the expectation thereof, has undercut the dollar. That affects Main Street. Wages are stagnant, jobs are very hard to come by, and the Fed is purposely undertaking a course of action that will further squeeze Main Street by driving up the cost of living. While the Fed might get a 9.5 for style points and the fancy terminology, it gets a big, red, F- in terms of stewardship of its two legal mandates: maximum employment and price stability. Round 1 of QE didn’t help and there is no reason to believe that more of the same will do any better.

And how about the recent rally in stocks? Are any of these gains real? Of course not. The dollar is tanking while stocks, Gold, and oil take off. The Fed is trying to rekindle inflationary expectations to artificially pump markets. If they are successful, it will most assuredly be at the expense of the American taxpayer-consumer.

This is the crossroads at which we now stand. The M3 contraction that has been occurring for the entirety of 2010 will either be allowed to continue, which would have a cleansing affect despite the many negative manifestations in the real economy, or the Fed will simply try to overwhelm market forces and fill a $200+ trillion fiscal gap with dumpsters of worthless paper dollars.

So far the Fed et al have proven to be completely unable to perfect the ‘kick the can down the road’ approach. The economy is sliding despite QE and other miscellaneous efforts to this point. Certainly things might be ‘worse’ had they done nothing, but we can certainly make the argument that in this case, the cure is worse than the disease.

2009 Jobs Losses Probably Worse than Reported – Reuters

Published on: 10/07/2010
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: No Comments

(Reuters) – The economy likely shed more jobs last year than previously thought, but analysts say the undercount by the government should prove less severe than it did during depths of the recession.

The Labor Department on Friday will give an initial estimate of how far off its count of employment may have been in the 12 months through March. The government admitted earlier this year that its count through March 2009 had overstated employment by 902,000 jobs.

Analysts expect a much smaller miscount this time, given the economy’s growth spurt in the second half of last year.

The department blamed its 902,000 miss on faulty estimates of how many companies were created or destroyed, and it has not yet made any changes to the so-called birth-death model that produces this projection.

Once a year, it compares payroll data from its monthly surveys of employers with unemployment insurance tax reports, which give it a much more comprehensive view of actual employment. It uses these tax records to produce a “benchmark revision” to adjust for discrepancies.

“That adjustment is probably overstating the employment gains because we are in a very subdued recovery and the likelihood is that the birth-death factor is making the data look better than it otherwise would be,” said Neil Dutta, an economist at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch in New York.

Tax records will probably show more businesses closed than initially estimated by the Labor Department, analysts said.

“It’s not going to be that severe (as last time). A lot of it is sort of aligned with the performance in the broader economy,” Dutta said, noting that the economy picked up in the second half of 2009 and entered this year strongly.

Other economists shared that view, while some said it was even possible that employment would be revised upward, citing other data, including a separate Labor Department survey of households, that had outperformed the monthly payrolls count.

They also said that while the department had not changed the birth-death model, it had incorporated new data from a period in which business start-ups were weak.

“Potentially, the model could have underpredicted for a time. With the incorporation of this new data you may see an upward revision,” said Zach Pandl, U.S. economist at Nomura Securities International in New York.

“In our view, the risks are tilted toward an upward revision.”

Whatever the outcome, it will probably have little implication for U.S. monetary policy, given that it is backward-looking and the economic recovery is very weak by historical standards.

But it could shed more light on the nature of the unemployment problem confronting the economy, with opinion increasingly divided on whether it is cyclical or structural.

Analysts will be looking at the sectors where job losses are concentrated. Steeper job losses than already reported in manufacturing and construction could strengthen the argument of a structural unemployment problem.

Dollar Slide Continues; Gold at New Record

TOKYO (AFP) – The dollar tumbled to a fresh 15-year low at 82.22 against the yen in Tokyo trading hours on Thursday on persistent fears over the US economic outlook.

The dollar fell from 82.87 in earlier trade to well below the level at which Japan last month carried out its first currency market intervention since 2004 to weaken the yen and protect an export-led recovery.

It later strengthened back to the mid 82-yen level.

The markets increasingly expect the US Federal Reserve to pump more money into the system to boost the flagging economy, even if doing so weakens the dollar and risks fanning inflation.

“The basic trend is dollar selling on the expected credit easing… The market is now sensitive to any negative news on the US economy,” said Yasuyuki Takeuchi, dealer at Mitsubishi UFJ Trust and Banking.

The Australian dollar on Thursday surged to an all time high of around 99.00 US cents, traders said, outstripping the record of 98.49 since it was allowed to float in December 1983.

The euro was trading close the key 1.40 dollar level, at around 1.3983.

“A lot of the trading community thinks this has further to go,” Daragh Maher, a senior currencies analyst at Credit Agricole in London told Dow Jones Newswires.

The greenback has been pressured after a report from payrolls firm ADP showed an unexpected drop in private sector jobs in September, highlighting fears about the lagging economic recovery.

The data added to worries that a closely watched government survey on non-farm payrolls for September due Friday may also indicate weakness.

The markets increasingly expect the US Federal Reserve to pump more money into the system to boost the flagging economy, even if doing so weakens the dollar and risks fanning inflation.

Tokyo has also repeatedly warned it is ready to step into the markets again, with Prime Minister Naoto Kan threatening further “decisive” steps if necessary on Thursday.

The yen’s continued strength follows moves by the Bank of Japan on Tuesday to adopt a near zero-rate policy and new pump-priming measures in a bid to spur growth, beat deflation and address the impact of the surging yen on the economy.

The strong yen has hurt Japan’s exporters, making their goods more expensive and eroding overseas profits when repatriated. Exports expanded at their slowest pace this year in August, with falling demand adding to their woes.

A strong domestic currency also makes imports cheaper, helping prolong a damaging deflationary cycle where consumers hold off on purchases in the hope of further price drops, clouding future corporate investment

Goldman: Economy to be ‘Very Bad’ for Next 6 Months

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said the U.S. economy is likely to be “fairly bad” or “very bad” over the next six to nine months.

“We see two main scenarios,” analysts led by Jan Hatzius, the New York-based chief U.S. economist at the company, wrote in an e-mail to clients. “A fairly bad one in which the economy grows at a 1 1/2 percent to 2 percent rate through the middle of next year and the unemployment rate rises moderately to 10 percent, and a very bad one in which the economy returns to an outright recession.”

The Federal Reserve will probably move to spur growth as soon as its next meeting on Nov. 2-3, Hatzius said. Expectations for central bank action have already led to lower interest rates, higher stock prices and a weaker dollar, according to Goldman, one of the 18 primary dealers that are required to bid at government debt sales.

Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and his fellow policy makers are debating whether to increase Treasury purchases to spur the U.S. economy by keeping borrowing costs low. U.S. five-year yields dropped to a record 1.1755 percent today amid signs the recovery is losing momentum.

The “fairly bad” outlook for slow growth and rising unemployment without a recession will probably be the one that occurs, the e-mail said.

Renewed Recession

Hatzius’ note reiterated comments he made yesterday at a forum in Washington, when he placed the odds of a renewed recession at 25 percent to 30 percent. He told reporters that was up from 15 percent to 20 percent at the start of the year.

Another $1 trillion of asset purchases by the Fed would probably lower long-term interest rates by about 0.25 percentage point, adding a “few tenths of additional GDP growth,” he said yesterday.

The Fed bought $1.7 trillion worth of Treasury and mortgage debt in a program that ended in March. The purchases helped push mortgage rates to historic lows.

New York Fed President William Dudley, the Boston Fed’s Eric Rosengren and Chicago’s Charles Evans have all advocated further Fed action. Bernanke said Oct. 4 that restarting large- scale asset purchases would probably spur growth, after saying last week the central bank has a duty to aid the economy as unemployment holds near 10 percent.

Investors forecasting Fed purchases pushed two-year Treasury yields to a record low of 0.3987 percent on Oct. 4. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index rose 2.1 percent yesterday to the highest level since May.

The Dollar Index, which IntercontinentalExchange Inc. uses to track the greenback against the currencies of six major U.S. trading partners, slumped 0.9 percent yesterday to the lowest since January.

Martenson: Things Will Unravel Faster Than You Think

Chris Martenson

By my analysis, we are not yet on the final path to recovery, and there are one or more financial ‘breaks’ coming in the future.  Underlying structural weaknesses have not been resolved, and the kick-the-can-down-the-road plan is going to encounter a hard wall in the not-too-distant future.  When the next moment of discontinuity finally arrives, events will unfold much more rapidly than most people expect.

My work centers on figuring out which macro trends are in play and then helping people to adjust accordingly.  Based on trends in fiscal and monetary policy, I began advising accumulation of gold and silver in 2003 and 2004.  I shorted home builder stocks beginning in 2006 and ending in 2008.  These were not ‘great’ calls; they were simply spotting trends in play, one beginning and one certain to end, and then taking appropriate actions based on those trends.

We happen to live in a non-linear world; a core concept of the Crash Course.  But far too many people expect events to unfold in a more or less orderly manner, with plenty of time to adjust along the way.  In other words, linearly.  The world does not always cooperate, and my concern rests on the observation that we still face the convergence of multiple trends, each of which alone has the power to permanently transform our economic landscape and standards of living.

Three such trends (out of the many I track) that will shape our immediate future are:

  • Peak Oil
  • Sovereign insolvency
  • Currency debasement

Individually, these worry me quite a bit; collectively, they have my full attention.

History suggests that instead of a nice smooth line heading either up or down, markets have a pronounced habit of jolting rather suddenly into a new orbit, either higher or lower.  Social moods are steady for long periods, and then they shift.  This is what we should train ourselves to expect.

No smooth lines between points A and B; instead, long periods of quiet, followed by short bursts of reformation and volatility.  Periods of market equilibrium, followed by Minsky moments.  In the language of the evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould, we live in a system governed by the rules of “punctuated equilibrium.”

Complex Systems

Our economy is a complex system.  The key feature of such systems is that they are inherently unpredictable with respect to the timing and severity of specific events.  For the uninitiated, they can look enormously fragile and prone to flying apart at any minute; for the seasoned observer, there is an appreciation that the immense inertia of the economic system will almost always delay and dampen the eventual adjustments.

Like everybody else, I have no idea exactly what’s going to happen, or precisely when.  Anybody who says they do know should be greeted with a furrowed brow and a frown of suspicion.  As my long-time readers know, I prefer to assess the risks and then take steps to mitigate those risks based on likelihood and impact.

Which means that although we cannot predict the size (exactly how much) or the timing (precisely when) of economic shifts or world-changing events, we can certainly understand the risks and the dimensions of what might happen.  Just as we cannot predict when an avalanche will release from steep slope, or even where or how big it will be, we can readily predict that constant snowfall coupled with the right temperature conditions will lead to an avalanche sooner or later, and more likely in this gully than that one.  Given certain conditions, we might expect one that is larger or smaller than normal.  Although we don’t know exactly when or how much, we do know that when snow accumulates, so do the risks of more frequent and/or larger avalanches.

Such is the nature of complex systems.  While inherently unpredictable, they can still be described.  The most important description of any complex system is that it owes its order and complexity to the constant flow of energy through it.  Complex systems require inputs.  This is one way in which we can understand them.

Given this view, one easy “prediction” is that an economy without increasing energy flows running through it will stagnate.  To take this further, an economy that is being starved of energy becomes simpler in the process — meaning fewer jobs, less items produced, and a reduced capacity to support extraneous functions.

Accepting “What Is”

The most important part of this story is getting our minds to accept reality without our passionate beliefs interfering.  By ‘beliefs’ I mean statements like these:

  • “Things always get better and are never as bad as they seem.”
  • “If Peak Oil were ‘real,’ I would be hearing about it from my trusted sources.”
  • “Dwelling on the negative is self-fulfilling.”

While each of these things might be true, they also might be false and therefore misleading, especially during periods of transition.  Our job is to remain as dispassionate and logical as possible.

Let’s now examine more closely the three main events that are converging — Peak Oil, sovereign insolvency, and currency debasement — using as much logic as we can muster.

Peak Oil

Peak Oil is now a matter of open inquiry and debate at the highest levels of industry and government.  Recent reports by Lloyd’s of London, the US Department of Defense, the UK industry task force on Peak Oil, Honda, and the German military are evidence of this.  But when I say “debate,” I am not referring to disagreement over whether or not Peak Oil is real, only when it will finally arrive.  The emerging consensus is that oil demand will outstrip supplies “soon,” within the next five years and maybe as soon as two.  So the correct questions are no longer, “Is Peak Oil real?” and “Are governments aware?” but instead, “When will demand outstrip supply?” and “What implications does this have for me?”

It doesn’t really matter when the actual peak arrives; we can leave that to the ivory-tower types and those with a bent for analytical precision.  What matters is when we hit “peak exports.”  My expectation is that once it becomes fashionable among nation-states to finally admit that Peak Oil is real and here to stay, one or more exporters will withhold some or all of their product “for future generations” or some other rationale (such as, “get a higher price”), which will rather suddenly create a price spiral the likes of which we have not yet seen.

What matters is an equal mixture of actual oil availability and market perception.  As soon as the scarcity meme gets going, things will change very rapidly.

In short, it is time to accept that Peak Oil is real – and plan accordingly.

Sovereign Insolvency

Once we accept the imminent arrival of Peak Oil, then the issue of sovereign insolvency jumps into the limelight.  Why?  Because the hopes and dreams of the architects of the financial rescue entirely rest upon the assumption that economic growth will resume.  Without additional supplies of oil, such growth will not be possible; in fact, we’ll be doing really, really well if we can prevent the economy from backsliding.

Virtually every single OECD country, due to outlandish pension and entitlement programs, has total debt and liability loads that Arnaud Mares (of Morgan Stanley) pointed out have resulted in a negative net worth for the governments of Germany, France, Portugal, the US, the UK, Spain, Ireland, and Greece.  And not by just a little bit, but exceptionally so, ranging from more than 450% of GDP in the case of Germany on the ‘low’ end to well over 1,500% of GDP for Greece.

Such shortfalls cannot possibly be funded out of anything other than a very, very bright economic future.  Something on the order of Industrial Age 2.0, fueled by some amazing new source of wealth.  Logically, how likely is that?  Even if we could magically remove the overhang of debt, what new technologies are on the horizon that could offer the prospect of a brand new economic revival of this magnitude?  None that I am aware of.

In the US, the largest capital market and borrower, even the most optimistic budget estimates foresee another decade of crushing deficits that will grow the official deficit by some $9 trillion and the real (i.e., “accrual” or “unofficial”) deficit by perhaps another $20 to $30 trillion, once we account for growth in liabilities.  This is, without question, an unsustainable trend.

It’s time to admit the obvious:  Debts of these sorts cannot be serviced, now or in the future.  Expanding them further with fingers firmly crossed in hopes of an enormous economic boom that will bail out the system is a fool’s game.  It is little different than doubling down after receiving a bad hand in poker.

The unpleasant implication of various governments going deeper into debt is that a string of sovereign defaults lies in the future.  Due to their interconnected borrowings and lendings, one may topple the next like dominoes.

However, it is when we consider the impact of the widespread realization of Peak Oil on the story of growth that the whole idea of sovereign insolvency really assumes a much higher level of probability.  More on that later.

For now we should accept that there’s almost no chance of growing out from under these mountains of debts and other obligations.  We must move our attention to the shape, timing, and the severity of the aftermath of the economic wreckage that will result from a series of sovereign defaults.

Currency Wars

We could trot out a lot of charts here, examine much of history, and make a very solid case that once a country breaches the 300% debt/liability to GDP ratio, there’s no recovery, only a future containing some form of default (printing or outright).

In a recent post to my enrolled members, I wrote:

The currency wars have begun, and the implications to world stability and wealth could not be more profound. Fortunately, all of my long-time enrolled members are prepared for this outcome, which we’ve been predicting here for some time.

When pressed, the most predictable decision in all of history is to print, print, print.  So I can’t take credit for a ‘prediction’ that was just slightly bolder than ‘predicting’ which way a dropped anvil will travel; down or up?

The only problem is, widespread currency debasements will further destabilize an already rickety global financial system where tens of trillions of fiat dollars flow daily on the currency exchanges.

You can be nearly certain that every single country is seeking a path to a weaker relative currency. The problem is obvious: Everybody cannot simultaneously have a weaker currency. Nor can everybody have a positive trade balance.

If a country or government cannot grow its way out from under its obligations, then printing (a.k.a. currency debasement) takes on additional allure.  It is the “easy way out” and has lots of political support in the home country.  Besides the fact that it has already started, we should consider a global program of currency debasement to be a guaranteed feature of our economic future.

Conclusion (to Part I)

Three unsustainable trends or events have been identified here.  They are not independent, but they are interlocked to a very high degree.  At present I can find no support for the idea that the economy can expand like it has in the past without increasing energy flows, especially oil.  All of the indications point to Peak Oil, or at least “peak exports,” happening within five years.

At that point, it will become widely recognized that most sovereign debts and liabilities will not be able to be serviced by the miracle of economic growth.  Pressures to ease the pain of the resulting financial turmoil and economic stagnation will grow, and currency debasement will prove to be the preferred policy tool of choice.

Instead of unfolding in a nice, linear, straightforward manner, these colliding events will happen quite rapidly and chaotically.

By mentally accepting that this proposition is not only possible, but probable, we are free to make different choices and take actions that can preserve and protect our wealth and mitigate our risks.

What changes in our actions and investment stances are prudent if we assume that Peak Oil, sovereign insolvency, and currency debasement are ‘locks’ for the future?

« page 2 of 2

Welcome , today is Friday, 05/18/2012