Tags: business

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?

PA Issues Last Minute Bailout to Harrisburg

Published on: 09/12/2010
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: No Comments
Financial Times

The state of Pennsylvania has stepped in to help its capital city Harrisburg avoid a default by advancing next year’s state aid so that the money can be used to make a $3.3m bond interest payment due this week.

On Sunday, Ed Rendell, the governor of Pennsylvania, announced a $4.3m cash transfer and said missing the bond payment was “not an option”. “Harrisburg’s financial future is still very cloudy, and difficult decisions still need to be made to return this city to financial stability,” he said in a statement. “Allowing a missed bond payment, however, would not be a good decision.”

Harrisburg’s strains have been closely watched as other US local governments and states struggle to close gaps in their budget amid falling tax revenues in the downturn.

For many months, Harrisburg officials have been debating how to handle its debt burdens and whether the city should follow a handful of other cities that have filed for bankruptcy.

Harrisburg has already defaulted on $282m of debt in an incinerator project that the city partially guaranteed. The $3.3m payment due on September 15 is an interest payment on the city’s general obligation bond sold in 1997.

Such municipal debt is sought out by many investors in the $2,800bn US municipal bond market because the GO bonds have a reputation as being safer than many other types of bonds.

Payments take priority over other spending. A default on such a GO bond could have knock-on effects across the municipal bond market, increasing the interest payments that are demanded by investors and leading to a reassessment of default risks.

Politically, there can be incentives for cities not to pay bondholders if it means that services do not have to be cut, although many GO bonds are held by local residents who get tax breaks for buying such debt.

As well as paying bondholders, $850,000 of the money will be used to pay Scott Balice Strategies, a financial management company, to “develop a comprehensive plan for the city’s financial stability”.

Last week, Linda Thompson, Harrisburg’s mayor, proposed “painful steps” to tackle the budget deficit including the closing of a fire station and further layoffs. “There are more difficult decisions to be made in the near future,” Ms Thompson said last week.

Mr Rendell said in Sunday’s statement that bankruptcy should not be an option for Harrisburg until all other options had been exhausted. Sunday’s deal includes a $500,000 loan that Harrisburg will have to repay once its finances improve.

Dow Stumbles to Worst August Since 2001

Published on: 08/31/2010
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: No Comments

Stocks limped to their worst August since 2001, battered by a wave of discouraging data that cast doubt on the faltering economic recovery.

Investors now enter September, a month that has been historically challenging for the stock market, against a backdrop of broad uncertainty, including slow growth and deflation fears.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average battled to a stalemate on Tuesday, rising 4.99 points, or 0.05%, to finish at 10014.72. The blue-chip index’s 4.3% drop for the month was the worst since a dismal May, and the measure’s first down August in five years. The Dow had rallied 7.1% in July.

Small-capitalization stocks have taken a big hit this month. Above, a trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange Aug. 31.
More

* September Slump Superstitions

August is typically a positive month for stocks, whereas September declines tend to come as companies begin issuing warnings ahead of third-quarter results and mutual-fund managers get back to work after the typically light volume in the summer.

The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index fell 4.7% for August, while the Nasdaq shed 6.2%. Small-capitalization stocks, a leading indicator of the economy, took an even bigger hit. The Russell 2000 index of small-cap stocks posted its worst August in 12 years, falling 7.5%.

Other barometers of economic activity are flashing warning signals, too. Technology stocks were the weakest performers on Tuesday, taking a hit after technology-research firm Gartner cut estimates for computer sales, reinforcing growing concern about the outlook for the sector.

Intel and Cisco Systems were big decliners, and joined Hewlett-Packard as the month’s worst performers among Dow components, each falling 13% or more in August. The Philadelphia Stock Exchange’s Semiconductor Index fell 11.8% during the month. “The average retail investor is definitely fearful right now,” said Paul Brigandi, senior vice president of trading at Direxion Funds.

Crude-oil prices also fell, dropping 3.7% to bring the month’s fall to 8.9%. Gold edged closer to all-time highs, capping a 5.6% gain for the month.

Stocks made gains early in the day after housing, manufacturing and consumer-confidence data came out slightly better-than-expected. But those gains vanished after minutes of the August Federal Reserve meeting showed policymakers disagreeing over how to support the faltering economic recovery.
Market Data Center

Paul Vigna explains why stocks managed to finish in the green after trading lower earlier and falling below the 10,000 level.

The yen continued to gain on every major currency but the Swiss franc, defying the Japanese policy makers’ efforts, while the safe-haven Swiss currency approached parity with the dollar for the first time in over two years. The euro edged up against the dollar.

The Turmoil Continues

The obvious pick for a topic this week would be yesterday’s fearful plunge in US Markets. However, absent a well-defined culprit for the plunge (so far), it seems pointless to speculate on what really happened. I am still sifting through my own observations of that ten-minute span as well as those sent to me by subscribers. There are reports of index ETFs with near zero volume and unfilled orders at the market. Yesterday should also serve to remind us of the possible pitfalls associated with using stops. There were countless times in 2008 when stops weren’t filled. It happened again yesterday. Truly it was an awful day well before 2:40 with the Dow already off several hundred points. Looking at the bigger picture, yesterday was the fourth 90% down day in two weeks. The market’s disposition has clearly changed for the worse. All this aside, there are a couple of other topics that need to be discussed, which have an even larger bearing on what is going on behind the scenes.

The ‘Strong Dollar’ is Back?

For the past several weeks, the proclamations of a ‘strong dollar’ have been floating around the airwaves. Commentators will point at the rising USDollar Index and mistakenly assume that everyone wants our currency because our economy is recovering so nicely. What they fail to understand and/or convey is how the index is calculated. The index is nothing more than a weighting of the value of various currencies versus the Dollar. The Euro is currently 57.1% of the index and is in freefall thanks to out of control sovereign debt. Our policymakers should be taking notes on the developments in Europe. At any rate, since currencies are traded in pairs, when one half of the pair falls, the other rises. This recent surge in the US Dollar index, while good for us in terms of the cost of European imports has nothing to do with the strength of our currency. I’ve said this time and time again. We have to hope for bad things to happen to the rest of the world to keep the Dollar afloat. The true barometer of the strength of a currency is the cost of Gold in that currency. Even as the Dollar index has risen over the past several months, Gold priced in Dollars has risen right along with it. Gold is sniffing out exactly the points made above. People are fearful of paper currencies, and while they dump the Euro in favor of the Dollar in the short run, they are also loading up on Gold, the ultimate money.

Gold versus USDollar

The reality shown above is not a one or two day event, but a three month trend, which is intact even in a period of extreme market distress. Many people will try to draw parallels between 2008 and the present. By that logic, they argue that Gold should be falling since we’re flirting with another period of all-out liquidation. However, 2008 was largely a liquidity crisis whereas today we are facing that plus the bankruptcy of roughly 20 nations and the possible disintegration of at least one currency along with it. Yes, the sovereign debt crisis is that bad. Granted, the emerging divergence between the equity markets and Gold (shown below) is in its infancy, but it is a very important development and needs to be pointed out now.

Gold versus DJIA

Will Greece Pay Up?

On the front burner and driving the current hysteria is the situation in Greece. While the EU has come together to bailout the embattled nation, there are legitimate fears that:

a) The bailout isn’t big enough and is merely a band-aid. Apparently folks have been paying attention to the bailout of the US financial system.

b) The EU won’t be willing (or able) to extend the bailout

c) The people of Greece will not accept austerity measures

d) The people of Greece will dismiss their standing government in favor of one who will continue the current welfare state.

e) Greece will not pay back its neighbors for the bailout

I would contend that all of these are legitimate concerns. Several days of intense rioting and national strike by the people of Greece are making it very clear that at this point they have no intention of being under the thumb of austerity. This is what happens when you create a welfare state. Again, our policymakers should be taking notes. The country can’t pay back what it already owes, hence the ‘need’ for a bailout. How is a reasonable person to accept the notion that somehow Greece will now be able to pay back the money already owed plus another $146 billion in bailout loans?

Yanking the carpet out from under a welfare state is going to have monumentous social implications. The people of Greece are likely to dispatch their current government in favor of one who will take a disposition similar to that of Iceland and tell the lenders of the bailout money and the country’s creditors in general to take a real long walk off a short pier.

It would be bad enough if this problem stopped at the Greek borders, but unfortunately, it is nearly systemic in Europe, and in fact extends across the Atlantic as well.

Freddie Mac Continues to Bleed

In a harsh reminder of the perpetual state of bailout that the US has entered, Freddie Mac announced earlier this week that it will need another $10.6 Billion from the Treasury by the end of June to cover first quarter losses of $6.7 Billion. This wil run Freddie’s tab to well over $50 Billion with no end in sight.

Back in 2008, the USGovernment pledged to guarantee that both Freddie and Fannie Mae maintain a positive net worth. This has led to periodic infusions of cash into what is now admitted to be a black hole at both companies. What is most concerning about these actions is that there is little or nothing being done to end the reliance on bailouts. At the root of this problem lies the reality that people, for various reasons, cannot pay their mortgages. For many it is because of job losses. If we’re going to borrow and throw money down a black hole, it would have made a lot more sense to use the $50 Billion to build some factories that would employ workers who would produce goods made in the US. That would have put people to work and at the same time would have helped us ease our reliance on foreigners. Instead, we throw the money away, choosing to perpetuate a broken system.

April Jobs Report

As of this writing, the April jobs numbers are available. The economy ‘added’ 290,000 jobs in April, with generous upward revisions to both February and March. What is disconcerting about this report is the fact that we now know that roughly 600,000 new census workers are in place, yet these folks don’t appear to be attributed to the government’s portion of the non-farm payroll. BLS is claiming that of the 573,000 jobs created so far this year that 483,000 were created in the private sector. Yet looking at the Federal Government’s workforce over the past few months there hasn’t been much of an increase at all. So either government is trimming the sails in other areas or the census workers aren’t being counted as government employees, but are instead being credited to the private sector. A recent Gallup survey seems to bear out this discrepancy in that it concluded that government hiring was outpacing private sector job creation. While we don’t yet have the birth/death adjustment to April’s numbers, it is clear that something is amiss. The headline and U-6 unemployment rates rose to 9.9% and 17.1% respectively. State and Local government workforces continued to shrink in April, outlining the dire circumstances that continue to face many geographic areas.

With the cost of insurance on European bank bonds surging to a pre-Lehman high, it is apparent that at the very least, there is again a severe ripple in the credit system, this time at a sovereign level. Given debt levels around the globe it is quite likely that damage control will take precedent over containment.

Debt and an American Bankruptcy

There has never been as much attention paid to the situation of a looming American bankruptcy since the National Debt Clock made its debut many moons ago. It is hard these days to pick up a newspaper or look at a TV program without hearing someone mention our massive debt. And they’d be correct in saying we’re in big trouble. Numerous articles have asked the question ‘Is America Bankrupt?’ While bankruptcy on a family or individual scale is a fairly simple construct to grasp, such is not the case when it comes to a nation or group of nations, as is the case in Europe. This week’s essay is dedicated to making a rather complex question a little easier to understand, and more importantly – to arrive at a more definitive answer.

Probably the most misleading of conclusions is to simply point at the national debt and declare America to be bankrupt. While there is no denying that America is in big trouble with its national debt that will not be what causes bankruptcy. Think of it on a micro scale – a family. Family X has $120,000 per year in revenues and $150,000 in expenses. Let’s say for the sake of simplicity that the family replicates these figures for 4 years. At the end of the 4 years, Family X’s debt (not counting interest payments) will be 100% of its revenues. Is Family X bankrupt? Absolutely not. Truth told, this family could continue to run these annual deficits as long as someone is willing to give them $30,000 in loans each year, dismissing debt service payments for simplicity.

For some reason when it comes to looking at Sovereign debt and debt ratios, the number always used as a benchmark is GDP. I am uncomfortable using GDP in creating a quantitative measurement of solvency since GDP is not some cash account from which public debt may be paid off. GDP is a rather convoluted measure of output, not an expense account. Since the Federal government has assumed this debt on behalf of you and I (a whole OTHER issue), they (we) are responsible for paying it back. Therefore, since the government is on the hook, we need to be looking at the government’s revenues, not GDP when making judgments on the veracity of the government’s financial position.

In fiscal year 2009, the US Government had revenues of $2.198 Trillion. This was a decrease of $463 Billion from FY 2008 according to the Treasury’s Financial Report of the US Government report. The outstanding debt as of this writing is $12.87 Trillion making the debt/revenue ration 5.85. This is a whole lot worse (and much more accurate) than saying that debt is 90% of GDP. As bad as it is having an outstanding debt that is roughly 600% of revenue, it doesn’t even begin to address the issue of bankruptcy.

Debt Issuance

Marginal Utility of Debt Turns Negative

The underlying graphic has been seen in many different places, and with good reason. One of the biggest justifications of borrowing money in any situation is to cause growth. What has become apparent, however, over the past 5 decades is that the utility at the margin has diminished. What this means is that our ‘bang for the buck’ has disappeared. For example, back in 1966, a dollar of debt resulted in nearly $.90 in GDP growth. Today, adding a dollar of debt results in an over $.40 contraction in GDP. While this doesn’t have a direct bearing on national bankruptcy per se, what it is telling us is that our borrowing addiction is now cannibalizing economic growth. Small wonder. However, since economic output has a direct bearing on government revenues vis a vis tax receipts, the broken debt function will sit like an albatross upon our backs as we try to negotiate this brave new world.

We see evidence of the recognition of this reality in Washington as policymakers of varying stripes try to justify a value-added tax to close the gap and give the impression that we are, in fact, serious about austerity. No, this isn’t a joke. As usual, our government is making more colossal mistakes. Of course, real austerity would mean cutting government spending, but it should be clear to all that we will get nothing of the sort; from either bunch.

Marginal Utility of Debt

So, What Exactly is it that Constitutes Bankruptcy?

According to the Kotlikoff-Auerbach model, which is a variant of Irving Fisher’s Two Period Life Cycle Model work circa 1930, the current fiscal gap is approximately $185 Trillion. That number is a week old. Back in July of 2006, the fiscal gap stood at $65.9 Trillion. Anyone see a problem here? This gap analysis includes the full complement of social insurance programs including the new healthcare plan, military spending on wars for global empire, other domestic entitlements, and pretty much anything else you can think of that the Federal government might be involved in. The model looks at future revenues and outlays well into the future using current law and policy and uses the Net Present Value equation to bring the future amounts into present dollars.

To what extent will the Federal government be able to take the output of producers in the economy and dedicate it towards payment of these bills? We were cutting it very close when the number stood at $65.9 Trillion 4 years ago. Instead of addressing it then, we chose to do nothing. $185 Trillion is an unfathomable amount of money, especially for a government that takes in around 1/90 of that each year in tax revenue. And it is a lot for a country, whose total assets don’t even amount to 1/3 of our tab. Simply raising taxes won’t do it. The more marginal tax rates rise, the less incentive there will be to produce in following the old economic wisdom that you always get less of what you tax and more of what you subsidize. The historical landscape is littered with examples of how raising marginal tax rates actually causes tax revenues to decrease. So much for the idea of the VAT saving the day. Taking corporate profits won’t do it either. Raise taxes on corporations and they’ll lay off more employees, raise finished goods prices, and consumption will fall in proportion. So that isn’t going to work either.

An Undesirable Solution

The only real solution to this mess would be to essentially kill off Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits beyond what those programs actually take in each year on a cash basis. Going hand in hand would be the assumption that the contribution rates of these programs would remain the same. Pay 85% of benefits based on what the forecast is for the program’s revenue for a year, then give recipients a ‘catch-up’ payment at the end of year based what was actually taken in. Then start the next year with a clean slate. No unfunded liabilities. Period. At the same time, government would be turned into a flying gas can, being allowed to spend on only the barest of essentials.

Can you see the myriad of problems that lie in such a course of action? Forget the fact that it would be political suicide for anyone to propose this, which is the only reason I can get away with it – I’m not running for office. The culling of government would result in massive unemployment, with essentially no way to pay the benefits. The same would be true for private sector unemployment. The program cuts in social insurance would put most families over the edge since so many people rely on them. Ostensibly, we have no savings as a nation, with more than 4 in 10 having less than $10,000 set aside for retirement or any type of life emergency. In short, too many people rely on these programs making the social insurance Ponzi scheme too big to fail. At the same time, the sheer magnitude of these programs makes them too big to save.

Fundamentally, the question of American bankruptcy (or any for that matter) becomes the simple matter of looking at the bills that need to be paid and determining if they can in fact be paid. They certainly can’t be paid with revenues; we know that. We are already borrowing heavily and there is no indication that will change. Getting back to the earlier example of Family X, conventional analysis keeps telling us that some time uncertain, such a system arrives a point where there is simply not enough money in the system for external lenders to perpetuate it.

Points to Ponder

For all intents and purposes that has already in fact happened and the Fed is currently monetizing roughly 80% of Treasury auctions and bribing banks NOT to lend to the public by paying them interest on the reserves they keep at the Fed. This is all done to avoid what would normally turn into a hyperinflationary explosion. The bills cannot be paid. America is bankrupt. And we’re not alone. This is one of the reasons I wrote two weeks ago that we’re going to likely see a coordinated devaluation of currencies and then default as central banks slam the door on monetary creation. The monetary aggregates are already showing signs of this. It will not be pretty. At the same time expect more cuts in programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. The money will simply not exist to pay all the promised benefits. It will be an in situ default.

There will be those who will say that the above thesis is baloney and that it will be hyperinflation forever and ever. We are so much smarter than we were back in the 1930’s and we should have never allowed that nasty deflationary collapse to occur. However, the debt bubble that exists today on a global scale is several orders of magnitude larger than what existed back then and believe me, banks and governments knew back in the 1930’s about over-issuing paper currencies.

Our national history is littered with these little experiences of wanton money creation. They never ended well. However, looking at it through that lens, the 1930’s allowed the banking elite to ‘reset’ the system and squeeze another 70+ years out of an already broken monetary model. However, the only reason we made it this far is because the first 30 or so of those years we were giving away the national treasure in the form of our Gold to foreigners for the right be the consumers of the world. History doesn’t always repeat, but it sure does rhyme. I certainly don’t have a crystal ball (or inside info for that matter), but to me, the above thesis makes a good deal of sense especially given the untenable financial position we find ourselves in.

We already have what amounts to the sovereign debt equivalent of a commercial signal failure in the case of Greece, and it doesn’t take much thought to come up with the conclusion that nobody wants to step up and bail out an entire country and start the avalanche. It may well end up being that the default occurs for no other reason than it is the path that provides the least resistance.

The Greatest Show on Earth

For many years the title of ‘Greatest Show on Earth’ belonged to Ringling Brothers and its traveling circus. I had the pleasure of seeing the extravaganza for the first time about a year ago and was amazed at the talent of the performers, their skills, and the hours and hours of practice time that went into making everyone sit on the edge of their seats for the better part of two and a half hours. Unfortunately, they’re losing their title. Another circus has come to town which causes us all to be on the edge of our seats, displays little in the form of talent, and yet charges an exorbitant fee for attendance, which some might say is mandatory. Yes, we have our own three-ring circus in America today and it consists of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the US Treasury, and the Commerce Department – all overlaid by the mainstream media.

All joking aside, we’ve again reached the point of absurdity on so many fronts that instead of focusing in on a single topic, it is time to dedicate an entire issue to scanning the landscape in an attempt to make sense of the ludicrous.

Bureau of Labor Statistics – Ring #1

The monthly unemployment numbers were released last Friday by BLS and you could almost hear the clinking of the champagne glasses from the studio in the belly of the NASDAQ. Yes, the US only lost 36,000 jobs in February; good times must be just around the corner! Such a sham was this report that I actually dedicated an entire podcast to debunking it. The bottom line is that the jobs deficit for the month of February was around 350,000 jobs – nearly 10 times what BLS reported. This takes into account the 97,000 jobs mysteriously created by the birth/death model (completely unsubstantiated), the fact that our economy needs to create roughly 145,000 jobs each month just to break even in terms of population growth and new entrants to the work force, and finally the fact that most of the ‘new’ jobs created were temp jobs, a whole bunch of which were for the upcoming census.

Perhaps the most alarming part of this report was the revelation that 31,000 state and local government workers lost their jobs last month. These are the jobs most people make fun of, but would love to have because they’ve always been considered to be a job for life with a great pension. The paradigm is changing folks. Either recognize and deal with it or become cannon fodder for the new economic realities that are emerging. The days of borrow and spend are over; at least for the consumer. As you’ll see in the next section, the US Government apparently thinks it has an exemption from the laws of economics – and common sense.

The US Treasury – Ring #2

In the second ring, we have the US Treasury and its burgeoning FY2010 shortfall. So bad was FY2009’s shortfall that the report that outlines our actual financial position was delayed nearly 2 full months, FINALLY being released back on 2/26 to an absolutely comatose response from the belly of the NASDAQ. February’s outlay was massive, totally $220.9 billion. Much of it was blamed on stimulus spending, tax credits, and TARP outlays of $2.3 Billion (Yes, they’re still handing out TARP money). The media cooed about the Fed’s contribution to the US Treasury, but says nothing about the fact that every dollar in our system is loaned to us by those same loan sharks at interest. Ah, the conveniences of selective reporting. To date, the Treasury’s gap stands at a whopping $651.5 billion, which is around $65 billion ahead of last year’s record pace. If they maintain this pace for another seven months, we’ll have a cash basis shortfall for FY2010 of $1.563 trillion – around $132 billion more than FY2009.

Let’s consider for a second all the money that has been spent on stimulus and other projects. Let’s consider the trillions spent bailing out banks. Finally, let’s overlay all that spending with the grossly awful jobs report from last Friday and the months preceding it. How can anyone in their right mind call the stimulus anything but an abysmal failure? The problem is that the government cannot create jobs. Simple. Yes, the government can pay people to perform services. They can pay for a guy to fill potholes. (Send someone to Pennsylvania while you’re at it please; I’ve seen some potholes here that are bigger than these new ‘mini’ cars everyone seems to want.) Once the potholes are filled, then what? Once the bridge is built, then what? Once the census is finished, then what? It all comes down to sustainability. None of the money that is being spent in ‘stimulus’ is being spent on anything that can sustain itself. It cannot pay for itself. How is an $8000 housing tax credit going to pay for itself? The consumer will take the $8000, spend it and create a temporary boost. Then what? This is why I’ve said for many months now that additional stimulus would be needed. And it will need to continue ad infinitum unless our policymakers wise up and start implementing policies that would foster genuine growth, provide for a return of manufacturing to the US, and create sustainable economic growth. Unfortunately, that just isn’t in the ringmasters’ plan. The new tactic in Washington is to devise stimulus packages, but call them anything but, as if somehow changing the name really makes a difference.

The Commerce Department – Ring #3

Not to be outdone we have the Commerce Department, and more specifically the Census Bureau, in the third ring. This morning’s release of retail sales data will no doubt serve to thoroughly confuse anyone who pays attention to such matters. Granted, it is extremely hard to reconcile, but one must look just in the opening statement of the release to get a window into what is really going on here. Repetition notwithstanding, it must be noted (again) that retail sales are reported in nominal terms. From this morning’s release:

“The US Census Bureau announced today that advance estimates of US retail and food services sales for February, adjusted for seasonal variation and holiday and trading day difference, but not for price changes, were $355.5 billion…”

It would be much more useful, albeit challenging to accomplish, if these numbers were reported in units as opposed to dollars. But we can do some reasonable discounting on our own. The ‘headline’ retail sales number was up .3%. Ignore for a second that the media takes sales ex-autos when that shows a bigger gain or smaller loss. Basically, whichever number is better is the one they’ll focus on. While we don’t yet have February’s CPI, let’s assume the headline is .2%-.3%, which is pretty much in line with what has been reported over the past half year. That pretty much wipes out the headline gain. Our internal metric was .55% for February, which when applied to the headline number would take it to a .25% contraction.

Of course, you’ll never hear this from the belly of the NASDAQ. You’ll be lead to believe that all is well, consumers are tripping over each other to spend money, and that a return to the boom times of 2005 can only be a few short months around the corner. While that would be nice, it would be extremely irresponsible to predict such an occurrence based on the evidence that now lies before us.

Some potentially useful tidbits of information from the report are presented below. It must be noted that these useful bits of information can be gleaned from each month’s report for monitoring purposes.

- Seasonal Adjustments added $38 billion or 12.28% to February’s total.

- Removing the seasonal adjustments, retail sales fell in February from $321.8 billion to $316.7 billion; a change of $5.1 billion or 1.59%

- Gasoline station sales are up 26.4% in the last year.

- The 3.7% jump in electronic and appliance stores comes in concurrence with several states doing ‘cash for appliances’ type programs. See Iowa as an example. The state gave away nearly $200 million in funds to such a program. While that may not sound like a lot, it accounts for nearly all of February’s gain for the sector. And that is just Iowa. I realize this is highly anecdotal in nature, but these are the types of things that can skew reporting and promulgate false assumptions so I’m bringing it up.

- The data for MARTS (Monthly Retail and Food Services Survey) is gathered by sending surveys to 5000 businesses. The responding firms’ data accounts for nearly 65% of the national monthly sales estimates.

- The estimates use the 90% confidence level. If the range established by the use of this level includes zero, then the change is not statistically significant. The headline number was .3% with a range of ±.5%, meaning that zero lies in the range, and therefore this month’s retail sales change from last month is not statistically significant. The December 2009 – January 2010 change of .1% with a range of ±.3% was also not statistically significant. Put simply, retail sales are just as likely to have been flat or even negative as they were to gain .3%.

Obviously the points above are enough to cast serious doubt on the veracity of consumer spending. When one overlays the jobs situation, relatively stagnant incomes, and other factors over top of this, it would seem fairly likely that this report represents something of an outlier. It is also instructive to note the role that borrowed government spending plays in skewing the numbers as in the case of cash for clunkers last year, homebuyer tax credits, and now cash for appliances. Also not commonly known is that Medicare spending also counts as part of retail sales. So if Medicare pays for a knee replacement for your uncle, that counts as retail sales and is parlayed as consumer spending.

Sorry Ringling Brothers, but the government-media complex, which puts out and then appropriately spins the numbers and information has stolen your title of “Greatest Show on Earth”; and they’ve done it hands down.

This month’s issue of the Centsible Investor will be released on Monday, March 15th. It will contain an in-depth analysis of the recent Treasury report on the financial condition of the US, a look at current trends in gasoline production and consumption in light of predictions of $3.50/gallon gas this summer, and a comprehensive study of a rather successful petroleum transportation operation. Plus, we’ll do our usual cutting-edge analysis of the major stock indexes and plot the course for the markets over the next few weeks. For more information, Click Here

Another October Surprise?

I have been asked countless times in the past month why it is that share markets seem to have a difficult time navigating the autumn months. Obviously, there is a healthy amount of fear regarding the next 29 days, as the memories of last year are still firmly intact. Yesterday’s 203-point drop in the Dow Jones Industrials Average has done nothing more than rekindle those sour memories. While the question ‘Why October?’ is largely rhetorical in nature, we can certainly take a look at history for some potential causes for the blowups.

Not helping our prospects for avoiding another October surprise is the fact that almost nothing has been done to rectify the underlying problems facing the US economy. Plenty has been spent to bailout various enterprises, but until a healthy, unsubsidized demand for goods and services exists at the consumer level, we will continue to spin our wheels. A fantastic example is the cash for clunkers program. The massive infusion of subsidies did manage to increase auto sales, but now that the program has ended, we’re heading right back to where we were before. This is evidenced by Ford’s US auto sales immediately dropping 5.1% after C4C was terminated.

The Panic of 1819

The panic of 1819 was the first stoic example of the boom-bust cycle in the nascent United States. Oddly enough, this panic, and the crisis in which we are currently embroiled have striking similarities even though they occurred nearly 200 years apart. For starters, the panic of 1819 was a direct result of internal factors rather than external ones. Occasionally, a crisis in a nation can happen because of someone else’s doing. This one was mainly due to the rampant spread of private bank notes of varying quality and value thanks to runaway inflation caused by borrowing for the War of 1812. Oddly enough, the panic of 1819 resulted in many of the same things we are seeing today: foreclosures, unemployment, bank failures, and significant slowdowns in both agriculture and manufacturing activity. This crisis is important because it is the country’s first example of a homegrown crisis and really determined the anatomy of many subsequent events. Essentially what happened was a boom of sorts, which resulted in malinvestment, financial and economic dislocations, and the decay of underlying fundamentals followed by a severe correction of the imbalances to restore economic and financial order.

However, there was another interesting twist in many of these early panics, and it had to do with our money itself. One of the characteristics of early banks in the US was to offer paper bills that were redeemable for specie (metallic) money. Redeemability was a huge factor in the confidence in the paper bills. Unfortunately, analogous to today’s Fed, these early banks had the propensity to print and circulate bills far in excess of the amount of specie they had on deposit making them susceptible to bank runs. Many of the early panics in the new United States were caused because banks got greedy and overstepped their boundaries. Sound familiar? The more things change, the more they stay the same. Unfortunately, when these bank runs occurred, the banks would merely run to the government who made the rather foolish decision to suspend specie payments on bank notes, effectively ripping off the holders of the bank notes. Incidentally, as a result of the panic of 1819, unemployment in Philadelphia, for example, reached near 90% and almost 2000 workers were put into debtors prisons. In addition, displaced and unemployed workers lived in tents outside the city. I am sure this irony is not lost on anyone who has seen some of the tent cities around America as a result of runaway foreclosures.

The important point underlying many of the panics of the 19th century was the fact that they were rooted in the monetary system and/or the economy in general. This paradigm shifted with the advent of share markets and the panics oftentimes transitioned from monetary and economic panics to stock market crashes and then to a hybrid situation from 1929 through the start of World War II.

The Crash of 1929 – October 24-29, 1929

I am not going to rewrite the chronology and factors surrounding the Great Depression. For anyone who is interested, they can Click Here to read an article entitled ‘Anatomy of a Disaster’ from last fall. This crash was the first well-defined example of a stock market crash and a significant economic contraction happening simultaneously. Not surprisingly, this is where the history books usually get it wrong. They oftentimes assert that the market crash caused the Great Depression. Nothing could be further from the truth. The economic boom of the roaring 1920’s had run its course leaving (as in prior examples) financial and economic dislocations, overleveraged consumers, and a general feeling the boom would last forever. The mountain started shaking in the summer of 1929 and by autumn, panic gripped the markets resulting in a 2-day 23% sell-off in the DJIA. By the middle of November 1929, the DJIA had lost 40% of its value. What happened next is crucial to understanding what is happening right now. The market then made a valiant attempt to rally, bringing back many investors from the sidelines as the Dow mounted a furious charge into 1930. However, the rally didn’t stick, conditions worsened, and by the time 1932 rolled around, the venerable index had lost 89% of its value. It would take 25 years for the Dow to recover that lost value in nominal terms. If you think this cannot happen again, then you are incredibly naïve.

DJIA 1929-1932

The Crash of 1987 – October 14th – 19th, 1987

In financial folklore, the crash of 1987 is one of those events that cannot generally be explained since there were no obvious dislocations. P/E ratios were high, but not extreme, investors were not grossly overleveraged, and the economy was comparatively healthy. There have been many theories about financial raiders cashing in on the sudden decline, and given what we’ve seen recently, the idea of someone triggering a crash for their own benefit doesn’t seem too far out of the realm of possibility. The interesting thing about the 1987 event was the recovery time. On a percentage basis, the loss was massive – 31% in 5 days for the DJIA. Yet it took just a tad under two years for the index to fully recover in nominal terms.

What was rather poignant about the ’87 crash was the response. This was the event that gave rise to the shadowy President’s Group on Working Markets, lovingly referred to as the Plunge Protection Team. In addition, various circuit breakers were placed in the markets to halt trading if certain conditions were met:

Trading Curbs

After the invocation of trading curbs and the President’s Working Group, investors seemed to be lulled into a sense that the markets could never again drop significantly. That has certainly not been the case, and in case anyone is counting, the events are becoming larger and closer together. In 1997 and 1998 we had the Asian crisis and the Russian default, followed by Long Term Capital Management. The new century was ushered in by a vicious bear market thanks largely to overvalued Internet stocks. That bear market ended in 2003 and was followed by a steep nominal recovery in share prices only to see markets fall apart once again after the late 2007 top.

In summation, given everything we know about the underlying economic fundamentals, and the nature of bear market rallies; it certainly won’t be much of a surprise if we have another horrendous October. And if the first day is any indication, it could be a long month.

The Opportunity.. A Year Later

Last October was a pretty brutal time to be in the prognostication business. I had just called Gold the opportunity of a lifetime at the end of August at a price of around $800/ounce. By the time late October came around, the price had fallen to around $725 and the catcalls had begun in earnest. The Keynesian Kakistocracy was out in full force, hurling insults so rich and humorous that I felt compelled to write some of them down. Now a year later it is time to do another quick review and probably set myself up for yet another barrage of hate mail if the price of Gold doesn’t immediately set a course for Mars.

Yes, we are one year removed from that column and Gold is up 25% in dollar terms at nearly $1000/ounce. Detractors will quickly point out Gold’s inability to land and stick above the $1000 level. In return, I will point at the Dollar’s failed rally to 90 as measured by the USDX. Detractors will point to a lack of interest and dividends from investing in Gold. I will point out that Gold is not an investment; it is money. However, for those who insist on comparing Gold to stocks, I will point out that in the year since the last article, Gold is up 25% while the Dow Jones Industrials are down 19%. Detractors will point out the new bull market in stocks. I’ll counter with the fact that stocks are merely in the middle of a countertrend rally within a bear market while Gold’s correction last year was a countertrend move within a bull market. Detractors will point to the save-haven status of the Dollar during times of economic distress. I’ll counter with the fact that Congress has ensured that the Dollar will die of nearly two trillion cuts – in FY 2009 alone. Must we really continue this?

So on the anniversary of the beginning of the first in extremis phase of the financial crisis, we’re going to look at two of the many developing situations that should give us pause when considering the stability of our financial structures despite all the positive rhetoric and hopefully compel us to consider how to adequately protect ourselves.

China’s stop-loss

Earlier this week, China released some rather earthshaking news that was barely reported by the diligent media here in the US. And where it was reported, the significance was completely glossed over or even ignored. The Chinese Government gave a directive to its state banks to cut their losses on commodity related derivatives, many of which are tied to NY and London banks. In doing so, the Chinese government is in essence saying it no longer respects the validity of these specific performance contracts, pointing out that without performance, there is nothing special about the contracts.

This is tantamount to a shot across the bow. The commodities portion of the total notional value of all OTC derivatives as of December 2008 is rather small at .75% of the total. Telling Wall Street to take a long walk off a short pier in this instance will probably not destroy the financial system in and of itself, but it will certainly give the bailout boys a hint of what could happen if the Chinese et al (think BRIC) start backing out of other more important areas such as interest rate swaps which were nearly 55% of the total notional value. (Data courtesy of BIS)

Derivatives

Even the most diehard of Keynesians, who have never seen a deficit they didn’t love, are aware of the fact that it is much more favorable to have foreign cooperation in your currency burying than to have to do it on your own with direct (or around the woodpile) monetization. In that regard, they still need the Chinese if for nothing else than maintaining the façade of vendor financing and the maintenance of the status quo.

Stock markets reacted poorly to the news on Tuesday with the DOW losing nearly 200 points on a day where there was a bevy of ‘green shoots’ economic news in the form of ISM manufacturing data, pending home sales, and motor vehicle sales. Financial stocks led the decline and we must wonder if the smart money had its eyes on the Chinese as the day progressed. On Wednesday, Gold broke out of its recent doldrums and immediately headed north. Granted the technical patterns had been predicting the breakout for the past few weeks, but it is rather coincidental and we have to ask if we are not beginning to see the first shockwave from the recent Chinese action? If so, Gold gets a big thumbs up, while paper assets get the boot.

FDIC: The paper tiger is going to need more paper

“We’ve all seen the good news that has come out on the economy in the past few weeks. While challenges remain, evidence is building that the American economy is starting to grow again. But no matter how challenging the environment … the FDIC has ample resources to continue protecting insured depositors as we have for the last 75 years. No insured depositor has ever lost a penny of insured deposits … and no one ever will.”

The above statement, made by FDIC boss Sheila Bair is overflowing with inaccuracies, but for the purposes of this article, I want to focus on the last sentence. The FDIC’s ‘trust fund’ is dry. At the beginning of 2008, the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) had a balance of approximately $52.8 Billion. By the end of 2008, the DIF had been drained to around $17.3 Billion on the back of just 25 bank failures. To date in 2009, there have been 81 failures, with the two largest failures of the recession coming in the last month. At the end of Q1 2009, the DIF balance had already been reduced to $13.1 Billion. In addition, the list of ‘troubled’ (read: dead) banks now stands at 416 as of the FDIC’s latest quarterly report.

Ms. Bair, in her statement alluded to the notion that the FDIC sets aside reserves for anticipated failures. The problem is that their estimates of the total impact of failures have been categorically low during the recent run of bank failures. In fact the actual losses have been nearly twice (1.94X) the estimates by FDIC. In the following graphic, used in Ms. Bair’s presentation, the FDIC has estimated the cost of failures to be $32 Billion. If recent history is any guide, the real cost is likely to be a tick over $62 Billion. Given that the balance of the DIF is now at $10.4 Billion, I’d say they have more than a small problem.

FDIC Accounting

What is even more interesting is that Ms. Bair considers money borrowed from the Treasury (taxpayers) and thrown into a black hole to be an asset and her chart above fails to recognize that such a loan creates a liability as well. However, this is indicative of our new accounting paradigm. In addition, she asserts that the FDIC is entirely ‘industry-funded’. Not so when they’re tapping a Treasury credit line. While most folks are sniffing a bailout of FDIC, I wouldn’t count on it. So far, the vast majority of the bailout money has found its way to Wall Street, not Main Street.

So while the FDIC is bragging that no insured depositor has ever lost a penny and never will, it must be noted that it is incorrect to assume that Congress is under any type of mandate to bailout FDIC. When the DIF requires massive borrowing from the Treasury, bank premiums will be increased in a vain attempt cover the cost, which will mean higher borrowing costs for the real economy. And if Congress does step in and bailout FDIC, the amount will just get tacked onto the national debt. So while large banks gobble up smaller ones and consolidate on the back of TARP, TALF, TSLF and a dozen other ‘emergency’ Fed lending programs, everyday Americans will foot the bill in its entirety. How’s that for a guarantee?

The above items are just a sampling of where we stand a year later. The opportunity offered by precious metals is the opportunity rid oneself of counterparty risk. The Dollar is the ultimate example of counterparty risk as it relies on the responsible performance of government and monetary authorities to maintain its value. Since the two aforementioned entities have been absentee custodians of the Dollar for so long, its value has deteriorated dramatically. Precious metals have allowed individuals to compensate for that loss in purchasing power. Pundits will say that Gold is a lousy investment and they’re right. The problem with their thinking is that Gold is not an investment; it is sound money and should be regarded as such, not with contempt as is routinely the case in the mainstream press corps.

So as we begin another September, a time of year that seems to bring out the worst in our financial and banking system, I will say it again – Gold continues to be the opportunity of a lifetime.

August Centsible Investor Available

August 2009 Issue Highlights

This month’s Keynote article deals with the US Bond market, the future of interest rates, and potential impact that the oversupply of Treasury bonds will likely have on the equity markets. We also update our powerful proprietary indicator, which has been front-running major turns in the 10-year yield market for nearly the past 3 years.

In the Energy and Precious Metals reports, we analyze the many mixed signals in precious metals, and take a much closer look at the supply-side of the energy markets. Our contention is that mainstream economists and analysts alike are making a critical error when assessing these dynamics. You need to be aware of these misconceptions.

Model Portfolio Recap: 15 of 20 active components are currently in positive territory. 9 of our current components are up over 25% and 4 are up over 50%. The Portfolio has a total return of 3.44% since 11/2007. The fact that we’re able to talk about gains when one looks at the performance of the major indexes during this period is quite remarkable. If you agree, please please consider subscribing.

For subscription information, please Click Here

page 1 of 5 »

Welcome , today is Sunday, 02/05/2012