Reuters reports (June 23, 3010) that Soros is wringing his hands over Germany’s savings policy:
“Germany’s budget savings policy risks destroying the European project and a collapse of the euro cannot be ruled out, billionaire investor George Soros said in a newspaper interview released on Wednesday. Continue reading
From Rick Ackerman:
We all need to get on board with paying down debt like any responsible citizen debtor would do. We owe big-time and this is but a taste of how it may cost us:
- Major employment reductions amongst those working in the public service
- Health care services that are rationed. Fewer nurses, health practitioners and support staff Continue reading
“The bottom line is that we can expect real wages to stagnate for several years, as a predictable reflection of slack capacity in the labor market. While credit concerns will be helpful in augmenting the demand for U.S. government liabilities as a default-(food poisoning)-free alternative to other assets, there is a continued prospect for significant price inflation beginning in the second half of this decade. With the ECB surrendering monetary discipline for the sake of short-term expedience, that prospect has become even more hostile. Continue reading
“Trader Rick Ackerman interprets the cheer-leading in the headlines:
“Could the newspapers simply be misinterpreting the signs? It would certainly seem that way. To take the headlines cited above, we see oil’s price surge as having absolutely nothing to do with a pick-up in demand. Rather, the push toward $90 a barrel represents speculative excesses in the futures markets, exacerbated by the reluctance of traders to take short positions.
How could they, when, on any given day, a terrorist with a missile launcher could cause the global price of crude to double instantly by scuttling a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz?
As for “bets on growth” pushing stocks higher, it is not bullish speculation that has been driving up shares for the last 13 months, but rather a vast excess of liquidity in the financial system.
As for the rise in T-Note yields to four percent, we seriously doubt this is being caused by competition from expansion-minded borrowers in the private sector; rather, it comes from the rising fear among lenders that they will be repaid in a currency whose value looks all but certain to fall precipitously in the years ahead.
If the central bankers truly believe that strong economic growth is about to trigger inflation, why do they continue to hold the federal funds rate near zero?“
The whole inflation-deflation debate has always struck me as misbegotten. People use the terms to mean things so varied that it’s pointless to argue. But such as it is, I’m a firm believer in the deflationary thesis on the macro level… influenced in this by the economist Antal Fekete , and his theory of how capital is destroyed in a fiat money regime.
Nonetheless, I do see consumer prices rising.
In other words, asset prices fall, industry contracts, and unemployment levels stay high, while the stuff on the shelves costs more, insurance and tuition rates climb, and living in general becomes more expensive. Continue reading
“Our grasp of deflation’s logic began with the 1976 book, The Coming Deflation, by the late C.V. Myers, and continued with Davidson and Rees-Mogg’s The Great Reckoning. Although Myers’ work was obviously premature, the concepts it emphasized are timeless, particularly this one: “Ultimately, every penny of very debt must be paid – if not by the borrower, than by the lender.” This is the crux of the inflation vs. deflation debate, and because of the way Myers framed it, we’ve never had any doubt that the U.S. would eventually experience a catastrophic deflation. We were early in thinking the financial system would topple as a result of the allegedly “mild” recession of 1990-91 and its S&L crisis. In retrospect, it’s clear that we lacked the imagination to see that the huge amounts of Third World debt that threatened the global economy at the time were relative chump change compared to the galactic sums that Bush, Obama and the Federal Reserve have put into play in the last three years in hopes of saving the system.”
My Comment
I posted this to support my reiterated position that the recession cannot possibly be corrected as simply as advocates of the stimulus programs like to argue. It´s been in the making for more than a quarter of a century. Can a few months change everything so fast? I could be mistaken, but I don´t think so,…
I also posted the Ackerman piece to counter the establishment media spin that Nouriel Roubini was so much “ahead” of others in predicting the recession.
I call Roubini an establishment figure because of several things, including the fact that he does business with Larry Summers. Here is Roubini warning about housing in 2006...
He himself said the earliest he predicted the housing crash was in July and August 2006.
But by then, even a layman, like yours truly had already done that, and done it earlier – July 2005
And I was, at least in part, drawing on my reading of Mises. org, Lew Rockwell, and The Daily Reckoning, when I wrote the piece…which is where they spotted me on the web, and offered me a gig.
(As I said, I´m always walking into synchronicities in my life..)
Compare that with what other experts were saying in 2005, which is, there´s no housing bubble. That´s Ritholtz, by the way, who writes the excellent blog, The Big Picture (At least, Ritholtz also did say that housing was extended).
But then, in that same piece, Ritholtz also predicted that 2008 would be a good time to reenter the housing market. Oops. [Dec 12. On second thoughts, maybe oops isn´t really warranted. Housing may not have bottomed out everywhere, but I´ll bet you could have picked up good bargains in a few places in 2008]
That shows that you can have very good number-crunching skills, but then miss some of the…..dare I say it?…big picture.…because the big picture has nothing to do with number-crunching but with perspective
And that takes a knowledge of history…. and not simply economic history either. It takes a broader knowledge of the world than professional money-managers usually have.
Meanwhile, compared to Austro-libertarians (see those cited above in Ackerman´s post), Roubini was some twenty-five years late in his analysis.
Yet the media studiously ignores Austrian theory and Austrian theorists (Mark Thornton, for example, called the housing bubble exactly on time and called gold $1200 back in 2005) and stamps approval on people who were either late or wrong…and turns to them for solutions.
Why is all that important? Because it shows the intellectual dishonesty that is at the heart of the corruption of the system. Fraud and force go together, and for political and financial fraud to succeed, they need intellectual and academic fraud to cover their sins… and prep the soil.
Deep lack of trust of anyone who adheres to a rival political theory (or to a rival political party)…. and the arrogance of power…lead the establishment media to rewrite history…. and this intellectual dishonesty is the rag behind which the emperor (the state) hides his moral nudity.
All the bugs who were rah-rahing and telling people to buy gold over $1000, instead of cautioning them to take profits and watch out must be feeling subdued. Despite the thrust upward to yearly highs, the gold action this year never struck me as spectacular at all. Considering everything that’s gone on, it’s been rather staid.
The most common explanation for that from the gold bug community is manipulation. GATA has recently got confirmation of Federal Reserve gold swap arrangements that would certainly fall under the category of market intervention.
A second reason is that we still haven’t come out of the deflationary movement of the economy. We had the first wave of contraction last year, followed by an artificial bounce provoked by stimulus money and a lot of happy talk from the pundits. Now the second contraction has begun. Gold might do well in a deflation relative to other commodities, but so far it’s tended to sink when the market sells off, and that’s precisely what happened yesterday. No surprise there for me at all.
But it seems to have been a surprise to some traders out there. Rick Ackerman at Rick’s Picks expresses his puzzlement over the rush to dollars – it’s a rush to the Titanic, he argues.
Well – that’s why fundamental analysis is something you need to put on the back-burner when trading. I don’t care how bad fundamentals are. Nothing moves in a straight line down or up. Besides that, Ackerman, like many American commentators, assumes that his view of the dollar is the world’s view. That simply isn’t so. The dollar has terrible problems, but at least for now, there aren’t that many currencies that are free of problems – some of them worse than the dollar’s. And since the dollar is the currency used in a majority of transactions, moving out of them (which would be the case if you felt the economy was contracting) would entail buying dollars. It’s simple logic.
Finally – never pile onto a trade that has too many people on one side. That’s logic too.
Gold rose, but only wishful thinking would call it as powerful an upthrust as the gold experts have claimed it was. If you watch gold prices regularly, you’ll know it’s nothing for gold to move $40-50 in a day. It’s volatile. That’s its nature.
Add to its inherent volatility, the other things going on – the G20 meeting, much talk about altering the SDR’s backing, Bernanke’s comments about the recession ending, international tensions over Iran, the fact that September is usually a strong month for gold, Chinese comments about walking away from derivative contracts, China’s instructions to its population to buy gold — put all of that together and it’s not surprising that gold should have moved up by about $70.
If you bought earlier, you should have taken profits and you should be watching to see how things play out. I didn’t buy earlier, so I’m just watching.
I still firmly believe we are due for a correction – and a relatively big one. I’ll buy then (with reluctance – since I think it’s a terrible industry in many ways). But what if we don’t correct, and gold shoots up?
Well, what if? Then I’ll be out. So what? if it goes up, it’s likely to go to $1200 or so. That’s a 20% upside. It could also go down to $800. Equal downside.
That’s not a good ratio of reward to risk. There are any number of stocks which will give you that kind of movement if you like gambling. But if you’re investing – and not gambling – then you should act like an investor and ask if you really want to buy at prices that high at the end of a long upthrust.
It doesn’t make investing sense. So wait and buy on dips.
That said, I’m prepared to eat my words…
PS: Seems like Ackerman is in the deflationist camp (along with Shedlock, Prechter and others) – as opposed to the hyperinflationists like Schiff. [Correction: I accidentally had this in reverse, with Shedlock as inflationist. I’ve posted on why both Schiff and Shedlock are correct – and why that sort of face-off is misguided. Deflation in some areas and over a certain time frame can certainly take place with inflation over other areas. But if you consider inflation to be only the kind that shows up in CPI and on the grocery shelves then obviously, we haven’t see the kind of hyperinflation that gold bugs are waiting for. One thing I fail to see from a lot of people is an awareness that what’s anticipated from the Fed might already be priced into the dollar.]
Rick Ackerman’s Response:
RE: gold and the titanic?
From: Rick Ackerman
Sent: Fri 9/25/09 10:00 PM
Hey, Lila!
I’m using a $1074 target for Comex December Gold and have told my subscribers, many of whom are hard-money guys, that I can’t promise them any higher than that, at least not based on the evidence of GCZ’s daily and weekly charts. My gut feeling is that this is not the rally cycle that will take gold into the Promised Land, assuming it gets there at all. I’m still a hard-core deflationist who believes hyperinflation must ultimately play out, but not in time to save 80 million underwater U.S. homeowners from going through the ringer.
No matter what happens, the Baby Boomers’ retirement plans have already been deflated away to nothing. And concerning the dollar, I’ve moved beyond the idea that the currency is fundamentally worthless, accepting the reality that it trades, simply, as a share in USA, Inc.
With kind regards,
Rick
That’s a pretty good take on things from one of the more astute traders around.