Archive - Aug 2011

Remember when Jim O'Neill was openly taunting the "bears"? Yeah, those days are long gone. In his latest weekend letter the BRICster proceeds to do what so many have already been doing for weeks and months, namely compare the current precarious global economic situation to 2008: "Another ugly week passes, and it is still only August 20th. What a particularly brutal August this is turning out to be so far, even when compared to many challenging ones in recent and distant years. Although there are many substantive reasons why things are very different, many cannot resist the temptation to make comparisons with 2008. So, I thought I would discuss the comparison this weekend." And like a true Keynesian, O'Neill proceeds to do not just that but to provide his solution to all the world's problems: more G7 intervention. Because they keep getting it so right time after time after time...

German taxpayers all along were wary of becoming the only teat on the EC’s udder for what Winston Churchill once called Europe’s soft underbelly. There is nostalgia, too, for the once high-flying DMark which few wanted exchanged in 2002 for Euros. Now those feelings are exploding with Germany’s vaunted economy going south – but not just for bailouts for Greece, Portugal, Ireland, and possibly Spain, and even Italy.

Perceptions have turned very negative and the media has been increasingly playing on fears (e.g. the U.S. debt ceiling crisis and the big default scare). If the economy gets so bad, and the stock market falls low enough, many believe the Fed will step in with another short term fix to prop up the stock market - QE3.

A few days ago we penned "As Chavez Pulls Venezuela's Gold From JP Morgan, Is The Great Scramble For Physical Starting?" in which, logically, we wondered if the unwind of the great gold cartel, whose purported price manipulation has always resided in the domain of paper, or confidence-based, precious metals, may have started from the most unexpected source: Venezuelan "dictator" Hugo Chavez who just announced that he will not only nationalize the country's gold industry but reclaim his physical gold (however much of it may exist) from custodians such as JP Morgan and Bank of Nova Scotia. The practical implications of this move are substantial- since then gold has seen record high after record high. Whether one attributes these moves to Chavez, or to yet another global "risk-flaring" episode is unclear. Luckily, Grant Williams, author of the always entertaining "Things That Make you Go Hmmmm", provides some very fascinating observations on this very interesting topic...

Well over two months ago we first reminded the Marxists of the world that something big may be coming over the horizon in "Attention Marxists: Labor's Share Of National Income Drops To Lowest In History" a theme, whose violent reprisals in the real world we have been observing since before the Arab Spring began (courtesy of the Fed of course).  Lo and behold, suddenly the coolest thing among the post-sophist punditry is to bring up the name of Marx for this and for that, because, guess what -  he was right all along or something. Where were these same pundits when Marxist postulates were becoming apparent not only across the past year, but past century, we wonder. That said, one analysis that does merit mention is that by UBS George Magnus, who several days ago does the most comprehensive summary of the modern world through the lens of Marxism. His conclusion is spot on: "We have had a gathering crisis of political economy this year, which is partly about economic growth and jobs, but also and importantly, about a malaise in politics and policymaking, in which governments are seen as unwilling, unable, divided or ineffective when it comes to economic management and stability. It’s this resistance or backlash against the political order that runs through the propagation of the political economy convulsions around the world, including, in extremis, the uprisings through North Africa and the Middle East." Granted this is not at all surprising, nor is it odd considering that all that central planning under the modern monetary system has done is to perpetually push off disasters, with each increasingly frequent subsequent one hitting with greater severity until not all the money printing in the world can save the modern broken socio-political (and economic) framework. But everything in due course. And yes, expect many more references to Marx by hollow econo-historians who bring nothing new to the table and merely stampede in where the herd has already boldly gone before.

Those of us who are history buffs, specifically World War II, including events that preceded and postdated that war (1937-1947), tend to look at the Nuremberg Trials (1945-6) with different degrees of criticism.  One does not need to be a legal scholar to realize that much of the Nuremberg proceedings simulated more a lynching party, or a guillotine exhibition, than a trial conducted according to universal precepts of common law.  The defendants, prisoners of war, were not allowed to challenge the fairness of the judges, nor were they given the right to appeal.  Many of the crimes for which they were charged, and convicted of, had been and were being committed by the accusers, or their governments; at times such crimes falling under retrospective law.  And, to top it all, the trials were conducted under their own, and unchallengeable, rules of evidence. Yet, even if History ultimately renders the Nuremberg Trials as illusory justice, or even a mockery of justice, the argument will remain strong that an important purpose was served by these trials: placating the demands for justice of a bleeding continent which had shed 40 million lives and experienced ruinous destruction; even if in reality it was a victors’ justice, it was by most accounts a remarkable improvement over past historical situations where post-war resolution usually amounted to no more than vengeance over an entire nation or people.

Storm clouds over Martha's Vineyard...

It appears that in the aftermath of the recent update of Obama's job approval polls which as we reported just hit an all time low, the market has formally priced in a 50%+ probability that the president will be limited to just one-term. According to the latest InTrade odds, Obama's chance of being reelected in 2012 is now at its all time low, or 48.5% after soaring to a high of 70% back in May in the aftermath of the Bin Laden death at sea. This result however is far from conclusive: InTrade 2012 presidential odds for Rick Perry have risen, but only to 18.5%, Palin is at 5.5%, and Ron Paul's chances are at 3.2% (Bachmann is at 2.5%). So there certainly is some arbitrage to be made there.

As if the global liquidity crunch was not bad enough (as we enter a vacation sleepy week, the key report on Monday will be the ECB's bond purchase update for last week - we estimate another E30 billion in secondary market monetizations, in addition to how many banks pulled dollars from the ECB in the 7 day liquidity providing operation on Wednesday as occurred first last week), geopolitical risk is back after headlines from both Libya and Israel indicate that the Levant region is on the verge of systemic instability once again. The first two stories put Israel smack in the middle of the Middle East action. First is Egypt, which earlier "said Saturday it would withdraw its ambassador from Israel, insisting the killing of five Egyptian security personnel while Israeli forces pursued gunmen across the border was a breach of its 1979 peace treaty with the Jewish state." Complicating matters is the announcement out of Iran, via AP, that "two American men arrested more than two years ago while hiking along the Iraq-Iran border have been sentenced to eight years in prison on charges that include espionage, state TV reported Saturday, a sharp blow to hopes their release was imminent. The announcement seemed to send a hard-line message from Iran's judiciary — which answers directly to the ruling clerics — weeks after the country's foreign minister suggested that the trial of Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal could clear the way for their freedom. It also was likely to raise speculation about Iran using the Americans as political bargaining chips and could bring added tensions to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's expected visit to New York next month." The cherry on top is late news out of Libya that the local rebel movement may be making headway (since denied by the government) in taking over Tripoli. Net result will be even more instability in the crude market which has been expected to drop courtesy of the recent spike in deflationary expectations. Alas, when geopolitics enters the equation, the only certain thing is a surge in uncertainty. That this will likely not benefit global equity markets goes without question.

Courseille had created something that was not only delicious, but an additional revenue stream for his employer (the “chicken” sells for $12, and to be honest, I would have paid $20 for it, it’s that good). Whether the guy knows it or not, he’s a marketing genius (on top of a master pastry chef). I had to meet him.

In plain terms, we’re entering a period in history that will rival the Revolutionary war. This country will be very very different by the time it has ended. Many people will lose everything in this mess. Yes, everything. 

In order for the  FOMC to keep the funds rate within the desired range, it will have to purchase whatever government debt exists or is issued into the market.  This amounts to establishing a de facto QE3 policy without announcing ex ante the amount of securities it intends to purchase.  Instead, the amounts purchased will be “whatever it takes.”

About a decade ago I realized we were putting the finishing touches on our own extinction party, with the party probably over by 2030. During the intervening period I’ve seen nothing to sway this belief, and much evidence to reinforce it. Yet the protests, ridicule, and hate mail reach a fervent pitch when I speak or write about the potential for near-term extinction of Homo sapiens.

“We’re different.”
“We’re special.”
“We’re too intelligent.”
“We’ll find a way out. We always do.”

We’re humans, and therefore animals. Like all life, we’re special. Like all organisms, we’re susceptible to overshoot. Like all organisms, we will experience population decline after overshoot. Let’s take stock of our current predicaments, beginning with one of several ongoing processes likely to cause our extinction. Then I’ll point out the good not quite so bad news.

They say that the simplest analysis is always the most powerful one. That appears to certainly have been the case with our presentation of global banks' Tangible Common Equity ("TCE") ratio to total assets from last Thursday, and specifically our observation of the glaringly obvious, namely that of the 30 most undercapitalized banks in the world, Canadian ones represented a whopping 33% of all. Note: this was not an attack on Canada, this was not some hedge-fund inspired start of a bear-raid on the Canadian banking system, this was nothing but an attempt to warn our readers of, again, what is out there for anyone (who is not blinded by cognitive bias) to see for themselves. Alas, the reaction to that post, particularly in the Canadian media, has been swift and severe, provoking such respected publications as The Globe And Mail to pen not one but two responses, one being the by now so-oft discredited attempt to ignore the message and target the messenger (Who is Zero Hedge, and why should we care?), followed by a more coherent attempt to debunk the claim that a painfully low TCE ratio is never a good thing (Is Zero Hedge looking at the wrong numbers?). The argument of G&M's Boyd Erman boils down to the statement that TCE is not a fair indicator of balance sheet stress and instead one should focus on a "Tier 1" approach of risk estimation, one that includes Risk Weighted Assets. Here we could provide the reference to Lehman's Tier 1 ratio, which was well in the double digits on the day when it filed for bankruptcy, even as the bank's true leverage was about 40x, a number which eventually brought on the biggest bankruptcy in history. We could but we won't, instead we will ask, rhetorically, who is John Paulson, and why should the Globe and Mail care?

What happens when Risk is priced too cheap for too many years.....