• Reggie Middleton
    03/19/2010 - 10:03
    As I warned in my Pan-European Sovereign Debt Crisis series and amid a depression, this Eastern European government has collapsed. Western European countries (and their banks) have material claims within this country, and when combined with pressure from the PIIGS, may be the ones that set off the financial/economic contagion daisy chain. It is difficult to determine who sets it off, which is why it is best to attempt to determine the path of the contagion instead...
  • Leo Kolivakis
    03/19/2010 - 07:34
    A recent joint poll by Responsible-Investor.com, the Network for Sustainable Financial Markets and AQ Research, showed more than 90% of investment professionals believe moral hazard has increased. And yet, global pension funds and wealth funds who manage trillions of dollars have not taken the lead to push for financial reforms. Why do they acquiesce, and not push for meaningful post-crisis reforms?
  • Econophile
    03/19/2010 - 00:48
    The fact that Google will not kowtow to Bejing and will walk away from the market of greatest potential is to me a commendable act. This is a companion piece to my series, "China's Fragile Economy, Its Housing Bubble, and What It Means To Us." China is not a liberal country, by far.

Is The Fed Enabling Foreign Central Banks To Swap Out Their Agency Debt Into Treasuries?

Tyler Durden's picture




Another quite intriguing piece by Chris Martenson "The Shell Game - How The Federal Reserve Is Monetizing Debt" reveals some of the intricacies of the Fed's monetization game and, by digging deeper into the Fed's Custody Account, demonstrates not just how the Federal Reserve is enabling foreigners to swap out of Agencies into Treasuries, but how it is implicitly monetizing a markedly larger portion of debt than is assumed.

For the full details of the article we eagerly refer readers to the original Martenson piece, but in a nutshell here are the components of what Martenson coins "The Fed's Shell Game":

It is no secret that capital flows into the US have declined precipitously, a fact that can be substantiated by TIC flows and by the St. Louis Fed:

Comparing this data with TIC releases, indicates that from January to May the total capital outflows from the U.S. amount to ($314) billion in assets, consisting of central bank purchases of $50 billion, however, matched with private investor dispositions of $364 billion.

Ignoring the implications of what this decline would mean for an economy that relies exclusively on credit growth in order to perpetuate the monetary Ponzi scheme that the US economy has been for years, the simple conclusion here is that a combination of declining consumer credit and foreign interest for US debt purchases has very negative implications for the credit bubble the Federal Reserve is trying to reflate. As for the consequences for the U.S. Dollar as a result of this activity, these have recently become all too clear.

All well and good up to here.

However, what is very troubling is what Martenson points out is the cumulative change in the Fed's Custody Account, which at last check was roughly $2.8 trillion, and represented by Martenson's chart below:

Martenson provides a good explanation of what the function of the Custody Account is:

The Federal Reserve actually holds the bonds (or rather an electronic entry representing the bonds) in a special account for these various central banks.  This is called the "Custody Account" and it holds US debt 'in custody' for various central banks. Think of it as a magnificently vast brokerage/checking account, run by the Federal Reserve for central banks, and you'll have the right image.

Indeed, while TIC may indicate one thing, an observation of the CA indicates that foreigned have in fact been accumulating substantial amounts of US debt since the crisis began in earnest, at a rate that has not budged from its long-term average.

Yet the concerning conclusion by observing the above chart is the dramatic divergence in the CA of Treasury versus Agency holdings. Says Martenson:

Here we note that agency bonds peaked in October of 2008 at nearly a trillion dollars but have declined by $178 billion since then.  Treasuries, on the other hand, have increased by over $500 billion over that same span of time.  A half a trillion dollars!  If you were wondering how the US bond auctions have managed to go so smoothly, here's part of your answer.

At this point it bears pointing out the Fed's balance sheet, where the Fed's large appetite for agencies (including MBS for the purposes of this analysis) is evident. I present the most recent Federal Balance sheet as presented on Zero Hedge a week ago:

May this be an explanation of what is happening:

It would appear that foreign central banks have been swapping agency bonds for Treasury bonds, but that's not how the markets work.  First, they would have to sell those bonds, before they could use the proceeds to buy government debt. So to whom did they sell those Agency bonds in order to afford the Treasury bonds?

And here is where the concept of the appropriately coined Shell Game comes into play:

These are the three critical points to remember as you read further:

  1. The US government has record amounts of Treasuries to sell.
  2. Foreign central banks, which have a big pile of agency bonds in their custody account, would like to help but want to keep things somewhat under the radar to avoid scaring the debt markets.
  3. The Federal Reserve does not want to be seen directly buying US government debt at auctions (and in fact is not permitted to, but many rules have been 'bent' worse during this crisis), because that could upset the whole illusion that there is unlimited demand for US government paper, but it also desperately wants to avoid a failed auction.

For various reasons, the Federal Reserve cannot just up and start buying all the Treasury paper that becomes available in record amounts, week after week, month after month.

Instead, it uses this three-step shell game to hide what it is doing under a layer of complexity:

Shell #1:  Foreign central banks sell agency debt out of the custody account.

Shell #2:  The Federal Reserve buys those agency bonds with money created out of thin air.

Shell #3:  Foreign central banks use that very same money to buy Treasuries at the next government auction.

The question arises, where are the agencies that the Fed is purchasing at such as gluttonous pace coming from? Absent an audit of the Fed, one can merely speculate, but likely is one of the primary motivations for the Federal Reserve Chairman and the Secretary of the Treasury to claim that any additional openness into the activities of the Fed would be "problematic to the country."

Would this "behind the scenes" rotation endorsed by the Fed, whereby the Custody Account is the middleman for Foreign-Fed transactions, be the primary reason for an apparently unwavering indirect interest in US Treasuries?

As Martenson concludes:

The Federal Reserve has effectively been monetizing far more US government debt than has openly been revealed, by cleverly enabling foreign central banks to swap their agency debt for Treasury debt.  This is not a sign of strength and reveals a pattern of trading temporary relief for future difficulties.

This is very nearly the same path that Zimbabwe took, resulting in the complete abandonment of the Zimbabwe dollar as a unit of currency.  The difference is in the complexity of the game being played, not the substance of the actions themselves.


The shell game that the Fed is currently playing does not change the basic equation: Money is being printed out of thin air so that it can be used to buy US government debt.


When the full scope of this program is more widely recognized, ever more pressure will fall upon the dollar, as more and more private investors shun the dollar and all dollar-denominated instruments as stores of value and wealth. This will further burden the efforts of the various central banks around the world as they endeavor to meet the vast borrowing desires of the US government.


One possible result of the abandonment of these efforts is a wholesale flight out of the dollar and into other assets.  To US residents, this will be experienced as rapidly rising import costs and increasing costs for all internationally-traded basic commodities, especially food items.  For the rest of the world, the results will range from discomforting to disastrous, depending on their degree of dollar linkage.

As more and more people dig behind the Fed lustrous facade, increasingly more troubling discoveries are made. On one hand you see POMO auctions that repurchase recently auctioned off securities; on the other - potential capital rotation via custodial accounts of which there is no mention in mainstream media venues. If this analysis is in fact correct, the Fed is monetizing not only the Treasuries it purchases via POMO, but effectively also the indirect bidders' treasury interest, which is represented by their rolling out of agencies purchased by the Fed, and the newly raised cash used for UST purchases. Has the Fed essentially monopolized the entire Treasury Auction process?

Whether this speculation of dollar abusive policies by the Federal Reserve, which will stop at nothing, to reinflate the credit bubble and debase dollar-based debt, is in fact true, is questionable. However, definitive answers from Chariman Ben will not be forthcoming until he is forced to show his hand, whether via a legal order such as the recently won Bloomberg lawsuit, or through political means, such as HR 1207 and S 604. In the meantime, it appears the Federal Reserve, whose accountability should be to the entire US population, not just to a select crowd of Wall Street oligarchs, continues to pursue activities that facilitiate at any and all cost the stratification of US society into that minority that will benefit vastly from the Fed's ongoing actions and the significant majority who will see the purchasing power of the paper in their wallets gradually disappear, and effectively put the entire concept of the "American Middle Class" at risk.

For the full link to Chris Martenson's article, please click here.

4.94643
Your rating: None Average: 4.9 (56 votes)



by Sancho Ponzi
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:33
#49076

OT: I KNEW this was coming, but couldn't they have the courtesy to wait until his body is cold?   ARRRRGGGGHHHHH! Bastards, all of 'em!

Dodd: "Maybe Teddy's Passing" Will Spur GOP To Act On Health Care

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/26/dodd-maybe-teddys-passing_n_269581.html

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:31
#49221

as Rush aptly pointed out "let's honor Teddy by giving every American the same Health Care Teddy himself had"

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:32
#49222

as Rush aptly pointed out "let's honor Teddy by giving every American the same Health Care Teddy himself had"

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:30
#49316

Ted was a good catholic. He rubbed his beads while he lay dying hoping God would forget the murders and the rapes. But He won't. This man was about as worthless a individual that ever lived and now he is held up as some kind of hero. God help us.

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:38
#49077

Is The Fed Enabling Foreign Central Banks To Swap Out Their Agency Debt Into Treasuries?:  

 

Crystal ball says "yup"

by defender
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 23:35
#49658

Could you guys help me with this, wasn't the first week that the Fed bought agencies one week after the surge in treasury demand?

by ToNYC
on Sat, 08/29/2009 - 10:46
#52844

Man in the Mirror too. Ben is channeling Michael Jackson. El-Erian's sugar high? ...more like crack and a course of propofol..the new FED speedball for the 21st Century deconomy. The public isn't spending because it doesn't believe there is an economy to replace their assets and they need to learn how to invest in their survival without....credit AIDS. That disease is now being spread by the FED at their crack house at 33 Liberty.

 

by deadhead
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:42
#49085

It's shit like this that is sending the usa into the crapper (well, bidet I guess for the ZH crowd, lol!).  the only good news is these phucks can't sneak it by anymore due to the new media.  I hope this pushes H.R. 1207 forward.

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:43
#49087

Hey CNN, why don't you steal this article too.  Doubt they'd let you print it!

 

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:49
#49091

Ponzi, Ponzi, Ponzi, Ponzi!

by zenith1
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:30
#49215

Standards Board decided to eliminate a concept known as the  special purpose entity"

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:50
#49094

thanks for posting this!

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:50
#49095

ok, then the question begs to be asked. how does this affect the velocity of money? and then my statement would be in this case. can this create the hyperinflationary collapse that many have been talking about?

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:12
#49160

there are two sets of funds to consider when
thinking inflation....there is tarp, talf, etc
money which is largely on deposit at the fed...
there is about 700-800b usd which is sitting there
but has not entered the economy.....if it does its
expansion coefficient is at the least 10x...and
could be as high as 50-100x according to numbers
i have recently read....

the 2d set of money (1.25t usd) is the money discussed here...
much of that money as we just read is going overseas
and as such ben thinks he is so clever because
he thinks he is keeping the inflationary effect
out of the usa while at the same time stabilizing
foreign banks and economies....

however there is still some good sized portion
of the 1.25t usd which is staying stateside
and will feed directly inflation....that money
will not stay in fed unless the pd are buying
massive amounts of citi and other zombie banks...
but they in fact may be doing so as evidence
here recently suggests....

these dollars are fueling the rise in
the markets and as such is not entirely
irrational - there
is indeed money behind the rise just as there
was in the early 1930s when the market bounced
50% on its way to its nadir in 1932 at -90%....

so part of the 2d set of money is contributing
to inflation and yes the money expanded will
result in hyperinflation....but it takes time...
there are still counterveiling forces but expand
even .5t usd by 10-50 and you can see it
overwhelming deflation....

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:24
#49198

actually i erred...i do not think any of the
fiat money is going overseas....i overlooked a
step in the shell transfer...

by Anonymous
on Sun, 08/30/2009 - 22:06
#53605

People who don't understand what the phrase "begs the question" means should not use it.

by Sancho Ponzi
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:50
#49096

I assume lots of these Agency bonds were sold to fund FAN, FRE, etc. 

Would you not be delighted to trade FAN and FRE agency bonds for Treasuries?

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:51
#49098

buy gold. buy silver. and put your head between your knees and pray.

by Sqworl
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:53
#49101

How do you convince the world that your credit worthy???

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:13
#49164

pay your debts - principal and interest...and
do so in currency which is not tanking.

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:36
#49310

deleted.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:37
#49325

yeh but rememeber paulson told the congress that unless they got their money there would be hell to pay.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:53
#49102

does this put the torch to the mish shedlock theoretical exposition? me thinks it does. oh wise mish, what say ye? i know it pisses him off. he said a couple of years ago, he never trusted anyone that posted on seeking alpha and never wanted to hear from them....ha ha ha

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:03
#49136

Mish still thinks the Fed is incompetent rather than a criminal operation

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:04
#49280

mish will hit that deflation drum until the time when he must take a wheel barrow full of money down the store to buy a loaf of bread....

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:35
#49322

LOL!

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:32
#49305

Which will be his undoing. You bring up an excellent point, PM. In fact, this type of thinking is common to many deflationists that have interacted with. They generally believe that there is no significant government manipulation occurring in various markets - that they are generally free and fair; believe that government is more stupid than criminal when in fact the opposite is the truth; think that government is incapable of spending enough to overcome "deflation" (whatever they fantasize it to be); vehemently deny the existence of precious metals price rigging scheme even when faced with mountains of incontrovertible evidence; believe that people will mostly "struggle" to pay their debts thus increasing demand for the dollar/cash instead of defaulting on  them (IMNSHO, the majority of us - i.e. those with a brain and survival instinct - won't give two shits about defaulting on an underwater house); usually live in a US Dollar centric world where they are are totally, madly IN LOVE with the USD and cannot explain what will happen in other countries which are basically on a similar fiat regime; think that the USD today is same as the Gold backed USD of the 1930's when in fact due to removal of Gold backing we are talking about two entirely different monetary regimes; totally ignore the possibility of hyperinflation due loss of confidence in the currency.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:25
#49311

mish thinks he is always right and everyone else is always wrong. denniger is the same way. also throw in that pinhead on kitco that goes by the name of jon nadler.

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:59
#49345

haha Nadler sucks so hard

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:18
#49369

nadler is a douche bag's douche bag.....

by SteveNYC
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:39
#49525

Good post. What I don't get then, is if they are more "criminal" than stupid, and if they are in this to benefit their buddies and cronies etc, under the scenario we are in two things may happen:

 

1) Hyperinflationary spiral, in which people's cash becomes worthless, and we riot and lynch politicians, Bernanke etc. the lot of them. BUT, their buddies, who are loaded up with cash (yes, foreign currency and precious metals, which are easily stolen and looted from them in such civil unrest) also become poorer via the value of their dollars being destroyed.

Or

2) Massive deflation, in which a country with no savings and loads of debt is effectively crushed by this deflationary force, we lynch politicians, Bernanke etc. BUT their buddies, who have loads of cash, no debt, and some forex and commodities, literally get to own the place and buy the country for pennies on the dollar.

 

Hyperthetically, it would seem to me that if pure "crime" was behind their motives, the secondary outcome would be better for their cronies. Thoughts?

 

Disclaimer: The "lynching" comments were merely used for "effect"!

by Gilgamesh
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:42
#49534

2, then 1.  They have backups standing by.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:47
#49595

Anyone with lots of money and at least a little brains, whoc is in on this scheme at any level, will leverage themselves so that they gain at some multiple of the rate of hyperinflation. That's what most deflationists dont get about these schemes. The GD's of the world will not lose any money even if money is debased by 50 or 99%. Because they are the ones who will be getting all the new money.

btw http://www.chrismartenson.com/ appears to be down

by ED
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 09:57
#49871

Re the $700B Bank reserves held on the Feds books - If such funds could experience a multiplier of up to 100x when relased into the economy, when does the point arrive when people start not accepting paper in exchange for goods? It's a lever primed 'pull for hyperinflation' isnt it?

And does this make sense - could the Fed be trying to shake foreigners out of their long USD (savings) positions before smackin the deflation button? The Fed wouldnt want a severe deflationary episode to occur whilst foreigners hold all the cash would it?

 

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 20:47
#51164

The "buddies" in group two are already hedged out of the dollar. They will buy things with gold silver and commodities, not with appreciated dollars. How can the dollar gain value. It's dilution is the mechanism of all of the theft. If I have a $1,000 and you steal $500, how can I be left with $1,500? Dilution and inflation are the tool of the theft. People that hoard an increasingly diluted asset because they believe the asset will appreciate in value are a counterfeiter's dream.

by Anonymous
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 20:58
#51182

If there are a million tons of corn in the world, and all of which is hoarded (ie the velocity is almost zero), and I am the only seller (say three tons) I am going to love the price I get and I'm going to encourage the hoarders. This is why the govenment loves the deflation myth. It can keep selling dollars while everyone else is hoarding.

by whacked
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 05:50
#49724

PM and GG

Interesting that you can lay so much crap on a bloggist that is yet to be proven wrong. A recent report showed that out of the 15,000 economists, only about 120 predicted accurately. Neo classical economists missed the boat. The classical ones did not.

As for deflation, history will be the judge. Quite frankly though, do you not think it is a tad deflationary when capital goods and rent are reducing? With the unemployment one would expect as much. Then again, the both of you know what you are talking about don't you?? And before any snide remarks read up on the definition of deflation, so you both know what you are talking about.

Same to with homebuyers underwater... you two should go read his blog instead of forming preconceived ideas that have no relevance to his comments. Then again it is easy to bad mouth and trash people isn't it .. the anonymity of the internet... I appreciate TD's anonymity but seriously your personalities and sometimes sanctimonious comments are making it tuff to really appreciate the site.

I forgot GG has a brain and makes this comment without reading the Blog!

As regards the currencies I think that you fall far short of expectations when addressing the USD. When markets collapse the money will still flow through to the USD. All CB's have done worse than the Fed and all CB's attempted to deflate their currencies. It is mind boggling. And on the Euro I will follow Keynes idea of the road bump. The individual States unemployment and various other problems will no doubt see to that.

For the hyper-inflation angle ... again history will decide who is right and who is wrong .. but why dont you go buy some Real estate or shares if you feel that the inflation is going north .. is that not the cure?

So instead of being right proper wankers just concentrate on the big gorillas, the Fed and the people in charge of the US (whoever they may be) ...

by Arm
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:25
#50081

Time to sell your gold holdings.

Paulson is talking his book (obviously to unload)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aJF7iETlOjQ4

by Arm
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:35
#50106

Lack of confidence in a currency does not lead to hyperinflation in that currency - it leads to no currency.

That is precisely the point where new currencies are introduced.  (Think Brazil, Rome, Mexico, Argentina, etc)

In Zimbabwe most transactions are not paid with wheelbarrows of money; they are paid with dollars and euros on the blackmarket.  The Zimi is the currency that is used only when forced to.

 

by Anonymous
on Fri, 08/28/2009 - 15:46
#52212

"In fact, this type of thinking is common to many deflationists that have interacted with. They generally believe that there is no significant government manipulation occurring in various markets - that they are generally free and fair"

Fair enough!

"believe that government is more stupid than criminal when in fact the opposite is the truth;"

OK ! So, the goverment is more criminal than stupid, big deal !
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE INTELLIGENT : you can be criminal and stupid too !
At least not enough intelligent nor ALLMIGHTY to manipulate everything.

Here is your implicit fallacy : assuming they can do anything, it's like if the universe was still and they were ultimate masterpuppets. But hey , they're humans they FAIL time and time again. And we're speaking about a SYSTEM and systems FAIL too, especially human hysterical finance ponzi systems.
Your theories evolve around your adoration for them, their money and supposed unlimited power :just look at your nickname and avatar:)
This combination of hyper-inflation scare and power fascination brings mainly more submission : you're preaching the same market cult of the greespan era, same hubris "don't fight the fed! they want inflation they'll get inflation. Don't ask questions!". Only this time, instead of Y2K euphoria, you have post-crunch ben and statist-finance fascism. The neo-cons in pure old fashioned fascist theory wanted to force the creation of a new reality in geopolitics, now the world powers want to revert to a situation where everybody believes everything is ok.

by transition
on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 17:13
#56815

that was me :)

by zenith1
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:32
#49223

pd are buying
massive amounts of citi and other zombie banks...
but they in fact

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:34
#49321

Mish is FINISHED. Put a fork in him.

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:02
#49347

Well I still read Mish in hopes some day he'll come around...  yeah we are in deflation sort of , M3 might roll over.  But M0 and M1 will not.   What's it matter what the net 'difference' between the two (printing vs credit destruction) if there is currency crisis?

 

As some people have mentioned before, prices of everything you don't want will go down.  Prices of everything you need will go up.

 

by Assetman
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 01:19
#49693

Exactly, PM.

Economists will call it stagflation.

The rest of us will call it Major Pain.

If this hypothesis has truth behind it, prision may well be the safest place for Bernanke, Geithner and Summers.

by Arm
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 11:30
#50093

Stagflation?  Would we be so lucky

by darkness (not verified)
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 13:13
#49644

boycott just like hole foods

good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions

by max2205
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:00
#49110

Knew it, Ben says sorry bout them agencies. please don't dump'em I buy 'em back with Treasy's.  Oppps, but when those turn into poop, what will he use to make them whole?

 

Again, why are we making everyone whole except the freaking citizens of this f'd up country....never mind, back to my charts.

Humm, wonder why AIG FRE FRM ect are running....who had this inside info?  f'king sick of these inside trades

by agrotera
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:43
#49478

Some suggest ( i think probably bank agents) that there were private threats from around the world, and that the "giving" of money to AIG, and probably many programs by the Fed are like ransom money.

Even if this is true, it is exponentially worse that no clear statement against the operations, laws, and the people who pushed the laws and operations to bring us this mess has been made by either of our governments administrations.  Furthermore, on the day of the big announcement (Feb 09) when Obama reported that he and Geithner would be backing the Paulson/Bernake plan, some reporter asked when the people responsible for this mess would be prosecuted, and Obama's response was that we can't look back, we have to look forward--effectively letting everyone responsible for the crimes that brought us this mess, off of the hook.

 

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:58
#49116

very good speculation....are any of these swaps part of the 1.25t usd announced purchases by the fed or are they in addition to?....

when the dollar goes into the crapper there will be the benefit of more expensive imports which may encourage more domestic production....although i am sure that the oligarchs would have a shit fit over that and stop it cold in its tracks....

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 15:59
#49120

The Fed has announced some time ago that it was going to buy $1.25 trillion MBS securities and $300 billion US government bonds. Which adds up to $1.55 trillion. Or almost exactly the same amount as the latest estimate for this year's US government deficit.

The US Treasury is basically borrowing $1.55 trillion from the Fed. And that's why the US government has no problem borrowing this much money despite the lack of demand from foreign lenders.

But this is probably being done with the consent of China and other large holders of US debt. Because the US government could've easily let Fannie and Freddie go bankrupt and let the foreign central banks loose their money.

The US government probably got a deal with foreign central banks where the Fed would print the money and buy back this agency debt from the central banks. And this was a good deal for the central banks. Because it's far better for them to have the Fed print the money than to end up with no money at all due to complete and total bankruptcy of Fannie and Freddie.

This was a deal that foreign central banks literally couldn't refuse.

by texpat
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:50
#49256

Yep. Extortion, money-laundering, monetization.

Imagine we defaulted on those (worthless) MBS. Chinese and Russian dirty bombs would be popping up faster than Jack could shut them down.

by jp
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 12:44
#50239

#49120 Excellent observation. I would only add a few additional ideas. When we look at GOLD as we all like to do, WHO has the MOST?

The short answer, is here...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official_gold_reserves

Here is a real RE US National total value number in 2005 dollars.

$23.5T

http://realtytimes.com/rtpages/20020725_homeowners.htm

 Macro food for thought.

by jp
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 20:23
#51129

They wanted more interest, now they are paying the price for the risk associated with that desire for a higher rate.

 

by andrew123
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:00
#49122

Doesn't this imply that their will be a bid in Treasuries until the rest of the world has finished liquidating their agency securities?

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:00
#49125

OK just posted on an earlier thread before seeing this post...

ghostface,

Thanks for the reply. Of the $2T MBS to be issued this year, what does that mean in terms of net growth of the MBS market? I'm assuming that a lot of that $2T is refi, and there is retiring of earlier vintage MBS.

It is right to think QE for MBS is a means to rotate FCB holdings from MBS/agencies to Treasuries? The most recent TIC data showed an increase of Chinese holdings of Treasuries, including 10/30's (foggy memory here, but I think that is right).

Is the refi component of the MBS market destined to shrink, and along with a continued slow pace of home sales (relative to 00's) will it lead to a secular decrease in the size of the MBS market?

I'm trying to imagine an exit strategy for QE, where it continues until FCBs have sufficiently swapped MBS/agencies for Treasuries. Then with a smaller refi market leading to a smaller MBS market, the FED can have a similar impact on the mortgage spread with a much smaller marginal purchase.

Of course, even if the above picture were accurate, it might chart a course to ramp down FED purchases of MBS/agencies, but if $1T budget deficits do become the norm, the FED will need to redirect its QE fire-power to Treasuries, since FCB rotation will have run its course.

I realize this is a very simple view of things! Just trying to make sense of this some how!

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:11
#49159

All complexity is simplicity in motion.

by ghostfaceinvestah
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:53
#49266

Yeah, I don't think Chris is really on to anything, sorry to say, it is pretty much as you describe: all money is fungible, so when the Fed buys agency debt, it frees up money to buy something else, like Treasuries.  Likewise, when the Fed monetizes 30 year Treasuries, it frees up money to buy 3 month Treasuries.  Which is what the Chinese are doing.

Note that the agency debt operations are for seasoned paper, just like the UST operations, so they can buy from FCBs.

With the MBS, you are correct - the Fed is not buying seasoned MBS, but the loans that go into the new MBS are partially mortgages that refi out of seasoned agency MBS (and seasoned private label MBS).  And that money goes back into Treasuries (or the stock market, or oil).

Bottom line is, the Fed's purchases of MBS and agency debt create dollars for someone to buy something.  that is all that is happening here.

Much more insidious is the monetization that is going on with the banks.  As they free up capital by unloading their toxic borrowers onto the govt, where is that money going?  UST.

The problem with the exit strategy for QE on MBS is not clearing out all the MBS and agency debt from the FCB, it is keeping the market for new MBS issuance from cratering.  Remember, the Fannie and Freddie MBS is still guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie.  Would you buy a pool of 30 year mortgages guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie without full faith and credit backing of the US govt?  What kind of guarantee are you going to have in 5 years?

Volume is a good question, though.  Say we do $2T this year.  Unless rates drop a lot, we won't do $2T next year, maybe $1.5T.

That has a lot of other implications - what happens in employment in the mortgage origination space if origination volume drops 25 - 30%?  The mini refi boom sure helped a lot of pocketbooks this spring.  That dries up and a lot of people get thrown on the unemployment pile.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:04
#49281

Why can't part of the exit strategy be a much smaller MBS market? Smaller due to refis, smaller due to prolonged lower levels of housing sales, etc.

Could spreads remain within historic norms without such a level of QE if the market were to drop below $1T?

by ghostfaceinvestah
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:19
#49374

Yeah, I think at a $1T annual run rate market (as an example) spreads would stay a bit more in line, there will always be some index fund buying, some servicer buying, etc., and with the Fed holding a large chunk of the market, you don't have to worry about secondary market selling putting pressure on new issuance.

Right now, though, the basis is about 50bps below what would be normal, and mortgage rates are probably at the high side of where the Fed wants them already.  and the 10 year is at 3.45%.  Widening spreads or a rising 10 year rate and rates go well above what the Fed wants.

They know that any recent rebound in the housing market is artificial, due to the $8K FTHB credit and the lack of supply due to the foreclosure moratoriums, and once the pent up foreclosures hit the market we will have another leg down in prices. So they want to keep rates as low as possible.  Without a fix to Fannie and Freddie they will have to stay active.

Imagine this scenario - foreclosure moratorium backlog hits the market in the fall, $8K tax credit expires in Nov, unemployment continues to rise, and the Fed stops buying MBS at 12/31.  I can't see it happening.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:00
#49127

I don't think anyone would be ashamed of asking for $233 million dollars, if there is the slightest chance that he or she might get this much money.

For this kind of money many people would commit murder and not be ashamed of it.

And that's the problem with Wall Street compensation. The incentives and the pay is so huge that ethics, morality, and a sense of shame no longer inhibit people's behavior.

This is like being offered to sleep with 80 virgins in paradise after you die. Such a temptation is hard to resist for those who believe in paradise. And on Wall Street, the huge offers of compensation are very easy to believe. Because they are real.

by SWRichmond
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:17
#49184

sleep?

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:40
#49241

i think he meant lay :-O

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:46
#49253

LOL!

by darkness (not verified)
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 13:13
#49642

The whole system needs to be overhauled

good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:00
#49128

Assuming Martenson's theory is valid, what happens when the foreign central banks complete their swap from agencies into treasuries?

How do the treasury auctions get sold then?

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:10
#49148

The Fed is offering primary dealers the tempation of risk-free profits in bond speculation.  The Fed can put a floor on the 5y, 7y, and 10y interest rates at the expense of the US dollar.   Therre will probably be a disorderly collapse at some point if this madness continues. 

 

There also can be a skyrocket in dollar during deleveraging.  Basically we have entered period of nonlinear dynamics.  The system is no longer stable, how much longer this continue is hard to say.  Days, weeks,  a few months if they are really clever.  But certainly not longer. 

by SWRichmond
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:31
#49319

"The Fed can put a floor on the 5y, 7y, and 10y interest rates at the expense of the US dollar."

Forgive me PM, but then it's not really risk free, is it?  It's more like Bernanke saying: "TRUST me, it's risk free!"

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:03
#49351

Yes I think you are right.   It will work until it doesn't.

by deadhead
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:09
#49151

equity money

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:19
#49168

check.  Big float there that can be used no doubt.

by texpat
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:52
#49262

Put it this way, any money you make on SDS calls will be worthless when you collect. Hahahaha.

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:04
#49279

Back to the make/collect discussion...  Bwhaaahaaa

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:17
#49183

either fronting foreign central banks the money
or naked monetization....

in the end the scheme fails....ben is betting
that he can outpace the horizon...

by pros
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:00
#49129

The Treasury "gifted" $500-$600billion of US debt to Fed to facilitate this transaction...

widely discussed by those in know in DC

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:09
#49153

Treasury may have also been covertly "gifting" some Reston, VA Hedge Funds.   I read this on FOFOA.  I am still researching this I don't have any proof yet.

 

by deadhead
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:41
#49245

the Reston 6.  I do hope something comes out on this matter.

let's hope someone at one of the R6 sends an email to tips at zerohedge dot com

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:45
#49252

Amen.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:17
#49301

is Sir Allen Stanford in that mix. I think his fund was CIA, Mossad, Russian mafia drug cartel etc. These are the people who really run the world drug operations. These are the people who bring the drugs into this country to destroy the society. The Mexican and Columbian pimps, aka, drug lords, etc, that serve as the faces of these drug organizations are merely there for show. Stanford Financial Group was also connected with Madoff.

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:04
#49353

Markopolos implied in his Congressional testimony that Madoff was laundering billions in drug money.  So it wouldn't surprise me to see the same with other scams.

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:25
#49381

Welcome to 1989, 1999 & 2009..  Glad to see ya made it (hehe) here PM

by agrotera
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:51
#49336

The public deserves to know, apparently the rest of the world knows about the PPT, according to "Move over Adam Smith: The Visible Hand of Uncle Sam" avail at www.sprott.com

 

by Joe Sixpack
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:08
#49130

One wonders if the recent change in the definition of "indirect buyers" at Treasury auctions enables this process?

Checked the original article- addressed, but not answered: "

As we now know, at least some of that money has been recycled into US government debt, where "indirect bidders" have been snapping up an unusually high proportion of the recent offerings.  (Note: The way Indirect bidders  are calculated has recently changed, and I am not entirely clear on how much this influences the numbers we now see….I'm working on it)."

by Zippyin Annapolis
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:01
#49132

Audit the Fed.

 

If Bernanke is Mr. Blue, who is Mr. Pink?

 

More importantly who plays Harvey Keitel?

by waterdog
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:13
#49165

Mr. Pink is Monkey man

by zenith1
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:34
#49230

tentativly knwn

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:05
#49140

Do you really want to see the emperor naked?

Might sound like a good idea, beforehand
Then once the lights go out, maybe not so much

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 22:08
#49610

I heard the emperor isn't hiding what he says is under there

by buzzsaw99
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:06
#49142

Nothing can go wrong as long as the Great and Powerful Bernanke is in charge.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:28
#49314

the sycophantic ass kissing of this guy is just too much to bare.

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:06
#49143

The backside trade that helps make the 4 & 5 ceilings possible.  For the moment.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:11
#49157

That means foreign central banks are being treated like primary treasury dealers. They buy, knowing they can sell back later--in this case agencies. Jeez, what would int. rates and prices be already if this hoax wasn't going on?

by buzzsaw99
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:12
#49162

This move is actually quite ingenius. BB has to back the agency bonds anyway, and when FCB swap for Ts he/we get to pay lower interest on that money. If the trade deficit dies it will be more difficult to manipulate the bond market after the agency paper is gone tho...

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:16
#49179

The BTW to the OhBTW

by SWRichmond
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:15
#49172

This is a very important piece, thanks for bringing it to us.

I've come up with a very useful and accurate means for evaluating whether or not the government will engage in any given activity.  Simply put, if a) the activity in question is needed to maintain government control, then b) they will do it.  There are no other considerations.  Collateral damage, loss of jobs, loss of life, loss of reputation, etc do not matter.

The ONLY means we possess to influence this behavior is in the area of their "getting away with it."

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:56
#49270

Bingo.

by Joe Sixpack
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:08
#49289

There is always the presidential pardon.

 

by TraderMark
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:21
#49190

Tim Geithner Video: Auditing the Fed is a "line we don't want to cross"

 

http://www.fundmymutualfund.com/2009/08/tim-geithner-video-auditing-fede...

by max2205
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:24
#49201

If he was there in front of me and there was a line, I'd cross it....

by Hephasteus
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:07
#49287

I want to cross it too. I also want to drag a wood chipper across it.

by max2205
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:23
#49197

Are these people just acting like they want to do something knowing they can't possibly. (Timmy droped the F bomb when this was staffed).

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. regulators plan to gauge how severe a hit banks will take from an accounting change that will force them to bring more than $1 trillion of assets back on their books, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp proposed on Wednesday.

 

The FDIC voted to seek input on whether banks need more time to build capital cushions against the assets that were once held by off-balance-sheet trusts.

 

The accounting change requires that banks move those assets back on to their books on January 1, 2010, in an attempt to bring more transparency to banks' financial statements.

 

"I think it's very appropriate that we're asking the question should we phase this in over time or not," said Comptroller of the Currency John Dugan.

 

"Some type of transactions may require a different type of capital treatment than others," Dugan told the meeting of the FDIC board.

 

Banks have used off-balance sheet vehicles to avoid reporting requirements or to reduce the amount of capital they needed to hold to offset risks.

 

Banking regulators are worried about how current capital requirements would work with the accounting change.

 

Earlier this year, the Financial Accounting Standards Board decided to eliminate a concept known as the "qualified special purpose entity" that banks have used to keep assets such as mortgage-backed securities off their books.

 

FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said regulators needed more information about how the accounting change could affect securitization markets and loan modifications.

 

(Reporting by Karey Wutkowski and Steve Eder; Writing by Rachelle Younglai; Editing by Simon Denyer)

by deadhead
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:44
#49251

thanks for posting this.....this item is a huge deal and the ABankersAssoc has been lobbying on this for months already, and hitting it VERY hard, make no mistake. Judging by this statement, "I think it's very appropriate that we're asking the question should we phase this in over time or not," said Comptroller of the Currency John Dugan." it looks to me like the ABA is making progress.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:24
#49200

This analysis surely points to the fed swapping treasures for agency debt, but NOT monetization.

For monetization the Feds balance sheet would have to be expanding which the graphs don't show in the last year. If the fed prints money and buys agencies and then sells treasuries to the same entities, it receives the money back. Only if it is a net buyer will it show up on its balance sheet and we would have monetization.

by Tyler Durden
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:31
#49220

The fed is purchasing agencies on its balance sheet. The cash goes to the sellers: the article points out the sellers may well be foreign CBs who use it to purchase USTs in their stead, effectively skewing the S/D for both sets of securities, and making indrects more willing to buy USTs.

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:52
#49261

Which at some point WILL be monetized. Those who think the US Goverment (or any government for that matter) will pay off it's debts without resorting to the printing press are delusional.

by texpat
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:57
#49271

Didn't they already monetize by buying the MBS with printed money?

i.e. Print money -> Buy MBS for printed USD -> sell treasuries for CB USD

1.25 trillion BABY!!!! Yeah Baby!!

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:42
#49328

In this mechanism on the net they have monetized only one set of bonds - the MBS's - the money from which has then been funneled to fund US govt.'s operations via the UST's. The creditor is still left holding UST's, which WILL be monetized at a future date.

by texpat
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:59
#49607

Oh fuck.

Thanks Gordo.

by gator gatlin
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:53
#49265

What potential role does the previous gigantic FCB currency swaps play in this particular caper?

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:59
#49273

Better to take a look at Bar,SocGen,DB and the other key players in the great circle route of liquidity and the processes of stripping headers....This has been the great float

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:35
#49323

don't forget about the money leakage at that wonderful government institution known as AIG.

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:29
#49382

THE go to folks for side letter arbitrage for the mentioned entities.. At 100% before event capital.. What a ratio!

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:26
#49313

it's used to sustain the value of the usd to the
extent that it can....

by Bam_Man
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:36
#49318

Looking at the Fed's balance sheet it looks like what they are doing is taking the proceeds from the "wind down" of the Maiden Lane (Bear Stearns) assets and using that to buy the FCB-held MBS. This frees up cash for the FCB's to use as indirect bidders at Treasury auctions.

The size of the Fed's balance sheet has not changed materially since 2008. The actual 'monetization' took place back then -- when the Fed took on the Maiden Lane 'assets' with newly created dollars. Once the Maiden Lane assets have been disposed of, the Fed will once again need to increase the size of its balance sheet to keep this 'shell game' going.

by GoldmanSux
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:44
#49250

Why would this be even done? The interest savings? Don't make me laugh. Is the long term plan to let agencies default? Just asking. If this proves to be the case, the Fed is committing fraud.

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:52
#49263

We both know that when it happens it will be called responsible monetary policy... After all, they will just scoop up the paper.

by GoldmanSux
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:01
#49277

In addition to this swap, if it is happening, if the US gov't doesn't backstop agency paper with its full guarantee, the Fed, Treausury, and Obama have been executing fraud for a year or more as the agencies have been operating recklessly as defacto gov't policy arms.

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:21
#49308

It would appear as this article discusses that when Ben & Hank decided to scoop up Fan n Fred that the guarantee was de facto, at least until the FCB's and their institutions could move out of their agency holdings.  Part and parcel of the quid.  Once this play on agency paper has run its course their belief is that this "temporary crisis in confidence" wil have also run its course and they will have successfully swapped paper on our housing stock for gov't paper...

You are absolutely correct in saying that the agencies have been operating recklessly.  On one level this could be a play to regain the paper on our housing... and the other being the need to prop up the international swap n trade flow with more predictability, on our backs.

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:44
#49331

This way they have to monetize only one set of bonds right now - the MBS's - and not both. See my comment above.

by zenith1
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:27
#49208

uninhabitable and more expensive to repair than tear down and rebuild.  This needs to be subtracted from inventory.

by Marshal Ney
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:30
#49218

The regulators are speculators, the referees are in the game. It's economic science-fiction.

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:40
#49242

"This is very nearly the same path that Zimbabwe took, resulting in the complete abandonment of the Zimbabwe dollar as a unit of currency. The difference is in the complexity of the game being played, not the substance of the actions themselves."

There is only one question that I want to ask all deflationists - Is Zimbabwe facing deflation? IS IT? Last I heard, Prechter was short Zimbabwe's stock market and advising Zimbabwe residents to stay in the safety of Zimbabwean cash.

 

by nicholsong
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:01
#49276

I don't think I've seen a single deflationist saying "deflation forever".  To the contrary, I've seen most or maybe all of them saying we'd experience deflation for a period of time and depending upon FED actions we would either reach a balance point or rush past it into high or hyper inflation. I'm fairly confident that what this post and others lately are pointing to is that the FED will likely not have the finesse or the understanding to stop when they need to, just as I'm fairly confident that what we've been seeing up until this point is largely what the deflationists have been saying. 

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:49
#49333

Hyperinflation is closer than most deflationists think. For example, Mish has put a timeline of at least a decade on it happening in the US. He thinks US will muddle around kinda like Japan for at least the next decade.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:28
#49520

After eight months, I'm starting to think it's not Gekko, it's Godot.

by TumblingDice
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:16
#49298

Most of the world's debt was not denominated in Zimbabwe's money.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:49
#49258

There's a very simple explanation for all this. The government knows that a Yellowstone supereruption is imminent and many of the economic distortions since then are part of the secret decades-long preparation plan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOn3wkehluk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR1bg_Yf0T4

This is why they created the subprime mortgage mess (to ensure the Wyoming and Montana evacuees), forced the banks to increase liquidity, expanded FEMA's powers and created the so-called "FEMA camps," implemented tax credits for roofing and insulation in the stimulus package, manipulated the natural gas markets, and much more.

by nicholsong
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:06
#49283

Oh yeah this is old news. It's all timed around the return of Halley's Comet in about 80 years or so. Well, to be more precise, Halley's return plotted against the recent strikes of an unknown planetesimal near Jupiter's pole. (Unknown to J6P but of course known to the reptilian overlords who control the stock market). Cheer up citizen, your Supreme Plutocracy of Unknown Noble Kleptocrats (SPUNK) have your future well planned for you.

by Joe Sixpack
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:13
#49294

Now I know. Plot disabled.

by Sqworl
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:51
#49260

On a brighter note:

A husband and wife were having a fine dining experience at their exclusive country club when this stunning young woman comes over to their table, gives the husband a big kiss, says she'll see him later and walks away.
His wife glares at him and says, "Who was that?"
"Oh," replies the husband, "she's my mistress."
"Well that's the last straw," says the wife. "I've had enough, I want a divorce. I am going to hire the most aggressive, meanest divorce lawyer I can find and make your life miserable."
"I can understand that," replies her husband, "but remember, if we get a divorce it will mean no more wintering in Key West, or the Caribbean, no more summers in Tuscany, no more Cadillac STS in the garage, and no more country club, and we'll have to sell the 26-room house and move to two smaller homes, but the decision is yours."

Just then, a mutual friend enters the restaurant with a gorgeous young woman on his arm.
"Who's that with Jim?" asks the wife.
"That's his mistress," says her husband.
She replies, "Ours is prettier."

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:13
#49296

lol

by i.knoknot
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 01:45
#49696

tnx, i needed that :^)

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:54
#49267

The motivation for swap/rotation comes from the FCB holders of MBS/agencies.

FCBs no longer want to hold FNM/FRE paper; they are willing to hold Treasuries.

That this enables such a shell game is a convenient by-product of the FCB's desires.

by Missing_Link
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 16:54
#49268

There's a very simple explanation for all this.

The government knows that a Yellowstone supereruption is imminent and many of the economic distortions since then are part of a secret decades-long preparation plan (kept secret to avoid mass chaos and the wholesale destruction of public confidence, the stock market, and America's economy).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOn3wkehluk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR1bg_Yf0T4

This at least partially explains why they:

-Created the subprime mortgage mess (to ensure that there would be plenty of foreclosed properties for the Wyoming, Utah, and Montana evacuees to move into)

-Forced the banks to substantially increase liquidity

-Expanded FEMA's powers and created the so-called "FEMA camps" during the Bush administration

-Implemented substantial tax credits for roofing and insulation in the stimulus package

-Manipulated the natural gas markets

-Invaded Iraq and Afghanistan

 

...  and much more.

This is yet another reason to buy some canned food, store some water, buy a firearm, and brush up on your survivalism skills.

by texpat
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 22:13
#49616

On that firearm thing, I dug out my Star Ultrastar 9mm, then googled up some info (manual etc), and what-the-fuck, Star are out of business.

Even bloody gun makers are falling.

by Mos
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:01
#49275

Not to mention that if just 2% of the Fed's "assets" default then the Fed is rendered insolvent.  Charles Ponzi would be proud.

 

http://mises.org/story/3281

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:02
#49348

Can a printing press default? To answer that question we need to ask another one: Is the paper that the printing press emanates money? If so, what makes it so?

by TumblingDice
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:59
#49424

Why are they valuing their gold at only $44 an ounce?

by darkness (not verified)
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 13:13
#49643

They can reflate bubbles over and over, but the impact will be less and less. Eventually the anger will spill over and (as one rube put so eloquently)good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:06
#49285

Gordon, Prechter says that the US will not be able to print money because people will lose faith in the Central bank...wait so they will have an increasing amount of faith in the currency of CB but lose faith in the CB itself. I have never heard a more stupid argument.

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:55
#49339

No matter what a CB does, fiat currencies have a finite life and they all end in hyperinflation. That's a historical fact. Period.

by ghostfaceinvestah
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:25
#49380

Wasn't it Voltaire that said paper money always returns to its intrinsic value?  Something along those lines.

Zero value = hyperinflation.  1/0 = infinity.

by TumblingDice
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:44
#49400

hyperinflation or hyperdeflation (read:default) it will indeed happen, and if things keep going at this rate sooner rather than later.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:32
#49464

true, and that life is one hundred years or so. it started in 1913, so that puts us at about 2013 more or less, probably less

by Gordon_Gekko
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 09:45
#49861

We didn't have a pure fiat money system till the '70's.

by Alitak
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:13
#49293

and this is the administration that has the gall to lecture China on currency manipulation!

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:21
#49307

Comrade obama also said, in a speech to a bunch of rabbi's that the government is partners with God in life and death, whatever that means. Frankly I don't like the sound of that, not one bit. So now we have talk about internment camps being set up....hmmmmmm...

http://www.washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?SectionID=57&SubSectionID=76&ArticleID=11291

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:28
#49383

those crazy indonesians just never know when
to shut up....those words were spoken like a true
nazi.....the nazi's were exceptional at leveraging
religion to advance the burning of jews....with
much thanks to martin luther....

politically correct, self righteous, absolutists
are always doing the "lord's will".....and
saving us from ourselves....

by Rollerball
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:47
#49407

"Matrix Revolutions" - we're fighting against machines (algos) to save Zion.  What color is the cyanide pill?

by MurryRothbard
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:51
#49334

why does the gold market continue not to react to what is going on?

by Gordon_Gekko
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:56
#49342

It will - soon.

by Hephasteus
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:04
#49352

Because gold is hard to find. What did Heraclitus say about it. Men dig tons of earth to find ounces of gold.

It's pretty durable stuff. Almost impossible to get rid of. It can sit on the bottom of the ocean for 10,000 years and come up pure gold.

The above ground gold supplies dwarf the mining activiity so the banks simply pass the above ground supplies back and forth at set prices and it dictates the price of mining activity. So it's price is simply engineered until a massive revolt occurs over the engineering through massive hording of it.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:19
#49371

You can't clone gold, or create it with a keystroke ad infinitum. Makes it much harder to cheat if you're a central banker..

by SWRichmond
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:52
#49415

Fekete considers gold to be the ultimate extinguisher of debt.  I believe Fekete would say that it was guaranteed that gold would ultimately "go into hiding" in hoards when gold standards were abandoned / gold clauses made inoperative.

by Project Mayhem
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:07
#49357

I think when the gold market truely reacts it will be a once-in-a-lifetime event and will happen very quickly.   I'm not sure when this will occur, but I suspect within months.  A big clue will be if gold goes into backwardation (spot price above near futures).

by texpat
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 22:19
#49622

Interesting, the good prof's two most recent papers cover exactly this subject.

http://www.professorfekete.com/articles.asp

I read these are saying we are there already, or at least on the cusp.

by Gordon_Gekko
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 09:47
#49863

Yup.

by Gordon_Gekko
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 09:48
#49864

Yup. Also, Gold EXPLODING past $1000 will shut up a lot of people.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:34
#49391

are you just teasing us murray?

gold is massively manipulated....read gata's
papers on how the money center banks like
jpm, ms, gs, db have highly concentrated shorts
for no reason than to carry out larry summer's
thesis published in the 1980s on the necessity
of suppressing the gold price to maintain
the attractiveness of government paper.....

while we are auditing the fed we need to audit
fort knox....bet there ain't too much gold there...

but in other ways gold has been reacting over the
past 9 years but the good stuff is yet to come....

by MurryRothbard
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:00
#49553

I'm a simple minded and deeply flawed person who would ask for a

compelling explanation as to the motivation for gold manipulation. I'm all ears.

by agrotera
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:51
#49598

The price of gold usually indicates how much fear is in the air about capital markets and asset values, so to speak. By keeping the price of gold down, it makes the green shoots look more believable.

 

by Hephasteus
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 02:00
#49700

It's a competing currency. If you leave it alone it will keep the fiat currencies honest and is too tempting to use as a settlement between international debts. Manipulated it allowed the dollar to become a completely corrupted reserve currency.

by Gordon_Gekko
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 09:51
#49865

Read the paper by Larry Summers - "Gibson's Paradox and the Gold Standard". Here is the link:

 

http://www.gata.org/files/gibson.pdf

by SWRichmond
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:00
#49427

Murray,

All you need to do is continue to relentlessly take delivery.  Personally, I believe there is a crash coming to shake commods and precious metals loose from weak hands (it won't matter to me) and maybe give JPM et al a chance to cover those shorts.  Take delivery and hang on tight.  Just my opinion.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:27
#49458

taking physical posession of gold is the sin
qua non for price appreciation.....

dumb bunnies are invested in etfs, comex, and
other crooked schemes where the same bar of gold
is sold multiple times to different buyers...

fekete reports falling gold stocks at comex
warehouses which supports the backwardation
thesis....

once gold buyers start to take gold posession
there will be a vigorous rise in gold prices
and comex gold market may well implode...and
it's gone!

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:35
#49524

we have all seen the pictures of the pretty gold bars sitting somewhere in some vault with the owners of the ETF's standing around in there. Who knows how much gold the ETF's have? who knows?

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 23:39
#49661

what will happen to gold stocks? companies?

by TumblingDice
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:08
#49431

Gold is a great hedge, something that you can't go wrong with. However consider copper as another possible play in the same spirit which may end up higher yielding. It has more intrinsic value.

All physical of course.... A futures contract is just another piece of paper or electronic record after all.

by agrotera
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:55
#49341

Thought this was going on, and thought this wasn't legal. 

Even the Exec Order 12631 requires actions taken to be "legal"...

Source: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/codification/executive-order/12631.html

by agrotera
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 17:57
#49344

So, who wants to bet when the FBI does a coordinated raid on all of their locations?

by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:58
#49422

That will only happen IF the FBI ever asks the right questions to begin with...

by yy
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:19
#49373

There is little surprising in the hypothesis, in fact Brad Setser on http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/   had numerous times identified the Agency to Treasury conversion China is likely engaged in over the last year. The post above tells us that this requires some FED participation, which while logical is difficult to trace since plenty of helpers such GS will be more than happy to facilitate....

 

The real question is to determine (1) when the operation will hit the wall  (2) how the FOREX adjustment will take place.  It is easy to say the USD will crash and prices of imports will increase, but in reality this cannot take place in the same way Zimbabwe or an emerging economy get hit. It will be entirely new and very volatile, the material of Black Swans.

 

by Hephasteus
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:20
#49451

Forex and monex won't ADJUST. They will simply close. Go AWAY. Disappear.

by michigan independant
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:29
#49384

What was Keynes after? The fusion of private ownership and socialism. It is not the ownership of the instruments of production which it is important for the State to assume. If the State is able to determine the aggregate amount of resources devoted to augmenting the instruments and the basic rate of reward to those who own them, it will have accomplished all that is necessary. Moreover, the necessary measures of socialisation can be introduced gradually and without a break in the general traditions of society (p. 378).

 

 

by Rollerball
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 18:54
#49421

EXACTLY!   

by TumblingDice
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:00
#49426

If only 5% of the population read and understood the content of this page...

by Ich bin ein whatever
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:04
#49432

Why do I feel like I just walked into a viewing of "The Sting", but instead of the movie starring Paul Newman and Robert Redford, I get Ben Bernanke, Timothy Geithner, and Goldman Sachs playing a shell game with my money?

Jeez.

by Icarus
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:06
#49433

I think there are many commenters over reacting to this.

The Fed bought $500B of MBS and it looks like half of it came out of the Fed custody accounts. By publishing that there would be a bid for MBS, the derisk move to Treasuries has been orderly without the MBS market crashing.

Everyone is continually being amazed by the Fed balance sheet - this is fractional banking. The currency hasn't completely collapsed, the monetary base is shrinking, consumer debt is shrinking, Treasury and Fed auctions continually go well, no government agency has any money, 17% U6 - it sounds like deflation.

The banks are busy building reserves for Jan 2010 to bring on off-balance sheet items.  Not to mention the absolute horrors that must be occuring at the discount window all in the name of keeping up appearances.

My money is still on deflation (possibly with devaluation - with an economy as big as the US its hard to know for sure).

by yy
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:39
#49472

I am with you on over-reaction, and the danger for investors of over-estimating the currency risk is serious, as we experienced late 2008. A rerun can easily play out one more time.

Deflation and devaluation do not make a natural fit. Deflation increases the value of cash (as in liquidity) to pay debts, which in turn reduces outstanding credit (which means existing debt becomes more valuable to creditors).  The only "variable" is Gold, but it is such an irrational thing, that in a way it does not matter much how people value gold (that's my take on the goldbugs out there).

A successful path is a managed deflation (like Japan), that will allow time for healing in balance sheets all around (and this is what Bonds seem to be pricing), anything short of that and we will get into local instabilities which will converge to the same outcome of managed deflation.

 

by SWRichmond
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:49
#49485

This thing of calling gold's value "irrational" is...irrational.  It's a characterization that is learned in B school I think, because I see this very word used often.

It makes absolutely no sense at all to be paid small sums of money for a day's labor when vast quantities of that very same "money" can be, and are being effortlessly clicked into existence every day at the whim of one man.  THAT'S irrational, and valuing the "money" that is produced / produceable in that manner is similarly irrational.

 

by SWRichmond
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:52
#49486

And while I'm at it, buying Treasury securities denominated in a currency that vast quantities of which are in fact being clicked effortlessly into existence must then be the absolute height of irrationality.  "I hereby promise to pay you with the output of my computer mouse". 

by yy
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:08
#49498

Take it easy, I am not for paper money either, I think tangibles such as energy (Oil/Gas), agriculture-commodities and even real-estate are more durable and valuable than Gold, especially in uncertain valuations.  Golds' advantage is being compact, easy to store/hide and non-perishable... but the disadvantage is that 7 billion people can live quite well without it, and if it never existed nobody would have cared...

Debt in terms of bonds will survive as long as society remains operational, absent a breakdown (such as Zimbabwe), a system for credit/debt will exist and the only question is the pricing of risk. I am for one, not willing to buy Treasury's at current returns, but iI am watching government's actions very carefully.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:39
#49526

i can'e believe the uninformed opinions calling
for energy, food, and real estate to as money....
talk about barbaric relics...artifacts from
millenia ago....

gold meets the criteria for money in ways in
which
those mentioned assets could never hope to do...
one item
you might want to consider is marginal utility...
and those characteristics which you did mention
are so important as to damn the value of the
ephmera and boat anchors you propose...

you lack even a basic understanding of monetary
science....

it is a preposterous utterance of
flibbertygibbetyness to say that gold's
non-appearance would never be missed....gold
has served to build and create a fabulous civilization
without which today's economy and standards
of living would be impossible....

7 billion people cannot live without gold - it
is as much a currency as ever amd as important
whether you can see it or not... reviled yes
because the totalitarian mind resents gold but
still currency nonetheless without which civilization
collapses...it's value does not depend upon who
physically posesses it....

i know that i would have much more success
walking into a car dealership to buy a car with
gold than
i would if i went in with a truck load of cheetos
and gallon of gasoline....

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:45
#49538

and while i am at it, you are confusing the
values of these secondary goods with value as
money....without being able to express any
good or service in terms of gold all values
vanish only to restructure along some primitive
barbaric model....

by agrotera
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 02:42
#49706

I totally agree with you SWRichmond!!!

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:23
#49513

i was going to let the gibberish on gold pass but
the idea that japan has managed deflation for
healing its balance sheets is a farce of
fantastical proportions....

japan has been in economic stagnation and
depression for 20 years....i don't see any green shoots
over there any more than i do here...

bernanke seems quite determined to avoid managed
deflation....that's just a policy statement -
not a prediction of success...

by Icarus
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:30
#49523

After decades of time to analyse the only critism of Japan is that they should have forced default on more debt. Now that MBS debt is gov backed they have painted themselves into a corner. That is what's sad about TD's post.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 19:17
#49447

So FCBs are happy to buy safer(?) treasuries than MBS. If dollar collapses who is on the hook? FCBs are going to be on the race to the bottom too.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:28
#49519

First, I hope Ron Paul got cc'd on this.

Second, I suspect that what will bring on the massive inflation is if, or when the economy actually recovers. If one nets out the money creation evident in this article with the increase in reserves held by member banks at the Fed, the actual inflationary pressure is mitigated. So long as there is no recovery, those reserves will probably stay on deposit at the Fed, and like the Japan case, the newly created money is not even sufficient to fill in the holes resulting from the collapse of asset prices.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:50
#49541

http://aaronandmoses.blogspot.com/2009/08/microsoft-photoshops-black-man-out-of.html

by Sqworl
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:52
#49544

Arrested this morning the only possible suspect for the Identity theft of Ben Bernanke quoted at the time of his arrest. Mr. Potato head said, "if I have only worn my derby and glasses they would have never found me."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/213696

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 20:54
#49546

In a roundabout way, the Chinese seem to be making some sort of statement that is either dollar supportive or evidences a belief in continued deflation. Or maybe it's just a statement about liquidity. Why? Go read the Real Estate post. In that post (NY Trophy Buildings...) some comments note that S-FL auctions have yielded condo buys as low as 2 cents on the dollar. The Chinese could easily have sold their Agencies and bought South Florida RE. Instead, the opted for Treasury paper.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:04
#49556

Someday the stiffs that are still keeping their real hard earned money in the busted banks will find that it isn't worth the risk, and then pull out. I am there.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:45
#49591

"The Fed and U.S. banks would suffer irreparable harm if details of the loan programs were made public, according to the central bank’s senior counsel, Yvonne Mizusawa."
-Bloomberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=atY_Xj_ihGM4

by rapier
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 21:54
#49601

This isn't news and it isn't a secret. It may be to most people.

Lee Adler's Wall Street Examiner's Fed Report contains this stuff and tons more.

 

"FCBs’ holdings of GSE paper have dropped from a high of $985 billion in July 2008 to $785 billion now. The quarterly (not annual) growth rate in FCB holdings of GSE paper is now minus 3.6% after being slightly positive for a couple of weeks in mid-May, but this is above the low of -4.3% hit the week of August 12

Any reduction of FCB holdings of GSE paper offsets any systemic gain resulting
from the Fed’s direct purchases of that paper.

This does not bode well for longer term Treasury yields. While the FCBs have been liquidating their GSE holdings they were buying Treasuries heavily...."

 

These systematic flows  can be surprising to see but analyzing their real impact is a guessing game. The Fed has committed to purchasing $200 billion of GSE paper. They have done about 120 of that so far. It pretty much goes without saying that whoever gets that cash is going to buy Treasuries with it.  This is all important but it isn't a secret.

http://wallstreetexaminer.com/

 

 

 

 

 

 

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 22:15
#49618

While the average american employee toil to earn his salary in dollars to feed his family, these folks at the Fed (incl the Feds of NY etc) and this person named bernanke who calls himself a professor is committing crime against us all by debasing our currency in the name of reviving the economy by creating inflation. When elites rob from the poor to feed the rich it is always recipe for a revolution - when is for americans to decide. If the people does not act, then we have ourselves to blame for the end of this nation and we will have to answer to future generations.

by darkness (not verified)
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 13:11
#49636

Half the stores had stuff marked in old prices and half in new prices. Everybody was living like there was no tomorrow...which made for some great unexpected intimate liaisons.

good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 22:58
#49646

Sorry I don't understand this whole ordeal.

Its in the best interest for the big stakeholders of the world (central banks stockholders) to hold USTs..right? If the agency bonds default, who gets the bill? The taxpayer.

So, isn't the US treasury essentially selling the United States by issuing more and more of USTs? In essence, if the US defaults, then those holding UST would have access to anything in the US.

That's the other reason I believe its in their best interest to have deflation. Wouldn't credit default create deflation? can't the fed control inflation through interest rates?\

Why not have a deflationary environment for the prize winners (those holding USTs) so they can buy things up for penneys on the dollars?

Just learning...so go easy on me. Thanks.

by SWRichmond
on Thu, 08/27/2009 - 08:38
#49791

"Wouldn't credit default create deflation?"

IMO deflation creates credit default, leading to currency crisis = hyperinflation.  Note that hyperinflation is not merely "high inflation" but a collapse of confidence in a currency, with subsequent loss of buying power.  High inflation is what Bernanke actually wants.

"Why not have a deflationary environment for the prize winners (those holding USTs) so they can buy things up for penneys on the dollars?"

Maybe.  This statement assumes that the losers will honor their losses and not stiff the lenders via their home-court judicial system and large military.

by Anonymous
on Wed, 08/26/2009 - 23:10
#49650

pretty soon, you'll see a huge line of sheople standing near closed doors of the banks

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.