This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Keeping an Eye on Inflation Expectations?

Leo Kolivakis's picture




 

Submitted by Leo Kolivakis, publisher of Pension Pulse.

William Rees-Mogg of the London Times asks which will come out on top: paper or gold?:

Last
week the price of gold rose to $1,100, the highest ever recorded. Gold
is still an important measure of the world economy. The theory of the
19th-century gold standard was that gold was “real money” in the same
way as landed property was “real estate”. All types of paper money are
capable of being created by banks or governments, so the supply is
potentially unlimited. It was observed that gold holds its purchasing
power over centuries, whereas paper money tends to depreciate towards
the value of zero.

Of course, the rise in the gold price
reflects the weakness of the dollar as well the strength of gold. I
have been writing about the significance of the gold price since the
early 1970s. The latest rise in price reflects the significance of gold
as part of the world’s monetary reserves.

 

The immediate cause of
the rise was a purchase of 200 tonnes of gold bullion by the Reserve
Bank of India from the International Monetary Fund. The Indian purchase
is quite large in terms of the gold market, but not particularly large
in terms of the Indian reserves. India’s reserves now amount to $277
billion, of which this new purchase of gold amounts to only $6.7
billion.

 

The significance of the
purchase is that it may be the start of a new phase in the struggle
between gold and paper. Since 1971, when President Nixon ended the
convertibility of the dollar into gold under the Bretton Woods
Agreement, the world’s central banks have tended to be net sellers of
gold and net buyers of dollars. Now the Indians have decided that they
have more dollars than they want.

 

Already
Sri Lanka has followed the Indian lead, with a purchase of five tonnes
of gold. If the new fashion spreads, and particularly if it is joined
by China, then Asia would have decided that it is better to have gold
which is rising in value than an unlimited supply of dollars which are
falling in value.

 

In the 19th
century, bankers trusted gold precisely because they did not trust
other bankers, or the paper that other bankers issued. They could hold
gold in their own vaults; it would not be dependent on other people’s
debts or on the printing of paper money. Most central bankers still
believe that the purchasing power of money is ultimately determined by
the quantity that is created.

 

Asian bankers know that the West,
and particularly the US, has been creating new money in huge and
unprecedented quantities. They must assume that this increase in the
creation of dollars will result in a fall in the purchasing power of
the dollar itself. China may or may not join in the movement to buy
gold, but the logic of the market would justify it doing so. Why should
China go on losing in dollars when the gold price is rising?

 

This
new logic extends outside gold and outside currencies. The real
struggle between gold and paper is a struggle for power. If paper money
is the dominant form of currency, as it is at present, then the
ultimate governors of the world economic system are the bankers who
have the power to create money.

 

If, however, gold is regarded as
the ultimate standard, as “real money”, then the market decides the
valuation. The floating rate system which emerged after 1971 depends on
relatively stable relationships between different currencies. If
countries develop a preference for gold over paper, then paper
currencies will have to demonstrate that they have a stable value in
gold, as they did in the years before 1971.

This may help to
explain the strange events that occurred in the G20 finance meeting at
St Andrews. In the 1970s, an American economist, James Tobin saw very
clearly the speculation that would arise after Nixon ended the
convertibility of the dollar into gold. Tobin, who later won a Nobel
Prize, knew that gold had been the standard by which other currencies
were valued. Once that was removed, he feared a growth of excessive
speculation, such as the inflation of the 1970s, or the successive
bubbles of recent years. He thought that this speculation could be
controlled if it were taxed. He advocated a new transaction tax.

 

At
St Andrews, Gordon Brown unexpectedly advocated the adoption of a
global Tobin tax. He was immediately repudiated by Timothy Geithner,
the US Treasury Secretary, and by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the head of
the IMF. The proposed global Tobin tax has the support of Oxfam and of
some left-wing economists, but without American support, it does not
have the least chance of being adopted.

 

The Swedes experimented
with a national transaction tax in the 1980s. It did not work because
bankers avoided paying tax by transferring transactions to markets in
which it was not imposed. The tax had to be abandoned in the early
1990s. This negative history must have been known to Mr Brown; perhaps
the clumsiness of his diplomacy reflects the pressure he is feeling.

 

In
Britain, there is an urgent need for a new tax base. One can take
almost any very large figure as the sum needed to balance the budget.
At some point, Britain will have to raise taxes and cut expenditure. It
is hard to see where this additional revenue can be found.

 

No
doubt it would be helpful to Mr Brown if the other governments of the
world would join him in policing a worldwide transaction tax on the
banks. Britain would be a major beneficiary. Like the US, Britain has a
combination of very large bank debts with a very large budget deficit.
As a response to the recession, large sums of money have been injected
into these economies. That has eroded global confidence in the pound
and dollar.

 

If there is no Tobin tax, it will be difficult to
rebuild confidence in these currencies, and the Tobin tax is not going
to happen, if only because it would not work. Two factors emerge. Gold
will be a stronger reserve currency than paper, and the market will
increasingly decide national policies. “You can’t buck the market”,
whether in taxes, in dollars or in gold.

I
thought all you gold bugs would enjoy reading the article above. But
there is another thing worth tracking in these markets. Matt Phillips
of the WSJ writes as the rally rolls, keep an eye on inflation expectations:

For
clues on inflation expectations in this carry-trade-crazed market,
Tuesday’s auction of some $25 billion in 10-year treasury notes is
something to pay attention to.

 

Last
week’s Fed statement signaled all clear for the carry trade. And last
weekend’s G-20 confab confirmed that the stimulus spigots at central
banks will be open for the foreseeable future. But the Fed noted in its
statement that it’s still going to be paying close attention to
inflation expectations in the marketplace

 

An auction of some $40
billion in three year notes on Monday went well, and the equities
market rally ratcheted up in response afterward, suggesting that some
participants are keeping a close eye on the bond market. But the
shorter end of the curve is anchored by the Fed’s near zero policy.
Inflation worries are more likely to crop up in some of the
longer-dated debt from Uncle Sam.

 

And
there’s already some signs that worries about inflation are floating
around out there. For one thing 10-year breakevens — that gap between
the yield on 10-year Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS) and
the yield on plain-vanilla 10-years — have been inching higher, a
somewhat inflationary sign, although we’d need more evidence to confirm
that inflation expectations are starting to break out.

 

“The
tougher part for the Treasury will be selling (Tuesday’s) 10-year and
Thursday’s 30-year auctions in light of the growing inflation
expectations as measured by the TIPS, among other signs,” writes Peter
Boockvar, of Miller Tabak.

 

If those auctions don’t go so well,
and the yield on the longer end of the curve jumps, that might prompt
more serious soul searching at the Fed. And uncertainty about how long
the Fed will keep the spigots gushing liquidity could push some who’ve
been betting on the weak dollar/rising risk trade to take a bit of
money off the table.

Those auctions will go very well. In fact, on Monday, Treasuries prices moved steadily higher after solid 3-year note auction:

U.S.
government debt prices rose on Monday after a record-sized Treasury
note auction drew strong demand and investors bet other debt sales this
week would get a similar reception.

 

The three-year note sale won a rousing bid as investors stood to gain
an extra 0.50 percentage point yield over two-year notes for taking on
slightly more interest rate risk.

 

"I
would call the auction stunning," said William O'Donnell, head of U.S.
Treasury Strategy at RBS Securities in Stamford, Connecticut.

 

"I like to focus on the bid-to-cover ratio and just looking at that it
was the best bid-to-cover ratio for the 3-year Treasuries since
November 1990."

 

The
Three-year Treasury note US3YT=RR was trading 1/32 higher with the
yield at 1.36 percent, down from 1.37 percent late on Friday.

 

Benchmark 10-year notes US10YT=RR were trading 10/32 higher in price to
yield 3.46 percent, down from 3.51 percent late on Friday, while
30-year bonds US30YT=RR were 15/32 higher to yield 4.37 percent from
4.40 percent.

 

Following
the three-year auction, the Treasury will sell $25 billion in benchmark
10-year notes on Tuesday and $16 billion in 30-year bonds on Thursday
as part of this week's $81 billion quarterly refunding.

 

"Two-year notes are already through their resistance level, so I think
the very steep slope of the curve is going to help the bond auctions
tomorrow and Thursday," added O'Donnell.

 

Before Monday's note auction, Treasuries appetite was curbed by a pickup in stocks and other riskier assets in the wake of a Group of 20 pledge to stick with measures to bolster the global economy.

We'll
see how the auctions go this week but my feeling is that Treasuries
will be snapped up fast. Moreover, it will take a lot more of this
liquidity rally to sustain a higher shift in inflation expectations.
Given the slack in the global economy, inflation expectations will be
capped for at least another year and possiby for a lot longer.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 20:56 | 126618 Carina
Carina's picture

Here's the link to the complete document (Breakfast w/Dave 11/10/2009):

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/15724694/Dave-Rosenberg-11102009

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 21:16 | 126638 Leo Kolivakis
Leo Kolivakis's picture

Thanks Carina, very interesting, but be careful with COT reports. A lot more speculation happens in the OTC markets.

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 20:54 | 126614 Carina
Carina's picture

From 11/10/2009 Breakfast with Dave (David Rosenberg):

 

Looking at the latest Commitment of Traders (COT) report, we can see some pretty interesting (and potentially disturbing) trends taking place (data for November 3rd):

  • The only areas where the speculators (non-commercial accounts) are net short are in Treasuries and in the U.S. dollar. Everything else has massive net speculative longs and hence near-term vulnerable to a reversal.
  • There is still a NET speculative short position in both the 10-year Treasury note of 85,551 contacts (on the Chicago Board of Trade). There are 95,648 net short contracts on the long bond too.
  • But there are 29,608 net LONG positions on the 30-day Fed funds contract —down from the highs, but it means that Fed tightening is completely off the radar screen. At the same time, there are 152,311 net longs on the 2-year Treasury note, so it would seem as though we have a crowded trade among the speculators on a bear curve steepening trade.
  • There is a significant net long position on the S&P 500 to the tune of 208,448 contracts on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME).
  • There is also a huge net speculative short position on the U.S. dollar (the ‘carry trade’). For example, on the CME, we have 24,389 net speculative long CAD positions; 50,264 net speculative long contracts on the Australian dollar, and 28,036 net longs on the Euro. These are huge numbers. What happens if/when the U.S. dollar ever undergoes a countertrend rally?
  • The largest speculative long positions are in the commodity space (this is near-term bearish) … 271,564 gold contracts (a record) on the Commodity Exchange (COMEX); 44,312 net longs on silver (near-record but not quite), West Texas Intermediate oil contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange (also a record); 10,871 net long copper contracts (a new cycle high); 5,538 net speculative long contracts on the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index.

 

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 15:13 | 126120 Duffminster
Duffminster's picture

I'll keep saying it because it still isn't understood even by the people 100 times smarter than me.  If the big hedge, pension and other funds that have gone long in gold or gold ETFs want to see there investment beat the long term suppressionary forces of the Bullion Banks, and commercials and the non-economic trades backed by certain local Central banks, they need to gain the high ground.

The high ground in the Precious Metals Battle is Physical Silver and Gold. 

The cartel knows this and it seems like they are using the leveraging relation of silver to gold to sell silver into the market to keep gold from blowing through $1650 and in fact trying to take it back to down to $1040. 

$100 Million spent to take physical silver off the COMEX and converting GLD and SLV to 1000 OZ.  bars of silver and gold is one of the fastest ways to take away the small amount of physical ammo that the huge gold and silver custodians use to make their short plays have any leverage.

The battle will be won on the physical level, not the paper level and the sooner the fund managers get this and start working with that knowledge on the broadest possible basis, the sooner gold and silver hit their inflation adjusted highs in my opinion.   They have the money but do they have the guts and the knowledge? 

This is all just my opinion and not investment advice.  

Wed, 11/11/2009 - 14:27 | 127244 Problem Is
Problem Is's picture

Is this similar to the manipulations and problems US bimetal policy in the 1880s caused?

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 14:26 | 126040 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Duh, Leo....we are Japan circa 1989 only our debt to GDP
has already surpassed theirs at that point. Check the
IMF figures. The 10 year bond will be snapped up for the next five years while Japanese style spikey rallies will
exhibit lower highs and lower lows on the way to the
ultimate bottom. Bernanke can't print enough or debase
the dollar enough to stop this from happening. Do the
math. This reflation/inflation trade is just a phase
we're passing through just as Japan did.

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 15:36 | 126167 Leo Kolivakis
Leo Kolivakis's picture

There is a possibility that we enter a long protracted downturn and experience our lost decade, just as Japan did. If so, pensions will be snapping up long-term bonds as they adopt liability-driven investing. It's already happening. But if there is a stronger than expected global recovery, watch out, inflation expectations will shift.

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 17:41 | 126377 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Understood. We are on the same page except
for the strength of the global recovery.
I think it will be quite weak and equities
and commodities will ultimately be
crowded out by sovereign debt. In effect,
UK, Eurozone and USA are ALL Japan now
with similar debt to GDP profiles of
early 90's Japan and rising to 118% by
2014.
(referencing IMF figures and projections)
That being said, I estimate the lost
decade will be cut to 5-8 years. Course,
that's an eternity.

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 13:24 | 125960 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Mad Max has it

PAYOLA trumps PAYGO

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 13:13 | 125947 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Since 1978 I have built up and saved 1478 pounds of gold. It's in the basement of my house. Is this safe?

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 18:47 | 126498 AN0NYM0US
AN0NYM0US's picture
Yes, it's safe. It's very safe. So safe you wouldn't believe it.
No, it's not safe. It's very dangerous. Be careful.
Tue, 11/10/2009 - 15:01 | 126087 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Uh...I dunno, what was your address again?

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:06 | 125824 MinnesotaNice
MinnesotaNice's picture

"Now the Indians have decided that they have more dollars than they want."

I think pretty much everybody has more dollars than they want... I know that I do.

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 10:31 | 125730 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

How much credibility should we put in the stated auction results - how do we know those weren't purchases by covert operations of the Fed, or by banks that had "gentleman's agreements" that the Fed would (somehow, post-QE) purchase the notes a short time later at a price that would make a profit to the bank?

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 16:22 | 126246 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Precisely!

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 11:50 | 125804 Problem Is
Problem Is's picture

Question from a novice:

Don't you get an indication of real demand by how much the primary dealers themselves are stuck buying out of each auction?

And how much the Fed buys back from them 3 to 10 days later by whatever lettered program is all the rage at Bernak-ster Printing, Ink... I mean Inc.?

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 11:36 | 125783 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Stop making sense.

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 09:56 | 125711 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Hurrah, finally someone sees the real (lack of) inflation picture.

Tue, 11/10/2009 - 12:51 | 125914 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

"But the Fed noted in its statement that it’s still going to be paying close attention to inflation expectations in the marketplace..."

But the problem is that by the time you recognize the effects of inflation, it's already too late.

So 'yes', morons. Keep the spigots open. But leave the window open as well, so you can plunge to your death once you 'see' inflation on the horizon.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!