Bank of England

• Germany Can Ratify ESM Fund With Conditions, Court Rules (Bloomberg)
• Obama Discusses Iran Nuclear Threat With Netanyahu (Bloomberg)
• Stocks, Euro Gain as Court Allows ESM; Irish Bonds Climb (Bloomberg)
• U.S. cautions Japan, China over escalating islands row (Reuters)
• Draghi alone cannot save the euro (FT)
• 'New York Post' Runs Boldest Anti-Obama Ad Yet (Bloomberg)
• Another urban legend: Fish Oil Pills Don’t Fix Heart Ills in 24-Year Data Review (Bloomberg)
• Troika Says Portugal’s Program is ‘On Track’ (Bloomberg)
• Russia Wants to Steer Clear of 'Gas War' (WSJ)
• U.S. Said Set to Target First Non-Bank Firms for Scrutiny (Bloomberg)
• Wen Says China’s Policy Strength Will Secure Growth Targets (Bloomberg)
• UK faces clash with Brussels on City (FT)

The official release, just issued by HM Treasury, is below. The unofficial one is as follows: "The successful candidate must have proficiency with the CTRL and P buttons. Must sound confident and sophisticated when talking in circles while saying nothing. Must be malleable to financial sector suggestions. All other considerations secondary."

There is a Transfer Union underway in Europe. While Germany has tried to avoid this at all costs, Europe, has found a clever way of implementing such a program and keeping it under the radar from the German citizens. In Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy the ECB has implemented a program where the sovereign guarantees some bank’s bonds. The bank then pledges them as collateral at the ECB and gets cash. The bank then turns around and lends the money back to the sovereign nation and provides liquidity and economic sustenance. The Transfer Union is completed as Germany guarantees 22% of the ECB and the European Central Bank is nothing more than a conduit to lend money to the various nations. This contrivance is also not sterilized so that the ECB is, in fact, printing money. In a very real sense the ECB is the only fully operational part of the European construct at present as the European Union does not have the “political will” to carry out its mandate.

The Little Investor Is About to Get Hosed Again by Ben and the Boyz ...

So, ok, yes, there’s a huge conditional bazooka out there, but who wants to really use it?

 Seems like a huge defibrillator. Good to have, but beware of not shocking the patient too much. 

With a price hovering around $1,600 an ounce and the prospect of "additional monetary accommodation" hinted to in the latest meeting of the FOMC, gold is once again becoming a hot topic of discussion. Krugman, praising 'The Atlantic's recent blustering anti-Gold-standard riff, points to gold's volatility, its relationship with interest rates (and general levels of asset prices - which we discussed here), and the number of 'financial panics' that occurred during gold-standards. These criticisms, while containing empirical data, are grossly deceptive.  The information provided doesn’t support Krugman’s assertions whatsoever.  Instead of utilizing sound economic theory as an interpreter of the data, Krugman and his Keynesian colleagues use it to prove their claims.  Their methodological positivism has lead them to fallacious conclusions which just so happen to support their favored policies of state domination over money.  The reality is that not only has gold held its value over time, those panics which Krugman refers to occurred because of government intervention; not the gold standard. Keynes himself was contemptuous of the middle class throughout his professional career.  This is perhaps why he held such disdain for gold.

We destroyed the myth that the LTRO would not in fact stigmatize bank balance sheets when it was first introduced as the encumbrance was evident from the start - though took the market a while to comprehend and reprice (exuberant on the new-found liquidity optics). The expectations that the ECB will embark on a new scheme of sovereign debt purchases, implicitly funding governments - no matter how many times they tell us that it is to ensure transmission mechanisms flow, have three objectives or rationales, according to Goldman's Huw Pill: Easing private financing conditions through monetary expansion, Financing governments, and/or Reactivating private markets. However, there is one glaring unintended consequence of this 'aid' - the risk exists that well-intentioned sovereign debt purchases result in perverse incentives and a perpetuation of chronic fiscal and structural problems (much as Bernanke's band-aids have eased the fiscal pressure on our own government and led us further down the rabbit hole). The lack of political legitimacy and blunting of incentives for more fundamental consolidation and reform to take place can only turn the acute pain of the moment in Spain into a truly chronic problem for Europe as a whole - be careful what you wish for.

With Draghi stepping aside, the headliner can shine and while Goldman does not expect Chairman Bernanke's speech on Friday morning, entitled "Monetary Policy Since the Crisis", to shed much additional light on the near-term tactics of monetary policy beyond last week's FOMC minutes; their main question is whether he breaks new ground regarding the Fed's longer-term strategy. An aggressive approach would be to signal that the committee is moving closer to the "unconventional unconventional" easing options that Goldman has been ever-so-generously advocating for months, although even they have to admit that expectations are that any moves in this direction will be gingerly.

The empirical data is in. And it turns out that as we have been suggesting for a very long time — yes, shock horror — helicopter dropping cash onto the financial sector does disproportionately favour the rich. Here are four simple questions to the venerable Bank of England (just as applicable to any and every Central Banker); and sadly, we expect to see the announcement of more quantitative easing to the financial sector long before we expect to see answers to any of these questions.

There is a frequent tendency to over state the importance of the Fed and its policies and ignore the primary fundamentals driving the gold market which are what we have long termed the ‘MSGM’ fundamentals. As long as the MSGM fundamentals remain sound than there is little risk of gold and silver’s bull markets ending. What we term MSGM stands for macroeconomic, systemic, geopolitical and monetary risks. The precious metals medium and long term fundamentals remain bullish due to still significant macroeconomic, systemic, monetary and geopolitical risks. We caution that gold could see another sharp selloff and again test the support at €1,200/oz and $1,550/oz. If we get a sharp selloff in stock markets in the traditionally weak ‘Fall’ period, gold could also fall in the short term as speculators, hedge funds etc . liquidate positions en masse. To conclude, always keep an eye on the MSGM and fade the day to day noise in the markets.

• So Draghi was bluffing after all: ECB Said To Await German ESM Ruling Before Settling Plan (Bloomberg)
• German finance ministry studying "Grexit" costs (Reuters) - it would be bigger news if it wasn't
• Money Funds Test Geithner, Bernanke Resolve as Schapiro Defeated (Bloomberg)
• Top Merkel MP says Greek deal can't be renegotiated (Reuters)
• China Eyes Ways to Broaden Yuan's Use (WSJ)
• Armstrong ends fight against doping charges, to lose titles (Reuters) - Dopestrong?
• Need more socialism: Public confidence in France's Hollande slips (Reuters)
• Seoul court rules Samsung didn't violate Apple design (Reuters)
• France, Germany Unify Approach to Greek Talks (WSJ)
• Stevens Sees Mining Boom Peaking, RBA Ready to Act (Bloomberg)

The European morning session has been fairly quiet, with European equities opening lower following over night reports from China that the People's Bank of China might buy back government debt in the secondary market making the much speculated reserve ratio requirement cut it less likely. With several market closures across the Euro-area thanks to the Assumption of Mary holiday, volumes have been particularly light, and with a distinct lack of European data, market focus was on the release of the Bank of England's minutes for the August rate decision. As expected, the MPC voted unanimously to keep the APF unchanged at GBP 375bln and the benchmark rate unchanged at 0.50%, though some MPC members noted there was a good case for further expansion of QE. The better than expected UK jobs report also helped strength GBP.

• World’s Oldest Shipping Company Closes In Industry Slide (Bloomberg)
• Japan Growth May Slow to Half Previous Pace as Exports Wane (Bloomberg)
• China Export Growth Slides As World Recovery Slows (Bloomberg)
• Weidmann tries to muffle not spike Draghi's ECB guns (Reuters)
• Draghi lays out toolkit to save eurozone (FT)
• Concerns grow over prospects for sterling (FT)
• RIM Said To Draw Interest From IBM On Enterprise Services (Bloomberg)
• UN urges US to cut ethanol production (FT)
• Goldman Sachs Leads Split With Obama, As GE Jilts Him Too (Bloomberg)
• New apartments boost US building sector (FT)

• Gu Kailai Trial Has Ended, verdict imminent (WSJ)
• Greek unemployment rises to 23.1 pct in May, new record (Reuters)
• Greece’s Power Generator Tests Euro Fitness Amid Blackout Threat (Bloomberg)
• Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Results May Ease Wind-Down Push (Bloomberg)
• Monti takes off gloves in euro zone fight (Reuters)
• U.S. Fed extends comment period for Basel III (Reuters)
• HP in $8bn writedown on services arm (FT) - must be good for +10% in the stock
• News Corp in $2.8bn writedown (FT) - must be good for +10% in the stock
• Japan to Pass Sales Tax Bill After Noda Avoids Election Push (Bloomberg)
• China May Set New Property Controls This Month, Securities Says (Bloomberg)

The lunatics are running the asylum. This is the only conclusion one can come to when considering the nonchalance with which what was once considered an extraordinary policy with a firm 'exit' in mind is now propagated as a perfectly normal 'tool' to be employed at the drop of a hat. We refer of course to so-called 'quantitative easing' (QE), which really is a euphemism for money printing. Apart from his sole focus on short term outcomes, an important point that seems not be considered by the FOMC's Rosengren this week is the question of what should happen if the 'open-ended' QE policy were to fail to achieve its stated goals. He seems to assume that it will succeed in lowering unemployment and creating 'economic growth' as a matter of course. It goes without saying that money printing cannot create a single molecule of real wealth. If it could, then Zimbabwe wouldn't be a basket case, but a Utopia of riches. We must infer from Rosengren's idea of implementing open-ended QE until  certain benchmarks in terms of unemployment and 'growth' are achieved, that in case they remain elusive, extraordinary rates of money printing would simply continue until the underlying monetary system breaks down.