Ben Bernanke

With the world's suckers investors (CEOs, politicians, and peons alike) all hanging on every word the man-behind-the-curtain has to say on Friday, Stone & McCarthy has crafted an excellent 'what-if' of key takeaways and interpretations ahead of Friday's Jackson Hole Symposium speech by Bernanke. Will Draghi toe the line? Will China be pissed? and what rhymes with J-Hole? On balance, we think Bernanke will save the policy directives for the FOMC meeting (potentially disappointing the market) while highlighting that the Committee is vigilant and flexible, and ready to act.

Ben talks, the WSJ blows smoke and storms grow.

Silver is going to blow SKY HIGH!!

We have critically examined the question of whether the stock market 'discounts' anything on several previous occasions. The question was for instance raised in the context of what happened in the second half of 2007. Surely by October 2007 it must have been crystal clear even to people with the intellectual capacity of a lamp post and the attention span of a fly that something was greatly amiss in the mortgage credit market. Then, just as now, both the ECB and the Fed had begun to take emergency measures to keep the banking system from keeling over in August. This brings to mind the 'potent directors fallacy' which is the belief held by investors that someone – either the monetary authority, the treasury department, or a consortium of bankers, or nowadays e.g. the government of China – will come to their rescue when the market begins to fall. 'They' won't allow the market to decline!' 'They' won't allow a recession to occur!' 'They can't let the market go down in an election year!' All of these are often heard phrases. This brings us to today's markets. Nowadays, traders are not only not attempting to 'discount' anything, they are investing with their eyes firmly fixed on the rear-view mirror – they effectively trade on yesterday's news.

It is Friday, and the market is in danger of posting its first weekly loss in months. Which means it is time for everyone's favorite Fed mouthpiece, Jon Hilsenrath to hand over the podium to his true superior, Ben Bernanke, by posting the Chairsatan's response letter to Republican Darrel Issa in which he defends QE and leave in the following: "There is scope for further action by the Federal Reserve to ease financial conditions and strengthen the recovery." And just to make sure that as Hilsenrath is to the Fed, so Reuters is to the ECB, we get the following tried and now simply pathetic regurgitation of the Spiegel rumor from this Sunday (which was since denied at least two times for the simple reason that Germany will never agree to open-ended debt monetization until global stock markets are literally collapsing) via Reuters: "ECB considering setting yield band targets under new bond buying programme according to sources." Of course, neither Ben has said anything new, nor the ECB has said something that is on the margin either credible or actionable (recall that earlier today the ECB explicitly said its hands are tied until the Kardinals of Karlsruhe make their decision in 3 weeks), but the market doesn't care, and surges. Sadly for the programmed market ramp, the non-news was leaked too early, and should have been released at 3:30 pm at the earlier. Look for a full German denial shortly.

• 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)

UPDATE: Added Romney's Bernanke-Busting Clip

With Romney's comments (that QE2 didn't work, that he doesn't back QE3, and that Bernanke should go) somewhat cornering the Fed-Head's decision-making, CNBC's Rick Santelli's comments this morning are even more prescient. The Chicago truth-sayer vociferously noted the increasingly politicized Federal Reserve actions, highlighting Schumer's recent 'demand' that Bernanke do his job. With Bullard this morning noting that muddle-through was not enough to justify the size of QE3 the market seems to be anticipating, it appears any actions by the Fed in the near-term can only be seen as political. The only way to justify any sizable NEW QE is then surely for the market to crash - and with Spain's no-bailout-soon, and Merkel back in the headlines, who knows what's possible. One thing is certain: under Romney the country will need a Fed Chairman. And if it is not Bernanke, despite Glenn Hubbard's promises yesterday, one very likely name will be Hubbard's close friend and co-author: Goldman's Bill Dudley, who now runs the NY Fed. One wonders which choice will be worse for the country (if not for gold longs) - the Chairsatan or Bill Dudley? Of course, look for Obama to retaliate and promise to para-drop dolla dolla billz if elected. Critically, the wizened ex-Gold trader Santelli notes the precious metal knows this and is acting as a barometer of anxiety in this stand-off.

When it comes to Glenn Hubbard, the man needs no introduction, at least to those who have watched the Charles Ferguson seminal movie 'Inside Job.' Indeed, the extensive connections of the Dean of the Columbia school of business to the financial industry is well known, a fact which served as the basis of Ferguson's question: just how corrupt is America's elite educational establishment, and just how much of a factor in the perpetuation of the status quo is Wall Street's puppet control over each generation of rising financial and economic thinkers. For those who are unaware, Hubbard also happens to be presidential candidate Mitt Romney's top economic advisor. The reason why Hubbard has suddenly made the headlines, is because of his overnight statement that contrary to what the potential future president has said, namely that Bernanke's days would be numbered under a Romney presidency, and that the Fed would be audited, Glenn has taken the other side of this argument, and told Reuters that Bernanke should "get every consideration" to stay beyond January 2014, when Ben's term expires. But why? Well, for the answer to this particular question, we have to go back to that long ago year 2004, when Glenn Hubbard together with current Fed president, and former chief Goldman chief economist Bill Dudley, authored a white paper bearing the Goldman sachs logo, titled "How Capital Markets Enhance Economic Performance and Facilitate Job Creation." In a word: for Mr. Hubbard (as well as for Mr. Dudley, Goldman Sachs, and thus, the New York Fed) it is all about the capital markets.

How far is the Fed from reaching the bottom of its ammunition box? Well, both Mario Draghi and Ben Bernanke said no to yet more monetary stimulus recently. Wall Street unsurprisingly was disappointed. Wall Street expected more stimulus, as institutional investors are analyzing monetary policy from their own perspective rather than the central bank's viewpoint – understandable, but a big mistake. Wall Street's Conundrum: with the S&P 500 up less than 7% in 2012, the year is almost over, and the investment firms have little to show for it.

Up until now we were a lone voice in the wilderness, with our "dry-humored" Transatlantic colleagues, working for a newspaper funded with Goldman Sachs advertisements, periodically mocking our "misunderstanding" of credit and money creation. We are now delighted that none other than one of the foremost opinions on all topics "shadow" stood up this week, and admitted that indeed, it is Zero Hedge whose view on money creation is the correct one. Behold several absolutely critical observations by Citi's Matt King. The same Matt King who a week before the collapse of Lehman wrote "Are The Brokers Broken" and explained to all those who had heretofore been reading and basing their understanding of finance on the above-mentioned Transatlantic newspaper, why everything they know about the modern financial system is wrong. Lehman filed for bankruptcy 12 days later. Unless and until this $3.8 trillion 'shadow banking' hole is plugged, one thing is certain: risk is not going anywhere.

Two years ago, in August of 2010, Ben Bernanke pre-announced QE2 at the annual Jackson Hole economic policy symposium. What followed was a 20% spike in the stock market as the impact of another liquidity deluge was digested by the market, leading to such luminaries as Tepper to make his first ever TV appearance telling everyone he was "balls to the wall" long. The QE effect came and went, and Tepper made money, and then lost it, as QE2 was followed by Twist, and then by more easing out of Europe, including a global coordinated intervention. This year, as the US and global economies have been floundering, the Fed has so far disappointed, and despite a "mere" continuation of Twist, has so far refused to implement the same bazooka measure that it did 2 years ago, no doubt well aware that doing so would merely confirm that every successive intervention has less of an impact, and last about half as long as each previous one (as we demonstrated over the weekend). The market, however, like the honey badger, does not care: and with stocks trading just shy of 2012 highs, and with Crude having soared by 20% since July, and with Brent at 3 month highs, is very much convinced that the imminent Jackson Hole symposium of 2012 will be a repeat of 2010, and Bernanke will announce something (and if not, there is always September, and if the disappoints then there is October, and December - in a world addicted to Fed liquidity the only thing that matters is when is the next fix). So what happened in the last run up to the 2010 Jackson Hole meeting? Here is a visual and factual summary.

Weekend economic indices of dubious value

From the perspective of ethics, the fiscal profligacy of the US government and related behavior in the private sector is the cause of the financial crisis

"At this juncture . . . the impact on the broader economy and financial markets of the problems in the subprime markets seems likely to be contained" - Ben Bernanke, March 28, 2007

"I don’t think student loans are a financial stability issue to the same extent that, say, mortgage debt was in the last crisis because most of it is held not by financial institutions but by the federal government" - Ben Bernanke, August 7, 2012

Please mark your calendars accordingly as yesterday the Chairman just guaranteed that student loans will be cause for the next "financial stability issue."

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.