Global Economy

There has been a lot of ink spilled about how the stock market performs during Presidential election years generally leaning to why investors should be fully invested to the hilt.  The current election year, with just three months remaining, has certainly played out to historical norms with the markets advancing on expectations of continued government interventions even as economic and fundamentals deteriorate.  To wit Bespoke Investment Group wrote back in July: "We have highlighted the similarities between this year and prior Presidential Election years numerous times. Most recently, in early July we noted the fact that based on the historical pattern, the S&P 500 could see a modest pullback in mid-July coinciding with the kick-off of earnings season. Sure enough, the market saw some choppiness about a week and a half ago and subsequently rebounded in the middle of last week. Holding to the historical pattern, that rebound came right at the same time that the market historically sees its summer low.  If the pattern continues, the S&P 500 could be set up for a nice rally to end the Summer. Will it hold? Only time will tell, but if the historical pattern has worked so far, what's to stop it from continuing?"

SNB bond-buying is "exacerbating" the gap between borrowing costs for stable countries like Germany and the rest of the 17-nation euro zone.

Liquidity, Fund Flows and Technicals matter now. Fundamentals, Dow Theory and the real economy, not so much. 

While oil prices have slid in their ubiquitous post-QE manner in the last few days, they remain notably elevated amid growing tensions in Iran and central bank largesse spillovers. These short-term fluctuations, however, pale in significance to long-run implications of peak-oil and whether it exists or not. From cost implications to technological innovation and demand destruction and supply constraints, the feedback loops of oil prices over time provide vicious and irtuous cycles for the global economy as we know too well. This brief clip provides all the color we could need on the matter of fossil fuel dilemmas and the diverging opinions of Astenbeck's (ex-Phibro) Andy Hall and Goldman's Michele Della Vigna provide the depth.

We have discussed the CRIC cycle a number of times - especially with regards Europe - but it seems the never-ending story of Crisis-Response-Improvement-Complacency has struck once again as Morgan Stanley notes when complacency becomes pervasive, it usually gives way to a renewed crisis. Complacent financial markets appear to be looking through the fact that the global economy remains stuck in a 'twilight zone' between expansion and recession. Dismissing weak PMIs in China and EU, markets have feasted in QEternity and OMT and this has, as expected, affected European policy-makers (e.g. ongoing disagreements over the details of the much-anticipated negative-feedback-loop-breaking banking union; and Spain/Italy's 'belief' they can avoid an ESM 'austerity' program). This feels eerily like the March/April period when post-LTRO improvements induced euphoria in traders and governments/ECB to relax prematurely and as Brevan Howard explains below - every major developed economy is facing significant downside risks - no matter how enthusiastic markets appear to be.

If anyone thought the bad blood between Germany and the rest of the insolvent proletariat, aka the part of the Eurozone which is out of money (most of it), and which has been now confirmed will be supporting Obama (one wonders what the quid for that particular quo is, although we are certain we will find out as soon as December), complete collapse of the Greek neo-vassal state of the globalist agenda notwithstanding, had gone away, here comes former ECB chief economist Juergen Stark to dispel such illusions. In an interview with Austrian Die Presse, the former banker said what everyone without a PhD understands quite well: "The break came in 2010. Until then everything went well..."Then the ECB began to take on a new role, to fall into panic.... Together with other central banks, the ECB is flooding the market, posing the question not only about how the ECB will get its money back, but also how the excess liquidity created can be absorbed globally. "It can't be solved by pressing a button. If the global economy stabilises, the potential for inflation has grown enormously... It gave in to outside pressure ... pressure from outside Europe" Why, whichever bank headquartered at 200 West, NY, NY might he be referring to?

Let’s review the tricks the central banks & governments have available to beat back any financial challenges presented by the debt reaper.

• Money tool # 1 = deficit spending. For years, the G7 countries have believed that spending more than you make, will create jobs and prosperity. To measure the success of this strategy, we invite you to hang out in Spain, Greece or Italy.
• Money tool # 2 = cut interest rates to 0%. All the really smart people in the World know that lower interest rates encourage people and companies to borrow more money and spend this money. To measure the success of this strategy, we invite you to hang out at the US Federal Reserve and help them count the $1.5 trillion in excess money held by the big banks.
• Money tool # 3 = when all else fails print money. Everyone knows by now the reason the Great Depression was great was because no one had the idea to print money to kick start the economy. To measure the success of this strategy, we definitely do not invite you to visit Japan. The Japanese have been printing money for over 10 years and that hasn’t shaken their economy from its funk one bit.

As we enter the always dangerous months of September and October, central bankers and governments just can’t get their heads around the fact that their cherished money tools are not shaking the World. Never one to quit, someone somewhere muttered “we must do something” – and something they did.

For those to whom this comes as a surprise, following the periodic jaunts of Tim Geithner to Europe explaining just what is truly important in life, not to mention Obama's daily phone calls to Mario Monti, we feel truly sorry:

• "Obama doesn't want anything on a macroeconomic scale that is going to rock the global economy before Nov. 6," a senior EU official told
• "As far as European leaders are concerned, they don't want Romney, so they're probably willing to do anything to help Obama's chances," said the source, an EU official involved in finding solutions to the debt crisis.

One kinda wonders: just what has Obama promised a broke Europe in return? Don't answer: it's rhetorical. It's also "fair."

While it is impossible to predict where the S&P will be in 10 years (or even 1), one can safely make some assumptions about what the world will look like in a decade (assuming of course it hasn't blown up by then). It will be hungry, it will be thirsty, it will demand resources, and it will be crowded (and it will certainly have lots and lots of wheelbarrows carrying pieces of paper to and fro the local bakery). Implicitly then, countries which control the production and export of various key natural resources and commodities channels will become increasingly more strategic and important. However, for some economies, such as the Middle East, whose entire export-based welfare is reliant on a core set of commodities, this export-benefit may be a doubled-edged sword, should it lead to militant antagonism by one time friends and outright enemies, and/or complacency leading to lack of revenue stream diversity.  In order to determine who the key resource players in the future will be, we present the below commodity trade matrix which answers two questions: how important is a commodity to a country, and how important is a country to a commodity. As GS notes, those on the riskier side of this equation are economies that are heavily reliant on oil, such as the Middle East or even Russia (which albeit scores better on other hard commodities). On the other hand, food exporters enjoy relatively better diversity in their trade portfolios. We highlight the LatAm economies here, while Canada and the US also look healthy. Will food (and water) be the oil of the future, and will the next resource war be not over black, or even yellow, gold, but, pardon the pun, edible gold?

Meet the man, who many say (most of whom correctly) has been running pretty much everything from deep behind the scenes.

• Deposit Flight From Europe Banks Eroding Common Currency (Bloomberg)
• BOJ eases monetary policy as global slowdown bites (Reuters)
• Stalled Rally Puts Pressure on Spain (WSJ)
• Missed Chances Stoke Skepticism Over EU’s Crisis Fight (Bloomberg)
• Germany's big worry: China, not Greece (Reuters)
• Goldman names new CFO, heralding end of an era (Reuters)
• Russia Demands U.S. Agency Halt Work (WSJ)
• Fed’s Dudley Says Easing Vital to Spur Too-Slow Growth (Bloomberg)
• Romney under fire from all sides (FT)
• Poland cuts red tape to spur growth (FT)
• IMF to Put Argentina on Path to Censure Over Inflation Data (Bloomberg)

US large cap corp profitability has been enhanced instead of eroded by outsourcing simply due to final demand being reflated by credit growth. That the US consumer’s deleveraging has not yet actually been felt in terms of final demand being squeezed and that the Federal government is going to go from supporting demand to detracting with some degree of fiscal cliff effect going into next year.  In a highly leveraged economy where SMEs are not performing well as evidenced by numerous anecdotal pieces of information and the overall weak post-08 recovery, the US could easily slide into a structural type deflationary recession. This is likely to have negative ramifications in EM/ EM FX where many of these companies have also enjoyed strong performance and negative implications for commodities and commodity exporters.

One of the more curious conspiracy theories that has appeared in the past 24 hours, or since yesterday's so far unexplained crude oil flash crash without a subsequent corresponding jump (those only happen in equities it appears), is that Saudi Arabia has decided to come to the aid of the Obama administration two months ahead of the election, and to pump enough crude into the system to offset the pricing in of the inevitable liquidity tsunami from the now global QEternity, or at least until such time as the election passes. Partially confirming this speculation was the FT's report that Saudi Arabia has offered its main customers in the US, Europe and Asia extra oil supplies through the end of the year, a sign the world’s largest exporter is worried about the impact of rising prices on the global economy. Reuters adds, citing a Gulf source that "We would like to see the price coming down and we are working to bring it down... The price now, we believe is high, and it's not supported by fundamentals at all. It's just speculation and geopolitics." "The majority of OPEC countries prefer around $100, including Saudi Arabia," he said, adding that $100 per barrel was "right now the ideal price for the majority of OPEC countries ... the majority is all except one or two." "We think the oil market is well balanced," the Gulf source added. This comes a day after fellow OPEC member Iran, whose output has been substantially curtailed in recent months as a result of a global embargo (with notable exemptions for key Iran clients India and China) made it clear that it would be happy with crude rising to $150 for obvious reasons. Obviously Iran is in the "minority" according to the Gulf source. And while the reasoning for Saudi Arabia to do all in its power to promote amicable relations with America's leadership is easily explainable, it is far less clear if Saudi Arabia can actually do much if anything to really prop up crude production, prop down the price of crude and gas at the pump, and support Obama's reelection chances.

A regional war in the Middle East could result, potentially sucking in the United States and Eurasian powers like China, Pakistan and Russia. China and Pakistan have both hinted that they could defend Iran if Iran were attacked — and for good reason, as Iran supplies significant quantities of energy. And with the American government deep in debt to foreign powers like China who are broadly supportive of Iran’s regime, America’s ability to get involved in a war on Israel’s behalf is highly questionable. And even without a war, further hostility and tension between America and her creditors would surely result in an even faster rush toward more bilateral and multilateral agreements to ditch the dollar for trade, something that America will almost certainly seek to avoid. So even with a President in the White House significantly more sympathetic to Netanyahu than Obama, America may find herself constrained by the realities of global economics, and unable to assist Israel. Most discouragingly, such a high risk operation seems to offer very little reward — a successful Israeli strike on Iran is estimated to set back Iran’s program by only one to three years. And such an operation would likely require bombings over many days and in many locations. If Netanyahu wishes to go ahead with such a scheme then that is his prerogative. But if he will not listen to Dagan’s wise counsel, why should the West rush to his aid if his scheme backfires?

Today's horrible piece of news, which at least on the surface was supposed to send the market soaring, comes courtesy of the Empire Fed Manufacturing Index, which printed at -10.41, the lowest print since April 2009, down from -5.85, and well below expectations of -2.0. The Index print confirmed the biggest 6 month drop since records began. The components painted a dire picture for jobs, with the employment index sliding from 16.47 to 4.26, New Orders tumbling from -5.50 to -14.03, while, wait for it, prices rose, from 16.47 to 19.15. Re-stagflation here we come. Market for now seems confused - since QE is priced into infinity, it is unclear if this latest datapoint confirming a recessionary economy, QE can't be more-er infiniter. Best to not respond to this, or any other macro news at all, which is precisely what the market has done. For those who missed it, not only has Bernanke doomed the global economy to stagflation and imminent food riots, while making the richest 0.001% richer than ever, he has completely broken any linkage between the economy and the market.