Market Share

Monopolies contribute to many problems - the record of evidence illustrates the potential inefficiency, waste and price fixing. Yet the greatest trouble with monopolies is what they take away - competition. Competition is a beautiful mechanism; in exercising their purchasing power and demand preferences, individuals run the economy. If we are for competition in goods and services, why should we disclude competition in the money industry? Would competition in the money industry not benefit the consumer in the manner that competition in other industries does? Why should the form and nature of the medium of exchange be monopolised? Shouldn’t the people - as individuals - be able to make up their own mind about the kind of money that they want to use to engage in transactions? Earlier, this year Ben Bernanke and Ron Paul had an exchange on this subject. It is often said in Keynesian circles that Bernanke is too tame a money printer, and that the people need a greater money supply. Well, set the wider society free to determine their own money supply based on the demand for money.

I am reminded that this is the 5-year anniversary of the emergency Fed Discount Rate cut in response to the collapse of Countrywide Financial (CFC) earlier that week.  

Here come the facts!!! Warning, if you get your feelings hurt over hearing the truth, simply move on. You may have a couple of quarters lefft.

The reasons why interest is so incredibly low in buying gold and silver among the general masses when they are screaming bargains, and why the general populace’s interest in PMs only perk up after prices have moved much higher, or worse yet, never at all, is a testament to the disinformation campaign waged by the bankers against the people.

Android is near 70% market share. At which point should one expect network effects to take over and push Android into the de facto mobile computing standard, much like Office is the standard for documents in the workplace?

A curious thing happened on the way to (ever deferred) recovery: America's goods manufacturing sector has been resilient, and in line what one would expect from a recovery. So far so good: the problem as everyone knows, 70% of US GDP is based on "services." And it is here that things get very ugly. As the charts of the day below show, while "goods have been good", it is services that have stunk up the economy in the post-depression era, and are what the Fed has been unable to do anything to stimulate, and by implication have kept US GDP subdued at stall speed levels.

Emotion, while an important element in man’s array of mental tools, can unfortunately triumph over reason in crucial matters. In the context of simple economic reasoning, today’s intellectual establishment often disregards common sense in favor of emotional-tinged policy proposals that rely on feelings of jealously, envy, and blind patriotism for validation rather than logical deduction.  “Eat the rich” schemes such as progressive taxation and income redistribution are used by leftists who style themselves as champions of the poor.  Plucking on the emotional strings of envy makes it easier to arouse widespread support for economic intervention via the state. Printed money is not the same as accumulated savings which would otherwise fund sustainable lines of investment. The truth is that capital is always scarce; there is never enough of it. Krugman and Stiglitz believe, as most do, that Americans should be born with the opportunity to succeed. What they fail to see (or refuse to acknowledge) is that the free market provides the best opportunities for someone to make a decent living by providing goods and services.

Here are my thoughts from the VALUEx Vail conference. The idea for this conference came to me when I attended VALUEx Zurich, organized by Guy Spier and John Mihaljevic in February 2011 (you can register for VALUEx Zurich 2013, here). The thought of spending three days learning and sharing ideas with smart, like-minded value investors felt instantly right. Investing on some level is a never-ending pursuit to get better. Most of us are locked up in air-conditioned offices where we learn through reading SEC filings, magazines, blogs, etc.

• U.S. nuclear bomb facility shut after security breach (Reuters)
• EU Commission Welcomes Greek Reform Pledge, Wants Implementation (Reuters) -> less talkee, more tickee
• China Cuts Stock Trading Costs to Lift Confidence (China Daily) as France hikes transactions costs
• Holding Fire—for Now—but Laying Plans (WSJ)
• ECB-Politicians’ Anti-Crisis Bargain Starts to Emerge (Bloomberg)
• Dollar falls back as non-farm payrolls loom (FT)
• Ethics Plan to Raise Consumer Confidence (China Daily)
• Brazil backslides on protecting the Amazon (Reuters) - fair weather progressive idealism?
• Japan Foreign-Bond Debate May Boost BOJ Stimulus Odds (Bloomberg)
• Japan’s Lower House Passes Bill to Let Workers Stay on to 65 (Bloomberg)

• What's wrong with this headline: Obama authorizes secret support for Syrian rebels (Reuters)
• Hilsenrath promptly dusts off ashes of sheer propaganda failure, tries again: Fed Gives Stronger Signals of Action (WSJ)
• Fed Hints at Fresh Action on Economy (FT)
• Fed Poised to Step Up Stimulus Unless Economy Strengthens (Bloomberg)
• IMF Chief Lagarde Praises Greece, Spain for Efforts (Bloomberg) - efforts to beg as loud as possible?
• US sanctions against bank 'target' China (China Daily)
• Trimming China's Financial Hedges (WSJ)
• ganda central bank cuts key lending rate to 17 pct (Reuters)
• Greece Agrees €11.5bn Spending Cuts (FT) - Agrees? Or does what a good debt slave is told to do
• Germany Retains Stable AAA Outlook at S&P After Moody’s Cut (Bloomberg)
• Spain’s Bond Auction Beats Target as Borrowing Costs Rise (Bloomberg)

TAG ought to be allowed to expire at the end of 2012, but people like Barney Frank and Tim Johnson will be working to preserve this corporate subsidy for their clients among the large banks regardless of the deleterious effect on the US economy.  

As the flow of subsidies from Washington slowly ebbs, the TBTF banks will begin to feed upon one another...

Too Big Leads To Destruction of the Rule of Law

There is no mystery to the “headwinds” that continue to plague and mystify monetary policymakers.  The global economy is not pulled into re-recession by some unseen magical force, conspiring against the good-natured efforts of central bankers.  Instead, the very thing central banks aspire to is the exact poison that alludes their attention.  Conventional economics will continue to believe and empirically “prove” that the theory of the neutrality of money is valid, giving them, in their minds, unrestricted ability to intervene and manipulate over any short-term period (though it is getting harder to argue that these emergency measures are “short-term” nearly five years into their continued existence).  The occurrence of panic in 2008 and the unresolved and unremoved barriers to recovery in the years since, however, fully attest to nonneutrality, an ongoing form of empirical proof that their models will never be able to refute.  And we are all condemned by it.

Wealth has become stateless, and as a consequence it is becoming increasingly less accountable to any state’s laws or tax codes. Over the last quarter century it has become increasing easier to transfer large sums of money, what is more, large financial institutions find it far easier today to relocate to a different legal and tax jurisdiction than at any previous time, because it is easier to re-establish the necessary business infrastructure, the cost of relocation has lessened. Recognising this trend over the last quarter century, and being desirous of any slice of revenue they can get their hands on, governments around the world have competed with each other, to provide the ‘best business environment’ for those financial institutions. Let’s not delude ourselves about this, the ‘best business environment’ is the least regulation and the most advantageous tax breaks. And by competing with each other in this way, governments around the world created the regulatory environment which was, in part, responsible for the current financial crisis. And then there are the ‘Tax Havens’