New Normal

Something funny happened when last August CNBC hired access journalist extraordinaire Andrew Sorkin to spiff up its 6-9 am block also known as Squawk Box: nothing. At least, nothing from a secular viewership basis, because while the block saw a brief pick up in viewership driven by the concurrent (first of many) US debt ceiling crisis and rating downgrade, it has been a downhill slide ever since. In fact, as the chart below shows, the Nielsen rating for the show's core 25-54 demo just slid to multi-year lows. And as NY Daily News, the seemingly ceaseless slide has forced CNBC to start panicking: "CNBC insiders tell us executives at the cable business channel are “freaking out” because viewership levels are down essentially across-the-board, particularly with its marquee shows, “Squawk Box” and “Closing Bell." “Their biggest attractions have become their biggest losers,” says one TV industry insider familiar with the cable channel’s numbers. According to Nielsen ratings obtained by Gatecrasher, from April 2011 to April 2012, “Squawk Box” is down 16 percent in total viewers and 29 percent in the important 25-54 demographic bracket that advertisers buy." Yet is it really fair to blame the slide of the morning block's show on just one man?

Common sense suggests that if employment is rising, the stock market should follow as more jobs means more wages, sales and profits. We see this correlation in the overlay of the S&P 500 (SPX) and employment until the latest recession and stock market Bull run-up: this is clearly a jobless "recovery" yet the stock market has more than doubled. Is this decoupling of employment from the stock market "the new normal" or an aberration that's about to revert to historical correlation? To do that, the market would need to fall in half or the economy would need to add 10+ million jobs in short order. If we combine Peak Oil with Peak Credit, we get a household sector with stagnant disposable income burdened by servicing monumental debt loads. Here is a chart of household liabilities and wages/salaries, unadjusted for inflation. Household debt has completely outstripped income. These charts do not paint a picture of robust recovery, they sketch a grim picture of stagnant household incomes and rising costs for fuel and debt service.

While the epically underfunded status of the US, by all definitions a ponzi scheme, whose combined liabilities have a net present value of about $100 trillion, is known to everyone, most can simply shake it off for too reasons: 1) it is a number too big to comprehend, and 2) by the time the ponzi blows up it will be some other generation's problem. However, it may not be so easy for California's retiring teachers. Minutes ago, CalSTRS, or the California State Teachers' Retirement System, with a portfolio valued at $152 billion as of February 29, 2012, and is the largest teacher pension fund in the United States, reported that its underfunding increased by a massive 15%, or from $56 billion to $64.5 billion, which happened despite the market being relatively flat over the past year. In fact this is supposed to be good news: as CalSTRS states, its underfunding was supposed to be even worse by $4.3 billion. So this is really good news. We wonder how good the news will be to tens of thousands of retiring and retired teachers once they understand that their obligations are only funded 69%. And dropping. But wait, there's more: new normal, no new normal, here is what CalSTRS did: it reduced "the assumed rate of investment returns from 7.75 percent to 7.5 percent, which increased the funding shortfall by $3.5 billion." In other words, if the market grows at a true New Normal of 1-2%, or worse, is flat over the long run, we wonder if the obligation coverage ratio would even be in the single digit percentage.

Back in June 2011, Zero Hedge first pointed out something very troubling: the labor share of national income had dropped to an all time low, just shy of 58%. This is quite an important number as none other than the Fed noted few years previously that "The allocation of national income between workers and the owners of capital is considered one of the more remarkably stable relationships in the  U.S. economy. As a general rule of thumb, economists often cite labor’s share of income to be about two-thirds of national income—although the exact figure is sensitive to the specific data used to calculate the ratio. Over time, this ratio has shown no clear tendency to rise or fall." Yet like pretty much every other relationship in the new normal, this rule of thumb got yanked out of the socket, and the 66% rapidly became 58%. This troubling shift away from the mean prompted David Rosenberg to say that "extremes like this, unfortunately, never seem to lead us to a very stable place." Which is why we are happy to note that as of last quarter, the labor share of income has finally seen an uptick, and while certainly not back at its old normal, has finally started to tick up, which leads us to ask: have we passed the moment of peak Marxism of this particular period in US history?

The Fed moved to defense. A tactical disavantage.

Following the durable goods miss at the end of March, there were some who were expecting another Schrodinger print in today's Factory Orders report, which was expected to post a 1.5% increase (even as the Durable Goods miss was revised from 2.2% to 2.4%, still short of the +3.0% expectation). Alas, no such luck, and instead the weakness from March is spilling over into April as February new factory orders rose 1.3%, missing expectations, but an improvement from January's print which was revised lower to -1.1%. Shipments however declined 0.4% in February, following two consecutive monthly increases. "Transportation equipment, also down following two consecutive monthly increases, had the largest decrease, $1.3 billion or 2.5 percent to $49.2 billion." Finally, and in what will be no surprise to anyone, Inventory stockpiling continues, and is now up twenty-eight of the last twenty-nine months. "This was at the highest level since the series was first published on a NAICS basis in 1992 and followed a 0.6 percent January increase." Finally, the inventories-to-shipments ratio was 1.33, unchanged from January. We will likely see some modest downward GDP revisions based on this data.

In an essay by Pimco's Tony Crescenzi, using the old and worn out title "To QE or Not to QE", which asks just that question, one of the lines of analysis focuses on the traditional conventional wisdom relationship between the jobless rate and initial claims for unemployment insurance. Tony says that this correlation leads him to believe that the unemployment rate is lower than where it official stands because, "Progress has been made, for example, on the employment front, with the six-month moving average for private payroll gains increasing to 214,000 per month in the six months ended in February 2012 from 160,000 per month in the 12 months prior. Importantly, weekly filings for initial jobless claims have fallen to a four-year low, fully 100k below year-ago levels and in territory consistent with a further decline in the unemployment rate (see Figure 1)." So far so good, and indeed if one very simplistically tracks merely the unemployment rate to jobless claims, the picture does indeed seem rosier than it currently is. The problem however, is that as always happens in this case, initial claims reflect only a discrete component of the true unemployment situation in the New Normal, which more than anything is characterized by one specific feature: the avalanche like implosion of the labor force, and the departure of millions of people, almost monthly from the labor pool, noted so very often on these pages, and recently forcing even Goldman and JP Morgan to ask whether Okun's law is not in fact broken precisely because of this. As such there is one other correlation that in our humble opinion should be tracked far more closely when trying to anticipate the unemployment rate: that of the unemployment rate but not just to initial claims, but rather to initial and continuing claims, as well as extended benefits and EUCs, which provide a far better picture of those who are truly falling out of the labor pool. And as the chart below shows, when using that far more accurate New Normal correlation, the picture is decided worse. In fact, instead of a sub-7% implied unemployment rate, the true implied unemployment rate is just over 12.5.

First it was Bob Janjuah throwing in the towel in the face of central planning, now we get the same sense from Bill Gross who in his latest letter once again laments the forced transfer of risk from the private to the public sector: "The game as we all have known it appears to be over... moving for the moment from private to public balance sheets, but even there facing investor and political limits. Actually global financial markets are only selectively delevering. What delevering there is, is most visible with household balance sheets in the U.S. and Euroland peripheral sovereigns like Greece." Gross' long-term view is well-known - inflation is coming: "The total amount of debt however is daunting and continued credit expansion will produce accelerating global inflation and slower growth in PIMCO’s most likely outcome." The primary reason for Pimco's pessimism, which is nothing new, is that in a world of deleveraging there will be no packets of leverage within the primary traditional source of cheap credit-money growth: financial firms. So what is a fund manager to do? Why find their own Steve McQueen'ian Great Escape from Financial Repression of course. " it is your duty to try to escape today’s repression. Your living conditions are OK for now – the food and in this case the returns are good – but they aren’t enough to get you what you need to cover liabilities. You need to think of an escape route that gets you back home yet at the same time doesn’t get you killed in the process. You need a Great Escape to deliver in this financial repressive world." In the meantime Gross advises readers to do just what we have been saying for years: buy commodities and real (non-dilutable) assets: "Commodities and real assets become ascendant, certainly in relative terms, as we by necessity delever or lever less." As for the endgame: "Is a systemic implosion still possible in 2012 as opposed to 2008? It is, but we will likely face much more monetary and credit inflation before the balloon pops. Until then, you should budget for “safe carry” to help pay your bills. The bunker portfolio lies further ahead."

Earlier today we presented an extended case by Caixin's Andy Xie, who is now confident that a massive 40% devaluation of the Yen is imminent and inevitable (with dire consequences for regional trading partners), as the opportunity cost, now that the Japanese economy is no longer competitive in the New Normal world (read trade surplus) of delaying what every other central banks has been doing so well (just observe the nominal surge in risk assets at 8 am this morning when Bernanke made it clear more real dilution is coming, as predicted here just yesterday), is the 3 decade long overdue pop in the JGB bond market. Yet as Xie notes, either of these two bubbles popping - the JPY or the JGB - is fraught with danger as both will confirm that three decades of central planning have failed. What is worse, Japan would then become a case study for failed central planning (yes, redundant), everywhere, but nowhere more than in the US. Which in turn, would not be a surprise to most, or at least to those who don't chase dead end momentum trends and heatmapped assets in simplistic hopes of finding a greater fool 1 millisecond into the future. It also would not be a surprise to anyone who sees the following chart from John Lohman which shows the gradual failure of central planning since the second global depression started in 2007 (and offset to date by $7 trillion in central bank private-to-public risk offset), during which time the BOJ has been forced to load up its balance sheet with substantially more assets than its GDP has grown by. Alas, this trend will accelerate which is why with time the exponential chart of central bank balance sheet expansion will only get more "exponential" until it finally pops, bringing with it an end to the truly last bubble. We can only hope we are somewhere far away when that happens.

Gold managed a 1.8% surge today (back above $1690 and its 200- and 100-DMAs and its largest jump in 2 months) from Friday's close thanks to the combination of the ECB on Friday and Merkel and Bernanke today assuring the world that anything more than a 2% dip in stocks will not be tolerated. While Silver outperformed Gold from Friday's close, based on its 2-3x beta of the last year this was a notable 'underperformance' as Gold outpaced everything (beta adjusted). Perhaps importantly, the S&P 500 when priced in gold met and rejected resistance at a key level today - even with its nominal 30pt rally off of Friday's S&P lows. Volumes were abysmal with stocks well below YTD average and the S&P futures 20% below average and among the lowest few days' volumes of the year. Credit markets did not participate as exuberantly (though HY outperformed IG as you would expect) but the day seemed split into 4 segments: pre-Bernanke (quiet/sideways), Bernanke to US Open (rampfest, Gold outperforms, TSY rally), US Open to EU Close (TSY selloff notably, equities sideways, Gold rips), and then from EU Close to US Close (Equity/Gold/TSY rally as USD leaked lower). In FX, JPY was relatively stable at its lows after Bernanke's speech as the rest of the majors strengthened versus the USD (as EUR broke above 1.3350 once again). Oil managed a small rally on the day but underperformed the USD's 0.5% weakness from Friday as Treasuries were very flip-floppy today - ending the day with a small twist around 7Y (30Y +3bps). VIX made new lows and closed there as the term structure flattened further to its flattest in almost 4 months (with the largest six-day flatttening in 8 months).

For months we have been saying that there is no housing recovery, and what little buying interest there was was driven purely by abnormally warm weather and still record low interest rates. Well, the seasonal aberrations are now over, and normalcy can return, but not before much demand was pulled forward (Cash for Caravans? Money for McMansions? Shekels for Shacks? Dough for Dumps?) to December-February courtesy of "April in January" and mortgage rates soaring to well over 4%, leading to a major tumble in MBA new home and refi mortgage applications (as noted here "So Long Housing - Mortgage Applications Collapse, And Sentiment Update"). So we won't repeat ourselves, intead we will give the podium to CNBC's Diana Olick who now finds empirical evidence of what we have been saying all along. From Olick:  "Housing was charging back. Spring sprung early. Sentiment among home builders doubled in six months. Any talk that the fundamentals might not be supporting the sentiment was met with harsh criticism. And then suddenly it wasn’t. A slew of new housing data last week disappointed the analysts and the stock market, and all of a sudden you started to hear concern that maybe housing wasn’t exactly in a robust recovery. From home builder sentiment to housing starts, to home builder earnings right through to sales of newly built homes, there was not one hopeful headline in any of it (except perhaps if you invest in rentals, as multi-family housing starts made more gains, but that is a contrary indicator to housing recovery)." And from the ground:"And then an email from a Realtor in New Jersey: “Just reviewed March buyer clicks, Google’s analytics on all the sites we monitor – March is turning out to be the weakest month since last October re: Buyer interest."

One of the biggest surprise stories of the past several months, in addition to economic activity skewing record warm weather, and the New Normal seasonal adjustments (which as Albert Edwards noted earlier are giving data an upward bias for each of the past three years), is the consistently "better than expected" jobs numbers. There is one problem: as discussed previously, the rising jobs are purely a quantity over quality trade off, as every month more and more temp jobs take the place of permanent ones, especially those of former professionals from the FIRE sector. In fact, in January temp jobs soared by the most on record, and the total number of temp workers was just shy of all time highs. Ironically, as this happened, discretionary online retail companies have seen their stock price soar to record highs. One of the primary drivers for this has been the increased "efficiency" at these companies' hubs - their warehouses. Which just happen to be staffed with temp workers. The following infographic presents the reality behind these American "sweatshops" - because this is the "quality" of job that is rising rapidly in the current economy (at the expense of traditional permanent jobs) to give the impression of an economic recovery. There is no point in making an ethical judgment - work conditions are as they are. Just as workers at FoxConn likely have far better conditions than their peers, at least in their view, so do these temp workers view their life as better than the alternative, which is unemployment. It is, as they say, what it is.

Nothing that we haven't said already many times, but always good to hear someone, in this case SocGen's Albert Edwards, observe what is patently obvious - namely that the start of every year now sends a consistently wrong signal that the economy is improving due to seasonal adjustments that no longer are applicable in the New Normal. This coupled with the liquidity boost that takes places just prior to each and every run up completely explains why 2012 is not only deja vu, as it continues to be a carbon copy replica of 2011 (when the market peaked in late April), but is really a treja vu, mimicking the action of 2010. After all it was none other than Reuters who in its puff spin piece tried to caution readers that we have been here before: "This time last year, the U.S. economy was adding jobs at a similar pace of more than 200,000 a month between February and April...Growth was nipped in the bud by the Arab uprising, which sent oil prices soaring. In 2010, prospects had looked even stronger. Between March and May, companies were adding a net 309,000 new jobs each month, and first-quarter growth came in at a 2.7 percent. The rebound proved temporary." And yet here we are, wondering if this time it's different. It isn't. Albert Edwards explains: 'With bond yields breaking out to the upside and the equity bull run continuing, investors are back to their same old hopeful habits. Many are thinking that if we have seen the all-time lows on bond yields investors will be forced into equities. We already can observe leading indicators rolling downwards in exactly the same way as they did in 2011." And here is why Edwards will once again be unpopular with the permabull, momentum chasing crowd: "Expect new lows on bond yields by Q3 and this equity rally to turn to dust – just as it did in 2011."

Earlier we shared some perspectives on the just released Ryan 2013 budget. Shortly thereafter it was the turn of Obama aide and National Economic Council director Gene Sperling to give his spin. In what can only be characterized as an epic filibuster of none other than CNBC, Sperling spoke in length, literally, about shared sacrifice, about how math fails to matter in a new normal (and nominal) world, how trillions and trilions in underfunded welfare benefits (which even Goldman sees as untenable) are really just a matter of perspective, but mostly about how net tax revenues running below debt issuance (as reported here yesterday) are 'viable.' We leave our readers to make up their own minds. We just want to add the following highlights from a Bloomberg October 2009 article, which just may provide some more color on where and what Mr. Sperling's true allegienaces are.

Headlines only via Bloomberg for now, with some very modest downside in the stock for now:

• *CONSUMER REPORTS STUDYING WHETHER APPLE IPAD POSES INJURY RISK
• *CONSUMER REPORTS SAYS IT'S TESTING IPAD AMID REPORTS OF HEATING
• *APPLE'S IPAD SUBJECT OF THERMAL ANALYSIS BY CONSUMER REPORTS

Perhaps this is Apple's way of allowing us to eat iPads warm? A new feature not a bug? Or perhaps it is really smart as we see gas prices rise as a way to heat our homes more efficiently (although in the new normal cold weather is a thing of the past so it may have been unnecessary)?