On November 8th, the US Presidential election will take place. Below Bank of America lists eight trades, all specific to the election, some applicable to whoever wins, some dependent on the election result:
A Clinton Presidency would assuredly mean a continuation of the ruinous policies of Greenspan and his successors. The election of Donald Trump could not only mean a new direction in monetary policy, but the public demotion of the likes of Alan Greenspan who will hopefully fade into the sunset never to be heard or seen from again.
"The Fed is increasingly F#ked," exclaimed one veteran market participant as Core CPI - among The Fed's favorite inflation indicators - surged to +2.3% YoY, the highest since Sept 2008. This is the 10th month in a row above the Fed's mandated 2% 'stable' growth as shelter and healthcare costs continue to surge.
“It is the worst economic and political environment that I’ve ever been remotely related to" Greenspan said, noting that the U.S. is headed toward stagflation even though "politically, I haven’t a clue how this comes out." He concluded that "I hope we can all find a way out because this is too great a country to be undermined, by how should I say it, crazies."
Wondering why the stock and bond markets are tumbling simultaneously? Confused by the market's apparent inability to follow the mainstream media's narrative that higher rates are good for markets? Wonder no longer - the answer, as we have previously detailed - is the collapse in so-called "risk-parity" funds that force leveraged long positions in equity and bond markets to be unwound en masse.
The Federal Reserve’s long-term influence hinges in part on its ability to convince millennials that its current policies can help push inflation closer to the central bank’s 2% goal. That’s not as easy as it sounds, because this cohort has both a different history and current relationship with this economic variable. Why?
"...the only way gold loses is if normal business and private sector cycles come back. If that is the case, gold goes back 100 dollars per ounce. The other outcomes, deflation, stagflation, hyperinflation are good for gold...If people become more confident, gold will ease back. But when the chickens come home to roost, gold will come back..."
“...the only way gold loses is if normal business and private sector cycles come back. If that is the case, gold goes back $100 per ounce. The other outcomes: deflation, stagflation, hyperinflation are all good for gold.” As for a return to a gold standard, Shvets has more bad news: “Gold standards come back after the war, not before the war.”
Norway is heading straight into stagflation and at some point Norges Bank will be forced to tighten monetary policy into a weakening economy. The world should take note, because the real end game for central banks will come when they are constrained by rising inflation in a weakening economy. We all know what happened after the 1970s stagflation; and hiking rates to 20 per cent in an overleveraged world is a lot harder than it was back then.
If the cost of money is high, people think carefully about where they want to put their money. They select only the best investments. This helps everyone. When money is cheap, they throw darts against a wall. This is not the best use of societies' scarce resources. Is it any wonder productivity is down?