Guest Post: The New Abnormal

Tyler Durden — Mon, 20 May 2013 16:50:00 +0000

Submitted by James Howard Kunstler of Kunstler.com,

The collective state of mind in the USA these days may be even more peculiar than what went on in Germany in the early 1930s, when the Nazis were freely elected to lead the country and reconstructed the battered national psyche into a superman cult that soon beat a path to mass death and ruin. America has its own way of going crazy. We don't goose-step to tragedy; we coalesce into an insane clown posse and stumble into it by pratfall -- juggaloes dancing backwards off the cliff edge.

We've been softened up and made extra-stupid on a 60-year-long diet of TV and kreme-filled donuts. Instead of a "master race," our political fantasies revolve around a master wish - to get something for nothing. Want to feel good about yourself? Smoke some crank. Want to become economically secure? Buy a Powerball ticket or drive to the local casino. Want political esteem? Plug a flag pin into your lapel. Want status? Borrow free money from the Federal Reserve at zero interest and arbitrage it into massive earnings for your primary dealer bank. All these behaviors are the consequence of a culture that elevated advertising to such a high social good, it ended up drowning in its own manufactured bullshit.

A subset of our master wish has been on vivid display in recent months, namely the idea that God has blessed the USA with a limitless supply of new oil that will allow us to keep driving to WalMart forever. This propaganda from an oil industry desperate for capital investment has been swallowed whole by people in authority who ought to know better, just as that same class of people in Germany of 1934 should have known better about what they were bargaining for in economic well-being with the Nazi agenda. In our case, the propaganda drumbeat is being led by formerly respectable news organizations. The New York Times, National Public Radio, Bloomberg News, Forbes, and The Atlantic Magazine are media giants that have lately spread the "good news" that America will soon be 1) "energy independent," 2) the world's leading oil exporter (greater than Saudi Arabia is now!), and the "go-to nation" for cheap manufacturing.

All of these claims are false, by the way. The American way-of-life was designed to run on $20-a-barrel oil, not $90-a-barrel oil, and "new technology" has not changed that. The unfortunate and, to some extent, mendacious memes about the wonders of "new technology" have only snookered the public into a false sense of security about a future that will disappoint them badly and probably provoke an extreme political reaction as the reality of our predicament sweeps through daily life.

Most of the current "endless oil" fantasy revolves around shale oil. Just to get a visual idea of what this amounts to, consider this map. It depicts the two major shale oil production regions of the USA: the Bakken in North Dakota and the Eagle Ford "play" in Texas. Bakken production is confined almost entirely to four counties in North Dakota (Williams, Mountrail, McKenzie, Dunn). The Eagle Ford region touches perhaps ten Texas counties. Now, realize that the oil fields all over the rest of the USA (including Alaska) are in decline. Here's where the "bonanza" of new oil all comes from:

The oil coming out of these places is high cost and low flow-rate oil. This is exactly the opposite of what US oil production used to be (low cost and high flow-rate) when we were busy building all the freeways, strip malls, housing subdivisions, suburban office parks and all of the other stranded assets that now make up the infrastructure of daily life in this country. Those were the days when you could pound a single pipe vertically 1000 feet down (not much deeper than many home water wells) into the temperate wheatfields of Oklahoma (drive to work in shirtsleeve weather!) and after that modest investment in drilling you could kick back and depend on a great flow rate (5,000 barrels-a-day, not unusual) of sweet light petroleum for years.

Horizontal drilling (often more than 10,000 feet down + many "laterals" an additional 10,000 feet horizontally) and then fracturing "tight" rock for shale oil is not only a way larger capital expense (lots of steel!) but the flow rates per well (82 barrels-a-day average) are laughable compared to the halcyon days of conventional oil -- little better than "stripper" wells. Consider also that shale oil well flow-rates decline greater than 60 percent in the first year (rapidly thereafter, too) and you can see easily that there will be no "kicking back" to run the pump-jacks like cash registers, as in the old days. In fact, the rapid depletion only prompts more frantic drilling and re-drilling to keep the production at its current rate - the "Red Queen Syndrome" ("I'm running as fast as I can to stay where I am"), which means fantastic capital expenditure to keep drilling and fracking more wells (even more steel!). Consider also, that the small "sweet spots" in the shale oil regions were the ones drilled first (in earnest after 2003), for the simple reason that they were the most promising. This was the "low hanging fruit" -- easy to pick. Outside these sweet spots the oil may be too meager or difficult or costly to bother drilling for.

This is a picture of a boomlet that may run a few more years -- if the banking system doesn't implode and the massive stream of capital doesn't quit flowing to the shale counties. The excitement will all be over before 2020, but I suspect that troubles in finance and banking will put the schnitz on the shale gas mania long before that date. What will happen when the American public discovers that they were lied to about yet another important matter? The discovery will coincide with very severe changes in daily life that won't be avoidable. Everyone will be affected. Many will be impoverished and suffer real hardship. That's when the public goes apeshit and starts tearing down the house.

Apart from the issue of sheer economic suffering and all the damage that will ensue, consider that it will be generations before anyone believes the "authorities" again -- though, like the oil age itself, the era of giant national media will probably prove to be a one-shot deal, too. Future generations -- if they are lucky -- may read the news on one-page circulating broadsides, printed laboriously in hand-set type by letterpress. Or maybe they'll be reduced to just parsing out rumors.

Gold And Silver Inverse Baumgartner'd

Tyler Durden — Mon, 20 May 2013 16:15:22 +0000

UPDATE 1: Chatter of a potential US downgrade from Moody's is being blamed (but that news out hours ago)

UPDATE 2: Silver futures trading volume 82% higher than 100-day average

While the mainstream media will likely be loathed to mention it, gold and silver are surging higher. Gold has retested $1400 and Silver $23 on no news... so it seems the demand for 'cheaper' precious metals was enough to warrant a 4.6% rally off overnight lows in gold and 12.5% in silver amid heavy volume in futures markets...

Charts: Bloomberg

Who is RBS? Royal BS... or the Royal Bank of Scotland

Reggie Middleton — Mon, 20 May 2013 16:00:50 +0000

Scotland is making a move for independence from the UK as a sovereign nation. Such an event is bound to be rife with political motivations and ramifications that I'm no where near qualified to gauge or judge. Yet, there is one thing that I can comment on with conviction, and that is the risks that abound in the banking system. You see, with so many political motivations running in several directions, the truth (or even a facsimile of it) will be hard to come by in such a situation, but I believe I can ferret out a nugget or two. Here are a few snippets from an article ran on CNBC.com today: Scotland Independence Could Lead to Cyprus-Style Banking Crisis

An independent Scotland is at risk of a Cyprus-style banking crisis, as its banking sector would be "exceptionally large" compared to the size of its economy, a U.K. government report has said.

"An independent Scotland would have an exceptionally large banking sector compared to the size of its economy - with banking assets of more than 1250 percent of Scottish [gross domestic product] - making it more vulnerable to financial shocks and the volatility of the sector," the Treasury report said on Monday.

The report pointed out Scotland's banking exposure would dwarf that of Iceland and Cyprus, two countries that faced severe banking collapses in recent years. Iceland's banks, for example, had assets equivalent to 880 per cent of GDP, while Cyprus, which faced a banking crisis in March, had total banking assets of around 700 per cent of GDP.

...for Scotland if its banks needed bailing out, posing significant risks to Scottish taxpayers, the report claimed.

The report as cited by the article then goes on to make more direct comparisons to Cyprus, not unlike I did two months ago, but with Ireland (see As Forewarned, The Irish Savers Have Just Been "Cyprus'd", And There's MUCH MORE "Cyprusing" To Come).

"At the end of September 2012, the two largest banks – the Cyprus Popular Bank and Bank of Cyprus – had assets in the region of 210 per cent and 175 per cent of Cyprus's GDP respectively."

"It is worth noting that, if Scotland became independent, its banking sector would be similarly concentrated (with two large players, Bank of Scotland and Royal Bank of Scotland and a number of smaller firms), and that an independent Scotland's domestic banking sector would be likely to be significantly larger than that of Cyprus (assuming no change to firms' domicile arrangements)."

While there's not a single doubt in my mind that this so-called research paper has distinct political ulterior motives at it heart, a fact is still a fact nonetheless. RBS is still a problem in terms of systemic risk. On Thursday, 11 April 2013 I penned, I Illustrate How The Irish Banking Cancer Spreads To The UK Taxpayer And Metastasizes Through US Markets! wherein I clearly illustrated that RBS is materially understating its liabilities AND even went so far as to include links to the SEC and the UK banking regulator so that US/UK taxpayers and investors can notify our erstwhile regulator(s) to the potential of financial shenanigans. The root of the problem is that RBS has materially under-reported its liabilities (in my oh so humble opinion.) Those that stress tested RBS (the same erstwhile professionals that allowed the Irish banks to pass their stress tests 3 months before they started collapsing) apparently overlooked humongous swaths of liabilities. The charge documents referred to in the aforelinked article are definitively not apparent in the recent bank stress testing’ conducted by the European Banking Authority, at least not in the summary results that the EBA have made available. For those who are still skeptical, I beg thee reference the RBS Stress Test download. I presented ample evidence directly in my previous articles, to wit:

What happened behind closed doors?

Ulster Bank gave a first floating charge in favor of the Central Bank of Ireland (an arm of the European Central Bank) and the Financial Services Authority of Ireland. U.S. investors would have had to rely on the contents of The Royal Bank of Scotland's 2008 Annual Accounts which apparently (in my opinion) concealed the existence of the CRO registered charges to the Central Bank of Ireland.

Ulster Bank RBS charge doc 2 Page 1

I even included a lawsuit filed in which investors apparently go the message, they just didn't have access to the analyst that I proffered...

rbs litigation

Anyone interested in RBS will be well served to review "I Illustrate How The Irish Banking Cancer Spreads To The UK Taxpayer And Metastasizes Through US Markets!" thoroughly!

To give the prospective Scottish taxpayer a clue as to what surprises may lurk beneath, I post this tidbit from the afore-linked article...

The app below allows the UK Taxpayer to calculate for themselves exactly what their individual contribution (pro rata) is to the government bailout of RBS.

I've taken the liberty of pre-populating the input fields for you, but if you don't agree with the numbers then by all means insert your own!

Caterpillar North America Sales Collapse Suggests US Economy Back To 2010 Levels

Tyler Durden — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:50:45 +0000

While we have wondered on numerous occasions previously if the collapse in lumber prices is the far more accurate indicator of end demand for housing (as confirmed by the recent collapse in multi-family housing starts), perhaps an even better indicator of trends in housing (and by implication the broader economy) is private sector intermediate end demand, such as Caterpillar North America sales, which unlike government data, are far less subject to political intervention, interpolation, guesswork, seasonal adjustments and otherwise, general manipulation.

And even though we have previously reported on the woes ailing the world's largest seller of bulldozers, excavators and wheel loaders, such focus was primarily targeted in the offshore markets, and especially China (the abysmal European market needs no mention). So maybe the time has come to shift attention to the US, where as Caterpillar just reported, not only are all foreign markets still trending at several impacted levels, but where US machine retail sales just saw the biggest tumble in three years, falling 18% Y/Y: the most since early 2010. What is more disturbing is that CAT equipment is used in far-broader economic activities than merely housing, and likely is a far more accurate indicator of true industrial end-demand than any other number cherry-picked by the government.

Whether one can extrapolate general trends in the US economy based on how Caterpiller is doing in its North American market, is an open-ended (rhetorical) question which we leave to readers.

However, maybe a far better question is whether CAT NA sales is the same true proxy for the state of the US economy, as electric consumption - that Achilles heel of Chinese economic data manipulation - is to China.

Compare and contrast the chart above, with the chart below, showing the collapse in Chinese electricity consumpion.

If the answer is yes, and if indeed both the US and Chinese economies are now operating at a true level not seen since 2010, then just how bad is the rest of the world, if somehow the US continues to be perceived as the cleanest dirty shirt while the world's fastest marginal growing economy is in fact, crashing to earth?

Source: CAT Dealer Statistics

Bernanke's Testimony to Congress and FOMC Minutes Preview

Pivotfarm — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:47:45 +0000

Orginally posted http://www.tothetick.com/bernankes-testimony-to-congress-and-fomc-minutes-preview

THE IMPORTANCE OF BERNANKE’S TESTIMONY

Fed chairman Ben Bernanke’s testimony to Congress will be important in setting the tone for the markets (particularly the dollar, equities and US treasuries), as traders hunt for clues on when the Fed is likely to ease its rate of asset purchases.

The greenback surged last week, with the dollar index reaching a three-year high, on the back of traders’ expectations that improving US economic data will lead the Fed to begin tapering its programme of quantitative easing, possibly as early as the middle of this year.

Minutes from the FOMC’s latest policy meeting in May will follow Bernanke’s testimony. However, it is likely that Bernanke’s testimony may take the edge off this release, in terms of market impact.

FOMC POLICYMAKER UNCERTAINTY

Bernanke’s testimony is crucial, given the mixed messages from Fed officials in recent weeks. For example, Charles Plosser has suggested decelerating the rate of asset purchases, also suggesting that the Fed shortens the duration of the bonds it currently holds.

Some FOMC members, like John Williams, are in favour of tapering asset purchases by the end of this year. On the other hand, Eric Rosengren has argued that now is not the time for the Fed to taper its asset purchases.

And this week, Richard Fisher came out in favour of slowing purchases of mortgage securities, saying the housing sector no longer needs the Fed’s support.

Sebastien Galy, an analyst at Societe Generale, says “the Fed is slowly moving out of the ultra-dovish camp, as the Bernanke clan reassesses the risks for the Fed balance sheet and the economy of ultra-easy conditions for so long.”

It appears as though the Fed is eager to push the debate into the public domain. Simon Smith, an economist at FxPro says that “[the Fed] is keen not to scare markets when the [tapering] does eventually happen, hence the propensity to talk openly about it.”

WHAT CAN WE EXPECT?

What is definitely known is that the Fed is intent on tapering asset purchases. When is less clear – it is generally accepted that it could be anytime from the middle of this year, all the way out to 2015 (assuming that the tone of economic data improves – especially unemployment and inflation).

However, it is worth noting that “the current debate over tapering QE does not stem from a satisfaction with state of the labour market or concern over inflation risks but a desire to limit the perceived financial stability costs of QE,” according to Divyang Shah, a strategist at IFR Markets.

Recent US economic data has softened, but is still encouraging. Retail sales notably beat expectations, rising by 0.1% in March. Consumer confidence has improved; the University of Michigan consumer sentiment index advanced to 83.7 in May, from 76.4 in aPRIL, as the mighty US consumer shakes off the impact of fiscal sequestration.

But challenges on the supply-side of the economy remain, as shown by both the Philly Fed and Empire State manufacturing surveys, which both fell below 0; industrial production also shrank by 0.5% in April. And the employment situation is mixed, with weekly jobless claims inching higher last week, after improving over the preceding weeks.

Nevertheless, Mansoor Mohi-uddin, an FX strategist at UBS, believes that there is still positive underlying growth momentum, pointing to the Philly Fed survey’s inventories sub-index, which rose from -26.3 to 0.7. And although housing starts fell by 16.5% in April, the forward-looking measure of building permits jumped by 14.3% month-on-month.

But Mohi-uddin believes that “it is still too early to expect the Fed to [taper asset purchases] in the summer.” This line of reasoning is underscored by the benign inflation outlook in the US. Core inflation – as measured by Private Consumption Expenditure, which is the Fed’s preferred gauge of inflation – has eased to 1.1% on an annualised basis.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal by Jon Hilsenrath, a prominent Fed watcher, suggested that FOMC members are not alarmed by the deflation risks, and are satisfied that inflation expectations are stable. Traders consider the benign outlook as supportive of continued monetary stimulus. FxPro’s Smith reasons that “it seems unlikely that the Fed will step back from its commitment to buy $85 billion of securities per month in the near-term, with the economy still mixed and inflation pressures easing.”

Whether or not Bernanke will choose to communicate his personal views on when asset purchases will be tapered remains to be seen. Some speculate that any change to the Fed’s asset purchases will only come when Bernanke holds a press conference after the policy meeting, which would give him an opportunity to fully explain the FOMC’s rationale.

These press conferences are usually held in March, June, September and December, when the Fed also updates its economic forecasts. Mohi-uddin thinks that “June seems too early, while September and December seem more likely for the Fed to start reducing its pace of easing if the US economy re-accelerates.”

But staying focused on Bernanke’s testimony on Wednesday, Kathleen Brooks, research Director at Forex.com, says that there are two key questions that traders want answers to: “How will he explain the uptick in initial jobless claims last week? How will he react to the drop in core inflation to a two-year low at 1.7% for April? His answers to these potential questions from Congress could determine the medium-term outlook for the buck.”

www.tothetick.com

Brent Vigilantes Drag Gas Prices Near 3-Month High

Tyler Durden — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:30:22 +0000

UPDATE: Gas Prices reach all-time high in Oklahoma City

With the bond vigilantes still suppressed by the heavy boot of central bank intervention, the role of 'governor' of monetary (and fiscal implicitly) largesse has been left to the energy markets around the world. As we noted here, the Brent Vigilantes have indeed capped economic gains in the past few years (and perhaps more worryingly for investors, as we detailed here, have capped P/E expansion hopes). Sure enough, with a one-month lead, crude oil prices are leading retail gas prices higher (now near three-month highs) which point to a rally-ending, economy-sapping $3.80 price within the next few weeks (unless oil prices are rapidly suppressed too).

and as a reminder, seasonally, things are picking up...

and while we are still below record levels on the average, there are pockets where prices are already at record highs...

According to AAA Oklahoma's gas price tracking website, on Sunday, the average price in Oklahoma City for a gallon of self-serve regular gasoline is at its highest point ever, $3.963, breaking Saturday's price of $3.952, which was also a record high.

Charts: Bloomberg

TiCKeTS FoR THe FiaT BaBY...

williambanzai7 — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:09:28 +0000

WB7: We are now over 35,000 views on last week's post concerning the mystery of deposit confiscation: Here

As a public service, I would urge all of you to do whatever you can to spread that article whether by email, social media and/or, yes, paper and ink.

Goldman "Proves" That "Good News Is Good For Equities, And Bad News Is Good For Equities"

Tyler Durden — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:07:24 +0000

While anecdotally we see again and again that equities rally on bad news (The Fed will save us) and good news (see The Fed saved us), none of that matters until it gets the Goldman Sachs stamp of approval. Sure enough, in a detailed study over the weekend, designed to defend their bullish equity view (specifically financials) and expectations for QE3 to continue to Q3 2014, the bank that does God's work offered up these pearls of statistically sound wisdom: "while equity prices respond more to dovish surprises than hawkish surprises, the results suggest that equity prices typically go up regardless of whether the Fed policy surprise is positive or negative (“good news is good for equities, and bad news is good for equities”). But it is not at all clear why the equity market should systematically buy into this pattern." So rest assured, buying wins; of course, that is, until it doesn't.

Via Goldman Sachs,

...

Specifically, we find that a 25bp surprise [or QE implied equivalent] is usually associated with a 1% change in equity prices on the same day.

...

Taken literally, these results suggest that equity prices typically go up regardless of whether the Fed policy surprise is positive or negative (“good news is good for equities, and bad news is good for equities”).

Asymmetric Fed communication might help explain some of this pattern. When policy is tightened, Fed commentary tends to be bullish on the outlook and thus helps prevent equities from selling off. But when the funds rate is cut, Fed commentary is not correspondingly downbeat and so equities rally a lot. This asymmetry in Fed commentary, in itself, is not surprising as Fed officials are usually intent on emphasizing dovish policy changes (to help stabilize the economy) and downplaying hawkish ones (to avoid destabilizing markets).

But it is not at all clear why the equity market should systematically buy into this pattern.

An alternative explanation is that the asymmetry in the equity price effect is simply a statistical mirage due to a small sample that is driven by outliers.

Ron Paul: "The IRS’s Job Is To Violate Our Liberties"

Tyler Durden — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:34:17 +0000

From Ron Paul

The IRS’s Job Is To Violate Our Liberties

“What do you expect when you target the President?” This is what an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) agent allegedly said to the head of a conservative organization that was being audited after calling for the impeachment of then-President Clinton. Recent revelations that IRS agents gave “special scrutiny” to organizations opposed to the current administration’s policies suggest that many in the IRS still believe harassing the President’s opponents is part of their job.

As troubling as these recent reports are, it would be a grave mistake to think that IRS harassment of opponents of the incumbent President is a modern, or a partisan, phenomenon. As scholar Burton Folsom pointed out in his book New Deal or Raw Deal, IRS agents in the 1930s where essentially “hit squads” against opponents of the New Deal. It is well-known that the administrations of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson used the IRS to silence their critics. One of the articles of impeachment drawn up against Richard Nixon dealt with his use of the IRS to harass his political enemies. Allegations of IRS abuses were common during the Clinton administration, and just this week some of the current administration’s defenders recalled that antiwar and progressive groups alleged harassment by the IRS during the Bush presidency.

The bipartisan tradition of using the IRS as a tool to harass political opponents suggests that the problem is deeper than just a few “rogue” IRS agents—or even corruption within one, two, three or many administrations. Instead, the problem lays in the extraordinary power the tax system grants the IRS.

The IRS routinely obtains information about how we earn a living, what investments we make, what we spend on ourselves and our families, and even what charitable and religious organizations we support. Starting next year, the IRS will be collecting personally identifiable health insurance information in order to ensure we are complying with Obamacare’s mandates.

The current tax laws even give the IRS power to marginalize any educational, political, or even religious organizations whose goals, beliefs, and values are not favored by the current regime by denying those organizations “tax-free” status. This is the root of the latest scandal involving the IRS.

Considering the type of power the IRS excises over the American people, and the propensity of those who hold power to violate liberty, it is surprising we do not hear about more cases of politically-motivated IRS harassment. As the first US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall said, “The power to tax is the power to destroy” — and who better to destroy than one’s political enemies?

The US flourished for over 120 years without an income tax, and our liberty and prosperity will only benefit from getting rid of the current tax system. The federal government will get along just fine without its immoral claim on the fruits of our labor, particularly if the elimination of federal income taxes are accompanied by serious reduction in all areas of spending, starting with the military spending beloved by so many who claim to be opponents of high taxes and big government.

While it is important for Congress to investigate the most recent scandal and ensure all involved are held accountable, we cannot pretend that the problem is a few bad actors. The very purpose of the IRS is to transfer wealth from one group to another while violating our liberties in the process, thus the only way Congress can protect our freedoms is to repeal the income tax and shutter the doors of the IRS once and for all.

Silver Halted 4 Times Overnight Amid Flash Crash

Tyler Durden — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:20:44 +0000

While we have become used to the almost daily trading-halts in Japanese government bonds, when the CME reports that Silver trading was halted four times overnight, it is increasingly clear that this market is anything but 'normal':

*SILVER TRADING WAS HALTED FOUR TIMES OVERNIGHT, CME GROUP SAYS
*SILVER TRADING WAS STOPPED FOUR TIMES IN 20-SECOND HALTS
*SILVER TRADING WAS HALTED IN `STOP-LOGIC EVENTS', CME SAYS

Yet somehow, amid all this 'extreme' volatility in 'safe' collateral assets, we still do not hear of funds blowing up (yet). While central bankers would seem to disagree, there really is no stability without volatility and the more that vol is suppressed, the more extreme the inevitable 'event'.