Central Banks

Enron --> Worldcom --> Adelphia --> Lehman --> MF Global --> Greece --> Sino Forest --> ????
We would rank these as some of the more notorious bankruptcies. These weren't normal course of business bankruptcies. These were dark and deviant. They have many similarities. Opaque and convoluted accounting and finances are common to them all.  Whether it was Jedi for Enron, repo 105 for Lehman, or off-market swaps with Goldman for Greece, they all used every trick in the book to keep debt off balance sheet and to obfuscate the risk. It is hard to watch what is going on in Europe and not believe that Greece is just the first of many. Countries and their banks. Countries and their regions. Countries and EU programs. Banks and their national central banks. Banks and the ECB. It is hard to pin down the fatal flaw, but for us it is harder to believe that there is nothing to see there and we should happily move along.

Our feeling is that Germany is establishing a "Plan B" in place in case it needs to leave the Euro at some point. The catalyst(s) that might provoke this are the upcoming French, Irish, and Greek elections, which could see a resurgence in leftist, anti-austerity measures in these countries. Moreover, inflation is kicking up in Germany which will exacerbate tensions between it and the ECB.

In the not quite 100 years since the founding of your institution, America has exchanged central banking for a kind of central planning and the gold standard for what I will call the Ph.D. standard. I regret the changes and will propose reforms, or, I suppose, re-reforms, as my program is very much in accord with that of the founders of this institution. Have you ever read the Federal Reserve Act? The authorizing legislation projected a body “to provide for the establishment of the Federal Reserve banks, to furnish an elastic currency, to afford means of rediscounting commercial paper and to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the United States, and for other purposes.” By now can we identify the operative phrase? Of course: “for other purposes.” As you prepare to mark the Fed’s centenary, may I urge you to reflect on just how far you have wandered from the intentions of the founders? The institution they envisioned would operate passively, through the discount window. It would not create credit but rather liquefy the existing stock of credit by turning good-quality commercial bills into cash— temporarily. This it would do according to the demands of the seasons and the cycle. The Fed would respond to the community, not try to anticipate or lead it. It would not override the price mechanism— as today’s Fed seems to do at every available opportunity—but yield to it.

Gold has been trading in a tight box around $1,660/oz today, as eurozone finance ministers meet in Copenhagen to discuss the scale of the permanent “bailout fund” set for July. Gold has been stuck in range of roughly $1,630/oz to $1,700/oz in recent weeks as risk appetite has returned after the latest European debt “solution” which saw the battered can kicked down the shortening road once again. Nothing has been solved with regard to the European debt crisis, and debt crises in Japan, the UK and the US now loom. The misguided panacea of heaping debt upon debt and shifting debt onto government balance sheets, debt monetisation and currency debasement is leading to continuing currency devaluations internationally. Despite this or maybe because of this - risk appetite returned with a vengeance as evidenced in equities internationally rising to multi-month and multi-year highs and the slight weakness in gold in March. So far in 2012, gold has performed well and is set to end the first quarter in 2012 with gains in all major currencies. Gold is 6.3% higher in US dollars, 3.2% higher in euros, 3.1% higher in pounds, 2.25% higher in Swiss francs and 12% higher in Japanese yen which fell sharply in the quarter.

 The ponzi will fail, and the economy will reset - the only question is when.

David McWilliams (of Punk Economics) is back (previous discussions here and here) and this time he takes on the the flood of liquidity and the false recovery that has been created. Starting with a discussion of gas prices and the central banks' recklessness behind it, he swiftly shifts to the 'shambles in Greece' where more debt is supposed to solve the problem of too much debt yet again. From extreme highs in Greek rates to extreme lows in rates among the major developed economies he juggles with the conundrum of injecting liquidity to reflate a bubble in order to avoid the consequences of the bursting of a bubble - brilliant (as those Guinness chaps would say) - as this merely pushes the next crash out a few more years but making it bigger and more devastating. Global Central banks have pumped $8.7tn into the banking system to 'save the world'. Saving the banks has cost more money than it cost to fight WWII, the first Gulf War, put a man on the moon, clean up after last year's Japanese Tsunami, and the entire African aid budget for the last 20 years all put together. Context is key - is it any wonder asset prices have risen since there has been so much cash looking for a new home - why hold something that is printed everyday (cash) when you can hold something that is actually running out like oil or gold. The punchline is what goes in must come out - and that means inflation - as the 'trip' of excess liquidity comes home to roost. Must watch.

The guesstimates have all the accuracy of a coin flip.

Much of the fiscal and monetary insanity that has come out of the EU over the last two years can be summated by one of my central global theses: politics determine Europe's policies, not economics. And Europe now appears to be shifting towards a more leftist/ anti-austerity measure political environment. If this shift is cemented in the coming Greek, French, and Irish elections/ referendums, then things could get ugly in the Eurozone VERY quickly.

Today at 12:45pm will be the 4th and final lecture given by the CTRL+P spinmaster himself to young and easily impressionable GW students. The propaganda tour will conclude as Ben shares his views on the "The Aftermath of the Crisis" where we will most certainly learn that the primary consequence is a parabolically rising global balance sheet, where $7 trillion in excess liquidity has been dumped in the world in the past 5 years by the big 5 central banks. That and the fact that virtually all energy commodities are trading at or near all time records. We will likely also learn that while it is speculators' fault that gas is at an all time high for this time of year, it is not speculators fault that the S&P is at a 4 year high. In fact, we will learn a whole lotta stuff that those who took the red pill some time ago, may have forgotten. Watch it live below.

The last time the S&P 500 rallied in such a serene manner as the current trend was March 1987 - a few months before monetary imbalances came undone and crashed in October 1987. Further, JPMorgan's Michael Cembalest notes that prior to WWII, the previous rally as calm and uninterrupted as this was in November 1928 - a year before the crash. The JPM CIO points out how the Fed's ZIRP has created a 'Portfolio Rebalancing Channel' (PRC) transmission mechanism from cheap credit to wealth effect through spending and profits (that has worked as planned) but the last leg on this mechanism has not functioned so well. Payroll growth has been underwhelming and the housing market remains stunted - leaving the real economy remaining fragile despite the market's appearance. The Fed remains committed to driving this 'channel' but, as Cembalest points out this could easily be derailed by inflation, a bond market revolt towards funding our 'Ecuadorean' deficits, or the pending fiscal cliff legislated for 2013. "So the PRC keeps chugging along, until the Fed's job is done (and Goldilocks continues), or something breaks." History does not rhyme; ninety years ago, money-printing led to calamity in Germany, and eventually, to disaster in Europe. Today, money-printing is designed to save it.

How long will this last?

The price of gold is being actively managed by central planners and their proxies. The main culprit here appears to be the US authorities, as the manipulation is most apparent in the US open gold market. For the most part, this 'management' has resulted in letting the price of gold rise, but not too much, or too quickly.  The price of gold has always been an object of interest for governments and central bankers. The reason is simple enough to understand: Gold is an objective measure of the degree to which fiat money is being managed well or managed poorly. As such, whenever paper money is being governed poorly, the price of gold becomes an important barometer. And this is why the actual price of gold is a strong candidate to be 'managed.' Or 'influenced'. Or 'manipulated'. Whichever word you prefer, they all convey the same intent. Some who are reading this are likely having an eye-rolling moment because they hold a belief that there is no conspiracy to manage the price of gold. This is an interesting belief to hold because it runs heavily against the odds. We could spend a lot of time discussing how a belief such as 'gold is not being manipulated' gets promoted and inserted into the popular consciousness, but we won't. Instead, we'll simply note that the people who hold this belief -- and you may be among them -- react to the concept at a visceral level, often with strong emotions such as anger or contempt, and even anxiety. When a strong emotional response surfaces during a conversation of ideas, it usually means that beliefs are in play -- neither facts nor logic. Experience has taught me that when someone becomes dismissive or angry or hostile when the idea of price manipulation is discussed, it's best to simply drop the conversation and move on. No combination of logic or facts is effective against a deeply-held belief. It's better to wait until some new evidence calls that belief into question, opening the door for revisiting the topic. But for those with an open mind, there is a very interesting trail of dots to connect.

Because of its interventions and bond purchases, ¼ of the ECB’s balance sheet is now PIIGS debt AKA totally worthless junk. And the ECB claims it isn’t going to take any losses on these holdings either. No, instead it’s going to roll the losses back onto the shoulders of the individual national Central Banks. How is that going to work out? The ECB steps in to save the day and stop the bond market from imploding… but the minute it’s clear that losses are coming, it’s going to roll its holdings back onto the specific sovereigns’ balance sheets?

Germany's recent 'agreement' to expand Europe's fire department (as Goldman euphemestically describes the EFSF/ESM firewall) seems to confirm the prevailing policy view that bigger 'firewalls' would encourage investors to buy European sovereign debt - since the funding backstop will prevent credit shocks spreading contagiously. However, as Francesco Garzarelli notes today, given the Euro-area's closed nature (more than 85% of EU sovereign debt is held by its residents) and the increased 'interconnectedness' of sovereigns and financials (most debt is now held by the MFIs), the risk of 'financial fires' spreading remains high. Due to size limitations (EFSF/ESM totals would not be suggicient to cover the larger markets of Italy and Spain let alone any others), Seniority constraints (as with Greece, the EFSF/ESM will hugely subordinate existing bondholders should action be required, exacerbating rather than mitigating the crisis), and Governance limitations (the existing infrastructure cannot act pre-emptively and so timing - and admission of crisis - could become a limiting factor), it is unlikely that a more sustained realignment of rate differentials (with their macro underpinnings) can occur (especially at the longer-end of the curve). The re-appearance of the Redemption Fund idea (akin to Euro-bonds but without the paperwork) is likely the next step in countering reality.

There is noise and fluff and soap bubbles floating in the wind but don’t be distracted. Like so many things connected to the European Union it is just hype. In the first place do you think that any nation in Europe is actually going to put up money for the firewall no matter what size that they claim it will be? Let me give you the answer; it is “NO.” The firewall is just one more contingent liability that is not counted for any country’s financials, one more public statement of guarantee that everyone on the Continent hopes and prays will never be taken too seriously and certainly never used. Any rational person knows that some promise to pay in the future will not solve anything and it certainly won’t create some kind of magic ring fence around any nation. Think it through; what will it do to stop Spain or Italy from knocking at the door of the Continental Bank if they get in trouble and the answer is clearly nothing, not one thing. The firewall is just a distraction to lull all of you back to sleep and all of the headlines and discussion about it makes zero difference to any outcome and so is nothing more than a ruse. “Look this way please, do not look that way, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, put up your money to buy our sovereign debt like a good boy and everything will be just fine.”