Global Economy

Today's Glencore implosion is a far greater risk to the capital markets and the global economy than Volkswagen: a few executive resignations, a few bribes to US Congress, and the scandal will be promptly snuffed. For Glencore, however, which suddenly the entire world realizes is - as we said in March 2014 - the way to trade China, it may now be too late.

While Asian trading overnight started off on the right foot, chasing US momentum higher, things rapidly shifted once Europe opened as attention moved back to global growth fears, global central banks losing credibility, as well as miners and the ongoing Volkswagen fiasco.

With the global economy sliding into recession, the one strawman repeatedly used by straight-to-CNBC pundits to justify some mythical case for US decoupling has been that US corporate profits are "fine." Here is the truth.

"The market is now observing itself from another angle as an observer of the observer of the observers."

While the rest of the levered-beta 2 and 20 chasers formerly known as "hedge funds" recently accused risk parity of blowing up their August returns (September is not shaping up much better) the biggest risk-parity fund in the world also found a scapegoat: the global economy, which according to Dalio, is the reason for All Weather's dramatic August slump. Bridgewater's message is simple: absent far more easing, what the charts above signal is that the US economy is about to slam head-on into an economic recession.

"At the start, China wasn't very confident. The worry was that there was no money for this."

Every dictator knows that a continuous state of emergency is the best means to justify tyrannical policies. The trick is to keep the fictitious emergency from breeding so much paranoia that routine activities come to a halt. Many have discovered that its best to make the threat external, intangible and ultimately, unverifiable. In Orwell's 1984 the preferred mantra was "We've always been at war with Eurasia," even though everyone knew it wasn't true. In its rate decision this week the Federal Reserve, adopted a similar approach and conjured up an external threat to maintain a policy that is becoming increasingly absurd.

For those of you who don’t want to take the time reading through the ponderous 7000-word transcript of yesterday’s FOMC press conference, we bring you the shorter Janet Yellen, translated from Fedspeak into plain English. Enjoy!

What the Fed really decided Thursday was to ride the zero-bound right smack into the next recession. When that calamity happens not too many months from now, the 28-year experiment in monetary central planning inaugurated by a desperate Alan Greenspan after Black Monday in October 1987 will come to an abrupt and merciful halt. Yellen and Co should be so lucky as to only face torches and pitch forks.

The incredibly strong demand for physical precious metals around the world continues to be obscured by institutional selling of futures contracts on the COMEX. The paper or electronic market continues to dominate the spot price for now. But rising premiums and delays for popular bullion products suggests that proper price discovery reflecting real world supply and demand may be at hand.

"Instead of acting via bond markets and banking sector, why shouldn’t public sector bypass markets altogether and inject stimulus directly into the ‘blood stream’?... CBs directly monetizing Government spending and funding projects would do the same. Whilst ultimately it would lead to stagflation (UK, 70s) or deflation (China, today), it could provide strong initial boost to generate impression of recovery and sustainable business cycle... What is probability of the above policy shift? Low over next six months; very high over the longer term."

Perception is everything in contemporary economics and the Fed is the center of perception; the medium has become the message. The truth is more this: the Fed no longer reacts to the waxing and waning of animal spirit-led demand. In the current monetary regime it exists to create and maintain animal spirits with a secular policy centered on ever-expanding credit, but it is very aware that admitting it’s centrality would defeat its purpose.

"As interest rates go more negative, market participants will have increasing incentives to make payments quickly and to receive payments in forms that can be collected slowly. This is exactly the opposite of what happened when short-term interest rates skyrocketed in the late 1970s: people then wanted to delay making payments as long as possible and to collect payments as quickly as possible.... if interest rates go negative, we may see an epochal outburst of socially unproductive—even if individually beneficial—financial innovation."

On Thursday, the Fed made it clear that its reaction function has changed. "Data dependency" is gone (or at least relegated to the backburner in times of global turmoil), and international and financial market developments are now officially guiding the FOMC's (tentative) hand. This epochal shift has left market participants asking one very simple question: "Ok, now what?" 

After so many years of the “new normal,” we have to be reminded just how extraordinary — and unprecedented — the Fed’s actions since 2008 have been. But does it not occur to bankers, much less the media breathlessly covering stock and bond markets, that these actions have set America on a hopelessly dangerous and unsustainable path? Or that placing so much economic power in the hands of a select few might not end well?