Changes in foreign holdings of US Treasury Securities, June 2007 - June 2008

Impending dollar implosion?

Mish reports a notion that there's heavy foreign buying of US Treasuries supporting the dollar; how much longer can it be kept up?

Financial experts "miserably bearish"

This report by Jim McTague from Barron's, reproduced on the Cumberland Advisors site, gives an indication of how the money experts were feeling this month, on their annual fishing trip in Maine:

[David] Kotok's diagnosis of the cause of the gloom that permeated the crowd was this: Most of them see more economic downside than upside; we don't have functioning credit markets; banks and big Wall Street credit intermediaries are either dead, wounded or on life-support; housing is a wreck; and the auto industry "is done."

Once the economy stabilizes, it will take many years to fully recover, he said, because no strong growth engines are evident. "That's why people are so gloomy! They see no upside!" He personally is investing client money in agricultural plays because, he says, the long-term price of food is trending up. He likes bio-companies whose products are geared to an aging population. And he likes Asia as an investment destination...and he doesn't like much else.

I conducted in-depth interviews with a dozen of the participants. They all perceive the economy in the early stages of a multiyear recession that will be the most painful downturn since the 1970s. The housing market, which experts once predicted would recover in 2008, may not recover even in 2009. Credit woes on Wall Street will begin to inflict real pain on Main Street.

We're already seeing the impact on housing, though the worst may not have happened yet; and I think stocks and bonds are still in something of a fool's paradise. I'm sticking with my guess that in retrospect, we will see that the upturn began in the Spring of 2010.

Down

Mish reckons there will be - is - a global slowdown and credit contraction, savings will increase, and bond yields and interest rates will reduce.

... which brings us back to gold.

A quote from the Economist article cited yesterday:

real returns from American shares were just 0.1% a year from 1966-81; they fell a dismal 1.3% a year from 1973 to 1981.

Although that performance was much better than the painfully negative returns suffered by holders of government bonds, it was a long way short of the 6-7% returns that shares have historically achieved. Gold was a much better inflation hedge, earning an annual 10.9% in real terms between 1966 and 1981.

Which is, I suppose, what Marc Faber means by recommending gold at this point.

Bonds: up or down?

Where's safe for your money? It's like a minefield: we seem to be zig-zag running between financial explosions. Housing? Overpriced, full of bad debt. The stockmarket? Due to drop when earnings revert to the mean. The commodity market? Distorted by speculation and manipulation.

How about bonds? Clive Maund thinks US Treasuries are due for a pasting as yields rise to factor-in inflation; but Karl Denning is still firmly of the DE-flation persuasion and thinks a stockmarket fall may be our saviour:

The Bond Market no likey what's going on. The 10 is threatening to break out of a bullish (for rates) flag, which presages a potential 4.20% 10 year rate. This will instantaneously translate into higher mortgage and other "long money" rates, destroying what's left of the housing industry.

There is only one way to prevent this, and that's for the stock market to blow up so that people run like hell into bonds, pushing yields down!

He also gives his own theory as to why the Fed stopped reporting M3 money supply rates:

The moonbats claim that The Fed discontinued M3 because they're trying to hide something. In fact they discontinued M3 because it didn't tell you the truth; it was simply NOT capturing any of the "shadow" credit creation caused by all the fraud (and undercapitalized "insurance" which, in fact, is worth zero), but it sure is capturing the forcible repatriation into bank balance sheets when there is no other when it comes to access to capital for companies and governments.

So, two elephants are riding the bond seesaw: fear of inflation, and fear of losing one's capital. I hope the plank doesn't snap. Antal Fekete reckons the bond market can take all the money you can throw at it - but what goes up will come down.

Cash still doesn't seem like such a bad thing, to me.

Will monetary inflation be absorbed by the bond market?

In the previous post, I looked at the expectation that interest rates will rise. But it seems that freaky things can happen if the government tries to stimulate the economy by progressively cutting interest rates and pumping more money into the system.

Professor Antal E Fekete thinks that in a deflationary environment, governmental attempts to reflate by introducing more money will be thwarted by the ability of the bond market to soak up the excess liquidity. Higher bond yields result in lower bond valuations, so reducing interest rates inflates the price of bonds. Fekete says that halving the rate doubles the bond price, and since mathematically you can halve a number indefinitely, the bond market can absorb all the fiat money you can create. Therefore, you can have hyperinflation and economic depression at the same time.

This trap is possible because the abandonment of the gold-and-silver standard means that the dollar has no limit to its expansion. And bond speculators have their risk covered by the need of the government to return to the market for renewed borrowing. If the Professor is right, it would be a nasty trap indeed.

But maybe our conclusion should be that this explains why interest rates must rise.

A quibble on style: especially in England, money is regarded as dull. So financial commentators try hard to add flavour, and in the Professor's case, too hard - it has been difficult for me to detect the meat of the argument under its many-spiced similes. Byron's Don Juan comes to mind:

And Coleridge, too, has lately taken wing,
But like a hawk encumber'd with his hood,
Explaining Metaphysics to the nation--
I wish he would explain his Explanation.

Warren Buffett's misleading optimism

Jonathan Chevreau reports Warren Buffett's bullishness on the US economy, long-term; but the real gem in this piece is the extensive, but cogent and crunchy comment by Andrew Teasdale of The TAMRIS Consultancy, who analyses Buffett's real approach to equity valuations.

Teasdale points out that although interest rates hit 21% in 1982, there was less debt, higher disposable income and lower valuations: relative to disposable income, debt is a bigger burden today than it was 25 years ago. He summarises his position pithily:

It is also worthwhile remembering that not everyone holds a Buffet portfolio and not everyone has the luxury of a 220 year investment horizon. If I was a long term investor with no financial liabilities arising over the next 15 years equities would be my preferred asset class relative to cash and bonds, but I would be mindful of valuations in determining where I put my money.

Not all the bad debt has yet surfaced, and as Karl Denninger comments, even at this stage Citibank has recently been forced to borrow foreign money at 14%, and other banks at over 7%, in preference to the 3% Federal Funds rate, presumably to keep the scale of their insolvency in the dark.

Inflation is increasing, therefore money-lenders are going to want more income to compensate for risk and the erosion of the real value of their capital. For the yield to rise, the capital value of bonds has to fall.

So I read Teasdale's summary as implying that for now, it's cash rather than either bonds or equities.

Stocks may follow bond yields down

Bob Bronson gives us a striking graph of the apparent correlation (since 2000) between the stockmarket and the yield on 10-year Treasury bonds. There is now a very wide gap between the two and seemingly the implication is that stocks are overdue for a large correction.

Contradicting the contrarians

Cash is king for now, but later next year it'll be equities up, dollar up, bonds down, according to the round table on Safe Haven.

UPDATE

But Tim Wood expects the market to hit a low - "The straw that finally breaks the camel’s back may be closer than you think."

Visions of 2008

Following Dearieme's comment on the previous post*, I'm going to try to visualise a chain of events over the next year - guesswork, of course, with plenty of obvious ones:

USA

a marked deflation in property prices
a reduced demand for luxury goods and services
reduced imports of the above
consequent recession abroad
further interest rate cuts
higher unemployment
higher taxes
higher State and Federal budget deficits
a sell-off in equities
increased demand for bonds
a weakening currency
higher prices for food, fuel and clothing

increase in the price of good-quality agricultural land
consumer price inflation indices will not be able to continue to mask the real increases in costs of living, and this will have further consequences for public finances
public enquiries, leading eventually to a thorough reform of the financial system

UK

much the same as above, except I don't think our house prices will fall so far - the US subprime mess will hit investments, but we will drop our interest rates to devalue the pound to maintain stability against the dollar

Gold

will continue to fluctuate interestingly, but although some smart money is after it, there will be less spare money around generally, and other commodities will offer interesting opportunities for inflation-beaters. It's already above its inflation-adjusted long-term trend, and lenders will make sure that the real value of their loans is not destroyed by hyperinflation

... in short, slumpflation.

UPDATE

*and, by way of comparison, here is Karl Denninger's outlook in his Dec 24 post.
... plus a more sanguine assessment by Nadeem Walayat.

A Merry Christmas to all, and thanks for your visits and comments.

What goes around, comes around

Rob Kirby quotes the Privateer newsletter's report that the European Central Bank is furious with Britain, for borrowing vast sums of Euros and forcing the stock of Euros to inflate.

Interestingly for me, he relates this action in part to the UK's having taken on so much of US Treasury debt, a matter on which I commented repeatedly some time ago.

The Fed may trigger off a run on Treasury bonds, says Wallenwein

Alex Wallenwein thinks the Fed will curb its impulse to drop interest rates as much as people want, because of its fear of inflation. He expects it will backfire when people figure this out.

Wallenwein suspects that the Fed has been buying longer-term US Treasury bonds to sustain demand and so keep interest rates low, but he thinks that once others scent the Fed's fear, there will be a massive dump that will throw more on the market than the Fed can mop up. This, he thinks, will send longer-term interest rates soaring.

His conclusion is that gold will perform its usual function of a safe haven in times of uncertainty.

As I pointed out this summer, the UK has (fairly recently) become the third-largest holder of US Treasury bonds.

Michael Panzner on Michael Panzner

Michael Panzner quotes USA Today quoting him, and I'll quote Michael too, since the advice seems sensible...

Predicting tough times ahead, Michael Panzner, author of Financial Armageddon, recommends that investors buy shares of companies that sell stuff that people need to buy no matter what's going on with the economy. Companies that sell soft drinks, tobacco, prescription drugs and toilet paper, for example.

Investors, he says, should play it safe, loading up on defensive stocks, socking away more cash and moving toward the safety of U.S. Treasury notes and bonds.

Hussman's view: white water

John Hussman is an American fund manager and takes pains to show that his judgments are carefully weighed; so his warnings are unlikely to be Chicken Little squawks:

In July, he looked at historical "awful times to invest", and found that July 2007 fits the same criteria. The 10-year outlook for the US investor is not attractive:

Presently, the probable total return on the S&P 500 over the coming decade ranges between -4% and 5% annually, with the most likely outcome in the low single digits.

More recently (November 12), he's considered many indicators and concluded:

I expect that a U.S. economic recession is immediately ahead.

(highlights mine)

This week (November 19), he remarks that much of the money apparently being pumped into the economic system is simply a rollover of earlier loans coming to maturity: the net increase is very small compared to the total oustanding, and so the rate of monetary inflation is slowing. He quotes Jan Hatzius of Goldman Sachs as saying (in effect) that if souring subprime debt hits financial institutions directly, they are likely to call in loans in order to preserve the ratio between their lending and their reserves, which in turn will slow the economy further.

What should investors do? He quotes the view of famous investment manager Jack Bogle:

"I would say do nothing – ride it out, if your asset allocation is right. The bonds in your portfolio and the long-term growth of businesses will bail you out. Unfortunately 80% of the market is speculators now, not investors. What would I say to the speculator? I would say I'm nervous and I might even say get out.”

So I guess it's the usual couple of points: are you in for the long term, or trying to make a quick killing? And where are you on the 25:75 Benjamin Graham bond-equity balance?

The name's Bond, Negative-Return Bond

Adrian Ash reports that pessimism has made bond prices soar, which in turn means they're a terrible investment for inflation-dodgers. He gives this graph:

Naturally he thinks this boosts the argument for gold, but I'd suggest that remorseless monetary inflation simply means that we need to store our excess wealth in a diversity of things. We just need to be careful not to pay too much, as the waves of excess liquidity temporarily make this or that asset bob high above its longer-term trend.

"It's good news week"

... as the ironic (though barely intelligible) Hedghoppers Anonymous song went.

For while Japan and China are selling down their holding of US securities, the UK is gobbling up even more, according to Matt's graphs at Discursive Monologue. Maybe we want to be second in Uncle Sam's hierarchy of foreign creditors, instead of third.

And US employment is holding up, according to the official October figures - but not if you use a different measure, says Chris Puplava.

Red speckles

Paul Nolte (Financial Sense yesterday) strikes a more judicious note. He points out that house price drops do not hit everybody equally, since not everyone has extracted equity and not everyone needs to sell:

... real estate is not like buying 100 shares of Cisco in early 2000 and watching it drop 80% - everyone loses the same amount, very unlike the real estate market. The point – the real estate market is not like the stock market bubble and will take a much longer time to work out – our best guess is an initial bottom is likely in 2009 and we won’t see a meaningful turn higher in overall real estate prices until sometime 2011-2012.

Similarly, there is opportunity for people to cut back on energy consumption in response to higher oil prices.

He expects a bit of a pullback in commodities and precious metals, and currently tends to prefer bonds to stocks.

"Wall of Worry" poll results

It seems respondents are as much confused as I am, about which way to go. I quoted Benjamin Graham's advice for passive investors, which is to strike some balance between equities and high-quality bonds, anywhere from 25:75 to 75:25, with a default position of 50:50.

The results are almost exactly divided: 8 at the top end for equities, 8 at the bottom for bonds, 7 voting for a 50:50 split, and one for 65% equities/35% bonds.

Buffett goes South and East

MoneyNews.com (Friday) reports on Warren Buffett's investments in Brazil and South Korea. Apparently the great man has made a pile in Brazilian currency but is now looking to switch to their bonds.

Abroad elsewhere, he's looking for high-dividend companies - a combination of the standard value investing formula and hedging against the dollar.