Chinese SWF: a subtle assault on the US dollar?

Jim Willie (a notable gold proponent) submits an interesting essay on China's influence in the currency and commodity markets.

Gold bugs say that the price of gold and other commodities has been held down by parties interested in maintaining the credibility of the US dollar. Willie thinks that the entry of a large Chinese sovereign wealth fund may foil such market manipulation in future, especially since the Chinese can back their hedge fund loans with their US Treasury holdings. An attempt to break a Chinese-held commodity position, if successful, could lead to a selloff of Treasuries and so crater the bond market, leading to raised interest rates and/or a drop on the dollar.

Between a rock and a hard place. This is what it is to be a debtor.

Recession - not even halfway there

Karl Denninger "does the math" and reckons that as Americans retrench, the economy will contract far more yet - at least 20% in total.

So anyone who has real money wants out: "The Chinese, Saudis and others with actual money that we are attempting to borrow to kick that can once again have figured out our scam and they are headed for the exits."

Coming soon: austerity, a devalued currency and high interest rates. And in the UK, it'll be worse.

A good time to save money, while you're still able to; and to bet against the crippled Anglo-American horses. No point piling up savings in our rotten fiat cash.

The Mogambo Guru continues to chirrup his commodities song.

Good luck, right action

Reportedly, George Soros doesn't see the bottom of the market yet. We judge by recent experience and think ourselves hard done by, yet look at the following chart, which takes the Dow and adjusts it for inflation:

All that has happened is that the illusory gains of the last 12 years, more than accounted for by extra debt taken on in that time, have now unwound. Yet we're still nowhere near where we were in 1987, which (if you were around then) we thought of as an exciting time for investment. To get back to that peaklet in real terms, the Dow would have to drop below 5,000 points.

But to return to the low point of the recession that preceded it - around July 1982 - the Dow would have to break down below 1,800. Even then, that miserable score is a big advance on the low of 50 years before that (July 1932: CPI-adjusted Dow would equate to c. 833 points).

Karl Denninger has said recently that he sees 2,000 points as a possibility; I've suggested a low of c. 4,000, because in these 40-year cycles, each peak and each low has been higher than in the previous cycle.

However, seeing how unbelievably high the Dow went in recent years (way above anything that could have been extrapolated from the highs of 1929 and 1965!), maybe a correspondingly low low is not out of the question.

So why am I planning to set up a new brokerage on my own? Why don't I send a copy of this blog to all my clients, together with news of my retirement from the industry and a valedictory "Good luck, because you're going to need it"? (Actually, I have repeatedly advertised this blog to clients; I only wish the viewing stats could show me that they all read it.)

The Mogambo Guru has taken to signing off his rants with a sarcastic "Wheee! This investing stuff is easy!" - he recommends gold, silver and oil. Over on Financial Sense a couple of days ago, Martin Goldberg opines, "The important question for most investors is whether to be in cash or gold" (cash for now, he thinks). Marc Faber has long been saying that we are entering a long bull market in commodities, and has just said he thinks an ounce of gold will one day be worth more than the Dow.

What they're really talking about is inflation. Debt, which is fixed in nominal terms, becomes cruelly heavier as the assets pledged against it become worth less and less. The pain will get so bad that the government will crack, as it always does, and debauch the currency. Holding cash just now is great, for those lucky enough to have it; but if Robin Hood can't confiscate it through taxation, he'll bleed it white by printing lots more fiat currency for himself (and the people who keep voting for him), so sucking real value out of your money. If you can't face investing, be prepared to spend like a sailor on shore leave when inflation hits town.

My clients generally aren't traders. In the same interview cited above, Faber said:

Recently I bought some U.S. stocks for the first time in a long time. If you buy Intel , Cisco , Yahoo! , Oracle and Microsoft , you will do much better in the next 10 years than you would with Treasuries. These stocks will double and even triple -- before going to zero.

That's not for my clients - they like the idea of the double and triple (who doesn't?), but not enough to risk the "going to zero".

That said, investment - including in commodities - is going to be part of their fight back against the attempt to take away everything they've saved. Inflationary periods do sap the real value of shares, they hit cash even worse. Look at the position of the man who invested in the (dollar-denominated) Dow from the start of 2008 up till last Friday's seeming debacle, compared with the poor chap who "played safe" and held good old British pounds:

The picture will change when the dollar dives, of course; though maybe the pound will dive along with it. To hold what you have, you'll have to keep on your feet, balancing the relative merits of currencies and asset classes. For me and most of my clients, it won't be about getting rich; it'll be about not getting robbed.

I'd have been happier with a world where money kept its value, and I'm not alone. The blogosphere is now crowded with people who have their own schemes for a fair and just economic world. But none of these ideal arrangements will enter into reality. There's too much to be made out of destroying it, by a handful of traders, and the politicians - and the bankers who will eventually employ the politicians when they leave office. We must take, not the right action, but the appropriate action.

Good luck, because you're going to need it.

Hi yo, Silver

Jesse surveys measures of monetary growth in the USA. He concludes that inflation is likely to drag the dollar down and shares upwards (N.B. in the 70s, they didn't rise as fast as inflation); as to commodities: "silver may be one of the first commodities to break out because the government maintains no significant physical inventory of it as it does for gold and oil."

UPDATE (re silver): Tim "Mess that Greeenspan Made" Iacono thinks so, too.

The view from Agamotto's Eye

Doctor Strange and the all-seeing Eye of Agamotto

Mish relays an interview with Marc Faber, who is a bull on the US dollar (not US stocks) and Japan.

"Europe will have to cut interest rates as well, and their economies are most likely much weaker than perceived...

... We are in a seven year bull market for commodities, so commodities can easily drop 50%. Some have already done that like nickel, lead, and zinc. Others will follow. But after that, I think that the bull market in commodities will reassert itself. But my view was that for the second half of 2008 commodities would go down."

Marc Faber update: take refuge in gold

Dr Faber has become a gold bug again, but is expecting a correction in other commodities. In a climate of low interest rates and high inflation, Adrian Ash seconds the call for gold.

And here's an extract from Faber's monthly "Market Comment" three years ago (July 5, 2005):

... Lastly, think about the following situation. The US manufacturing sector becomes very weak. The housing market falls and consumption declines. But oil goes through the roof because the empire of eternally rising home prices has just bombed Iran (very likely, in my opinion). Now the Fed cuts interest rates and eases massively. Just think what the stock, bond, foreign exchange, and gold market will do? The initial reaction might be a flight to safety – into government bonds and gold, and out of stocks. But, thereafter, a massive sell-off in bonds could occur as inflationary pressures build from sky high energy prices and massive money printing.

I have to confess, that I am not so sure exactly how this situation would play itself out, but it is worth thinking about it.

Worth the US$ 200 annual subscription, you may think. Especially since some of it goes towards the education of poor children in northern Thailand.

Why there are no customers' yachts

Hedge fund and investment trust managers sit on a big pile of money and a small percentage creamed off still means a handsome living. But Daniel Amerman maintains that's not the biggest advantage they have over you. As he shows with worked examples, shrewd use of the rules of the game can turn a real investment loss into a substantial gain.

By borrowing money at preferential interest rates, and writing-off the interest as a business expense, they can multiply the amount invested, reduce taxation and massively boost the return on the original capital. All is well as long as prices go up, and Amerman sees this a huge incentive to continue the inflation in financial assets: the system demands it.

His conclusion, in general terms, is to ignore the usual fairytales told to the small investor, work out how the con really operates, and exploit it. He thinks you should be in tangible assets, and understand the implications of taxation and inflation for your portfolio .

Michael Kilbach echoes that with respect to commodities, though like me, he thinks there'll be a step back before the next jump:

In the long term we believe prices are heading much higher and we are therefore looking for pessimism in the precious metals market before adding to our positions. We sell into extreme optimism. We understand that we could miss out on an opportunity to have more invested for a short term move higher, and we are willing to risk losing that opportunity. Rather than trying to catch up to the current markets move we try to anticipate the next markets move.

Avast behind!

Cut-throat Jake spies danger

Pearce Financial (Financial Sense, yesterday), like Marc Faber, believes that the East is dangerously overheated and deflation could hit commodities as well as shares; also, the dollar could rise again, and the Japanese yen might break free from its moorings.

I'd like some help with understanding this last, as tides of returning dollars and yen would seem to argue inflation in their home countries.

Karl Denninger (Market Ticker, yesterday) explains it as a relativistic effect:

Our problems are bad. The problems that will be faced overseas are FAR WORSE. Overseas economies are dependant on us, not the other way around. When this sinks in the other currencies against which the DX is measured will collapse; this will appear to raise the dollar, but in fact it is the sinking of other currencies.

"Tom the cabin boy smiled, and said nothing."

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.

The Inflation Protection Quandary

A succinct article by Weamein Yee in Banks.com (Friday), on what to do in inflationary times:

It’s almost like everyone is holding their breath to see what happens next.

As we know, Marc Faber recently suggested we might wish to stand on the platform rather than board any of the asset trains.

Stocks will tend to fall in anticipation of higher interest rates to combat rising inflation. The price of long term bonds will fall as investors will demand higher yields in an inflationary environment.

Yee says that the investor may be forced to consider choices that would normally be regarded as rather risky or sophisticated: commodities, precious metals and shares in foreign (less inflation-prone) countries. This is the paradox: taking a risk may be the best form of playing safe.

But before that, perhaps we could increase our holdings of government-backed inflation-linked savings bonds, something Yee doesn't mention. A lot depends on how the government defines inflation for the purpose of calculating our returns, but it should be fairly reasonable, one would hope.

The writer points out a final irony: low interest rates and high inflation support real estate prices.

Frank Veneroso elaborates on the gold bubble

I am impressed by the courtesy of important people.

After reporting on his April 2007 presentation to World Bank people (see yesterday's post, "Gold bubble"), I emailed Frank Veneroso, and have received a reply from him today. I wanted to follow up on his essay of May 2001. Here's what I asked:

In 2001, you wrote a very intriguing article, posted on GATA, theorising that central banks actually hold much less physical gold than they pretend, because of loan-outs and possibly surreptitious selling. If I may, I should like to ask a few questions:

1. Are you still of that opinion?
2. What do you think is the present situation regarding gold holdings by central banks?
3. What evidence do we now have?

Here is his reply:

That was my opinion. It still is. However I gave ranges regarding that amount. I now believe that central bank loan outs and undisclosed sales were at the low end of my expectations. Why? I have no direct evidence. My evidence is the following.

I believe that we are near the end of a commodity bubble that is the largest in all history. The greatest extreme is in metals. Hedge funds have accumulated futures, forwards and physical on a scale that simply has no precedent. The greatest excesses are in base metals but these same funds all hold large gold positions. I believe that individual funds may hold positions in copper or gold that are as large in value as the ETF. I know that sounds unbelievable. But I have a great deal of evidence.

If this is so, the price of gold should be much higher. My only explanation for why it is not is that central bank holdings must be very large for this to happen.

I should add, I believe there will be a coming crash in the metals sector that will surface. There will be an unprecedented investor revulsion toward this sector.

Gold’s fundamentals are totally different from those of base metals and silver. However, because the same funds also hold gold, I cannot see how gold can escape forced liquidations from these portfolios.

Mr Veneroso has kindly given his permission to publish the above comments.

From the prospectus for a conference in New Orleans in 2006:

Frank Veneroso — Perhaps the most highly regarded market economist of our time, Frank Veneroso has advised countless governments, as well as the World Bank, on economic policy, served as a senior partner in one of the world's largest hedge funds, and is a confidant and private advisor to many of today's most influential investors and economic leaders.

He was among only a handful of analysts who clearly predicted the Tech Wreck, and followed it up with a deadly-accurate forecast of today's gold bull market.

Now, Mr. Veneroso is stunning the world with predictions of a major train wreck in no less than two high-flying sectors of the global economy. Virtually no one is expecting these dramatic events...

Golden bubble

A bubble shot through by a bullet - experiment described here

Here's a counter-blast to gold-bugs and fans of other metals:

In this long and dense presentation to the World Bank, delivered in April 2007 and revised/updated in July, Frank Veneroso says that commodities, including gold, nickel and copper, are already in a big bubble. He thinks an estimated $2 trillion in hedge funds, plus leveraging, is pumping the prices:

When it comes to metals, we see hedge fund speculation, hoarding and squeezing everywhere. Not only have some metals markets been driven far, far higher in this cycle compared to all past cycles; we see the same phenomenon across all metals. It is the combination of both the amplitude and breadth of the metals bubble that probably makes it the biggest speculation to the point of manipulation in the history of commodities. (Page 50)

Short runs costs have risen, but not long run costs. New sources are being exploited. And if recession hits, demand will drop:

... the historical pattern... for all commodities, suggests that, rather than seeing well above trend metals demand growth in the years to come as the consensus now projects, we are more likely to see outright declines in global demand for these metals as demand destruction takes hold. (Page 56)

For institutional investors, the "barren breed of metal" is unproductive compared to other assets:

... it is likely that the net nominal return to portfolios from investing in physical “stuff” has not been more than 1% per annum. By contrast, in a 3% inflation environment, bonds have yielded somewhere between 5% and 9% and equities have yielded somewhere between 8% and 11%. In effect, you gave up an immense amount of yield if you diversified out of bonds and stocks into commodities. You did gain by reducing overall portfolio volatility, but that gain was not large enough to offset the loss in yield. Diversifying with “stuff” did not enhance risk-adjusted returns. (Page 57)

So prices have been boosted by the futures market. And commodities as a market are small enough to be susceptible to "manipulation and collusion".

Readers of this blog will recall that Marc Faber recently said he saw bubbles everywhere, including commodities. Even if cash isn't king, it may be a pretender to the throne.

The outlook from Financial Sense

Some voices and topics from Financial Sense, 25 August:

inflation, deflation, gold, cash...

Jim Puplava: ...I've had Bob Prechter on this program and Bob is a deflationist and Bob believes that we get deflation first and then hyperinflation where I guess my views are we get hyperinflation and then what follows will be deflation. And that's the way it has unfolded with great debtor nations. And I think history will repeat itself here with the US. There is too much debt here and it has to be inflated away...

...I really believe that the full force of these storms aren't going to hit until somewhere between 2009 and 2010 when this really comes home to roost. And all of these debt problems, the problems that we have with energy today, availability, peak oil, the geopolitical problems in the Middle East – I do not expect the next decade to be a pleasant one, John. I wish I could say otherwise because as a father with three children, one to get married shortly and looking forward to grandchildren, you know, this is something that you don't like to think about...

credit bubble, credit crunch, commodities, East delinking from West...

Doug Noland: ...the economy is much more vulnerable than many believe because of the credit that was going to the upper end; and I think the upper end mortgage area is where we had the greatest excesses.

So I think when all is said and done, subprime losses are going to be small compared to the losses we see in jumbo and Alt-A, and especially, unfortunately out in California...

...there’s desperation out there to find buyers for mortgages... Washington generally doesn’t understand the risk of Fannie and Freddie [US government-sponsored entities - "GSEs" - that offer mortgages], so of course they would think it’s their role to step in and provide the liquidity.

But... their total exposure is over 4 trillion dollars now. And this is a huge problem, and I fully expect down the road these institutions to be nationalized. And I think the US taxpayer is going to pay a huge bill for this... To be honest, I don’t mind the GSEs if they want to play a role in affordable housing; if they wanted to try to rectify some of the problems at the lower end because of the lack of the availability of credit in subprime. But to think that the GSEs should start doing jumbo mortgages, to try to be the buyer of last resort for California mortgages, my God, it’s hard to believe that makes sense to anyone because that’s just a potential disaster. It’s also reminiscent of the S&L – the Savings and Loan problem that, you know, was a several billion dollar problem during the 80s that they allowed to grow to several hundred billion by the early 90s. And definitely, the tab of the GSEs is growing rapidly right now...

...even if the central banks add a trillion dollars of liquidity to help out this deleveraging we still have this issue of how are we going to generate the trillions of additional credit going forward to keep incomes levitated, to keep corporation earnings levitated, to keep asset prices levitated, to keep the global economy chugging along...

...The global economy may be something of a different story because we have credit bubbles all over the world. Like the Chinese bubble right now is pretty much oblivious to what’s going on in the US and in Europe. You can see a scenario where, you know, you have serious credit breakdown but let’s say Chinese demand keeps energy and resource prices higher than one would expect. So I’m going to be watching this very carefully because we’re going to see some very unusual dynamics as far as liquidity and inflation effects between different asset classes and different types of price levels throughout the economy.

Agriculture on the up

An interesting report this week in the International Herald Tribune about the coming boom in agricultural commodities, powered by demand from emerging economies.

Meanwhile, cattle are moving off the Argentine pampas to make way for crops of soybeans and corn. The cattle are being crossbred to cope with the rougher conditions they'll face.

Safety first

Dan Denning comments on the recent rush for cash and safe bonds in The Daily Reckoning Australia today. He also repeats Marc Faber's point about an "earnings bubble" that skews p/e ratios:

Be careful about using low P/E ratios as a buying indicator. We read in this morning's paper that the average P/E on the ASX 200 is the lowest its been in 12 months. That doesn't automatically mean stocks are "good value." In fact, in the past, low P/E ratios have been a sign of the market top. Why?

At the height of an economic cycle, corporate earnings are high. When earnings rise faster than share prices, the P/E ratio will look low, flashing a "buy" signal. But this may be just the time that earnings themselves have peaked. That's definitely not the time to buy a stock.

And even commodity shares have to be chosen with care, when you factor-in rising costs.

David Tice bearish on commodities

Prudent Bear's boss is cautious about natural resources - though still in the market for energy and precious metals (see page 2) - Institutional Investor article dated 14 August.

Weathering the storm

The bankers have shown their hand - they fear deflation more than inflation. Pumping-in cash and cutting rates will keep us going through the economic squalls that they created by the same lax monetary policy. If you believe the monetarists, there will be a price to pay, but as long as this crisis management succeeds, the damage will be insidious rather than cataclysmic: money will slowly rot.

Now that we know the opposition's strategy, what do we do? My guess is, hold cash, wait for further crises of confidence, and buy tangible assets, or assets backed by tangibles, at bargain prices.

That's why I think Buffett and Soros have been so clever in acquiring more rail stock in recent months. Railways are a natural Benjamin Graham choice: mature, income-producing investments. There are big barriers to entry - think of nineteenth-century land speculation and skulduggery, and add-in eco protests, modern politics and the unavailability of coolie labour. Rail has advantages over road, especially as so much freight now is containerised and port-to-city; but from an investor's perspective it is also solidly thing-based.

Other experts are into tangibles also. For example, Marc Faber likes real estate in emerging economies - and possibly in depressed areas of developed countries, and Bill Bonner has farmland in Argentina (the Chinese love beef). And then there's various types of commodity.

I think we'll be back to putting money into things we can understand.

Gold and other commodities?

For those who want to hear from the bears on their bullish attitude to gold and natural resources, here's Monica Day in The Rude Awakening last Friday:

Be Fearful, Be Brave - By Monica Day

There's a fundamental rule about investing - you've probably heard it before: Be brave when others are fearful, and fearful when others are brave.

Bill Bonner, editor of Daily Reckoning, opened the Eighth Annual Agora Financial Investment Symposium by suggesting that most people are braver than they've ever been. And that means the rest of us should be very, very afraid.

He's right, of course. Hedge funds are taking in more money than ever…despite the questionable nature of their holdings. Twenty thousand new condos are under construction in Miami…despite the current crisis in the housing sector and the ticking bomb that is subprime lending. The Dow is hitting new highs…with some mainstream commentators calling it the greatest economic boom ever.

Indeed, Bonner agrees it is "great." But more like how the "Great War" and the "Great Depression" were great.

It begs the question - what should you do when you're fearful?

"Nothing," Bonner explains. But that's hard when you have money.

So what exactly constitutes nothing?

If you're a regular reader of these pages, Bonner's answer won't surprise you a bit: Buy gold.

Doug Casey…the Mogambo Guru…and a number of speakers have agreed. Although gold is already up to a 27-year high, it still seems cheap compared with the state of the economy - and the risks the market is facing - right now.

Doug Casey ran through a list of other asset classes and gave his reasons for not wanting his money in them, and he came to this conclusion:

"Where should your money be? GOLD! That's it. Honestly. I've looked at everything and anything - I'll buy anything if the price is right. Gold isn't just going through the roof - it's going through the moon. Mark my words, the gold bull market hasn't even really started…."

And of course, the Mogambo Guru had his own unique way of making a gold recommendation:

"Run out and load up on gold…and in the future when gold prices are astronomical and there's chaos all around you…you'll look around you and notice that you're rich and everyone else is poor and you'll say, wow, that Mogambo dude was right. It's a shame he was such a hateful, detestable little man. And you'll be right…but you'll be rich! So who cares…"

Of course…the "buy gold" line of thinking was not unanimous. Some of the experts and analysts at the Symposium offered worthwhile alternatives to simply buying gold. Natural resource expert Rick Rule was one of them.

Rule believes that you must be brave if you're going to invest in natural resources. Not crazy, mind you. But brave. Meaning you have to be a discriminate investor. You must buy when others are selling, sell when others are buying. This tactic, Rule admits, "is psychologically hard, but functionally easy. And it's the only way to make money consistently in the volatile resource markets."

Byron King, editor of Outstanding Investments, examined investment opportunities among oil and gas stocks. Because the world is no longer awash in oil, King declared, the energy sector - both traditional and alternative - will be awash in great opportunities.

The "cheap oil" days are over, he warned, which means the energy-dependent American lifestyle will become costlier to maintain…maybe much costlier. "We've invented the cheap-energy system that has given us prosperity and freedom," King explained, "now we begin the descent. We'll either have to invent our way out of it, or go back to the way it was before."

He was talking, of course, about our petroleum-based economy… in the face of Peak Oil. Once mocked, denied and ridiculed, the realities of Hubbert's theory are now coming to pass as, one by one, the world's oil fields pass their peak production rates and ease into decline.

If people like Byron King and Bill Bonner are right, the shock of recognition is going to come. But the flip side of this looming societal trauma, says King, is that all kinds of energy companies will make all kinds of money.

Our resident Maniac Trader, Kevin Kerr, also banged the natural resource drum - but to a slightly different beat: Food.

More specifically - how in the world is China going to feed all those people? Even with its one-child policy in place, the population of China is expected to go from 1.3 billion today to 1.49 billion by 2025. But only 11% of China's land is arable farmland. Compare that with 26% in the U.S. to feed a smaller population and you can start to see for yourself: China is in desperate need of a solution.

Plus, it is struggling with other issues. Combine factors such as soil erosion, inadequate water supply, lack of qualified labor for farming, lack of modern farming equipment and methods and extreme weather patterns, and you've got a darn good crisis in the making. But crisis spells opportunity.

A lot of bad things might happen in the world. Some we can foresee, while others will be like the proverbial Black Swan - completely unanticipated. But if you pay attention…and play your hand right…the bad things shouldn't happen to you.

Doug Casey said it best…

"Internationalize yourself. Keep your citizenship in one country, your bank account in another and live in another…treat the world as your oyster."

Out and in

Another quote, this time from Ludwig von Mises (via the Daily Reckoning Australia):

"There is no means of avoiding the final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion, or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved."

Like any sane person, my preference is the first option.

I have no idea how much longer this expansion will continue, but we've asked to take our modest holdings today. Maybe we'll miss out on a further commodity boom in the next few weeks, though it seems that when the market gets skittish gold runs with the herd for a while. We plan to come back in soon enough, on a regular premium basis; but unless Monday sees a significant drop, we've done all right over the last couple of years. Thank you, Mogambo Guru and others.

Familar themes, and a sales pitch (not mine!)

This is NOT a recommendation, but you may be interested in the general trend of thinking it reveals: The Daily Reckoning features a sales spiel for a newsletter from Tim Price, which passes on pessimistic comment on the near future of the markets, and indicates four areas for investment:

"Portfolio insurance"
Infrastructure (e.g. roads, railways)
Gold
Oil

We are seeing these themes crop up again and again among the contrarians. Though I'm not quite sure what is meant by the first - unless it's futures and options, which make me nervous.