Round and round

"from the Chrysopoeia ('Gold Making') of Cleopatra during the Alexandrian Period in Egypt. The enclosed words mean 'The All is One.'"

Here's a piece by Brian Pretti yesterday, on the Federal Reserve and its attempts to shore up the system with interest rate cuts.

His prose is a little sparky and luxuriant, but his point is that even though the official interest rate may drop, the lending market has become more bearish and there may be higher rates (or more stringent terms) for riskier loans. He feels that lending has not previously enjoyed the discipline of a proper open market, which is why pension funds ended up buying pigs in pokes (subprime packages dressed up as a form of reasonably secure bond).

But why is so much wealth tied up in housing, anyway? I've previously suggested that lenders like to put money into houses because they rise in value, yet that rise is mainly the result of increased lending. It's what looks like an infinite loop, but there are other factors involved, that will lead to braking and possible breakdown.

Over a long period, house prices have increased:

a) because wages tend to increase faster than RPI; but in a global economy, Western wages are stalling; and in an ageing population, social costs (and therefore taxes) are rising.

b) because, sometime after WWII, we moved from a pattern of one significant income earner per couple, to two, who could bid more as DINKYs (dual income, no kids yet); but unless we learn to live as threesomes (TRINKYs) or in larger communes (FAMILIES), this driver has gone as far as it can.

c) because interest rates fell a long way, so people could service much larger mortgages; but now interest rates can't go up much, without widespread repossessions and bankruptcies - of registered voters. And whenever things get difficult, the temptation will be to drop rates further, which expands the lending and ultimately tightens the noose.

d) because lenders got rich and reckless in the boom; they might have offloaded the loans, but they may still have to pay a price for their deceits.

Meanwhile, we have diverted money into real estate that should have been powering business: R&D, startups, expanding small firms. Instead, large concerns are wiping out their potential successors: shopkeepers' children are stacking shelves for hypermarkets.

Democracy is rooted in a degree of economic independence and social equality. In effect, by permitting excessive concentration of capital, we are in danger of enslaving the next generation: the first of the "mind-forged manacles" is the limiting of their aspirations.

Money safety update - American banks

"I warn you, Sir! The discourtesy of this bank is beyond all limits. One word more and I—I withdraw my overdraft." (Punch, June 27, 1917)

I recently looked at the security of deposits in British banks, but what about the USA? As with my earlier post this morning, we find concise information included in a different argument, in this case about the American liquidity crisis.

In the USA, it seems that up to $100,000 in checking and savings accounts (per depositor per "member bank") is covered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. There were two separate funds - one for banking, the other for savings (following the $150 billion losses in the savings & loan crisis a generation ago) - but they have been merged as from the end of March 2006.

There are three compensation methods used. One is direct payment to the investor, termed a "straight deposit payoff". The other two involve transfer of business to a healthy bank, with some financing from FDIC: these are known as "purchase and assumption" (P&A) and "insured deposit transfer" - full details here and here. (N.B. although FDIC prefers not to make a straight deposit payoff, as it is the most expensive solution for them, it remains an option - Sutton and Hagmahani's brief account skates over this point.)

The $100k upper limit for depositor protection is more generous than in the UK - and it seems to be 100% insured, unlike for the poor British saver. But, the authors warn, FDIC "only works when bank failures are isolated events, and will not work in a systemic crisis...or for that matter one really big bank failure."

Taking a more general view, the article explains that the subprime mess has reduced liquidity in the system, causing it to work inefficiently, which is why the Federal Reserve has pumped in more cash - accepting "toxic waste" collateral in return, and offering a discount on its loan rate to banks.

The authors have two objections to this assistance:

• it rewards bad behaviour and encourages a repetition ("moral hazard")
• accepting unrealizable obligations as collateral is inflationary, since it turns nothingness into money

Their prediction: a fall in the value of the dollar, and if the banks disguise their problems and fail to clean house, at worst a collapse of the financial system. The Fed has bought some time, but that time has to be used for urgent reform.

Doug Casey: business cycles and subprime loans

"The Man In The Moone" by Francis Godwin, Bishop of Hereford (1620)

I noticed years ago that you get the crispest explanations from someone who's busy trying to get to their main point - Isaac Asimov's "Extraterrestrial Civilizations" (1979) is an excellent example. Even if you disagree with the conclusion, you have learned so much on the journey, and so quickly.

Doug Casey in DollarDaze yesterday summarises the theorised relationship between the money supply and the business cycle, plus subprime mortgages and hedge fund gearing, as part of the argument for gold mining stocks. Again, you may not agree with him that gold "is going to the moon", but in the meantime he has given us a clear and concise exposition of two important economic topics.

Following the markets today

As I hoped and more than half expected, the major Western markets are recovering from some of their fright. The FTSE has passed 6,000 again and at the time of writing, the Dow is back above 13,000. Those chest pains will eventually be laughed off as a bout of indigestion, and it'll be back to the fags and booze after a while.

The subprime mess was well-telegraphed, if ignored by many, and although we still don't know the full cost, it seems that yet again, the central banks are willing to pump money into the system, rather than reform it. Marc Faber's view that the crisis should be allowed to burn through and eliminate some of the players, is too gritty for the banking establishment.

My take on this is that it's an opportunity for those still in the market to quietly come out without panicking everybody else. The rise of the dollar and the temporary sharp falls in precious metals, are reminders that in a crisis, cash is king; though given Ben Bernanke's statement about dropping dollars from helicopters, maybe king for a day.

US economy over-dependent on housing sector

The Daily Reckoning Australia summarises Dr Kurt Richebacher's analysis: the US economy depends on the housing sector to a dangerous degree, so even a stall in housing will have a big effect.

"...property bubbles have historically been the regular main causes of major financial crises. During its bubble years in the late 1980s, Japan had rampant bubbles in both stocks and property. While the focus is always on the more spectacular equity bubble, hindsight leaves no doubt that the following economic disaster was mainly rooted in the property bubble. Both bubbles burst in the end, but the property deflation has continued for 13 years now, with calamitous effects on the banking system."

I suspect we have a similar problem here in the UK.

Subprime update, plus Dow and gold

Here's iTulip's scathing video on the sub-prime lenders and special pleading from Jim Cramer; and according to this, it was $323 billion pumped into the banking system in 48 hours, not $266 billion.

The Dow closed down 207 points yesterday, anyway. Perhaps you can't pump up a burst balloon.

And gold, which one would think should have an inverse relation to the market, has lost $5 an ounce, too.

Things do look a little concerning.

Don't get mad

Adrian Ash in the Daily Reckoning Australia today, passes on some facts about the drop in US mortgage underwriting standards:

...mortgage underwriting changed beyond recognition between 1998 and 2006, as First American Financial recently reported:

* Adjustable rate mortgages as a percentage of new mortgages rose from 0.7% to 69.5%;
* Negative Amortisation loans - where the principal owed actually increases over time - rose from 0% to 42.2% of the market;
* Interest Only home loans - where the borrower only has to cover the interest due, leaving the principal for repayment sometime in the far future - rose from 0.1% to 35.6%;
* Silent Seconds, issued on the back of outstanding loans to the most vaguely-related people, rose from 0.1% to 38.7%;
* Low Documentation - where the greater the lie, the greater the loan - rose from 57% to 79.8%.
In short, the US mortgage market switched from cautious Fixed-Rate borrowing to head-in-the-sand ARMs...while the underlying debt was left untouched or actually grew larger...as borrowers struggled to meet just the interest alone after fudging the numbers to bag a loan they could never repay.

Most shocking of all, as Robert Rodriguez of First Pacific Advisors has noted, "is that the origination volumes for the last two years, when the most egregious deterioration in underwriting standards occurred, total more than the previous seven years of originations combined."

And this poor-quality debt has been sold to pension funds, very carefully staying just under a crucial limit:

"24% of all the hyper-leveraged assets managed by large hedge funds (US$1 billion or more) internationally, belong to pension funds and endowments," says a June 18 report from Greenwich Associates, as quoted by Paul Gallagher in the Executive Intelligence Review. "This average is just below the 25% limit at which an individual hedge fund, under the [US] Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) as modified in 2006, becomes an investment advisor with fiduciary responsibility for the pension fund doing the investing - something hedge funds obviously do not want to do."

More than that, pension funds have also stumped up one-fifth of the money held in 'hedge funds of funds', the aggregating super-funds run by many large banks. In first-half 2007, around 40% of current flows into the hedge fund industry has come from pension funds. And "as pension fund money is coming in," says Gallagher, "it's allowing 'smart' money to get out."

...Numerous reports, including a new one from Chicago-based Hedge Fund Research, Inc., have shown 'high net-worth individuals' reducing their net hedge fund investments by half, between 2006 and 2007 - investing instead into real property and stocks. They now account for only about 20% of the assets of hedge funds, which were supposedly made for them."

Instead of high-net-worth billionaires, it's now Joe Public left holding this junk, thanks of course to his well-paid retirement fund managers...

Giving control of your money to a financial "expert" might indeed prove the most foolish decision of all.

To me, this is outrageous. I've written earlier about a brokers' meeting I attended in 1999, where a rep from a technology fund burbled enthusiastically about the "super-boom" to come, and how I felt that the smart money was looking to use us to sell their holdings to suckers. And I think the same happened with the Lloyds of London scandal - advisers were encouraged to help their clients get a seat on what they thought was the gravy train, when the insiders knew it was the vinegar bottle. Now it seems we've seen effectively a raid on pension funds.

I sometimes suspect that the money system is not for storing wealth, but for stealing it.

The authorities should be busting the offenders, not bailing them. We should pay off depositors so they can put their savings elsewhere, re-educate naive financial advisers and institutional fund managers, and bankrupt the swindlers.

Here in England, London's Central Criminal Court has a motto above the entrance:

"Defend the Children of the Poor & Punish the Wrongdoer"

If I were an American, I'd be asking questions about justice and the rule of law: does the nation still protect the weak against the strong? Meanwhile, now that you know how the game is played, find a way to win honourably.

.................... A South Sea Bubble playing card

Subprime worrying Europe

Looking at the German stock exchange (^GDAXI in the sidebar widget), the market has opened lower. For Reuters comment, see here.

UPDATE (10.08 a.m.)

The FTSE is looking skittish, too. As Reuters reports: "Richard Hunter, head of UK equities at Hargreaves Lansdown [says], "... as a general rule of thumb, we've certainly been following (Wall) Street on the way down although not necessarily on the way up."

Peter Schiff: US Treasury less creditworthy

Peter Schiff in FXStreet today mounts a vigorous defence of his record of warning us that subprime problems would spill over into other credit areas. The market appears to be waking up to this, but he says there's worse to come:

A much larger disaster looms for holders of U.S. dollar denominated assets in general. It will not be long before our foreign creditors realize that Uncle Sam is the biggest subprime borrower of them all and will similarly mark down the value of its debts as well.

Once again, why has Britain recently become the third-largest holder of American debt? Our exposure is now 3 times higher than about a year ago.

Peter Schiff - corrosive effects of debt

Peter Schiff has revamped his site, and is generally increasing his media profile.

His economic commentary reports that the US has sent an official to China to ask them to buy into mortgage-backed securities! (The man will deserve a medal if he succeeds.) But it's not only subprime loans that are risky - Schiff says that many home valuations were inflated for mortgage purposes, and foreclosures realize less than half such values.

Turning to government debt, he says Treasury bonds will be hollowed out by a gradual devaluation of the dollar (by maybe 50% over the medium term), plus soaring interest rates. Further ahead, he sticks to his Crash Proof prediction of hyperinflation.

Future opportunities in the subprime market

Following on from the last post, I feel Mr Schultz could well be right, though the timing is important. There are going to be many people with an impaired credit history after this debacle, who want to have another go at owning their own home; and presumably houses will become more reasonably-priced, too. A specialist lender could get good returns from servicing carefully-selected customers, in much the same way that after a natural disaster, fresh insurance companies enter the market on a better footing, while the outfits that were already committed are still struggling.

As Wavy Gravy said at Woodstock, “There’s always a little bit of heaven in a disaster area.” Though of course, I'm sure he didn't mean it in quite that way.

Update

Having written that last bit, what do I read (in Saturday's Free New Mexican) but that some of the hippies who set up communes in New Mexico eventually became realtors!

US subprime fallout

Credit rating agencies seem on the brink of downgrading CDOs, according to last week's New York Times; GE has dumped its subprime portfolio, accepting $160 million losses; the Wall Street Journal reports on the exposure of mutual funds to subprime lending; Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are getting choosier; official guidance is being issued to brokers; borrowers are starting to sue lenders; the dollar is dropping against the Euro, in advance of expected bad figures on consumer spending and borrowing; builders are quitting, going to law or offering special financing deals.

Among loan arrangers, 15,000 of 500,000 jobs (3%) have gone; Guardian Loan Company has escaped collapse by the skin of its teeth, because eager new firms were squeezing it out of the niche market and back towards standard mortgages - but like General MacArthur, chief executive Stuart Schultz promises a return: "If I were a rich man, I would buy the largest subprime business in the country, because it will be back."

US mortgage difficulties to continue next year

There are now forecasts that mortgage defaults and foreclosures will continue into 2008; comparisons are being made with similar drops in the early 1980s and 1990s. Peter Schiff reminds us that the biggest losers will be the lenders, but to the individual mortgageholder that won't seem comforting.

More on housing loan losses

Stephanie Pomboy's MacroMavens site gave this worrying picture of banks' exposure to real estate risk, on 7 June 2005 - (I'd be grateful for an update for 2007). The Mogambo Guru recently (12 July) quoted her firm as saying (in Barron's) that $693 billion of mortgages are now in the red, with a possible $210 billion in outright losses.

Inflation, housing losses and a stockmarket bubble.

Richard Daughty aka The Mogambo Guru lays about him on 12 July. The housing bubble continues to deflate and inflation is up.

Apparently M3 (no longer reported as such by the Fed) has risen from 8% to 13.7% since figures ceased to be released officially. Looking across the water at the UK, our M4 (bank private lending) has averaged over 13.5% over the four quarters ending 31 March, so it seems we're in the same boat.

A disturbing element in Daughty's report is the notion (relayed from Gary Dorsch at Global Money Trends) that the strategy of US Treasury chief Henry Paulson is to engineer a stockmarket bubble to offset the losses in the housing market. This, as cinemagoers used to say in the days of continuous showing, is where we came in.

Puplava on subprime lending

For the time-challenged, I propose to highlight sections of Jim Puplava's Newshour. "Financial Sense" is what it says on the tin and I plan to make this a regular read/listen. Working off the transcript for July 7 (and that's another very laudable feature of his service), here is my interpretation of some points he makes about the subprime crisis:

The real sting of subprime defaults is in how they may affect the credit ratings of CDOs (Collateralised Debt Obligations, i.e. mortgages grouped together and sold on as interest-yielding investments). Some major institutional investors, including pension funds, have bought CDOs, but are required NOT to hold any bonds below "investment grade". So if these CDOs drop below a "BBB" rating, the fund managers will be forced to sell, and if there is a wholesale selloff there will be a sharp drop in the price.

Also, the hedge funds that invest in CDOs may have borrowed 10-20 times the value of their capital, to multiply their investments. The margin of safety is thin and a relatively small loss could trigger a cash call. So although Federal Reserve officials are correct in saying that subprime debt is only a small proportion of the lending market, this borrowing-to-invest vastly magnifies the problems.

Another complication is that credit ratings don't mean the same thing for all types of bond. Over the last decade or two, "BBB" rated corporate bonds have had a default rate of 2.2%, but BBB-rated CDOs have a 24% default rate. Do all investment managers fully realise this?

There is over $200 billion in subprime bonds that need to be re-rated, but rating firms are putting off the evil day. One reason for the delay is that the ratings people have a conflict of interest. It seems that many were involved in designing the CDOs in the first place, so if a re-rating happens soon, awkward questions will be asked and reputations shredded. There might even be litigation for damages. Meanwhile, Puplava speculates, the government itself might wish to encourage a more gradual unfolding of the bad news, to prevent the avalanche.

Listen to Financial Sense!

Click here for the transcript of July 7's edition of Jim Puplava's Financial Sense Newshour. This is a wide-ranging overview, from subprime loans to commodity investing and listeners' queries.

Soothing noises from the US Treasury re subprime losses

Treasury officials are quoted in Bloomberg, saying that subprime losses don't represent a systemic threat. Another official, Frederic Mishkin, said something similar at the Levy Economics Institute symposium this month (see my blog of 5 July).

News hub for sub-prime mortgage issue

A contributor has kindly alerted me to a blog that explains the issues and collates news items - please click here. Sub-Prime Mess is now also on the link list (see sidebar).

Subprime mortgages: bad news and more to come

Following the collapse of Braddock Financial's $300 million Galena Street, Reuters (6 July) looks ahead to what other hedge funds will have to report.

The Mogambo Guru includes subprime loans in his latest Daily Reckoning rave. I do hope someone posts his Agora Financial conference speech onto YouTube.