This
Week in Barrons – 6-30-2013
This Time it could be Different.
During a question and answer session
a week ago, The Ben Bernanke hinted that he wouldn't mind seeing QE start to
taper off later in the year, and maybe end in 2014. While he didn't make a single actual move, the
markets all around the world reacted violently. I personally do NOT
believe QE will end. If the mere mention
of it ending tosses the market around for hundreds of points, and pushes bond
yields up so fast (the likes of which we’ve never seen before) – what would
happen if they really did end it? The
results would be catastrophic. The ‘wealth effect’ would be gone. The ‘wealth effect’ comes from seeing asset
prices rice, and realizing (if you own those types of assets) that you are
implicitly wealthier than before. The
‘wealth effect’ causes people to feel better and therefore, spend money on
things that they don’t need – with (potentially) money that they don’t have.
Can you imagine what would happen if
the Fed stopped pushing $85B per month into the economy? To quote Peter Schiff: “Although Bernanke dodged the question in his
press conference, the Fed has broken the normal market for mortgage backed
securities (MBS). While it's true that
the Fed only owns 14% of all outstanding MBS’s, it is by far the largest
purchaser of newly issued mortgage debt. If the Fed were no longer buying, there are not
enough private buyers to soak up the issuance. Those who do remain would certainly expect
higher yields. To put it bluntly, rates
would increase dramatically if there would be any mortgage market at all.” The ‘wealth effect’ would then work in
reverse: spending, confidence and home prices will fall, foreclosures and
unemployment will rise, and we will be in a recession even before the Fed
begins to taper.
Ah, but remember those words ‘budget
deficit?’ Well if we are spending a huge amount each year to service our
debts in a ‘zero interest rate policy’ world, how are we going to service them with
rates increasing dramatically? Our
national debt would soar once again. The
Fed has built an economy based on the Fed. Our Federal Reserve System has gone from hiding in the shadows,
to being our masters. In the 60's and
even into the late 70's, you based your investing on the economic growth of the
economy and the individual companies that were sharing in that growth. You watched corporate expenses and profits and
you loaned them your money because you felt that they'd use it wisely, and
return both a dividend and possibly some capital appreciation. Today that
notion is as old fashioned as curing you with leeches. Today we don’t care about earnings, revenues,
or marking assets to market; but rather all we care about is the Federal
Reserve and if they will keep rates artificially low.
Which brings up the question: What is the Fed's next move? What ever it is, it has to be a change from what they're doing because the current path simply isn’t working. But let’s not forget, the Fed doesn't work in a vacuum, but rather works with other Central bankers from other nations on a total agenda. So, what is that agenda? I think Gold is telling us that agenda. I know this will sound somewhat cloak and dagger – but as the title suggests – this time it could be different. This time we're not talking about a few trillion dollars in debt between a few nations. This time we are talking hundreds of trillions in debts, and inflating the money simply won’t catch-up with all the debts that need to be paid. There needs to be a bigger, bolder plan.
My guess is that when Asia gets enough gold to make a stand with their currency, they're going to call for a global ‘reset’. I think that all of the major currencies and nations will be called upon to enter into some form of Bretton Woods type of plan - where everyone resigns debts and we all issue a new global reserve currency. It appears that this currency will require some metal backing. If you think about it like that, you can make some sense out of the incredible attacks on Gold. In the 30's when they wanted to re-price dollars, they passed a law making it mandatory that everyone turn in their gold. It was the largest confiscation of wealth on record. Well, instead of having people turn in their gold – what if they get all that they need by reducing the paper price and chasing people away from investing in it? We’re seeing a massive move of gold to Asia. It feels like this coordinated attack on the metals is being done to allow the Asians the opportunity to amass enough gold that when they pull the plug on dollars, everyone can meet at the table with enough physical gold that a new standard can be issued. I think the agenda is to allow the major nations the ability to obtain the physical metal, and then cut free of the current system of reserve dollars.
I might be crazy, but no amount of money printing is going to cure the debts. The EU is all but bankrupt. The US cannot mathematically pay off its debts. China is slowly admitting to building several unsustainable bubbles. Japan is a nightmare. But it’s different this time. This isn't one nation struggling – like Argentina. These are the major economies of the planet dying in debt. No amount of inflating the money supply will take away the ills of the world’s current overactive debt problem. Gold’s message is that nations need to obtain it.
Which brings up the question: What is the Fed's next move? What ever it is, it has to be a change from what they're doing because the current path simply isn’t working. But let’s not forget, the Fed doesn't work in a vacuum, but rather works with other Central bankers from other nations on a total agenda. So, what is that agenda? I think Gold is telling us that agenda. I know this will sound somewhat cloak and dagger – but as the title suggests – this time it could be different. This time we're not talking about a few trillion dollars in debt between a few nations. This time we are talking hundreds of trillions in debts, and inflating the money simply won’t catch-up with all the debts that need to be paid. There needs to be a bigger, bolder plan.
My guess is that when Asia gets enough gold to make a stand with their currency, they're going to call for a global ‘reset’. I think that all of the major currencies and nations will be called upon to enter into some form of Bretton Woods type of plan - where everyone resigns debts and we all issue a new global reserve currency. It appears that this currency will require some metal backing. If you think about it like that, you can make some sense out of the incredible attacks on Gold. In the 30's when they wanted to re-price dollars, they passed a law making it mandatory that everyone turn in their gold. It was the largest confiscation of wealth on record. Well, instead of having people turn in their gold – what if they get all that they need by reducing the paper price and chasing people away from investing in it? We’re seeing a massive move of gold to Asia. It feels like this coordinated attack on the metals is being done to allow the Asians the opportunity to amass enough gold that when they pull the plug on dollars, everyone can meet at the table with enough physical gold that a new standard can be issued. I think the agenda is to allow the major nations the ability to obtain the physical metal, and then cut free of the current system of reserve dollars.
I might be crazy, but no amount of money printing is going to cure the debts. The EU is all but bankrupt. The US cannot mathematically pay off its debts. China is slowly admitting to building several unsustainable bubbles. Japan is a nightmare. But it’s different this time. This isn't one nation struggling – like Argentina. These are the major economies of the planet dying in debt. No amount of inflating the money supply will take away the ills of the world’s current overactive debt problem. Gold’s message is that nations need to obtain it.
But there is one catch – there is not enough physical gold to be
purchased. When gold was rising in price
– people were buying it. When gold is
falling in price – people are buying it.
Why does it take 7 years to give back
Germany's gold? They first must find
enough of it to ‘give back’. So this
time could be different. We could be
looking at a global currency reset. How
it all plays out – I’m not certain, but it is the most logical path.
The Market....
Ever since Bernanke chatted about wanting to taper QE this year, and end QE next year – just about everything has sold off. I’ve consistently said that they can’t end QE because if they do, we crash. But what if the debts are so enormous and the possibility of inflating our way out so impossible – that once all the nations have enough gold, they will:
The Market....
Ever since Bernanke chatted about wanting to taper QE this year, and end QE next year – just about everything has sold off. I’ve consistently said that they can’t end QE because if they do, we crash. But what if the debts are so enormous and the possibility of inflating our way out so impossible – that once all the nations have enough gold, they will:
-
Back away from the stimulus.
-
Let things crash.
-
Rebuild from the
ashes.
-
Write off the debts.
-
And introduce a new
global reserve currency?
That is a hard pill to swallow. All Central bankers have ever known is to
continue to print more money, and to inflate away problems. But since this isn't just one single country,
and the debts aren't just a few trillion, can it actually be that they're going
to give up? Is that why The Ben Bernanke
is so hot on the idea of him leaving? He
made his life’s work about what the depression experts did wrong, and he said
that he could solve a similar situation. Maybe he just wants out before they do indeed
yank the plug on the whole darn system.
If that is the ‘final solution’, then we are in a whole new ball game. Don't get me wrong; I’m not there – yet. I think it is something to ponder, and dissect into its component parts. But if that becomes the case:
If that is the ‘final solution’, then we are in a whole new ball game. Don't get me wrong; I’m not there – yet. I think it is something to ponder, and dissect into its component parts. But if that becomes the case:
-
We would become
deflationary.
-
Economic activity
would slow to a crawl.
-
Prices would crash
because no one would buy anything.
-
Stocks would fall
below 2008 levels.
-
It would be the
"Greater Depression".
If however they are going to continue on the
printing press bandwagon, then the situation remains relatively the same. They continue to print, stocks hold up or even
rise, and the distortions become even larger.
Stocks have entered what looks to be their first significant correction since November of last year. From the May highs we've drifted sideways and down, and the volume on the down days far exceeds the volume on the up days. At our lowest point we had about a 6.2% correction – the deepest of the year. We then ran back up and tried to get over the 50-day moving averages in the big indexes, but it wasn't to be. Thursday’s close was not above them, and Friday slid back another 115 DOW points. Last week I thought that we'd rally back up, test the 50-day moving averages, and if we failed to break through them, we would drift down again. If I'm right about that scenario, what should happen is that we fade back down and re-test the 14,650 area. If that area doesn't hold, we could see a real 10% pull back (something new this year) and a long way down.
In a very strange twist, the only sector showing incredible strength on Friday was the gold and silver miners. All in all, the key word (especially for the “long only” investor) is to please be careful. This market could easily break in either direction. Earnings season is fast approaching, and it isn't going to be pretty. They will have to do a lot of spin to try and make these upcoming earnings look acceptable. In any event, listen for the Fed heads talking about QE, and try not to get too involved long or short. Volatility will rule the week.
Stocks have entered what looks to be their first significant correction since November of last year. From the May highs we've drifted sideways and down, and the volume on the down days far exceeds the volume on the up days. At our lowest point we had about a 6.2% correction – the deepest of the year. We then ran back up and tried to get over the 50-day moving averages in the big indexes, but it wasn't to be. Thursday’s close was not above them, and Friday slid back another 115 DOW points. Last week I thought that we'd rally back up, test the 50-day moving averages, and if we failed to break through them, we would drift down again. If I'm right about that scenario, what should happen is that we fade back down and re-test the 14,650 area. If that area doesn't hold, we could see a real 10% pull back (something new this year) and a long way down.
In a very strange twist, the only sector showing incredible strength on Friday was the gold and silver miners. All in all, the key word (especially for the “long only” investor) is to please be careful. This market could easily break in either direction. Earnings season is fast approaching, and it isn't going to be pretty. They will have to do a lot of spin to try and make these upcoming earnings look acceptable. In any event, listen for the Fed heads talking about QE, and try not to get too involved long or short. Volatility will rule the week.
Tips:
My
current short-term holds are:
-
SIL – in at 24.51 (currently 11.72) – no stop
-
GLD (ETF for Gold) – in at 158.28, (currently
119.21) – no stop ($1,223.80 per physical ounce), AND
-
SLV (ETF for Silver) – in at 28.3 (currently 19.07)
– no stop ($19.50 per physical ounce).
To
follow me on Twitter and get my daily thoughts and trades – my handle is:
taylorpamm.
Please
be safe out there!
Disclaimer:
Expressed
thoughts proffered within the BARRONS REPORT, a Private and free weekly
economic newsletter, are those of noted entrepreneur, professor and author, RF
Culbertson, contributing sources and those he interviews. You can learn more and get your free
subscription by visiting: <http://rfcfinancialnews.blogspot.com>
.
Please
write to <rfc@getabby.com>
to inform me of any reproductions, including when and where copy will be
reproduced. You may use in complete form or, if quoting in brief, reference
<rfcfinancialnews.blogspot.com>.
If
you'd like to view RF's actual stock trades - and see more of my thoughts -
please feel free to sign up as a Twitter follower - "taylorpamm" is my handle.
If
you'd like to see RF in action - teaching people about investing - please feel
free to view the TED talk that he gave on Fearless Investing:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2Z9I_6ciH0
To
unsubscribe please refer to the bottom of the email.
Views
expressed are provided for information purposes only and should not be
construed in any way as an offer, an endorsement, or inducement to invest and
is not in any way a testimony of, or associated with Mr. Culbertson's other
firms or associations. Mr.
Culbertson and related parties are not registered and licensed brokers. This message may contain information
that is confidential or privileged and is intended only for the individual or
entity named above and does not constitute an offer for or advice about any
alternative investment product. Such advice can only be made when accompanied
by a prospectus or similar offering document. Past performance is not indicative of
future performance. Please make sure to review important disclosures at the end
of each article.
Note:
Joining BARRONS REPORT is not an offering for any investment. It represents
only the opinions of RF Culbertson and Associates.
PAST
RESULTS ARE NOT INDICATIVE OF FUTURE RESULTS. THERE IS RISK OF LOSS AS WELL AS
THE OPPORTUNITY FOR GAIN WHEN INVESTING IN MANAGED FUNDS. WHEN CONSIDERING
ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS (INCLUDING HEDGE FUNDS) AN INVESTOR SHOULD CONSIDER
VARIOUS RISKS INCLUDING THE FACT THAT SOME PRODUCTS AND OTHER SPECULATIVE
INVESTMENT PRACTICES MAY INCREASE RISK OF INVESTMENT LOSS; MAY NOT BE SUBJECT
TO THE SAME REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AS MUTUAL FUNDS, OFTEN CHARGE HIGH FEES,
AND IN MANY CASES THE UNDERLYING INVESTMENTS ARE NOT TRANSPARENT AND ARE KNOWN
ONLY TO THE INVESTMENT MANAGER.
Alternative
investment performance can be volatile. An investor could lose all or a
substantial amount of his or her investment. Often, alternative investment fund
and account managers have total trading authority over their funds or accounts;
the use of a single advisor applying generally similar trading programs could
mean lack of diversification and, consequently, higher risk. There is often no
secondary market for an investor's interest in alternative investments, and
none is expected to develop.
All
material presented herein is believed to be reliable but we cannot attest to
its accuracy. Opinions expressed in these reports may change without prior
notice. Culbertson and/or the staff may or may not have investments in any
funds cited above.
Remember the Blog: <http://rfcfinancialnews.blogspot.com/>
Until next week – be safe.
R.F. Culbertson
<mailto:rfc@getabby.com>
<http://rfcfinancialnews.blogspot.com>
