Baltimore – (TFN): All eyes and ears are on the Fed this week. With Bernanke in New York discussing potential new bubbles and the New York Fed getting heat for overpaying AIG’s many creditors, investors are having a tough time knowing exactly who to follow.

For those of you who hold up the “Fire the Fed” signs, move over. I am thinking about joining your camp.

First, the real bad stuff. According to Neil Barofsky, TARP’s special inspector general, New York’s Fed (under the leadership of Tim Geithner) failed to use its leverage as the top-banking regulator to tell AIG’s lenders to take less than they were owed.

Instead of taking an across-the-board “haircut” as Obama and Pelosi told us we all should, finance giants like Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and Societe Generale said they want 100% of what they were owed.

The only holdout, UBS, said it would be willing to take 98%. But after tough looks from the guys from across the table, that offer was quickly rescinded.

According to Barofsky, the move cost the country billions of dollars and much, much more in confidence for the nation’s banking cops.

Thanks, Tim!

With that bit of news in today’s headlines, it is tough to find the confidence in some of the Fed’s latest plans to help pull the country from financial failure.

As the nation slowly recovers from last fall’s economic collapse, Bernanke and his troops at the Fed are now facing the difficult task of unwinding massive expansionary policies.

One trick discussed today is shortening the length of emergency loans from 90 days to just 24 days starting in January. It’s a pretty mundane move that will have little tangible effect on the markets.

But what could have a much larger impact, with much less transparency, is Bernanke’s recent discussion of paying interest on the reserves banks place with the Fed.

A popular move with many overseas central banks, the interest rates paid on reserves helps to establish a rate floor that regulators can gradually increase without raising overall interest rates.

Essentially, the move is a way of mopping up excessive liquidity without draining or lowering the water in a much larger pool of lending capital.

Like many things, the idea sounds great on paper, but so did letting the Fed negotiate with AIG’s trading partners and we now know how much that cost us.

Let’s face it. The markets like transparency and predictability. Anything less gives us what Friedrich Hayek called “malinvestment.”

As the Fed gets more and more creative in its efforts to boost the economy without creating deadly bubbles, transparency will go out the window.

Toss in growing political pressure from the folks from Washington and one thing is certain.

Anything the Fed does will cost you and I more money.

Unlike some stockpickers and newsletter analysts, who proudly trumpet all their winners, while shuffling the losers under the rug, I have no problem admitting when my calls go against me.

And to the delight of all the naysayers, this happened just a couple of days ago when gold prices shot to a record high. That triggered my sell-stop and, rather than let my pride come before a fall and hang on, it’s time to move on.

Don’t get me wrong, though… I’m still convinced that the yellow metal could suffer a correction for three main reasons…

• So far, inflation hasn’t reared its ugly head. If it stays in hiding much longer, disillusioned investors will probably head for the exits.
• If the U.S. economy recovers quicker than expected, investors will be inclined to abandon the safe haven of gold and reinvest in equities.
• The technicals point to a drop. The last four times gold spiked near or above $1,000 per ounce, it quickly (and sometimes precipitously) corrected.

However, giving into these convictions – and doubling down on gold – would mean abandoning two core investing disciplines that I swear by – position sizing and trailing-stops…

Have You Considered Using Trailing Stops & Position Sizing?

I know… you’ve heard about them countless times before. But indulge me for a moment, as I explain an aspect of both trailing stops and position sizing that you’ve probably never considered…

• When I speak at investment conferences, I always like to ask people to share their biggest loser. Heads go down and nary a hand rises.
• Conversely, when I ask them to share their biggest winner, it’s like I just offered free candy to an auditorium full of kindergarteners. Everyone’s hand shoots up and there’s a chorus of anxious, “Oohs!”

Nobody likes to talk about losing investments. Instead, we want to thump our chest over the latest 1,000% gainer. The reason for that is obvious, so let’s focus on the fear about talking about our losers.

Many investors turn their biggest loser into a total loss. Instead of employing a trailing-stop and exiting a trade as the price tumbles, they make it a long-term investment to save face. Or worse, they invest more at lower prices. Most times, the stock goes belly up and they lose even more.

Even the professionals can’t claim immunity here.

• For instance, take Bill Miller, the famous manager of the Legg Mason Value Trust Fund (LMVFX). Although Miller beat the S&P 500 for 15 consecutive years, he refused to man up to his mistakes when the market took a nosedive in 2008. He kept averaging down in stocks like Countrywide, Bear Stearns, Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE), Merrill Lynch, Washington Mutual (OTC:WAMUQ) and AIG.
• He revealed the true depth of his arrogance when he was asked how he knew when to stop buying a falling stock. “When we can no longer get a quote,” he replied. In other words, the only price at which he was unwilling to buy more was zero.

Here’s my point…

Avoid Losses With A Position Sizing & Trailing Stop Discipline

When I joined The Oxford Club, I immediately stopped worrying about my losses. That’s because we religiously adhere to a 25% trailing-stop discipline and a position size of no more than 4% in any one investment. Thus, losses are always contained.

The beauty of such a simple, disciplined approach is two-fold…

• The results add up, decidedly on the plus side. Case in point: The independent Hulbert Financial Digest has ranked The Oxford Club newsletter (The Communiqué) among the top five in the nation. That’s based on 10-year returns, too.
• A trailing-stop and position sizing policy allow me to keep making bold calls without regret. The bolder they are, the smaller my position size.

For instance, for my short gold call, I only invested 2%. For a hypothetical $100,000 portfolio, that means investing  $2,000 and losing $500, or less than 1% of the total portfolio value.

Bottom line: I don’t ever let an investment turn into an unacceptable loss. And I never put too many eggs in one basket. Sure I might lose 25% here or 25% there, but when I keep my position sizes small, in the grand scheme of things, it’s no big deal.

Such a strategy leaves me with plenty of capital to re-deploy and keep gunslinging. And while gold didn’t work out, some other contrarian bets are already making up for the loss and then some.

• Take Sotheby’s (NYSE: BID), for example. Back in June, I advised readers to buy shares when everyone else believed the market for investing in fine art was going into a long hibernation. The fundamentals faltered, but they didn’t collapse. As a result, Sotheby’s rallied 68% from my entry point.
• Then there’s my recommendation last Thursday to buy into the beleaguered retail sector with hhgregg (NYSE: HGG). It’s up 5.7% since then.

If I take profits on both now, my misstep by shorting gold doesn’t even matter.

The Critical Component to a Disciplined Investment Approach: Accountability

But of course, a disciplined investment approach is useless without the critical component of accountability… In terms of position sizing, there’s only one person who can keep you honest: Yourself.

But when it comes to implementing trailing-stops, multiple options exist…

• A So-So Option: Enter the stop levels with your broker. However, this is not ideal. Market makers can manipulate prices to trigger these stops.
• A Better Option: Use a service like TradeStops (www.tradestops.com). For a nominal annual fee, it will alert you via text message and/or e-mail when your stocks hit their trailing-stops.
• The Best Option: Excuse my bias, but the best value for your money is The Oxford Club. We constantly remind you about position sizing and more importantly, notify you immediately when we hit a stop-loss or trailing-stop. And our members keep each other honest.

In addition, membership also comes with a constant stream of high quality, profitable recommendations. And they make up for the occasional downer, like my short gold recommendation! To find out more, take a few minutes to read our report on how it all works.

Good investing,

Louis Basenese

Source: Two Tips to Avoid Letting a Bad Stock Sucker-Punch You

U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Congress agreed Friday that the financial system – not the American taxpayer – should bear the costs of bank bailouts. Sheila Bair, head of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC), wants the banks to ante up $45 billion – three years’ worth of deposit-insurance premiums – to bail out the fund that insures bank deposits.

When it comes to bank stocks, we all know that there were a number of Money Morning readers shrewd enough to buy Citigroup Inc. (NYSE: C) shares when the foundering giant’s stock price was below $1 a share.

If you’re one of those investors, good for you: With Citi’s shares now trading at nearly $4.70 a share, that shrewdness – or courage – has been amply rewarded.

But the question we have to ask at this point is: Why would anyone buy banks stocks right now?

Bailouts Revisited

When the Bush administration bailed out the banks last autumn, I opposed the bailout. But I understood the rationale for it. The Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (OTC: LEHMQ) bankruptcy had clearly done a lot of damage to market confidence. Thus, a series of high-profile failures – however well merited – could push the market into a behavioral funk that might take years to emerge from.

After all, as we were incessantly reminded, the banks were all intimately inter-connected – not in the least by the diabolical credit-default-swap market. So a big failure could trigger a mass-market meltdown.

That justified the immediate bailout back then. But it did not justify the continued existence of those banks and other financial institutions – especially Citi, Bank of America Corp. (NYSE: BAC) and insurance giant American International Group Inc. (NYSE: AIG) – a year after the bailout.

Even if there was an argument for preventing the immediate meltdown of those companies – to prevent panic – there was no good argument for allowing them to continue in business as zombies, distorting the market forever after. An orderly liquidation was what was really needed.

But if the plans called for these three bad actors to be liquidated, it should surely be happening by now. Two of the three have even kept their top management for the intervening year. The exception has been BofA, where Chief Executive Officer Ken Lewis is now being shoved – kicking and screaming – toward the exit. (However, I have no doubt he’ll end up being well rewarded for the indignity).

Japan’s ‘Lost Decade’

Economically, keeping banks and other companies alive after they should be dead is the mistake Japan made back in the 1990s. After Japan’s massive stock market meltdown, most of the banks were technically insolvent. A decline in the value of the stocks the banks held had gnawed away their capital, while their assets were shredded by the collapse in the value of their real-estate loans.

Despite this, Japan opted to prop up many insolvent companies, which kept the country’s entire banking system on life support until 1998 – hence the “Lost Decade” of financial legend. And a true resolution of the problem did not come until it was forced by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi in 2003. The result was more than a decade of economic stagnation and a mountain of public debt that actually exceeded 200% of gross domestic product (GDP).

For the banks themselves, the fallout can be even worse.

An ‘Artificial’ Market

At first blush, the profits of the last few months look pretty good. And the record bonuses being threatened on Wall Street suggest that all is fine. However, there are two problems. First, bank earnings have been propped up by an extraordinarily bank-friendly monetary policy, keeping short-term interest rates at close to zero and buying up more than $1.5 trillion of bad bank loans from the markets.

That simply can’t last. If it does, we’ll end up with a bad case of hyperinflation.

As for the bonuses, does anybody think that if Citi had gone bust, and ex-Citibankers were now selling apples on the street corners of New York, bonuses would be zooming so high?

If the market for overpaid bankers had been allowed to clear properly, they would no longer be overpaid.

If the Japan’s Nomura Securities (NYSE ADR: NMR) wanted to double its U.S. staff, as it announced Monday (an extraordinarily shareholder-hostile decision, given Nomura’s lousy U.S. track record), it could just lean out of its office and whistle, and a parade of ex-Citibankers, ex-AIG executives and ex-BofA execs would rush in, begging for scraps.

It appears that the concerns that Soros expressed are well justified.

A Grim Reaping For Bank Investors

Since there are more competitors in the market than there should be, once the Fed’s over-generous monetary policy is corrected, there will be too much competition, so bank profits will be squeezed. Conversely, there will be too many jobs in the industry, so banker pay scales will be artificially propped up.

If that’s a recipe for good shareholder returns, I’m a Dutchman.

There’s more. The populist fury against the banking system doesn’t look like it’s doing much about banker pay. However, it will almost certainly result in special extra taxes being levied on surviving banks, to pay for the bailouts.

The costs of those taxes will be passed through to shareholders, because competition from all the zombies that are still in business will prevent banker pay from being squeezed much. The extra levies that Bair, the FDIC chief, is employing to keep the deposit-insurance fund solvent also will fall on banks, although in this case it will be the small and medium-sized that will suffer the worst.

Squeezed profits, expensive staff, extra taxes and special FDIC levies – it doesn’t look to me as if there will be much left for bank shareholders.

Expect 2010 to be a grim year for them.

Source: Hidden Traps Make Bank Stocks a Bad Deal

He noted that “These people who were often truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government. All of this behavior supporting the aristocracy,” he says, “only ended up making it easier for me to find people stupid enough to take the other side of my trades. God bless America.”

This goes along with an article in the St. Petersburg Times about Tom James, chairman and chief executive of Raymond, James Financial, who had “some tough words for the wizards of Washington, DC who oversaw the $700-billion bailout package”.

He reports, “The Brave And Wonderful Mogambo (BAWM) was right all along! Those government weenies are the biggest freaking morons you ever saw, and we as a country should be ashamed of ourselves for having elected such corrupt, half-witted, utter failures and congenital idiots!”

As you have probably guessed by now, he did not say those exact words, but he implied every syllable when he said, “Legislators were almost embarrassingly ignorant of how the financial system works”, which I figure explains how they don’t understand the linkage between their own Bad, Bad Performance (BBP) as legislators and the subsequent Bad, Bad Performance (BBP) of the economy, and he says that only 3 of 16 legislators that he talked to actually understood what was going on in the “credit crisis.” Less than 20%! Hahaha! We’re doomed!

Well, maybe these Congressional losers will understand the unfolding economic slowdown, as evidenced by the Baltic Dry Index, which is an index of the cost to transport stuff by cargo ship, and which has fallen precipitously, which seems very important to me, and to Junior Mogambo Ranger (JMR) Riccardo, too, who is also alarmed by this like – as I previously said – me.

It’s actually beyond scary, in a terrifying kind of “ain’t nobody buying nothing in a consumer economy” kind of way, which means that without the consumer buying stuff as his or her contribution to the famous statistic of “the consumer is 70% of the economy”, we are, in case you ain’t heard, freaking doomed!

Well, maybe not all buying is drying up, as silver market analyst, Ted Butler, reports that in the last 10 months, “some 150 million ounces of silver can easily be documented to have been bought by investors. Undocumented purchases would add tens of millions more ounces.”

In fact, when you add it all up, “Investment demand for silver this year is running at a full 25% of world mine production and over 20% of total production (including recycling). This is a remarkable historical turnabout.”

Thus, it is easy to see why Mr. Butler is “bullish beyond belief for silver”, since this kind of demand means that “In silver, the documented 150 million ounces bought in the first ten months of this year is equal to 15% of all the silver bullion equivalent thought to exist!” Wow!

More than one-seventh of all the silver bullion “thought to exist” in the whole world was suddenly bought up in less than a year, and yet the price of silver has been pounded down to less than 10 bucks an ounce? No wonder I am so bullish on silver!

He also notes that the gold/silver ratio is at more than 80, which is “one of the biggest differences in history.”

And not only that, but since there are 4 to 5 billion ounces of gold in the world versus only 1 billion ounces of silver, that means that “the total dollar value of all the gold in the world is worth 300 to 400 times more than all the silver in the world (80 times 4 or 5)”.

Talk about undervalued! Hey! This investing stuff is easy! Whee!

Until next time,

The Mogambo Guru

Source: A Bull in a Silver Shop

It’s odd, that in his otherwise excellent blow-by-blow account (”Eight Days,” in the Sept 21 New Yorker Magazine) of the September 2008 Wall Street meltdown that left Lehman dead, and AIG croaking in a ditch, and the banking system in general functionally crippled, reporter James B. Stewart never got around to really describing the cause of it all — namely, the on-the-ground material catastrophe of American suburbia.

It was the worthlessness of the tradable securitized debt associated with all those overpriced (and overvalued) chipboard and vinyl houses, smeared recklessly over the American landscape, that started all the trouble in the first place. And it is our inability to come to grips with that underlying catastrophe that prolongs the resolution of the still-florid banking crisis — since the federal government is doing everything possible to prop up the failed capital equation of terminal suburbia, and to deny the obsolescence of that version of the American Dream and all the mechanisms for delivering it.

The suburban project was not a conspiracy by the likes of Robert Moses, Walt Disney, Frank Lloyd Wright, and President Eisenhower to produce a living arrangement with no future. It was the emergent, self-organizing result of special circumstances in a particular time and place: post World War Two America, with an immense supply of cheap oil, cheap land, and the industrial capacity to churn out all the necessary components for a car-dependent development pattern. Suburbia was spawned out of a couple of persistent themes in American cultural history: 1.) that cities and city life were no good; 2.) and that the romance of settling the wilderness could be reenacted, at great profit, in all that space beyond the towns and cities. It would be silly to deny the appeal of this arrangement at its inception. By the end of WW II, city life in the popular imagination was reduced to one potently awful image: Ralph Kramden’s apartment in “The Honeymooners” TV show.

There had to be something better than that. Suburbia was engineered as the antidote to the Kramden’s apartment: country-living-for-everybody. The evacuation of the cities to the new outlands proceeded as relentlessly as the landings at Normandy. It wasn’t until the program was well underway that the self-destructive essence of it became obvious — that every new housing subdivision killed the original rural character of the land, with the result that suburban life quickly became a cartoon of country living in a cartoon of a country house in a cartoon of the country. With additional layer-on-layer of, first, the shopping in the form of highway strips, then malls, along with the office “parks,” these places elaborated themselves into a kind of cancer-of-the-landscape, a chronic and expensive condition that Americans had no choice but to live with, because of the monumental investments they had already made in it. The discontents it produced lent it to psychological depression and dark humor, just as chronic illness does. But we were stuck with it.

Meanwhile, all the machinery of culture and politics made it impossible to construct anything differently. The exquisitely fine-tuned planning-and-zoning codes generated by the thousands of town boards mandated a suburban outcome everywhere — with plenty of help from the DOT traffic engineers, the fire marshals, and the even the mandarins of academia who trained all these professionals. As a natural consequence of all this, the disinvestment in cities — especially the older cities of the industrial heartland — continued remorselessly until it seemed as if the Second World War had taken place in St. Louis and Cleveland.

This mode of behavior persisted through the first, short-lived oil scarcity tremors of the 1970s. It was so completely embedded in the popular imagination that it had become the baseline American identity. The suburban project caught a second wind in the 1990s, when the last great non-OPEC oil fields of the North Sea, Alaska, and Siberia nullified the grip of the Islamic cartel for while, and sent the price of oil down to $11-a-barrel. Ironically, it was during those years that the warnings of “peak oil” first circulated beyond the geology offices, and it was clear to anyone who reflected on the connections that the project of suburbia was doomed.

It was also ironic, tragically so, that during this same period Wall Street began to seek some new way to make real money beyond stock and bond markets, which didn’t seem to produce wealth at all for more than a decade when inflation was factored in. By a fortuitous coincidence, the revolution in computers enabled Wall Street bankers to concoct abstruse new species of tradable paper securities based on bundles of debt that seemed to produce miraculous earnings. It had the added advantage of being inscrutable to both investors and financial regulators. Due diligence became impossible and moral hazard spread like ringworm in a dormitory. The bulk of the securitized debt originated in home mortgages and the larger result was a gigantic racket ramped up between Wall Street and the US government to conceal all the structural weaknesses of a de-industrialized US economy behind a hyperbolic commerce in the very thing that the American public cherished most: their houses, which, understandably, everybody had come to call “homes.” Wall Street might as easily have commoditized mother and apple pie – if you could sell each one for half a million dollars.

The banking fiasco still underway is at once a proxy for the larger failure of the American economy and the greatest fissure in it. Put as simply possible: we can’t service our debt, we can’t generate more debt, and the notional “capital” we thought we possessed is dissolving into nothingness. The federal government and Wall Street remain committed to supporting all the rackets associated with a suburban sprawl economy that has entered its own zone of remorseless failure. It is failing as a capital investment first, and is secondarily failing as a practical living arrangement. The two failures will continue in a close race toward terminal entropy.

The dirty secret all along was that by 2005 there was no economy left in the USA beyond the suburban sprawl economy with its so-called “consumer” nexus — largely devoted to the outfitting of suburbia. More mortgage debt (and credit card and car loan debt) will go bad and the investment paper that represents it will go bad and it will eventually destroy our current system for accumulating, valuing, and deploying wealth. It will not destroy the function of capital — no matter how many angry intellectuals inveigh against the straw man of capital-ism, as if it were merely a belief system – but it will be a long long time before anything sturdy or credible in the way of banking will be reconstructed out of the wreckage.

Regards,
James Howard Kunstler

Source: Ruinous Debt to Create Futureless Suburbia

It’s true; gold has become noticeably less unpopular during the last few months. It is still not as popular an investment as, say, AIG or the shares of almost any other incompetent financial institution. But some investors have actually begun to admit that they’ve purchased some gold.

A couple of the most conspicuous gold-buyers – the Chinese government and hedge fund manager, John Paulson – represent quintessential examples of the “new” gold buyer. This new type of buyer does not also buy ammunition, bottled water and Lynyrd Skynyrd tank tops. Nor does this new gold buyer spend Saturday nights sipping Gallo Hearty Burgundy in his La-Z-Boy, while flipping through binders full of Walking Liberty gold coins.

These new gold buyers do not LOVE gold nearly as much as they FEAR paper. But they are buying aggressively nonetheless…and leaving their tracks everywhere.

Earlier this year, for example, Paulson & Co., the hedge-fund firm run by billionaire John Paulson, became the largest holder of the SPDR Gold Trust (NYSE: GLD), an ETF that buys gold bullion. The New York-based firm owned 8.7 percent of the fund, as of March 31. Paulson has also taken very large stakes in several gold mining companies – in particular Gold Fields Ltd. (NYSE:GFI), Kinross Gold Corp. (NYSE:KGC) and AngloGold Ashanti Ltd. (NYSE:AU)

Paulson has lots of company among mom and pop investors who are allocating some of their capital to gold. As the nearby chart illustrates quite clearly, the SPDR Gold Trust ETF has been accumulating ever-rising quantities of gold bullion – all in response to investor demand.

Although this chart is a bit dated, the trend it illustrates remains firmly entrenched. As of September 21, this ETF controlled 1,563 tonnes of gold, making it the world’s fifth individual holder of gold. The Swiss central bank, by comparison, holds only a little more than 1,000 tonnes of gold.

Meanwhile, the Chinese doubled their official gold holdings last year, and have been making a lot of headlines with some very public gripes about the dollar. A couple weeks ago, Cheng Siwei, former vice chairman of the Standing Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, complained, “If [the Fed] keeps printing money to buy bonds, it will lead to inflation, and after a year or two, the dollar will fall hard. Most of our [Chinese] foreign reserves are in U.S. bonds and this is very difficult to change, so we will diversify incremental reserves into euros, yen and other currencies…Gold is definitely an alternative.”

No wonder rumors were running rampant last week that the 403 tonnes of gold the IMF is selling will land in a Chinese vault.

Interestingly, while investment demand for gold inexorably rises, mined production of gold inexorably declines. Apparently, the folks who coax this precious metal from the earth can’t coax as much of it as they might like.

According to Grant’s Interest Rate Observer (citing statistics from the World Gold Council), worldwide gold production has dipped over the last seven years. Gold production since 2002 has declined from 2,590 metric tons to 2,486 metric tons through June 30.

These divergent trends – demand up and supply down – do not guarantee a rising gold price, but they do suggest that a rising gold price may become the path of least resistance.

Obviously, substantial above-ground supplies of gold – in bank vaults, around fingers, in belly buttons, etc. – will find its way into the gold market if/as/when prices rise. Nevertheless, a powerful inflationary trend would produce enough investment demand for gold to easily absorb all sources of supply…and ALSO push the gold price higher.

“There is a growing distrust of paper currencies amid a deluge of massive government deficits since late 2008,” Roseman concludes. “The dollar might be the biggest drunk at the bar, but the euro and other currencies are also drinking their way to devaluation against gold.”

Source: The New Gold Buyer

It’s true; gold has become noticeably less unpopular during the last few months. It is still not as popular an investment as, say, AIG or the shares of almost any other incompetent financial institution. But some investors have actually begun to admit that they’ve purchased some gold.

A couple of the most conspicuous gold-buyers – the Chinese government and hedge fund manager, John Paulson – represent quintessential examples of the “new” gold buyer. This new type of buyer does not also buy ammunition, bottled water and Lynyrd Skynyrd tank tops. Nor does this new gold buyer spend Saturday nights sipping Gallo Hearty Burgundy in his La-Z-Boy, while flipping through binders full of Walking Liberty gold coins.

These new gold buyers do not LOVE gold nearly as much as they FEAR paper. But they are buying aggressively nonetheless…and leaving their tracks everywhere.

Earlier this year, for example, Paulson & Co., the hedge-fund firm run by billionaire John Paulson, became the largest holder of the SPDR Gold Trust (NYSE: GLD), an ETF that buys gold bullion. The New York-based firm owned 8.7 percent of the fund, as of March 31. Paulson has also taken very large stakes in several gold mining companies – in particular Gold Fields Ltd. (NYSE:GFI), Kinross Gold Corp. (NYSE:KGC) and AngloGold Ashanti Ltd. (NYSE:AU)

Paulson has lots of company among mom and pop investors who are allocating some of their capital to gold. As the nearby chart illustrates quite clearly, the SPDR Gold Trust ETF has been accumulating ever-rising quantities of gold bullion – all in response to investor demand.

Although this chart is a bit dated, the trend it illustrates remains firmly entrenched. As of September 21, this ETF controlled 1,563 tonnes of gold, making it the world’s fifth individual holder of gold. The Swiss central bank, by comparison, holds only a little more than 1,000 tonnes of gold.

Meanwhile, the Chinese doubled their official gold holdings last year, and have been making a lot of headlines with some very public gripes about the dollar. A couple weeks ago, Cheng Siwei, former vice chairman of the Standing Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, complained, “If [the Fed] keeps printing money to buy bonds, it will lead to inflation, and after a year or two, the dollar will fall hard. Most of our [Chinese] foreign reserves are in U.S. bonds and this is very difficult to change, so we will diversify incremental reserves into euros, yen and other currencies…Gold is definitely an alternative.”

No wonder rumors were running rampant last week that the 403 tonnes of gold the IMF is selling will land in a Chinese vault.

Interestingly, while investment demand for gold inexorably rises, mined production of gold inexorably declines. Apparently, the folks who coax this precious metal from the earth can’t coax as much of it as they might like.

According to Grant’s Interest Rate Observer (citing statistics from the World Gold Council), worldwide gold production has dipped over the last seven years. Gold production since 2002 has declined from 2,590 metric tons to 2,486 metric tons through June 30.

These divergent trends – demand up and supply down – do not guarantee a rising gold price, but they do suggest that a rising gold price may become the path of least resistance.

Obviously, substantial above-ground supplies of gold – in bank vaults, around fingers, in belly buttons, etc. – will find its way into the gold market if/as/when prices rise. Nevertheless, a powerful inflationary trend would produce enough investment demand for gold to easily absorb all sources of supply…and ALSO push the gold price higher.

“There is a growing distrust of paper currencies amid a deluge of massive government deficits since late 2008,” Roseman concludes. “The dollar might be the biggest drunk at the bar, but the euro and other currencies are also drinking their way to devaluation against gold.”

Source: The New Gold Buyer

Years of debt and securitization finally caught up to the FIRE (finance-insurance-real estate) sector of the economy. The titans of finance refused to come clean about the real value of the ‘assets’ they sat on…and finally it came time to pay the piper.

Dan Amoss, whose recommendation of Lehman put options generated 462% gains earlier that summer, wrote in this space a year ago, “Think about how much better off Lehman Brothers would be if its management hadn’t put off the process of reporting losses, dumping impaired assets and raising new capital. Would its stock be 26 cents today? Probably not.”

So the heavy-hitters of the finance sector have surely learned their lessons and proceeded to mark down their “assets” to realistic levels over the last year, right?

You wish. Even mainstream economists like the Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz say we’re in a worse pickle now. “In the US and many other countries, the too-big-to-fail banks have become even bigger,” Stiglitz told Bloomberg over the weekend. “The problems are worse than they were in 2007 before the crisis. It’s an outrage.”

And how do ordinary people feel about the response their government leaders have made to the crisis? Americans are, as our friend Doug Casey would put it, ‘a bunch of whipped dogs.’ Rather, they’re supremely sanguine, compared to much of the rest of the world.

For all the honeymoon-is-over talk surrounding Obama, we’re struck by how much grumpier people seem to be elsewhere. Americans are as satisfied with the actions of Obama and Congress to the same extent Russians are satisfied with those of the Putinocracy.

We should note here that Russian GDP contracted at a breathtaking 10.9% last quarter, while consumer prices are rising at a better-than-10% clip.

Source: Have the Titans of Finance Learned Their Lesson?

Good day… And a Wonderful Wednesday to you! Well… The currencies, for the most part, kept the heat on the dollar throughout the day and in the overnight markets. The euro, did rise to 1.45 and change yesterday, while it is hovering right at that figure this morning, so it did give a little bit back.

There were no big announcements last night like we saw on Monday, so the currencies didn’t have anything to push them further. In fact, there may be a “letting the dust settle” period of time, with the Big Dog, euro, before we see any further advancement, given the euro’s huge gains yesterday…

We did have “Mr. Yen” Sakakibara, tell a crowd of people that he believed the dollar would remain the world’s reserve currency for 20 years… Hmmm… Apparently, the IMF and UN haven’t let him in on the news that they desperately want to do something about the dollar! Not to mention the BRIC countries of Brazil, Russia, India and China, of whom, have already stated their case for a change!

Chinese stocks were up again last night, so that could lead the way to further gains by stocks here in the U.S., which would bring even more risk takers out of the walls… That is, of course as long as the trading pattern that has existed for 9 months remains in place!

I did read something last night about a complete collapse of Consumer Borrowing here in the U.S…. Hmmm… Well, on one hand, if that’s true, that would mean that Consumer spending is down, and saving has replaced it, and that would be a good thing! On the other hand… Consumer Spending is like 70% of our economy… Or was 70% of our economy I guess I should say! And if we’re going to see a further slowing of spending, then you can kiss the thought of a “V” shaped recession good-bye! Bye now… Don’t go away mad… Just go away!

Gold was unable to hold $1,000 yesterday and last night… I was talking to my Publisher for the Currency Capitalist letter yesterday, and I was telling her, that while I’m a firm believer that this stock market rally is going to crash and burn, bringing all risk assets along to the fire, which would adversely affect the prices of currencies, and commodities, including Gold… There’s no mistaking the appearance of a rush to Gold in the past week… And why did the rush occur? Well, to me, as I explained yesterday, it’s simply an understanding that inflation is on the other side of what we are now experiencing, and if you can pick Gold up now at those levels that existed last week (sub $1,000), why not, before it takes off?

So… I was assigned to write a piece on Gold… See how that works in the Publishing biz? You mouth off with your thoughts, and the next thing you know, you’re doing research for a piece that has to be done in 3 days or so! UGH! But… The thing I thought of was simply this… We may, and I’m not sure yet, but we may be getting to a new level, where I used to say I thought it was good to buy Gold when it dipped below $900… That might have to be changed to $1,000… That is, if we don’t have the crash and burn…

Getting back to the crash and burn thing… I know, I know, I’ve been talking about this for a couple of months now… And no sign of crashing or burning… Yet! But, then maybe there won’t be any crashing and burning as long as the markets are manipulated… I was doing some research the other day, and came across something that plays well with my manipulated theory… The stocks of Fannie (NYSE:FNM), Freddie (NYSE:FRE), AIG, and… Oh shoot! I’ve forgotten the 4th one… It’s a Gov’t owned company… SHOOT! Oh well, it doesn’t matter, these 4 stocks were accounting for over 40% of the volume each day in the stock market… Usually these 4 account for about .3%… What’s going on here folks? I’ve got a boat load of conspiracy theories about what’s going on… But I’ll leave that up to your imagination!

The Commodity currencies, that were so strong yesterday, have given some ground back VS the dollar overnight. The only thing that makes sense to me here, is that it is profit taking… For, these Commodity Currencies, (except Canadian loonies) have yield advantage over the dollar… Shoot Rudy, they have yield advantage over all the major currencies… Euro, yen, sterling and dollars! And for the most part, interest rates in these countries will be the first to rise beginning later this year… So, it had to be profit taking!

But, what do I always say, when there’s profit taking? That’s right! It gives us a chance to buy at cheaper levels!

One currency that continues to baffle me and probably many others with its rise from the ashes, is pound sterling… (cable, as currency traders call it) I’ve had quite a few readers send me notes asking me about sterling’s strength, given the fact that the U.K. is probably in more dookie than the U.S…. There are two things I can think of that probably explain it… But even these don’t do that good of a job explaining this rise in sterling…

1. the talk of using SDR’s… SDR’s currently consist of: euro, yen, sterling and dollars. So, if SDR’s get wider use, then more sterling will have to be bought by the IMF (who issues the SDR’s)
2. The crosses… Because most of the currencies are rallying and have been rallying against the dollar since March, sterling gets dragged higher in the crosses…

I’ve explained these crosses many times in the past, so I’ll just touch on it here… Whenever you buy a currency, you have to sell a currency… So the two currencies that make up that trade are called a “pair”… These are also called “crosses”… Here in the U.S. we only think of dollar VS a currency… But all over the world, people are crossing euros for yen, and vice versa, Swiss francs for Aussie dollars, etc. A lot of those crosses, have sterling in them, and therefore, sterling gets dragged higher… Not a fundamental thing…

But we’ve seen this over the years, especially with yen… And the dollar of course!

Well… You might have missed this news yesterday… But the U.S. Senate is going to have to raise the federal debt limit beyond $12.1 Trillion by mid-October! Hmmm… Anyone have a guess as to who blocked the raising of the debt ceiling in 2006 and said… “Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren”? It’s the same person that is now that same person is asking Congress to raise the debt ceiling to $13 Trillion…

But, the reality of this is that our Budget Deficit this year will be $1.6 Trillion, by Gov’t accounting standards… By Chuck standards, it will be $2.5 Trillion when it’s all said and done… And we just keep finding more ways to spend money we don’t have, don’t we? I’m going to stop here, because this all just ticks me off, and I don’t want to say something that will fill my email box with name calling emails…

Did you see the story in the Washington Post regarding the resetting of ARM’s? and I’m not talking about the arms that get broken on the playground and have to be reset… I’m talking about Adjustable Rate Mortgages… Here’s the skinny from the Washington Post story…

“Between now and 2011, roughly 70% of option ARMs, with a total value of about $189 billion, will reset.” The rating agency, Fitch, put together the numbers and did the research… And none of spells good times for home owners that are already stretched to make mortgage payments.

Here’s how I believe they work… Option ARMs, also called pick-a-pay loans, allow borrowers to choose how much to pay each month. Nearly all the borrowers who took out this type of loan from 2004 to 2007 chose to pay less than the interest due. Sometimes they paid as little as 1 percent interest. But the loans eventually require the borrowers to start paying the principal and full interest rate, so the payments shoot up.

So… This mortgage meltdown will continue to remain in the news, eh? $134 Billion of these ARMs will reset in the next two years, and the monthly payments are expected to jump 63% on average, or $1,053 per month, for loans adjusting this year and next… Can you imagine getting that letter in the mail? Dear Homeowner, your next mortgage payment will be xxxxxx…

That’s a really sad thing… Very sad…
But… Another reason why I say this is a depression and not a recession! It’s going to carry on, and on, and on…

There was more Happy Days (NOT!) news in the Washington Post yesterday… “There is little chance U.S. taxpayers will recover all of the billion spent on rescuing Chrysler and General Motors, according to a report by the Congressional Oversight Panel.”

Great! But in reality, we didn’t expect to recover it did we? I know I didn’t! The Gov’t doesn’t have a good track record of preventing losses much less recovering them.. And I’m not just talking about the current brand of Gov’t… It goes back many years…

My friend, David Galland, gave a quick history lesson in his letter this past weekend… While this may be depressing, it does give what I said above, credence…

A Quick History Lesson

The U.S. Post Service was established in 1775. So they’ve had 234 years to make it work. It is broke.

Social Security was established in 1935. They’ve had 74 years to make it work. It is broke.

Fannie Mae was established in 1938. They’ve had 71 years to make it work. It is broke.

Freddie Mac was established in 1970. They’ve had 39 years to make it work. It is broke.

The War on Poverty started in 1964. They’ve had 45 years to make it work. About $1 trillion of taxpayer money is confiscated each year and transferred to “the poor.” It hasn’t worked.

Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965. They’ve had 44 years to make it work. They are both broke.

AMTRAK was established in 1970. They’ve had 39 years to make it work. Last year it had to be bailed out and today continues running at a loss.

$700 billion bailout of 2008. It has yet to create a single new private-sector job.
Cash for Clunkers in 2009 went broke after 80% of the cars purchased turned out to be produced by foreign companies.

Now that it’s put like that in black and white, it sure doesn’t look good does it?

I really got on a roll today regarding the goings on in the U.S. and didn’t pay much attention to the currencies… But, that’s because they are trading in yesterday’s clothes this morning… With no data to talk about yesterday, and so on…

The data cupboard only yields the Fed’s Beige Book for us this afternoon… For those of you who don’t know what this entails… The Fed’s Beige Book is a summary of Commentary on Current Economic Conditions by each Federal Reserve District. It’s printed 8 times per year, and usually about two weeks before a FOMC meeting. (Federal Open Market Committee) It was once believed that the Fed Heads would use the findings in the Beige Book to help them make their decisions on monetary and fiscal policies…

I say, “It was once believed” because… After reading Bill Fleckenstein’s great book about Ignorance at the Fed Reserve, Greenspan’s Bubbles, I was scratching my head asking, but I thought the Beige Book was used to help make those decisions that Big Al Greenspan made?

So… Again, no real data today… So the currencies will get their direction once again from stocks… And like I said above, the Chinese stock markets was good to go overnight…

OK… So… Before I go to the Big Finish, let me recap today… The currencies held onto gains, albeit giving back small amounts in what appears to be profit taking. The Senate needs to raise the $12.1 Trillion debt ceiling. $189 Billion in Option ARMs are coming due in the next three years, and no data today should leave currencies to be directed by stocks, that is if the trading pattern holds.

Currencies today 9/9/09: A$ .8615, kiwi .6969, C$ .9245, euro 1.45, sterling 1.6505, Swiss .9560, rand 7.5525, krone 5.9375, SEK 7.0575, forint 186.70, zloty 2.84, koruna 17.60, RUB 31.18, yen 92.40, sing 1.4260, HKD 7.75, INR 48.50, China 6.8285, pesos 13.35, BRL 1.8290, dollar index 77.29, Oil $70.90, 10-year 3.48%, Silver $16.36, and Gold… $996.35

That’s it for today

Chuck Butler

Source: Currencies Hold Their Gains…

“Banks recover to their levels before the fall of Lehman,” is a headline in this Monday’s El Pais from Madrid.

“Public assistance enables the world’s largest 15 financial firms to return to the capitalization they had in September 2008,” the article continues. The largest of the largest, HSBC, is now judged to be worth $186 billion, according to the stock market. China’s ICBC is on its heels, with a market cap of $178 billion. BNP Paribas is 7th at $87 billion.

We will overlook the compromising detail that banks actually lost money in the last quarter – more than $3 billion. And let’s forget that China’s major banks are sitting on mega-losses from more than eight years ago (to say nothing of the more recent losses). Western banks, too, still have billions in assets whose real worth is an open question…and subject to quick reconsideration…

El Pais goes on to report something intriguing: “The two big Spanish banks leave the crisis stronger.”

Ah. What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. The world economy is recovering, or so people believe. Stocks are going up – led by the banks. But are the undead of the banking world really stronger?

Ha ha…don’t make us laugh.

But the world seems to believe it. The Wall Street Journal reports that just five big financial stocks are behind the stock market’s rally. Fannie Mae (NYSE:FNM), Citigroup (NYSE:C), Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE), Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) and AIG account for nearly a third of market’s daily turnover. Seems everyone is speculating on the banks…and moving them higher.

You will recall, dear reader, the banks made a fortune during the bubble years. You may also recall that they made so much money that when the bubble years came to a close, that they were almost all broke. Without hasty action from the feds, it would have been the end of the road for every major bank on Wall Street. As it was, even with government help, none of them survived intact. They all either went bankrupt, were sold off, or got bailouts with strings attached.

What busted the banks was too much of a bad thing. They made their money by peddling debt. In order to move the stuff, they convinced clients that their products were good safe investments – even leveraged derivatives backed by subprime mortgages! Such good salesmen were they that they even convinced themselves. When the crisis came, they realized that they had been buyers of the debt…as well as sellers of it. What could they do with it…except sell it to the feds?

But the whole financial industry is coming back to life. According to El Pais, it’s back…and it’s better than ever.

But wait? How could that be? Hasn’t the world entered the worst recession since the great depression? How could lending money be such a good business? People don’t borrow in a recession.

Strategic Short Report’s Dan Amoss is just as skeptical. “The banking system has no experience managing through the current ‘negative home equity’ environment,” he tells us. “This is an environment in which mortgage rates are already about as low as they can get and consumer balance sheets are as stressed as ever. Due to the nonrecourse nature of mortgages, most borrowers have no financial incentive to keep paying. Many are choosing to mail the keys back to the lender.

“This problem will cap the upside of bank stocks for years to come, so the sector will offer lots of short selling opportunities.”

Borrowing by households has fallen off a cliff. Instead of borrowing, they’re paying back debt at the fastest rate since the ’50s. No money to be made there.

How about commercial and business loans? Are you kidding? Businesses are cutting back too. Businesses borrow to expand…and there is no expansion going on. This is a contraction. Credit is contracting along with everything else.

Then, how could the banks make money? Let’s refer to that news item again. Oh…there are the magic words: “Public assistance enables…”

The banks are making money the same way Detroit is making money…dishonestly and temporarily. Instead of doing honest deals with willing and able counterparties, the banks are pulling a fast one. Their money comes, ultimately, from the poor taxpayer…the poor sap who funds all the government’s giveaways. The private sector lived far beyond its means during the bubble years. People wasted their money they didn’t have on things they didn’t need. Now, they try to save their money. But now the government wastes their money for them.

Speaking of which…a quick note on the Cash for Clunkers program. Numbers to be released today are expected to show a peak in sales in August caused by the feds’ incentives. President Obama calls the program a showcase, proving how effective government can be at getting the economy back on the road.

But let’s go back to basics. It’s a sham when people waste their own money. It’s a crime when they waste other peoples’ money. Prosperity comes from accumulating (saving) capital…and using it to increase productive capacity. The formula is pretty simple: Save your money. Invest it in productive business. The Clunkers program encouraged people to do the opposite – consume capital, other peoples’ capital.

’Nuff said.

We were going to let Ted Kennedy go to his grave without mention here at The Daily Reckoning. The newspapers, television and radio shows have mentioned it enough. Even the foreign press has taken note of the event.

We might have let it go, but we have taken an oath: whenever we see a bubble we must pop it. And there is a bubble in Kennedy worship so big it threatens to blot out the sun. Today, we approach with a needle.

No writer has failed to mention that Mr. Kennedy was not the first of the clan die. The press cannot resist hero worship – especially when its heroes die young.

The Kennedy brothers could have lived comfortably all their lives on their father’s liquor money. Instead, they took up the banner of ‘public service’ and wrapped themselves in it so tightly it suffocated them all. The oldest of the band was killed in WWII. Ted Kennedy’s grave lies only 100 feet from his brother, Robert, killed in 1968 while running for president. And only another 100 feet from another brother who was shot down five years earlier. With that kind of curse on a family, you’d think the younger bro would have gone back into the liquor business. Instead, the younger held his head up…headed for glory…and drove off a bridge. The bridge probably saved him. Had he made it beyond the primaries, some nutcase would have certainly taken a shot at him.

The bridge incident would have sunk a lesser man – that is, one who lacked the name, family connections, lawyers, and money of Ted Kennedy. It probably would have sunk a more reflective, more sensitive man too. A man with a sharper conscience might have seen the girl’s face in his dreams and have been driven to drink…eventually drowning himself in his own guilt, like a character from a Russian novel. But Kennedy had the ability to rise above shame and put scandal behind him, with some helpful amnesia from the press. Chappaquiddick is reported in today’s press as though it were a personal triumph. A lesser man would have gone to jail for manslaughter; Kennedy went on to become the ‘lion of the Senate.’ He merely gave up his presidential aspirations and buckled down to the life of a Senate hack. The eulogies tell us that driving off the bridge, drunk, made him what he was: “the greatest legislator of all time,” as the President put it.

No, we never shared the conservatives’ loathing for the man. We never met him. Had we known him personally, we probably would have found him as agreeable a drinking companion as anyone else. But we come neither to bury Ted Kennedy, nor to praise him…we merely poke fun at the world that idolizes him.

The fact that the Kennedys committed themselves to ‘public service’ seemed to make them part of the furniture of public life. Everywhere you looked, there they were. The newspapers loved them. Everyone knew what they looked like. Hairdressers knew their private lives. Taxi drivers suffered their personal tragedies as if they were one of the family.

But the Kennedys were more than just furniture. First, because they were not particularly useful…you couldn’t sit on them or dine on them. More importantly, when it came to decorating the republic, they were the ones who wanted to arrange the furniture.

All the obituaries hammered this point as if they were hardening steel: “He devote his life to public causes…” says one. “He fought for the poor and the downtrodden…” says another.

He said so himself. In a letter to Pope Benedict XVI, Kennedy seemed to write his own obituary. He allowed as how he had “done his best to champion the rights of the poor and to open doors of economic opportunity. I’ve worked to welcome the immigrant, fight discrimination and expand access to health care and education…”

USA Today provides a typical illustration of the Senator’s magnanimity and generosity.

A woman with an autistic son asked the government for help. “The Haitian immigrant wrote to her senator, ‘the only one who can understand what it takes to raise a child with disabilities.’” (Kennedy’s son lost a leg and his sister, Rosemary, was mentally disabled. This, according to USA Today, gave him “a connection with the public’s private pain.”)

“Within three weeks,” the news item continues, “they secured vocational and life skills training [for the son]…that allowed his mother to finally earn a college degree last year at age 58.

“I have my life back and my son is no longer under by my care 24 hours a day…”

No…now he’s under someone else’s care! Kennedy redecorated. He moved the cost of caring for the poor fellow on to someone else.

And what does the mother do with her free time? She’s now a “community organizer.” You can bet she’s organizing more transfers…of money from the people who earned it to the people who didn’t.

“He was always reaching out,” said Democratic strategist Donna Brazile. Yes, he was always re-arranging the furniture. And USA Today told us that he inspired a whole race of redecorators – people infected by a desire for ‘public service.’

“Hundreds of lesser-known former Kennedy staffers and campaign volunteers…followed him into public service…The alumni of his office pepper the government…”

But what is the consequence of all this meddling? Is the nation better off for it? None of the obituaries we saw even raised the question. How do you know if something is genuinely a public service? Is it a public service when you take money from one person and give it to another? The press seems to think so. Is it a public service when you load up the nation with hundreds of billions worth of programs and pet projects?

Kennedy was a prolific proposer…a serial legislator…a Tom Friedman with a Senate seat. Surely some conservative think tank has totted up the cost of all his legislation. And surely it is in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Where did the money come from? It had to come from somewhere. It has to come from people who had ideas and plans of their own…people who had put the couch under the window and the TV in front of the easy chair, just the way they wanted it. Were they really any better off when Kennedy moved things around? Was the republic stronger, healthier, more prosperous and more honest after the Kennedy brothers got through with it?

We leave you with the question.

As for Ted Kennedy, the man was a scalawag. But he was God’s scalawag; and all His creatures deserve our respect. And now that he’s in the dirt, God will do with him as He chooses. RIP.

Until tomorrow,

Bill Bonner

Source: The Undead of the Banking World