London , England

We got back from South America on Friday… ready for a rest. So, we spent the weekend reading… and occasionally, thinking.

What we’ve been thinking is that the dollar is dead meat in the long run. But in the short run, it might have enough life in it to bite investors on the derrière.

The US stock market rose 73 points on Friday, to bring the Dow just 30 points south of the 10,300 mark. Why is this level important? It’s not really. But it reminds us that this is still just in “bounce range.” Big drops in stock prices are followed by bounces – always. A bounce of 50% of what was lost is not unusual. That’s what happened after the Crash of ’29, for example. So, there’s nothing exceptional about what we’re seeing on Wall Street.

But here at the Daily Reckoning we’re not smart enough or fast enough to play the countertrends. We want investment positions that we can ignore for years… We want to be able to go on a long trip… say, down the Inca Road or over the Hindu Kush. And when we come back, we want to find that we have at least as much money as when we left.

If stock market buyers – in the US – have more money a year from now than they have now, we’ll be surprised. The private sector is still more than 2/3rds of the economy. And the private sector has begun de-leveraging. Nothing that has happened in the last 8 months makes us think that that trend is going to reverse any time soon. There are 70 million baby boomers who need money for retirement. They’ve got to save. That means cutting back on spending. And that means less income for business. Are stock prices really going to go up when business income is going down? No.

We leave our “Crash Alert” flag flying, here at the worldwide headquarters. We don’t know when… or IF… stock prices will crash. But the downside risk is not worth the possible upside. Daily Reckoning readers should be out of all US stocks, except those they wouldn’t mind holding through a 50% correction.

The other thing we mistrust – aside from politicians, stock promoters and tap water – is the dollar. But here the story is more complicated. Because the next downswing in stocks could push the dollar up! Everyone is betting against the dollar. And most think it is a one-way gamble. But it’s not like Mr. Market to grant investors a one-way bet. He’s got something up his sleeve.

Last week, the Financial Times reported that a group of IMF economists had made a “Plea to reduce demand for dollar reserves.”

That is another way of saying: find something else to put in your vaults rather than dollars!

To read the complete article at The Daily Reckoning, click here.

The first public retirement pension scheme was created by Otto von Bismarck in 1880 Germany. Fifty years later, during the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt followed suit in the United States. As we’ve seen, the number of people expected to reach the retirement age of 65 was not considered to pose a threat to future funding. Life expectancy in 1935, in the United States, for example, was 76.9 for men. Workers relying on the plan for retirement would not receive much each month and were not expected to live long enough to drain the system.

When Social Security was founded, the typical U.S. worker at age 65 could expect to live another 11.9 years. But if today’s official projections are right, by the year 2040 the typical 65-year-old worker can expect to live at least another 19.2 years. If the normal retirement age had been indexed to longevity since 1935, today’s worker would be waiting until age 73 to receive full benefits and tomorrow’s workers even longer.

In a report called “Demographics and Capital Markets Returns,” Robert Arnott and Anne Casscells argue that the crisis is not in Social Security, but in demographics. “When an entire society ages,” suggest Arnott and Casscells, “…the thing that matters most is the ratio between the workers to retirees. Unfortunately, the aging of the baby boom generation, which is a significant bulge in population, will cause a dramatic increase in the ratio between workers to retirees, one that will put enormous strain on society and cause friction between generations.”

In the United States, as in other developed countries, the unfunded benefit liability for public pensions amounts to 100 percent to 250 percent of GDP. It is a “ hidden debt ” far greater than official public debt. Unlike in the private sector, these debts are not amortized as expenses over 30 to 40 years. 21 And it may be worth pointing out that under normal conditions economies do not run such crushing deficits. They only do so in crisis mode.

The annual cost of Social Security benefits represented 4.4 percent of GDP in 2008 and is projected to increase to 6.2 percent of GDP in 2034, and then decline to about 5.8 percent of GDP by 2050 and remain at about that level.

A Bubble in Health Care

And to the retiring boomers’ other doubts and insecurities, we might add that U.S. health care costs are expected to rise by 7 percent of GDP over the next 40 years—a rate that is more than twice as fast as other developing nations. The “old old,”—those aged 80 and over—are predicted to rise sharply through 2050 and will dramatically increase long – term care costs as well as disability, dependence, and health care expenses.

In fact, by official projections, in 2030, the U.S. government will be spending more on nursing homes than it spends on Social Security today. “Although people justifiably worry about Social Security,” says Victor Fuchs, an economist who studies the health care industry, “paying for old folks’ health care is the real 800-pound gorilla facing the U.S. economy.” 23 Adding projections for Medicare and Medicaid ’s expenditures to those of Social Security could raise the total cost to more than 50 percent of payroll taxes.

The fiscal kickers of health cost inflation and political demand for more long-term care benefits threaten to raise public spending dramatically in the United States. Between 2005 and the fall of 2008, we spent two and a half years chronicling the efforts of David Walker, the former comptroller general of the United States, and Bob Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, to reign in reform and shore up the Social Security and Medicare systems. The project yielded a feature length documentary film, which earned us a trip to the Sundance Film Festival in January of 2008 and another to the Critic’s Choice Awards in Los Angeles a year later. We published a best-selling companion book of the same title in late 2008. You’re encouraged to delve into the numbers we presented in the film and book. They’re truly mindboggling. But in many ways the project was dated the moment we released it to the public.

The credit crisis that reached a fever pitch developed in 2008 pushed the date of insolvency of these programs ever closer. On May 13, 2009, the Medicare Trustees warned that the fund they tap to pay for beneficiaries’ hospital care will be insolvent by 2017—two years earlier than trustees had predicted the year before. The program has been paying out more than it collects in taxes and interest since last year, in part due to a recession well underway. 25 Medicare would have to deposit $ 13.4 trillion—$ 1 trillion higher than last year’s estimate—into an interest-earning account today in order for the hospital fund to pay its scheduled benefits over the next 75 years. The program’s total unfunded obligation, which includes doctor and prescription drug benefits, is $37.8 trillion. The trustees estimated that in coming years, Medicare spending will rise faster than workers’earnings or the economy as a whole.

Trustees say that while the financial standing of Social Security decreased more sharply than Medicare last year, the health program remains at greater risk of insolvency. The financial difficulties facing Social Security and Medicare pose serious challenges, the report concluded.

For Social Security, the reform options are relatively well understood but the choices are difficult. Medicare is a bigger challenge. Its cost growth can be contained without sacrificing quality of care only if health care cost growth more generally is contained. But despite the difficulties—indeed, because of the difficulties—it is essential that action be taken soon, particularly to control health care costs.

After the revised Social Security and Medicare announcement the world began to wonder: Can the U.S. hold onto its AAA credit rating?

“The U.S. government has had a triple-A credit rating since 1917,” David Walker, now president and CEO of the Peterson G. Peterson Foundation, commented in the Financial Time s following the release of the Trustees report, “ but it is unclear how long this will continue to be the case. In my view, either one of two developments could be enough to cause us to lose our top rating.

“First, while comprehensive health care reform is needed, it must not further harm our nation ’ s financial condition. Doing so would send a signal that fiscal prudence is being ignored in the drive to meet societal wants, further mortgaging the country’s future.

“Second, failure by the federal government to create a process that would enable tough spending, tax and budget control choices to be made after we turn the corner on the economy would send a signal that our political system is not up to the task of addressing the large, known and growing structural imbalances confronting us.”

Of course, we must note that the whole credit rating biz is…well…corrupt. The agencies that are responsible for dishing out sovereign credit ratings (S & P, Fitch, and Moody’s) are the same ones that left us all out to dry in 2007. (Of course, mortgage – backed securities get a AAA…housing prices never fall!) Rest assured, if Wall Street can buy its way into AAA, Uncle Sam surely can, too.

But even Moody’s is starting to hedge their bets. They’ve since created three subdivisions within their AAA rating: resistant, resilient, and vulnerable…a corporate way of saying the good, the bad, and the ugly. While the United States isn’t in the worst of the bunch, it’s certainly not the best.

Regards,
Bill Bonner and Addison Wiggin

Source: Excerpt from ‘The Hard Math of Demography’

Your family’s share of the government debt is now over half a million dollars. A record $546,668, to be exact.

That cheery Monday stat comes courtesy of a USA Today study, which claims that each American family’s share rose 12% in 2008. That’s $55,000 in new government debt last year for every U.S. household — thousands more than the median household annual income. Here’s how it breaks down:

Last year’s spike is the biggest since the Medicare prescription drug benefit was added in 2003. According to the rag, the government garnered $6.8 trillion in “new obligations” in 2008, bringing the total U.S. tab to $63.8 trillion. Given our spending record so far in 2009, it’s safe to say your family’s burden is already much, much larger.

And you ain’t seen nothin’ yet… the Social Security program will grow by 1-2 million beneficiaries every year until 2032 as baby boomers retire. Medicare will add just as many each year starting in 2011, when that same demographic starts turning 65.
Unless the U.S. becomes a net saver, “another global financial crisis triggered by a dollar crisis could be inevitable,” forecast former Chinese central banker Yu Yongding over the weekend. (Oy… Beijing is 7,000 miles from Washington, and even they can see this coming.)

Yu’s comments were purposefully timed — U.S. Treasury Secretary Geithner embarked on a sudden PR tour of China this weekend. His mission? Keep the cash flowing from America’s No. 1 creditor.

“No one is going to be more concerned about future deficits than we are,” said Geithner, whose government’s budget deficit will exceed $1.75 trillion this year. “As we recover from this unprecedented crisis, we will cut our fiscal deficit [and] we will eliminate the extraordinary government support that we have put in place to overcome the crisis.”

In the meantime, Geithner assured students at Peking University that China’s investments in U.S. paper are “very safe.”
“I doubt the Chinese believed him,” says the man, the myth, the legend Chuck Butler. “Of course, I’m not a Chinese official, so I don’t really know what they are thinking. But I’ve watched them smile and tell former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paulson that they were going to allow greater currency flexibility, and after he would board his plane, it would business as usual… Same thing for Graham and Schumer, who thought their prestigious status as lawmakers would get them someplace with the Chinese.

”It all comes down to the fact that the U.S. needs China more than the other way around.”
General Motors, once the backbone of U.S. manufacturing, is officially bankrupt. As you’ve no doubt heard, the company declared bankruptcy this morning. But since it’s 2009, lord knows it can’t be a run-of-the-mill insolvency. The Obama administration has its hands deep in this thing… here’s the fine print of the biggest industrial bankruptcy in U.S. history:

• Uncle Sam gets a 60% stake. The government will pump an additional $30 billion into GM (on top of the $20 billion already squandered). In exchange, the government will be the largest shareholder… leverage it will use to usher GM through bankruptcy and convert it to this “leaner, stronger company” we’ve been promised
• Half of the UAW’s $20 billion health care fund will be converted to GM stock, which will give it a 17.5% stake in the company. 12-20 factories will be closed, at the cost of approximately 21,000 union workers. 40% of the 6,000 GM dealers will have to close, too
• The Canadian government gets a 12% stake, given all GM’s design/manufacturing activity up north.
• Bondholders were bought (bullied?) out. They’ll swap their $27.1 billion in unsecured debt for 10% of GM, with warrants to own 15% more. Surely, they learned from Chrysler’s bondholders, who were publicly vilified by President Obama for demanding what was lawfully theirs… so much for that hallmark of American capitalism
• Current shareholders get nada. At least that rule of bankruptcy is still intact. If you were long GM, please consider letting someone else manage your money. Anyone.

“GM Bankruptcy to Bring Taxpayer Ownership,” headlined Bloomberg this morning. Shame on them and the U.S. government for perpetuating this “taxpayer ownership” BS.

We must have been asleep when the “taxpayer” got any say in this one. GM is owned by wealthy politicians in Washington who, under threat of imprisonment, forced their constituents to finance the deal. Insinuating the public has any control is “Orwellian in the extreme” Addison suggested when we discussed the matter late Friday. Amen.

And let’s be really honest… taxes haven’t gone up to cover the GM bailout (or any credit crisis expense), but government borrowing certainly has. If any “taxpayers” truly own GM, their tax returns get mailed to Beijing or Tokyo.
Sign of the times… GM and Citigroup are getting kicked off the Dow. Cisco and Travelers will replace them next Monday. Extra irony (and foreshadowing?) in this exchange, as Citi is the former owner of Travelers, which it spun off in 2002.
The market baked in GM’s insolvency a long time ago. In fact, the Dow’s off to the races this morning, even though one of its 30 components is rapidly approaching zero (the “beauty” of a weighted index). The big indexes rose 2% within the first 30 minutes of trading.
“We have reached a pivot point in financial markets,” forecasts Rob Parenteau, steward of the Richebacher Society.

“As we have documented in recent weeks, the list of U.S. macro series showing stable nominal levels over the past three-four months continues to increase. These include retail sales, new orders for durable goods and imports of materials and finished goods. That is not what usually happens in a debt-deflation dynamic, which cumulatively builds on itself. It appears the debt-deflation risk is being contained by extreme fiscal and monetary measures.

“Stability is better than free fall, but it is not the same as expansion, and we believe equity investors have shoved valuations high enough over the past three months that they now require signs of economic growth, not just stability, to carry equity indexes higher. We think the odds of them getting that could improve after we get past the auto production and dealer downshift later in the summer, but the rise in Treasury yields is becoming alarming.

“So from a strategic point of view, we believe equity investors want and need to see stronger economic and earnings results to drive indexes higher, while bond investors need just the opposite to calm Treasury yields down. In addition, through near-zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) and quantitative easing (QE) approaches, the Fed has been trying to push private investors into riskier asset classes while the Treasury’s debt issuance calendar implies they need private investors to prefer owning Treasury bonds, which are generally not the asset of choice in an economic recovery scenario.

“In other words, we have contradictory cross currents here. If the Fed doesn’t intervene to slow or halt the Treasury yield backup, there is a chance the stabilization in unit home sales will wither away. If the Fed does step up QE operations to halt the Treasury yield rise, professional investors taking the ‘green toilet paper’ view will continue to sell dollars and buy commodities. Down the line, that implies higher energy prices for consumers and higher input prices for manufacturers, neither of which we would consider growth-supportive developments.”

If you seek a better, richer life through macroeconomic awareness, you’ll be right at home in the Richebacher Society. Get in, here.
Like last week, materials and energy companies are leading the way today. The great global rebound argument is still hot, and this data point is keeping the commodity fire ablaze:
China’s manufacturing sector expanded for the third month in a row in May, its government reports today. China’s purchasing managers index registered a score of 53.1 during the month, down just a bit from April but still above the expansion/contraction score of 50.
Oil’s up to a fresh seven-month high of $67 a barrel today, largely due to China’s PMI number.
The dollar is still falling, giving commodities an even bigger boost. The dollar index fell right through support at 80 on Friday and has plunged another point and a half since. It’s at 78.8 as we write, just off its 2009 low.

Thus, the cost of your European vacation has popped 7% since the start of May. The euro is up 9 cents over the last 30 days, to just under $1.42 as we write. The pound has followed suit, up 11 cents over the last month, to $1.62.

And could parity be around the corner for our neighbor to the north? The Canadian dollar is up to 92 cents today, its highest level since October 2008.
Gold continues to flourish, but silver has been the real precious metal story of late. The yellow metal is up about 9% over the last month, to roughly $980 today. Silver, on the other hand, shot up 29% in May, to $15.50 an ounce.

“In general,” says Byron King, “the precious metals are up because the big-spending politicians in Washington have no respect for the U.S. dollar. Break out the black crepe and armbands of mourning for the U.S. dollar.

“Specifically, silver has always been the “poor man’s gold.” Silver tends to lurk in the shadows of the price of gold, sort of a stepchild to the yellow metal.

“But on occasion, silver undergoes a slingshot effect. Between the basic industrial demand for electronics, plus jewelry demand (’cuz gold’s getting pricey!), and now the monetary pull… silver is accelerating in a price rise that is — believe it or not — leaving gold in the dust.

“Silver could break $20 sooner than we’ll see gold at $1,200, and the silver miners (my readers own several) will soar to new heights. Do you have your ticket for this ride? All aboard!!!”

Heh, get your ticket here: Byron’s latest special report on precious metals investing.
Silver may continue to outperform gold. If you’re a believer in historic ratios, silver still has room to rise in order to meet its average gold price ratio over the last decade.

Either that, or gold’s price needs to fall. And in this environment, we’d sooner go long silver than short gold. Do you agree?
“I’m a raving fan, but sometimes you guys get misled a bit,” writes a reader in response to Robert Gordon’s call that the recession has bottomed.

“The so-called ‘ultimate indicator’ of recession ends of the four-week moving average of initial jobless claims is hardly as accurate as suggested. It is true that it does turn down typically, just as a recession ends from the retrospective declaration of that recession, but it is NOT true that every time the four-week moving average of initial jobless claims turns down during a recession, the recession ends.

“In the ’81-’82 recession, the indicator turned down from over 500k four times before a correct signal — in December ’81, February 82, May 82, June 82, and finally at the real ultimate peak in October 82. In the 1990 recession, it turned down in January of ’91, before its ultimate peak in April 1991.

“In the 2000 recession, it turned down in June 2001 from high levels, to give a false signal before peaking in October 2001, although many other recession indicators suggest that the recession went on for far longer than in the graphic you presented.

“Virtually every recession therefore has witnessed false signals of at least one and often many times before the ultimate peak in initial claims and before the later declared end of the recession. Why would this time be any different — particularly in view of the potential for auto mess to lead to accelerated claims?”

The 5: We agree… guess we didn’t lay the skepticism on thick enough when we introduced the idea. Glad to hear you’re a fan.

Source: Your Share of the Debt, GM Dies, Silver Still a Buy, A Pivot Point and More!

Americans have just lost over $10 trillion in wealth in the housing crash, stocks are still about 40% off their highs and there’s a strong likelihood of inflation and higher taxes on the way. This is bad news for anybody interest in protecting their savings and retiring in comfort.

Here at Notes, we have no intention of hanging around and waiting for this onslaught. We are putting together a team of financial and legal experts to head up a wealth protection program for people who don’t intend on surrendering their cash to pay for the clean-up costs of the crisis.

This program will provide top-level money management and tax planning advice. If you’re serious about checking out of the welfare state for good, this program may be for you. We intend to keep the amount of members extremely low. If you’re interested in finding out more, send an email with the subject line “Family Office” to info@contrarianprofits.com.

By the end of 2008, $30-$40 trillion had been lost, in stocks, housing and derivatives. Investors breathed a sigh of relief when December 31 finally came. But then came 2009! World markets have fallen 18% so far this year…2009 is on track to lose far more than even 2008, which was the worst year in stock market history.

What has gone wrong?

Today, we’re going to retrace our steps. In order to understand where we’re going, we have to spend a minute remembering where we’ve come from.

First, the biggest bubble in history sprang a major leak in the summer of ’07. Then came the autumn of 2008, and it was losing air from every seam. The biggest bubble in history might be expected to lead to the biggest bust in history. And so it has…

“Let it burn itself out,” was our advice. Instead, the feds sounded the alarm, slid down the pole, and rushed to put the fire out. But the more money and credit they pumped on the flames, the worse the fire seemed to get.

The Federal Reserve, under the leadership of Ben Bernanke, called out all the fire trucks and opened up all the hoses. Rates were cut to zero…and the Fed expanded its balance sheet – increasing the amount of credit available to the banking system – by nearly $1 trillion.

And the Federal government – under the leadership of George W. Bush – rushed out a tax rebate…and then a rescue bill. Together, they cost a bit more than $1 trillion.

None of this rescuing has done any good. Every bank and business that has gotten help has deteriorated, as near as we can tell. The feds let Lehman go bust and we were done with it. But they saved insurance giant, AIG. Now, AIG is in trouble again. And today’s paper tells us that the feds have stepped in…this time to put in a further $30 billion and “take a controlling stake in two of the stricken insurer’s largest divisions.”

Hey…so now the feds are in the insurance business too.

And here comes the new administration with another $825 billion bailout and the kind of budget that takes our breath away.

If Mr. Obama gets his way, he will soak the rich and squeeze the military; everyone else will be showered with benefits. There’s a health care initiative, for example, that will cost more than $600 billion. And there’s even a plan to provide higher education for everyone.

Republicans are gearing up for a fight. They owe many of their careers to military contractors and are looking forward to cushy jobs with defense businesses should the voters ever catch on and boot them out of office. They’ll fight to keep the U.S. spending money as if we were at war. The Republicans don’t appreciate it much either when people on their high-dollar-donor lists are hit with higher taxes.

Democrats are readying for a dust-up too. They’ve dreamed of moments like this – it is as if the police and the alarm companies had all gone on strike at the same time. They’re planning to rob every bank in town – and expect to get thanked for it. It is not often that they can divvy up trillions in boondoggles…and pretend it is in the national interest.

With this worldwide financial meltdown you can get away with anything. People have come to believe things so absurd you’d think even a Democrat would laugh at them. Most think you can give money to failing companies…and somehow they’ll be healthy businesses again. Some believe that you can print up paper money – and that it will be as good as the real thing. Almost all of them think spending money on anything, no matter how stupid, actually helps the economy. If it were only that easy!

Obama says he’s preparing for a fight too. Which is fine with us; we like a good fight. Even one that is rigged. And this one surely is. Just look a chart of government spending over the last 30 years. What you see is that there is nothing extraordinary about what Obama is doing. Every year, through Republican and Democratic administrations…from Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama…the Republicans and Democrats pretended to fight about how much money the government spent. And every year the trend continued: higher spending, higher deficits. It didn’t seem to matter who was president, or what was going on. Each year, spending rose…and so did the real deficits. That too is a feature of the post-war consumer economy. And that, too, is probably coming to an end.

*** After all this fire fighting…you might think that the blaze would be under control by now. Not at all.

On Friday, the Dow lost a further 119 points. It’s clearly ready for a rally…but there is none in sight – yet.

Oil is at $44. Gold lost ground too…it’s down to $942.

We recall that last December, as stock prices were collapsing, Warren Buffett stepped up and put his money and his mouth in the same place. He was buying stocks, he said.

But buying stocks proved a bad place for both his money and his mouth. Stocks continued falling. And so did the economy that is supposed to support them. Economic output in the United States is falling at a 6.5% rate – the fastest drop in 26 years. And now Buffett says the economy will be a “shambles” this year. His own company, Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A / BRK.B), reported profits down 96% from the year before…and is trading at only about half its peak. In other words, Berkshire shareholders have lost half their money.

And here’s a good question for you, dear reader: If the smartest investor in the world can’t make money in this market, how do you expect to?

If we were you, we wouldn’t even try. You see, this is not a recession…and it’s not a buying opportunity. It’s a depression. And at this stage in a depression, the best thing to do is to sell stocks, not buy them. Because they have further to fall…and because they could take a long, long time to recover.

We’ve explained the difference between a recession and a depression before. But we’ll do it again. A recession is a pause in an otherwise healthy, growing economy. A depression is when the economy drops dead. And when it drops dead, the assets that people owned – stocks, bonds, houses, derivatives, debt – are called into question. What are they worth, now that the economy that created them no longer exists? That’s the big question. The U.S. economy has been expanding for the last 60 years – largely by increasing consumer spending and debt. Now, neither consumer spending nor debt is increasing. In the last 6 months, consumers have suddenly reversed their free-spending ways. Borrowers and lenders have repented too. But if it is no longer an economy that grows by increasing consumption and debt…how does it grow at all? And what about all those businesses that are set up to provide products and services to the consumer economy? And what about all the debts and obligations that the consumer economy produced; what are they worth?

That’s what everyone wants to know. So the markets have entered into a period of vigorous price discovery. Some things are still valuable, of course. A house, for example. But many things aren’t as valuable as they used to be. The house won’t be worth as much if people can’t borrow to buy it…or if potential buyers can’t get a job. And the mortgage debt that the house carried…which was recycled into a leveraged debt instrument…is bound to be worth a lot less than people once thought.

But it takes time to sort out the good assets from the bad ones. How much does the business owe? To whom? Who owes it money? Will the debtor be able to pay? And what about those strange piece of paper – CDOs, MBOs, SIVs – in the company vault? What are they worth?

For a while, people are so afraid of making the wrong move that markets freeze up. No one wants to lend when he doesn’t know if he’s going to get his money back. That’s called a ‘credit crunch.’ And no one wants to buy when he has no idea what things are worth. That’s when markets go “no bid.”

But eventually – unless the feds stop the process – things sort themselves out. Businesses go broke. Homeowners are defenestrated. Automobiles go back to the dealers’ lots. Prices sink to a level where people are able to buy. And the whole process starts over again.

This can take a long, long time…especially when government is trying to stop it.

*** “We must kill zombie banks or face a lost American decade,” says James Baker, U.S. Treasury Secretary under Ronald Reagan and U.S. Secretary of State under George Bush I. Japan is still trying to adjust to the realities of its post-bubble world…after the initial crash 19 years ago. It propped up banks instead of fixing them, he says. The banks were kept alive…but not performing their function. Result: a lost decade. Maybe two.

In the United States, in the ’30s, on the other hand, the zombie banks were allowed to die. More than 1,000 banks were buried. Still, the economy didn’t really recover until after WWII – some 2 decades after the crash of ’29.

Maybe killing the zombie banks isn’t enough. Zombie companies must be allowed to fail, too. And zombie homeowners. And all the zombie investments made in the preceding bubble years.

Of course, that is what is needed. A period of creative destruction. But in this period of discovery, we don’t know who’s a zombie and who’s not. Not yet. It will take time to find out. A new economic model must take shape. Then, the markets must tell us what things are still valuable…and what they are worth.

An example: a mall. Shopping malls were designed for an economy in which consumption increased at a more-or-less predictable rate. As consumption increased, mall owners could project how much retail space they could let out…and what yield it would produce. Based on those figures, banks could lend against the value of the mall…and investors could put their money to work building new malls.

But that economy is missing and presumed dead. Consumption is no longer increasing, it’s declining. And the biggest consuming group – the baby boomers – seem to be changing their habits forever. From here on out, they are likely to be saving money for their retirements…not spending.

What is that mall worth now? What do the projections show? The commercial property loans used to build the mall were based on projections made years ago; what are those loans worth now?

We’re all waiting to find out. A new economy needs to arise, step over the corpse of the dead one, and get moving. What kind of economy? We don’t know… When will it happen? We don’t know that either. What companies will prosper…which ones will fail?

We wish we could tell you.

In the meantime, all we have is guesses… Stay tuned for more…tomorrow.

Regards,

Bill Bonner

Source: Federal Firefighters to the Rescue!

This from Money Morning:

For the 50 million Americans with 401(k) plans – many of them close-to-retirement Baby Boomers – the heavy lifting is just beginning.

In the 12 months after the U.S. stock market hit its record peak in October 2007, more than $1 trillion worth of stock-market wealth held in 401(k)s and other “defined-contribution” plans was eviscerated, The Wall Street Journal reported. The lost wealth is more like $2 trillion if individual retirement accounts (IRAs) are taken into account.

For many, the pain will be especially acute. For instance, workers aged 55 to 64, who have been contributing to the same 401(k) plan for the past 20 years, have seen their the 401(k) account balance plunge by a staggering 25%-plus since the start of 2008, according to research by the Employee Benefit Research Institute. Since those figures don’t separate out new cash contributions to the plans, the statistics actually tend to drastically understate the actual level of losses, The Journal reported.

Given that many Americans were already trying to deal with major declines in the values of their homes – and given that thousands of households are dealing with, or are expecting, job losses – this eradication of their retirement savings is taking on a kind of “last straw” quality.

After all, any one of those three things alone  – falling housing prices, loss of incomes due to lost jobs or a retirement plan haircut – is tough enough to rebound from. But the combination of all three is the kind of triple-whammy that can put an entire economy out for the count.

“This is the biggest test that the 401(k) plan has seen to date, and it has failed,” Robyn Credico, head of defined-contribution consulting at Watson Wyatt Worldwide Inc. (WW), told The Journal. “We’ve put people close to retirement in a very challenging position.”

There are plenty of ways to react, ranging from indifference to outright panic. Neither extreme will prove productive. However, there are some options in between that will form the foundation of any sound retirement plan rebuilding strategy.

After reviewing a plethora of options, Money Morning offers you the three best ones.

Retirement Rescue Tip No. 1: Don’t Cash Out

Possibly the worst thing you could do to your retirement is cash in your 401(k) – a move that would level your finances come tax time, extend your pre-retirement career by a number of years, and/or reduce your income when you start retirement.

So let’s rule that out immediately. That will put you well ahead of others who didn’t resist this urge, or who were forced to make this unattractive choice due to extenuating circumstances.

In the last two months of 2008, requests to withdraw from retirement plans rose 59% from the same period in 2007.

Magnifying this mistake is the fact that the contributions participants have funneled into their retirement have steadily declined since July, HR consultancy firm Mercer Inc. reported after polling 1.2 million participants with employer-sponsored defined contribution retirement plans.

Luckily – for now – less than 1% of plan participants account for both these declines.

“What should sound the alarm with plan sponsors, however, is the growth trend, not the absolute figures. As most experts would agree, withdrawals from 401(k)-type retirement plans and reducing participant contributions to zero are two actions that are completely counter to preparing for retirement,” Eric Levy, Retirement Business Leader at Mercer, said of the firm’s poll. “This may point to the dire straits that a small-but-growing number of participants find themselves in where withdrawals and zero contribution rates are seen as a type of financial last resort.”

Levy raises the central issue: It’s less of a lack of faith that the markets will bounce back, and more of a basic need for money for daily expenditures.

That’s understandable, and excusable to a large degree. After all, you won’t be able to enjoy retirement if you lose your house in the process of putting away money for later.

But the bottom line is less money contributed now translates into less money you’ll have to enjoy life and meet your basic daily needs after you punch that company timecard for the last time.

Sometimes you have to take one step back before you can take two steps forward.

Retirement Rescue Tip No. 2: Balance and Rebalance

The phrase “rebalance your assets” sounds intimidating. But 401(k) managers and financial planners know their clients aren’t financial wizards.

They know a large portion of 401(k) participants don’t have the time or knowledge to actively manage their plan’s holdings. And they know investors have different tolerances for risk.

That’s why 401(k) plans have asset-allocation models designed to assess a participant’s risk tolerance, manage that risk and maximize returns by setting a percentage for each category of assets. Over time, these ratios can change as some assets surge in value, while others hold steady or even decline.

That, in turn, could skew your asset allocation. Assets that performed well could now comprise 20% of the portfolio’s value, instead of once accounting for 15%, if other asset categories tanked.

Levy says that many employers offer quarterly or semi-quarterly rebalancing programs, as well as some that rebalance automatically.

“Conceptually, you should be regularly looking at the asset allocation of your account relative to your age and risk tolerance,” Levy said. “And [you should be] looking to rebalance that at least on an annual basis if not more often.”

Retirement Rescue Tip No. 3: It’s a Marathon, Not a Foot Race

Since 1947, of the 11 times the quarter-over-quarter change in gross domestic product (GDP) was a minus 4% or more, the Dow Jones Industrial Average index was higher by an average of 25% one year later and 35% two years later.

This information especially applies to 401(k) participants. The reason: The more you invest when markets are down, the quicker you will recover the losses you sustained over the past two years.

Just take a look at the following chart.

“The latest projections suggest we’re right in line with historical norms, given that economists expect that the U.S. economy suffered a mind-numbing decline of 4.35% in the final quarter of last year,” says Money Morning Investment Director Keith Fitz-Gerald. “When everyone else believes the worst; that’s when you should be buying.”

For prospective retirees – those who watched as their 401(k) plans trip and fall right before the finish line to their working days – take heart: The markets will rebound. It’s just not clear when. While that may mean you have to stay in the race a little longer, consider this: You’ll be able to keep contributing to your retirement cache, magnifying your retirement war chest when that rebound does come.

For those 40 and under, this is possibly the biggest opportunity to build long-term wealth in your lifetime. Keep saving. And stay focused.

Source: Retirement Strategies: The Three Best Ways to Rescue Your 401(k)

Surviving the Bailout: The Grim Arithmetic

Surviving the Bailout: The Grim Arithmetic

I awoke this morning in high spirits in anticipation of the playoff game between the Baltimore Ravens and the Miami Dolphins. Feeling expansive, I decided to practice my Portuguese by watching a Sunday morning news review on Brazilian television. (One of the signal advances in the world in recent years has been the advent of satellite TV, which makes it possible for DISH subscribers to watch several Brazilian channels, as well as those of dozens of other countries that were formerly a world away.)

I briefly toyed with changing the channel to watch Meet The Press , but the beautiful blonde who was presenting the news on TV Globo was more fetching than David Gregory, not to mention Senator Harry Reid, so I settled back to be alarmed over what she had to say.

Her script was mostly about Obama and his “recovery” program, sandwiched around a brief interview with Raul Castro, the 78 year-old president of Cuba.

Castro invited Obama to meet him for direct talks. He said that Obama had awakened hopes he could not fulfill but wished him luck. The rest of the news report focused on Obama’s multi-trillion-dollar plans to foster economic recovery, underscoring some grim realities that will inform your and my prospects of surviving the bailout.

Special

Predatory Trading Formula Preys on Falling Stocks for 170 Winning Trades!

While most people are being decimated by the ongoing market collapse, a small group of smart folks are turning the market plunge into big gains of 224%… 279%… 214%… 291%… and more!

Here’s how to turn the market crisis into your personal profit machine. First come, first served… so reserve your space now…

Let’s look at a specific example. This is for my own parents, who turned 65 last year. (That puts them just before the Baby Boomers.) They live in a nice suburb outside of New York City, on the coast of Connecticut. Like many older people, they would like to stay in the house they have owned for about 20 years now, in the community they are accustomed to, and near the friends they have. It’s not so easy to start over when you’re over 65.

Even people who have been able to accumulate significant assets, pensions etc., might be a little nervous. Trying to depend, for the next 20 or even 30 years perhaps, on financial abstractions and government promises would be a little scary. I usually tell them that they should be scared! Or, at least don’t put too much faith in various Wall Street promises (and pensions are ultimately Wall Street promises too). You aren’t going to make a smooth 8% per year in your 401(k) just because some financial advisor told you so. But, I guess you’ve figured that out now. Anything can happen. Particularly as we are sort of in a depression right now. Owning a big house in a nice neighborhood is not cheap, even if it is 100% owned with no mortgage. The annual costs of a house look something like this:

Property tax: $8000 (and that could go up)
Insurance: $2000 (could be higher)
Maintenance: $2000 (could be higher)
Utilities (phone, internet, cable, electric, trash collection) per month: $200 or $2400/year.
Heating oil: $2000 per year (could be higher).

Total: $16,400. That is probably on the low side. So, let’s just budget it at $18,000.

Then, you’ve got a car and all the other expenses of living. And what happens when you get a little frail, and want living assistance?

Have you seen the prices for nursing homes?

It’s not that these burdens are unbearable. It’s rather that they are burdensome. Just house-related costs could chew up most of your Social Security check right there. And, if things really go to hell in the future, they might become unbearable. Who knows what things will look like in 20 years? Only your financal advisor knows for sure.

Let’s look at it from the financial side. Maybe you can get 3% of cashflow from a “safe” muni bond portfolio, or dividends from stocks. And, you have to take into account inflation … over the next twenty years. How do we “take into account” the unknowable? What happens if there’s not enough fifteen years from now, and I’m still alive? To get $18,000 of income would take $600,000 of muni bonds. And, muni bonds are looking kinda risky these days. Dividends from stocks might take more than $600,000, because you have to pay taxes on dividends. Stocks go up and down a lot too. Sickening.

Now, like I said, they’ve been living in the area for a while and have some good friends, who are about the same age and in similar circumstances.

So, here’s the plan:

You get together with your friends. You say: “We’re all retired now. I’ve got a big empty house. You do too I suppose. Maybe we can think of living together. That would help reduce our living expenses. Plus, it might be fun, and it would be a good way to keep an eye on each other. That can be important when you’re getting older.”

Everyone is repulsed at first, because we Americans are all taught that we have to live as far away from each other as possible. But, they remember that, when they were in college, they used to share houses, and it was kind of fun. Also, everyone is older now and a lot better behaved than when they were in college. And, it is true that it might be good to have someone keeping an eye on you.

So, everyone decides to move into one house, owned by the Owner. The people who move in, two other retired couples, are the Renters. The Renters pay the Owner $800 a month to rent a bedroom, and agree to pay 1/3 of the utility and heating bills. The Renters’ cost of living looks something like this:

Rent: $800 * 12 = $9600
Utilities: $100/month = $1200
Heat: $700

Total annual costs: $11,500.

Now, indeed renting turns out to be cheaper than owning the big house, even when the big house is fully paid for. They could sell their big houses if they wanted to. But, they are nervous about just selling the house they have owned for twenty years, and moving in with someone else. It might not work out. Let’s not burn any bridges. So, instead of selling their now-empty houses, they rent them out.

Rent: $3500 per month = $42,000 per year (typical, actually a little low). Heckuva lot cheaper than paying the mortgage on a million-dollar house. Just the thing for a Wall Streeter with a family that needs to downsize quickly. Real quickly. Utilities are paid for by the renters.

Costs:
Property tax: $8000
Maintenance: $3000 (higher with renters)
Insurance: $2000
Total: $13,000

Net cashflow: $42,000 – $13,000 = $29,000.

Now, they’re getting $29,000 in rent net of property expenses. Then, they pay their $11,500 it costs to live in the shared house.

$29,000 – $11,500 = $17,500.

Now, look at the renters:

Before: $18,000 per year of housing costs.

After: Housing and utilities are paid for, and an extra $17,500 per year of free cashflow, plus probably some tax benefits.

Wow, all of a sudden, you’re living for free, and getting paid too! You just created, out of thin air, the equivalent of a $1,200,000 muni bond portfolio. Maybe more, if you consider tax benefits (rental properties can charge depreciation.) And, you still own your house.

For the Owner, it looks like this:

House costs: $13,000
Utilities: $1200 (1/3)
Heat: $700 (1/3)
Total: $14,900

Rental Income: $800 * 2 * 12 = $19,200

Net cashflow: $19,200 – $14,900 = $4,300.

So, the Owner is also living for free! However, their cashflow is not as high as the Renters. That’s probably the way it should be, because the Renters will probably want a little extra incentive to move out of their house into someone else’s.

So, now where are we? All three couples are now living for free, and getting some extra cash on top of that. And, there are things you can do in a shared house, like splitting cooking duties. Instead of cooking every night for two, the cook can cook twice a week for six. That’s a lot easier, and would probably result in a more ambitious menu, and would resolve the question of how three people can cook in one kitchen. If the men are smart, they will encourage a little friendly competition among their wives, to “keep up the pace” for their two dinners a week. You can finally use that formal dining room every day. Then, everyone has a house’s worth of furnishings. The antiques, boutiquey stuff, art and heirlooms, and the grand piano, all goes into the house where everyone is living. The more generic, replaceable stuff can go into the houses that are being rented out. Maybe you can charge an extra $500 a month for a furnished house. $500 a month is $6000 per year. That’s another $200,000 muni bond portfolio-equivalent, that you created out of some used furniture. You would have had to save $400,000 before income taxes, to get a $200,000 portfolio after taxes.

After a while, in a shared house, there is always the issue of who does what house chores, and do they do it adequately, and so forth. The easy way to solve this problem is to get a housekeeper to come in one day a week, and do the vacuuming, laundry, bathrooms and all that. It’s $100 a week, or $5,200 a year, or $1,735 per couple per year. Covered by their extra cashflow. Over time, people are over 70 and a little frail. Maybe they would like a little more help with shopping or even cooking, or they are no longer able to drive safely by themselves.

So, they get a live-in full-time housekeeper. The housekeeper lives in the fourth bedroom. The housekeeper gets room and board and use of a car, plus $1,000 a month in salary. Not a bad deal for a housekeeper. That’s $12,000 per year or $4,000 per couple. That is also within their net cashflow. So, now everyone has their housing and utilities and a live-in housekeeper paid for. Make it $2,000 a month and you could get a registered nurse, probably. Now you’ve got a private nursing home.

Being older with lots of free time, it would probably be good to get outside for some light exercise. The house sits on two acres, of which perhaps there is one full acre of lawn. Instead of growing grass, let’s grow some vegetables. This is prime farm country, or it was in the colonial days. You can grow a lot of vegetables on a full acre. Heck, you can grow a lot of vegetables on a tenth of an acre. A tenth of an acre is 4,356 square feet, or 43 feet by 100 feet. Not a small garden, that. So, you drop some seeds in the ground, and have fresh vegetables all summer. You even do some canning and put some away for winter. It’s all organic, you get some exercise, and no more big-ticket trips to Whole Foods.

So, now, instead of paying out $18,000 a year in housing expenses, you’re living for free, with your friends, with a live-in housekeeper, with some extra cashflow on top of that, and a lot of your food costs are covered as well. What is there to be worried about? Pass the 401(k) on to your kids. Don’t worry about the corporate pension. Consider the Social Security check to be your entertainment budget. If there’s inflation, just raise your rents.

And all it took was a little cooperation among friends, to make better use of what they already own.

Source: Benefit from Being a Baby Boomer

This from the Guardian (UK):

Investors should start seeing the effect on year-end balance sheets, and reforms under the Pension Protection Act of 2006 are likely to complicate matters by forcing companies to spend cash to shore up their plans.

“If your pension plan was invested mainly in equities and equities are off 20 percent, all of a sudden you have a 20 percent shortfall,” William Hernandez, chief financial officer of paint maker PPG Industries Inc , told Reuters in an interview earlier this month.

“It is going to force a huge number of companies into making large contributions next year, at the worst possible time,” he added.

Companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500 index <.SPX> are on their way to record underfunded status and few plans are expected to turn a profit this year, S&P’s senior index analyst Howard Silverblatt said in a note to clients last week.