Today, we light a candle and try to interpret the shadows on the wall…

Yesterday, the Dow fell 81 points. Gold dropped $5 to $1009.

Will the feds succeed in causing inflation? Or will they fail? Will the dollar continue to go down? Or will it prove to be a safe haven currency in a time of deflationary trouble?

According to the papers, the feds have already done it. “Fed says recovery underway,” says a headline from yesterday’s press.

Another headline tells us that the feds are considering how and when to ease themselves out of their interventions. But what would the economy look like after they stopped meddling? Just look at auto sales. People bought cars when the feds bribed them to do so. When the bribes stopped, so did car sales. Now, the clunker program has ended and spiders are busy building their webs in showrooms again. Sales fell 38% from August to September… to a 28-year low.

House sales too have been goosed up by the feds’ tax credits. According to an estimate we reported yesterday, 350,000 new house sales since January were assisted by federal intervention – about 80% of the total. What will happen when this program ends in November? Hey… let’s guess… uh… housing sales will fall, right?

And speculators are worried about what will happen when the feds stop their intervention in the financial industry, scheduled for December. Thanks to taxpayer money, the bankers were spared the consequences of their own stupidity. Instead, taxpayers will pay for their mistakes. No one is particularly upset about it. The taxpayers don’t know what is going on. And bankers are happy to continue living in the style to which they have become accustomed. Reuters reports:

“You wouldn’t know it by his pay stubs, but Jiang Jianqing heads the world’s largest bank.

“Jiang, chairman of Indus trial and Commercial Bank of China, made just $234,700 in 2008. That’s less than 2 percent of the $19.6 million awarded to Jamie Dimon, chief executive of the world’s fourth-largest bank, JPMorgan Chase & Co.

“The contrast illustrates the massive differences in pay among the CEOs of the world’s top banks. The compensation of the CEOs of the largest U.S. banks towers above what’s paid to banking chiefs in other parts of the world, according to a Reuters analysis of pay at the 18 biggest banks by market value.

“The United States is home to four of the nine largest banks in the world — JPMorgan, Bank of America Corp, Wells Fargo & Co and Citigroup Inc. It is also home to four of the six most handsomely rewarded bank CEOs.

“China, for example, boasts three of the world’s four biggest banks, yet the leaders of those banks — Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, China Construction Bank Corp and Bank of China — are among the lowest paid of those surveyed by Reuters. The chairman and the president of each of the banks are paid roughly $230,000 per year.”

If America’s make-believe capitalists want to pay their CEOs exorbitant wages, that’s their business. A pox on all of them. But in come the feds… and now we’re all paying the price. And if the program ends in December, as scheduled, we’ll get to see how far the economy goes without taxpayers’ money in the gas tank. Let’s see… it comes to a complete stop?

But no matter how malign and imbecilic the feds are, the public is rooting for them. People think Bernanke has avoided a ‘second great depression,’ and that the government has rescued the economy. Now they see nothing but clear highway ahead… perhaps with a little bump from time to time.

What’s ahead? We don’t know. Neither does anyone else. There is no precedent. Never before has a major central bank reacted so recklessly to a market correction. Never before has the monetary base exploded so violently. Never before have so many people with so many bills to pay had to face such a downturn.

But amid all the confusion, uncertainty and noise… your editor is calmly, cheerfully and confidently awaiting a depression. Yes, dear reader, we don’t know what markets will do. We don’t know how much gold will sell for next year… or what the actual GDP will be. But when we look at the shadows… we have a strong hunch that we are entering a depression… and that we won’t get out of it soon.

That said, we caution readers not to expect soup lines or people selling apples on the street corners. This is a depression à la 21 st century. A depression with Iphones and Twitter. This is NOT your grandfather’s depression.

It’s not your grandfather’s depression, but it has many elements that your grandfather would recognize. This from David Rosenberg:

“FRUGALITY THEME IS SECULAR, NOT JUST CYCLICAL

We came across two articles that truly resonated on this score — about how U.S. households are changing their entire approach to the family budget and this transformation cuts a wide swath on a socio-demographic basis. See Census: Recession Had Sweeping Impact on U.S. Life on Bloomberg news (by Hope Yen) as well as Consumer Spending Cuts Reach Across Incomes in the Associated Press business news section (by Eileen Connelly).”

With so much noise… and so many distortions… it’s hard to tell what is really going on… and impossible to know how the markets will react. Still, there are some patterns that make sense. After a long period of credit growth, credit is now shrinking. At least in the private sector. And that is not likely to change. Well, it’s not likely to change unless the Fed goes nuclear. If they push the hyperinflation button, the whole picture changes radically and immediately. But that’s not likely to happen any time soon… so let’s ignore it for the present.

What we have before us now is a consumer economy where the consumer is cutting back. Despite the odd shadow shapes on the wall, that means a slowdown in hiring, business revenues and real prices… and tax revenues.

New York says its budget deficit will grow to $3 billion. And over on the sunny West Coast, California is selling $8.8 billion in notes to try to close its deficit.

Apartment rents in New York City are falling. Credit card defaults hit a new record. And the Wall Street Journal says that holiday jobs in the retail sector are likely to be scarce.

All of those things are about what you’d expect.

Another thing you’d expect is a decline in America’s relative economic power and political influence. Richard Duncan, along with your editor, has been following the story. Bloomberg reports:

“Sept. 23 (Bloomberg) — U.S. budget deficits will continue to pile up in the next decade, eventually reaching an unsustainable level that may result in an economic collapse, according to Richard Duncan, author of “The Dollar Crisis.”

“The U.S. has little chance of resolving its deteriorating financial position because the manufacturing industry continues to shrink, leaving the nation with few goods to export, said Duncan, now at Singapore-based Blackhorse Asset Management.

In “The Dollar Crisis,” first published in 2003, Duncan argued that persistent current account deficits by the U.S. were creating an unsustainable boom in global credit that was destined to break down, resulting in a worldwide recession.

“The bad news is at the end of a 10-year period we’re still not going to have fixed the problem,” Duncan said in an interview in Hong Kong yesterday.

“Eventually it will lead to high rates of inflation well down the line and really destabilize things to the point where there may be irreparable damage. A kind of ‘Fall of Rome’ scenario.”

*** Fall of Rome? Hey, Addison Wiggin and your editor wrote the book on the fall of Rome idea. “Empire of Debt,” we called it. It was such a hit that the publisher asked us for a new edition… which was released this summer.

[Editor’s note: You can get Bill’s book here.]

Richard Duncan, with Bloomberg on lead guitar, was singing our song:

“The federal budget deficit will total $1.6 trillion this year, while combined shortfalls are forecast to total $9.05 trillion in the next 10 years, according to projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

“The U.S. has run a current account deficit every year since 1982 except one, with a peak of $788 billion in 2006. Foreign purchases of U.S. debt has propped up the dollar and allowed a credit-fueled spending boom by the nation’s consumers, according to Duncan.

“ U.S. workers are now likely to face declining wages and that may create a political backlash against free-trade policies, he said. The nation’s jobless rate jumped to a 26-year high of 9.7 percent in August, while wages logged a 2.6 percent increase from the previous year.

“As unemployment remains above 10 percent well into the foreseeable future, it won’t be long before Americans start voting for protectionism,” Duncan said.

“That’s going to be bad because protectionism will mean world trade will diminish and will overall reduce global prosperity.”

Once the U.S. debt burden becomes too large and the government can no longer sell debt to the public, the Federal Reserve will likely step in and monetize it, resulting in high levels of inflation, he said.

Source: Awaiting the Depression

Achilles was said to be dipped in the river Styx and made invulnerable. But his mother held him by his heel, leaving that part untouched by the magic waters. Naturally, that is where a poison arrow got him.

The moral of this story is that you have to go all the way. If you want your baby to be invulnerable, put him all the way under the water… even the heels. Or, maybe there’s another point: that there’s always some place where you’re vulnerable.

For the purpose of today’s tale, we’ll take the second possibility. Try as you may, you can never escape all risks.

All over the world, consumer prices are falling. The world has too much capacity… too many factories… and too many workers. Too many, that is, for current demand. The ‘world’s mouth’ – the USA – has gone on a diet. And if the US reduces its intake, that means the rest of the world – especially China – must reduce its output. Otherwise, the whole thing will become unbalanced.

Yesterday’s news tells us that despite press reports of a recovery, the key indicators of real economic growth are still falling. Almost one out of 10 mortgages are now delinquent. And the rate of foreclosures is increasing faster than any time in the last 30 years. Housing prices, meanwhile, fell 16% in the 2 nd quarter, from a year earlier, according to the National Association of Realtors.

Unemployment claims went up last week. The sharp eyes of the Financial Times see the link: “Mounting joblessness fuels US housing crisis,” says its headline.

In the real economy, people are cutting back… with the inevitable results we discuss every day here in the Daily Reckoning. One major consequence of reduced demand is too much supply. The factories built in China to supply products to America during the bubble years now find they have no market.

Currently, overcapacity and oversupply are causing prices to fall. Falling prices mean rising currency values. Each unit of ‘money’ buys more stuff. But there are many competing currencies, and they don’t all rise and fall together. Even in a world of deflation, some currencies will deflate more than others.

The dollar is, of course, the world’s main money. In a sense, the whole world economy is under its heel. But it is a heel that has never been dipped in the river Styx. It is now a heel that waits for an arrow.

PIMCO is the biggest manager of bond funds in the world. It says the greenback is going to lose its status and lose its value.

“Investors should consider whether it makes sense to take advantage of any periods of U.S. dollar strength to diversify their currency exposure,” says its Emerging Markets Watch report. “The massive amounts of U.S. dollar liquidity produced in response to the crisis” doom the currency.

Both China and Russia are calling for a new global currency to replace the dollar.

“While we have not yet reached the point where a new global reserve currency will arise, we are clearly seeing a loss of status for the U.S. dollar as a store of value even in the absence of a single viable alternative,” continues the PIMCO report.

Meanwhile, our old friend Jim Rogers says he is moving all his assets out of dollars and buying Chinese yuan. And Warren Buffett warned this week – writing in the New York Times – that “greenback emissions” threaten the whole world econo-system.

But what does it mean? What are the threats to you? What are the opportunities? If you pay your bills and keep score in dollars, what does it matter if the dollar loses value against the yuan? If prices are generally falling, the dollar is actually getting stronger, isn’t it? So what if some other currencies are getting even stronger still?

The trouble with the Achilles heel is that it is connected to the Achilles tendon… which is connected to the leg muscles… which is what keeps the whole thing moving forward. Cut the tendons and the feet go flippety, floppety and you get nowhere.

Yesterday came word that the US deficit for 2009 might come in lower than expected. Instead of borrowing $1.8 trillion as anticipated, the feds might only borrow $1.58 trillion. Well, that still leaves them about $680 billion short – even if every dollar of trade deficit and every dollar of domestic savings is applied to it. But definitely a step in the right direction! This gap must be closed by quantitative easing, that is to say, by printing press money. So, holders of old dollars are bound to wonder how much their savings will be weakened by the addition of so many new ones.

They’re likely to wonder, too, how much those US Treasury notes will be worth after this monetary inflation catches up to them. At some point, they are likely to think twice about buying more of them… and possibly even want to sell the ones they have already. Either way, it could create a nasty financial whirlpool which sucks down the entire world economy. As private investors reject US dollar credits, the Fed would be forced to print up more money to buy them itself. As the Fed buys more, private investors become more fearful that this monetary inflation will lead to consumer price inflation; they may panic and dump all dollar-denominated assets.

But if investors drop the dollar, what do they take up in its place? Oil… maybe. Oil is selling for $72 a barrel, even while the world is in a major downturn. What makes it so expensive, if not the fear that the currency in which it is quoted is more slippery than the black goo itself? And gold? Yesterday, gold lost $3. But is still trading in the mid-$900s – not far from its all-time high. And this at a time when consumer price inflation is going down! In the US non-oil export prices are falling at a 5% rate. If people are buying gold as a hedge against inflation, they must know something we don’t. Consumer prices are falling…actual CPI rates are negative in many countries already. Take out the effect of speculation on oil and commodities, and deflation is probably a fact of life almost everywhere. Gold buyers are not hedging against an increase in the price of bread, in other words; they’re hedging against a poison arrow directed at the dollar itself.

*** It is a real Ouzilly summer.

We feared we would be alone this summer. Our children almost all grown, we imagined ourselves sitting on the veranda and talking just to each other, like a pair of old shoes left in the closet. No family was coming from the US to visit. Our daughters were pursuing their careers. Our sons had plans of their own.

But then a Swiss friend came. And then his mother came. And then the boys showed up. And then an Irish journalist. And then and Italian egg producer. And then an Argentine singer. And then, a girl from across the street. And then a girl from the village. And then… the house was full…

In the kitchen yesterday, three women busied themselves… making jam… polishing the old stove… sharing gossip and jokes. It was like a scene from an earlier era… when people had regular kitchen staff. Our ‘staff’ are all volunteers and part-timers. Still, the ambiance was rich and convivial.

“Do you want a cup of coffee?” one asked.

“Yes… but I’ll make it….”

“No… I’ll make it… you shouldn’t make it. You’re the head of the house. You’re the one who keeps the place going…”

“Oh… yes… well… that’s a nice way to look at it…”

“Yes, without you, we’d have to go to the beach for the summer… and we wouldn’t have the pleasure of working in this hot kitchen. I’m just joking. It’s fun working in the kitchen. This is where the action is. Did you know that? It was always the kitchen that was the place to be… in these big old houses. That was where the maids and gardeners and all the staff hung out… in front of the fire. It was often the only warm room in the house. Everyone wanted to be in the kitchen. And it was where the food was.

“And people in the kitchen know what is going on… The maids come down and report on the state of the bedrooms… and who is sleeping with whom. Yes… that’s the way it was… at least in France. And they hear who is arguing with whom… and about what. And the staff keep their eyes and ears open… and then they come into the kitchen and talk. There were never any secrets in a place like this… the people in the kitchen knew everything…”

Source: The Achilles Heel of the World Economy

As Money Morning warned in an investigative report that ran in early April, the stumbling U.S. commercial real estate sector was developing into a financial black hole that was threatening to blot out the resurgence of the U.S. economy. Commercial real estate prices have been in sharp decline for the past two years, making it tough for owners to refinance and pressuring companies to sell buildings at steep discounts.

The plummeting prices not only jeopardize a possible recovery, but they put pricing pressure on commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) that are held by institutional investors.

Commercial property is “certainly going to be a significant drag” on growth, Dean Maki, a former Fed researcher who is now chief U.S. economist at Barclays Capital Inc. (NYSE ADR: BCS), told Bloomberg. “The bigger risk from it would be if it causes unexpected losses to financial firms that lead to another financial crisis.”

Property values for commercial real estate such as hotels, apartments, shopping malls, and office buildings fell by more than 18% on a year-over-year basis during the second quarter, according to an index published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Center for Real Estate. That’s the biggest decline in the 25 years since the index was first published. It’s also the fifth consecutive quarterly drop and the seventh quarterly decline in the past eight quarters.

The index is down 39% from its mid-2007 peak, surpassing even the 30% decline in housing prices.

That means companies that earlier in the decade borrowed heavily and expanded as property values soared have been left with buildings that are worth far less than their mortgages and aren’t generating enough cash from rental fees to pay off financing expenses.

Maguire Properties Inc. (NYSE: MPG), one of the largest office-building owners in Southern California – including in the downtown Los Angeles market, for instance – is making preparations to turn seven properties with about $1.06 million in debt over to creditors.

But even with those sales, Maguire still has $3.5 billion in debt and many analysts believe that exceeds the value of the properties in its portfolio.

“Almost everything in Maguire’s portfolio is underwater,” Michael Knott, an analyst with Green Street Advisors Inc., told The Wall Street Journal. “I don’t envy some of the choices that they are having to make.”

Maguire reported a second-quarter net loss of $380.5 million, more than triple the loss of $110 million reported a year earlier.

If the slump in commercial real estate continues to test these depths, the Federal Reserve may be forced to keep emergency-lending programs in place and leave its benchmark interest rate close to zero for longer than some investors expect.

The Fed expanded the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) in June to cover as much as $100 billion in loans to support commercial mortgage-backed securities.

More than 40 members of Congress, led by Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, D-PA, on July 31 sent a letter to Bernanke and U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, asking them to extend the program through 2010.

“The $6 trillion commercial real estate market has recently experienced a massive credit shortfall, which the TALF program has only just begun to help stabilize,” the petition read. ”While I would like to wind down the government’s emergency support for the private sector as quickly as possible, we need to provide more time for the TALF program to work in this industry, especially with $1 trillion in commercial real estate debt maturing in the near future.”

Fed Chairman Bernanke – in his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee on July 22 – assured lawmakers that he is ready to counter the threat posed by the ailing commercial real estate market, and said he would consider the policymakers’ petition for an extension of the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility.

“We will certainly be monitoring the situation, and if markets continue to need support, we will be extending the final date of that program,” Bernanke said. “We are somewhat concerned about that sector and are paying very close attention to it. We’re taking the steps that we can through the banking system and through the securitization markets to try to address it.”

Source: Will Commercial Real Estate Pose the Next Hurdle for the Federal Reserve?

Long-time readers know that I have been growing more and more bearish of late. I have been writing for a long time that we are in for a long period of slow Muddle Through growth as the twin crises of the housing bubble and credit bubbles require time to heal. Today we look at a serious proposal for cutting the time to healing for at least one of those bubbles (housing), and at least keep the other (credit) from getting worse. This is the most serious idea I have seen that could actually make a real positive contribution to the economy and help put us back on a growth path.

I will post Gary’s papers and a link to the actual op-ed piece for those who want to do further research, but let me make one point at the beginning that he did not emphasize: the US is already allowing roughly 1 million immigrants a year into the country (which for a variety of reasons I and most serious economists of all stripes believe is a very good thing). We are suggesting that we simply change the nature of what constitutes the conditions for acceptance, so as to jump start the housing industry and the economy. We are not suggesting additional immigrants, although nothing would be wrong with that. I will also post a link for you to send this e-letter to your congressmen and senators.

Let me put up front a few benefits of a program that would allow legal status to immigrants buying a home. Housing values would stabilize and in many cases rise. The massive losses because of bad loans that are being subsidized by US taxpayers would be stemmed, saving many hundreds of billions, if not a trillion or more dollars. The excess inventory of homes would quickly disappear and the millions of jobs that were lost as home construction fell into a deep depression would come back. If housing values rise, many families would be able to refinance their homes at lower rates and have more income left over after paying their mortgages. $12 billion in commissions would end up in real estate agents’ pockets, helping a very battered and bruised group. Hundreds of billions will flow into local businesses, as these new immigrants will need to furnish their homes. This could mean as much as a half trillion dollars in sorely needed stimulus in the next few years, without one penny of taxpayer money and actually adding taxes back to governments from local to national. And we are not bringing in 1 million foreigners, we are attracting 1 million mostly middle-class new Americans, which, if we are smart in how we do this, will result in more jobs for all Americans. So let’s jump right in and look at the details.

Housing Could Drop Another 20% in Pricing

Let’s review the situation as it will be if we do nothing. Shilling shows that we built 6.7 million more homes in this country between 1996-2005 than the normal trend would have projected, partially because we underbuilt the decade before that. New housing starts average about 1.5 million in normal times but have fallen to 500,000 recently, and could fall further as unemployment rises and demand declines. Even so, Shilling estimates that we still have about 2.4 million excess homes.

This compares rather well with estimates by independent analyst John Burns, which I cited in the e-letter early last year. What they both agree on is that it will take at least until 2012 to work through this excess inventory, and that assumes that foreclosures do not increase as housing prices drop.

Excess supply of anything means lower and continuously falling prices, and that has certainly been the case in housing. Here is what Shilling writes:

“We believe that if nothing is done to eliminate surplus housing, prices will fall another 20% between now and the end of 2010 for a total peak-to-trough decline of 37% (Chart 1 below). The resulting further negative effects on the economy will be devastating. At that point, almost 25 million homeowners, or almost half the 51 million total with mortgages, will be underwater… That’s also a third of the 75 million total homeowners, with the remaining 24 million owning their houses free and clear. It would take a little over $1 trillion to reduce their mortgages to the value of their houses, compared to $449 billion for the almost 14 million currently underwater.”

This is not inconsistent with similar projections by other acknowledged experts and independent analysts like John Burns and Professor Robert Shiller of Yale. If nothing happens to stimulate buying, there is a great deal more pain ahead for American homeowners.

For the great majority of Americans, their homes represent the largest portion of their assets. This is particularly true of Americans of more modest means, who have been hit the hardest. Watching their single biggest assert drop another 20% will be devastating and for many will mean they will not be able to retire as they had planned. More Americans own homes (68%) than own stocks (50%). This helps explain a recent poll which shows more Americans are worried about house prices than about the decline in stock prices.

Falling home prices means that consumers have to save more for retirement, which results in lower consumer spending, which translates into lost jobs and more homeowners coming under stress — a vicious spiral that is increasing unemployment. Realistic estimates of unemployment rising to over 10% within the year abound.

Two years ago I and a few others foresaw the current housing crisis (and an accompanying credit crisis), predicting a protracted recession and a slow, multi-year Muddle Through recovery. Sadly, I was right about the housing crisis. Without some intervention, there is little to suggest that the prediction of a long, protracted recovery will not come true.

Lowering rates, as is being discussed in various circles, will help homeowners who can make their payments, but it does nothing to really bite into excessive inventory. Until we reduce the inventory, housing prices in many neighborhoods all across America are going to continue to come under pressure. And as Barry Habib points out, while the Fed may be lowering rates for securitized packages of loans, those low rates are not available to the average home buyer. The cost of packaging and securitization adds considerable cost.

Shilling discusses the “traditional” options for reducing home inventories, but in the end there is no real solution other than time, or massive amounts (read trillions) in taxpayer money being given to homeowners, which will be very unpopular, as homeowners who were responsible and are paying their mortgages would get no benefits. Waiting another two and a half years for the excessive inventory to sell will keep this country in a very slow or no-growth economy, and devastate the wealth of millions of homeowners.

But there is a solution. There are millions of foreigners throughout the world who would like to come to live in the US. In 2006, there were 1.1 million immigrants allowed into the US, some 63% of whom were allowed in simply because they already had relatives here. Only 13% of visas were granted to people because of their skills. While allowing relatives of current residents to come to the US may be a humane and reasonable policy, it does nothing to assure they bring more than that relationship to help them make their way in the US.

Buy A Home, Get a Green Card

What if we changed the rules for a few years? Starting as soon as possible, we should allow anyone to come into the country who would buy a home. They would be given a temporary visa which would become permanent if they had no problems after, say, five years.

While Gary proposes that they be allowed to borrow against the value of their homes, I lean toward suggesting that initially we take those who buy their homes outright (with a few exceptions). That means they have enough capital to purchase a home to begin with, which probably means they are educated and have skills. In fact, if they have enough cash to buy a home, that means they would have more actual savings than most US citizens. We would be attracting future citizens with the capital to invest in job-creating businesses and/or who have useful skills to assist in the recovery of the US economy.

Of course, there should be some rules that go along with this proposal. Background checks and references should be required. The home could not be rented for a period of time (at least two years), to help reduce the supply of available housing, and could not be resold for at least two years unless another home was purchased. There should be a minimal price, which could be somewhat different for various regions, but $100,000 would seem to be a good minimum for most areas, with higher minimums in certain areas.

The immigrant should demonstrate the ability to support himself and his family for a period of time (at least one year, preferably two), including the purchase of health insurance. Cash or letters of credit or other guaranteed commitments would be required. Only immediate family members (spouse and children) would be allowed to come with the immigrant. Cousins and siblings must buy their own homes. The permanent visa should be contingent on not having gone on welfare or public assistance at any time in the past five years. We are trying to solve a housing problem, not looking to create others.

I would make an exception in having 100% financing for immigrants with advanced degrees or special skills, especially those who did their schooling in the United States. If the US is to remain competitive in an increasingly technological world, we need more scientists and engineers. But getting permission to stay is becoming increasingly difficult. We are seeing a brain drain of those who would like to stay and create new jobs and technologies (and buy houses) here in the US. Shilling and Le Frak write:

“The authors of this report believe that a number of people have given up waiting for those visas or don’t want to put up with the hassle and are leaving the country. This “brain drain” is unfortunate since many of these foreigners are highly productive. In 2006, foreign nationals residing in the U.S. were named as inventors or co-inventors on 25.6% of the 42,019 international patent applications filed from this country, up from 7.6% in 1998. Studies of the authorship of academic papers show the same trend.

“U.S. educational institutions are considered the best in the world by many and are magnets for foreign students, especially at the graduate level. Many of them are inclined to settle and work in this country after completing their studies, if they can obtain permanent resident status.

“The Council of Graduate Schools survey revealed that in the fall of 2007, 241,095 non-U.S. citizens were enrolled in graduate programs. Technological progress and the productivity it generates depends on people educated in biological sciences, engineering and physical sciences, but only 16% of U.S. citizen graduate enrollment was in these three disciplines. In contrast, 55% of total non-U.S. citizen enrollment was in those fields. Conversely, 53% of graduate enrollment by Americans was in education, business and health sciences while those three fields accounted for only 24% of foreign graduate students.”

(There is a great deal more background detail in the second white paper. See link below.)

Much can be learned from similar programs already in place in immigrant-hungry countries such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. The United Kingdom has recently added new programs. Many countries realize that in the coming years there is going to be increasing competition for the best and brightest of the world. Again, there are more details in the white papers, but let’s turn to the effects that would result from such a program.

A Real Stimulus Package

First, upon Congressional approval, it would almost immediately stop the seemingly inexorable slide in house prices, as initial demand would be significant. Let’s assume one million new immigrants would buy homes. At an average price of almost $200,000, that would be $200 billion injected into the economy. And each of those homes has to be furnished, food has to be bought, clothing will be needed, local taxes will be paid. Airplane tickets to research potential areas, hotels needed during the interim period, and other related expenditures would add up. Over two years, this could easily be another $100 billion.

Couple 1 million new buyers with current US demand, and the excess inventory would be worked through within a year, and possibly faster. This puts a floor under the housing market, and home values could once again to begin to rise in line with a growing economy.

Such a program would have a salutary effect on the value of the dollar, as not only the initial purchases of homes and materials would need to be converted to dollars, but it is likely that immigrants would bring even more capital into the country.

By stemming the fall of home values, it would decrease the likelihood of foreclosures and help homeowners get refinancing at lower rates. Refinancing now is difficult because most lenders want a substantial slice of equity to go along with any new mortgage. If your home value has dropped 20% and is likely to fall another 20%, it is hard to have enough equity to qualify for a new mortgage. Stopping the fall in prices is critically important; and maybe if prices rise in some areas, homeowners will be able to refinance at better rates, giving them more cash each month to save or spend.

As I have written in previous letters, the psyche of the American consumer is permanently scarred. We are on our way back to a savings rates that will look more like 1987 than 2007, when it was almost zero. Just a few decades ago, we saved 7-10%. Consumer spending was only 64% of US GDP in 1987. It was 71% in 2007. It is on its way back to that lower level.

Lower consumer spending will be a drag on growth for years. But bringing in 1 million already middle-class new immigrant families will help make up for a lot of that reduced spending. If you can spend $200,000 on a home, you are likely skilled at something and well-educated. You will find a job, or create one, as many immigrants do, and then you will add to our total consumer spending.

If you are a real estate agent, you should love this proposal, as it would result in an additional $12 billion in commissions.

If you are a home builder, what a great way to reduce inventory and get back to the conditions where there is a demand for your product. This would help put back to work those who have lost their jobs in the home construction collapse. Home Depot and Lowe’s and local stores? It would help them to increase sales, which leads to more jobs.

We are on the cusp of the Baby Boomers beginning a huge wave of retirement, both in the US and elsewhere in the developed world. There is going to be a need for skilled workers to replace those Boomers, as well to provide services to the retirees. Further, the promised Social Security and Medicare expenditures are going to start increasing at a significant rate. We are going to need immigrants to help pay for those benefits. Given the controversy over immigration, we will look back with some irony in ten years when we find we are in a serious competition with other nations to attract skilled immigrants. We should start now. I think the concept is, let’s not waste a good crisis.

Let’s look at some of the potential critics of this proposal. I was on Yahoo Tech Ticker yesterday talking about this, and got a few irate emails and phone calls.

“Why,” I was asked, “do I hate American workers? Isn’t there enough unemployment? Why do we need more immigrants taking American jobs?” And there was considerable angst about illegal immigrants.

First, I am suggesting we transform the already existing legal immigrant flow, which is going to happen anyway, into a form which helps us solve a major crisis. I am not talking about adding another 1 million immigrants on top of the current legal inflow. Just change the nature of that inflow until the excess housing inventory is settled, and then we can go back to the current program, if that is what is wanted (more on that below).

Second, I am not suggesting we bring in or condone illegal immigrants. That is another issue altogether, for another debate at another time.

If we do nothing, unemployment is going to rise to at least 10%. That is certainly not good for the American worker. Home values are going to continue to fall. That is certainly not good for the American worker. The economy is likely to be stagnant for an extended period of time, which means job growth in a Muddle Through recovery will be slow and stagnant. That is not good for the American worker.

Hundreds of billions more of taxpayer dollars will have to go to banks to keep them solvent as falling home prices and increasing unemployment increase foreclosures. That is not good for the American worker and taxpayer.

And further, I am not talking about bringing 1 million foreigners to this country. I am talking about bringing 1 million future Americans, who want to work hard and live the American dream.

Let me say a few words to those who are opposed to immigration — and I have heard from you. With few exceptions, US citizens reading this have an immigrant in their genealogies. Some of mine go back to the 1600s. Some of mine were not exactly considered welcome. “No Irish and Dogs allowed” read the signs. But immigrants and their children have been the driver for growth in this country for generations. It is hard-working immigrants who leave their homes for the dream of being Americans that have been the backbone of the building of the nation — the hewers and shapers, if you will.

It is precisely that melting pot of human diversity that is the strength of the American idea. Each new wave of immigrants has been viewed with trepidation or scorn, yet within one generation they have become American. And in turn, their children’s children forget that their forebears had to deal with discrimination.

America — the US — is not so much a country as it is an idea, the idea that anyone, regardless of race or religion or gender, can come here and with hard work and determination make their own way. Some end up owning the local deli, and some end up founding Google. Some 25% of Silicon Valley start-ups, I am told, are by immigrants, creating jobs at the bleeding edge of technology. They see the US as a land of opportunity. That is why so many want to come and that is why we can attract a new generation of affluent, self-reliant immigrants who can help us solve a problem that we created.

I can see no downside to changing our immigration policy for a few years. We solve the housing crisis, stabilize home values, brings hundreds of billions in stimulus to the US, and with no taxpayer outlay. For a short time, we substitute one class of immigrant for another, to solve a serious crisis. It is not a matter of immigrants or no immigrants, just which immigrants

So which do you want? 10% unemployment and a decade of lower home values and increasing foreclosures, with a slow, Muddle Through, jobless recovery, or a stable housing market and home construction back to trend?

If you agree with me, I suggest you contact your Congressman. You can go to http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ (selected at random from many such sites) and type in your address and get the name of your congressperson and senators. Just tell them you like this idea, and cut and paste the link where you read this into the letter. And tell them to get into gear! I would like to point out that this proposal is not Republican or Democrat, it is just common sense. I hope we can get broad bipartisan support.

The link to the Wall Street Journal editorial is: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123725421857750565.html

The links to the white papers are:

http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/pdf/Housing_Whitepaper_1.pdf
http://www.frontlinethoughts.com/pdf/Housing_Whitepaper_2.pdf

Las Vegas, La Jolla and the OC

I expect I will get a few new readers from this letter. Normally, at the end of my regular weekly letter, I make a few personal comments. I write this free weekly letter to my 1 million closest friends, and you can add yourself to the list at www.frontlinethoughts.com. You can find out more about me at www.johnmauldin.com.

Parts of this letter have been written in New York and Dallas, and as I write this I am on a flight to Las Vegas to speak at a conference on natural resources. I am sure the recent Fed actions will be at the center of conversation. There is not enough space now to comment on that; but I did do a few segments on Yahoo Tech Ticker (one of which evidently made the Yahoo home page), which you can listen to at the following links.

Links to the Yahoo segments:

D.C. to America: You Can’t Handle the Truth
http://bit.ly/10rUiF

Plan to Solve Crisis: Let Immigrants Buy Houses
http://bit.ly/W0XLq

Fed Strategy: Spread Economic Pain Over Multiple Years
http://bit.ly/wgGjA

Source: Solving the Housing Crisis

• The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the policymaking arm of the U.S. Federal Reserve, will conclude a two-day meeting today (Wednesday), and investors are expecting members of this key central bank group to determine just what’s the next monetary-policy step needed to jump-start the recession-plagued U.S. economy, Bloomberg News reported.  Back in December, the FOMC slashed the Federal Funds rate to a range of 0% to 0.25% – an all-time low for that benchmark for U.S. borrowing costs.

• The chief executive officers of two top U.S. banks have made big bets on their own institutions, filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission show. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) CEO James “Jamie” Dimon bought 500,000 bank shares at a price of $22.929 each on Jan. 16, an outlay worth nearly $11.5 million, the documents show. Four days later, embattled Bank of America Corp. (BAC) CEO Kenneth D. Lewis bought 200,000 shares at prices ranging from $5.98 to $6.06 a share, resulting in a total outlay of $1.165 million, SEC records show.

• Once he was known as Wall Street’s “Mr. Fix-it.” But the once-teflon-coated reputation of ousted Bank of America Corp. (BAC) executive John Thain now needs fixed up. Thain, who joined BofA when that bank took over Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. at the very end of last year, was fired last week after losses at Merrill led to a $15.3 billion loss at Bank of America, and forced BofA to seek additional government aid. According to Bloomberg News, Thain has reportedly retained public relations specialist Sunshine, Sachs & Associates, whose clients include Ben Affleck and Leonardo DiCaprio – most likely in a bid to rebuild his image.

• Yahoo! Inc. (YHOO) logged a fourth-quarter loss of $303 million, compared with earnings of $206 million a year ago. Sales in the quarter fell 1% to $1.8 billion from $1.83 billion.

• The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index fell to a new record low of 37.7 this month from a revised 38.6 in December. “It appears that consumers have begun the new year with the same degree of pessimism that they exhibited in the final months of 2008,” Lynn Franco, director of The Conference Board Consumer Research Center, said in a statement. “Looking ahead, consumers remain quite pessimistic about the state of the economy and about their earnings.”

• The Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller 20-city housing index plunged 18.2% year-over-year in November – the sharpest annual drop on record. Homes in the 20-city index have lost a quarter of their value since their peak in July 2006. The National Association of Realtors said Monday that the median home price fell a record 15% in December to $175,400 – down from $207,000 a year ago.

Source: Global Investment News Briefs Wednesday, January 28th, 2009

President Nixon instated price controls on the 15^th of August, 1971. Inflation was a little over 4% at the time. Price controls manifestly did not work (resulting in shortages of all sorts and a deep recession) and were rescinded a few years later. President Ford went to Congress with programs to fight inflation that was running closer to 10% in October of 1974, with a speech entitled “Whip Inflation Now” (WIN). He famously urged Americans to wear “WIN” buttons. That policy too was less than effective, and the buttons, in a history replete with silly gestures by governments, should stand on anyone’s top ten list of such silly gestures.

Cynics more thoughtfully wore the buttons upside down and said the inverted letters (which looked like NIM) stood for “No Immediate Miracles.” They were right. There was no miracle, just eventual pain and lots of it. Ultimately, Paul Volker defeated inflation, but at the cost of two serious recessions and a lot of economic misery, with unemployment levels over 10% for nine months in 1983.

This week we were given the data that inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) over the last year was 4.2% and unemployment is now 5.5%. Some call for the Fed to raise rates so that we do not have to experience another lost decade like the ’70s and then ultimately see some future Volker forced to raise rates and drive unemployment back to 10%. Others suggest that “core” inflation is what should be paid heed to, and urge caution.

This week we look at the cost of what could be a renewed effort to Whip Inflation Now, not just here but in countries worldwide. Will Trichet in Europe raise rates even as the European economy seems to be slowing down? If you think inflation is bad in the US and Europe, take a peek at Asia. And I ask, “What will Ben do?” It should make for an interesting letter.

Whip Inflation Now

Nixon and his advisors thought inflation at 4% was serious enough to institute price controls. Headline inflation in the US is now 4.2%. What kind of economic policy should we pursue to bring inflation back into the Fed’s comfort zone of 1-2%? Would it work and would it be worth the pain? To get a handle on the question, let’s go to the data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and see where inflation is coming from.

And let me note, this is the same exercise we could do for a host of countries. The answer will be roughly the same: there are no easy solutions.

Core inflation, or inflation without food and energy, grew at 2.3%. Inflation without food costs was an even 4% and without energy was 2.7%. Clearly energy was the leading contributor to inflation in the past year.

But the recent trend in rising inflation is even more worrying. If you look at just the last three months of data and compute an annualized rate of inflation, you find that overall inflation has risen to 4.9%, energy inflation is running at a staggering 28%, and food costs have risen 6.2%. Meanwhile, core inflation during that period dropped to 1.8%. You can see all the data at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm.

Now, gentle reader, let’s think about these numbers. Food (over 14%) and energy (over 9%) combined make up roughly 24% of the CPI, yet were responsible for over 60% of the recent three-month trend in inflation. By the way, housing was up 4.9% and transportation up 8.7%, so it was not just food and energy.

What would it take to drop headline inflation back to under 2%? Well, one way would be for food and energy prices to fall. Let’s look at the possibilities.

As Donald Coxe has noted, North America has had an 18-year run of remarkably good weather in our growing season. You have to go back 800 years to get a string of years that were that good. Yet today food reserves of all types are at decades-long lows. There is very little room for any type of problem.

This growing season is not off to a good start. It looks like the yield on the corn crop will be lower than normal, and that is if we get very benign weather this fall. Given how late much of the US corn crop was planted, and how torrential rains in the corn belt have devastated crops (not to mention flooding cities, and our thoughts and prayers go out to those who have lost their homes to flooding), an early frost would be disastrous.

Because we have devoted so much of our arable land to corn (in a very misguided policy to turn food into ethanol), we have less for soybeans, which is putting upward price pressure on beans and other grains that are used to feed cattle, hogs, chickens, etc. In fact, it costs so much to feed livestock that ranchers are shrinking their herds.. This means more meat is coming into the system now, which is dampening prices. Increased supply will reduce prices in the short term, but next fall we will find that supplies of all types of meat will be short. That will potentially send meat prices soaring. Cereal and bakery products are up 10% over the last year. They could continue to rise in the fall if the corn crop does not yield more than currently projected. It will cost even more to feed your household and feed the animals we need for meat.

Food is the most basic of commodities. Demand is fairly consistent, and supplies may come under pressure. Looking for food inflation to drop back by the fall to 2% is not realistic in the current environment.

What about energy? There is some more hope there, at least on the oil front. High prices have reduced demand in the US, with gasoline usage down about 4%.

I think we have reached a tipping point. The psyche of the US consumer has been permanently scarred. Slowly, this country is going to replace its fleet of cars with smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. Over time, we will see demand continue to fall. We could see further drops in the demand for gas in the next few months.

Much of Asia used to subsidize oil prices to their consumers. That is changing, as Indonesia, Sri Lanka, and Taiwan have announced they are decreasing their subsidies, as the cost is simply too much. Malaysia now spends 25% of its budget on oil subsidies, and must raise prices or cut other services – or watch inflation get worse. India is now contemplating how to cut its subsidies. Even China is likely to start to raise costs after the Olympics. These countries are going to go through their own price shocks. All this will reduce world demand for oil.

The report predicts that UK house prices will crash by 10% by 2010 and that, with consumer spending slowing, the Bank of England will eventually need to cut interest rates by three-quarters of a percentage point to 4.25% next year.

Ben Traynor in The Daily Reckoning explains how a house price crash in the UK will affect the country’s economy…

It never rains, it pours. Hot on the heels of the Bradford and Bingley saga, we wake up today to the news that mortgage lending has hit a record low.

Just 58,000 loans were made last month. That compares with 64,000 in March and 113,000 in April 2007. House prices will keep falling. But they’ll take their time — the market is drying up, with many would-be sellers pulling out of deals rather than dropping their prices.

It’s like a massive staring contest between buyers and sellers. Who will blink first? My money’s on the sellers — once they realise prices aren’t recovering any time soon, they’ll bite the bullet and drop them. Just a little bit… Then a little bit more…

So what’s the upshot for the housing market? A ‘soft landing’ or a short, sharp shock? And what about the economy?

Let’s start with housing. Fundamentally, houses are too expensive. But it’s hard to say how far and how fast they’re going to fall.

It all comes down to affordability. In theory, it should be easy to calculate the ‘correct’ level for house prices. How much do people earn, and what multiple of that can they affordably borrow? Run the numbers, and you get an idea of where house prices ‘should’ be.

But here’s where it gets tricky. We can get wage data pretty easily. But many would-be buyers have other capital to draw on. First-time buyers regularly rely on borrowing from parents, for example.

And besides, many current homeowners have demonstrated they’re all too willing to buy at a price considerably above what they can afford. Who’s to say the rest have learned from their mistakes?

Both of these factors make it hard to say exactly how far house prices need to fall to be ‘affordable’. But the good news, from our perspective, is that it doesn’t really matter. We’re confident we know which way they’re going, and that tells us a lot when it comes to where we should (and shouldn’t) invest.

Let’s move onto the wider economy. If house prices are coming down slowly, does that mean a ‘soft landing’ for the economy too? And is this preferable to a short, sharp shock?

Again, I think it’s going to take its sweet time sorting itself out. And here’s the kicker — the longer it takes, the greater the likelihood of a recession. I’ll explain why in just a second.

First, I want to answer the question of which we should be rooting for — the gentle decline or the brutal shock. My terminology is deliberately chosen to reflect the way I suspect the Government will view it.

The argument against a short shock can be summarised in one word — hysteresis. Hysteresis is the economic phenomenon of path dependency. A shock, so the argument goes, sets in train a series of events that can become self-sustaining.

An example would be long-term mass unemployment. If a large number of people are put out of work in one go, not all of them will find alternative employment quickly. Those that don’t will become deskilled, demotivated and will find it harder to get back into work. The shock, therefore, delivers its own persistent structural problem.

I think this argument has a lot of merit. But I still believe facing the inevitable, and quickly, is the preferable course of action. It all comes down to our irascible, temperamental friend Sentiment.

The longer this uncertainty drags on, the more entrenched negative sentiment will become. This will make a recession not only more likely, but more difficult to get out of.

Sadly I reckon this is exactly the scenario we’re facing. A long, drawn out recession. A few false dawns, with everyone, their confidence battered, scurrying for cover again at the first wobble.

The investment lesson is clear. Avoid companies with a high level of exposure to the British consumer. This would include most banks and retailers.

Put your money with firms whose profits aren’t wholly dependent on the spending habits of Mr and Mrs UK.

Because Mr and Mrs UK are about to go into hibernation…