What’s he talking about? Today, we take a look and invest right alongside his idea. And it should start to pay off with the arrival of the first swallows of spring in 2010. It’s also timely now — in this weak-kneed economy — because it has traditionally held up well even in when the economy is on the ropes. Even the Great Depression couldn’t put this thing down.

We start with simple truths. The world’s population has more than doubled since 1950 — from about 2.5 billion to 6.7 billion. By 2050, there will be more than 9 billion people on the planet. Almost all of this growth will come from undeveloped markets such as China and India. And they will all be doing one thing, for sure — eating.

Now, hang on. I know that is a banal insight by itself, but this story has layers like a tiramisu. The second layer is the mix of food eaten, which is important. These undeveloped economies are getting richer. Predictably, as people everywhere have done and continue to do when they have a little more money in their pockets, they change their diets. They spend more on food. The average Chinese spends 40 cents of every additional dollar earned on food. In India, it’s about 70 cents of every additional dollar. What do they buy?

Read the rest of the story at PennySleuth.com.

It all started back in 1991, when J. Aron & Co., Goldman’s commodities-trading division, recommended that a large institutional client invest about $100 million in commodities.  The vehicle “du-jour” was Goldman’s own investment vehicle, the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (now the S&P GSCI Commodity Index).

The GSCI is a 24-commodity dollar-weighted index, comprised of 70% energy (oil and natural gas), 8% industrial metals (aluminum, copper, lead, nickel and zinc), 3% precious metals (gold and silver), 14% agriculture (wheat, corn, soybeans, cotton, sugar, coffee and cocoa) and 4% livestock (cattle and hogs).

Goldman was to take the other side of the bet, meaning that should the index rise, Goldman would have to pay equivalent returns to the investor.  In order to hedge, J. Aron needed to institute similar positions in the futures markets for those commodities.

But the plan had one wrinkle in it.  At the time, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) – the agency that regulated the commodities sector – placed position limits on certain agricultural commodities, like wheat, corn and soybeans.  Other commodities weren’t subject to these same limits.  Yet it was necessary to hedge all the commodities concerned in order for this investment arrangement to work.

So with a large chunk of new business at stake, J. Aron asked the CFTC to grant it an exemption.  Goldman contended that it was not a speculator, but was instead a true “hedger.”

The upshot: In October 1991, J. Aron was granted the sought-after exemption.

Inspired by J. Aron’s success, other members of the commodities-trading oligopoly followed suit, and soon had similar exemptions in hand.

The Global Commodities Boom

In the 18 years that followed the exemption grants, the commodities sector was all in all a pretty orderly place. Between 1990 and 2002, in fact, commodities prices essentially traded sideways.

Unfortunately, that stability wasn’t to last. Like a greyhound that sets out after the hare after having been penned up for too long a stretch, commodity prices started to surge – and ended up doubling over the next six years, albeit in a relatively orderly fashion.

Finally, last year, a market that had been simmering for far too long finally came to a full-fledge boil – and last summer boiled over. Food prices soared, intensifying inflationary fears here in the United States while prompting the leader of the United Nation’s World Food Programme to warn that a “silent tsunami” of hunger was threatening to span the globe.

It seems, though, that the actual boiling point was reached last summer when oil went into a near-vertical climb, surging 63% in just five months, and hitting an all-time high of $147 a barrel last July. Given that oil is in many ways the most relevant commodity to the general public (think fuel for transportation and heating), the new record price touched off a media feeding and prompted projections that crude oil could be headed for $500 a barrel.

As commodity prices were shooting skyward, however, U.S. stock prices saw their already-steep descent turn into a nearly vertical plunge – thank to a worsening of the deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

As a result of that crisis, the world’s largest banks, insurance firms and brokerages have been forced to take nearly $1.5 trillion in writedowns, Bloomberg News reported. Because of that and some other related problems, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner is pressing Congress to somehow restrain the $600 trillion worldwide derivatives market.

And that has set the stage for a showdown that pits the regulators against the speculators.

What Gensler Wants …

As the spotlight has increasingly been focused on Goldman in the last couple of years for its trading prowess, it’s been suggested on many occasions that the investment bank must be benefiting from some sort of a “special” relationship with the federal government.

The suggestion is understandable on several levels.

Only a month ago, for instance, when Goldman reported its financial results for the second quarter, the investment bank’s trading results helped it record all-time-record profits of $3.44 billion – a good 50% above what experts had been forecasting for what had been expected to be a “blowout” quarter for Goldman.

The stunning profit results once again reminded observers that Goldman Sachs alumnae seem to have a “knack” for landing in positions of high influence.
Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. “Hank” Paulson Jr., who held that position under former U.S. President George W. Bush – where he was widely viewed as the mastermind behind many of the bank bailout programs conceived last fall – was once the chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs.

While he was serving as Treasury secretary, Paulson’s office calendar says he called Goldman Sachs Chairman Lloyd C. Blankfein roughly 24 times the week that the federal government opted to bailout out busted insurance giant American International Group Inc. (NYSE: AIG). Remember, had AIG been allowed to collapse, Goldman would have been left holding the biggest of all bags, because of the oversized bets they’d made on AIG’s financial insurance.  Paulson, it seems, would have none of that.

The “Six Degrees of Goldman Sachs” doesn’t end there, either, as the many connections show. Geithner, the current Treasury secretary, was mentored by Goldman alumnus John Thain [the last chairman and CEO of Merrill Lynch before it merged with Bank of America Corp. (NYSE: BAC)].  Plus, Geithner just chose Mark Patterson, formerly a lobbyist for Goldman, as his top aide.

And don’t forget about Gary Gensler, the newly installed head of the CFTC whose resume includes a 20-year stint at Goldman Sachs. But interestingly – perhaps even ironically – Gensler’s new job pits him directly against Goldman, as the CFTC looks to rein in what some consider to excessive speculation.

During hearings held in July and August, attended by representatives from both Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM), Gensler commented that the CFTC “must seriously consider setting strict position limits in the energy market.” He also indicated that his staff had been instructed to determine “every authority available to the agency” to guard the interests of the public as well as the markets.

What Goldman Should Get

In its defense, Goldman has argued that setting position limits on trading commodities is likely to prove harmful, as restricting access could affect liquidity.  (Highly liquid markets, or “deep” markets with large volume, are considered to be more fairly priced).

Steven Strongin, a managing director at Goldman, recently told a Senate hearing committee that “attempts to regulate volatility have rarely – if ever – succeeded.  Yet they often have unintended and significant consequences.”

Although commodities trading accounts for a considerable part of Goldman’s revenue – some estimates place it at about 8% to 9% – making it a target for would-be reformers, Strongin’s cautionary words should serve as a warning to back off for one simple reason.

He’s right.

Because of the exemption granted to the trading houses, institutional investors have been better able to provide commodity diversification to their portfolios, thereby minimizing some asset and inflation risks.
United States Oil Fund LP (NYSE: USO) and the United States Natural Gas Fund LP (NYSE: UNG) – two ETFs that are among the largest such products in the world.

Though very popular, such exchange-traded funds (ETFs) as the United States Oil Fund LP (NYSE: USO) and the United States Natural Gas Fund LP (NYSE: UNG) could also be affected.  They currently boast large volumes in the 12 million and 40 million units traded/day, respectively. That means that a limitation on futures positions – let alone an outright prohibition – would work against the best interests of individual investors.

Even producers and refiners of petroleum products could end up being squeezed, as well. These oil-sector players sometimes hedge risks by calling on the large commodities traders who can provide them with custom trades on demand.  The dealer then turns around and wisely hedges its own risk.  Now, doubt is being cast on the ability to perform these transactions.
So we know that Goldman, along with JPMorgan Chase) and others – as the largest owners of derivatives – have a lot to defend.
But there’s actually an even-bigger-picture view that argues against regulation – of any kind.

Who Needs Rules?

Government oversight, intervention, and insurance schemes usually lead to problems – often really big problems.

A simple example should be enough to make my point.

Just think back to what happened last year to mortgage giants Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE).  It doesn’t take an accounting degree to figure out that, by having their loans government guaranteed, management had no incentive to follow cautious lending practices.

After all, why should they?  When a base salary is certain, a bonus is tied to sales or growth, and there are no consequences for bad results, why not take on more risk and just shoot for the moon?  If you hit it out of the park, your bonus swells.  If you strike out – even so badly that you even make “Mighty Casey” look like Henry Aaron – and you lose really badly and your company loses big, even to the point of bankruptcy or outright collapse, you still get your base salary.

Where’s the incentive to manage your risks?

In the case of a bank, there’s no incentive to be careful with depositor assets when the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) is your bottomless backstop.

Clearly, the government does not always know better.

And that brings us back to Goldman Sachs.

Goldman Sachs: Unplugged, Unfettered, Unregulated

In the debate about regulating the commodities markets, I come down on the side of Goldman, reasoning that a free market – left unfettered – knows best, since the forces of supply and demand will ultimately price things fairly.

Inside an economic system as highly developed as that of the United States, everything operates at a level of complexity that no single person – let alone a government bureaucracy – can operate, or even fine tune. And as soon as anyone begins to tinker with it, there are always going to be unintended consequences.  Which leads us back to the question of regulation.

According to Prof. Kent Moors, a noted global oil consultant, only a small portion of a commodity’s price, at any given point in time, can be attributed to speculators.  He believes that speculators they are necessary to provide liquidity and that, in the end, the benefits speculators provide cancel out any of the negatives often ascribed to their marketplace activities.

If regulations with real “teeth” – in this case, position limits on energy futures – are actually put in place, U.S. financial leaders will end up playing the economic equivalent of Whac-A-Mole – an unwinnable game, and a dangerous one, at that.

While the final result is difficult – if not impossible – to picture, here’s my best guess: The financially lucrative, economically prestigious and strategically important commodities-trading business won’t fold up and disappear – it will just move to another country, where it’s better treated, and even nurtured.
Perhaps it will end up in Asia, as has been the case with so many other important businesses during the past couple of decades.  And that, once again, will end up costing America jobs – these jobs high-paying and prestigious – at the worst possible juncture.

According to commodities guru Jim Rogers – who is frequently quoted here in Money Morning – “the three commodity exchanges in China are booming.  Dalian trades more soybean contracts than Chicago does already, and that’s with a blocked currency [and] a closed market.  Can you imagine what’s going to happen if and when they open that market up to foreigners?  It’s going to explode.”

So as you think about “big bad trading firms” such as Goldman Sachs, and commodities speculators, remember the necessary role they play.  And realize that restrictive regulations will end up being bad for consumers, investors, and the same free markets we should be defending.

Source: How Over-Regulating Goldman Sachs Will Lead to Higher Oil and Commodity Prices

Billionaire investor George Soros thinks the worst of the global financial crisis is behind us.  In a June 20 interview with Polish television, the Hungarian-born Soros acknowledged that this has been the most serious crisis he’s seen in his lifetime, but said, “Definitely, the worst is behind us.”

For those that like to interpret “Soros-speak,” that’s as powerful a sign as any that one of the world’s most successful investors is “going long.”

But is he wrong?

On one hand, the World Bank is busy roiling the markets with recently updated figures that project a 2.9% decline in global economic activity this year. Then there are the signs that the “green shoots” (how I’ve come to detest that term) may be more like weeds. Debt is devastating the developed world and the once-mighty G-7 looks more like a G-1 every day.

On the other hand, I wouldn’t bet against him. When it comes to financial influence and acumen, Soros is about as powerful and prescient as they come. He’s made billions over the years speculating on things that others simply couldn’t see or, more often, didn’t want to believe. He’s as iconic as he is legendary for making big bets on market timing even if, by his own admission, he’s not always right.

For the millions of investors who are tempted to interpret Soros’s comments as bullish, that admission forces me to urge caution. In fact, my advice to proceed with caution extends to any comments that might be made by such other investment legends as Warren Buffett, or even Soros’ former investment partner, noted author and commentator Jim Rogers.

I preach caution for three reasons:

• Despite the fact that each of these men is fabulously successful, the typical retail investor has no idea how much money they’re betting on the upside, or what percentage of their wealth is involved in any publicized position.
• It’s not clear what – if any - protective stops are being used so you don’t know whether the positions they’ve taken represent core portfolio holdings or speculative trades.
• These revelations – disclosures – are usually made after the fact, which means that investors who may want to tag along for the ride are put in the risky position of having to make “me too” investments.

So if you’re a savvy investor, what steps can you take to translate moves being made by three of the best investors of our time into profits of your own?

A good place to start is by taking the time to understand precisely what drives these guys. Even though Rogers hunts for opportunities around the world, Soros tends to pursue investment plays involving currencies and macroeconomic trends, and Buffett is a deep value guy, they are more alike than they are different. That’s especially true since the core elements of the strategies these three investors use to win and profit usually run counter to Wall Street’s conventional wisdom.

Take the very concept of profits, as an example. Most people are surprised to learn that none of these gentlemen sits around over coffee in the morning, rolling his hands with an evil laugh as he wonders aloud how much money he’s going to make on that day. But nearly all have gone on record at one point or another talking about the importance of not losing money in the first place. They’ve also repeatedly stressed the importance of waiting until the really compelling opportunities develop before they put their money at risk.

Rogers, once Soros’ partner at the Quantum Fund, a hedge fund that’s often described as the first real global investment fund, goes a step further. He describes his investment process as a little like waiting until somebody else puts money down in the corner, then “walking over and picking it up.”

Another common trait is that not one of these three investors believes that you have to take big risks to make big money. In fact, all three gentlemen believe, as I do, that it’s how you concentrate your wealth that matters.

This flies in the face of what Wall Street would have you believe which is that you need to diversify your assets to get ahead. Diversification as Wall Street practices it is a complete misuse of the math and a proxy for an entire establishment that doesn’t know what it’s doing.

The thinking is that by spreading your money around willy nilly, some of your holdings will rise in value, even as other parts of the portfolio fall. Even so, by diversifying, Wall Street says that you will be better off for it over the long run. Granted, there are some instances where taking steps to “diversify” leaves you better off than if you’d done nothing at all, but one of the critical problems with diversification as Wall Street has practiced it is that it doesn’t work when everything goes down at once – as so many investors who had been led to believe they were protected found out the hard way in 2000 and again in 2007.

That’s why, for example, I’m a proponent of concentrating my efforts on a few relatively high-probability choices, especially when it comes to trading services, such as the Geiger Index or the New China Trader, for example. It’s a strategy that individual investors should consider, as well.

But what matters most is that people put the comments they hear from these guys into perspective and think for themselves. It’s important to remember that neither Buffett, nor Soros nor Rogers care about what other people think. That’s one of their real strengths. Nor do they care what the markets will or won’t do.

In fact, none of the three – as least as far as I can tell from the research that I’ve done – subscribes to the “random walk” or “efficient market” theories I’ve mentioned as complete bunk in recent months.

The bottom line is that Soros, Buffett and Rogers have demonstrated time and again that they’ll only make a move when they’re darned good and ready – when they’ve done all they can to scope out the situation at hand, and done everything possible to make sure that the percentages are in their favor.

That, alone, is a terrific lesson for retail investors to learn. Wall Street tries to push investors into action with advertisements that portray “real” people making trades from their kitchens, or getting the latest quotes on their mobile phones. They show attractive retired couples who’ve achieved their dreams with big sailboats, or antique cars, or on expensive vacations. Ignore those messages and you’ve effectively elbowed aside the artificial sense of urgency that Wall Street is trying to create.

Not only is this manufactured urgency designed to separate more of you from your money, but they wouldn’t do it if they knew that most investors got it “right” more often than they got it wrong.

Buffett, Soros and Rogers act only when they believe the time is right. Buffett has referred to this as waiting for the Sunday pitch. If you’ve never heard that term before, it’s one that dictates extreme patience while all the spitballs, knucklers and sliders go by. You only take action when the one pitch you know you can hit out of the park is on its way – then you swing from the heels, giving it all your effort.

There’s one final task that these guys do better than almost anyone – and that’s to keep everything in perspective. They assemble their portfolios carefully with diligent planning, attention to detail and an emphasis on the objectives they expect to achieve. They make investments based on a clearly defined set of expectations and do not hesitate to cut their losses if they find out they were wrong.

In that sense, every investment choice they make fits a specific role in their portfolio. Nothing, if they can help it, is left to chance. So to the extent there’s any action to be taken right now, let me leave you with one final thought.

No nation in the history of mankind has ever bailed itself out by doing what we’re doing now, which means that placing bets on a “recovery” is really a fool’s errand. On the other hand, making choices that capitalize on the trillions of dollars now being injected into the world’s financial system is the place to be. History shows that it’s better to be generally long resources, inflation-resistant choices, and real companies with real earnings.

Not only will these types of profit plays fall less than others if the markets stumble and fall from here, they’ll also rise faster and farther once the capital infusions start to work their way through the global financial system and the rebound gets under way.

And I’ll bet my bottom dollar that George Soros knows it.

Source: Is George Soros Long or Wrong on the Global Rebound?

[Editor's Note: Fourteen trades. All profitable. Since launching his Geiger Index trading service late last year, Money Morning Investment Director Keith Fitz-Gerald is a perfect 14 for 14, meaning he's closed every single one of his trades at a profit. And he did this in the face of one of the most-volatile periods since the Great Depression. Fitz-Gerald says the ongoing financial crisis has changed the investing game forever, and has created a completely new set of rules that investors must understand to survive and profit in this new era. Check out our latest insights on these new rules, this new market environment, and this new service, the Geiger Index .] ]]> http://www.contrarianprofits.com/articles/is-george-soros-long-or-wrong-on-the-global-rebound/18632/feed 0 http://www.contrarianprofits.com/articles/rogers-soros-farmland-one-of-the-best-investments-of-our-time/17943 http://www.contrarianprofits.com/articles/rogers-soros-farmland-one-of-the-best-investments-of-our-time/17943#comments Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:17:27 +0000 Contrarian Profits http://www.contrarianprofits.com/?p=17943 We have no shame here at Notes. When legendary underground investor Jim Rogers makes a call we listen. And we listen good.  Rogers correctly predicted the commodities rally in 1999. And between 1970 and 1980, when he partnered with George Soros at the Quantum Fund, his portfolio made gains of 4,200% when the S&P 500 rose by 47%. To say he’s a legend is an understatement.

Rogers and Soros are snapping up farmland right now. These two old hands are betting that demand for food will soar, pushing up the price of arable land. This from MoneyNews.com:

Falling commodity prices aren’t bringing prices for farmland down with them. Even as the price of grain goes down, the cost of the land it’s grown on…

The global population is peaking and is consuming more food than it’s producing. This will make food scarcer and cause it to rise in price.

But there are more subtle reasons for investing in commodities right now. Rogers says that although stocks may touch crazy valuations in the near term, they may be in worthless currencies – a vista Notes readers will be familiar with. This from a recent interview with Rogers in the Economic Times:

Central banks all over the world have printed huge amounts of money, and the real economy is not strong enough for all this money to be absorbed… so, it’s going into stocks and real assets such as commodities. It’s a mistake what they are doing. It’s giving short-term pleasure, but there’s long-term pain as we are going to have much higher inflation, much higher interest rates and a worse economy down the road.

The American bond market is already beginning to go down dramatically as people realize that the American government has to sell huge amount of bonds, and secondly, there is going to be inflation, serious inflation, as it was always in the past when you had governments printing huge amounts of money.

The fiscal deluge is lifting stocks. But they’re getting frothy. And Rogers reckons the current upward trend won’t last.

It’s going to snap. Later this year, next year, we are going to have currency problems, maybe even a currency crisis. I don’t know with which currency — maybe with the pound sterling, maybe with the US dollar, who knows. It maybe with something none of us have at the moment. When you have a currency crisis, stocks will be affected, many things will be affected. It is not sound, what’s happening out there in the world.

In the 1930s, we had a huge stock market bubble which popped. And then politicians started making many mistakes. They became protectionist. They made solvent banks take over insolvent banks and then both banks failed in the end.

They are doing many of the same mistakes now. What’s different this time is that we are printing huge amounts of money which they did not print at that time. So, we are going to have inflation this time.

There are a number of ways to play this scenario with hard assets. But to keep things simple, you may want to focus on the following three market-beating commodities ETFs (hat tip ETF Trends).

1) The iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed ETF (NYSE:GSG), up 8.1% for the year

2) Notes’ old favorite, the PowerShares DB Agricultural Fund (NYSE:DBA), up 7.5% for the year

3) The Market Vectors-RVE Hard Asset Producers ETF (NYSE:HAP), up 25.9% for the year

Platinum plunged from early New York trading to mid-morning, turned abruptly and shot higher to just past the noon hour, then eased for the rest of the day, ending at $1089, down $14. For the week, platinum fell by a steep 7.4%.

Silver was down from Hong Kong to the mid-point of the London session, falling almost to the $12 mark, moved higher through most of the Comex, peaking at $12.80 just after noon, then slipped a bit through the Globex to close at $12.50/oz., up 13 cents. For the week, silver lost 3.1%. (Click here for charts)

While gold was dead flat, silver posted a gain on the day, presumably because of its role as an industrial metal in an economy that is supposedly on the mend.

“We are seeing some people abandoning gold in favor of equities as they seem to believe that the worst of the financial woe is over,” said Philip Gotthelf, of Equidex Brokerage Group in Closter, New Jersey.

However, longer term, “I am still bullish on gold,” Gotthelf added. “If the financial woes continue through June, the June contract will probably reach $1,000 an ounce. If the problems continue through July, we will see the October gold contract at $1,200 an ounce if not $1,500.”

There is still some overhang from the IMF gold sale threat, says investment biker Jim Rogers. “I own some gold, but I am not buying at the moment because the IMF, which is one of the largest owners of gold in the world, is desperate to sell its gold,” Rogers said. But although not buying, “I’m not selling my gold,” he added.

The deal is that the IMF “is trying to get permission from everybody,” Rogers said. “If and when they sell their gold, they may set a bottom. Who knows? It may go down to $700. They got a lot of gold to sell. If it does, I hope I’m brave enough and smart enough to buy more.”

But for the moment, with gold holding pretty well where it is despite the market negatives, analysts believe strong near-term support exists at the $860 level.

Source: Gold Flattens Out

• Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK.A, BRK.B) is investing 3 billion Swiss francs ($2.6 billion) in Swiss Reinsurance Co. (ADR: SWCEY ). Swiss Re, which is expecting a net loss, said it is also seeking another 2 billion francs on the capital markets, the Associated Press reported.

• Renowned global investor Jim Rogers said he’s keeping his money out of weakening Russia – saying there is “a good chance Russia will continue to disintegrate into more than one country” in a Bloomberg Television interview. “I am not optimistic about the continuous stability of Russia,” Rogers said.

• Ford Motor Co. (F) is talking with China’s Geely Auto Holdings Ltd. (PINK:GELYF) about unloading its unprofitable Volvo unit, several sources told Bloomberg. Ford has also contacted China’s Chery Automobile Co. and Chongqing Changan Automobile Co. about Volvo, the people said.

• LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA (ADR:LVMUY) said net income dropped 4.2% to $1.5 billion (1.14 billion euros) in the six months ending in December, missing analysts’estimates for second-half profit, Bloomberg reported.  The world’s largest luxury-goods maker said higher handbag sales failed to offset slumping demand for Hennessey cognac and Moet champagne. The financial crisis has crimped demand for even the most expensive luxury goods, eroding sales in the $230 billion (175 billion-euro) luxury goods market.

• U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown signaled he won’t block bonuses to executives at Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc (ADR: RBS) as lawmakers stepped up pressure to adopt a U.S.-style plan capping pay. While he told reporters he supported President Barack Obama “strongly” on the need to change the way bankers are rewarded, he twice refused to say he’d ban bonuses at RBS, Bloomberg reported.  The U.K. government is taking a 70% stake in RBS after the Edinburgh-based institution tapped part of the Treasury’s 50 billion-pound recapitalization fund.

• U.S. mortgage rates jumped to their highest levels since December this week, frustrating efforts to bring mortgage rates down to levels that will spur demand and help the hard-hit housing market begin to recover, Reuters reported. Interest rates on U.S. 30-year fixed-rate mortgages rose to 5.25% for the week ending February 5, up from the previous week’s 5.10%, according to a survey released Thursday by home funding company Freddie Mac (FRE).

• The National Retail Foundation said current economic stimulus legislation might not do enough to spur consumer spending and repeated its call for a series of temporary sales tax holidays. The retail trade group estimates that the proposed tax holidays would save consumers about $20 billion, or $175 per family, reported. The U.S. government would reimburse states for the lost revenue.  The proposal comes as the NRF forecasts a 2.5% drop in retail sales in the first half of 2009.

Source:  Global Investing News Briefs Friday, February 6th, 2009

But there is much talk now of a “commodities bear market” and the popping of the so-called “commodities bubble” as prices pull back from their highs.

Jim Rogers, however, remains a commodities bull. “This bull market is not magic,” says Jim, writing in Whiskey and Gunpowder. “It’s not some crazy ‘cycle theory’ I have. It does not fall out of the sky. It’s supply and demand. It’s simple stuff.”

In the 80s and 90s, when people were calling you to buy mutual fund and stocks, no one called to say, “Let’s invest in a sugar plantation.” No one called and said, “Let’s invest in a lead mine.” Commodities were in a bear market and in bear markets people do not invest in a productive capacity. They never have. Perhaps they should have, but they’ve never done it throughout history and probably never will. There has been only one lead mine opened in the world the last 25 years. There’s been no major elephant oil fields [of more than a billion barrels] discovered in over 40 years.

~~~~~~~~~~~Special~~~~~~~~~~

The Single Best Way to Insure You Never Run Out of Money

In three simple steps, unleash a steady flow of work-free income…starting with up to 75 automatic “paychecks” deposited directly into your account.

Act now or risk missing the next “payday”. Find out more about the “Endless Paycheck Portfolio” here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Many of you were not even born the last time the world discovered a huge elephant oil field. Think about all the elephant fields in the world that you know about. Alaskan oil fields are in decline; Mexican oil fields are in rapid decline; the North Sea is in decline. The UK has been exporting oil for 27 years now. Within the decade, the UK is going to be a major importer of oil again. Indonesia is a member of OPEC. Indonesia is going to get thrown out because they no longer export oil, they are now net importers of oil.

Malaysia has been one of the great exporting countries in the world for decades. Within the decade, Malaysia is going to be importing oil. 10 years ago, China was one of the major exporters of oil, now they are the second largest importer of oil in the world. Oil fields deplete, mines depletes. This is the way the world’s been working for a few thousand years and it will always work this way. So supply has been going down for 25 years.

Meanwhile, you know what’s happening to demand. Asia’s been booming. There are three billion people in Asia. America’s growing. Most of the world has been growing for the last 25 years. So supply has gone down and demand has gone up for 25 years. That’s called a bull market.

One of the things you’ll find if you go back and do your research is that whenever stocks have done well, such as the 1980s and 90s, commodities have done badly. But conversely, you find that whenever commodities have done well, such as the 1970s, stocks have done poorly. I have a theory as to why this always works, but it doesn’t matter about my theory. The fact is that it always works this way and it’s working this way now.

So before I set off to my second trip around the world, I came to the conclusion that the bear market in commodities was coming to and end. So I started a commodities index fund. This is an index fund. I do not manage it. It’s a basket of commodities we put in the corner. If it goes up we make money; if it goes down we lose money. But since Aug 1st 1998, when the fund started, it is up 471%.

I [mention this index] to show you that the commodity bull market is not something that will happen someday. It’s in process right now, and it’s going to go on for years to come, because supply and demand are out of balance. And by the time we get to the end of the bull market, commodities will go through the roof. There will be setbacks along the way.

I don’t know when or why, but I know they are coming, because markets always work that way. Commodities have done 15 times better than stocks in this decade and they’re going to continue that [trend].

My five-year-old daughter knows this. She never owns stocks or bonds; she only owns commodities. She’s very happy owning commodities. She doesn’t care about stocks and bonds, but she knows about gold. I assure you, she knows about gold.

Some of you probably diversify, or believe in diversification. I do not diversify; I am not a fan of diversification. This is something that stockbrokers came up with to protect themselves. But you’re never going to get rich diversifying. I assure you. But if you DO diversify, commodities are the best anchor because they are not going to do what the rest of your assets are going to do.

I will give you one brief case study about oil, because it’s one of the most important commodities. Some of you know that a company called ARAMCO owns oil in Saudi Arabia. It was nationalized in the 70s. They threw out BP and Shell (NYSE:RDS.A /RDS.B) and Exxon (NYSE:XOM). But the last Western company to leave did an audit [of Saudi oil reserves] and came to the conclusion that Saudi Arabia had 245 billion barrels of oil.

Then in 1980, after ten years, Saudi Arabia suddenly announced it had 260 billion barrels of oil. Every year since 1988 – 20 years in a row – Saudi Arabia has announced, “We have 260 billion barrels of oil.”

~~~~~~~~~~~Special~~~~~~~~~~

Can We Trust the Saudi’s?

We’ve been depending on Saudi Arabia’s oil estimates for years. If things ever really go bad we can always depend on our old Saudi friends. But can we trust what they’ve told us?

It seems they’ve been telling us one thing, and our leaders something else. But the hoax goes deeper.

See how far it goes here…

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is the damndest thing. Twenty years. It never goes up, it never goes down, and they have produced 67 billion barrels of oil in this period of time. When nuts like me go to Saudi, we ask, “How can this be? How can it be that they always have 260 billion barrels of oil?” (By the way, last year they said they have 261 billion barrel of oil). And the Saudis say, “You either believe us or you don’t,” and that’s the end of the conversation.

I have never been to the Saudi oil fields, and even if I had, I wouldn’t know what I was looking at. But I do know something is wrong. I know that every oil country in the world has a reserve problem, except Saudi Arabia of course.

I know that every oil company in the world has declining reserves. So I know that unless someone discovers a lot of oil quickly, the surprise to most people is going to be how high the price of oil stays and how high it goes eventually. That is the supply side. Let’s look at the demand side.

The Indians use 1/20th as much oil as their neighbors in Japan and Korea use. The Chinese use 1/10th as much per capita. There are 2.3 billion people in India and China alone. Well, the Indians are going to get more electricity. The Indians are going to get motor scooters. They are going to start using more energy, so are the Chinese.

But if the Indians just doubled the amount of oil used per capita, they would still use only 1/10th of what the Koreans use. If the Chinese doubled their oil use, they would still be using only 1/5th what the Japanese and the Koreans are using. So you can see what kind of pressures there are on the demand side for oil and energy, at a time of terrible stress on the supply side. These are simple things.

So I would urge you to take a lesson from my little girls. My little girls are learning Chinese. My little girls are getting out of the US dollar. My little girls own a lot of commodities. I would urge you to do the same.

Source: Supply and Demand Shape Commodity Markets

In the second part of an exclusive interview with Money Morning, Rogers says giving up on that country now would be like selling all your U.S. stocks at the start of the 1900s – before America created massive wealth by evolving into a world superpower.

“I have never sold any of my Chinese companies,” Rogers said. “You know, selling China in 2008 is like selling America in 1908. Sure, let’s say the market goes down another 40% – so what! You look back over 100 years, you look back from the beauty of 1928, or even 1938 [in the depths of the Great Depression], and there is somebody who bought shares in 1908. He was still a lot better off having not sold in 1908.”

During a 40-minute interview during a wealth-management conference in this West Coast Canadian city last month, Rogers also said that:

• The anti-travel policies China has put in place to reduce gridlock and slash pollution during the Summer Olympic Games may actually have created a “bottom” in China stocks – possibly creating a great entry point for long-term investors.
• The 34-day worldwide Olympic torch relay leading up to the opening ceremonies likely re-awakened China’s deeply felt nationalism – which will be key as that country strives to build demand for its domestically produced products.
• And noted that the country must still deal with such problems as pollution, rising inflation and an overheated economy.

A long-time China bull, Rogers first made a name for himself with The Quantum Fund, a hedge fund that’s often described as the first real global investment fund, which he and partner George Soros founded in 1970. Over the next decade, Quantum gained 4,200%, while the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index climbed about 50%.

It was after Rogers “retired” in 1980 that the investing masses first really got to see him in action. Rogers traveled the world (several times), and penned such bestsellers as “Investment Biker” and the recently released “A Bull in China.” He also made some historic market calls: Rogers predicted China’s meteoric growth a good decade before it became apparent to everyone else, and he subsequently foretold of the powerful updraft in global commodities prices that’s fueled a year-long bull market in the agriculture, energy and mining sectors.

Rogers’ candor has made him a popular figure with individual investors, meaning his pronouncements are always closely watched. Here are some of the highlights from the exclusive interview we had with the author and investor, who now makes his regular home in Singapore:

Keith Fitz-Gerald (Q): There’s a lot of talk that the Chinese will use the Olympics to launch a new wave of nationalism and to move ahead. Are the Olympic Games as relevant as some people think?

Jim Rogers: They’ve already got tremendous nationalism. But the international reactions about Tibet and the Olympic torchbearers re-awakened it.

And the politicians, of course, need it because they’ve got their own problems with inflation and overheating and [pollution and] the rest of it. So, like politicians throughout history, they fan it – do their best to say: Hell, it’s not our problem. It’s the evil farmers. It’s the French. See that store over there: It’s their fault. It’s the Americans.”

So that is happening, anyway.

As far as the Olympics themselves, they’re irrelevant.

America had the Olympics in ‘96 and it had no effect on the American economy – before or after. Some people in Atlanta were affected before and after. And some people who were involved with the Olympics were affected before and after.

America at that time had 270 million people. China’s got five times as many people, and it’s a much bigger country geographically.

Sydney, Australia had the 2000 Olympics. It had virtually no effect on the Sydney, or on the Australian economy – even though Australia had 18 million people. It’s tiny … nothing. Yes, it had an effect on some people.

Greece, in 2004, had the Olympics. You haven’t heard stories of a major collapse or a major revival of Greece in 2005, because the fact is that the Games didn’t have much of an effect – not a noticeable effect, anyway. It had spot effects only, so I ignore the Olympics as far as the Chinese economy – and its stock market – is concerned.

(Q): Are you still bullish on China?

Rogers: Oh, yeah. I never sold anything in China. In fact, I bought more. I bought Chinese Airlines (PINK: CHAWF) last week. I flew one coming here. Maybe I made a mistake [with the investment], because it was emptier than I thought it would be.

(Q): Any thoughts why?

Rogers: One thing, you know, is that China’s made it extremely difficult to get a visa right now. In the past, it’s been hard to get a seat because Chinese airlines were so full. On this flight there were empty seats.

That brought home to me that they are cutting back enormously on visas right now. Discouraging travel, trying to clean the air, trying to protect against somebody blowing up the Forbidden City, et cetera. So the fact that planes are empty right now may be smarter than I thought.

Maybe I did get the bottom on the airlines, because if they are going to reissue the visas again, after all this, after September [after the Olympic Games have concluded], then the planes are going to fill up pretty quickly again. I would have picked the stock up at a bottom.

(Q): Yes.

Rogers: Anyway I’m still around China. I have never sold any of my Chinese companies. You know, selling China in 2008 is like selling America in 1908. Sure, let’s say the market goes down another 40% – so what! You look back over 100 years, you look back from the beauty of 1928, or even 1938 [in the depths of the Great Depression], and there is somebody who bought shares in 1908. He was still a lot better off having not sold in 1908.

P.S. After interviewing legendary investor Jim Rogers at his home in Singapore back in March, Investment Director Keith Fitz-Gerald caught up with Rogers again in July – this time in Vancouver, where both were speaking at the Agora Wealth Symposium. In Part 1 of this two-part series, Rogers talked extensively about the ill-advised bailouts of Bear Stearns, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the potentially ruinous fallout from the financial “Super Crash” that’s about to engulf the U.S. market. In this second installment, Rogers emphasizes China’s long-term profit promise – something he highlighted in his recent bestseller, “A Bull in China,” which contains detailed research on dozens of China’s top stocks. To find out how to get a report on the once-in-a-lifetime profit plays available in China – and how to also get a free copy of “A Bull in China” – please click here. Part 1 of this Money Morning interview with Jim Rogers ran yesterday (Tuesday).]

BIS Disses the Dollar

By Chuck Butler

Front and Center this morning, we have the euro climbing above 1.58, and the Aussie dollar hitting a 25-year high! The dollar is getting sold again, as the negativity toward the dollar grows strong again. We also have The Bank for International Settlement (BIS) talking about how a disorderly decline in the dollar can’t be ruled out completely, while U.S. Treasury Sec. Paulson is talking about how a strong dollar is a good thing for the U.S.

We also have conflicting stories on Commodities, as some are saying the Commodities bubble is bursting, and our old friend, and investment guru, Jim Rogers, says to; “avoid U.S. dollars at all costs, buy commodities instead.” I’ll pin my colors to Jim Rogers mast for sure on that one!

Oh… And the Black Gold, Texas T, Commodity of Oil… Has reached $143 overnight. UGH!

You should have seen the currency screens light up on Friday when: 1. the U. of Michigan Consumer Confidence report printed… We had already seen U.S. Income soar, on the tax checks that will be taxed next year (but don’t let that get in the way of a feel good story!), and the markets were feeling pretty cocky… But then the U. Of Michigan report printed and the dollar bulls quickly cowered back into their corner. The report dropped to a new low since beginning to report in 1980. And analyst that reviews this report said that; “It looks as though the U.S. Consumer is about as depressed as they could possibly be”… But I’ve got news for him… This is going to get even uglier…

And 2. The Weekly Jobless Claims rose to 380K… This report keeps inching toward that 400K per week job loss that we saw during the last recession…

With Friday being a holiday here in the U.S. (4th of July), the Jobs Jamboree will move to Thursday… The report in recent times has been quite depressing, with negative job creation the past 3 months. I fully expect job losses to print around 100K in June, marking the 4th consecutive month of job losses. I would also look for the Unemployment rate to rise to 5.6% (from 5.5%), which would be a high in a month of Sundays… The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), which as you know, I don’t hold in high regard, will have the final say on the number that the media picks up… I still say -100K…

Ty sent me a note on Friday afternoon of a story that appeared in the Telegraph (U.K.)… And instead of explaining the story, I’ll just let it speak for itself! “Barclays Capital has advised clients to batten down the hatches for a worldwide financial storm, warning that the US Federal Reserve has allowed the inflation genie out of the bottle and let its credibility fall “below zero”.

“We’re in a nasty environment,” said Tim Bond, the bank’s chief equity strategist. “There is an inflation shock underway. This is going to be very negative for financial assets. We are going into tortoise mood and are retreating into our shell. Investors will do well if they can preserve their wealth.”

Last week I told you about a similar warning from the Royal Bank of Scotland… Maybe these guys are all Pfennig readers? HA!

Anyway, with the stock market in a tailspin, the Japanese yen is back in the atmosphere… It now trades with a 105 handle… And Swiss francs have a hop in the step this morning too! And remember last week, when I said in the Pfennig (Thursday, June 26th) “Gold, which sold off big time earlier this week, is still below $900… Wink, wink…?” Well… Even since that morning, Gold has taken off! And is now trading at $934! It has not looked back at the sub $900 number since I gave you the “wink… Wink”…

The European Central Bank (ECB) meets this week (Thursday), and they just received some very bad news for anyone thinking the ECB might delay a rate hike this week… Eurozone CPI (inflation) printed this morning at double the ECB’s ceiling target of 2%… A 4% print in CPI won’t make the ECB happy, and pretty much puts the chances of a rate hike on Thursday at the equivalency of a slam dunk for Shaq! It’s a done deal folks…

And, I’ll finish coming full circle on an item I mentioned in at the top… The Bank for International Settlements (BIS), issued a report last night that really dissed the dollar… Let’s listen in… “A plunge in the currency may happen even after is remarkably orderly 14% slide against the euro in the past year. Foreign investors in the U.S. dollar assets have seen big losses measured in dollars, and still bigger ones measured in their own currency. While unlikely, indeed highly improbable for public-sector investors, a sudden rush for the exits cannot be ruled out completely.”

Remember, a few months ago when G-7 said “no mas” regarding dollar weakness? The dollar rallied for a short time afterward… But, as time goes on… The dollar slowly sold off again, and again, and again, till we’re about right back to where we were when G-7 met… I guess, as always, always, I tell you, Tutor Turtle, words mean nothing without action! Help Mr. Wizard!

Source: BIS Disses The Dollar!