No, this rally had another factor pushing it: our friends in the Far East. The Chinese have been quite vocal with their concern over the US dollar and have increased their official gold reserve holdings by 75% in the spring. Smart move.

In the Weekend Edition’s Highlight of the Week, Bill Bonner looks closely at where the recent rise in gold prices puts our “Trade of the Decade.” Read on…

Gold took off [Wednesday]…closing at $1020. Here at The Daily Reckoning, we’re impressed. But we’re not that impressed. Gold, of course, is half of our Trade of the Decade, which we announced almost 10 years ago. We’re bullish on the metal…have been for a very long time. But recent comments in this space have made readers wonder what the Hell is going on…so we will spend a few minutes clarifying.

First, we hope you bought gold many years ago. That would make it simpler. Then, we could say: hold! Gold is an antidote to paper. There is so much paper…and so much more apparently on the way…that the gold play seems like a winner. It’s a bet that the money system that has been around since August ‘71 is going to fall apart.

We still think that is a good bet. Our Trade of the Decade remains. Buy gold on dips; sell stocks on rallies. We’ve done well with this trade; we’ll stick with it a bit longer.

But what if you don’t own gold? The yellow stuff is now over $1,000. In fact, it looks like $1,000 could be a new support level for the metal – with most of the support coming from the Chinese. China has relatively little gold in its central bank. It must see what we see – the weakness of the dollar and of the dollar-reserve monetary system. It must worry about the value of the $2 trillion or so it has in dollars. It must also wonder how it is going to run its economy if the dollar falls apart. American buyers were its consumers of first and last resort. To whom will China sell if its most important customers’ money becomes worthless?

Recent comments by a group of Chinese officials make it clear that they are thinking of these things…and that they have decided to add more gold to their reserves. In fact, all the central banks have become net buyers. No more selling off gold reserves. That is seen as a mug’s game – which it is. Replacing gold with paper? C’mon, what were they thinking?

So China is a buyer. Trouble is, it has to be a discreet buyer. It has too much money. It could cause the price to skyrocket overnight. Then, it would be paying too much. So, perhaps it does what we do – China buys on dips! For example, the order may have gone out: buy gold whenever the price goes below $1,000.

We don’t know what their buying strategy is…but the Chinese are probably going to be big buyers over the next few years.

Should you buy along with the Chinese? Should you compete with the Chinese for each ounce of gold that comes on the market?

Good question. Unfortunately, we don’t have a good answer. So let’s try a different question: Is gold going up or down?

The answer to that is simpler: gold is going up…then down…then up again. It is going up because the feds – including the feds in China – are encouraging speculation. Then, it is going down when the next phase of the bear market reasserts itself and the speculators run for cover. Then, it is going back up…much farther and faster…when the Fed becomes desperate and finally throw caution – and dollars – to the wind. We’re confident this last stage will arrive. Our hesitation is that it will take much longer than we expect. Gold may rise in a deflation…but it soars in a period of inflation. That period could be a long way off.

The above is just an excerpt from Bill’s standout essay from this week. You can read it in its entirety here.

Well, that does it for us…enjoy the rest of your weekend,

Kate Incontrera

Source: China Gets in on the Trade of the Decade

“Of the June total,” reports the Labor Department, “1,235 mass layoffs were reported in the manufacturing sector.”

“All the indicators in the real economy,” said Bill Bonner in his final speech at the Agora Financial Investment Symposium in Vancouver, “are actually getting worse.”

And is it any surprise? What exactly does America make anymore? We have been a nation of consumers for the past decade, spending and borrowing to buy the gee-gaws and gadgets that our friends in the Far East have been so busy producing. But now, consumers are saving…they aren’t buying flat-screen televisions…or new cars…or much of anything for that matter.

And it goes without saying that since the housing bubble has popped, the one sector that was actually producing – the building of residential and commercial real estate – is failing miserably as well.

Caterpillar (NYSE:CAT) announced its results for the second quarter too. Profits were down 66%. In other words, while the banks were making money speculating with taxpayer’s money, Caterpillar was trying to make things and selling them to customers. Caterpillar not only makes things; it makes things that help other companies make things. Things with motors…big things…things that make noise and give off exhaust…things you use to dig holes and move dirt…things you need if you’re going to have a real economic recovery. Unfortunately for CAT, these things aren’t selling.

So what does this tell us? Well…it suggests that there is no real economic recovery at all. The real economy is suffering…sinking…and shutting down.

The banks are not earning their money helping Caterpillar expand. They’re making their money not because of a recovery, but because there isn’t one. In other words, they’re profiting from the financial stress of the early stages of a depression. There’s a post-crash bounce…and the government is sending a lot of money their way.

As for a real recovery – forget it. There’s no evidence of it. Unemployment is getting worse. Housing is still going down. Profits are going down. Those aren’t the things that presage a recovery…they herald a deeper, darker depression.

The depression darkens because people are not just being laid off – their jobs are disappearing. They do not get called back to work. Instead, they stay unemployed until they run out of unemployment benefits…and then the statisticians in Washington drop them off the unemployment rolls. Currently, the first batch of those people to reach the end of their benefits came this week. Last we looked, the Pennsylvania legislature was passing a law so they could continue drawing benefits for a few weeks more.

Unemployment, trade, defaults, foreclosures, bankruptcies, prices, manufacturing…you name it and you have to go back to the end of WWII to find similar numbers. Of course, at the end of the war, the wartime economy shut down. Millions of people who have been in uniform…or making tanks and airplanes…were suddenly out of work. Economists thought the economy would go right back into the Great Depression. Instead, it boomed.

But what was normal for so many years is not normal any more. Now, consumers are paying off debt faster than any time since 1952. The government, however, is making up for them. Goldman may no longer be able to push more credit onto the public; but it can push one heckuva lot of debt onto the public sector. Wall Street firms helped households ruin themselves in the Bubble of 2003-2007. Now they’re doing the same for the government, helping the feds raise money on a scale never seen before in human history.

The above is just an excerpt from Bill’s standout essay from this week. You can read it in its entirety here.

Bill also made the final speech at the AF Investment Symposium on Friday. “I’d like to start by thanking all the DR readers here,” he said to the audience, “you have my sympathies. You have to read 1,500 pages a year – and in ten years it’s been 15,000 pages.”

That’s right. The Daily Reckoning recently celebrated a birthday – our little publication turned 10 this month. We celebrated by “roasting” Bill at an intimate gathering at the Pan Pacific Hotel in Vancouver this past Wednesday night.

Addison Wiggin, started working on the DR in the early days of the Internet Age…when they weren’t quite sure how this ‘daily e-mail’ thing would work – but they knew it was something they had to try. Addison fondly recalled that in those days, he and Bill shared a tiny desk in an office in Paris, and every time Bill got up from the desk, he would knock the power cord out of Addison’s computer, erasing all the work he had done that day.

But the DR has come quite a ways since then. We have figured out the ins and outs of Internet publishing (for the most part) and we now have five international versions. Sometimes we are right, and sometimes our forecasts and musings are wrong…but that won’t keep us from publishing these daily reckonings. We hope you enjoy them.

Here’s to ten more years,

Kate Incontrera

Source: The Real Economy is Getting Worse

Also happening today: President Obama is set to speak on the economy this morning, and Helicopter Ben is delivering a speech on “Four Questions about the Financial Crisis” this afternoon.

Hmmm…he should have called our emergency hotline we have set up for Treasury Secretaries and Fedheads. We could have helped him out with some of the answers to those questions…

CNNMoney.com reports that in the prepared remarks for his speech, Bernanke said, “Recently we have seen tentative signs that the sharp decline in economic activity may be slowing.”

The ‘signs’ he is referring to include recent upticks in home sales and new home constructions, as well as improvements in consumer spending, especially new vehicles.

“A leveling out of economic activity is the first step toward recovery,” said Big Ben. “To be sure, we will not have a sustainable recovery without a stabilization of our financial system and credit markets.”

Bernanke may have wanted to wait until the retail numbers were released before preparing those remarks. Nearly every expert that has been surveyed on this topic believed that U.S. retail sales, which count for half of consumer spending, rose in March, mainly due to the auto industry incentives that began last month.

However, it turns out that retail numbers pulled a fast one – and showed a drop in sales for last month.

Two months of gains has boosted hopes that March’s numbers would follow suit, building a rebound in consumer spending.

But, not so much. The Commerce Department showed that March’s retail sales were down for almost every type of store except necessities, such as food and drugs.

MarketWatch reports: “Retail sales in the first quarter were down 1.2%, compared with the fourth quarter of last year, raising the possibility that real consumer spending may have fallen again for the first three months of 2009 after plunging at a 4% annual rate in the final six months of 2008.

“Economist David Rosenberg of (NYSE:BAC) Bank of America’s Merrill Lynch said he expected consumer spending to decline at a 3.7% annual pace in the April through June quarter.”

“The retail sales figures indicated incentives and promotions by car dealers and clothing stores such as Gap Inc. failed to draw customers hurt by a lack of credit and the highest jobless rate in 25 years.”

In other words…outlook not so good for the economy. Americans have clearly been spooked by the high jobless rate. It seems that everyone knows someone who has been laid off, or had hours cut back…and the possibility of it happening to you becomes very real. So you cut back. You make dinner instead of going out…make do with last year’s summer clothes instead of going on a shopping spree. You want to make sure you have cash in the coffer…just in case.

This behavior begins to add up, as these numbers show. It makes you wonder: is it possible we are witnessing the taming of the American consumer? We’ll have to wait and see.

Now, we turn to Addison, with a report on what news has investors in a tizzy:

“The U.S. stock market dodged another bullet yesterday,” writes Addison in today’s issue of The 5 Min. Forecast. “Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) announced late in the day that it had pulled off a $1.8 billion profit in the first quarter.

“That’s $3.39 a share, more than twice as much as the market had anticipated.

“Investors are now wildly confident that Goldman Sachs will be one of the best performing financials of 2009.

“The Dow managed to end the day with less than a percent loss. The S&P 500 and NASDAQ both pulled off small gains.

“Curious how the markets work, though, isn’t it?

“In reality, Goldman benefited from a quirk in its new reporting schedule. ‘Its fourth quarter ended in November 2008,’ reports the Financial Times, ‘but after converting to a bank holding company last year, Goldman adopted a calendar-year earnings period starting in 2009. As a result, the company did not have to include December in its first quarter earnings, a month in which it sustained $1.3bn in pre-tax losses.’

“So Goldman actually made $0.5 billion in the first quarter. But who really cares? The investment bank is up 54% year to date!

“And since their stock is so ‘strong,’ Goldman bigwigs confirmed that they would move forward with a $5 billion secondary stock offering… the proceeds of which will be used to pay back TARP loans. Work it.

“Oh boy, ‘buyer beware,’ warns our short side specialist Dan Amoss. ‘The most responsibly managed banks should survive this downturn because cash flow from good loans should roughly offset the losses from souring loans.’

“‘Regulators will probably grant forbearance, meaning that they’ll look the other way while they allow bank capital levels to get dangerously low in 2009 and 2010. But just because many banks will avoid FDIC receivership doesn’t mean the stocks will be good investments.’”

And back to Kate, reporting from a blustery Baltimore:

“I hear that the government’s turn around on tax returns are up this year, which gets money back in the hands of consumers at a faster pace than previous years,” writes our good buddy Chuck Butler in today’s issue of The Daily Pfennig. “And we all know what happens when consumers get money in their hands: they spend it!”

Very true…but will the American consumer have anywhere left to spend their tax return?

A new report shows that strip malls, neighborhood centers and regional malls are losing stores at the fastest clip in over ten years. In addition, consumers are keeping a tighter grip on their wallets, causing retailers to trim down on the amount of merchandise available in the store, in order to stay afloat.

The report, done by New York-based real estate research firm Reis, shows that “In just the first quarter of 2009, retail tenants at these neighborhood centers have vacated 8.7 million square feet of commercial space. This number exceeds the 8.6 million square feet of retail space that was vacated in all of 2008.”

The report goes on to show that “vacancy rates at malls rose 9.5% in the first quarter, outpacing the 8.9% vacancy rate registered in all of 2008, marking the largest single-quarter jump in vacancies since Reis began publishing quarterly figures in 1999.

Are we still surprised at the disappointing March retail figures?

Now back to Goldman Sachs, which managed a major bounce back from its worst quarter since it became a public company in 1999.

Reporting their results a day early, Goldman said yesterday that it earned $1.8 billion, or $3.39 a share, for the quarter ending March 31.

But as Addison pointed out, above, Goldman did benefit from a ‘quirk’ in their new reporting schedule.

“Leave it to the clever boys at Goldman Sachs to turn dross into gold,” says our friend Barry Ritholtz in a post on his blog, The Big Picture today.

“The bulk of their profits had come from AIG transfer payments – the AIG 100% payouts funded via bailout monies that saw Goldie as one of the largest recipients. Floyd Norris notes that most of the AIG effect was in December. ‘For the first quarter, the total A.I.G. effect on earnings was, in round numbers, zero.’”

Wondering how this is possible? Well…that’s where the beneficial ‘quirk’ comes into play…

From the NYT:

“Goldman’s 2008 fiscal year ended Nov. 30. This year the company is switching to a calendar year. The leaves December as an orphan month, one that will be largely ignored. In Goldman’s news release, and in most of the news reports, the quarter ended March 31 is compared to the quarter last year that ending in February.

“The orphan month featured – surprise – lots of write-offs. The pre-tax loss was $1.3 billion, and the after-tax loss was $780 million.

“Would the firm have had a profit if it stuck to its old calendar, and had to include December and exclude March?”

“Truly astounding,” writes Barry, “the word Chutzpah simply does not do it justice.”

Source: U.S. Retail Figures Pull a Fast One

This from Money Morning:

Although still seen as the world’s economic superpower, the United States has found itself with a myriad of problems: Skyrocketing federal debt, growing annual budget deficits, an almost nonexistent personal savings rate, and the dubious honor of being the country with the largest current account deficit, of which trade makes up the largest part.

A trade deficit occurs when you are importing more than you are exporting — in other words, you are consuming more than you are producing. So the next time you are at Wal–Mart (NYSE:WMT) or Target (NYSE:TGT), take a look around. Just about everything you can purchase there comes from another country.

Economists are generally split over what the economic impact of a trade deficit is on a country. Those who defend running a trade deficit argue that when the United States sends money to another country for its goods or services, that country will take that money and invest it back into the United States, in one way or another. In economist Milton Friedman’s opinion, having a large trade deficit meant that your country’s currency is desirable. He believed that a trade deficit simply meant that consumers had an opportunity to purchase and enjoy more goods at lower prices; on the flip side, a trade surplus implied that a country was exporting goods its own citizens did not get to consume or enjoy, while paying high prices for the goods they actually received.

However, as those on the other side of the argument point out, countries with large and long-term trade imbalances also maintain a low national savings rate. Conversely, those countries with trade surpluses (such as Germany, Canada, and Japan) have a high national savings rate. Those arguing against trade deficits believe that gross domestic product (GDP) and employment will be pulled down by a large trade deficit over the long run. As goods flow into the United States from other countries, the country is losing opportunities to produce these goods domestically, which subsequently has an adverse effect on U.S. jobs.

Somewhere in the middle of these two sides is the world’s richest man, Warren Buffett. Buffett believes that, on a whole, trade is a good thing for America, but that over the long term, running “large-and-persistent” trade imbalances will be problematic for the United States.

Buffett realizes the importance of having the average American understand big economic issues, like the trade deficit. As a result, he wrote an article in 2003 for Fortune magazine, called “Squanderville vs. Thriftville.” This parable of sorts was designed to simplify for the readers the problems inherent in trade imbalances.

“Economics tends to put people to sleep,” Buffett told us when we sat down with him in his office at Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK.A, BRK.B), where he is CEO and largest shareholder. “And I thought by creating a couple islands with inhabitants of quite widely different activities that it might get across a point that otherwise they get lost on.”

In Buffett’s story, he outlined two side-by-side islands: Thriftville and Squanderville. On these islands, land is the capital asset, and these primitive people only need food and produce only food. At first, the citizens of both islands work eight hours a day and produce enough to sustain themselves. However, as time passes, the Thrifts realize that if they work harder and put in longer hours, they can produce a surplus of goods and then trade what they produce with the Squanders. The people of Squanderville like the idea of working less — and all the Thrifts want in exchange for these goods are “Squanderbonds,” which are denominated in “Squanderbucks.”

As time goes on, these Squanderbonds begin to pile up and it is clear that the Squanders will have to put in double time to eat and pay off their growing debt. “Meanwhile,” writes Buffett, “the citizens of Thriftville begin to get nervous.

Just how good, they ask, are the IOUs of a shiftless island? So the Thrifts change strategy: Though they continue to hold some bonds, they sell most of them to Squanderville residents for Squanderbucks and use the proceeds to buy Squanderville land. And eventually the Thrifts own all of Squanderville.”

“At that point, the Squanders are forced to deal with an ugly equation: They must now not only return to working eight hours a day in order to eat — they have nothing left to trade — but they must also work additional hours to service their debt and pay Thriftville rent on the land that they so imprudently sold. In effect, Squanderville has been colonized by purchase rather than conquest.”

In a nutshell: Buffett’s story illustrates that any short-term actions have long-term consequences that sometimes people don’t think about in the short run. This is true of the United States.

“Our country’s ‘net worth’,” Buffett writes in the introduction of his Fortune article, “is now being transferred abroad at an alarming rate. A perpetuation of this transfer will lead to major trouble.” And it may be more than just economic trouble. History shows that countries with similar trade and debt problems are fertile ground for political movements we’re not accustomed to in a democratic society.

In 2007, the total U.S. trade deficit was $738.6 billion, which was down 9% from 2006. Much of the decline could be attributed to a decline in the value of the U.S. dollar. The popular argument suggests that a lower dollar makes production of goods in the United States cheaper and therefore more attractive to buyers of U.S. goods overseas. Exports would go up. And in fact they are, each year.

Some would argue that the dollar is being kept weak to help close the trade gap.

“If I could finance all my own consumption today by handing out something called Warren Bucks or Warren IOUs and I had the power to determine the value of those IOUs over time, believe me, I would make sure that when I repaid them 10 or 20 years from now that they were worth less, per unit, than they are today. So any country that piles up external debt will have a great temptation to inflate over time, and that means that our currency, relative to other major currencies, is likely to depreciate over time.”

And this is just what the United States is doing. From November 2002 through August 2008, the dollar has fallen more than 50% against the euro. Some experts will argue that a weaker dollar benefits the United States — at least where the trade deficit is concerned.

What is not pointed out in this argument is that a falling dollar – paired with low domestic productivity – means that the country is consuming more than it produces. In that sense, since the dollar is losing purchasing power, Americans are paying more for these imports, and the rise in these import costs erases any sort of benefits the country would have seen because of a falling dollar. In other words, America is getting fewer goods for the same amount of money — but that isn’t slowing down the rate of American consumption.

“In the past six or eight years,” Buffett explains, “the United States has started consuming considerably more then it produces. It’s relied on the labor of others to provide things that are used every day. Because the country is so rich, this can continue for a long time, and on a large scale — but not forever.”

Buffett likens it to a credit card. “My credit’s pretty good at the moment,” he says, which usually draws snickers from the audience. “If I quit working and have no income coming in but keep spending, I can first sell off my assets and then, after that, I can start borrowing on my credit card. And if I’ve got a good reputation, I can do that for quite a while. But at some point, I max out. At that point, I have to start producing a whole lot more than I consume in order to clean up my debts.”

The trade deficit aside, Buffett doesn’t believe that the economic situation in the United States is as dire as many of the other experts with whom we’ve spoken have made it out to be. While he warns to not “bet against America,” because he believes that we have a healthy overall economy, what does keep the Oracle of Omaha up at night is the imbalance between imports and exports.

“The rest of the world is buying more and more of our goods all the time, but at an even greater rate, we’re buying more and more of theirs. More trade, overall, is good — as long as it’s true trade. If it’s ‘pseudo trade,’ where we’re buying but not selling, I do not think that’s good over time.”

This is why the U.S. trade deficit remains high. The United States is consuming more than it is producing. The country’s dependence on foreign oil, automotive parts, and cheap consumer products from China accounts for almost the entire deficit.

[Editor’s Note: The following essay was adapted from the book, “I.O.U.S.A.: One Nation. Under Stress. In Debt,”a companion offering to the critically acclaimed documentary “I.O.U.S.A.”]

Source: A Trip Down the Road to Squanderville

This from The Daily Reckoning:

The Labor Department reported today that the United States lost more jobs than forecast for August and that the unemployment rate rose to a five year high. The data also indicated that home builders, financial firms and the service industry has trimmed down their payrolls – a clear sign that the effects of the housing slump and subsequent credit crisis are being felt.

“We’re losing jobs in all kinds of industries now,” Roger Kaubarych, chief U.S. economist at UniCredit Global Research in New York, said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio. “This is the clearest recessionary signal we’ve seen.”

The rest of the world is getting the signal as well…markets across the globe are sinking. Apparently, they still had some hope in a speedy U.S. recovery, but no such luck.

Last Friday marked the 10th U.S. bank failure of 2008, as regulators took over Integrity Bank (ah, the irony). How anyone believed the U.S. was on the road to recovery is beyond us.

Bill Gross of Pimco didn’t do much to squash these global fears as he made a plea for further government intervention (i.e., releasing more cash). “This rarely observed systematic debt liquidation is what confronts the U.S. and perhaps even the global financial system at the current time,” Gross wrote on Pimco’s website. “Unchecked, it can turn a campfire into a forest fire, and a mild asset bear market into a destructive financial tsunami.”

Still not convinced that the strong second quarter growth was nothing more than a mirage? Here’s something that may change your mind: A report released by the Mortgage Bankers Association today shows that a record 1.249 million homes were in foreclosure during the second quarter. In addition, from the end of March to June 30, 2.9 million homeowners were delinquent on their mortgage payments – up 25% from the same time period last year.

Our friends at Strategic Investment warn that there is an even bigger property bust on the horizon – in commercial property.

The bust could be worse for banks, stocks and the U.S. economy as a whole than the current residential debacle…an almost unbelievable notion. Bloomberg says that the United States could see the worst drop in commercial property since the 2001 recession and Morgan Stanley is calling for a 15% drop over the next two years.

Source: Making a Bad Situation Badder

Inflation started to spiral out of control in Zimbabwe after the the government of Robert Mugabe began nationalizing farms in 2000.

Bill Bonner says that, although we look at the likes of Zimbabwe with incredulity in the US, we are heading down a similar route with the nationalization of mortgage giants Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddy Mac (FRE). So much for the biggest ‘free market’ in the world…

In the United States,  we look at countries like Zimbabwe and shake our heads in disbelief. It seems almost like slapstick comedy to us.

As Milton Friedman once said, “If you let the government run the Sahara Desert, soon there will be a shortage of sand.” And in the U.S., we have Fannie and Freddie, who represent a huge nationalisation event in the United States.

This is a remarkable thing for the supposedly most ‘free market’ country in the world. Nationalising their biggest industry, the mortgage industry. Johnson was trying to pretty up the nation’s account, so he took Fannie and turned it into a private business.

Bill is currently attending an investment conference in Vancouver where he told 1,000 attendees:

Nationalisation is a great milestone in our economic lives. Adjusted for the price of gasoline, no one has made money in stocks for 40 years. When you adjust American wages for inflation, you’ll see that they’ve gone nowhere for the past 40 years, either. No one has been getting rich. How is this possible? You have to ask this to find out what’s going on, where it leads and what we’ll do about it.

We take for granted that economics matter. We have only been thinking of this for the last 25 years. This idea of capitalism brought to us in the 80s was fatally flawed. People got the idea that to be rich you need a free market and free trade. But really, you don’t get rich because of those things – those are just the circumstances that allow you to get rich… if you do the right thing. If you do the wrong thing, it will allow you to go broke. You can’t get rich on consumption, as Dr. Richebächer used to say. You need capital formation. Save your money and invest it in productive enterprises.

Source: Millions of Zimbabweans Face Starvation due to Nationalisation caused by Hyperinflation

It should, says Kate Incontrera in The Daily Reckoning.

Because the housing bill approved by Congress yesterday will cost taxpayers $25 billion in fiscal years 2009 and 2010, according to the Congressional Budget Office. And it could wind up costing up to $100 billion in the long term.

The bill is also a major threat to privacy, according to Desidooru Saloon’s Dave Gonigam… 

The big news this morning is that President Bush has dropped his threat of a veto for the housing bill that will bail both Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) out, and also offer relief to homeowners that have gotten in over their heads and now run the risk of foreclosure.

CNNMoney.com reports that the legislation would allow the Federal Housing Agency to insure up to “$300 billion in new 30-year fixed rate mortgages for at-risk borrowers in owner-occupied homes if their lenders agree to write-down their loan balances to 90% of the current appraised value of their homes…The cost of the FHA program – which would begin on October 1 and be in place for just a few years – would be funded by fees from Fannie and Freddie.”

And of course, since Fannie and Freddie are seriously ill-equipped to offer up those kinds of funds at the present moment, the bill would allow the Treasury broad powers that would provide the mortgage giants with liquidity and a “capital background” – basically an unlimited line of credit.

It is generally understood that this will leave U.S. taxpayers with a gigantic bill to pay – in fact, yesterday the Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost of the “rescue” at $25 billion, and said there is a chance that it could end up costing the U.S. government $100 billion in the long term.

Source: Fannie and Freddie Say Goodbye to Veto

The efforts to turn Canada’s tar sands and Colorado’s oil shale into energy are really just efforts to speed up what would happen naturally over time. But we don’t have time. So we throw excess energy at the problem, trying to cook shale in situ or use huge quantities of natural gas to increase oil production via the tar sands. We don’t have much excess energy, either.

Both processes use tremendous amounts of energy for a small net energy yield (energy returned on energy invested, or EROEI). Yet free solar income rains down on the planet each day. The sun is eight-minute energy! We simply don’t have an industrial system built to run off the modest amounts of energy we can convert from sunlight. We need a new system or a way to convert a higher percentage of sunlight into usable energy.

It’s not the sort of thing you design on your kitchen table. It’s the sort of thing that evolves out of necessity and experimentation. Its evolution obeys the same basic laws that govern the evolution of species… variation, mutation, adaptation. Australia has a wide variety of clever and well-managed companies working on different aspects of the problem.

But in the big picture, we think human beings are pretty good at adapting when they have to. The alternative is non-survival, which also goes by the name of death. True, civilisations seem to go through a life cycle of their own. And perhaps this oil-based one is past its prime. People are quarrelsome and stupid. We may not adapt our way out of this problem before it overwhelms us. But it would be unnatural not to try.

Source: A Hank and a Hurricane Affect the Oil Price

In particular, the slide of twin mortgage giants Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) is spooking foreign investors. This is because one in ten US mortgages are essentially held by foreign institutions and governments.

Foreign investors looked on securities in Fannie and Freddie as just as good as US government securities, says Kate Incontrera. So to keep foreign investors in the country Congress has little choice but to back the US Treasury’s Fannie and Freddie bailout plan…

The dark twins of the mortgage market have foreign investors nervously chewing their fingernails, as one out of 10 American mortgages are, in essence, owned by institutions and governments in other countries.

The Treasury Department reports that as of June of last year, China holds $376 billion in securities issued by Fannie and Freddie, and Japan holds another $228 billion.

While these securities aren’t guaranteed by the US government, the New York Times reports, “the housing giants… have attracted overseas investors with a simple pitch: the securities they issue are just as good as the United States government’s, and they usually pay better.”

Unfortunately, the United States now looks like a giant, international credit risk. And although the idea of Congress issuing a “blank check” to bail the mortgage giants out is worrisome to most, in order to keep the foreign investors the U.S. so heavily relies on (somewhat) confident in the country, Congress really has no other choice. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson said on “Face the Nation” yesterday that he was “very optimistic that we’re going to get what we need from Congress. Congress understands how important these institutions are.”

Source: Cracks in the Monetary Facade