This champagne-cork-popping performance obscures a few trends that should be worrisome to the celebrants. First, the S&P 500 has gained no ground whatsoever since May 8, the first trading day after the Federal Reserve triumphantly announced the results of its banking sector “stress tests.” Second, the BKX Index of financial stocks has DROPPED more than 16% since May 8. (As we have noted in prior editions of the Rude Awakening, the finance sector has been leading the overall stock market – both to the upside and downside – for the better part of four years. So the sluggish recent performance of the BKX Index is probably not a “nothing.”) Lastly, most gauges of investor sentiment – like the VIX Index of option volatilities – are flashing readings of extreme investor optimism. Typically, as contrary indicators, such readings presage a market selloff.

But even if we were oblivious to all of these “inside baseball” stock market indicators, we would find plenty of reasons to worry about the near-term prospects of the US stock market.

Yesterday’s headlines, alone, offered ample evidence that something is rotten in the state of the U.S. economy:

For starters, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency announced a troubling jump in “prime mortgage” delinquencies during the first quarter. Secondly, the S&P/Case-Shiller Index of home prices continued to slide, both year-over-year and month-over-month. (But the rate of decline is slowing which, we are told, means that the housing market is “bottoming.” Maybe yes, maybe no. We been hearing these pronouncements almost every month since the housing market peaked in 2006). Lastly, the Conference Board disclosed that consumer’s are feeling blue once again. Consumer sentiment dropped sharply from the prior month.

It’s true that much of the economic data flying across the newswires are less bad than before. But they are not good in any absolute sense of the word. Economic distress is still ascendant from coast to coast, with very few exceptions. The only other ascendant trend is self-delusion.

In yesterday’s edition of the Rude Awakening, we examined the adulation and success the “big men” in America are currently enjoying…and we postulated that the very existence of this adulation indicates that the crisis is far from over. But maybe this analysis of ours is too wacky and unscientific for most Rude readers. So let’s take a hard look at the hard lives America’s little men (and women) are enduring.

A “little man,” loosely defined, is any worker in the United States who does not appear among the “Friends” on former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson’s Facebook page. A secondary definition of “little man” would be any individual without Ben Bernanke’s cell phone number in his “Fave 5,” and/or any individual without a direct line of credit from the Federal Reserve.

“Everywhere one looks these days,” we observed in yesterday’s Rude Awakening, “the big men are looking pretty darn smart. Meanwhile, the little men are suffering like never before.”

In what Sarah Baxter of “The Sunday Times” of London calls a “Mancession,” American males are suffering a disproportionate share of financial distress. “The economic crisis is sweeping away men’s jobs at a faster rate than those of women in America,” Baxter relates, “heralding the onset of a so-called ‘mancession.’” The Wall Street Journal’s, Mark Penn, dubs the growing ranks of unemployed males, “GLBs” (Guys Left Behind), and suggests their sufferings bode ill for the future of the American economy.

Picking up on the observations of Baxter and Penn, the Financial Times remarks:

“Men have lost almost 80% of the 5.1 million jobs that have disappeared in the US since the recession started. This is a dramatic reversal of the trend over the past few years, when the rates of male and female unemployment barely differed.”

This curious statistic may contain valuable a macroeconomic insight. Specifically, men are losing jobs because America’s metal-bending industries are atrophying.

“Men have been disproportionately hurt,” the Financial Times explains, “because they dominate those industries that have been crushed: nine in every 10 construction workers are male, as are seven in every 10 manufacturing workers. These two sectors alone have lost almost 2.5 million jobs. Women, in contrast, tend to hold more cyclically stable jobs and make up 75% of the most insulated sectors of all: education and health care.”

“The widening gap between male and female joblessness means many US families are solely reliant on the income the woman brings in,” the Financial Times concludes. This widening gap also means that America’s economy is becoming dangerously reliant on service and finance industries, rather than manufacturing industries.

To be sure, a paycheck is a paycheck, no matter whether a “Ms.” or a “Mr.” is cashing it…and a pink slip is a pink slip, no matter which gender is receiving it. But that’s not the whole picture. If the service-sector “Ms.” is cashing her paycheck, while the manufacturing-sector “Mr.” is receiving his pink slip, trouble is not far behind.

This is not a male-female thing; it is a national prosperity thing. Large economies cannot live on service industries alone. And large economies do not “recover” while their manufacturing industries are contracting. So, no, the U.S. economy is NOT recovering, no matter how many folks wish it were so.

Even if we look at the recent economic data through gender-neutral spectacles, we see a picture of national distress, not national recovery. We see soaring long-term unemployment, coupled with a subsistence-level consumer spending.

America’s “headline” unemployment rate is 9.4%, which is pretty darn bad. But America’s actual unemployment rate is more like 16%, which is a horrific. The chart below tracks the combined percentages of American workers who are: 1) unemployed; 2) partially employed, but seeking full-time employment or; 3) so discouraged that they have stopped looking for work, even though they are unemployed.

The chart speaks for itself…If this is a “green shoot,” it must be a weed.

Source: Stocks Deliver Their Best Quarter in Over a Decade: So What Now?

It certainly appears as if the credit crisis is well and truly over or, at the very least, the light which most of us think we can see at the end of the tunnel is no longer that of an oncoming freight train.

No wonder equities are currently enjoying one of their best spells ever. And while equities continue to go up and up, most of us are left scratching our heads. Is this the real thing or will it go down in history as ‘just’ another bear market rally? Not so long ago, the entire financial system stared Armageddon in the face. Now, only a few months later, equity markets behave as if all the worries of yesterday have been washed away. How is that possible?

“Never in the history of the world has there been a situation so bad that the government can’t make it worse.”

-Unknown

The great bank illusion

The current bull market began in earnest in the second week of March, but what really got everyone going were the surprisingly good Q1 US bank earnings which were reported during the first half of April. Most commentators interpreted the numbers as the clearest piece of evidence yet that we are now firmly on the road to recovery.

Of course US banks made good money in Q1. The environment created for them is the equivalent of the US government reducing the cost of goods to zero for its embattled car manufacturers and then going on to buy – courtesy of the US tax payer – a couple of million cars that nobody really needs. Even Detroit would make money given those conditions!

Liquidity is trapped

The problem for the rest of us is that the banks are not sharing the candy they have been handed. Much of the liquidity created by the central banks remains trapped in the financial sector (see chart 1). Quite simply, the multiplier is not doing its job, as many banks prefer to hoard cash rather than increase lending at this juncture.

This is both good and bad news at the same time. Good because it implies that we probably do not have to worry too much about the inflationary effect of the aggressive monetary easing currently taking place; bad because it means that the economy is not going to kick back to life as quickly as everyone would like – and expect.

Meanwhile investors are growing cautiously optimistic about the GDP outlook for the second half of the year with many now forecasting modest growth – at least in the United States. Only a fool would suggest that GDP would shrink by 5-10% per quarter in perpetuity, as has been the case over the past two quarters. The economic slowdown is now decelerating and, as I pointed out last month, there are good reasons why we may see a temporary lift in economic activity later this year, but it will almost certainly prove transitory.

We are still in a bear market

The dangerous conclusion to draw from the experience of the past few weeks is that all is now well and dandy and it is time to load up on stocks again. I cannot emphasize it strongly enough: The bull market of March-April 2009 is almost certainly a bear market rally but, as one of my partners pointed out the other day, NYSE saw four 20%+ rallies between 1929 and 1932 (see chart 2). Bear market rallies can be extremely powerful and hence deceiving.

The problems are not over yet. Not by a long stretch. It will take longer than 18 months to unwind the excesses of the past 25 years. Analysts at Morgan Stanley reckon that the 15 largest banks which between them have shrunk their balance sheets by about $3,600 billion so far in this crisis, will shed another $2,000 billion in 2009¹. If you do not share my pessimism, please take a quick look at chart 3 below. The US financial sector debt load (as a % of GDP) is now 117%. In the early days of the great bull market in 1982, the same number was 22%. Households are not much better off with total household debt now at 96% of GDP vs. 47% in 1982.

Further write-offs to come

The IMF reckons that both European and US banks – but in particular the European ones – are well behind the curve in terms of recognizing their credit crunch related losses. According to the IMF, there is at least another $1,500 billion to come. So when the US banks reported surprisingly good numbers for Q1 it was certainly not because the economy had suddenly and miraculously revived itself, but because some of the oldest tricks in the book were used to gloss over much bigger problems².

As the recession bites into the lives of ordinary people, banks will face losses not only on sub-prime mortgages but on all loan products. As you can see from chart 4, sub-prime is indeed a small fraction of the total loan book for the US banking sector.

Delinquencies are on the rise

And that is precisely what is beginning to happen as illustrated in chart 5. Delinquencies are now on the rise on all mortgage products; however, whereas sub-prime started to deteriorate as early as 2007, it is only recently that delinquencies related to Alt-A and adjustable rate mortgages have taken off, and prime and jumbo loans are only now starting to suffer.

These are all temporary problems, though, however bad they may appear. By far my biggest concern at the moment is the enormity of the debt problem facing most OECD countries. In the March issue of the Absolute Return Letter I referred to an important study conducted by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff back in December of last year³ which I would like to re-visit (see chart 6).

Banking crises run and run

Reinhart and Rogoff studied every banking crisis of the past generation and made some startling observations. One in particular caught my attention. It has to do with the subsequent rise in government debt which, according to Reinhart and Rogoff, has been “… a defining characteristic of the aftermath of banking crises for over a century”. According to the authors, governments inevitably underestimate the ultimate cost of a banking crisis, because the indirect costs (such as falling tax revenue in subsequent years) end up much higher than predicted.

The IMF estimates that the cost of the current crisis to the United States will eventually reach 34% of GDP or close to $5 trillion. However, the Obama administration, through its various implicit and explicit guarantees, is already using a number close to $9 trillion⁴. And Reinhart and Rogoff’s historical average of 86% of GDP implies an ultimate cost of over $12 trillion!

The IMF is too optimistic

I have a lot of respect for all the good work being produced by the people at the IMF; however, they are sometimes too politically correct for my taste; maybe too afraid of stepping on someone’s toes. So when they go public, as they did recently, with an estimate of how much the current crisis would ultimately cost, their projection will more than likely prove hopelessly inadequate.

The true cost is important, because it has to be financed through new bond issuance, and it is my thesis that the sheer size of this tsunami will eventually overwhelm the world’s bond markets. As you can see from chart 7, using the official IMF estimates, the twelve most industrialised of the world’s G20 countries (in my book known as the Dirty Dozen) will have to issue about $10 trillion worth of new bonds to cover the cost of the current crisis.

The final cost will be enormous

However, if you (like me) believe that IMF underestimates the true cost of this crisis, Reinhart and Rogoff offer a more realistic approach (see chart 8). Using their least costly case study (Malaysia 1997) as our best case scenario, the true cost comes to $15 trillion. If one uses the average of 86% instead, the cost jumps to a whopping $33 trillion. I didn’t even bother to produce a worst case scenario – it all got too depressing!

I need to put the $33 trillion into perspective, because it is so big that it is almost incomprehensible. According to Wikipedia (see chart 9), total private wealth across the world today is about $37 trillion less the losses incurred in 2007-09, so the real number is probably closer to $30 trillion now. Total global savings (loosely adjusted for the big losses in 2008) are probably somewhere in the region of $100 trillion. In other words, financing this crisis could absorb one-third of total global savings. No wonder Gordon Brown looks tired!

Where do we find the money?

Obviously, governments may buy a portion of these bonds themselves, but they cannot afford more than a fraction of the total unless they want to challenge Mugabe as the ultimate master of illusion. Neither should investors hold out for sovereign wealth funds to do the dirty work. As is clear from chart 9, the total amount of wealth accumulated in these funds is pocket money when compared to the projected bond issuance over the next few years.

Hence it comes down to the price at which governments can attract sufficient demand from people like you and me. One of two things may happen. Either this crisis will ignite such a bout of deflation that investors will happily own government bonds yielding 2-3% or the deflation scare goes away ultimately, the global economy recovers and bond investors demand much higher yields for taking sovereign risk. I am not yet sure which scenario will prevail, but I do know that both are quite bad for equities longer term. Take your profits!

Source: The $33,000,000,000,000 Question

• Consumer credit in the United States fell by a record $11.1 billion in March after the jobless rate reached its highest level in a quarter century and banks made it harder to get loans in an effort to firm up their balance sheets.  Consumer credit fell by $2.55 trillion, almost three times more than forecast and the most since records began in 1943, according to a Federal Reserve report released yesterday (Thursday) in Washington. “When you have record job losses, you have to expect record declines in spending and economic activity in general,” Richard Yamarone, chief economist at Argus Research Corp. in New York told Bloomberg.

• General Motors Corp. (NYSE: GM) said it burned through $10.2 billion in the first quarter as it tapped into federal bailout funds to survive a sharp decline in global sales that overwhelmed its cost-cutting efforts.  Revenue dropped by almost half to $22.4 billion as the company cut production by about 900,000 vehicles and worked to run down costly inventories in the United States and Europe.  Chief Financial Officer Ray Young said there was evidence consumers were scared away from GM cars and trucks because of concern the automaker was headed for bankruptcy, Reuters reported.

• Delinquencies on commercial mortgages in the U.S. jumped to the highest levels in over 11 years in April as scarce credit made it difficult for landlords to refinance loans, Bloomberg reported, citing a report from property research firm Trepp LLC.  About 2.45% of loans are now 30 days or more behind in payments, more than five times the year-ago number said the report. “It’s about as bad as it’s ever been,” said Thomas Fink, a Trepp senior vice president. “I don’t think we’re done yet. Where it’s going to top out, I don’t know, but we’re not done.”

• Nearly two-thirds of U.S. retailers posted better- than-expected monthly sales results for a second straight month in April, giving fresh evidence that consumer spending is warming up. Most retailers reported April sales at stores open at least a year that topped Wall Street estimates and a handful said their first-quarter results, which start landing next week, will be better than expected. “Overall, you are seeing some signs of a return to discretionary purchases throughout different areas of retail,” Barclays Capital PLC (NYSE: BCS) analyst Robert Drbul told Reuters.

• The U.S. Justice Department’s proposed budget calls for adding more FBI agents to investigate mortgage fraud and white-collar crime, Attorney General Eric Holder said on Thursday. In prepared testimony to a Senate appropriations subcommittee, Holder said the proposed $26.7 billion budget includes a 3.8% increase from the previous year for combating financial fraud for fiscal 2010, Reuters reported.  Increased funding would be used for “additional federal prosecutors, civil litigators and bankruptcy attorneys to protect investors, the market, the federal government’s investment of resources in the financial crisis and the American public,” he said.

• Boeing Co. (NYSE: BA) lost a deal for 25 of its 787 Dreamliners, the biggest order cancellation yet for the plane, meaning the giant jetmaker now has lost one more contract this year than it has won.   The scrapped deal, valued at about $4.44 billion, takes Boeing’s cancellations in the first four months to 59, versus 58 purchases, according to data published today on the Chicago-based company’s Web site, Bloomberg reported. Airbus SAS (NYSE: SPR) said earlier it has 11 net orders after signing 30 agreements and losing 19. The 787 remains Boeing’s best-selling new plane ever, with 861 contracts remaining. The jet, built mostly of composites, has suffered four delays because of defects, parts shortages and redesigns and is due to fly by the end of next month before entering service in the first quarter of 2010.

Investment News Briefs Friday, May 8, 2009

Our old friend, Marc Faber, says he expects a 10% drop in the stock market before the rally resumes.

Maybe. This rally is going to end sometime. But it probably has a ways to go. There are still a lot of suckers who haven’t been drawn in.

Another old friend, Rick Ackerman, thinks the problem with this rally is capitulation…or rather, the lack of it. There’s been no capitulation, says he. And you can’t have a real bottom without it. No capitulation, no bottom.

The news from the economy is bad and getting worse.

Credit card debt has just taken its biggest plunge in 32 years…maybe ever. Credit card balances fell at a 9.7% annual rate. And the number of open credit card accounts is going down too.

What happens when people can’t pay down their loans?

“Mortgage delinquencies soar in the US,” says a Reuters article. Remember, delinquencies are the beginning of the process. Then come foreclosures and auctions – all eventually driving housing prices down further.

And when property prices fall, so does the collateral behind the banks’ and other financial institutions’ assets. So, their troubles aren’t over. The worst is still ahead of us, not behind us.

But despite the bad economic outlook, investors think the worst is past for the stock market. Markets look ahead, they say, beyond the immediate economic forecast. True, but they have an adorable habit of seeing only what they want to see.

“In January 2008, when the S&Ps were in the early stages of what was to become a devastating collapse,” explains Rick Ackerman, “domestic equity mutual funds were worth about $6.5 trillion. Lo, a little more than a year later, in February 2009, we see that the value of these funds had fallen by about 48%, to $3.4 trillion. But guess what: Over that time, net redemptions totaled only 2%, or about $100 billion! What that means, explicitly, is that mutual fund investors have stuck with this bear market throughout the decline.”

Investors didn’t give up on stocks – despite the huge decline in stock market prices. What that means is that there’s still a lot of selling to be done.

“This bear market will end,” he continues, “like every other bear market in history, with a wholesale dumping of stocks at prices that will make current values seem exorbitant in comparison.”

That’s why you use trailing stops. You want to be sure that when the selling begins your stocks get sold first – long before most investors finally capitulate.

More news on how to play this bear market from Addison and The 5:

“If you’re shorting stocks, this might be of use,” writes Addison Wiggin. “Now that the easy targets are long gone (big banks, homebuilders, AIG) and the bear market rally is in full swing, short sellers are setting their sites on some more diverse organizations.”

“Hmmm… pretty all over the board, eh?” Addison notes. “There’s a mobile tech biz, several real estate players, home healthcare, a bank and a popular chain of sandwich shops. What’s the connection?”

“Most of the stocks on this list,” answers our resident short seller Dan Amoss, “are characterized by at least one of these three facets: Shorting the stock is a current fad, the company is using ‘creative” accounting methods that traders think is fraudulent, or the company is a high risk for insolvency.

“Regardless, bulls beware… when you see short interest that high (as a % of outstanding shares), you rarely see sustainable short squeezes.”

And back to Bill with more thoughts:

It’s amazing how much credibility some people have. Seems almost infinite. No matter how bad their advice…or how little they understand…people still ask their opinions.

Or, to put it another way…it’s amazing what most people will believe.

You’d think – after $50 trillion in losses – that people would be careful whom they listened to. Who would take Alan Greenspan’s thoughts seriously, for example? Yet, the newspapers still report his remarks with a straight face.

And what about all the economists who claimed that since the “U.S. has the world’s most flexible, dynamic economy” you couldn’t go wrong buying U.S. stocks? And what about the market timers who urged investors to buy “bargains” when the Dow was only 10% below its peak? And how about the regulators – such as Tim Geithner – who completely missed the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time, taking place right under their noses? And the economists who thought derivative debt made the financial world safer by “distributing risk more widely?” And those, such as Hank Paulson, who thought the sub-prime crisis was “contained” at $100 billion in losses? (Current cost of the bailouts – $12.8 TRILLION!)

As our friend Nicholas Taleb says, it’s as if these guys had wrecked a school bus – while they were driving drunk.

But instead of putting them in jail – they’re given a new school bus to drive!

Kevin Phillips, author of Bad Money: Reckless Finance, Failed Politics, and the Global Crisis of American Capitalism warned of a the pending explosion of a 25-year “multibubble.”

The bubbles began in the 1980s, he says, when the financial sector accounted for 10 percent to 12 percent of the U.S. economy had grew to an “arguably crippling” 20 percent to 21 percent of GDP by the middle of this decade.

Who’s to blame? Henry Paulson, he says…and Ben Bernanke…and Alan Greenspan.

The Reuters report: “Phillips calls Paulson a Wall Street insider who was looking out for his own, and Bernanke an academic misguidedly trying to refight the 1930s Great Depression. Together they formed the wrong team at the wrong time whose ad hoc approach threw away hundreds of billions of dollars and more than doubled the Fed’s balance sheet, he says.

“What you’re seeing Bernanke do is he’s trying to create a bailout reflationary bubble, which he can’t describe as a bubble, just as Greenspan couldn’t describe the housing mortgage bubble as a bubble. What we’re seeing by Bernanke is a covert attempt to rebubble,” Phillips told Reuters.

Meanwhile, Nouriel Roubini – who’s been mostly right about the crisis – says that [Jim] “Cramer is a buffoon.”

“He was one of those who called six times in a row for this bear market rally to be a bull market rally and he got it wrong. And after all this mess and Jon Stewart he should just shut up because he has no shame…He’s not a credible analyst. Every time it was a bear market rally he said it was the beginning of a bull and he got it wrong.”

Roubini warned two years ago that the United States faced its worse recession in four decades. He points out that the current rally on Wall Street merely follows the pattern of other major downturns.

“Once people get the reality check than it’s going to get ugly again,” he says.

Finally, as promised in yesterday’s issue: What can we learn from Argentina?

In the ’30s, Argentina suffered along with the rest of the world. Until then, it was roughly as rich as Europe and rivaled America in some ways.

“As rich as an Argentine,” was an expression in England. Marrying one’s daughter to an Argentine planter was the dream of many down-at-the-heels English aristocrat.

But something went very wrong on the pampas. Instead of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, the Argentine’s got a raw deal from Juan Peron. Both programs were frauds. Both made things worse. But Peron’s program stuck. Americans soon came to their senses and forgot Roosevelt. Between Franklin Roosevelt and Barack Obama were Eisenhower Republicans and Carter Democrats. But Peronist politicians have dominated the Argentine political landscape since the ’40s.

Every problem demands a government solution. And every Peronist solution makes things worse.

Source: A ‘Rebubble’ Attempt

• Royal Bank of Scotland plc (ADR:RBS) said it may eliminate as many as 9,000 additional jobs to curb costs and repay $3.7 billion in government bailout money over the next three years. The bank said the actual number of losses may be “significantly lower” because of efforts to shift employees to new positions, Bloomberg reported.
• The number of delinquent mortgages rose 7% in February, with 39.8% of subprime borrowers at least 30 days behind on their mortgage payments, Dann Adams, president of U.S. Information Systems for Equifax Inc, told Reuters. “I’m trying to find optimism in these numbers, but I’m pretty hard pressed to do that,” Adams said.
• After contract negotiations stalled, Rio Tinto Group PLC (ADR:RTP) offered Asian steelmakers a 20% discount on its iron ore, well below the 40% to 50% discount Chinese steelmakers demanded, four executives close to the deal told Bloomberg. Some Chinese mills already rejected the offer from Rio, the world’s second-largest iron ore producer.
• Retailers are expected to post a 0.3% drop in same-store sales in March. Excluding Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT), that figure would be a 4.7% drop, according to Thomson Reuters data. “We don’t see any signs of significant improvement with the exception of a continued full-fledged flight to value retailers,” said Craig Johnson, president of Customer Growth Partners, a retail research firm.
• The number of Latin American companies whose ratings have negative outlooks or are under review for a downgrade has jumped to 23% from 10% in September and more than half have “high exposure to funding risk,” Moody’s Investors Service reported yesterday (Tuesday).  The region’s companies are struggling to refinance debt as the financial crisis reduces access to credit and slowing economic growth crimps earnings, according to Moody’s, Bloomberg reported.
• A survey of U.S. chief executives released yesterday (Tuesday) showed two-thirds plan additional layoffs and expect sales to decline in the next six months as their confidence in the economy continues to fall, Reuters reported. The Business Roundtable’s quarterly CEO Economic Outlook Index fell to negative 5 – the first negative reading in the survey’s six-year history – and down from a fourth-quarter reading of 16.5. A reading below 50 means CEOs expect contraction rather than growth.
• Private equity firm Colony Capital LLC is in talks with MGM Mirage (MGM) to help refinance the casino company’s debt, two people with knowledge of the discussions told Bloomberg. Colony may invest as much as $750 million in corporate debt secured by a lien on one or more of MGM Mirage’s casinos, the anonymous sources said.  An investment in CityCenter, MGM Mirage’s unfinished Las Vegas Strip project with Dubai World, is unlikely.
• Worldwide sales at Audi fell 10.7% in March from a year ago, but the German carmaker managed to increase sales in China, Reuters reported Monday. Audi, a Volkswagen AG (OTC:VLKAY) unit, sold 90,400 cars worldwide in March as sales fell 12.9% in Western Europe but rose 6.6% in China. “The trend is positive: Our monthly results have been continually improving since January,” said Peter Schwarzenbauer, the manager in charge of marketing and sales at Audi.

Source: Global Investment News Briefs Wednesday, April 8, 2009