The Room : Bailout

The Room – 04/03/2009

David Galland — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:00:00 GMT

Dear Readers,

In the March 6, 2009 edition of this missive/blog/column/whatever you want to call it, I listed three "Desperate Measures" the U.S. government might turn to next in its futile attempt to rearrange the ruined economy into something more resembling a perfect world.

Suspend "mark to market" rules. At the time of my initial write-up (which you can read here), highly placed sources within the financial services industry that I spoke to were of the opinion that no significant changes would be made, for the simple reason that to do otherwise would risk destroying what little credibility was left for the financial sector.

As you now know, the government has strong-armed the FASB into modifying the rules, essentially allowing companies to "mark to model." Which simply means that the same financial wizards who helped create the models so pivotal to causing the mess in the first place are now free to dust those models off, give them a little tweak, and use them to fabricate more attractive values for the toxic waste than the market was willing to assign. Some might term these rule changes outrageous, fraud even... I call it business as usual.
Bad bank. The government has moved forward with this initiative as well, essentially rigging up a system that literally guarantees that a very small handful of firms -- likely just four or five -- will receive the sweetheart deal of the century, at the same time that the U.S. taxpayer gets the short end of the stick… right up the side of the head.
Fed buys long-term Treasuries. This, too, has now come to pass and is likely to accelerate. While there are many ways that one could describe this latest initiative, I find it best to keep these things simple... it's called inflation.

Maybe next week, I'll try to come up with some new candidates for desperate measures, but for now I would like to turn my attention to the much-anticipated and widely watched G20 meeting that has just wrapped up in London.

I imagine, because it is such a headliner event, many of you expect me to wax with some vitriol about it, but I fear I must let you down.

Sure, it bothers me that our president traveled to the event with an entourage of 500, including secret service agents, paper carriers, and other lucky sycophants -- all of whom were put up in grand style at taxpayer expense. (By way of comparison, my Portugal-based correspondent General Watson reminded me that when Maggie Thatcher was prime minister, for state visits, she used to travel commercial with a small group of aides. Often times, the other passengers were unaware she was even on the plane. )

This sort of excess is somewhat ironic and maybe even a little hypocritical, given Mr. Obama's derogatory comments about companies flying executives to corporate meetings in places such as Las Vegas, a topic I briefly touched upon last week.

I cannot begin to imagine what sort of costs are involved in transporting all those people -- along with three presidential helicopters and any number of stretch armored limousines -- to Europe, then keeping them in clover for a week... but I suspect it would be more than enough to keep the occupants of a moderately sized city in some third-world country in food for a decade or so.

G20 Meeting, Who Cares?

While I often don't succeed, I try to focus these weekly comments on matters that are actually of some importance -- on a broader scale, and to me personally. With that filter in place, the G20 meeting barely registers a blip.

Sure, there were a lot of fine-sounding speeches by politicians, but since when are those worth the paper they are written on? And yes, they managed to agree in principle to give over $1 trillion to the IMF – a topic I’ll have more to say about in a minute. In addition, they promised to collectively put the shoulder to the wheel in an effort to create a massive, new, global regulatory regime.

Run for cover? Hardly.

On the radio yesterday, I heard an African intellectual bemoaning the fact that the G20, by its numerically limited scope, excluded the representatives -- and therefore bypassed the inputs and opinions -- of over 180 other, lesser nations whose names did not make it onto the invite list.

Now, let me ask you, when it comes to implementing the high-sounding pronouncements that emanated from the G20 meeting, what are the odds that this collection of talk-a-crats will actually be able to come together to the extent required to create a functioning bureaucracy that delivers on its promises at any time in, say, the next 1,000 years?

Which makes the laments of the above-mentioned African intellectual all that more laughable. Can you imagine political junket-goers from 200 countries getting together and accomplishing anything other than drinking the hotel bar dry?

For the source of my skepticism, look no further than the United Nations.

(One thing I do find mildly amusing at gatherings such as the G20 is a circus of professional protesters who flail their thin arms at the rather better-equipped, truncheon-wielding security forces. The source of my humor is that the vast majority of these individuals are there to encourage the representatives of the world's governments -- the very same governments whose names should appropriately be entered into the blank following the question "Who is most responsible for the mess the world is in?" -- to further expand and extend their powers. Memo to protesters: the solution to bad government is not more government.)

The IMF

It seems somewhat ironic that the IMF, which was founded in 1944 as part of the Bretton Woods arrangement, should now be viewed as a possible source of the world's salvation.

In the way of history, its original purpose was to "promote international monetary cooperation," specifically by attempting to maintain fixed exchange rates for the world's many currencies. The idea was that the IMF would step in whenever a country suffered from a temporary deficit in its balance of payments. To help the country avoid having to debase its currency to meet its external obligations, the IMF will provide a short-term loan. These loans came with "strings" attached, in the form of various demands for monetary reform following the Keynesian principles favored by the functionaries of the organization.

According to a briefing paper prepared by the CATO organization for Congress (which they'll never read anyway)...

Read the complete paper here

In addition to spawning a coterie of kleptocrats around the world, the IMF has also failed miserably in its role of managing the global monetary system, witnessed by the persistent inflation the world has suffered since its founding.

(As for the fixed rate system it was supposed to be managing, that came to a sudden halt when the U.S. government closed the window on gold convertibility, a central tenet of the same Bretton Woods agreement that birthed the IMF.)
So what function does the IMF currently serve? Shedding light on that topic is Ken Ewert, writing in The Freemen...

Why then, the widespread support for the IMF? The reason is more straightforward than many of us would like to believe. When governments speak of the need for "increased economic coordination," what they mean is that governments around the world want to better synchronize their inflationary monetary policies. Inflation is politically expedient for every government in our age. It temporarily stimulates economic activity and in so doing buys considerable political favor. Only later when the unpleasant effects appear -- rising prices, economic dis-coordination, consumed capital, and unemployment -- does the inflation become a political liability. The illusive goal pursued by governments around the world is to reap the political benefits of inflation without paying its subsequent costs.
Even so, perhaps out of sheer frustration or even spite, the Chinese, Russians, and any number of other nations are now openly discussing the idea that the IMF should be given both the resources and the responsibilities to create a new international monetary regime that would serve to demote the U.S. dollar to just another currency, albeit a still very important one.

Ed. Note

The G20 moves the world a step closer to a global currency

Read it here.

Many observers assume the Chinese are bluffing when they raise the topic of pushing the U.S. dollar aside as the world's reserve currency... or that these comments were otherwise cooked up in a Beijing political meeting to give the Obama administration pause in its headlong rush to debase of the U.S. dollar.

Those assumptions could prove wrong -- the Chinese may be sincere in their calls for a new monetary regime. I say that after reading a paper written by Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of the People's Bank of China, titled "Reform International Monetary System. ”

I highly recommend that you at least give the article a quick scan, because it shows that Zhou has a clear understanding of the various monetary systems and a clear preference for currency that is "anchored to a stable benchmark and issued according to a clear set of rules." He goes on to take a direct shot at the world’s fiat monetary system, saying, correctly, "The acceptance of credit-based national currencies as a major international reserve currencies, as is the case in the current system, is a rare special case in history."

Read his essay by clicking the link here.

As per above, I am completely confident that despite China's wishes, the world's leading governments won't be able to get out of their own way long enough to produce a new monetary system -- let alone one that is based on something other than political hot air. That leaves the door open for a single country to decide to break the mould by backing its currency with gold or some other basket of tangibles. That, of course, we shall watch for with some anticipation.

Before leaving this subject, I thought I'd share the contents of a message that our own Bud Conrad sent across this morning on the topic of China and the beefed-up IMF Special Drawing Rights...

The IMF's Gold

Those among you who find gold to be an attractive asset, which I suspect is most, are well aware that this week the IMF announced that it was likely to sell off 400 or so tons of gold in order to continue supporting the borrowing habits of its regular clientele.

While these special sales have been threatened in the past, this time around it looks like it might actually happen. While the idea of the sale might spook the gold markets for a bit, the actual event is likely to have little if any lasting effect… other than continuing to hollow out the IMF.

That's because the odds are very high that the gold will never actually make it onto the market, but instead will trade hands in an off-market transaction between the IMF and the Chinese or some other nation looking for the earliest opportunity to trade its much abused paper dollars for something of tangible value.

At this writing, of China's $2 trillion in reserves, only about 1% is held in gold. There has been credible talk of them boosting that percentage to as much as 10%.

At $900 per ounce, the math looks something like this…

At 32,000 ounces per ton, 400 tons equals 12,800,000 ounces. Multiplied by $900, we arrive at a total value of the intended IMF sale of $11.5 billion.

Ready to be deployed against that amount is as much as another 9% of China's $2 trillion reserves -- which adds up to $180 billion. And that's just China. Of course, there are any number of other countries sitting on piles of U.S. dollars and viewing the outlook for those dollars in fairly negative terms.

So, sure, the notion of a big IMF gold sale might spook the gold market a bit… but in the final analysis, it will amount to less than a hill of beans.

The Closing Door

Speaking selfishly, a human trait I won't apologize for, the headlong rush of global governments to debase their currencies might be viewed as something of a positive. That's because, being aware of it, we can take steps to arrange our investments in such a way that we should be able to profit from it.

Unfortunately, the currency debasement is only one of many actions we can anticipate that governments will take going forward. Because as they set about destroying their currencies, they’ll simultaneously be looking to raise revenue elsewhere -- specifically by squeezing the productive segments of society out of whatever money they can. But of course, until they actually put up The Wall, most people of means, in most countries, are still free to pick up their bags and move to climes where their capital is better treated.

Understanding that, one of the major initiatives that came out of the G20 soirée just ended was a rededication by the world's bureaucrats to tighten the vise on any country deemed to be overly capital-friendly. Doug Casey, who has long anticipated these developments, has warned that time is running short for U.S. citizens in particular to diversify globally.

Specifically, the gang of 20 announced they were going to use a list just published by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to aggressively go after "tax havens." Regrettably, that list includes names such as Costa Rica and Uruguay, places that we know many of our subscribers have an interest in.

The implications of these moves on personal freedom are not to be sniffed at. While the G20 countries may lack the organizational skills to create a functional new monetary system or widespread regulatory regime, it is a fairly easy matter to apply financial pressures on “errant” countries. They have a lot of experience in that regard. And so, to quote the G20 communiqué on the subject, "We stand ready to deploy sanctions to protect our public finances and financial systems. The era of banking secrecy is over."

Few nations can stand up to the pressure of global sanctions, and so many if not most of those nations are likely to roll over. The only way to stave off this latest assault on the free flow of money would be if there were an eruption of a widespread public outcry, complete with rampaging mobs and a liberal throwing of rocks. But as you and I both know, that’s not going to happen.

Some of you may think that I am making much ado about nothing, but I believe it's important to view these sorts of developments not based upon the world as it now is… but rather as it could be.

That exercise is usually helped by taking a quick glimpse in the rearview mirror. And, looking back over history, you can find any number of examples where despots have taken control of governments and engaged in the wholesale confiscation of private property, either overtly or through determined inflation.

Up to this point in time, with some limitations, a person could always take some comfort in the idea that -- should push come to shove -- they will be able to escape to another jurisdiction with enough wealth to start over again.

In the brave new world we are headed for, that simply may not be possible.

As something of an experiment, I recently walked into a bank in Uruguay and asked for the papers required to open an account (one, I can assure you, that I would have fully disclosed), but was told in an apologetic tone by the bank manager that they would not accept accounts from Americans.

The door is closing, the noose tightening.

Letters from You

David again... as JK's email confirms, while there has been a huge pick-up in the interest in gold compared to even a couple of years ago, we are nowhere near the mania phase. In fact, if you step back and look at the situation dispassionately, you’ll note that gold has remained strong not because of but in spite of the current economic environment. An environment that includes, of late, a clear deflationary trend pretty much across the board in the commodity sector.

All of which is to say that once the environment for gold begins to change for the better and the consequences of today’s inflation begin to be widely felt, then and only then will gold really begin to move. In the interim, we can expect gold to fluctuate, which – for those of us who are comfortable getting positioned now, ahead of the crowd – simply means additional buying opportunities.

Miscellany

I'm sure the orphan will thank them later. It’s good to know that the poor orphans are safe from the horror of being adopted by zillionaire rock stars. Thanks in no small part to human rights groups, led by the Human Rights Consultative Committee, a coalition of 85 groups that apparently have nothing else to do with their time and their donors’ money, the Malawian government turned down Madonna’s request to adopt a second orphan from that country. Why should they oppose this adoption? Easy, it was out of heartfelt concern that the impoverished orphan might enjoy a better life than they. (Click here for more)
Kick them when they're down. This item also got my attention this week... “March 31 (Bloomberg) -- A Senate panel approved new restrictions on credit-card interest rates that are broader than those adopted by the Federal Reserve in December, brushing aside objections from Republicans and the banking industry.

“…The bill, known as the ‘credit card bill of rights,’ also would require the signature of a parent for a borrower under age 21, unless there’s proof of independent income or completion of a financial education course.”

So, let me get this straight. First the government bails out the banks, then promptly handcuffs them in their ability to price for the elevated risk of credit card loan losses, assuring that the money provided them will soon get flushed down a rat hole. Or, more likely, they’ll just stop offering credit. But wait -- isn’t that the very problem the government is trying to fix?

Now, I'm no fan of many of the practices of credit card companies, but I'm even less of a fan of the government establishing what is essentially price controls on the credit industry, with an added dose of nanny state thrown in via the requirement that adults – and anyone over the age of 18 is certainly an adult – must first take a course in finance prior to being allowed to get a credit card.

Do I think that adults will benefit from taking courses in finance? Of course. Do I think that they should be forced to it? Absolutely not. What's next, mandatory courses in parenting before being allowed to have a child?
Soup lines. Many commentators have observed that all that the current financial crisis is missing now is the sight of soup lines around the blocks of our cities. Actually, there's a reason these haven’t yet appeared. Namely that, thanks to the innovation of food stamps, the inconvenience of a soup line is no longer necessary. And at this point, according to a report just released by the Agriculture Department, fully 10% of Americans are now relying on food stamps for some portion of their daily bread. That is roughly 32,000,000 people – a very long line, indeed.

And on that unhappy note, I must sign off. As I do, a quick glance at the screens tells me that the S&P 500 is flat, taking a breather after the strong gains of last couple days. Given the onslaught of continued bad news, including the latest, poor unemployment numbers, the stock market should be in a freefall at this point.

And it probably would be if it hadn’t been buoyed up by the change in the "mark to market" rules that will soon usher in a new era of obfuscation and outright deceit. Those changes will also serve to extend the current downturn, for the simple reason that they postpone the value discovery process that ultimately must occur in order for some semblance of confidence to return to investment markets.

In the history books, I suspect that the best they'll be able to say about these rule changes will be "it seemed like a good idea at the time."

Meanwhile, I note that gold is below the $900 level for the first time in a while. I'd be very surprised to see a drop to below $850 anytime soon, and maybe never. If it were to happen, however, I’d be just one of many on the phone to the bullion dealer.

Until next week, thank you for reading and for subscribing to a Casey Research publication.

Sincerely,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research

The Room – 03/27/2009

David Galland — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:31:00 GMT

Dear Reader,

The Las Vegas taxi driver was an old fifty-something, with a mullet hanging out of the back of his battered baseball cap and a potato sack gut hanging over his belt. Having driven a cab myself, long ago and far away, I habitually engage in cabbie chat, as I did now.

“So, how’s biz?”

“Horrible. Thanks to Obama, my family’s going to starve!”

“Really?” I asked incredulously, surprised by both the topic and the heat of his response. “How come?”

“Thanks to him trash talkin’ Vegas, we’ve had 110,000 room cancellations. Once the March Madness basketball tournament is over, this place is going to go back to being a ghost town, just like it was last week, and the week before that. My family’s going to starve thanks to Obama!”

“But they’re not actually going to starve, are they?”

“Yeah they are, I’m telling you. Starve, plain and simple. I ain’t making any money as it is, and once town empties out again, I’m going to go broke and my family is going to starve!”

“Wow,” I said, “so, what are you going to do? Move away?”

“Nah,” he said with no hesitation, explaining, “I like it here too much.”

With a quick and puzzled glance at the neon-illuminated cement wasteland through which the cab was speeding, I had a hard time imagining what attraction the place might have.

“What is it about this place you like so much?” So much, apparently, that he was willing to let his family starve in order to stay.

“Well,” he said in an almost professorial tone, “first, I get to see a lot of naked women. Second, I get a lot of ‘freebies’,” he said lustfully, sending a shudder down my spine. Call it rural naivety, but while I can understand that a working girl has to work, I had a hard time getting around the idea that she had to “work” with him. And for what, a free cab ride?

“Finally,” he concluded, “I like the weather. That’s about it.”

As I couldn’t think of anything else to say – at least not without risking offense -- to a man who was apparently comfortable with the idea of letting his family starve so he could continue to ogle, and apparently fondle, the women of this fair-weathered Sodom & Gomorrah, I turned my attention back to the surroundings.

And what surroundings they are. Lavish. Spectacular. Ridiculous. Some day in the future, perhaps 500 years from now, the gilded ruins of this testimony to humankind’s penchant for excess will be picked over and cataloged by archeologists for the benefit of primary school education.

Then again, with the way things are going, it could be just 50 years. I say that because City Centre, the world’s largest construction project, continues to be built on autopilot, even though it’s only about half finished. And this is just one of a number of other hotels and condo towers in a similar circumstance; started in a more optimistic time, but now merely adding to the unsold inventories that have made Las Vegas the epicenter of the real estate meltdown.

The place is in real trouble. Maybe the degenerated taxi driver will hang on, family be damned, but I suspect that an exodus from the place is inevitable. And can a cluster of mysterious large-construction project fires be far behind? (As an aside, if you own any insurance company stocks… run, don’t walk, to the selling window. It’s not just that certain doomed construction projects are likely to become fire hazards, but that insurance companies notoriously invest their capital in real estate and bonds, both of which are dead ducks, or soon will be.)

I am glad I saw Las Vegas when it was still at its prime. Soon, I suspect, it will be something akin to an urban war zone. As for Obama, the next time he gets an urge to take in a show, he might want to give the place a pass.

A Quick Musical Interlude, Then Something Different

I am going to try something different for the rest of this week’s missive, but before I get to that, I want to share a bit of music many of you may recall. But first, a little backgrounder.

A subscriber and new friend, the talented musical producer and film maker, Sadia Sadia, attended our Las Vegas summit and gave me as a gift a copy of Rick Wakeman’s autobiography, “Grumpy Old Rock Star.”

Those who recognize the name will remember Wakeman as the talented organist for the mega-band “Yes”… as well as the composer/performer for a huge body of solo work, including his much-acclaimed Journey to the Centre of the Earth.

While I wouldn’t count myself as a rock groupie and so Wakeman’s name evoked little in the way of recollection, I began to casually peruse his book, which is really just a collection of stories from his wild career, and got sucked right in. It was a big surprise… interesting, well written, and very, very funny.

As is the way with these things, reading the book reignited my interest in his music, and so I quickly stumbled back upon Roundabout by Yes, a forgotten favorite and one of the band’s best-known tunes. You can listen to it here.

(In the video, the guy dressed up in the glittery cape is Wakeman -- as gifted and as hard-living a rock star as has ever graced the stage -- so hard living, in fact, that he had two heart attacks at the age of 25.)

Now, as for the rest of this edition, I’m going to try to tell a story, but using snippets from other sources with, perhaps, a side comment thrown in now and again.

I am taking this approach because, frankly, since hopping on the plane to Las Vegas last week, the sheer volume of proposed new regulations, legislation, and plain idiocy have outstripped my processing abilities. It seems that every hour or two over the past week, there has been a breaking story that has me saying out loud, “What, are you kidding?” Or, “Wow… we’re really in trouble now!”

It came to me as I started writing to you this morning, that these many stories – rather than just random spatters of inanity – together form a distinct pattern. And the pattern seems to point to a new paradigm now materializing here in the U.S. and, by extension, the world.

As I think the following stories demonstrate, the new paradigm is not one any thinking person will embrace.

Eat the Rich

"Prudent investments in education, clean energy, health care and infrastructure were sacrificed for huge tax cuts for the wealthy and well-connected. In the face of these trade-offs, Washington has ignored the squeeze on middle-class families that is making it harder for them to get ahead. There's nothing wrong with making money, but there is something wrong when we allow the playing field to be tilted so far in the favor of so few." (A New Era of Responsibility: Renewing America's Promise. The President's Budget and Fiscal Preview)

One finds many charts in a federal budget, most attributed to such deep mines of data as the Census Bureau or the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The one on page 11 is attributed to "Piketty and Saez."

. . . Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, French economists, are rock stars of the intellectual left. Their specialty is "earnings inequality" and "wealth concentration."

Messrs. Piketty and Saez have produced the most politically potent squiggle along an axis since Arthur Laffer drew his famous curve on a napkin in the mid-1970s. Laffer's was an economic argument for lowering tax rates for everyone. Piketty-Saez is a moral argument for raising taxes on the rich.

. . . Turn to page five of Mr. Obama's federal budget, and one may read these commentaries on the top 1% datum: "While middle-class families have been playing by the rules, living up to their responsibilities as neighbors and citizens, those at the commanding heights of our economy have not."

"Prudent investments in education, clean energy, health care and infrastructure were sacrificed for huge tax cuts for the wealthy and well-connected."

"There's nothing wrong with making money, but there is something wrong when we allow the playing field to be tilted so far in the favor of so few. . . It's a legacy of irresponsibility, and it is our duty to change it."

(The Obama Rosetta Stone, by Daniel Henninger, from the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal.Com)

Supporters of Capitalism Are Crazy, Says Harvard

everyone knows

that

(

From

Mises Daily

by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. )

Obama's Latest No-Banker-Left-Behind Scheme

(From CounterCurrents.Org)

What’s Not to Support?

David again. With a deal that has the taxpayer lending the boys club 85.7 cents on the dollar, and assuming all risk should the loans failed to be paid back, who wouldn’t provide “support” to Mr. Obama? But at what cost? Well, at better than one trillion more dollars, if things go off the rails – as they almost certainly will. How do you spell dollar? D-O-O-M-E-D.

By the by, click the following link for an exceptionally well done graphic representation of just how much money a trillion dollars is. Call the family around and give it a click (then pass it on)… http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html

New York Tax Rise on Higher Earners Hinted as Budget Gap Rises

Not So Fast

Remember Wen?

March 23 (Washington Post)

***

March 25 (Bloomberg)

***

March 25 (Bloomberg)

Timothy Geithner

Zhou Xiaochuan

Barack Obama

David again. If these people are the smartest folks in the room, I wonder who’s cooling their heels in the hallway.

We’re from the Government and We’re Here to Help

9:02 p.m.

(Alec MacGillis on the Washington Blogging site commenting on Obama’s online Town Hall meeting)

***

Barack Obama

Paul Volcker

Peter Orszag

David here. But surely Volcker, that old cohort of President Reagan and champion of fiscal conservatism, won’t recommend punishing overseas investment or raising taxes by another $300 billion?

Sadly, you are laboring under a misconception (you’re not alone).

(Real Clear Markets, The Paul Volcker Myth, Feb 2008)

***

(“Paul Volcker Blasts Idea of Permanently Repealing Estate Tax,” Wall Street Journal, January 2003)

***

EPA Greenhouse Gas Declaration May Pressure Congress

General Motors Corp.

American Electric Power Co

David Bookbinder

…

David again. Don’t you love the “Congress can do it all in one shot” comment. And, yes they can. Even mentioning this sort of legislation in the face of all that now challenges the economy is near criminal. Especially in that it is almost certain to chase away the remaining companies that still endeavor to engage in manufacturing in the U.S..

Radio Worth Listening To. Do yourself a favor and find a comfortable seat and click here to listen to this audio interview of Lord Monckton from the G. Gordon Liddy Show. Monckton is one of the most well-informed – and entertaining – commentators on the topic of anthropogenic global warming on the planet.

“Hold the fort,” I can hear some of you saying. Liddy is a hard-core dogmatic. Hardly a balanced perspective. And you are right. While I have met Liddy on several occasions and enjoyed his company, a reading of his book Will indicates that he is far more than dogmatic. Insane is more like it.

But he does a competent job as an interviewer, and Monckton does a brilliant job as an interviewee. You have to sit through some oddish music in the beginning, but it’s worth taking a listen – no matter where you come down on the issue of man’s contribution to global warming.

Worth Watching… Closely

David, still here. In the following article from the Wall Street Journal, I have boldfaced the relevant words. Words have consequences, and the consequences of these words indicate we may be on the path to another ginned-up “conflict” of the “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” sort. It could also be an early step toward gun control, a topic that many Americans pay close attention to (and, based on history, for good reason).

Here’s the article – as you read it, see if your mind begins to evoke, as mine did, visions of the author running around waving his or her arms at the new and impending “crisis!”…

address the crisis

the full Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, also will offer the highest level of attention from Congress on the issue thus far

extra $100 million

targeting the guns and money from inside the U.S

The government is girding for a possible Katrina-style disaster along the 2,000-mile-long Mexican border

Obama Announces Plans for More Funding for Afghan War

(Washington Post)

***

The End of Summer(s)?

The Innovator's Dilemma

(Adrianna Huffington writing in The Huffington Post)

David here. Don’t you love the “our remarkable president” bit of sycophancy? It reminds me of a conversation I had at the Las Vegas summit with a friend of some duration – an interesting and intelligent individual. It started when she told me she had been a big supporter of Obama’s, but now she wasn’t so sure. The conversation went something like this…

“Why were you such a big supporter?” I asked.

“You know, because he was for change,” she replied.

“Sure, but what does that actually mean? What change?”

“Oh, you know, change from the way Bush was handling things,” she said with a certain uncertainty in her voice.

“So, your vote for Obama was really just a vote against Bush’s policies?” I asked, thinking that wasn’t altogether a bad reason.

“Well, no, I don’t think so,” she answered. “There is something else. You see my father was black and my mother was white, like Obama, so I felt a connection.”

“Fair enough,” I commented, “But was that it? I mean, wasn’t there some particular philosophical point that rallied you behind Obama?”

“Well, er, I’m not sure. But I sure am worried about him now.”

I have always found it remarkable how many otherwise reflective people have a hard time expressing why they support one candidate and dislike another… often viscerally. It is, I believe, strong testament to the ability of the campaign team, and the media, to paint a picture that resonates with the target audience… a picture that, while attractive, more often than not completely lacks a tangible foundation.

Americans may not be very good at manufacturing “stuff” these days, but we are whizzes at selling stuff through multi-channel media campaigns, including fine-talking politicians.

As for Summers, I have previously mentioned that Olivier Garret and I heard Summers at a White House conference last year. When it came time for him to speak, he gave a very lucid and even passionate argument for making Bush’s tax rollbacks permanent (for the not irrational reason that to let them expire will amount to one of the largest tax increases in history, an increase that the economy can ill afford at any time, but especially now).

While I don’t have a full grip on Summer’s broader philosophical and academic views of the economy, I took it as encouraging that he was brought onto Team Obama, though from what I have heard since, it seems like he has grooved right in with the statist views now dominating in Washington. But maybe not, and so, per Huffington, expect him to be an early casualty.

“Fusion Centers” Expand Criteria to Identify Militia Members

(FOX News, 3/23/09)

David again. Be afraid… be very, very afraid.

Glimmers of Hope

Gordon Gets a Thrashing

(“General Watson,” friend and occasional Casey Research European correspondent).

David again. Here’s the video… and it is definitely a “must see” -- if you haven’t yet done so, and most of you probably will have, given the amount it is being emailed around. Click here to watch.

Given the amount of play this video has received, there is hope that the media will look to boost their ratings by finding other champions of fiscal sanity and providing them a soap box. Could happen. Probably won’t.

AIG, I Quit!

David again. Another item that has made the rounds this week is the letter of resignation from an AIG employee.

There is so much to the “evil bonus takers” story that the media, falling back on Ye Olde Witche Hunt as a circulation booster, has ignored, either deliberately or just because they are stupid.

The now famous AIG resignation letter sheds some much needed light, so read it if you haven’t.

Meanwhile, the net result of all of this grandstanding and outright thuggery (for a definition of the word, look up Andrew Cuomo in the dictionary) is that the top executives from AIG and other leading financial institutions are handing in their bonuses with one hand while signing new employment agreements with firms overseas that, as part of those new agreements, are agreeing to replace those bonuses as recruitment incentives.

Even without the enticement, who would possibly want to work for AIG these days?

And so, the American taxpayer, who is already into AIG for $200 billion, has just assured that the asset “we” have paid so dearly for is little other than a gutted shell run by second-rate people. Oh, and those second-raters will be forced to deal with trillions in remaining derivative contracts. It will be akin to asking monkeys to repair jet engines.

Of course, as the next wave of planes begin to fall from the sky, the government will again rush in… with your money.

In any event, the “Glimmers of Hope” part is that the soon-to-be-former AIG employee’s letter may, just may, help cool down the mob psychology that bordered on violence last week.

A Politician I Can Support

(Press TV, March 25)

Some Concluding Thoughts

David again. Remarkably, I could go on, but I fear I have tried your patience enough for one day. So, what are we to make of all these stories?

First, the Obama administration is clearly statist. And they apparently have set their sights on taxing the productive elements of society to the fullest possible measure. As I have noted in the past, however, businesses don’t pay taxes – rather, they just pass the taxes on to their consumers (or they go out of business). And so every time you see a new business tax, cover your wallet.

While the higher net worth individuals will, for a time, accept higher and higher tax burdens, unlike the proverbial frog in a pot of water that is slowly approaching boil, those with the assets to move will – when the temperature reaches uncomfortable – hop out of the pot and head to friendlier grounds.

Recognizing this truth, the Obama administration is already working on exchange controls. That is clear in the Obama campaign promise to use tax policy to punish companies that ship jobs overseas, a promise he is now putting into effect ala Volcker. Once those particular bricks are laid, adding on a few more layers in order to also wall in the individual is a snap.

Now, some of you – many perhaps – arrive at this point in time as supporters of Obama, and so bristle at my remarks. Just as do those of you who favor the views of the strident opposition from the “right,” unhappy at my quick jibe at Bush’s policies.

It behooves me, as the managing director of a company that makes its payroll by offering solace and substance to its subscriber base, to caper and scrape to our clientele. You, to be specific.

To the extent that I offend, I apologize. But only because that is not my intent, no matter the tone of voice I might use in these weekly musings. Rather, I sit here, like you, an observer of the world around us, and I try to make sense of things. Last week, I expressed outrage at the scramble to foist our current problems onto the backs of our progeny. Today, the pattern that is visible in the collection of articles here tells me things are moving quickly beyond the matters related only to the economy. And so, looking over the landscape, I am touched by an entirely different emotion… one of deep concern for the very nature of our society.

What does all this have to do with investing, some of you will angrily write?

That, of everything, has a simple answer: with a clear, albeit disturbing pattern now emerging, so, too, are the personal opportunities to protect yourself and to profit. Gold, silver, foreign investments, contrarian stock market opportunities, strategically structured futures and options strategies to take advantage of volatility – all those and more.

These are, of course, topics we cover in great detail in The Casey Report and our other publications. And to a lesser degree, these weekly ramblings.

Regrettably, because of my duties related to getting the next edition of The Casey Report out by this time next week, I need to leave it at that, despite my promise last week to share some of the highlights from our just concluded Crisis & Opportunity Summit in Las Vegas.

I will endeavor to do so next week. I just felt the material I covered here was more important, and hope you concur.

Miscellany…

Tokyo Phyle. One of our subscribers in Tokyo is looking to start a phyle. If you’d like to meet up with other Casey subscribers in that city, drop Kristen a note at phyle@caseyresearch.com.

You Are the Best! A quick note to say, as I have before, how wonderful it was to spend time with so many of you at the Las Vegas summit. After the event ended, virtually every speaker I talked to told me that the audience was the finest, most intelligent, and impressive they had ever come across. I couldn’t agree more.

Finally, because it’s sort of funny, I wanted to close by updating the story of my quick short on the S&P, using Scottrade. As you may recall, I used words to the effect that one of the advantages of an online trading account is how quickly you can short the market (in that case, using RSW, a 2X inverse S&P ETF). At one point during the day that I was writing that issue of The Room, I was up about $800 and was going to close my position with the quick profit, but got distracted by my son asking me to check out something he was doing on a video game. By the time I remembered my short, the market was closed. Long story short (excuse the pun), that gap in attention has, so far, cost me about $15,000.

I am, however, unconcerned. There is so much bad egg now baked into the cake that the rally of late simply can’t be sustained, and today appears to be wobbling. And so I will hold my inverse ETF shares and even add to them on any further rallies. I’ll let you know how it worked out when I finally close out the position.

In the meantime, I hope you gain some benefit from my experience. Namely, because something is easy – i.e., popping into an online trading account to make a quick trade – it also makes it more likely you will take the action, based on little more than impulse and a quick flush of emotion.

On that note, I will share with you Terry Coxon’s dictate. Which goes something like this, “The next time you spot a really, really exciting investment opportunity, one that you absolutely have to act on immediately, the first thing you should do is to look around for a comfortable chair, sit down in it, and take a few deep and relaxing breaths.”

Always good advice.

And with that, I sign off, thanking you for reading and for being a subscriber to a Casey Research publication. We work only for you, and it is a pleasure to do so.

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room - 10/10/2008

David Galland — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:27:07 GMT

October 10, 2008

Dear, Dear Reader,

In last week's edition of this meandering missive, I mused as follows...

"What, I wonder, will the government do when next week, or the week after maybe, the U.S. stock market takes another header for 500 points? Stay tuned. Meanwhile, gold is at $826, down considerably over the past week.

Like when a tsunami sucks the water away from the shore just before hitting, we're in a transition period. I'm not worried about where gold is going next. I wish I could say the same about the world."

According to the number crunchers, the U.S. stock market is on track to have its worst week since 1937. Which, as you can see from the DJIA chart here, is an acceleration of the broader trend that has held sway for some time now.

While we can't yet say what action the U.S. Government will take next, glancing over the horizon, we see a growing number of countries implementing a euphemistically named "market holiday." In Iceland, all banks and markets are now enjoying a day off. And Kevin Brekke, our Switzerland-based researcher, just wrote that there is a rising call to halt trading in Germany. It would not surprise me in the slightest if the same were to occur in the U.S.

As has previously been noted, we are wandering through deep woods, with little in the way of a map to guide us. And so we must rely on what few signs we can discern. And one of those signs is that, literally, all of the "solutions" to the problem now being pushed forward by governments around the globe have to do with trying to re-generate an expansion of credit through the liberal application of a thick layer of monetary grease. In other words, trying to solve the problem with more of the same.

It's like trying to sober up a prostrate drunk by pouring Vodka down his throat as a restorative.

To the extent that these exertions fail, government is forced to fall back on the coercive powers they have taken unto themselves over the decades... slap down the short traders, clamp shut the markets, or... or... we just can't say. But in our mind's eyes, we can hear the motto of our century, "Whatever it takes," bubbling from the blubbery lips of officialdom around the world.

Playing their part, the MMM (Mass Media for the Mindless) intone that the smart move for investors to make now is to play for the big bounce, a drumbeat that was heard especially loud as the week of October 5 opened for business.

This notion that sunny skies are surely just ahead was being championed, of course, by all of the king's men and most of the punditry. It is as if the words "The worst is now behind us" are etched on the inside of their lungs.

And so they urged the investing public to jump back onboard the Rebound Express... maybe even with the use of leverage, just to be sure to squeeze all of the juice possible out the rally that surely cometh.

On Monday and again on Tuesday, I received several emails from readers inquiring for my opinion on that very same theme, often accompanied by articles from this sage or that about the pending rally.

My response to one such inquiry is as follows...

It is this.

Everyone operates from within the framework of their experience. The author's experience is that when his phone begins ringing, it's a bottom. Or when the candlestick chart shows that X level is below Y, then a bounce is due.

He is likely right in one sense... that no market goes in one direction consistently, without pullbacks and bounces.

But what if this time things are, in actual fact, different?

Oh no! Not that old saying.

Well, consider that America has historic (as in, never happened before) levels of trade deficits, government deficits, record levels of personal indebtedness, the largest housing bubble ever – a housing bubble that qualifies as the largest financial bubble in history (by a wide margin), record number of dollars in the hands of foreigners, etc.

So, before we broke through all those negative records, one could have said, yeah, but for those things to happen, things would have to be different... and they were.

Both Doug Casey and Bud Conrad are on record saying that the entire global financial system – a system built on the house of cards of a fiat currency – may be about to fall. That the holders of trillions of dollars in misallocated capital and derivatives anchored to that capital may be about to learn just what the underlying value of a fiat currency actually is, and demand something else.

Look at the stock chart of the Great Depression and you won't see it moving in a straight line... there are bounces along the way... but if you had bought ahead of most of those bounces, it would have been a financial disaster.

All of which is a long way of saying, the author you quote may be right... but I would play the bounce only with money I could afford to lose.

Gold at these prices should be a good monetary medium to transfer wealth to calmer waters... that, and not as a speculative investment, is its best and highest purpose just now. And it is a hell of a lot safer than pretty much any mainstream security (by virtue of the fact that credit markets are frozen... which makes it kinda hard to buy raw materials, meet payrolls, build inventories, buy capital equipment, etc.)

Unless and until the credit markets are working again, caution is the word.

Prior to this week, perhaps, the concept that the world we live in might not be quite so predictable and well organized – you know, that stocks fall, then quickly recover, allowing you to close shop and head down to your preferred martini bar for a $15 libation -- had not made it through the well-coifed craniums of the young and the restless that now dominate the world of finance.

An email from our Jake Weber, the Chicago-based editor of our very useful (and free!) new e-letter, Casey's Charts, shed a passing glimpse on the cost associated with misunderstanding the nature of what's going on just now...

My friend, who's a day trader here in Chicago, said that he lost $100k for the company in 10 seconds, and had he waited 10 more seconds, it would have been $300k. It's a different game...

Now, multiply that experience by the tens of thousands, handling tens of millions, and you can begin to get a sense about the hard dose of reality that has been meted out to the optimistic this week.

It is said that a picture can tell a thousand words (or, these days, given inflation, is it a hundred thousand?), and so I would share the accompanying photo from the Financial Times. One can't say with certainty, but I suspect the look on the young gentleman's face is not enthusiasm but panic.

No $15 martini today, though a bottle of cheap gin in a darkened room might be called for.

Go Gold

As I don't need to tell you -- or at least those of you who have been with us for any length of time – the core fixative in our prescription for the immunization of portfolios large and small from the dark age now descending on global financial markets is a healthy dose of bright and shiny gold.

I hope you didn't drag your feet in laying in supplies, because it is now all but impossible to find physical gold... pretty much in any form (other than expensive rarities), anywhere.

Personally, I've never seen anything like it. Even in the gold bull market scramble of the late 1970s, you still could still walk into pretty much any gold shop and pick up an ounce or two (with a short wait in line, at worst).

Likewise, I couldn't have imagined we'd see such a disconnect between the paper price of gold – which, while comforting, seems restrained to us – in light of the physical shortages and all that those shortages imply.

Shedding some light on that topic, Sally Limantour, the editor of our soon-to-be-launched trading service, forwarded the following excerpt from recent writings by Bill Fleckenstein, one of the few money managers with the foresight to see what was about to unfold...

Lust for Gold Dust

If that's the case, it could cause a mad scramble at the COMEX, because there's not enough gold to meet the open interest. It looks like physical gold, as compared to paper gold, is rapidly becoming the flavor of the day -- meaning that a huge price move may lie just in front of us.

And, if that thesis is correct, when more folks start understanding it, there might not be enough gold around to satisfy demand at anywhere near current prices -- and their attention will turn to the place where they can find gold, namely the gold miners, whose job it is to "make" more. (With the price of energy dropping as world GDP slows, the profit potential for the gold miners is liable to be the best it has been in many years.) So, I think the stage may be set for a dramatic move in gold stocks.

This, of course, is a thesis we subscribe to in our BIG GOLD letter, which is dedicated to following the fortunes of the large market capitalization producers – as well as the various ways you can buy and hold the monetary metal (in the next edition, the BIG GOLD team looks for – and finds – physical gold available for purchase. Learn more.)

The bottom line is that if you are in gold and -- we continue to believe, gold stocks and other assets connected to gold – hold on tight because as interesting as things have been so far, the next three or four acts promise to bring down the curtain.

A Quick Conrad Commentary

Our Casey Research chief economist, the always-working Bud Conrad, shot me the following note and chart in an email yesterday. While his words are succinct, they do a good job of summarizing the situation as it now stands.

Taken together, the dollar is overvalued and stocks are still not reflecting the multi-year recession that, I expect, will bring much lower earnings than the current estimates that keep the CNBC rubes saying stocks are undervalued.

Until I hear something different from the government, other than pouring more gasoline on the fire, I don't expect this crisis to even begin to be solved. At this point, I don't think they have even determined what the problem is, namely too much debt and its deleveraging.

They are working on the wrong problem with the wrong solutions.

Meanwhile, the chart here provides a glimpse at where those solutions are taking the U.S. economy. Not a pretty picture. Gold remains the only safe harbor.

Snippets

The following items arrived this week from Mr. Watson, my longtime friend and correspondent in Portugal.

Running Out of Digits

To which I reply by sharing the message off a bumper sticker I saw earlier this week, "If you aren't angry, you aren't paying attention!"

Iceland on Ice. British local governments, it is now revealed, may have as much as 1 billion pounds parked in Iceland banks, banks with an AA rating. They all parked funds there on the recommendation of John Prescott, Tony Blair's deputy prime minister! The Iceland government wanted to seize control of the three bankrupt banks but discovered that there was no law on the books allowing them to do this. So they used the anti-terrorism laws to seize the banks' assets. Look out, America. Meanwhile, the Iceland president just had a heart attack and was rushed to hospital for heart surgery. I wonder if there is a cause-and-effect relationship at work?

David again, on the topic of Iceland, the following excerpt came out of an article that just came across the wires from an English news source...

Financial crisis: Gordon Brown to sue Iceland over near £1bn of frozen bank deposits

Gordon Brown has described the behaviour of the Icelandic government following the bank collapses as "totally unacceptable", adding that the Government was considering legal action.

The Prime Minister is furious that 300,000 bank customers are blocked from accessing deposits in online bank Icesave.

There are also concerns that councils and police authorities might not be able to retrieve nearly £900m of taxpayers' money which is stranded in Icelandic bank accounts.

Mr. Brown told a press conference: "We are taking legal action against the Icelandic authorities. We are showing by our action that we stand by people who save."

Alistair Darling, Chancellor of the Exchequer, added: "The Icelandic government, believe it or not, have told me yesterday they have no intention of honouring their obligations here."

In sandbox lingo, those comments would be equivalent to, "If you don't give me back my ball, I'm going to tell my mother!" Regardless, one government giving raspberries to another is not exactly the sort of big love international cooperation everyone is cooing about lately.

The Really BIG Bubble

As I wrote in the September 1 edition of The Casey Report, which focused on housing and how much longer the meltdown in that important sector might last, the global housing bubble at $30 trillion ranks as the biggest financial bubble in history.

It is, in fact, an amount roughly equivalent to the GNP of the entire world.

But my contention that it was the biggest bubble ever was an error. The Really BIG Bubble is in global derivatives, as shown here in this snapshot from the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. As you can see on the lower right-hand side of the really big bubble, the Credit Default Swaps alone come to over $54 trillion... and they are now coming unglued.

While we cannot know how the game will end, the simple fact that the pieces involved are this big is a lot more than a little concerning. I sincerely hope the best case will appear in a fresh suit and pressed tie and announce that all is well. For the time being, however, preparing for the worst case seems appropriate.

What to Watch Now

We expect this crisis to unfold in stages. So far, we have seen the real estate bubble beginning to deflate (and it has a long ways to go, increasingly involving commercial real estate, a play we are already profiting from in The Casey Report), a freeze-up in credit, the emergence of violent market volatility... and now a global stock market meltdown (dare we say "crash"?).

Next up will be widespread bank failures, corporate bankruptcies, soaring unemployment, increasingly draconian government interventions, all of which will end in a massive inflation. How's that for a string of happy thoughts?

Unfortunately, we'll have a lot of time to discuss those various developments in the weeks, months, and even years ahead.

For now, however, the key measure to watch is the London Interbank Lending Rate, or LIBOR, as it is referred to in the trades.

As you may already be aware -- being a whole lot more astute than most people in such matters -- LIBOR is the rate at which banks are willing to lend money between themselves. In addition to being viewed as a measure of trust and normalcy in the global financial system – and on that measure, an upward-spiking LIBOR is the equivalent of a flashing red light these days – it is also used as a feature in financial contracts worldwide.

For example, if you have secured a loan to build your factory or a line of credit to finance the stream of materials you need to manufacture your goods, the underlying terms of your agreement almost invariably use LIBOR, plus some percentage, to express the interest rate you'll pay on the loan.

LIBOR is so widely used in this manner that it is estimated to be linked to over $370 trillion worth of financial contracts. Thus, when LIBOR spikes by 1.44% to 5.38%, as it did earlier this week (it has since settled in around 4.82%... for the moment), the financial consequences to already struggling businesses are huge.

To get the full picture, you have to understand that, pre-crisis, LIBOR was ticking along at about one-half of a percent. So, in raw numbers, multiply a 4.3% increase in LIBOR across $370 trillion worth of contracts and you come up with a financial punch in the gut of almost $16 trillion.

Businesses will fail. Industries will grind to a halt.

Watch LIBOR. Unless and until those rates come down, you can forget about that whole "Happy days are here again" thing. (And, when LIBOR does eventually come down, we'll still be in the deep, dark woods... just in another quadrant of the woods.)

Vive Le Difference!

The McCain/Palin team, correctly in my view, hurls bricks at Obama/Biden for looking to the government to fix all that ails.

Set the free market free, I cheered, pumping my arm enthusiastically in the air with a loud whoop or two thrown in for effect.

But then I came across the following, and my arm dropped across my forehead in an swoon of bitter despair.

"And it's my proposal, it's not Senator Obama's proposal, it's not President Bush's proposal," McCain said. His campaign estimates it would cost about $300 billion, some of which could be diverted from an existing $700 billion rescue package.

Democrat, Republican... two sides of a statist coin if you ask me.

But wait, just when my despair was about to turn to cynicism, I came across this other item from Bloomberg... they caught the culprit behind the financial crisis!

His name, in case you hadn't heard, is Kenneth Rickel. And better yet, he's from Beverly Hills! Rich and greedy, just as we suspected. Bring out the duct tape and truncheons, I say!

From Bloomberg's report on the miscreant behind the crime of the century...

Just what kind of short seller is our man Rickel? Not a naked short seller, like the kind Cox normally vilifies. And while the SEC may have called his civil violations "illegal," it didn't accuse him of fraud.

According to the SEC's complaint, Rickel covered short sales on 14 companies with shares he bought through their public stock offerings. If he'd covered his bets with stock he bought on the open market, he would've been OK under the rules. In a short sale, an investor sells borrowed shares, hoping to buy them back at a lower price and pocket the difference as profit. (Naked shorts sell shares without borrowing them first.)

And what was the totality of Rickel's ill-gotten gains? $207,291. For shame, Mr. Rickel, for shame! (You can read the whole story here:)

Kind of reminds me of Barney Frank's blaming the housing collapse on the free market (see last week's edition). On that topic, someone -- and I am sorry to say I don't recollect, but thanks to whomever you are -- sent along the following.

Which brings me to my song of the week, a classic and very appropriate to today's situation. It's Ship of Fools by World Party. You can listen to it here.

And, Now for Something Entirely Different...

I'm tired of writing about doom and gloom. So, let's take a quick breather by spending a few minutes on one of my favorite topics... the more optimistic topic of technology. This week, a couple of items came to my attention.

Cars for Teens. The first is that Ford announced they are coming out with a new car that allows parents control over maximum speed, music volume, and required seat belt usage. As the father of two pre-teens and remembering my own experience as a teenager behind the wheel (final tally four accidents, one serious), I am solidly in Ford's customer demographic for this innovation.

Kindle 2 Coming. Subscriber and regular correspondent Marv A. tipped me off to the fact that the much anticipated Kindle V.2 is on the way. In fact, here's a peek at it. As readers of any duration know, I am in love with this technology... and even more so with each passing day. If you don't have a Kindle yet, you just don't know what you're missing. In any event, here's a link to an article on the new version. I'll be a buyer (that will make three for a family of four... but I suspect it will be four for four in the not-too-distant future.)

Correspondence

I have received many wonderful and thoughtful emails over the last couple of weeks (along with a few not so wonderful, but hey, it is what it is). While I read all email addressed to me, the problem comes in responding, which takes longer. The problem is that the incoming mail – perfectly understandable given the temper tantrum being thrown by global markets – has reached the point where I am falling hopelessly behind.

Next week, I will try to be a better correspondent.

Sleep Walking into a Brave New World

"It's unreal," said Dean Price, 24, a graphic designer in London. "We've been sleep-walking into this. Everyone talks about Orwell and 1984, but no one ever does anything about it."

I'm running out of time, but I don't want to end this week without hoisting a warning flag about the rising tide of fascism, which typically occurs during economic crisis.

You don't need me to point out the signs that are there for everyone to see, if they weren't too sheepish or just too busy trying to survive to do so. Gitmo, wiretapping of civilians (and, according to breaking news, soldiers in Iraq and their loved ones), U.S. spy satellites being redirected to within U.S. borders for law enforcement purposes, even the deployment of a U.S. Army brigade within the U.S. with a specific mandate to be available to "help" in the event of a domestic emergency of an unspecified nature. A democratic congressman, during the floor debate on the big bailout, said that he and a number of his colleagues were told that if they didn't vote in favor of the bill, "the stock market would crash, and within two weeks martial law would be declared." (You can look all those references up for yourself. I would have done it for you, but I am already out of time.)

The quote at the top of this segment comes from an article I came across on Bloomberg this week on the very slippery slope that Britain is now on. It started with surveillance cameras here and there and has expanded to the point where even local councils have been given permission to deploy spy cameras and wire tapping.

It is worth reading, which you can do here.

As an aside, I am re-reading Orwell's 1984... on my Kindle, of course. It is a true classic and well worth a re-read, especially now.

My point is simple: if there was ever a time to be vigilant, this is it.

Miscellany

You Think Times Are Tough in the U.S.? Last week, I discussed the fact that, as bad as things are in the U.S. financial system, it is as bad, or worse, in Europe. How bad? Well, I can't say for sure if this photo out of England is real or not, but if things keep going the way they are, it could be... (thanks to Bill W. for sending that along!)
Stock Sale Notice. As is our policy, please be advised that a member of our team intends to sell his shares in Allied Nevada, a company we are currently have as a buy. The decision to sell is entirely due to the need to raise some of the money needed to pay a tax bill and has nothing to do with the company or its prospects. Also per our policy, he will not sell until you have had a head start of two business days.
Phyle Announcements. Glenn in Auckland, NZ, is looking to start a get-together group for subscribers, as is Hans in Tampa, FL. The inaugural gathering in Los Angeles is Oct. 18 at 7:00 pm at The Church and State located at 1850 Industrial Ave (east downtown LA). The next phyle meeting in Seattle is scheduled for Oct. 21 at 7:00 pm at the Starbucks in downtown Mercer Island, WA. For more on these events, drop a line to Kristen at phyle@caseyresearch.com.

That's it for this week. As I sign off, just after midday, I see the DJIA is off by 368 points, the S&P is off another 39 points to 865, and gold, after a morning surge, has backed off to around $880 per ounce, as traders close out positions ahead of the weekend. This weekend, the G-7 finance ministers, the IMF and Worldbank all meet in Washington, DC. Understandably, there is a lot of uncertainty in the markets about what's going to happen on Monday.

Speaking of which, Sally Limantour, in the current edition of The Casey Report, provided the technical break-up/break-down levels for a number of markets... i.e., the levels at which a breakthrough signals a bigger move up or down. I asked her to update the levels for stocks and gold. The current break-up level for the S&P 500 is 1005, the break-down is 825. For gold, the break-up is $942, the break-down is $866.

Now, obviously, those numbers move with time... but at least now you know what the traders are watching.

We live in interesting times. Stay in touch...

David Galland

Managing Director

Casey Research, LLC.

The Room - 10/03/2008

David Galland — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 14:53:44 GMT

Dear Readers,

We're no longer in Kansas, Dorothy.

At this point, the world's financial markets are in the firm grasp of a massive tornado. Our vision is blurred with fast-moving images of abandoned houses, crumbling banks, pontificating politicians, alien-looking Treasury secretaries on one knee, and suicide stock and commodities charts.

When the whole mess crashes back on terra firma, the landscape will look considerably different.

But, what?

We remain convinced that the result, with the unavoidable time lag, will be inflation on an epic, global scale. But if history provides one lesson in rich abundance, it is that the future is unpredictable.

Who is to say that the government of these United States -- and of similarly indebted and in-trouble countries "over there" -- aren't too late to the game? Or that even $700 billion, or a trillion... or...?... will not prove to be too little, too late?

In such an environment, the only thing we can say with any degree of certainty, as we do in the current edition of The Casey Report, is "take cover." Loosely defined, that's the technical term for grabbing guns, gold, and cash, and ducking below the edge of the trench until the cloud of flying projectiles passes by.

Guns?

That's the advice of none other than Barton Biggs, Merrill Lynch's legendary global investment strategist, as reported in Bloomberg and forwarded by subscriber and correspondent Ed T...

The "etc." must mean guns.

A few rounds over the approaching brigands' heads would probably be a compelling persuader that there are easier farms to pillage," he writes in his new book, "Wealth, War and Wisdom."

Given that Barton's book was released this January, one can only wonder what he knew, and when, about what's now unfolding. Whatever it was, he was one of only a very small handful of Wall Streeters to offer a candid assessment – rather than one of the bought-and-paid-for variety – of the potential for a true disaster striking the heart of the economy.

But that was then, and this is now.

And now it is a time for serious reflection on just how serious things are, and, as important, what you might do to further prepare.

For the rest of this issue, I am going to fly pretty fast and low, a necessity given the sheer volume of input coming across the screens.

As musical accompaniment as I start off, I'm listening to a suitably hard-pounding, new song with an end-of-the-world theme, They Say by Scars on Broadway. If you are one of those with more pacific musical sensibilities, you may wish to pass on this week's selection; it's hard rock at its best (or worst, depending on your POV.)

Let's kick things off with breaking news from Bud Conrad, our own chief economist and workaholic without peer...

Do You Know How the Fed Is Managing Your Money?

By Bud Conrad

While the world concentrates on the drama surrounding the Treasury's request for a multi-year $700 billion bailout, the latest iteration starting with an installment of $250 billion, they are missing a far more important move to debase our dollar being undertaken the Fed. Specifically, in the two weeks ending October 1, 2008, the Fed added another $502 billion of new liquidity to the banking system. This infusion of over half a trillion dollars is extremely important as it is dollar debasement writ large. And yet, almost no mention of it is being made by politicians and the media alike.

The Fed is planning to do even more: on September 29 it made the following announcement:

Actions by the Federal Reserve include: (1) an increase in the size of the 84-day maturity Term Auction Facility (TAF) auctions to $75 billion per auction from $25 billion beginning with the October 6 auction, (2) two forward TAF auctions totaling $150 billion that will be conducted in November to provide term funding over year-end, and (3) an increase in swap authorization limits with the Bank of Canada, Bank of England, Bank of Japan, Danmark's Nationalbank (National Bank of Denmark), European Central Bank (ECB), Norges Bank (Bank of Norway), Reserve Bank of Australia, Sveriges Riksbank (Bank of Sweden), and Swiss National Bank to a total of $620 billion, from $290 billion previously.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20080929a.htm

As a result of those moves, 1) the TAF will rise to $300 billion from the existing $150 billion; 2) two times the $150 billion will add another $300 billion over the year-end. The swaps had already been issued at the amazing level of $290 billion, and I am just amazed that they plan to provide $620 billion.

The Asset Backed Commercial Paper (ABCP) Money Market Mutual Fund (MMMF) Liquidity Facility (AMLF) was announced September 19, which allows money market funds to borrow at low rates to provide liquidity to the asset-backed commercial paper market.

In total, these programs don't seem to have worked. Despite the massive liquidity intervention with promises of more, the fear assigned to second-tier commercial paper remains high, with the rate staying at the extreme level of the last two weeks:

The conclusion is that while the Congress and public are fiercely debating the $700 billion Paulson plan to turn the U.S. Government into a giant investment bank, buying toxic waste with the proceeds of Treasury borrowing, the Fed is already massively pouring gasoline on the fire with its multi-pronged paradigm shift from lender of last resort for commercial banks, to market manipulator and guarantor of a wide range of financial institutions. This can only lead to dollar debasement and loss of trust in the U.S. financial system.

Call Us Utopians... or Free Marketers

Ed. Note

As I write, the U.S. House of Representatives is, once again, preparing to vote on Paulson's bailout (more on that topic momentarily from our new man on the scene, Don Grove). In that we've received a number of emails asking what our position is on the bailout, I thought I'd set it down in writing.

First and foremost, we are of the opinion that the government should stop meddling in the markets. Instead, it should step aside and let the banks and other institutions fail. The housing bubble has to be resolved by prices falling to a point where buyers find them attractive. It won't be solved by competing with private lenders or declaring moratoriums on home foreclosure. In other words, the government should avoid, at all costs, the default mode of meddling, especially by using its fiat monetary powers to inflate the country out of this long-coming crisis.

Of course, the outcome might be that this downturn would be particularly deep – thanks to the scale of the market dislocations created by the "good works" of government, egged on by its many parasitical toadies from the last 50 years or so. But it wouldn't necessarily need to be prolonged, because people will know where they stand, and quickly.

But that position presupposes that the government would simultaneously take other actions to encourage wealth building, like lightening the tax load on everyone, reducing barriers to entry for businesses, fairly dramatically cutting size of government, and reducing the expensive business of empire building/maintenance (along with the wars that engenders). And, to assure that things never again run out of control, the Fed would be dismantled and the nation put back on a gold standard.

In short, if the nation is going to benefit from the medicine we would propose, then a paradigm shift in the standard operating procedure for the country is required. Fortunately, our "leaders" don't need to look very hard for a working model: a quick perusal of the very same principles that gave the United States the unprecedented economic kick-start that moved it from subsistence farming to the world's most powerful economy in just a bit over 100 years will do fine.

As none of that is going to happen, however, the following are far more likely scenarios, in my personal opinion:

Scenario A. The bailout passes, but only with everyone involved promising to increase regulation in order to avoid it happening again... and raising taxes to boot, based on a flawed rationale that this will help pay for the cost. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, the Fed and FDIC continue to bail out like crazy. Obama gets elected and announces a New Deal (he'll come up with a phrase that evokes the same idea, but spun just different enough to be claimed as his own), and then the size of the government really ramps up. Inflation rages.

Scenario B. The bailout fails, the markets get slammed, the meltdown accelerates until the point that the increasingly desperate government passes Plan B, the net cost being more or less identical to Scenario A. Meanwhile, behind the scenes, the Fed and FDIC continue to bail out like crazy. Obama gets elected and announces a New Deal, and then the government really ramps up. Inflation rages.

So, when you come right down to it, our position is correctly called utopian, or even delusional... because the odds of a voting majority of Americans waking up to the true nature of the problem and resolving themselves to taking their medicine, good and hard, and swearing off the government teat for good, are unlikely in the extreme.

Instead, to quote a succinct email I received yesterday from my dear partner and resident guru Doug Casey...

"Cockamamie schemes will proliferate from all quarters. The only solution is liquidation, total deregulation, and cutting back the government massively. But there's no way that's going to happen. The only question is which combination of harebrained schemes the government will embrace."

The Arabs have a saying that is quite apropos, "The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on."

This caravan is inexorably on its way to an inflationary catastrophe. Done barking, the dogs turn back to their calculations on ways to invest to take advantage.

Ed. Note

Oink! Oink! For Shame!

By Don Grove, Casey Research Washington D.C. Correspondent

Have you been concerned about the BAILOUT? Like me, you may have completely misunderstood what this is about. Fortunately, our senators have set us straight with a 442-page tome that only a bureaucrat could love. We've come a long way from the modest 3-page draft statute that Hank Paulson brought to the Hill on September 20. This is pork barrel politics at its finest.

You may have thought this was just about bailing out banks. Like me, you may be surprised to learn what that entails. Among other things, it's about arrows – yes, arrows.

Not just any arrows. We're talking about favored tax treatment for "wooden arrows designed for use by children." Now for those who would protest that this important provision is just too costly during this time of global economic crisis, don't worry. The senators have sensibly clarified that the favored arrows are only those having a "shaft consisting of all natural wood with no laminations or artificial means of enhancing the spine." See HR 1424 § 503 (attached and linked so you can search the PDF and find this comforting language for yourself). Obviously that leaves one very important question unanswered: How big are they? Well, "5/16 of an inch or less in diameter."

Is that all it takes to bail out a bank? Certainly not. It takes wool; yes, wool. I will admit that as I reveled in the House defeat of HR 3997 Monday, I had completely overlooked the critical importance of wool to the economic well-being of every American. Of course we're talking specifically about "fabrics of worsted wool" and "yarn of combed wool." HR 1424 § 325. It's also about rum, health care, economic development in American Samoa, bicycle commuters, Indians, recycling, and oil spills.

It was clear to the Senate that the House got it wrong. What can you expect from that unruly crowd? Unfortunately, Article I, § 7, clause 1 of the Constitution requires that "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives." Bummer! What's the Senate to do – just stand by? Not! Fortunately, that same clause continues, "but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

Now it just so happens that a handy little piece of legislation had already passed in the House, been sent over to the Senate for its approval, and had been languishing on the Senate's legislative calendar since March: HR 1424, the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007. Perfect. Everyone is in favor of mental health and against addiction. Let's roll it out and load it up. In one busy day, this obscure 45-page bill designed "to require equity in the provision of mental health and substance-related disorder benefits under group health plans" was magically transformed into an $800 billion vehicle to save the world – with something in it for everyone – and for only $100 billion more than the House bailout bill. Such a deal.

In times of great crisis, Rome would select a magister populi who answered to no one and was empowered to take whatever steps were necessary to alleviate the crisis. In his original September 20 bailout plan, Hank Paulson proposed that "ecisions by the [Treasury] Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Hey, Paulson's a smart guy. Letting him work out the details would have kept it simple – too simple. Instead, we now have a bailout plan that Congress can be proud of, and the secretary has been properly reined in, as has, hopefully, his yet unnamed successor.

We were assured that American taxpayers would probably get their money back and might even show a profit on this exercise. Meanwhile, just to be on the safe side, Paulson built in a little room to maneuver. His draft would have raised the national debt limit by providing "that Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking out the dollar limitation contained in such subsection and inserting in lieu thereof $11,315,000,000,000." The Senate, in its infinite wisdom, left that very important part of Paulson's proposal completely intact. See HR 1424 § 122. I think it's fair to say that the United States Government is technically incapable of saving (on our behalf or otherwise) or of ultimately paying off its debts. The statutory debt ceiling now stands at $10.615 trillion. See http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/charts/charts_debt.htm. Sounds to me like we will never see our $800 billion again.

Always the optimist.

Regards, Don

The Big Debate

I wouldn't be a very good correspondent if I didn't at least mention the much-anticipated vice-presidential debate last night.

Despite my skeptical comments about Sarah Palin last week, I assumed she would do well in the debate. And, speaking strictly as an observer of the art of debate, she did. Whoever coached her did a masterful job, as she gets full marks as a student of same, starting out in fine form with the well-delivered line "May I call you Joe?" (He should have answered, "Sure, if I can call you Sarah?", punctuated with a smile and a wink.)

But was there actually anything important to be gained from the experience of watching the two candidates swap half-truths, exaggerations and outright lies? Maybe...

Biden is a card-carrying socialist. Now, I don't mean that as an insult, per se, but rather as what seems to me a statement of fact. The body of his comments and clear vitriol against "free markets," capitalists, loose regulations... coupled with his constant drumming for more regulation, tax increases, and a multitude of perfect-world programs, confirmed his view that the fate of the world and everything in it is best coddled, coerced, and otherwise shepherded along by Big Brother. Listen, we live under majority rule. If the majority really want the fingers of the government in every pie, and if you believe the polls, they do... then who am I to argue?
Palin is a true believer. A mind that is trained from youth to unquestioned acceptance of the fantastical (an apt description, I believe, of those raised under the circumstance of extreme religiosity) is a mind trained to believe just about anything. It came across loud and clear that Governor Palin is a true believer, as is her running mate. If our unfortunate current president labors under one psychological challenge more than any other, it is his certainty. And once certain, he lets nothing and no one stand in the way. I fear that the same would be in store, should McPalin get elected. While I continue to favor the economic policies of the McCain/Palin team, the thought of this pair of mavericks, by gosh, unleashed on the world is enough to send me looking for a thick slab of cement to hide behind.

George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, where are you when we need you most? They certainly won't be on the ballot come November 3.

World on the Edge

There has been much commentary about the current financial fiasco being an "American" problem, usually followed by the tossing of a few bricks at the greedy capitalists. While there is no question that Wall Street's ever-creative financial engineers did a smack-up job of investment alchemy, turning pigs' ears into (exploding) silk purses, that doesn't let the rest of the world off the hook for loading up on the stuff by the container load before taking the time to actually understand what they were buying, or the risks involved.

The phrase caveat emptor is more than just two high-sounding words. One assumes that by the time one achieves a certain elevated station with a major banking institution, whether in New York or Dublin, one understands concepts such as due diligence and risk/reward ratios. As hard as it is to believe, many of the foreign banks are even more leveraged up than the much-maligned U.S. banks.

In an article earlier this week, Marc Faber quoted at length from a study by the Centre for European Policy Studies in which the author, one Daniel Gross, points out that Germany's Deutsche Bank has a leverage ratio of 50:1 and is in debt to the tune of two trillion euros, an amount equal to about 80% of the GDP of Germany. And Barclays, with a leverage ratio of 60, has liabilities of 1.3 trillion pounds, an amount equal to the GDP of the UK.

This week Fortis Bank (leverage ratio 33, liabilities equal to 3X the GDP of its home country of Belgium) was nationalized.

And the German government had to cobble together a bank bailout amounting to 35 billion euros, the largest ever in that country.

As discussed in the September 1 edition of The Casey Report, there's an increasing chance that the European Union will not be able to withstand the storm now breaking over it. On that topic, I highly recommend reading the following Oct 2 article by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in the Telegraph. You can read it by clicking here.

In Faber's article, he also points to another closely watched index related to the global economic situation, the Baltic Dry Index, which tracks the price of shipping. That is used to gauge the level of global trade (a rising index indicates robust demand for cargo shipping and thus economic growth). Well, the index looks like the trajectory of Wily E. Coyote falling off a cliff.

Clearly, the slowdown is global and spreading. The truth of that can be seen in falling commodity prices. At this point, we are advocating staying clear of most commodities, other than gold and selective energy stocks. The former because of its increasing importance as money, and the latter because supply pressure and geopolitics put a floor under the energy sector somewhere near here (more on that momentarily).

No question, the trading herd is now rigging for a serious global downturn. In time, as the inflation that is being baked into the cake every day now makes itself known, the commodities sector, as a whole, will regain its upward momentum... but for now, outside of gold and energy, the best bet is the safe bet of standing aside.

As the commodities move into a position of being extremely oversold, which seems ever more likely, a spectacular contrarian opportunity will be created. But that opportunity is still a ways out.

More on the Global Situation

This week, the Irish government announced they are going to stand behind 100% of bank deposits in that nation. This set off a inflow of money as depositors in other European countries sought the safe harbor offered by that unprecedented guarantee. Reacting quickly, the Greek government, under some added pressure thanks to bank runs in two major cities, followed suit. If you believe observers of the European banking scene, this is only the beginning.

"The whole of Europe will have to do same thing, otherwise Europe will have a split banking system," said Hans Redeker, currency chief at BNP Paribas. British banks are already facing a haemorrhage of deposits to Irish banks that now enjoy the AAA sovereign rating of the Irish state.

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., the current bailout legislation includes a provision that raises FDIC coverage to $250,000. Enough, we expect, to keep the boobus from lining up at the doors of the nation's banks, empty gym bags at hand.

Problem solved? Well, not quite. To quote from Bud Conrad's dissection of the latest developments in the crisis and its implications in the October 1 edition of The Casey Report...

That's a further problem, because the FDIC has just $40 billion in reserve to provide coverage on $4.3 trillion of deposits. That's a penny for each dollar. To put things in clearer perspective, consider that the failure of IndyMac Bank alone wiped $8.9 billion off the FDIC's reserve. Clearly, the cost of bailing out the depositors of hundreds of failed banks will quickly deplete remaining FDIC reserves.

Bringing the matter full circle, the reserves of the FDIC are invested in (drum roll, please...) U.S. Treasuries! So the FDIC will have to sell off Treasuries to obtain the money to refund depositors. That adds to the demand for credit, at a time when credit is scarce. And what happens if, say, 10% of the $4.3 trillion deposits needed to be covered, a distinct possibility given the scope of the crisis? Simple math shows that the government would have to find another $430 billion to bail out the FDIC. While there may be some debate around the current bailout of the big banks that sank themselves with toxic waste, there will be no debate when it comes to bailing out depositors.

Meanwhile, back in Europe, the powers-that-be are thrashing about trying to figure out how to actually manage the widening banking crisis there – this week, a plan for a $400 billion fund was raised and shot down – given that there is no central monetary authority with the power to actually create the funds in the same way the U.S. Treasury can.

Does that mean the U.S. is better prepared to deal with the crisis and will come out of the tailspin sooner?

If I had to vote, I'd vote yes... because as challenged as the U.S. is just now, the U.S. is not burdened with the sort of employee-for-life regulations that cling on to the backs of companies in so many other countries. In the case of Europe, the overburden of EU regulations makes things even worse. While those regulations might feel good to the populace in good times, they are going to become crushing as things grow worse.

China? As I have mentioned on many occasions, the leadership of that country is in a do-or-die (literally) situation when it comes to maintaining strong growth in their economy. Events don't allow time just now to cogitate on how that important country will deal with the slowdown or what effect growing unrest might have on the willingness of its citizenry to own renminbi versus, say, gold. (At least until it's banned, again.) This is an analysis we'll try to turn to in the near future.

Finally, on the topic of global affairs, subscriber and correspondent Steve Hanke, who is also a Forbes columnist, emailed yesterday that, as of last Friday, annualized inflation in Zimbabwe reached 531 billion percent.

So, things could always be worse.

Ed. Note

An Interesting Perspective on European Energy

Yesterday, Marin Katusa, the relentless head of our Energy Division and managing editor of Casey Energy Opportunities sent across the following data points. I found them pretty eye-opening and thought you might, too.

Russia literally has a stranglehold on European gas. Below is a list of the percentage of the gas European countries get from Russia's Gazprom monopoly:

Slovakia, Finland and Macedonia 100%

Bulgaria 96%

Serbia 87%

Greece 82%

Czech Republic 79%

Austria 74%

Turkey and Slovenia 64%

Hungary 54%

While those are some of the biggest-percentage buyers of Russian gas, even if you expand the analysis to all the countries in Europe, the total is still over 25%. Now, check this out...

"As of today we can say that the price growth dynamic has surpassed Gazprom's expectations, and the price for the gas supplied by Gazprom to Europe exceeded $500 in October," Gazprom's statement quoted chief executive Alexei Miller as saying.

Putin is a genius.

We are continuing to look for ways to play this situation.

Ed. Note

Casey Energy Opportunities

Learn more here

Blarney Barney

Over the last little while, I have had to grit my teeth while listening to the politicians pointing fingers at the free market for the mess we find ourselves in.

A few items I came across on that topic pertaining to the views of House Finance Chairperson Barney Frank: "The private sector got us into this mess," Frank said, "the government has to get us out of it. We do want to do it carefully."

And this from an article on Frank's views from the top of the year.

"Reagan's central idea," said Frank, "was ‘Government is not the answer to our problems—government is the problem.' His philosophy is why we're here today."

To which I answer by reprinting something I wrote in the September 21, 2007 edition of this column...

Economics 101 for Politicians

Earlier this week, I heard an interview with Barney Frank, a politician of some duration and standing in the U.S. Congress, on the topic of changing the FHA home loan program to be softer on lenders in this time of tightening purse strings. For those of you unfamiliar with the FHA, it stands for Federal Housing Administration. It's a holdover from the New Deal legislation passed after the Great Depression, and it's unique in that it has managed heretofore to avoid being sucked into the subprime quagmire, largely by virtue of actually maintaining something akin to responsible lending practices.

What struck me most about Barney's many strident comments – and struck me sufficiently hard that I found myself muttering aloud in the privacy of my vehicle, much in the same way that a vagabond pushing a shopping cart full of cardboard might do in public – was when he dipped into the topic of the rates being charged by the FHA to poor-credit borrowers looking for a loan.

I must paraphrase here, because I don't want to listen to the man's voice again, but his understanding of the ways of the world are summed up in words almost exactly like these.

"The FHA is too conservative in its lending, it is charging higher rates than available from private institutions. My GAWD, man, that's just wrong! We are the government!!!" he fumed and sputtered.

When challenged by the interviewer that perhaps individuals with poor credit histories should be required to pay a touch more in the way of an interest rate, he pontificated, begrudgingly, along the following theme.

"Okay, so if someone with poor credit takes a loan and the FHA does charge them more, and they then make their payments on time for three years, we should give them a refund on the excess rates they were charged for being a poor credit risk in the first place. After all, after three years, they would have shown themselves to be good credit risks, so why shouldn't they get a refund?"

It was at that point I unleashed my howl and started the aforementioned muttering.

If a person with his hands on the reins of power is so ignorant on the very basics of how lending (should) work, then any proposed "fixes" are doomed from the get-go. While I probably don't need to point out the flaw in Mister Barney's logic, I will, just because his ignorance needs exposing to as many of his voting public as possible, starting with you.

The reason the FHA has stayed out of trouble is because (a) they have been more restrictive on whom they lend to, and (b) they apply a higher rate to those with marginal credit histories. By applying a high rate for past crimes against creditors to a broader portfolio of poor credit risks, they assure themselves the extra revenue to cover the inevitable losses.

If an individual with a spotty track record of showing up at the repayment window decides to stick to the straight and narrow, then good for them... they will be rewarded with positive notations in their personal credit history. However, as the odds are 100% that a certain percentage of the borrowers will revert to their former practices and spend the mortgage money on beer, the extra interest charged to the whole will be needed to help cover those losses. To refund the bad-credit-gone-good folks, the difference would leave only the exposure to the bad, assuring a smoldering hole in the FHA's balance sheet.

As much as we are loathe to snap a rigid hand to the brow in the direction of any government agency, we will at least give a nod to the FHA for avoiding the current credit mess. We will simultaneously give Frank and his meddling ilk a dismissive wave. "We are the government!" indeed.

The essence of what you actually are, Mr. Frank, is an ignorant tick sucking off the life blood of taxpayers.

That, approximately, is what I muttered aloud to myself in the privacy of my car. Can a shopping cart be far away?

Miscellany

Reckoning day for derivatives? According to the Financial Times, some significant percentage of the $54 trillion in derivatives contracts outstanding, those on now defaulted derivatives linked to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers and WaMu, have to be settled in October. Think the financial problems are over? Think again. Read the article here.
Gold demand soaring. Also in the FT, which I consider best of the mainstream financial journals (and which is now available on Kindle), was an article entitled "Wealthy investors drain supplies of gold by hoarding bullion bars." You can, and should, read it here.
- Similarly, Germany's Spiegel reports "A Run on Precious Metals." You can read about it here.
- And the Guardian of England carried an article this week titled "There's gold in them thar' shops." Read it here...
New phyles starting up. Brian in Chattanooga, TN, and Philip in Ann Arbor, MI, are both ready to host phyles. Drop us a note at phyle@caseyresearch.com and we'll get you set up if you are interested in attending.

And that, dear, patient readers, is that for this week. There was so much more I wanted to cover, and will next week... but time has slipped away. As I sign off, I see that the DJIA is up a flaccid 121 points, not very impressive given the passage of the bailout. What, I wonder, will the government do when next week, or the week after maybe, the U.S. stock market takes another header for 500 points? Stay tuned. Meanwhile, gold is at $826, down considerably over the past week.

Like when a tsunami sucks the water away from the shore just before hitting, we're in a transition period. I'm not worried about where gold is going next. I wish I could say the same about the world.

Until next week, thank you for reading, and for being a subscriber.

Sincerely,

David Galland

Managing Director

Casey Research, LLC.

The Room - 09/26/2008

David Galland — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 21:34:16 GMT

September 26, 2008

Dear Readers,

What a world I have returned to from my cloistered retreat at the beautiful Vivenda Miranda, scenically situated on a cliff outside of the quaint port town of Lagos, Portugal.

Everything has changed.

Everything is changing.

The storm we have so long tried to help you prepare for is upon us. At this point, I can only hope you have your sails rigged for the storm now breaking, because time is running out.

The violent volatility I warned of when last I wrote has arrived, with towering waves now rising up and smashing into the economy - and as an unavoidable consequence, our personal portfolios -- from all sides.

Overnight the holders of my mortgage, WaMu, failed, the largest bank failure in history. This week, the golf course that I usually play on was taken over by the government... last week it belonged to AIG.

As you don't need me to tell you, that same government now wants to spend over a trillion dollars to bail out Wall Street and to shore up the money market mutual funds - which have so far flown under the radar screen despite portfolios stuffed to the brim with bad paper.

While no one was paying attention, U.S. automakers used their election year leverage to win approval for $25 billion in low-interest loans.

As you can see in the chart shown here, the monetary base of the U.S. has surged, a topic we'll have more on in The Casey Report, which will be released next week. Even before the bailout, the government has begun doing what it knows best... pumping up the money supply in a desperate attempt to save the economy from the crash it so desperately needs.

According to Reuters, last week the Fed lent nearly $188 billion per day, on average, to banks and money managers.

Last week, as this fiscal prolificacy was underway, gold surged as we expected it to. This week, it has consolidated, holding its gains but not pushing higher yet.

We don't care.

Owning gold right now is the right thing to do, on multiple levels. Others are now quickly coming to that same understanding. This week, I have had two calls from people I haven't heard from in years, asking me how to buy gold. And then there's this...

From a correspondent in Switzerland...

So, we call Bank Cantonale Bern. The Cantonale Banks are like BofA in the States - it's a huge retail banking company with branches in most towns. We learn, yes, they have limited bullion for gold but no silver.

The surprise came when we arrived at the bank this afternoon. The bank has a teller window, segregated off to the side of the others, with a sign above the window that read,

"Change & Gold" (foreign currency and gold coins)

We had to wait in line. I bought the last of the one-ounce bullion they had - Krugerands. And there were people behind us in line. The woman who helped us said that the demand for gold has been so strong that they made it available via front-line employees, rather than through a bank representative in a private, "behind the counter" transaction. And they haven't had silver for several weeks. She said supplies of silver had been sporadic at certain branches in Zurich.

So there you have it. A retail bank where you can conduct business in gold just as easy as Swiss francs. A developing trend? One can only hope.

Just a few minutes ago, my dear friend Mr. Watson, whose birthday it was I went to help celebrate in Portugal, tipped me to this... from the Toronto Star.

Coin dealers from the U.S. to Canada have reported a surge in buying of bullion coins and other gold products as troubles in the financial markets prompt people to seek a safe haven in precious metals.

"Demand has exceeded supply for American buffalo 24-karat gold one-ounce bullion coins, and our inventories have been depleted," the mint said in a note to its dealers. "We are, therefore, temporarily suspending sales of these coins."

The trading herd will follow the physical buyers. The recent $100 surge was just a precursor. The lag in understanding - and action - is understandable. The global economy is in a true paradigm shift. People don't want to believe what their eyes and ears are telling them. And so, at this point the trading herd is standing en masse, eyes wide open, nostrils flaring, muscles twitching spastically, waiting for the news that will tell them which way to bolt for safety.

While they are only to be used by the attentive, and with great caution, I am now using a variety of options and futures strategies to leverage what's coming. I will never risk so much as to put myself in any real financial trouble. But, with that filter, I am now positioning myself for higher gold prices and a falling stock market (I suspect one more dead-cat bounce after the bailout is passed... then watch out below).

Higher interest rates are a sure thing, but there will likely be a lag between now and then as well. Structure things right, and you can ride through any possible downturn, then earn extraordinary returns as things move in your favor. But the key thing to remember is that, like hot chili sauce, a little leverage goes a long way... and a lot of leverage can burn you, badly.

Knowing where your money is has also become very important. In the upcoming edition of The Casey Report, we'll also be presenting a detailed explanation of how to be sure your bank will be one of those still standing after the storm.

Ed. Note

The Casey Report

Try our 3-month no-risk trial now.

Whatever the final form of the bailout, and I am convinced there will be one - the money may not flow in exactly the way that Wall Street wants, but it will flow nonetheless -- in the medium to long term, the die is cast. The hegemony of the U.S. dollar in international trade is coming to an end (more on that momentarily). Given the lack of a tangible alternative, namely one that is not solely faith based, a new currency regime will arise. It's impossible to gauge from this distance what it will ultimately look like, or who will sponsor it (there is talk of the IMF fulfilling the role), but it's safe to assume it will have to include gold and other tangibles.

We live in dangerous, yet exciting, times. We'll continue doing our part to keep you in the know, and on the right side of things.

Moving along, I want to share a front-seat analysis on this week's congressional hearings on the bailout from Donald Grove, our new Washington correspondent.

The Bailout: Behind the Scenes

By Donald Grove

I went to hear Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke testify this morning before the Joint Economic Committee (Chairman Chuck Schumer, D-NY), primarily on the Bush administration's capital markets intervention proposal. I thought I would pass on my observations, which will probably be different than what you read in the mainstream press. Bernanke has had it rough lately. He was testifying yesterday with Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and SEC Chairman Chris Cox before the Senate Banking Committee (Chairman Chris Dodd, D-Conn) and was scheduled to testify with Paulson later this afternoon before the House Financial Services Committee (Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass).

Schumer recalled that Bernanke last appeared before the Joint Economic Committee in April, following the narrowly averted collapse of Bear Stearns. He said "Most of us thought we had just witnessed an event that we were likely never to see again in our lifetimes. And yet, here we are, only six months later, and we are discussing a crisis many orders of magnitude greater." Schumer stated, as did others, that "we must act and we must act soon." Those statements were not without reservations, however, and I would add that not acting may be the more prudent course. There seems to be a compulsion on the Hill to do something, even if it's wrong. I guess that's what legislators think their constituents expect - and maybe they do. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg told NBC's "Meet the Press" that "nobody knows exactly what they should do, but anything is better than nothing." Not necessarily so - in fact, probably not so. "Expecting Congress to fix the current financial crisis is like expecting an arsonist to put out the fire he started," said Representative John Shadegg (R-Az).

Schumer told Bernanke that "Americans are furious" and that he and probably each of his colleagues have heard "amazement, astonishment, and intense anger" from constituents. No doubt, but why? According to Schumer, "over the last eight years, we were told that markets knew best, that financial alchemy had reduced risk to an afterthought, and that we were entering a new world of global growth and prosperity. Instead, what we have learned is that we now have to pay for the greed and recklessness of those who should have known better." Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. I personally recall hearing Schumer in a hearing on the Hill within the last eight years demanding that the less fortunate be given access to home mortgages so they, too, could realize the American dream. He was not alone. The former Fed chairman urged Americans to avail themselves of adjustable-rate mortgages. As was often noted during today's hearing, there is plenty of blame to go around. What worried me was the tendency to lay blame for this debacle on the free market.

As I noted above, I think doing nothing may be the best thing Congress can do right now. In fact, if Congress had done nothing in the past, we might have avoided a lot of these problems. It's never too late to stop meddling. Why not start right now? Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) suggested that we just let the free-market system correct itself. Of course the Fed chairman did not agree. He told Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) that we need to figure out what the price should be on complex securities so that private capital can come in and help buy them up so that banks can reestablish capital to make loans. Ron Paul, in prime form, said that most illiquid assets are illiquid because they are not worth anything. He added that price fixing prolonged the Great Depression, and that is what is being proposed now. He said that messing with prices risks socialism. Paul said the Fed is not smart enough to fix prices. Hear! Hear! Nor, I would add, is the Treasury Secretary or Congress. The free market, however, is uniquely able by its very nature to set prices just right, including, by the way, interest rates - the price of money.

Congressman Paul asked where this $700 billion will come from. Not from taxes or borrowing from China. He said it will come from us, presumably through the insidious tax of inflation. He explained that the downturn in housing is because housing is overpriced. Let housing prices come down, he said. He said, "We can't solve inflation with more inflation." Paul asked the Fed chairman where his authority comes from and noted that only 15% of Americans care about the Constitution or the rule of law - and less than that in Washington, D.C.

Bernanke conceded that price fixing was counterproductive but insisted that we have to somehow "discover" what prices are. Duhhh! That's what the free market is for! As to his authority, he cited the Federal Reserve Act ..... "now if you disagree with the Act...." Well, I do disagree, and I think Ron Paul also believes that the creation of the central bank in 1913 was where a lot of this trouble started. Nevertheless, I don't think the Fed has even been complying with the mandate and constraints of the Act.

Refreshingly, retiring Senator Jim Saxton, ranking member on the Committee (R-NJ), noted that it would be nice if we could go to a safe at Treasury and take out about 5% of GDP to bail out financial institutions, but we can't. We have to borrow it, he said (albeit probably surreptitiously from our unborn progeny). I am always heartened to see that someone on the Hill realizes that. Unfortunately, I suspect that a majority of Americans do vaguely suppose that there is something like a big safe with real money in it that the government taps to pay for things like this - kind of like believing that the Social Security Trust Fund is bundles of hundred-dollar bills stacked up in a cool, dry place.

Vice Chairman Carolyn Maloney (R-NY) asked if this proposal to intervene in the credit markets to the tune of $700 B would affect inflation and wondered if the Fed might have to raise rates. Bernanke said that this was not a stimulus. He said that if it helps the economy grow, the Fed may have to raise rates sooner, but the he did not expect it to have any effect on inflation. I'm speechless! Of course it's inflationary. I also have to wonder whenever I hear a comment like this, whether he actually believes that an expanding economy causes inflation - like some mysterious act of God - and that it is the Fed's role to counter that by raising rates.

He explained that this would not be an expenditure. He said it would be "acquisition of assets." If there is a loss, he said, it would be much less than $700 B. I think I agree with Ron Paul. We are basically trying to pretend that the real estate bubble never popped by saying that the debt instruments based on those inflated values still have value. Several legislators expressed their frustration over the fact that Hank Paulson added other toxic waste to the mix this weekend - car loans, student loans.

Congress is trying to add its own unique signature to this boondoggle. For example, there is talk of coming up with the money by placing a surcharge on those making over a certain amount per year (I think $1M). There is also a move to restrict the compensation of financial institution executives. Amy Klubuchar (D-MN), said, "There should be a limit on what you can make when taking our money." Bernanke said there has to be an incentive for risk taking. "For this to work," he said, "we need a wide range of participation. If we stigmatize institutions that participate, they won't participate." Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) suggested a $200 B tranche with Warren Buffett at the head of the board of some administering organization to "get these institutions functioning again." Bernanke noted that Buffett had invested $5 B in Goldman Sachs and that the Oracle of Omaha had said that we "go over the precipice if Congress does not act."

There was also a bright side to proposals from legislators. Kevin Brady suggested that Congress look at a holiday on the capital gains tax or temporarily lowering repatriation road blocks since taxes now make it too expensive to bring capital home from overseas. He noted that three years ago, $300 B came home when the tax barriers were lowered. Bernanke said these actions alone will not solve the problem. Again, I am not holding my breath - more likely that we will see exchange controls.

Representative Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) noted that although Bernanke says he will be "acquiring assets," he has asked Congress to raise the debt limit to do it and is acquiring the assets because they are toxic waste and we don't know what they're worth. "In Texas," he said, "we say ‘those chickens are coming home to roost.'" Then he thought better of it and said "vultures are coming home to roost." He said we have a bankrupt ideology. I'm not holding my breath waiting for taxpayers to get their $700 B back. Ron Paul later said that after Doggett's comments, he can't tell who the conservatives are.

As is often the case in exchanges with the Fed chairman, there was an emphasis on market psychology, not real sound money practices. The whole concern seems to be for creating the illusion of economic stability as if stability could not actually be achieved, so the illusion is the best we can do. For example, Schumer asked whether a $150 billion installment, with the rest to come later, wouldn't be enough to assure markets that Congress is serious. Bernanke agreed that it is about psychology and said $700 B is what the administration thought it would take to provide psychological reassurance. Representative Carolyn Maloney asked where he got that figure. He said it was not science. It's about 5% of the $14 trillion in outstanding residential and commercial mortgages, on which the loss rate is about 5 %. I couldn't help thinking that returning to the gold standard would certainly show the market that Congress was serious and would allow real financial planning instead of trying to guess at the unintended consequences of clumsy government intervention in the free market.

There was a lot of discussion of the technical aspects of getting banks lending again - putting taxpayers first, strong congressional oversight, enticing financial institutions, including foreign institutions, to participate in the auction of these troubled securities, fire sale vs. hold-to-maturity prices, the Fed paying a premium for them. Senator John Sununu asked if firms would be willing to sell at below book value. Bernanke said (apparently now agreeing with Ron Paul) that "over time there is no way to hide the real value of an asset." I think that was a "yes," but I found myself wondering whether the objective here isn't to pay above-market value for these securities with taxpayer's money. I think it is.

Bernanke said this is the most significant post-war economic crisis for the United States and the world. He noted the hardships for those on Main Street if banks can't lend - consumer credit dries up, car and small business loans are unavailable. Baron Hill (D-IN) asked Bernanke what he should tell his constituents who asked if their stock portfolios and 401(k)s were going to lose value. Bernanke said "yes," they would lose value if Congress does not act. He said the credit system is like plumbing that permeates the economy. He said choking credit takes the life blood out of the economy. That may be, but perhaps it should not be. It occurred to me that there are two components to interest: opportunity cost and risk of lost purchasing power. If you take away the latter, I think the credit system becomes quite simple and we don't have to go through all these contortions, and probably don't need the Federal Reserve. Inconveniently, the government would have to live within its means like the rest of us.

Bernanke said the pain on Main Street would be very significant if Congress does not authorize this plan. He urged Congress to solve this problem now and come back later and look at reforming regulation. As Representative John Shadegg said, however, you can't expect an arsonist to put out the fire he started. There is no way we are going to avoid pain at this point. It seems to me that each time Congress tries to avoid it, the inevitable pain gets worse. Let's bite the bullet and get it over with and for God's sake, no more regulation!

Jim DeMint (R-SC) said that unbridled capitalism is not at fault. He said this problem was caused by the government and its implied guarantee. He said we removed accountability for risk from the enterprise system and that this was a failure of government intervention, not a failure of the free market. Bernanke tried to clarify that he was not talking about heavier regulation, just reformed, smarter regulation - maybe even less regulation. I'm afraid I have evolved from a libertarian into an anarchist and find not the slightest comfort in those words. I was happy to hear DeMint point out that some of the institutions that Bernanke found too big to fail were government-created GSEs. He said that none of these programs support free-market activity. He noted that the Sarbanes-Oxley "monster" chased capital off shore but failed to tell us about Bear Stearns. He concluded that "no amount of government regulation will eliminate corruption if risk is removed." Bravo!

Rep. Phil English (R-PA) was troubled by the extraordinary power this proposal would give to the Treasury Secretary, an unelected official. He suggested that this was the path to "Crony Capitalism." I will add that the next Treasury Secretary will inherit this power and will not only be unelected, he or she has not even been named.

Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) observed that Bernanke and Paulson went to the White House with this problem last Thursday but had to have known about it before that. He wondered why Congress had been kept in the dark. Bernanke cited efforts taken to correct the problem, including the discount window, CDSs, and the market's natural healing process. Hinchey said he was skeptical in April when Bernanke and Paulson told the Committee that the economy was growing and that our financial institutions were healthy. He said there was motivation to keep this under cover and that we are seeing manipulations and distortions of the mortgage market. Bernanke cited the sharp interest rate cuts in January. Apparently he was still hopeful that they would work in April and did not want to alarm the Committee. He suggested that Congress "should look at substantial regulatory reform." He suggested a "1-2 punch. Stabilize and then fix it so it does not happen again." Again, I say that fixing it will take more than adjusting a few dials or fine tuning some regulations. The overhaul necessary to fix this I suspect no one on the Hill has the guts for except Ron Paul, maybe Tom Coburn.

In conclusion, I would say it sounds like this bailout may not be a done deal. Constituents are ringing phones off the hook, telling their legislators "don't do it." Many are suspicious that it came up so quickly and that they are being asked to act so quickly. Representative Mike Pence (R-IN) told CNN, "There are those in the public debate who have said that we must act now. The last time I heard that, I was on a used-car lot. The truth is, every time somebody tells you that you've got to do the deal right now, it usually means they're going to get the better part of the deal."

Always the optimist.

Regards, Don

More Views on the Bailout From the Washington Post...

During testimony before the House Budget Committee, Peter R. Orszag -- Congress's top bookkeeper -- said the bailout could expose the way companies are stowing toxic assets on their books, leading to greater problems.

"Ironically, the intervention could even trigger additional failures of large institutions, because some institutions may be carrying troubled assets on their books at inflated values," Orszag said in his testimony. "Establishing clearer prices might reveal those institutions to be insolvent."

In an interview later yesterday, Orszag explained using the following example: Suppose a company has Asset X, whose value is recorded on the books as $100. Because of the current economic decline, Asset X's real value has dropped to $50. If the company takes part in the government bailout and sells Asset X for $50, the company has to report a $50 loss on its books. On a scale of millions of dollars, such write-downs could ruin a company.

Such companies "look solvent today only because it's kind of hidden," Orszag said. "They actually are insolvent" already, he said.

From Ron Paul...

Dear Friends,

Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.

The events of the past week are no exception.

The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."

That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.

The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!

The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.
Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.
Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.

There goes your country.

Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.

Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.

Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.

The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?

When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?

Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.

In liberty,

Ron Paul

Quotes from the Quislings

Not to be indelicate, but the working title I had chosen for this next section was "FCUK YOU!"... that, by virtue of my feeling that strong words are in order for the quislings who purport to be free marketers and who have been lined up to support the government's bailout.

Here's my Rogues List...

Laurence Fink

BlackRock Inc

"If this plan works, taxpayers are not going to be out money," Fink, a pioneer of mortgage-backed securities, said in an interview with Bloomberg TV.

... Based on current prices, buyers of distressed debt, including the government, will earn "strong returns over the next five to seven years," said Fink, who declined to say whether his New York-based company will bid on contracts to manage the proposed Treasury fund.

And there's the well-regarded Mr. Buffett...

"I am betting on the Congress doing the right thing for the American public and passing this bill," Buffett said on cable channel CNBC today. "I certainly have a vote of confidence in Goldman and vote of confidence in Congress."

Of course, Buffett didn't mention how much money his company stood to lose if the government failed to rush into the breach. Or how much extra money he'd make by trading his good name to Goldman for a sweetheart deal that will form a footnote in all future books on financial topics... but only if the bailout goes through. Among other kisses, Buffett's coup includes perpetual preferred shares that pay a 10% coupon. Simply, that means if the U.S.G. bails out Goldman, Buffett will collect $500 million a year on his $5 billion investment, and his payments will come before those sent to any other shareholders. He also gets under-the-market warrants on another $5 billion worth of shares.

Goldman never would have agreed to this deal unless their feet were roasting in the coals of calamity. One can hardly blame Buffett for making his move (it's not like he couldn't withstand the loss of $5 billion, should the worst come to pass), but now that he is so handsomely positioned, his cheerleading should be viewed as the disingenuous self-dealing that it is.

And then there's this, from the Washington Post, quoting mega-bond manager Bill Gross...

"The Treasury proposal will not be a bailout of Wall Street but a rescue of Main Street, as lending capacity and confidence is restored to our banks and the delicate balance between production and finance is given a chance to work its magic. Democratic Party earmarks mandating forbearance on home mortgage foreclosures will be critical as well. If this program is successful, however, it is obvious that the free market and Wild West capitalism of recent decades will be forever changed. Future economic textbooks are likely to teach that while capitalism is the most dynamic and productive system ever conceived, it is most efficient over the long term when there is another delicate balance -- between private incentive and government oversight."

On that last bit, I feel it's worth mentioning that Freddie and Fannie may have "enjoyed" more government oversight than any other two institutions on the planet.

If there is one certainty, and there are several related to this fiasco, it will be that the free market will be made the patsy, and the result will be a public outcry for more, not less government.

In the end, now that the government has broached the topic, the $700 billion is going to get spent... whether it starts by going into the pockets of the Wall Street, or is cycled back into the public pocket through the vehicle of FDIC guarantees, or making the money market funds whole, or giving millions of householders a free ride on their mortgages... or simply writing checks to consumers... it, and a lot more is going to get spent.

For my money, and it is my money (and yours), the best argument for the bailout was offered by none other than President Bush, who succinctly opined in a meeting yesterday of congressional leaders, "If money isn't loosened, this sucker could go down."

Unfortunately this sucker, aka the economy, is going down no matter what they do at this point.

At this point, all we can do is to wait and watch. Focus on liquidity for your personal portfolio and prepare for the worst. It's coming.

About Those Foreigners...

In all of the frenzy, the U.S. Government seems to be largely ignoring the foreign holders of our many trillions of dollars. This is also, as we have repeatedly said would be the case, because foreigners don't vote, and if they do decide to dump their dollars - as we expect they will (and actually are) - they will only hurt themselves. Or, so runs the logic of desperate policymakers, relying on MMAD (Monetary Mutual Assured Destruction) to rationalize their massive unleashing of dollars.

If you've voted for any of the clowns running our country for the last 40 or so years, you might want to take a moment to apologize to your children and, if you have them, your grandchildren as well. (Ron Paul supporters, you can take a pass on this.)

That's because, as I mentioned above, the U.S. Government has managed to squander the unbelievable advantage of being the suppliers of the world's de-facto reserve currency... an advantage made almost miraculous given that it was backed by nothing.

All the bureaucrats had to do was show even modest restraint and occasionally take a few moments to remind themselves of the principles of self-reliance and open opportunity that made this country what it is. Instead, the political class, cheered on by the voting public, fell in love with virtually every perfect-world social program, every new make work, corporate suck-up and pork barrel program waved in front of their snout-bedecked faces these many years. In the process, they have traded away something that no nation will again enjoy... a global blank check.

Bud Conrad is assembling the eye-opening hard data showing the trend reversal in foreign investment in U.S. dollar assets for the next edition of The Casey Report.

In the meantime, the anecdotal evidence is beginning to mount, an example being this item from MarketWatch this week..

HONG KONG (MarketWatch) -- Chinese regulators have asked domestic banks to stop lending to U.S. financial institutions in the interbank money markets to prevent possible losses during the financial crisis, the South China Morning Post reported Thursday. The China Banking Regulatory Commission's ban on interbank lending of all currencies applied to U.S. banks, but not to lenders from other countries, the report added, citing a source.

I don't need to tell you that the Chinese government operates on group-think. For an official arm of the government to take this step is a howitzer shot across the bow of the U.S. ship of state.

Meanwhile, the current administration has managed to almost entirely alienate the Russians with our persistent meddling overseas ("Avoid foreign entanglements," said George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. "Take over the world," answered a succession of modern politicos). Not shy about giving as good as they get, the Putinistas are moving game pieces closer to home ground.

The memorandum was signed on Monday in Caracas, as a Russian Navy squadron, including the heavy cruiser Peter the Great and three escorts, set sail from St. Petersburg to join Venezuelan vessels in the first show of Russian naval power in the American hemisphere for many years.

They have been preceded by the Russian Air Force, which dispatched a pair of long-range bombers to Venezuela for the past week. A Russian naval spokesman told Mineweb the squadron will operate in the Caribbean, and will enter the sea from the Atlantic Ocean.

And the official mouthpieces of the Russian government, this one from the Russian News and Information Agency, are firing torpedoes at the U.S. dollar. This excerpt from an article entitled "Time for a gold rouble" published yesterday...

Second, the Russian leaders might also consider making their own currency, the ruble, convertible into gold. The idea of gold convertible currencies is extremely unpopular among most economists; they dismiss gold as a "barbarous relic" (to use the famous phrase of John Maynard Keynes) and suggest either the present regime of paper currencies or, at best, a link to a basket of commodities.

Both these solutions are highly artificial and based on the same level of state control which has now just so spectacularly failed. Indeed, which is more "barbarous" -- the reintroduction of gold as an instrument of payment, or the practice of amassing huge quantities of the precious metal to keep it locked underground in the vaults of central banks? The contempt of the Keynesians notwithstanding, it is an indisputable fact that gold does remain the ultimate store of value, which is precisely why states own so much of it.

At this point, even our "friends" are starting to make excuses and reach for their coats. This from a Reuters report on the strong words falling out of the mouth of the German finance minister...

In some of the toughest language since the crisis worsened this month, German Finance Minister Peer Steinbrueck told parliament the financial turmoil would leave "deep marks" but was primarily an American problem.

"The world will never be as it was before the crisis," Steinbrueck, a deputy leader of the center-left Social Democrats, told the Bundestag lower house.

"The United States will lose its superpower status in the world financial system. The world financial system will become more multi-polar."

It is impossible to fully appreciate, let alone understand, the implications of the loss of the dollar's global reserve status... but it's a topic we'll be digging into. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen.

A Musical Interlude

For something a little lighter, I want to share some of the musical recommendations that were sent by readers in response to my recent solicitation.

Before getting to your recommendations, however, I'll tell you that today I have been listening, repetitively, to the soundtrack from "Once," an excellent film we watched earlier this week. Our own Louis James had first recommended it, followed by another friend, and so I thought I should check it out. It is a simple, beautifully executed, romantic little film... overlaid with powerful music.

The track I'm currently listening to is one of my favorites, "When Your Mind's Made Up." You can listen to it and see a scene from the film, compliments of YouTube, by clicking here. It starts slow, then builds to the point where it pretty much blows me away -- just the kind of music I love.

Okay, so that's my entry this week... now here are yours.

Explosions in the Sky

The Birth and Death of the Day

It's Natural to Be Afraid

All of a Sudden I Miss Everyone

My All Time 5 Favorites... Foo Fighters - Pretender - awesome video where they fight the riot police, btw...

KRS1 - Sound of Da Police ...

NWA - F*** Da Police

Pink Floyd - Another Brick in the Wall Pt. 2

Public Enemy - Fight the Power.

As you may have noticed, I like my music with a message... Music to overthrow your government by! Jeff B.

JS Bach's Toccata and Fugue

It is surpassed only by Hector Berlioz's Requiem, scored for full symphony orchestra, a double choir, and a brass band in each of the hall's four corners. Despite its title, it's a rouser! If you have a good sound system, open

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=berlioz+requiem&search_type=&aq=2&oq=berlio

Start with Requiem et Kyrie, and keep going. C V.

First off, the Isley Bros, in general, are hard to beat. For passion and purity of voice you gotta hear (the late, due to cancer) Eva Cassidy, not exactly rockin' music but well worth the listen. I was delighted to actually find recordings of her live performances on YouTube, though her best album was Songbird.

Other mentionables from assorted categories that are worth a listen and whom you may or may not be familiar with (we're about the same age) are Dan Hicks and His Hot Licks (hippie country rock), Zap Mamma (world), (the late due to dying) Shirley Horn (torch jazz), and early John Mayall (blues).

www.generalfuzz.net

Thanks for all the great insights so far. . . James

So here is my must have for you and maybe you are already enlightened... Yo La Tengo. Writing beautiful rock and roll for 20 years. Check Youtube "Today is the day" and listen to the live performance on John McEnroe's show. Then graduate to "Blue Line Swinger" It is a 9 minute song and the first time you hear it, by minute 4 and 20 seconds your foot will be tapping, the second time I think it will be tapping the whole time. John W.

Gypsy Soul

Obsession Confession

Slash

While speaking of songs that get me movin' (and STOP me from working), I might mention one called Orinoco Flow (Sail Away) by Enya. Sounds as if it would be rather staid if you know anything of her, but there again is something about that song... it got airplay at a time when I was training for powerlifting at some ungodly early time in the morning before work. Whenever that song would come on, I would have to wait to start my set, but I was awake and movin' by the end of it.

How about Classical Gas for a movin' song?

Country music provides the bulk of the really good guitar playing (and I honestly am not that impressed by most rock guitar playing). Roy Clark has been my favorite since I was a kid (although I don't really care to have him sing). And if they were to map my DNA, I believe they would discover a Boogie gene.

And on that note, give a listen to an Aussie flatpicking champion named Tommy Emmanuel.

Now back to work (me, not you). Matt B.

A tune that is a favourite of mine and in keeping with the problems at present (Chris Rea's Highway to Hell) (listen carefully to the lyrics) for your entertainment. Chris M.

David again, I have many more... and will try to cycle in your recommendations in future editions. But for now, time is running short and I need to move on. Thanks to all of you who have contributed... my musical horizons have been expanded.

McPalin Is Toast

This week I finally found the time to spend a little time, figuratively speaking, with Sarah Palin (encouraged by an article Doug Casey is preparing for The Casey Report on McCain's surprise running mate).

I have to say, I was pretty shocked. As I think many Americans will be, as they watch the candidate in action in the weeks just ahead.

The following quote is from Palin's interview with Katie Couric, in response to a question on the bailout.

"That's why I say, I, like every American I'm speaking with, we're ill about this position that we have been put in [fumbling for words to continue] where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh -- it's got to be all about job creation too. Shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today. We've got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that."

Huh? What?

Listen, I know there are McPalin supporters out there and, I will say it again, strictly from a personal perspective - i.e., I really don't want to pay any more taxes - if I were forced to pull a lever, it would be for McCain (because a victory by him would mean gridlock, that glorious state where the government's power to "do good" is curtailed). So, don't get angry or send me emails accusing me of being some sort of commie-sympathizer or member of the left-wing media conspiracy.

I'm sure Sarah Palin is a perfectly wonderful person, but she is way out of her league here. And, shortly, the boomerang effect of her media appearances is going to smack McPalin upside the head.

If you don't believe me, watch the following excerpt from the Couric interviews, this one on Palin's purported experience in foreign affairs. (You may have already seen this, because it's starting to make the rounds on the net... which is exactly the problem.)

At this point, I can't see any conceivable way McPalin wins. Which means, get ready for a serious asset stripping come next year.

Miscellaney

Phyling On

phyle

In any event, Herb in Jacksonville, FL is looking to start a phyle.

And the next meeting of the Sacramento phyle is scheduled for September 30th with Ron Parratt of AuEx (one of my favorite explorers) as a guest participant.

And the Toronto group, one of the most active, will be held on October 3... with our own Doug Casey sitting in.

For more details on any of these get-togethers, or any of the other phyles now up and running (this is all happening organically, by the way... all we're doing is facilitating the introductions of the new members to the organizers), contact Kristen at phyle@caseyresearch.com.

Well, that's all that time allows for today. It has been a long and immensely interesting week. We are living through a crisis of a magnitude seen only once a century. While one might take satisfaction by being able to say "I told you so" to sundry friends and associates - you know, the ones who have habitually rolled their eyes and parroted the "all is well" mantra of the financial talk show hosts whenever you have tried to warn them about what's coming... the reality is that these are dangerous times. Even for the prepared.

So, be careful. Especially when discussing topics related to wealth and precious metals ownership. Those who "have" could easily become targets for those who "have not" as this crisis unfolds. Mum's the word.

As I sign off, stocks are largely flat and precious metals are up nicely, to $888. If I were to guess what's going to happen next, it will be that an agreement on the bailout will be announced, the stock market will have another dead-cat bounce... after which it is going to start on a sharp slide.

As always, I greatly appreciate you using some of your valuable time to read this column, blog, musings - whatever it is. Your comments and suggestions are always welcomed, and often directly responded to, by writing david@CaseyResearch.com.

A final note. If you have friends who you think might benefit from our service, we would take it as a great favor if you'd tell them about our services and suggest they take us up on our 3-month no-risk trial subscription for The Casey Report. The next three months should be particularly important, so now's the time to act. You'll be doing them a favor, if for no other reason that our analysis is unbiased because it is beholding to no one except you, our subscribers.

As for the money managers and other talking heads now cheering for the bailout versus warning the people who listen to them to run for cover... well...

I'll leave it at that...

Until next week,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room 09/12/2008

David Galland — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 19:14:37 GMT

September 12, 2008

Dear Readers,

In today’s “special” edition of the Room, I want to go somewhat beyond the latest news and observations on same.

Instead, I want to discuss the big picture as it relates to the U.S. and global economy.

I do so because it is growing more important with each passing day to get a solid fix on where things stand and, more importantly, where they are going next and how you can protect yourself. It’s hard to overstate just how unpredictable and dangerous the economic and investment environment has become.

While these are topics we’ll be covering in today’s online event, Casey’s Crisis & Opportunity Update, the situation at this point is moving so fast, and is so highly charged, that it is time to pay very, very close attention to things.

As you should expect, we have been furiously fingering the tea leaves in an attempt to make actionable sense out of the big moves now in motion. While there is much that we know about the unfolding events, there is also much that is unknowable – for instance, how much longer the long-suffering foreign holders of U.S. dollars will be patient.

In our quest for answers, we’ve been digging through the data and comparing notes with others we respect. For instance, earlier this week I spoke with real estate entrepreneur Andy Miller, who recently sat for a very insightful interview for the current edition of The Casey Report. In Andy’s view, the government takeover of Fannie and Freddie was a seminal event in U.S. history, ranking right up there, in his words “… with the Crash of 1929 or even the Civil War.”

We agree.

To set the stage, I want to share a lengthy excerpt from an article we just published, titled “The Biggest Bailout of All Time.” If you’ve already read it, skip to the next section.

The Biggest Bailout of All Time

(Published 9/10/08)

On Sunday, September 7, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, flanked by James Lockhart, the new conservator from the Federal Housing Finance Agency, announced a plan to take over the operation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and to guarantee their debt. They cited what we all knew, that they did not have enough capital to continue operating. Their business is to borrow to lend for housing mortgages, and to guarantee half the country’s housing mortgages, about $5.4 trillion. The equity and preferred is all but wiped out as all dividends are suspended and management and the board are fired.
This is the biggest bailout ever. If 10% of the $5 trillion of guarantees must be made good by the government, the payments would be $500 billion. That is the size of the annual U.S. defense budget. The outstanding debt of the U.S. held by the public is the size of the guaranteed mortgages. It is huge.

We from Casey Research have seen this coming for more than a year:

International Speculator

Unusual Aspects

The Treasury will add funding to Fannie and Freddie when their assets are less than their liabilities. The Treasury gets warrants to own 79.9% of the equity. Fannie and Freddie are allowed to expand mortgage lending through the end of 2009 but are required to wind down their $850 billion of debt at 10% per year until they are essentially out of business at only $250 billion debt.

The effect on the Credit Default Swap (CDS) market could be big: there are about $1.47 trillion of CDS on Fannie/Freddie-backed mortgages. The creation of the conservatorship is probably a credit event, triggering the payment of the insurance on the debt. But as we know, the insurers are already weak, and forcing them to pay could eliminate them as ongoing business, thus creating a cascading loss of the value of insurance on other debt they guarantee.

The "New Secure Loan Agreement" that is designed to bail out the debtors of Fannie and Freddie will also be used to bail out the Federal Home Loan Banks. $274 billion additional housing market funding was passed through the FHLB last year, and it is safe to assume there are problems there too.

Who Will Rescue the Taxpayers from Fannie and Freddie?

The U.S. Government has decided to spend an enormous amount of money to prevent the two mortgage giants from defaulting. What will be the real effects?

The rescue won’t resuscitate the housing market. As much as prices have declined, they still haven’t come down enough to make houses affordable. (They only seemed affordable for a while because of the artificially low interest rates the Federal Reserve engineered during the housing boom through its inflationary policies.) Don’t expect the rescued Fannie and Freddie to revive the housing market; the government’s rescue package requires them to shrink their operations.

The rescue won’t end the credit crisis that is pulling the economy into recession. Fannie and Freddie are perhaps the biggest, but certainly not the only, institutions that overcommitted to risky mortgages. Banks, insurance companies, and pension funds are holding billions in the same kind of dangerous stuff. And they still must get through another two years of interest “resets” on subprime mortgages created during the housing boom. As those resets occur, there will be more defaults on mortgages that borrowers can no longer afford – or no longer want because the loan balance exceeds the value of the house.

The rescue helps keep bad decision makers in place. Managers of banks and other financial institutions that invested heavily in Fannie and Freddie paper get let off the hook. They get another chance to make more bad decisions about how to deploy trillions of dollars of capital. And the politicians who passed the laws that encouraged Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to take all those wild risks? They’re up for reelection.

Implications for the Future

The complete collapse of the agencies that provided 80% of new mortgages year-to-date is now here. The whole structure of creating mortgage-backed securities and passing them on is gone. There will be no creating new phony tranches of sliced and diced SIV debt, and no CDO and no CDS and no AAA-rated toxic waste. We don’t know what happens to $62 trillion of notional CDS derivatives, but somebody is holding a disaster. This financial crisis is far from over.

By itself, the government might be able to manage some of these problems, but the problems are not isolated: the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) guarantees $4.3 trillion worth of bank deposits… but has only a $50 billion reserve to cover bank failures.

Interest rates are close to 50-year lows, from the Fed cutting the short-term rate, and as a result of the flight to Treasuries as a “safe harbor”… which serves to drive rates down. But the longer-term implication of the bailout is more deficits… and more deficits will weaken the dollar and therefore, in the longer-term, drive interest rates higher -- especially for non-government-guaranteed debt, to cover inflation and increased risk.

There will be many more financial institutions in trouble: perhaps 150 banks will fail, including probably one or two big banks, like Lehman, Citi, or Merrill. FDIC is next to need a bail-out, in our opinion, once a big commercial bank goes under.

The dollar is up in the short term on what we expect is a short covering rally, but that is not consistent with long-term implications, so we don’t expect it to stay up.

Homeowners gain, as Fannie and Freddie are allowed to continue to expand in 2009. But after that, they will be looking for a newly reconstituted system beyond what is in the conservatorships that are being asked to unwind. The long term is unclear.

The U.S. Treasury is now in the mortgage business. The financial future of the world is crumbling, and this is the biggest step in that change.

David Again, With a Public Service Announcement

Before we move on, I would like to pause for a quick public service announcement.

expanding audit program

Okay, with that out of the way, let’s move on to the topic of who is actually in control of monetary policy in these here United States. And for that, I gladly turn the page over to our own Bud Conrad.

The Reason Paulson Panicked

By Bud Conrad, September 11, 2008

Foreigners have been reinvesting their trade surplus into the U.S. The Federal Reserve keeps a custody account for foreign central banks, acting like a broker for them in buying U.S. Treasuries and agency debt. Agency debt is debt issued by agencies, most notably Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Fed publishes the data weekly. It is the most up-to-date source of foreign investment.

The chart below shows what happened monthly. Foreigners broke a record for selling off their holdings at the annualized rate of $280 billion in August.

The U.S. housing market and Freddie and Fannie in particular have depended on foreigners buying their debt to fund mortgage loans. The above data show a loss of confidence by foreigners and a reversal from buying $200 billion a year… to selling off their holdings. There were other pressures, including PIMCO’s Bill Gross demanding a bailout before his huge fund would invest. But this foreign investment pullback was undoubtedly a big reason that Paulson had to act over the weekend to keep the whole agency debt market from collapsing.

Think through the implications of the largest bailout in history being dictated by foreign central banks -- I suspect that the Chinese are the main culprit, based on Paulson’s frequent travels there of late. Think through the fact that our monetary/fiscal policy is now essentially being dictated by foreigners. The bottom line is that the U.S. is now in the position of a third-world country because of our debt!

On the topic of the size of the bailout and the likely cost: in my view, a 10% loss on the $5 trillion insured by Fannie and Freddie is entirely plausible. That would mean that the government would have to come up with $500 billion… just to make the operations whole. But that doesn’t do anything to recapitalize their businesses so that they can continue as a successful ongoing enterprise. That would likely require another $300 billion to be credible.

Now where does the federal government get that kind of money… $800 billion? It means no health care program for Obama, or no defense spending or nuclear power initiative for McCain.

One of the risks a new president might face would be if the public catches on to the fact that the U.S. Government is going to have to pay close to a trillion dollars to bail out foreign central bank holders of bad debt from Freddie and Fannie. Given the trade-off – i.e., no new social programs – many people might decide that bailing out the foreign central banks isn’t such a high priority. The conclusion from that is that the bailout and reconstitution may not happen as planned, for financial reasons; never mind, constitutionality, or just because lawmakers feel duped by estimates of $25 billion. What happens if the mortgage defaults reach 20%? It could happen.

This situation is still very fluid and far from resolved.

“On a Scale with the Crash of 1929 and the Civil War”

David again.

When Andy Miller used that phrase in relation to the Freddie and Fannie takeover – and he didn’t use it flippantly – I took notice. As you know, here at Casey Research, we believe the unfolding crisis will be one for the history books… but we are not used to hearing such words from a mainstream business executive.

So, why was the Freddie and Fannie takeover so significant? Simply, it puts the economy even further out into deeply uncharted waters, with the U.S. Government now standing directly behind the organizations that, per Bud’s earlier comments, have year-to-date been responsible for guaranteeing some 80% of all U.S. mortgages.

Because the event is unprecedented, the consequences are also unpredictable.

To make that point, consider that since making the takeover announcement, the situation has continued to evolve. Or, more accurately, devolve… evidenced by the following items:

The problem with this move, and it is symptomatic of the problem with the whole stinky mess, is that if you ignore longer-term funding obligations that cause it to balloon into the stratosphere, total U.S. Government debt now rings in at about $9 trillion. Toss $5 trillion onto that number, and you might just scare the wrong people… i.e., the foreign holders of dollars.

If there is one thing you can count on, it is that the Treasury will try to find some clever way to obfuscate the true cost of the bailout, which will be exponentially larger than the $25 billion they have suggested. (Recall that the cost of the Iraq war was initially estimated by the administration at $50 to $60 billion… current estimates put the total at closer to $3 trillion.)

And then, there’s this…

So, what these fine senators are proposing is essentially a 3-month moratorium on paying mortgage payments for many. Other than a testament to the stupidity of career politicians, it represents a huge step in the wrong direction… for taxpayers. I am as sympathetic as the next guy to the challenges now being faced by homeowners. But whether you give a person a 90-day or a 9-month moratorium, if you can’t afford the home, you can’t afford the home. This sort of legislation only assures that the bills mount or the loans go that much more in arrears. And it assures that once the moratorium is lifted, the process of actually cleaning up the mess will drag out for that much longer.

Meanwhile, many of the homes in question will be deserted, vandalized and stripped down to the sticks. And, as Andy Miller pointed out in his Casey Report interview, the disincentives will mount for private lenders to make mortgage loans. Thus, the housing crisis can be expected to continue, possibly for years, setting up a powerful negative feedback loop, with yet more downward pressure on prices, more defaults, more foreclosures, more debt moving onto the back of taxpayers.

But it gets worse.

Now that the government has made it clear that it is in the bailout business, it will be very hard for them to draw the line on who qualifies.

For instance, as we have been talking about for some time now, Lehman Brothers is about to be folded into someone else’s family. And Merrill Lynch is right behind them. As was the case with Bear Stearns, will the government end up as a party to whatever deal is struck? Probably.

Then there is the whole banking sector, which is in deep, deep trouble. It is looking more likely with each passing day that WaMu, a giant, will fail. They will be far from the last, as the trend of bank failures is far closer to the beginning than it is to the end.

And then there is the matter of faltering industry. This from the Associated Press earlier this week…

I love how the lobbyists have thoughtfully packaged their well-timed pitch for the big bucks in the wrapping of “energy independence.” And that part about the auto industry being an essential component to the “backbone of the U.S. economy” is inspired. Funny, I thought the backbone of the economy was the free-market system that, in its less diluted form, was responsible for making the U.S. the world’s richest economy.

But no worries. No responsible politician would authorize a bailout of this magnitude to a group of car makers who, as friend Porter Stansberry points out, collectively have a market capitalization that is less than half the amount being requested.

Okay, okay, Obama, courting the union workers, might roll for it, but not McCain. At least we can count on that.

Well, not exactly. The AP article continues…

“Democrat Barack Obama has criticized Republican rival John McCain for not supporting the full $50 billion loan program. McCain said last week he supported fully covering the $25 billion loan program in the energy law.”
Oh, well.

In my view, the government is desperate at this point… desperate to do something, anything, other than let the chips fall where they may… and must, if the country is going to move on. Instead, as the crisis gains momentum, the government has shown that it will try to manage things, but what it will really end up doing is rushing from emergency to emergency, stepping in again and again as the lender of last resort.

It is an untenable situation. It cannot end well.

Before continuing, I wanted to share a photo from Casey Researcher and daily correspondent Ed Steer of a bear that I think deserves serious consideration as the new poster child for U.S. industry.

What Does This All Mean to Investors?

Earlier this week, I was interviewed by a news service. As we talked, the notion struck me that the interview format might be useful in addressing some of the concerns expressed in the emails I have received lately. And so, with no other interviewer handy, I decided I’d tackle the job myself.

Me: Thanks for making time available today. I can imagine you’re a bit busy, you know, with everything going on in the markets and all.

David: My pleasure. Yes, things are certainly busy, but I’m taking off for a vacation to Portugal next week, so I’ll probably survive.

Me: What’s that music I hear in the background? I can barely hear you.

David: Sorry about that, it’s Polly by Nirvana. It’s actually one of their more mellow songs. Too bad about Kurt Cobain, the guy had a real talent but he couldn’t handle the success and made a lot of bad decisions, not the least of which was frying his brain with excessive quantities of unhealthful stimulants. His later music was truly horrible, but he still managed to secure his reputation by killing himself.

Me: Pretty morbid, but how about we talk about investments? Let’s start with gold. You’ve been very vocal in your bullishness on gold. But as we speak, gold is trading around $750. Are you still bullish, or are you starting to curb your enthusiasm?

David: I’ve never been more bullish. Now, stop rolling your eyes. I’m serious, and here’s why. When trying to understand where investment markets may be headed in the future, we have to largely rely on a combination of hard facts and observations of cause-and-effect relationships that history has shown to have some correlation.

So, what are the hard facts of the situation today? Well, for one thing, we are in the grips of a truly monumental financial crisis, one for the history books. We have the government essentially taking responsibility for over half of the mortgages in the nation, and by passing “anti-predatory lending” legislation and otherwise messing in the free market, assuring that what few private lenders there are still in the mortgage business will soon exit. We also know that the housing bubble was the largest in history, on the order of $30 trillion. And we know that that bubble, and all the little bubbles that spun off from it, were critical drivers of U.S. consumption which, in turn, was a critical driver of global economic growth.

And we know that the housing bubble is now deflating, quickly, with absolutely no turnaround in sight.

Me: That sounds deflationary.

David: No question. As Terry Coxon put it so succinctly, we now have an economy where lenders are afraid to lend, and borrowers are afraid to borrow. That is not a formula for economic growth but contraction. But it is important to interject the factor of time into this discussion. Is the economy in a downturn? Absolutely. Will investments that suffer in an economic downturn suffer in this downturn? Absolutely. Will the government do everything in its power to try to curb this downturn? Absolutely.

Which is why I remain so bullish for gold. While gold is temporarily out of favor with the trading herd, in this day and age, information moves quickly. As the government redoubles its efforts to fix all the many ails of the U.S. economy – and its only real power comes from the printing press – Mr. Market will take note and the pendulum will shift back towards tangibles.

Me: What about the rebound in the dollar?

David: There is a very high correlation between gold and the dollar…and between gold and oil, which is, of course, priced in dollars. It’s hard to argue with the contention that the U.S. dollar was oversold, and that oil was overbought. So, the U.S. dollar has had a bounce, as was inevitable because trees don’t go to the moon, and no investment moves in just one direction. And oil corrected, for much the same reason. As a consequence, gold took a big hit. But what happens as the crisis continues to unfold and the trading herd remembers that the U.S. dollar is trash? Oh, and so is the euro and the pound and the yen? Where is the money going to go next? The Chinese renminbi? Sure, some of it might… but I have to believe that more and more of it is going to find its way into gold.

I recently commented that the 24-hour trading volume on currency futures contracts is worth about $3.2 trillion. Against that number, gold trades about $26 billion and silver just $4.5 billion. When the currency traders start looking for their next safe harbor, I have to believe that some small percentage is going to head into tangibles. And what’s more tangible than gold?

It may not happen overnight, but it will happen. And when it does, the gold price is heading back toward $1,000 in a hurry.

Me: What about gold stocks?

David: To answer that question, you have to start by separating the gold stocks into two categories; the junior explorers and the producers.

Starting with the latter, I remain very bullish on the big producers. At today’s gold prices, the good ones, such as we follow in BIG GOLD, are throwing off large amounts of free cash. How many other sectors can you say that about these days? But the story is even better, because the stocks have been punished along with the broader market and with gold. Thus, they are selling for ridiculously low valuations, by just about any standards.

Historically, there have been a number of occasions where the gold stocks have initially fallen with the broader markets, but then snapped back relatively quickly and head to new highs. I think we’ll see this pattern repeat, and I don’t think we’ll have to wait overly long for it.

There is one other factor in the favor of the big gold companies, but it’s not particularly good news for investors in the junior exploration companies for the near term. Namely that the cashed-up big gold companies are beginning to pick off the juniors with serious deposits that lack the cash to make forward progress in these challenging times. And, thanks to the current market conditions, they don’t have to pay big premiums for those companies. So, that’s a big plus for the producers, but not so good for some of the juniors.

Me: Speaking of the juniors, seems like you should have seen the meltdown coming.

David: We certainly didn’t foresee the depth of the pullback in the juniors. At this point, the losses on juniors are a similar scale as those suffered by investors in the financials, which we did anticipate. In our defense, we did make a couple of moves relatively early on that I think were important. The first was to recommend selling all our appreciated base metals juniors back in August 2007, locking in big gains. Our rationale back then was that base metals were particularly susceptible to the economic downturn we saw coming, and that made it all the more important for subscribers to take their considerable profits off the table.

The other move, made around the same time, was to begin tightening up the portfolio of our remaining stocks, shifting our focus primarily to the highest-quality juniors involved in advanced stages of gold exploration. That was consistent with our view that gold’s role as a monetary metal would become highly valued in the economic crisis. That view hasn’t changed, but the structural underpinnings of the junior resource sector has taken a major hit, causing even the highest-quality juniors to suffer big setbacks.

Me: What structural damage are you referring to?

David: First and foremost, there has been a flight from risk. And we have never made it a secret that the junior resource stocks are risky – it’s what gives them such wonderful upside – which is why we constantly remind investors to only take positions with a relatively small percentage of their portfolio.

Regardless, in the process of trying to reduce risk, an increasing number of investors began trying to unload their juniors, at the same time that buying interest was drying up. That has effectively kept the lid on most of the stocks, even those that have delivered the drill results needed to confirm they are sitting on a major new deposit.

The situation has been exacerbated by a wave of redemptions by investors in the funds that had moved into the smaller resource plays – RAB Capital being the latest example. To meet those liquidations, the managers have been forced to sell, almost without regard to price.

So, ironically, just when everything should be breaking the way of the juniors, they are struggling.

Me: Is it time to throw in the towel on the juniors?

David: Personally, I’m holding. But I am doing so because the positions I own that actually matter – to wit, those of any real size – are all in companies that used their shareholder capital efficiently to discover and/or prove up significant discoveries.

And, per our criteria for the vast majority of the companies we are following in the International Speculator and Casey Investment Alert services, the companies I own are well cashed up and have proven management teams. It is highly unlikely that the deposits they have found are going to be returned to the former property owners or dumped in a fire-sale… at least not as long as the cash holds out. And they have cash.

So, I think, in the longer run, they’ll come out a lot more than fine. Could they get cheaper in the short term? Absolutely. If a fund is forced to dump everything, then quality is no longer a protection; in the short term, the stock is going down.

Between now and the end of the year, I would only look to invest in very special situations. A recent example was a company we brought to the attention of CIA readers on August 15 that subsequently announced a major discovery, giving readers a quick opportunity to lock in a gain of as much as 75% within a couple of weeks. But, as we expect to see in this market, the stock has since come back a bit, though we’re still well in positive territory.

So, the special opportunities are out there, but they take a lot of work to uncover. Fortunately, hard work doesn’t bother people around here very much.

But returning to something I said earlier, we really can’t know what tomorrow is going to bring. With market conditions as volatile as they are today -- and I expect things to get violently volatile before this is over – who is to say that gold doesn’t do a runner through $1,000 almost overnight? That could be a big game changer, and it is certainly not out of the question given the powerful uncertainty hanging over the global economy just now.

So, personally, I’m maintaining my positions in the juniors and looking to raise cash for the truly amazing opportunities I think the quality juniors are going to offer once things bottom early next year. At the point where there are no more sellers, these stocks are going to explode to the upside. As Rick Rule put it in my recent call with him, and Rick is one of the most successful resource investors ever, he is becoming very, very bullish on the better-quality juniors.

If I was pressed to it, I would say that the companies that we are following in the International Speculator and the Casey Investment Alert are going to do exceptionally well next year. We’ll have to get through this lag between the cause of their finding a major deposit and the effect of getting paid for it, but they will get paid.

I know that many of Aurelian’s shareholders were disappointed by the price that Kinross paid for them – but the number worked out to be about $88 per ounce in the ground. Not really all that bad, given that that ground is located in a very politically unstable place. By this time next year, the premium on good deposits, in good jurisdictions, should rise considerably.

Me: You focused your comments on the quality junior resource companies. What about the other 95%? You know, the paper tigers with indifferent management, small or non-existent mineral deposits, and little to no cash?

David: If you own any stocks that fit any part of that description, I’d be looking to beat the market to the punch by selling as soon as possible. Certainly before any serious year-end tax selling gets underway.

The bottom line is that bad companies will have a very bad outcome, simply because they are not going to find the cash they need to survive.

Me: What about base metals? Still bearish?

David: The world’s manufacturers are not going to all close up shop and go away, no matter how bad things get. Despite the big run-up in the prices of many base metals, copper for example, supply inventories throughout the period have not shot up as you might expect they would. So the supply/demand remains fairly tight, and we expect it will continue that way for the foreseeable future.

Our big concern about the base metals has been a sell-off due to broad concerns about a major economic downturn. Since our sell signal last August, we have seen much of the froth come off the base metals and, in the case of some of the metals, a steep sell-off. As the depth and scope of the crisis become widely apparent, we see base metals becoming oversold. At that point we expect to be buyers, competing for our shares with the end users who actually need the feed for their smelters or for their factories.

Me: What about oil? Given the positive correlation with gold, the outlook for oil seems important.

David: It is. While oil, like base metals, may take a few more hits as recession fears spread, the medium to long-term outlook is very bullish. As we have discussed at some length in Casey Energy Opportunities, on the order of 70% of the world’s production is now in the hands of state-run energy companies. That’s important for two reasons.

The first is that, unlike a private company where management has to be attentive to the expectations of shareholders, a government entity will respond only to the wishes of officialdom. As Rick Rule points out, governments have, for decades, dedicated large percentages of their oil revenues to the task of mollifying their populations with all manner of social programs. That money is not being spent to find and develop new fields. Which, in turn, assures that oil supplies will remain tight, and shortages are a locked-in certainty in the years just ahead.

Similarly, I have written about Jeffrey Brown’s Export Land Model, which shows that Mexico will go offline as an exporter to the U.S. within the next six years. While much of that has to do with geology, there’s no question that a diversion of oil revenues to social programs has limited new exploration.

Then there are the geopolitical aspects. If the big oil-producing countries, which include Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, think the price of oil is getting too low, they have it in their ability to stir things up or organize a cut in production, and loudly announce same, to drive prices back up. There are a lot of geopolitical apples in the air just now, not the least being the very real potential for an Israeli attack on Iran.

And just today, Venezuela tossed the U.S. ambassador out and announced it is withdrawing its U.S. envoy. Despite all his bluster and bravado, Venezuela is still the third or fourth largest supplier of oil to the U.S., depending on the day, so, who knows, maybe this time around Chavez ends up cutting off the U.S. and redirecting the country’s oil elsewhere? If there is one truth about history, it is that anything can happen at any time.

So, the outlook for oil remains strong. At least until we get the inevitable breakthrough in technology, I think it will be solar, that changes the entire game. But before that happens, the odds are high we’ll see $200 a barrel.

Me: What about other opportunities?

David: Now you’re talking. In a time of great crisis, there is also great opportunity. It’s all a matter of orientation. Being aware of the scope of the problems now challenging the global economy – and a surprising number of investors are still unaware of just how serious this situation is -- gives you a real leg up in positioning your portfolio to profit. In fact, it is getting hard to keep up with all the many ways to profit from this crisis, though we’re certainly giving it a good try in The Casey Report. Shorting regional banks with portfolios stuffed to the gills with condominium mortgages, or anticipating the inevitability of rising interest rates, or shorting financials, or buying more gold at today’s low prices, or buying natural gas companies on the cheap… and… and.

In the final analysis, I am sorry to say that the common man is going to take a serious hit here. But for the uncommon man, and by that I mean anyone actually willing and able to act decisively at the right time in the right sectors, the potential to earn investment fortunes in the next year or two is very real.

We see it as our job to keep our readers up to date on the unfolding situation and on the ways to play it. It’s a job we take seriously, even though we do sometimes talk to ourselves.

Taunting the Tiger

You may recall the tragic tale of the teenagers, encouraged by the liberal application of pot and alcohol, who thought taunting the tiger at the San Francisco zoo last year was a good idea, a notion that changed quickly when the tiger jumped the fence and expressed his displeasure in that special way only angry tigers can.

I recalled that story when reviewing the following story emanating, as usual, from that towering bastion of hijinks and stupidity, Washington D.C.

Now, rules are rules and all that, but at this particular moment, Congress might want to look the other way on new legislation to tax foreign investors in the U.S.

After all, should the IRS succeed in its endeavors in this regard, it might, just might, make the U.S. less attractive as a place for foreigners to park funds. And right now, I think the U.S. probably needs all the investment capital it can get.

Why, no sooner had those words rolled onto the screen than the following popped up in an email from the ever reliable Mr. Steer…

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-09/12/content_7020656.htm

I suspect, but can’t know, that given the general environment where bonds will soon look like a really, really bad idea, and stocks won’t look much better… at least not those in the U.S., given the proposed IRS enforcement, coupled with that whole collapsing financial markets thing… the Chinese and others in Asia will see some wisdom in adding some more precious metals to the portfolio mix. It wouldn’t take much more than a percentage point or two of $4 trillion to do some pretty amazing things to the price of gold.

A Very Useful New Service

Last week, I finally found time to do something I have been meaning to do for years but have always put off: I sent off a bunch of my old VHS tapes to be transferred to DVD.

The tapes, from my youth and my family life, have been gathering dust and slowly degrading.

Well, anyway, I finally got around to researching the best way to handle the transfer and settled on the Photo Archival Company. I don’t do a lot of product endorsements, but the service was so excellent – including changing my delivery instructions over the weekend – the prices so reasonable (about $10 a tape) and the quality of the transfer so good, I highly recommend them.

I was particularly amazed that they were able to successfully transfer, and retain the quality of the initial recording, of one tape that was almost 25 years old, of a very strange adventure I was involved with in Africa.

In any event, as I suspect you probably have old VHS tapes or Super 8’s, whatever, lying around, you may find this service as useful as I have. Check it out.

Miscellany

Good perspectives on gold. Frank Holmes, the top-performing gold fund manager, often comes across interesting facts and insights, which he shares on his website (you can read some of his recent postings by clicking here). Recently Frank co-authored an excellent book on gold investing, titled GoldWatcher. It’s quite well done and well worth the price, even though it’s not available on Kindle yet.
Orange County phyle starting up. If you live in Orange County, California, we have a subscriber who is willing to organize get-togethers. Drop us a note at phyle@caseyresearch.com.
Doug takes on James Carville and Fred Thompson, live… The annual New Orleans Investment Conference is coming up, Nov. 13 – 17. It has become something of a tradition for the organizers of this long-running event to put Doug Casey up against all manner of opposition in a debate format. This year’s challengers should be particularly interesting, especially Carville, who is famous for his rapier wit. Can Doug prevail against this media slick? Only one way to find out… be there. More details on the conference can be found here.
Music makes the world go round. I was thrilled to get so many emails with so many great songs I have never heard – and reminders of many great old songs I have. I was going to do a compilation of all your recommendations in this edition but ran out of time, so I will save that for the edition after next, when I am back from Portugal. Until then, thanks to all of you who took the time to write with your favorites!

And Finally…

And with that, I will sign off for this week… and for next as well, as I’ll be visiting with friends in Portugal. As I sign off, gold is trading up at $753, and the U.S. stock market isn’t open yet… I started quite early today. But a glance at the news suggests another rough day... with retail sales falling further and Lehman teetering.

One item of interest to gold investors, a group I am happy to belong to, has it that U.S. Producer Prices fell 0.9% in August. At first glance, that might seem a reversal of last month’s robust gains. But scratch at the data a bit, and you find that producers paid 9.6 percent more for goods in August 2008 than they did in August 2007. And, taking out food and energy, you find that the gain in “core” prices in August was 3.6%, the biggest year-over-year increase since 1991.

Even so, you can expect the pundits to point to the data as a sign that the inflation has been tamed, giving the government yet more license, as if they needed it, to belly up to the money bar.

Which brings me to one final item before I sign off.

The days ahead are going to try the mettle of most people and the quality of our lives will, in the end, be determined by how well we cope. It is important to keep things, good and bad, in their proper perspective. There’s more to life than money, and we as a species are truly resilient.

In that regard, I think the photo here, from Ireland during a recent flood, strikes a resonant chord.

Next week Olivier Garret, our hard-working CEO, will be writing this column.

And so, until the week after next, thank you for reading and for being a subscriber.

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC