The Room : David Galland

The Room – 05/15/2009

David Galland — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:48:00 GMT

Dear Reader,

Last time I wrote, I labored under the after-effects of a mild case of “immoderation.” In response to which the ever-moving Doug Casey (writing from Washington D.C.) sent along the following witticisms, which I thought you might enjoy...

After a week of engaging in all manner of healthful activity, I am ready once again to tilt my lance against the armies of absurdity that assault the senses more or less constantly these days.

This week, for instance, Alan Greenspan opined that the economy has bottomed, and the stock market actually rallied in response! It’s akin to Bernard Madoff announcing he is opening a new money management service from the secure facility where he now resides, and having investors rush all over themselves to hand him their money.

Or how about these headlines...

US Retail Sales Unexpectedly Fall for Second Month (Bloomberg)… and, Foreclosures: “April was a shocker"(CNN)… or Unemployment Claims in U.S. Jump More Than Forecast on Idled Auto Plants (Bloomberg).

Now, despite my ready access to a large and very capable team of researchers who are intensely curious and focused on facts, I won’t claim anything close to perfect knowledge about anything. But I will claim that any economic observer who is “shocked” by any piece of bad news these days has either been misreading their doctor’s instructions on their daily doses of Valium, or is just plain stupid.

But the absurdity doesn’t stop there. Not by a long shot.

For proof of that contention, look no further than the crime of omission the mainstream media are now committing by failing to report, emphasized with banner headlines, the train wreck now occurring with the government’s finances.

Starting with the trouble the U.S. Treasury had on May 7 when it tried to auction off $14 billion in long-term bonds. Skeptical buyers demanded higher yields, forcing the rate to rise from 4.19% to 4.29% over the course of the auction.

But even that is just the tip of the iceberg. The latest developments have to do with the sharp shortfall in tax revenues we have been anticipating.

Here’s the story…

Tax Revenues Tanking

While everyone else has been focused on the banks’ stress tests and how much government is spending to bail out troubled “too big to fails,” a disturbing trend on the other side of the equation is now emerging: how much (or rather, how little) the U.S. government is receiving in tax revenues.

After combing through the past 25 editions of the “Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the United States Government,” which is compiled and published by the Treasury Department’s Financial Management Service, we created the following chart.

Here’s what’s going on:

In 2007 and 2008, government tax revenues averaged about $633.15 billion per quarter. For the first quarter of 2009, however, the numbers just in tell us that tax receipts totaled only about $442.39 billion -- a decline of 30%.
Looking to confirm the trend, we compared the data for April – the big kahuna of tax collection months – to the 2007-2008 average, and found that individual income taxes this year were down more than 40%. The situation is even worse for corporate income taxes, which were down a stunning 67%!
When you add in all revenue from all sources (including Social Security revenue, government fees, etc.), the fiscal year-to-date – October through April – revenue shortfall comes to 19%, vs. the 14.6% projected in Obama’s budget. If, however, the accelerating shortfall apparent year-to-date, and in April in particular, continues, the spread between projected and actual tax receipts will widen considerably.

Tellingly, for the first time since 1983, the U.S. government posted a deficit in April. That’s a big swing in the wrong direction, as the bump in personal tax collections in April historically results in a big surplus -- on average about $68 billion.

What are the implications of this tanking tax revenue?

For starters, it means the federal government deficit is going be as bad or worse than the $2.5 trillion Bud Conrad, chief economist of Casey Research, projected it to be last year.

If the shortfall in individual and corporate tax revenue persists -- and we expect it will -- then the deep hole the government is already digging for itself will be that much deeper.

Using the government’s own expense projections, the revenue shortfall, even if it doesn’t worsen further, would push the fiscal 2009 budget deficit up to about $1.958 trillion. For reasons we’ve discussed at some length in The Casey Report, those expense projections are likely to be significantly understated.

Case in point, in January the government projected a $1.2 trillion deficit for fiscal year 2009… in March, just three months later, they upped the projection to $1.8 trillion. That $600 billion “adjustment” alone totaled more than any full-year budget deficit in the nation’s history.

Yet, the real fly in the ointment is that the actual borrowing by the Treasury is likely to be at least half a trillion dollars more than the deficit.

That’s because the Treasury is buying toxic paper (mortgage, credit card loans, etc.) and putting them on the books with a higher value than the market is willing to assign. While that makes the budget deficit appear smaller, it doesn’t negate the fact that the government still must borrow the money needed to buy the toxic paper in the first place. The additional revenue shortfall means they have to raise that much more money. Based on the struggle they had pushing the $14 billion in long-term notes at the latest auction, it becomes increasingly apparent that when push comes to shove, the only way the government is going to come up with the money needed to meet its aggressive spending is to print it up.

In other words, events are rolling out almost exactly as we have been anticipating. Below, for example, are some useful excerpts from an April 3 article titled “Widening Deficits” by Casey Research CEO Olivier Garret. To quote…

In the midst of the Great Depression, the 1931 federal tax revenues had fallen by 52% from their 1929 highs. While we do not expect anything that dramatic in 2009, it would not be unrealistic to see a 20% to 25% reduction in cash flow from tax collections this tax season. Such a drop would pose significant challenges given that spending commitments are off the charts and climbing.
Later in that same article, Olivier continued,

Olivier’s forecast of failed auctions and rising interest rates on Treasuries proved more prophetic as a May 7th story from Bloomberg reported:

So, what does all this mean?

As per above, the rock-and-the-hard-place scenario we have been predicting is unfolding before our eyes. At this point, other than sharply changing course and letting the free market cope with the crisis through a brutal “survival of the fittest” scenario, the government is left with no other option than to accelerate its buying up of its own debt.

Which is to say, it must push even harder on the levers of its printing presses, further setting the stage for the massive period of inflation we continue to see as inevitable… and for the stunning rise in interest rates we are now positioning ourselves for in The Casey Report (and, you can too… learn more).

Super Fed, Super Cop?

Did you see that the Obama administration wants to turn the Fed into a “super cop” to regulate any company considered by the government to be “too big to fail”? If not, you can read the story here…

That notion caught the attention of Bud Conrad, no big fan of the Fed. In his own words…

video of testimony by the Inspector General

anything

David again. Speaking of banking, there is a short but very informative video that explains in simple terms what a sham the recently concluded bank stress test really was. Watch it here…

Sharks Eat Sharks

Dear friend and regular UK correspondent Sadia sent me a collection of links to the unfolding media scandal now underway in England over the egregious abuses of expense accounts by members of parliament in that country. Here’s her email…

Times: Parliament's darkest day: MPs suspended and Michael Martin at risk

Linked here

Times: Shahid Malik stands down as Justice Minister after PM orders inquiry into his expenses
Linked here.

Daily Mail: Bring them to justice! The Mail helps to launch campaign to prosecute sleaze MPs
Linked here.

Independent: The married couple who took taxpayers for £282,731
Linked here.

FT: MP claimed for non-existent mortgage
Linked here.

Guardian: MPs' expenses
Linked here.

Telegraph: MPs' expenses
Linked here.

David again. My purpose for including all those links was not to invite you to spend the rest of your day in idle reading, but rather to make the point that there is an honest-to-goodness, blood-in-the-water media frenzy now underway in England. Members of both the ruling party and its loyal opposition are (correctly) under assault – which is to say, the very institution of government in the UK is running for cover.

The good news, for this side of the Atlantic, is that you can bet your last dollar that the desk editors of various U.S. media factories, having taken note of the satisfactory increase in eyeballs-on-pages being generated in England over the expense scandal, are now urging their reporters to look for – and find – a similar scandal in Washington D.C.

I suspect they won’t have to look too hard.

While no fan of the whole genre of news-as-entertainment, I expect to be highly entertained by the revelations of expense abuses by U.S. congressmen and sundry bureaucrats that should be coming to a media outlet near you soon.

Eat Dirt

Given the general outlook and views of those here at Casey Research, it is something of an oddity that we are headquartered in Vermont. It is, in fact, something of an accident -- the outcome of the usual twists and turns of life that brought me to this place roughly 25 years ago. Subsequently, Casey Research followed along.

The "oddity" part has to do with the fact that this is one of the highest-taxed states in the union, and the overarching political temperament could be accurately described as "socialist." In fact, Vermont's Senator Bernie Sanders is the nation's only elected (openly declared) socialist.

Yet, the place has much to recommend it, including a general lack of population due to the aforementioned high taxes and a well-earned reputation for cold winter weather. But it also has an abundance of beautiful scenery, scenery that includes any number of ski hills and even the shores of the six largest lake in the country. When the weather is good here, Vermont is very nice indeed.

I mention all of this because I came across a story this week from one of our fellow residents, an amateur environmentalist by the name of Annie Leonard who has created a popular YouTube video about America's "stuff"... the general theme being that to own "stuff" is bad. Very bad.

To give you a sense of her views, here is an excerpt from an article on her film.

“We’ll start with extraction, which is a fancy word for natural resource exploitation, which is a fancy word for trashing the planet,” she says at one point. “What this looks like is we chop down the trees, we blow up mountains to get the metals inside, we use up all the water and we wipe out the animals.”

There is an old saying, "Beware what you wish for because you may get it.” While I cannot find it in my heart to hope that Ms. Leonard gets her wish, because then we would all be living in caves and subsisting on roots and berries, I can certainly hope that the populace come to their senses before her Luddite notions gain any real traction.

Alas, I think it is a false hope because she has just signed a contract with Simon & Schuster to publish a book on the same theme. Further, her video is now being widely distributed to the nation's schools to be used in their normal curriculum of brainwashing.

You, too, can glimpse the future we should aspire to, according to Ms. Leonard, by emulating the world of the past – by taking 20 minutes now to view the same video, “The Story of Stuff,” that millions of schoolchildren will be viewing in the months and years ahead.

This seems to be an appropriate time to mention that we are now homeschooling one of our children... and none too soon. More on that topic on another day.

(But since we are on the topic, however briefly, if you have any good recommendations for online courses for middle- and high-school students, I would greatly appreciate it if you'd shoot them my way, at David@CaseyResearch.com.)

Word from the (Mexican) Street

Earlier this week, as part of an effort to further calibrate our investment advice to the needs of our readers, I reviewed a count of Casey Research subscribers by geographic location. As usual, I was pleasantly surprised at the large number of countries in which our subscribers reside – including Burkina Faso, Lebanon, Brunei, Nepal, and well over 100 more.

Once again tapping into this widespread network, I was able to solicit a first-hand report “from the ground” as to the state of things in Mexico. Jeff B., a longtime correspondent, filed this dispatch on how the swine flu hysteria had affected life in his current home town of Acapulco…

Star Trek – “Stayed Wide Awake”

Last weekend, I took the kids to see the new Star Trek movie. While most movie reviewers tend to use some number of stars or perhaps thumbs pointing upwards or downwards in order to communicate their opinions on the movies they watch, I have a simpler system that emanates from the hours I keep.

Using my rating system, uninteresting movies warrant a "long nap" -- literally.

Mediocre fare will garner "periods of napping," or perhaps "occasional nodding off.” It is only the very best movies that rate "stayed wide awake throughout" -- the rating I enthusiastically award to the latest entry in the Star Trek movie franchise.

As a youth, I enjoyed Star Trek but would not categorize myself as a "Trekkie" (generally speaking, a self-imposed moniker that always struck me as categorizing oneself as "delusional" and maybe in need of "getting a life"). Even so, it was fun to see how the director managed to seamlessly introduce the Star Trek characters as they came together in their early careers, the background against which the movie unfolds.

But even if I had never seen a Star Trek episode, I have to believe that the overall plot and production values of the film would have sucked me in and kept me glued to my seat, as they did. The only disappointment came in mild doses, mostly associated with brief appearances by one of the original cast members whose age is sufficiently advanced at this point that you can detect a slight but distracting whistling of his dentures as he delivers his lines. But that’s a petty critique of what is otherwise a very tight movie.

So, at least by my rating system, if you're looking for an entertaining, interesting, and action-packed film for a rainy weekend, Star Trek may be just the thing.

Miscellany

Lecture on the Great Depression. While there is as much or even more misinformation on the Internet, and a great deal of mindless -- make that mind-numbing -- stupidity on services such as YouTube, there is no debate that there is also much excellent content available. For instance, if you have 49 minutes available, you can listen into an excellent lecture on the Great Depression sponsored by the Von Mises Institute. All that’s required is that you click the link here.
Charlotte Phyle… Grant in Charlotte is looking to get a phyle started. If you are in the area, drop us a note at phyle@CaseyResearch.com and we’ll get you hooked up.
Trade War… with Canada? As I was getting ready to go to press, someone sent me an article from today's Washington Post on the topic of a burgeoning trade war between the U.S. and Canada, the unintended – or maybe intended – consequence of the "Buy American" provisions inserted by Congress into the recent stimulus package. Here's an excerpt to give you a flavor of the thing...

Once again reminding one of the reason to run in the opposite direction whenever one hears the phrase "Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help." (Read the full article here)

And with that, I must sign off for the week, noting as I do that the U.S. stock market is jumping around like a yo-yo, with the DJIA down 36 points as I sign off. Gold continues to defy its naysayers by holding firm at $930, and oil is changing hands at $58 a barrel, no small feat given the surpluses now filling storage tanks, and even oil tankers, around the world. There is big money moving into inflation hedges just now… but merely a trickle compared to what’s to come.

Until next week, thanks for reading and for being a Casey Research subscriber…

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room – 03/20/2009

David Galland — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 03:36:00 GMT

Dear Reader,

I worry I shall disappoint you today. After all, how can mere words, pecked out awkwardly on a shaky airplane table, adequately communicate all that has occurred this week?

As regular readers may guess, the plane I am on is taking me to Las Vegas for our sold-out Crisis & Opportunity Summit. While the event was deliberately scheduled to give the Obama administration an opportunity to reveal its cards after having been handed Bush's busted hand, the timing has turned out to be especially propitious, coming as it is at the end of a week that seems to be of some historic significance.

Of course, we wish you were joining us here in Las Vegas -- if you aren't -- but as your correspondent, I will certainly include notes from the event in next week's missive. But that is then, and this is now.

And now, everything is going to hell.

Bernanke's Gamble

Last week I posed the rhetorical question, "Wen is Enough?" in which I mused about the possibility of the Chinese cashing in their dollar chips and turning inward with their investing. Analysts of every stripe pooh-pooh that idea, intoning that the Chinese are now stuck with their dollar reserves, and that, further, the U.S. Treasury market is the only one with sufficient liquidity and safety to meet the needs of cash-rich foreigners.

This week we saw two developments related to this story.

The first was the Treasury International Capital (TIC) report. It is data released by the U.S. Treasury on international purchases and sales of U.S. assets. When foreigners are purring contently, the TIC report confirms that foreign investors are buying up U.S. assets, particularly long-dated Treasuries, as those represent a long-term bet on the U.S. economy and, by extension, the dollar.

Conversely, when foreigners are unsure about the outlook for the U.S., the TIC reflects this by confirming a sell-off of U.S. assets, coupled with a shift in what Treasury buying there is from the more optimistic long-term end of the time scale, to the skittish "ready-to-bolt" short-term end.

Which brings us to the just released January TIC, which was, to use the word selected by one reliable observer, a "disaster."

Our own Bud Conrad, writing with one wing (the other being smashed up in his rather spectacular bicycle accident last week), provides the big picture.

Here are some of the highlights:

1) January saw $148 billion net capital outflows from U.S. securities.

2) These big capital outflows are hard to square with the dollar's January rally.

3) Both private and official investors sold long-term U.S. assets. Aside from December, foreign investors haven't been buying long-term U.S. assets since the crisis began.

4) U.S. investors bought a bunch of foreign bonds. U.S. investors have been selling off foreign bonds and equities throughout the fall, so this marks an interest change. Is it evidence of nervousness about the dollar's future?

5) Banks stopped piling into U.S. assets.

6) Private investors reduced their Treasury bill holdings by $44 billion, and banks reduced their net dollar deposits by $119 billion.

Conclusion: The substantial selling of U.S. securities shows growing concerns about U.S. economic prospects. It is not a good sign for the dollar.

David again.

One of the interesting aspects of the January TIC was the wholesale exit from U.S. agency paper, shown in the chart here.

Given that these agency securities (paper issued by Fannie, Freddie, and others) are for all intents and purposes guaranteed by the U.S. government, the sell-off of these assets is a clear signal that Wen Jiabao and other foreign creditors are now doing more than just talking about their concern over the creditworthiness of the world's largest debtor... they are taking action. Specifically, eschewing agency debt instruments and putting what money they still invest in Treasuries into the short-term stuff that can be dumped in a proverbial heartbeat.

Which brings us to our second story.

As we have previously discussed here and in other Casey Research publications, the dismal January TIC numbers confirm that the foreign buyers so essential to financing the U.S. government's elevated spending needs are falling well short of fulfilling those needs. Couple this with what has to be a sharp fall-off in tax revenues, and the government begins to find itself not just between a rock and a hard place, but between the jaws of a Maxpower Industrial Grade Locking Vise Grip.

And so, this week, the Fed announced it was going to whip up a large batch of fresh cash for the purpose of buying the agency securities and even long-term Treasury bills that no one wants.

Here's a quote from Bloomberg on the baseline story...

March 18 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve said it will buy $300 billion in Treasury securities and increase its purchases of mortgage and agency debt in an effort to bolster housing and hasten the end of the recession.

"To provide greater support to mortgage lending and housing markets, the committee decided today to increase the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet further by purchasing up to an additional $750 billion of agency mortgage- backed securities," the Federal Open Market Committee said in a statement in Washington today. "Moreover, to help improve conditions in private credit markets, the committee decided to purchase up to $300 billion of longer-term Treasury securities over the next six months."

Chairman Ben S. Bernanke is becoming more aggressive after unemployment climbed to 8.1 percent and economists forecast the economy will shrink through the middle of the year. Fed officials also kept the benchmark interest rate at between zero and 0.25 percent. The central bank also said it will consider expanding the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility to include "other financial assets," the statement said.

Altogether, this latest explosion in money creation comes to $1.2 trillion -- somewhat more than the Chinese now hold in U.S. dollar-denominated reserves, reserves that have been built up by years of heavy trade and regular (self-serving) investment in support of the U.S. government's endless spending.

And, with the flip of a proverbial switch, the Fed has diluted the dollars that make up those reserves with another cool $1.2 trillion infusion of funny money.

So much for President Obama's strong assurances last week to Wen Jiabao that the U.S. government can be counted on to be a careful shepherd of the dollar.

The dollar failed to concur with Obama's assurances by staging a sharp sell-off and, in the process, sending our favorite yellow metal up handsomely.

And the government isn't done yet.

Earlier this week, we also heard that the Treasury was considering using the Term Asset-Backed Loan Facility (TALF) program to lend up to $1 trillion to their buddies – I mean highly respected financial firms – to buy up a variety of discounted, albeit troubled assets, sweetening the deal up by making the loans "non-recourse." Simply translated, that means "can't lose."

Back in the good old days, these sorts of deals traditionally involved paper bags stuffed with unmarked bills... but that was much more inconvenient. Again, turning to Bloomberg...

As it's currently set up, the TALF may lend as much as $1 trillion to investors from hedge funds to pension funds and insurance companies to buy recently created securities backed by loans for car purchases, college education and real estate. Applications for its first loans are due tomorrow.

Broadening the TALF to include older, illiquid and lower- rated securities could allow the participants in the public-private investment funds to potentially repackage assets and sell them on to a wider group.

So, what does this all mean? Simply that the government is literally willing to do "whatever it takes" in its attempt to return the country to its bubble days, a notion that any sane observer would instantly recognize as a delusional fantasy. But hard reality and vote-getting often don't get along, and so instead we get a government on the determined path of least resistance... unleashing an ever-escalating airlift of dollars.

Sharp Words

And now I feel the need to express thoughts that might strike some as a little "sharp."

This morning, as I was driving to grab a pre-flight coffee, I heard an ad for a local car dealer promoting that – thanks to one of the federal government's many new programs – by purchasing a new car in 2009, you are able to deduct the state and local taxes you would otherwise pay come tax time. This, according to the announcer, would save you $1,500 on a $25,000 purchase. And this, they say, was just one of a number of new federal programs they could help you use to save money on your new car purchase.

For reasons that only a neurologist (or maybe a psychiatrist) could fathom, despite having heard a litany of bailout and stimulus news over the last year, this proved to be the final straw, and instead of just shaking my head in dull resignation, I felt anger.

Sitting with a friend over my coffee a few minutes later, I tried to put the source of my agitation into words. The conversation picks up after I explained to him the message of the commercial.

He: "Dude, I hear ya, and I hate all this stuff, but it's necessary."

I: "Why is it necessary? Who is going to pay the $1,500 that the government doesn't have in the first place? This and all the stimulus programs are just putting the country further and further into debt. And who's going to pay for that debt? Not us, but our children and their children. Sure, we're going to get stuck for more taxes now, but there is no way the Obama administration can cover all this new spending with taxes, and the foreigners aren't going to keep lending to us. So, it comes down to borrowing more and more, beggaring future generations."

"Hey, it wasn't Obama who got us into this mess, man."

"No, it wasn't, and I'm not saying it was. It was Bush and the entire Congress, with some of them, like Barney Frank, more responsible than others. But it's Obama's ball now, and he's calling the shots. And as much as I want to give him the benefit of the doubt, I can't believe what he's doing."

"Well, he's got to do something, man, otherwise the economy would crash and everyone would suffer even more pain."

"Exactly!" I said, maybe even sputtering a bit, "But it is our generation that should take the hit. It is us who should feel the pain of the collapse. We did it to ourselves by standing idly by while the government and its many friends in the banking sector got us into this mess. And don't forget the orgy of spending and personal debt that the population engaged in, encouraged every step of the way by the government's easy-money policies. This all happened on our watch, but instead of taking our medicine, we the people are now encouraging the government in its many efforts to reinflate the bubble, fully aware all we are really doing is trying to shift the mess onto the backs of our children, and their children, and probably their children's children. What a bunch of cowards we are."

(That, of course, is not a perfect recounting of our conversation... I'm pretty sure I interjected one and maybe two "rat bastards" into my diatribe.)

You can call all of this quantitative easing if you wish; I call it institutionalized cowardice walking hand in glove with mob psychology.

Or you can call it "change."

If, however, I were the Chinese, I would call it "enough" and accelerate my plans to swap my dollars for just about any tangible asset at this point. There's no reason for them to stick around to share the pain we have all but guaranteed our children.

Protectionism

While there is a fair amount of debate about the causes of the Great Depression of the 1930s, there is one lesson from that dire circumstance that pretty much everyone agrees on: that the global trade war set off by the U.S. with the Smoot-Hawley Act and its many tariffs only made things significantly worse and helped prolong the depression. Further, everyone agrees that the world, faced with an economic crisis such as that now unfolding, would never make that mistake again.

But then the U.S. government went ahead anyway and slapped our trading partners in the face by including the Buy American provision in the recently passed stimulus package.

Those trading partners are starting to slap back.

First, Mexico announced this week that they would, henceforth, be foisting tariffs on a wide array of U.S.-made products... this in retaliation to the entirely disingenuous refusal by the U.S. government to live up to the terms in the NAFTA agreement whereby Mexican trucks would be allowed to drive on U.S. highways.

"Unsafe!" say the unions and their government backers, supported, oddly, by outraged talk show hosts of a more conservative leaning, whose normal free-market instincts are apparently trumped by xenophobia.

For the record, Mexico is the United States' third largest trading partner, behind Canada and China. Even so, we all know in our heart of hearts that the Mexicans are really just looking for an excuse to smuggle drugs and illegal aliens across the border, so the hell with them! If they want a trade war, bring it on!

Then there are the Chinese, who this week decided to institute a new "Buy Chinese" clause, at least as far as Coca-Cola buying a controlling interest in a successful Chinese juice company is concerned.

Regardless of how this stuff gets started, once it does, it can very quickly snowball, with national sensitivities getting hurt and exporters on both sides of the disputes being the ones taking it in the neck.

Too bad no one in government is actually involved in an export or import business, or any business at all, for that matter. Because then they might understand that these actions have real consequences, today, just as they did in the 1930s.

Now, don't get me wrong. I am not so naïve to think that our trading partners don't try to gain the system in order to help their export companies succeed in U.S. markets. But I am not so blindly nationalistic that I think we don't try to do exactly the same thing.

Even so, for better or worse, thanks to its past success, the U.S. serves as a role model for the rest of the world and, in that regard, is held up to a higher standard. That we are willing to overtly move toward protectionism, whether by reneging on elements of NAFTA or through the Buy American provision, risks setting off a chain reaction of protectionism. Just as did Smoot-Hawley.

But we'd never make that mistake again, right?

Evil Capitalist Polluters!

Despite the quickly mounting deficits caused by stimulus money flying here and there like a St. Patrick's Day snow flurry, the new administration remains fully committed to tackling the all-important topic of global warming.

In fact, if current plans come to fruition, crisis or not, Team Obama may require the evil capitalists that run the few remaining manufacturing concerns to spend up to $2 trillion on "cap and trade" credits.

An excerpt from the Washington Times on the topic...

President Obama's climate plan could cost industry close to $2 trillion, nearly three times the White House's initial estimate of the so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation, according to Senate staffers who were briefed by the White House. A top economic aide to Mr. Obama told a group of Senate staffers last month that the president's climate-change plan would surely raise more than the $646 billion over eight years the White House had estimated publicly, according to multiple a number of staffers who attended the briefing Feb. 26.

"We all looked at each other like, ‘Wow, that's a big number,'" said a top Republican staffer who attended the meeting along with between 50 and 60 other Democratic and Republican congressional aides. The plan seeks to reduce pollution by setting a limit on carbon emissions and allowing businesses and groups to buy allowances, although exact details have not been released.

At the meeting, Jason Furman, a top Obama staffer, estimated that the president's cap-and-trade program could cost up to three times as much as the administration's early estimate of $646 billion over eight years. A study of an earlier cap-and-trade bill co-sponsored by Mr. Obama when he was a senator estimated the cost could top $366 billion a year by 2015. A White House official did not confirm the large estimate, saying only that Obama aides previously had noted that the $646 billion estimate was "conservative."

"Any revenues in excess of the estimate would be rebated to vulnerable consumers, communities and businesses," the official said. The Obama administration has proposed using the majority of the money generated from a cap-and-trade plan to pay for its middle-class tax cuts, while using about $120 billion to invest in renewable-energy projects.

Mr. Obama and congressional Democratic leaders have made passing a climate-change bill a top priority. But Republican leaders and moderate to conservative Democrats have cautioned against levying increased fees on businesses while the economy is still faltering. House Republican leaders blasted the costs in the new estimate. "The last thing we need is a massive tax increase in a recession, but reportedly that's what the White House is offering: up to $1.9 trillion in tax hikes on every single American who drives a car, turns on a light switch or buys a product made in the United States," said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner. "And since this energy tax won't affect manufacturers in Mexico, India and China, it will do nothing but drive American jobs overseas."

Now, of course, the Washington Times heavily skews Republican and so can be counted on to point dramatically at every Obama misstep, but the fact that anyone is even thinking about foisting another bureaucracy -- and a massive new tax regime -- on struggling businesses is, in my view, just plain insane. And for the record, while businesses do go out of business, they don't pay taxes... that burden falls only to consumers, who ultimately get passed the tab.

Even so, at the rate things are going, by the time the full force of the new taxes are felt in a couple of years, the $650 billion, or $2 trillion -- whichever the number turns out to be -- may amount only to roughly enough in inflation-adjusted dollars to buy a Big Mac, hopefully with fries and a shake.

The Coming Credit Crisis

Oh, you thought we've already had our credit crisis? Sorry, so far we've only seen the first act. As for what's next, this came to me this week from a trusted correspondent who works in the consumer credit arena. It's from the Herald News...

There is a common perception in America that most of us live beyond our means with credit cards financing the party. However, the newly released Federal Reserve Board's Survey of Consumer Finances for 2007 tells a different story. According to their results, it's easy to see that the middle class has been steadily increasing its consumer debt in order to keep up with inflation.

An easy translation of that is the average Joe is using his Visa card to pay the light bill and keep his family fed. He's not partying, but trying to find a way to live from day to day. That news has real repercussions for what the next rollout of bad news and blow to our already battered confidence in the economy is most likely going to be.

The Fed's survey, which is taken from a carefully selected cross-section of 4,500 consumers, shows that since the last reading in 2004, median family incomes dropped slightly for middle income Americans, particularly those headed by a single parent. Average incomes for the wealthiest 10 percent rose substantially, by 8.5 percent.

The mean amount of credit card debt being carried by individuals rose 25 percent, from $3,000 to $7,300, a much faster rate of increase than in previous years. That doesn't sound significant enough until all the pieces start to come together.

The survey noted that the majority of the credit card debt has shifted from stand-alone companies, such as Capital One, to 87.1 percent being held by commercial banks. Those are the very same banks the feds have been working with to ferret out poisonous mortgage debt. Commercial banks that are doing well also made the same decision to not lend short-term consumer debt in large quantities to high-risk people. That means that the debt that is most likely to go unpaid is sitting with the same banks that are already in trouble.

Also, most consumers in the middle income category reported they were saving less than 1 percent, which makes sense if it's already taking a credit card to pay for the basics of life.

So the picture that's forming is an average voter who has a family to support but fewer real dollars in order to accomplish the feat and vital credit sources that have quickly disappeared except for the bill, with no monetary reserve to get through a tight year.

Add on top of that the climbing unemployment rate of this very same group.

It becomes easy to see the very real likelihood that a lot of the retail debt now held by weakened commercial banks will go unpaid. Consumers will choose paying for pretty much anything else before catching up the credit card debt when there isn't enough to cover all of the essentials. A damaged credit report will stop being seen as enough incentive if there's a risk of foreclosure on the house or the phone being disconnected.

Banks will start to make hard decisions about covering the debt owed to the retailers who accepted in good faith the bank-generated credit card. It all starts to roll downhill again.

What's astounding, given that the survey is generated by the feds, is how little Bernanke and his crowd are talking about the coming tidal wave. It can't be that we're still practicing the idea that if we look away long enough it won't all fall apart, yet again.

Fannie Mae, AIG, WaMu and Lehman were apparently not a big enough lesson. One of the more galling aspects is that right now there is not only no significant consumer loan modification being offered in this category but instead, banks are trying to generate bottom line income by charging fees of 25 percent based on a consumer's balance. There was a time when that was called usury in the United States. It starts to beg the question of what real differences exist anymore between the dreaded payday loan and some of the bank-issued credit cards.

It's also possible to conceive that consumers are now paying down debt that consists more of fees owed than actual retail debt. That's where we are at the moment.

If nothing is done, voters can rightfully say that, once again, big business and another pending bailout of some titan of industry on the taxpayer dollar mattered more. After all, the Federal Reserve was the one who gathered the necessary information and then stuck it in a drawer.

David again. In previous financial crises, credit card defaults were the first sign of trouble... this time around, it has largely been mortgages. That's because so many people were so far over their head with their upside-down mortgages and the sheer burden of homeownership that they knew trying to stay in the house, in many cases bought as speculations, was a non-starter. And so, instead they let the mortgages go in record numbers, while hanging on to their lifeline – the credit cards.

That the credit crisis is now intensifying into credit cards is, and should be, deeply concerning. As bad as credit card defaults have gotten, they are getting worse. In fact, this week the news came out that, in February, credit card defaults rose to a 20-year high. Amex and Citigroup (of which you, if you are a U.S. citizen, are now a proud owner) are particularly hard hit, with net charge-off rates rising to 8.7% and 9.6%, respectively.

Now, it is not my role in this world to be a bearer of bad news but rather to make sure that you are fully in the picture. And that picture at this moment is fairly bleak. Okay, it's downright dark. So don't make the mistake of thinking that the worst is behind us... it's not.

That said, the stimulus will almost certainly have some effect once it starts to hit into the economy. But the effect will be short lived and should be treated like a lit firecracker. Kind of exciting with the fuse fizzing away, but hold on too long and the result will be very painful.

"AIG Scum Out of Town!"

That was the epitaph scrawled into the dust-encrusted rear window of an SUV stopped in front of me here in the town that serves as world headquarters of Casey Research. A town that also happens to be the location of a prominent resort built with AIG money.

This sort of outrage over the AIG bonuses was underscored by the CNN reportage I was forced to watch on the large flat-screen TV stuck on the wall in front of the exercise equipment down at the local gym. (I don't have cable at home, and never intend on getting it.)

According to CNN, the citizenry and its elected officials are up in arms because AIG lived up to contractual agreements to pay the executives who continued to work at the firm rather than deserting the sinking ship to look for more permanent employment elsewhere (and, yes, a number of those who got bonuses were helpful in the actual company-sinking).

As I am on a plane, I can't yet say whether or not the government has followed up on its threat to pass legislation, retroactive no less, levying a 90% tax on the bonus recipients, but it won't surprise me if it does.

I'll come back to that momentarily, but am going to juxtapose that story with a second story that caught my attention while attempting to whip my body into shape. The story started with CNN's cameras showing a large ballroom filled beyond capacity with bureaucrats and contractors who were lined up literally down the hallway to get and complete the paperwork needed to get their share of the stimulus funds now being made available. The only catch, according to one interviewee, was that the projects for which they sought free money had to be "shovel ready" -- meaning the recipients had to begin spending the money they received this year. Thus, the ballroom seemed to have the same sort of frenetic energy one might attribute to a mosh pit, with the recipient hopefuls jostling elbow to elbow while clamoring for their share of the quick cash.

Doing my best to test your levels of concentration, I now return to the AIG story. Given that the government provided AIG with over 150 billion dollars in bailout funds, it is a safe assumption that the powers-that-be felt such a massive bailout was necessary. In fact, according to officialdom, it was critical because, should the company fail, it would lead to a real global catastrophe.

Is it too much of a stretch, therefore, to think that the government might actually want the company to succeed in working its way out of the trillions in CDS and other problem derivatives linked to the company? Or that, to accomplish that goal, the company might need to attract or retain executives with a certain skill set?

Now, it is not my intention to be a cheerleader for the morons that brought AIG to its knees in the first place, and I was very much against the bailout in the first place. Rather, I am simply trying to follow some sort of basic logic related to these bonuses.

And it doesn't seem illogical to spend $165 million in bonuses if that raises the odds of recouping a return on the $150 billion already dropped into the company and, more importantly, the hundreds of billions of more potential losses lurking in the AIG closet. (Remember, thanks to the misguided bailout, the government has put you, the taxpayer, in the position of owning 80% of AIG... and virtually all of any further losses they incur.)

So, as distasteful as the whole mess is, I can find some small rationale for the AIG bonuses.

But how, as a taxpayer, am I to rationalize the ballroom full of bureaucrats and their friendly contractor friends, each clamoring for a million here or a million there to fill in some pot holes, build a new bridge, or a knock together a new community center? Why are these things necessary, now of all times, with the country already struggling like Atlas with a groin pull under a world of debt?

The answer, simply, is because the administration believes that this grand experiment will somehow produce an economic miracle, magically reinflating a bubble that easy money and massive spending created in the first place. And Congress, in all its wisdom, and only after great study and deliberation, signed off on the stimulus, just as they did with the Iraq war and the Patriot Act.

Sure the AIG bailout was an outrage, and the bonus money is just an extension of that initial outrage... but so is the stimulus spend-a-thon.

As is the notion that Congress would even consider using tax policy – pay up or go to jail, to be specific – as a punitive measure. By the time this plane lands, I hope against hope that the bill has failed... because if it hasn't, then the government will have discovered a new tool for its large and growing arsenal of coercive powers. While we can't know whom they will turn it against next, you can be assured that, in time, they will.

The sponsor of the bill to use taxes as punishment was Congressman Steve Israel (D-Huntington), who grandly stated upon announcing the legislation...

"American families shouldn't be forced to reward these professional financial failures with extravagant bonuses that could buy fancy cars and yachts," Israel said in a statement. "AIG may not like it, but since they had to come to the federal government for help, the federal government now has a say in how they spend taxpayer money."

I wonder what Rep. Israel would say if someone proposed a bill to tax 90% of the salary of the "professional financial failures" who have led our country into a depression, and who are now throwing taxpayer money around in the trillions, beggaring the populace for generations to come?

[Okay, I am now in Las Vegas and, sure enough, they passed the legislation. Whether you think that AIG or other bailout bonus recipients are greedy and deserve punishment or not, the horrible precedent of punitive taxation aimed at a select group of citizens has now been established.

And there is something else that I heard this morning that is as concerning. It was an overt death threat by New York's Attorney General Cuomo, who has managed to extort the names of all of the employees of Merrill Lynch who, under the terms of their employment contracts, received bonuses over the last year. The company has asked Cuomo not to make those names public over fear for the safety of their employees in this overheated atmosphere. To which Cuomo has replied that he will hold off for a bit, but only to see which employees return the bonuses so he can strike their names off the list. In other words, return your bonuses or else suffer the potentially dire consequences.

We are deep in uncharted water, and it is only going to get deeper from here.]

It Just Doesn't End

Another thing that I just have to comment on this week is that the IMF is seriously considering joining the money-printing game, pumping out Special Drawing Rights that countries around the world can use as money.

As my plane is beginning to descend, and writing about this stuff is beginning to weigh on my good temper, I will leave it to the Telegraph to fill out the story...

The International Monetary Fund is poised to embark on what analysts have described as "global quantitative easing" by printing billions of dollars worth of a global "super-currency" in an unprecedented new effort to address the economic crisis.

Alistair Darling and senior figures in the US Treasury have been encouraging the Fund to issue hundreds of billions of dollars worth of so-called Special Drawing Rights in the coming months as part of its campaign to prevent the recession from turning into a global depression.

Should the move, which is up for discussion by the summit of G20 finance ministers this weekend, be adopted, it will represent a global equivalent of the Bank of England's plan to pump extra cash into the UK economy.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

If the U.S. dollar manages to come through this crisis and retain its status as the world's reserve currency, I will be very surprised. Maybe, just maybe, whatever is next will be backed by something more tangible than political promises. But that's just a pipe dream.

Miscellany

Inflation? What Inflation? Regular readers may remember that last month the inflation numbers came in significantly higher than expected. "A fluke," we were assured. But this week, the CPI from February was released, showing that once again the CPI was up 0.4%, an increase over the 0.3% the prior month. And the highest inflation reading since last July.

Another anomaly, we are told, caused because gasoline unexpectedly spiked over 8% for the month... but increases were seen in a broad range of other items, including clothes, of all things. Could it be that the China discount, another topic we have mentioned in the past, is starting to fade away right along with our foreign trade? When you consider, as does Jeff Clark in the current edition of BIG GOLD, how strong gold has been over the last year, in the face of a strong dollar and a general absence of inflation – can you imagine how strong it will get when the reverse is true?

How high could gold go? A lot higher than you might think. To read the current edition of BIG GOLD and find out, risk-free, click this link. The current edition also includes the latest and most comprehensive article I have ever seen on whether the GLD ETF is actually safe... essential reading.
Videos? I know this is oldish news, but I think I have finally figured out why President Obama gave Gordon Brown a 12-pack of DVDs as his symbolic gift of friendship when Brown came calling at the White House in one of the first state visits of the Obama administration.

It struck me that the gift was analogous to the time I forgot to get my wife a birthday present and had to hightail it down to a local spa to buy a day pass complete with relaxing herbal wrappings and a massage. In this case, I'm pretty sure that as Gordon Brown was walking up the front steps, someone slapped a forehead and said something to the effect of, "Oh, crap... we forgot the present. Quick, didn't Bush leave behind some DVDs?"

I just wish I could have been there to see the expression on Brown's face, or heard what he had to say when he got back to his room.
Got Gold? If Not, in Zimbabwe You Starve. This is not a funny story. Rather, it is a video showing how the only thing now standing between many in Zimbabwe and starvation is their ability to pan for gold. There are parts that are hard to watch, but the message – that even in the most dire of situations, gold is still used as money – is a worthwhile one. You can watch the video here.
Tea Party. There are increasing signs, overseas and in the U.S., that we are entering a new phase of social unrest. In Cincinnati, a group of citizens outraged over the stimulus staged a tea party. Expect more.
Casey Phyles Updates and Info.

The next SoCal Phyle meeting will take place Saturday, March 28, 2009 from 1:30pm - 5:00pm (or so) at the Baja Cantina, 311 Washington Blvd., Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 http://www.bajacantinavenice.com.

The next Calgary Phyle meeting will be held Tuesday, April 7, at 7:00pmatCadence Coffee, 6407 Bowness Road NW, Calgary, Alberta http://www.cadencecoffee.com/main.html (All inquiries regarding the Calgary Phyle can be directed to calgaryphyle@yahoo.ca )

People looking to start a group: Daniel in the Lapeer, Yale, Port Huron, MI region. Homer in Winter Park, FL.

And that, dear readers, is it for this week. I am sorry for having gone on so long. Believe it or not, I actually cut out about five pages of notes on other topics I wanted to discuss this week. But for now, I must sign off and turn my attention to the Summit, which starts later today.

As I sign off, I see that the U.S. stock market is down modestly (the DJIA is off 33 points) and gold is hanging tough around $960. I wonder what the government will do next if the stock market takes another big dive from here? I suspect we won't have long to wait to find out.

Until next week, thanks for putting up with my ramblings... and for subscribing to a Casey Research publication.

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room – 02/20/2009

David Galland — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 04:34:00 GMT

Dear Reader,

We’re going to be flying low and fast in this weekly scan of the landscape in the quest for items that are “important,” as opposed to “merely interesting.”

At the top of the list of what we would consider important is the increasing likelihood that the wheels are about to come off the global economy. And, worse, fly through the air and wipe out any number of innocent bystanders. (By now, you and the other readers of our services should already be safely in the duck-and-cover position.)

It is becoming clear that more than just our subscribers are beginning to understand the depth, severity, and nature of this crisis: as I begin writing this morning, gold has rebounded to just a few ticks away from the $1,000 mark. By the time I am finished today, we could see that mark taken out. More on that topic later, but first…

Making It Up on the Fly

President Obama this week signed into law the new $787 billion stimulus plan, then followed up with a $287 billion housing initiative with $75 billion to support a convoluted plan to keep individuals who can’t afford to stay in their homes… in those very same homes.

I say the plan is convoluted because, simply, it is. And how could it be otherwise?

This and so many of the other major initiatives now flying out of Washington are being brewed up in a proverbial blink of the eye. The stimulus bill – which many in Congress have admitted to never having read before voting on it – runs over 1,000 pages and is mind-boggling in its complexity. Virtually every one of the dozens of multimillion or multibillion spending components included in the bill will require the hiring, training, and equipping of armies of new bureaucrats.

There will be mission statements to be drawn up, buildings to be designed and built, grant programs created, oversight committees assembled, human resources professionals hired, forms to be drawn, and databases to be programmed… and that’s just for starters. To make the point, try to envision the start-up process involved with just the following handful of initiatives, a fraction of the total included in the bill…

* For “Broadband Technology Opportunities Program,” $4,700,000,000.

* For “Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program,” $650,000,000, for additional coupons and related activities under the program implemented under section 3005 of the Digital Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005.

* For “Scientific and Technical Research and Services,” $220,000,000.

* For “Construction of Research Facilities,” $360,000,000.

* For an additional amount for “Operations, Research, and Facilities,” $230,000,000.

* For an additional amount for “Procurement, Acquisition, and Construction,” $600,000,000.

Chris Wood of our office actually went through the herculean effort of reading through the entire stimulus bill and pulling out all of the various spending items contained therein. To review the full list, and as a taxpayer, you should, click here.

As you read through the list, ask yourself just how many of the items are the equivalent of digging holes and then filling them in again… versus something that at least remotely resembles an investment with the potential for a payoff down the road?

My point is this: while I am on principle opposed to any new government spending, a weak case could be made for the government to invest in something that might actually produce a return on the money spent. The government’s investment in building the interstate highway system enhanced the free exchange of goods and services and, by so doing, provided some sustainable increase in gross national product. That, in turn, allowed the government to recoup its expenses – and more – over time through taxes on the increased revenues.

That, however, is an entirely different beast than the massive pork doling and hole digging included in the latest stimulus bill. How, for example, does the $200 million allocated to building and furnishing new headquarters for Homeland Security achieve anything other than support further government bloat (or worse)? How does the $165 million earmarked for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to spend in upgrading wildlife refuges do anything other than give a bunch of aging boy scouts more money to play with? Then there’s the hybrid cars for the military and… and…

And let’s not forget the $75 billion housing foreclosure program, yet another quickly conceived government experiment in social and economic engineering. While I could unleash a rant on the topic, I doubt I’d be able to outdo the subtle sarcasm and pure entertainment value of the one you’ll find at PlanetMoron.com, one of the few blogs I make it a habit to read. Read it here, you’ll enjoy it. http://planetmoron.typepad.com/

The bottom line is that government is just making up this stuff as it goes, backed by not even a scintilla of historic evidence that this approach is going to lead anywhere but to prolonging the crisis and to a major inflation. If you haven’t prepared for it, start now.

Credit Capitulation

Speaking of the housing bill, Doug Hornig, the hard-working editor of the Daily Resource PLUS and regular contributor to our BIG GOLD publication, dropped me the following note today.

Here's a local tale of two friends. One of my buddies, who's never missed a mortgage payment, tried to refinance and was denied. Another fell behind by two months, came home one day, and found a FedEx envelope at his house. Inside was an offer from Countrywide, his mortgage holder, saying they were lowering his payments by $700/month and pushing all his delinquency fees to the end of the mortgage. He took the deal.

To state what should be obvious, as people struggling on the financial edge look around and notice that others in similar circumstances are simply throwing in the towel on their debts and receiving government assurances that they will be provided relief, as well as hard cash, they, too, will begin capitulating. This is a trend in motion that will only worsen until and unless the government steps aside and says, “Sorry, that’s it. Henceforth, you will have to suffer the consequences of your own financial decision making, the government can do no more.”

But, of course, that is not at all what the government is going to do. Instead, they will continue to return to the legislative drawing board, interspersed with trips to the podium to deliver compassionate speeches designed to reassure the populace that yet more help is on the way.

Meanwhile, more signs of credit capitulation are appearing daily. This week, we learned that credit card defaults are on track to exceed 10% this year and could go as high as the “mid-teens,” according to the folks who watch this stuff at Moody’s.

Losses of that magnitude will do a couple of things. For one, they will further damage the margins at the major banks and issuers, which are already suffering mightily. How mightily? Between 2007 and 2008, the world’s largest credit card company, Citigroup, saw its card profits collapse from $4.7 billion down to $166 million. For another, the rising tide of credit card defaults will further freeze up credit lines, unless, of course, Uncle Sam can be chatted up for guarantees and further bailouts (you can get a glimpse of the good Uncle by putting on a fake goatee and donning a red, white, and blue top hat, then looking in the mirror). In fact, the banks are already clearing their throats about the need for yet more money.

At this point, this is akin to a big hamster wheel – with the government running as hard as it can – and the axle of the wheel connected to the arm of a printing press.

In a conversation earlier this week, our own Terry Coxon made an astute observation when he said something to the effect of, “You know, David, if the government had just done nothing when this crisis first appeared a year and a half ago, it would probably be over by now.”

I think he’s right. People would have taken their losses, revalued their assets, gone out of business, moved out of houses they couldn’t afford (or directly negotiated workouts with their lenders), banks would have failed… but the “value discovery” that is a prerequisite to any recovery would be well advanced at this stage.

Instead, governments the world over have decided on taking a different path, trying to print their way out of trouble… a well-worn path that assures this thing will drag on for years.

If there’s a silver lining (besides the personal profit potential for the attentive), it’s that the current path could very well lead to the end of the fiat money experiment. Even the financial celebrity of the day, Nouriel Roubini, is warning of that potential, albeit indirectly. This from Bloomberg:

“The process of socializing the private losses from this crisis has already moved many of the liabilities of the private sector onto the books of the sovereign,” Roubini wrote on his Web site today. “At some point a sovereign bank may crack, in which case the ability of the governments to credibly commit to act as a backstop for the financial system -- including deposit guarantees -- could come unglued.”

(Interestingly, Roubini’s prescription for the global economy is to further socialize the private losses by ramping up the stimulus even further… oh, well.)

Money is all about trust. And when the public at large no longer trusts the central banks in charge of their respective currencies – and the steady demand for gold confirms this is a trend in motion – then the fiat money system will come unglued.

All that is missing is a single major government to call it quits on fiat currency and announce they will henceforth link to gold. That will be the game changer. In my view, it is now inevitable. And, at the speed at which things are unraveling, maybe even imminent.

If I had to guess which country might be most likely to go there first, I’d put the odds on Russia.

About That Whole Deflation Thing…

As you might suspect, a number of readers have challenged us on our conclusion that the current monetary inflation must, after a lag, resolve itself in a serious price inflation.

We are always polite in our responses and do try to see the other side. Yet we remain firm in our conviction, thanks in no small part to the observable reality that the governments of the world are reacting exactly as we have long predicted they would to this crisis. Namely trying to print themselves out of the mess they have created.

This week, despite the widespread expectation of further signs of deflation, it was inflation that showed up at the door. Starting with U.S. producer prices, which went up 0.8 percent in January. Then today, knock, knock, consumer price inflation stopped by, rising 0.3 percent month over month. The price of food, in particular, continues to rise at the rate of 10.1 percent annualized.

And the U.S. wasn’t the only country registering an inflation surprise. This from the Financial Times, under the headline, “UK inflation more entrenched than expected”…

Inflation is more entrenched than many economists had imagined, easing only marginally in January as the weaker pound pushed up the price of imports and offset much of the benefit of lower fuel and housing costs.

The consumer prices index rose in January at a year-on-year rate of 3 per cent, down from a 3.1 per cent rate in December, official figures showed on Tuesday.

But retail prices – the measure of inflation felt by most households – defied economists’ expectations of a contraction, registering a 0.1 per cent year-on-year rise in January as rising prices of household goods offset some of the impact of falling mortgage interest payments.

There is a combination of things going on. For one, commodities, which have taken a brutal thrashing (other than gold, of course) are now showing signs of a bottom. And that is to be expected, given that so many are now selling at or near the cost of production. A farmer doesn’t need to have a PhD to know not to plant crops that they are sure to lose money on.

For another, merchants, finding they have less business, are trying to make up the lack of volume with higher prices. I have seen that anecdotally in the local merchants and have heard it from other correspondents. And, as was mentioned in the case of the UK, the weakness of the pound means that the exports it must buy now cost more.

But all that is just window dressing for the flood of money just now beginning to enter the system, thanks to a global race to quantitative easing.

Even as they admit their surprise at the latest inflation numbers, government officials and the punditry are quick to pooh-pooh the notion that inflation can do anything but fall from here. While it would be foolish to expect that inflation can only rise from here, though that is far from out of the question, when you think about it, the government’s view that deflation is the primary problem is the only stance they can adopt.

That’s because to acknowledge the potential for inflation at the very same time they are adopting quantitative easing would be a serious disconnect. And, in the case of the U.S., it could scare away foreign dollar holders.

Thus, the official line is, “There can be no inflation.”

I wonder if the foreign dollar holders are buying it?

China Dumping Dollars?

On February 11, 2009, a senior Chinese Banking official, one Mr. Luo, went on record following a speech in New York as saying that, despite some misgivings, his country would continue buying U.S. treasuries and otherwise supporting the U.S. dollar. The following quote from the Financial Times captures the moment…

Mr Luo, speaking at the Global Association of Risk Management’s 10th Annual Risk Management Convention, said: “Except for US Treasuries, what can you hold?” he asked. “Gold? You don’t hold Japanese government bonds or UK bonds. US Treasuries are the safe haven. For everyone, including China, it is the only option.”

Mr Luo, whose English tends toward the colloquial, added: “We hate you guys. Once you start issuing $1 trillion-$2 trillion . . . we know the dollar is going to depreciate, so we hate you guys but there is nothing much we can do.”

Reading that citation reminds me of some advice I heard from a currency trader some years ago. “If you want to know what a country has planned for its currency,” he said, “listen to what the government says they are going to do, then expect the exact opposite.”

Now, if you were the Chinese bureaucrats in charge of such things, and you wanted to lighten your dollar holdings, would you (a) announce that you were going to be a seller and then try to beat everyone to the door, or (b) announce you were going to be buyer and then slip out the exits while no one was looking?

On that front, there was a rather telling photo in the Financial Times this week, which I liked so much I scanned it for you here.

It shows the official signing ceremony between Rio Tinto and Chinalco, for the largest deal a Chinese state company has ever done… exchanging a pile of 20 billion U.S. dollars for an additional big chunk of equity in the mining giant (with this investment, Chinalco will have invested $33.5 billion in Rio Tinto).

What I liked about the photo was how Rio Tinto’s CEO is poised on the edge of his seat. You can almost read his mind, "Please sign, he's going to sign it, oh please sign it, there he goes, he's going to sign it, oh gawd, I just can't stand the suspense, just sign it! "

Now, to review the transaction, the Chinese take $20 billion of their $700 billion or so pile of U.S. dollars and exchange it for an 18% interest in a company that produces $54 billion worth of a variety of commodities, a company with assets that, at current production rates, should hold out for decades.

Rio Tinto, on the other hand, gets $20 billion to pay down some of the debt it’s run up in its quest for growth. As paying down that debt only helps the company's prospects, the Chinese have just had what might be termed in corporate speak, a "win-win-win." They unloaded some dollars, bought into a stream of essential commodities needed to keep their country’s manufacturing sector at work, and at the same time helped assure that their shares in Rio Tinto, bought on the cheap, will actually weather the current downturn in commodity prices.

And there is one more thing. As such a large shareholder, the Chinese are now able to exert a lot of influence on the company, influence that will almost certainly result in off-take agreements being signed down the road. In other words, while other countries will increasingly be forced to scrap it out for the world’s remaining reserves of key commodities, through this strategic and farsighted business move – and many similar to it – the Chinese are assuring themselves of a reliable supply, long into the future.

Suggesting a certain urgency to the unloading of their dollars at this advantageous time, just days after the Chinalco deal was signed, Minmetals, the Chinese state-owned metals trading company, stepped up to the plate to buy Oz Minerals, the world’s second largest zinc producer, lock, stock, and barrel for $1.7 billion.

Whatever you may think about the Chinese, you have to give them a tip of the hat as economic competitors. While the U.S. and much of the world are in full panic mode, the Chinese are sticking with their long-held plans to secure the raw materials they will need to keep their economy productive for decades to come. And thanks to the global economic crisis, they are now able to fulfill that mandate at a deep discount, and pay for their purchases with a depreciating asset – the U.S. dollar.

Since we are on the topic of the Chinese, the news came out this week that they – and other Asian investors – are not willing to buy any more mortgage-backed securities from Freddie and Fannie unless they are given explicit, versus implicit, guarantees from Uncle Sam (quick glance in the mirror).

Frankly, I don’t see how the government can fail to provide those guarantees, even though the act further solidifies the fact that taxpayers are on the hook for all manner of bad debt.

This is, I suspect, the beginning of the trend that will lead to foreign creditors of all stripes and inclination treating the U.S. government as they might any hapless bankrupt, demanding terms that suit them and not the U.S. government.

But, many analysts opine, the Chinese and other foreign dollar holders have to support the U.S. government and its currency, because otherwise their own dollar holdings will be hurt.

To which I answer, “Rio Tinto” and “Oz Minerals.”

Let’s Talk Gold

Today I have had communications from two friends, one of whom I stay in regular touch with and one I had lost touch with for a couple of years.

In both instances, they expressed their belief that gold is about to rocket higher and wanted my opinion on whether now is a good time to buy.

My answer, after the usual caveat that I really have no idea, is that they need to decide why they want to own gold.

If it is as a core holding – to buy and forget about as insurance against the very real potential of a currency crisis – then buy away.

If, on the other hand, it is as a speculation, then they might want to hold off to see if there is a pullback here. No market goes up in a straight line, and gold will be no exception. That said, if you can wait out a correction that might see gold fall back $100, or even $200, before heading back higher again, then, again, buy away.

I also pointed out that until the inflation begins to really ramp up, there is no penalty for sitting in cash (at least in the U.S.). So, if capital preservation is your goal, then simply sitting on cash is not a bad move for the time being.

At this point, there is every sign that gold wants to go higher. Demand in gold in 2008 was about 29% over that of 2007, according to the latest report from the World Gold Council. And demand for bars and coins was up by 87%, mitigating the fall-off in jewelry sales. One other useful observation in the report was that strong buying kicked in on any dips in the price.

So, we appear to have something of a floor under the price of gold at this point. If you look at the price of gold over the last couple of years, the floor appears to be around the $750 mark. If you are okay buying here, around $1,000 an ounce, with the clear understanding that gold could see as much as a 25% retrenchment, then go for it. If, on the other hand, the potential for that sort of a short-term pullback worries you, stick to cash and maybe you’ll get a chance to buy cheaper, as earlier buyers take profits at the higher prices now available.

But couldn’t gold go down from here, and stay down?

Anything is possible, but looking at the shape of things, I would rate the odds of that happening as very low.

Shattered Hope

I was going to do an article this week commenting on some recent media reports that certain U.S. military leaders were expressing concern and dismay that President Obama was actually taking time to deliberate before committing more troops to Afghanistan.

I was going to be complimentary that rather than reflexively throwing men into an unwinnable war, he would reconsider the whole (bad) idea and maybe even start drawing up plans for an orderly withdrawal. But then, on Feb 17, he stepped up to the plate and approved a 50% increase in U.S. troop levels.

I heard the UK defense secretary commenting on the Obama administration’s commitment, in the context of being asked if the UK would commit more troops. While not a direct quote, he said that they are reviewing the situation, but are concerned that there are too many “caveats” applied to the rules of engagement in Afghanistan, and that they would be more willing to add troops if those caveats could be eliminated or reduced.

What he was saying, in plain-speak, is that they want to be able to apply whatever brute force they feel was required, regardless of the collateral damage, in taking out the local opposition to the current occupation by NATO forces.

This is a very slippery slope, and one that the West should already know as a failed idea from even a cursory reading of the history books. As I have commented on in the past, there is no conceivable way that the West could hope to outdo the naked brutality exhibited by the Soviets in their run at Afghanistan. And look where that got them.

So why, exactly, are we marching deeper and deeper into Afghanistan? Call me a cynic, but I suspect it is because President Obama, in the next election, wants to be able to stand up to the inevitable charges that would otherwise fly that he was “soft on terrorism” or “failed to support our troops.”

Getting deeper into Afghanistan is, in my opinion, a great and entirely avoidable travesty.

(On the topic of the Soviets in Afghanistan, The Beast, an older movie about a Soviet tank crew that gets lost in that dangerous country is well worth a watch.)

Enough of all that. To improve my mood, and hopefully yours, I want to share with you a couple of items I came across this week that I think you’ll find amusing.

Just for Fun

This first item came in an email from a friend with the subject: “How the stimulus package works.”

Three contractors are bidding to fix a broken fence at the White House. One is from Chicago, another is from Tennessee, and the third is from Minnesota.

All three go with a White House official to examine the fence. The Minnesota contractor takes out a tape measure and does some measuring, then works some figures with a pencil. "Well," he says, "I figure the job will run about $900: $400 for materials, $400 for my crew and $100 profit for me."

The Tennessee contractor also does some measuring and figuring, then says, "I can do this job for $700: $300 for materials, $300 for my crew and $100 profit for me."

The Chicago contractor doesn't measure or figure, but leans over to the White House official and whispers, "$2,700."

The official, incredulous, says, "You didn't even measure like the other guys! How did you come up with such a high figure?"

The Chicago contractor whispers back, "$1,000 for me, $1,000 for you, and we hire the guy from Tennessee to fix the fence."

"Done!" replies the government official.

And that, my friends, is how the new stimulus plan will work.

A Really Good Read

The following article is reprinted with permission of the publisher of the local newspaper. The article is one of the best-written and most entertaining I have read in any paper in years. It was written for The Waterbury Record by Peter Miller, a well-known local photographer… and a great writer, in my opinion. The article, about an epic battle between a local man and a fisher cat (as you will read, a mean-tempered member of the weasel family) offers a glimpse into life hereabouts, though not all the locals are quite so eloquent. I just love the passing reference to coq au vin. Enjoy…

Scott Broderick of Waterbury Center recently engaged in mortal combat with a fisher cat.

Broderick and his partner, Amber Rae Sulick, are house-sitting for friends in a renovated farmhouse a mile off Route 100 in Waterbury Center, on Gregg Hill Road. In front of the house is a large wetland. Behind the house are woods that scatter down to the Waterbury Reservoir. The pair takes care of the dogs, cats and a coop of chickens.

On Sunday, Jan. 24, Sulick came back from a cross-country ski hike and found three chickens slaughtered.

“They were in the outside pen,” Sulick said. “Two bantams and one black hen. They were lying limp on the snow. Their throats had been sliced and there was a little spot of blood around the neck. They were not eaten or ripped apart. I could see in the snow where the chickens had been chased around the pen. I could see the tracks really well. The animal hopped , two and two, feet together. I thought it was a weasel. This happened between 2 p.m. and 4 in the afternoon, when I was checking for eggs.”

The next day, while Sulick was at work, Broderick went for a snowshoe hike and when he returned, he heard all sorts of commotion coming from the chicken coop.

“There were thumps, squawks, squeals of terror and screams that are best imagined,” said Broderick. “I took off the snowshoes and hurried into the coop. I could see, through the chicken mesh, that Ozzie the rooster was flat on his back, the head turned to the side. He looked dead. A black animal was on top, like a vampire, sucking blood. It looked up at me, showed its bloody teeth and hissed.

“I had two axes by the door, for splitting wood and dispatching, recently, a rooster that we turned into a coq au vin for Christmas dinner. I grabbed both axes, entered through the small door and went after him. The animal — I later found out that it was a fisher cat — leapt off Ozzie and, ignoring me, went after the hens. There were more terrible squawks and screeches. The fisher moved so fast, I was missing on my swings. It then climbed up on poles near the rafters. Suddenly, it turned its attention to me. …Suddenly, I was no longer on the attack but defending myself.”

The fisher leapt through the air and onto Broderick’s chest. “If I hadn’t moved back he would have latched onto my face. I could have ended up like Ozzie, who had his comb chewed off, lost an eye and had a lot of blood sucked out of him,” he said.

“I threw him off and he landed in the corner, where the hens cowered. More squawks, screams and wing-beating,” he said. “The fisher, with incredible speed, climbed back up to the overhead poles and screaming its battle cry, again leapt at me. I knocked him down and then I was screaming, as I hit him with the axe, over and over.”

Broderick was not bitten. Ozzie the rooster was taken inside and given first aid. When it was returned to the coop, the hens circled around him very glad to have the master back. However, the rooster died two days later.

A fisher cat can weigh up to 14 pounds and measure 36 inches, including its bushy tail. They are ferocious predators, related to the wolverine, and feed on porcupines, other wildlife and farm animals. They also have a taste for domesticated cats. Very rarely do they attack humans, but in this case, the fisher may have felt cornered.

Miscellany

* Casey Research Las Vegas Crisis & Opportunity Summit Update. First off, we have finalized the program and are very happy to announce that we have lined up an excellent keynote speaker for the banquet, Professor Tom Rustici from George Mason University. I’m not going to go into any great detail on Professor Rustici here, other than to say he is a terrific speaker with deep (and surprisingly entertaining) insights into the nature of depressions. We have also confirmed John Woolway, a professional bond manager of long experience, to discuss a range of topics related to his specialty, including best ways to invest for income today, opportunities in TIPS, how to play rising interest rates, and more.

All of the rooms at the Four Seasons are now sold out, but we are working on securing a handful of rooms at the Mandalay Bay (the adjoining sister property to the Four Seasons) starting at $189++. Please email summit@caseyresearch.com to get more information.

There are still a handful of seats left, but not many. With everything going on in the world just now, this promises to be our most important – and profitable – Summit to date. Hope you can make it. Registration information, as well as a link to the final schedule, be found by clicking here.

* Gun Control on the Way? Someone sent me an email on a bill called HR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. Always skeptical about emailed information of this sort, I had a researcher give it a look and, sorry to say, it’s real. The bottom line is that Congress is taking up a bill that will require gun purchasers to jump through a number of hoops before being able to buy a gun, including pass a test and agree to allowing government officials to come to your house to inspect your guns at will. Failure to properly secure your guns will carry a fine and even the potential for a five-year stint in jail. You can read more about the legislation here. http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text.

Knowing as I do the attitude of a number of gun-owning acquaintances of mine, I think legislation such as this could trigger some pretty strident opposition. And for good reasons: one of history’s better-documented lessons is that almost every transition to dictatorship has been preceded by some form of gun control.

* Where Do They Get Their Numbers? Hardly a day goes by of late without some member of Team Obama standing up to announce that this plan or that will create or preserve X million of jobs, or help “as many as 5 million homeowners refinance.” Most people accept such pronouncements as having a loose connection to reality. They don’t.

In fact, that sort of loose talk is highly misleading and counterproductive, because it gives the populace the false impression that the economy is almost mechanical in nature. Push this button or that, and voila, out pops a million jobs. If it were that easy, then why would Team Obama stop at 3 million jobs, as they claim will be created in the latest stimulus bill? Why not just give the knob a few more twists and go for full employment? There’s nothing particularly profound in this observation, because you already know that the economy is a complex system, which is to say, it is largely unpredictable. So, the next time you hear the president or anyone else in the ring of power spouting off some specific numbers associated with this initiative or that, join me in making a loud raspberry sound. Or throw your shoes… whichever makes you feel better.

* New Phyles. Zoe is looking to start up a group in Reno. And Mike in Kingwood, Texas, has started up a phyle and is looking for more members. If you live in or near either of those places and would enjoy sharing views with other Casey subscribers, drop Kristen a note at phyles@caseyresearch.com.

* Music? I often include links to music that has caught my attention over the previous week, but not much of anything has overly moved me of late – I like powerful music – so last week I skipped and I was going to do so again. However, there is one song, from the movie Slumdog Millionaire, that I have had on rotation and find it pretty snappy… it’s called O-Saya by M.I.A. You can hear it here.

(If you have some dramatic and exciting music you’d like to share, drop me a line at David@caseyresearch.com.)

And that, dear readers, is that for this week. And what a week it has been.

To give you some sense of how things have gone, yesterday I recorded an hour-and-a-half-long phone interview with Dave Hightower and Terry Roggensack, the commodities gurus behind our new Casey Trend Trader.

During the interview, which is to appear as a special feature in the next edition of The Casey Report, we talked about just about everything you can imagine as it relates to commodities, including the data they monitor on China’s current stockpiling of commodities… whether or not gold is being manipulated… where the GLD ETF is getting its gold… which commodities are selling at or below the price of production… which ones are poised to rebound first and strongest and which are still at risk… how to structure futures and options trades to tightly control risk (in their entire 27 years in the business, they have never had a major loss)… plus, the outlook for oil and natural gas… when interest rates are likely to turn around, and much, much more.

As we finished, I was so excited about the interview that I pushed the wrong button on my recorder. Then I compounded the error by pushing a second wrong button, sending the entire recording to the permanent trash bin in the sky! In the words of Mr. Broderick, quoted above, on discovering the loss of the recording, there were “…thumps, squawks, squeals of terror and screams that are best imagined.”

The thumps being my head repeatedly hitting the desk.

Fortunately, Mssrs. Hightower and Roggensack are patient and even forgiving individuals, and so we will be doing it all over again. Look for the new interview in the next edition of The Casey Report.

(If you are not yet a subscriber, don’t hesitate for a minute to take us up on our special new subscriber offer. We make it easy and inexpensive to give this unique monthly letter a try, because we’re convinced that once you try it, you’ll want to stay with it. Learn more about the trial offer here.)

As I sign off, I see that the rout in stocks continues, with the Dow off by another 175 points. Oh, and looky there… Senator Christopher Dodd says that the government might need to nationalize some banks. Is it any wonder that gold spot has just cracked over $1,000?

For many moons now, we have cautioned you to “be right and sit tight.” While, as per above, there is no sure way to know where gold is going to go in the short term, there is likewise nothing we can see that doesn’t suggest that it can’t go much higher in the longer run.

We live in interesting times.

Until next week, thank you for reading and for being a subscriber to a Casey Research service. If you find us helpful, don’t hesitate to spread the good word to your friends and associates.

Sincerely,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room - 01/30/2009

David Galland — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 19:11:00 GMT

January 30, 2009

Dear Reader,

Like most people, I occasionally find myself overwhelmed by the tasks involved with everyday life.

This week, I have been, to use the old adage, "working like a dog." Though, now that I think about it, I have a hard time imagining the origin of the term. Even in his youth, my now elderly companion General Beauregard Piddle didn't seem to take on anything more rigorous than climbing up on an unattended couch for a nice nap.

In any event, it's been one of "those" weeks. And so today, as I prepared to write this weekly missive, I found myself groaning, "Arrgh, I've got to write The Room," to my ever patient and entirely wonderful wife.

"But," she said, misunderstanding the nature of my apparent complaint, "I can't see how that's a problem. There's so much to write about."

"Exactly!" I said, "That's the problem!"

In actual fact, I almost always look forward to these weekly writings as a form of personal reflection and even entertainment... and as a usual way to keep myself in the flow of the passing parade.

But some weeks – most weeks, it seems of late – the sheer volume of important news that I should comment on, at least if I were trying to be a good correspondent, is so staggering in dimension, it is a real challenge to know where to begin.

So, instead, I start by writing about old dogs and wonderful wives. Go figure.

Okay, enough of that. Procrastination is almost never a good idea, unless it is on the part of legislators who, I always hope, procrastinate to the extent that they don't ever quite get around to doing anything. Unfortunately, with the mantra of the moment being "Yes, we can," that is probably a false hope.

Turnaround in Interest Rates?

A few weeks ago in these musings -- January 9, 2009, to be more exact -- I wrote the following in response to Bud Conrad's latest projections of a deficit that could go to $3 trillion in fiscal 2009...

Well, this week we began to see a whiff of the situation just described. Here's the article from Bloomberg...

Note that Bloomberg still estimates the total deficit at $1 trillion. They are dead wrong... my money (literally) is on the number coming in much closer to Bud's stunning projection. And that means that interest rates will have to go higher... much higher.

It is for that reason that all four editors of The Casey Report -- Doug Casey, Bud Conrad, Terry Coxon and yours truly -- are in agreement that positioning yourself to profit from rising interest rates should be the big money-making play for 2009 and beyond.

It's not too late to jump on board... and it's easy to do so, with the no-risk, three-month trial being offered for The Casey Report. Click here for details...

Bait for the Two-Legged Rat

I have often said that humans are like rats in that they are extremely ingenious when it comes to looking after their personal interests. Lock a rat in a metal box and it will almost be able to figure a way out. Almost. A human would actually have a shot at it.

In the debate about what went wrong with the economy and how to fix things, the topic of loose credit standards usually arises early in the discussion. And correctly so. Due to loose credit standards, people without the financial resources to own a home were practically carried across the threshold by predatory lenders.

Well, at least that's how the outraged political class and their adoring punditry see things.

According to that section of the jeering crowd, these lenders were so avaricious, greedy, and downright dastardly that they would actually hand the keys to a $500,000 house to an individual with not just poor but pitiful credit and with little or no money down. Bastards!

Of course, as a former banker (shudder), I have a somewhat different perspective.

Because no matter how devious or dastardly a lending institution might be, it wouldn't even contemplate making such loans if it didn't have a fairly well-reasoned plan in mind to actually get paid back... with interest.

Enter the government in the form of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and the quasi-state-owned (and now absolutely state-owned) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Absent their guarantees, the private sector would never, but never, have made the loans just described. That's because...

As a result, within the acceptable tolerance range for any human endeavor, banks are historically careful in setting lending standards.

But add into the equation a rate-slashing Fed looking to stimulate things a bit, side by side with a bloated Uncle Sam looking to engage in some social engineering by putting people without the credit or means into a house, and the picture quickly changes. Why, even the FHA's own website does a good job of summing up the role they played in the pumping up the housing bubble. Some relevant excerpts...

For lenders, our mortgage insurance protects lenders against loss if the homeowner defaults on his or her mortgage loan

For the record, there are about 55 million single-family mortgages in the U.S., so the FHA has over 10% covered.

But the FHA is just one of Uncle Sam's kissing cousins. Others, including the aforementioned Fannie and Freddie, guarantee another 31 million mortgages between them. So, in total, U.S. taxpayers now stand behind about 65% of all home mortgages in the U.S. But it is worse than that, because ever since the credit crisis began, over 80% of all new mortgages generated have been "conforming" in order to go onto the books of a government agency.

Thanks to Uncle Sam's largess and no-risk lending guarantees – warmly applauded by the nation's banks and sundry money shoppes, to be sure – since 1992 there has been about a 50% increase in U.S. homeownership.

Is it any wonder, therefore, that until recently you could spot a loan officer by the wide smiles on their faces, as well as their ink-stained fingers, the result of producing prodigious quantities of freshly printed loan contracts?

The way it all worked was very simple. Uncle Sam shouts for all lenders to hear, "Bring me your poor, your unqualified, your liars, and your wannabe speculators, and I will buy up their loans, allowing you to make a quick profit for generating them, and then passing them like a hot potato into my portfolio."

Given the opportunity to make money by giving money away – not a real hard sale – the lenders rose to the occasion. A rat, sniffing out a crust of bread down an unguarded alleyway, would do much the same.

Likewise the masses, equally quick to discern the opportunity, can hardly be faulted for scrabbling to take the house, oftentimes along with a loan that put extra money in their pockets in the process.

No one was much concerned about paying for the homes; the lender's risk was assumed by the government and the unqualified buyer didn't have much of any money in the game, and besides, everyone was certain that house prices could only go in one direction, up. As for the government, well, the government doesn't really pay much if any attention to the money it spends, because it's not their money. It's yours – if you are a U.S. taxpayer, that is.

But you have never paid much attention to how the government spends your money, have you? No, like a former client of wily Mr. B. Madoff, you just assumed Uncle Sam was on top of his game.

Of course, as the smell of free cheese and wealth without end spread throughout the ether, more and more two-legged rats acted on what they perceived to be their self-interest, causing a steady influx of new buyers to stream into the alley of homeownership. Many of the early adopters, sensing that if one was good, two could only be better, began to double and even triple up.

And the next thing you know, you have a housing bubble of historic proportions.

But you know all this, so why am I repeating history? Well, because this week, I stopped in at a local sandwich shop and, to occupy myself with something other than looking out the window, took hold of a regional real estate guide that, as part of its editorial features, includes a table showing all of the lenders who do business in the area – 16 in all.

Among other information, the lenders' table displayed whether or not the various lending institutions offer "Mortgages to Buyers with Less Than 20% Down?"... and whether they "Offer Mortgages with Credit Scores Under 600?"

Even today, after all the news and global angst, 9 out of 16 still advertise that they offer loans to individuals with credit scores below 600, and four of them actively promote the fact that they'll go down to 580 – which is roughly the credit rating of an escaped felon on the run for credit card fraud. But such a loan, each of the listing institutions further qualifies, is available "Only w/FHA."

And 12 out of 16 will still give you a loan with less than 20% down... in fact, "w/FHA," the solid majority will still provide a loan with less than 5% down, and one touted the availability of a 103% loan.

Alas, despite the understandable desire of lenders to earn yet more cheese by generating poor-quality mortgages for Uncle Sam, borrowers now believe real estate can only go down. Given the oversupply, they are largely right for the foreseeable future. On that basis, they whiff the downside, spot the trap that waits behind the front door of Home Sweet Home, and scamper away.

The lesson in all of this, other than that once I get pounding away on the keyboard, I seem to have no off-switch, is that the real cause of the housing-led crisis was a failure to appreciate the similarities between humans and rats. Every government interference in the market, no matter how well intentioned, carries the seeds of dangerous unintended consequences. Just ask the twenty-something welfare mothers of the 1980s who, when offered monthly pay for each new offspring, quickly converted their wombs into baby factories.

I wish I could say that this lesson – that humans, like rats, will always figure out a way to pursue their self-interest, even if it requires chewing through a real or proverbial wall – has been understood, thanks to the crash.

But as evidenced by the following item, also just in from Bloomberg, it's clear that the lesson is far from learned... at least by certain rats...

Dolts!

Fortunately, there is consolation to be had from the current trend towards more and bigger government. Namely, if you can fully understand what's going on and what's coming next, you have a rare opportunity to – in the words of a stock promoter who used to speak at conferences some years ago – get "stinky, filthy, sloppy rich."

We'll do our part to help you achieve that elevated position, in our various publications and at the upcoming Casey Research Crisis & Opportunity Summit in Las Vegas, March 20 – 22.

Speaking of that event, even though we still haven't gotten around to widely marketing it, the Las Vegas Summit is now more than 2/3 sold out... with less than 100 seats remaining. You should make the effort to get there if you can... there isn't a better time to step away from your computer and everyday life and spend a couple of days in the active contemplation of what's coming next and how to profit. You will get your most pressing questions answered. An updated schedule and registration information is available by clicking here.

Obama Watch

Looking past the rhetoric to the actions of those with their hands on the tiller of power this week, we find some items of interest.

Higher-mileage, lower-emission standards on the way. It increasingly looks as though the enviro-alarmists within the Obama administration are willing to pursue a scorched-earth policy in order to advance their agenda. This week, they set the ball in motion to accelerate the date when car manufacturers have to dramatically reduce emissions and raise fuel mileage... and looked to set a precedent whereby individual states can set their own, even more rigorous, standards. In the best of times, these sort of dictates are often stupid and counterproductive. In the worst of times, they are also dangerous.

In my view, left alone, people and industries will fluidly adapt to changing conditions... even if that adaptation means some businesses will fail and others rise. Unfortunately, the government and far too many members of the voting public just don't see it that way. And so, as with the housing crisis, expect unintended consequences.

Not having to look very far for examples of this principle in action, it was reported this week that State Farm Insurance will be dropping 1.2 million customers and withdrawing from Florida's residential home insurance market after state regulators refused the company's request for a rate hike. According to Bloomberg...
Stimulus or another brick in the wall? This just in from Washington Correspondent Donald Grove...
(Don isn't the only one encouraging a "no" vote on the stimulus bill. Check out this ad from the folks at CATO... http://cato.org/special/stimulus09/cato_stimulus.pdf
Things that go bump. Recently I shared comments by Fitzroy McLean, former intelligence operative and co-editor of Without Borders, on the topic of the daily intelligence briefings that every U.S. president since Bill Clinton has received. To recap, this briefing contains info on a wide range of real and potential threats. The president is then asked to make a decision on how to act. Failure to do so carries with it the potential for a political blowback, should the threat assessment turn out to have been accurate. Thus, even though he was only in office a few days, President Obama approved a drone attack into Pakistan's sovereign territory, killing 20 or more locals, including a number of women and children.

Now, I can't say, because I don't know, whether the intelligence leading to the attack was sound, or whether the "collateral damage" was worth it. But it is important, in my view, to note that the new president has shown himself willing, like his predecessor, to ignore international law and risk further destabilizing an already unstable ally. Was the drone attack warranted? Or was President Obama simply continuing the new presidential tradition of covering his hindquarters by acting reflexively to things that go bump in the night?
Speaking of Afghanistan. This week, we also heard Defense Secretary Robert Gates confirm that (a) there will be a build-up of more U.S. troops in that country, and (b) the whole notion about helping stabilize the country through development activities will likely be back-burnered in favor of just killing unfriendlies. In his own words, the DefSec testified...
As is made clear in Counterinsurgency Warfare by David Galula (available at http://www.praeger.com), probably the best book ever written on the topic, you simply can't win a war against insurgents with blunt military force alone. Gates, who I am almost positive has read the book, knows this, so I find a certain tired resignation in his words. We send more troops to Afghanistan not because we expect to win, but because Obama said we would in his campaign.

Supporting my contention of the futility of the conflict is the fact that the Soviets were incredibly brutal in their attempt to pacify the country, going so far as to drop toys that would explode when handled, the idea being to blow the hands off the next generation of Mujahedeen. So, let me ask you – if we aren't willing to go to that sort of extreme, and beyond... and we have given up on the idea of winning Afghan hearts and minds through on-the-ground politicking and development... then what, exactly, is the endgame?

To get a better sense of the situation, watch this video, it details an eye-opening trip to the largest arms bazaar in the Khyber Pass. (Thanks to Dave M. for sending it along.)

The link is here: http://www.vbs.tv/full_screen.php?s=DGFE2305DC&sc=1363196

But if we pull out, won't a new gang of terrorists reestablish themselves and begin to train for the next 9/11? Could happen, but there are better ways of dealing with those threats than getting deeper and deeper into a country that history has correctly awarded the moniker as "graveyard of empires."

(While its lyrics refer to a different sort of road, this week I've been listening to Chris Rea's The Road to Hell, which seems fitting to a discussion of the Khyber Pass. You can listen to it here)

The above list of actions of the Obama administration is not in any way meant to be a complete tally of what's been going on. For example, according to the news, later today President Obama is expected to "issue executive orders to reinforce the rights of organized labor." And he has added to his new administration Harvard Professor David Cutler. According to Harvard's web site...

"Cutler, who specializes in health care and public economics, is a vocal proponent of increasing America's health care spending, arguing in his most recent book, "Your Money or Your Life: Strong Medicine for America's Health Care System," that such spending has been worthwhile despite its high costs."
To all of which I can only repeat, "stinky, filthy, sloppy rich."

Go Gold!

For obvious reasons, there has been a lot of news on the gold front this week, with an increasing number of articles showing up in the mainstream financial media on the shift towards gold as a safe-harbor investment. Even famous hedge fund managers and other institutions are beginning to buy into the case for gold. And not just bullion, but gold stocks. This from Bloomberg this week...

Meanwhile, GLD, the largest gold bullion ETF, reported that its holdings reached an all-time high of 832.57 tonnes last week.

Miscellany

Bye, Bye, Bobby. The freshly minted Zimbabwean $100 trillion note didn't last long. This week, that nation's befuddled kleptocracy finally threw in the towel on its own currency and is allowing the citizenry to use pretty much any form of currency they can get their hands on to trade among themselves. Without the power to print and no reserves of anything of value left, the end of the Mugabe administration can't be far off. In fact, I'll go on record saying that he'll be out of power within three months. Want to bet $100 trillion Zimbabwean dollars on it?
Scapegoat Bank, MEMBER FDIC. Recently I discussed the idea of the government implementing a "bad bank," an idea that has come to life this week, with the FDIC raising its hand to manage same. Subscriber and correspondent Ian M. of Toronto sent in the following this week, which I thought was both interesting and relevant.

And that, dear readers, is that for this week.

Juggling my responsibilities as managing editor of The Casey Report, the next edition of which is due out on or about February 6, I started this week's edition of The Room yesterday afternoon... and so I am finishing up earlier than usual, at about 11:15 am. While I can't say where the markets will end today, I can report that, at this moment, the DJIA is off about 84 points, oil is up modestly to $46.05, and gold is up to $920.

Given the sheer volume of bad news this week, with unemployment continuing to reach new highs, home sales continuing to collapse, and consumer confidence – and spending – in a steep slide, the stock market should have been crushed... but it wasn't. That it wasn't, I can only view as being due to base building in anticipation of Super Obama's magical plan... you know, the big New Deal "get it done" plan to end all plans.

It's coming...

And I am going...

Until next week, thank you for reading and being a subscriber to one or more Casey Research services.

Sincerely,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room - 10/24/2008

David Galland — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:47:33 GMT

Dear Readers,

I have woken in the pre-dawn to find our direst predictions coming true, with global stock markets taking yet another pounding and U.S. stock futures limit down.

Serving as a proxy for the mindset now gripping governments around the world, French President Sarkozy has announced that the French government will, henceforth, buy shares in important French companies in an attempt to prop them up.

"We will intervene massively whenever a strategic enterprise needs our money," said Sarkozy, a supposed economic conservative, as he pounded the table on behalf of nationalizing industry.

The New Age of big government is upon us. Armed with Harry Potter-like magical monetary wands, they are wildly conjuring a deluge of money from thin air to bind the free market and keep it from facilitating the resolution of economic and investment dislocations created over decades.

Bud Conrad tells me he is having a hard time adding up all the fiat money that has been committed to the battle for economic – and, by extension, political – survival over the past couple of months. The numbers rolling off the lips of officialdumb have progressed well past the hundreds of millions, or even hundreds of billions, and have now reached the trillions.

In that theme, the Fed announced this week that it would drop over half a trillion – $540 billion, to be exact – on the purchase of suspect commercial paper now clogging the portfolios of "safe harbor" money market funds. Given that there is a total of $3.4 trillion of your money resting in those very same funds, the commitment of $540 billion – about 16% of the total – should be taken as an indicator of just how bad the problem really is.

A friend of mine, employed as an executive in the money fund business, worried aloud to me over a cup of coffee a couple of months back that if even 5% of the total holdings were found lacking, the huge money market complex that provides his paycheck would be in deep trouble. That the Fed is opening the bid with 16%, therefore, says much.

Now my friend doesn't need to worry... his hefty paycheck is secured, compliments of Uncle Sam or, more accurately, the suckers whose pockets he so smoothly picks. Similarly, the stock portfolios of French shareholders are also now secure, compliments of Sarkozy.

On the topic of suckers, there is an old poker saw that goes, "If you are playing poker and within 30 minutes you can't figure out who the sucker is, it's you."

Well, the game has now been going on for about 50 years, and the average taxpayer is still glancing around, bug-eyed, trying to figure out who the sucker is.

They are about to find out.

The Trial of Gold

They filed into the docket, faces bright and smiley despite the shackles around their arms. The leader of the gang, Mr. Gold, was pushed forward into the defendant's chair. The rest, including Ms. Silver as well as the members of the resource share clan, Biggie Goldshares, Junior Goldshares and Ms. Silvershares, were manhandled onto the hard bench just behind. Rather than looking discomforted at the treatment or the ugly smells and sounds of the crowded courtroom, they just looked around pleasantly, as if on a church-sponsored outing to the local zoo.

Calling the court to order, the bailiff announced that all should rise for the judge. Shortly thereafter, Judge Market entered from stage left, a stern look in his eye. Approaching the dais, he arranged his robes around him and took his seat before gaveling the court to session.

The trial of Gold had begun.

"Mr. Gold, you and your cohorts have been accused of misleading investors into thinking that you would help them preserve their wealth, when exactly the opposite has been true of late. How do you plead?"

"Not guilty, Your Honor," Mr. Gold answered brightly, receiving a dour look in return.

"Mr. Cuomo, you may question the witness," Judge Market announced impatiently.

As Mr. Gold made himself comfortable in the witness stand, Andrew "Son of" Cuomo, taking a break from his well-oiled political career, I mean, job as New York attorney general, to serve as the public prosecutor in this high-profile case, rose smoothly to his feet, patted an imaginary loose hair into place, shot his cuffs, and approached the defendant.

"Mr. Gold, behind me in this court are good folks, hard-working folks, who believed in you. Yet you have failed to perform as advertised. How can you sit there, all shiny, and claim that you have not deceived the public in this regard?"

A pleasant and, some might say, radiant smile fixed on his face, Mr. Gold responded in an even voice. "I'm just a simple metal. I've never made any claims one way or another, so I don't know where people got it into their heads that I'm anything special. But for thousands of years now, people have been chasing after me, all over the world. Beats me why."

"Your Honor, if I may." The defense attorney, Mr. Reason, rose to his feet.

"Yes?" asked Judge Market, looking grumpy.

"I know it's a bit unusual, but Mr. Gold is not exaggerating when he says he's, well, kind of simple. If it pleases the court, it might speed things along if I could ask some expert witnesses to assist in answering the prosecutor's questions. Can do?"

"Highly irregular," said the Judge, glancing over at Mr. Gold where he sat, his smile and countenance oddly reassuring in the dark, smelly courtroom. "Mr. Cuomo, any objection?"

Seeing the fond looks in the eyes of many in the courtroom as they stared, fixated, at Mr. Gold... and after a quick consultation with his internal popularity meter and coming to the conclusion that he didn't want to appear mean-spirited, Cuomo nodded in agreement.

"Thank you," Mr. Reason said reasonably. "Then I would like to ask the Ghost of Murray Rothbard to join Mr. Gold on the witness stand."

As the court watched, their collective mouths somewhat agape, Rothbard's ghost floated softly to the witness stand and landed on the rail next to Mr. Gold, who winked at him amicably.

"Ahh, okay, well..." Mr. Cuomo, stammered, looking a little discomforted by the sight of Rothbard's ghost, his transparent bow tie ruffled slightly by some unfelt celestial wind. "How do you answer the charge against Mr. Gold that he has lured people to him under false pretenses?"

"I'd like to answer by quoting from an excellent book on the topic, the very best, in my opinion," said Rothbard's ghost with a wry smile. "It's called The Mystery of Banking and it is written by... me!"

In all countries and all civilizations, two commodities have been dominant whenever they were available to compete as moneys with other commodities: gold and silver.

At first, gold and silver were highly prized only for their luster and ornamental value. They were always in great demand. Second, they were always relatively scarce, and hence valuable per unit of weight. And for that reason they were portable as well. They were also divisible, and could be sliced into thin segments without losing their pro rata value. Finally, silver or gold were blended with small amounts of alloy to harden them, and since they did not corrode, they would last almost forever.

Thus, because gold and silver are supremely "moneylike" commodities, they are selected by markets as money if they are available. Proponents of the gold standard do not suffer from a mysterious "gold fetish." They simply recognize that gold has always been selected by the market as money throughout history.

Generally, gold and silver have both been moneys, side-by-side. Since gold has always been far scarcer and also in greater demand than silver, it has always commanded a higher price, and tends to be money in larger transactions, while silver has been used in smaller exchanges. Because of its higher price, gold has often been selected as the unit of account, although this has not always been true. The difficulties of mining gold, which makes its production limited, make its long-term value relatively more stable than silver.

Concluding with a large smile and a wave of the hand, Rothbard's ghost graciously accepted Mr. Reason's words of gratitude for taking time out of his schedule to make an appearance, then stood on the rail of the witness box and, with a flourish, took a deep bow before flying out the door to return to his ethereal seat in the heavenly branch of the Austrian School of Economics.

Mr. Cuomo played for a moment with a well-manicured cuticle before whipping around, his finger jabbing in the direction of Mr. Gold. His voice rose dramatically.

"And what, Mr. Gold, do you have to say on the topic of inflation? Can you deny that you and your friends claim to be inflation hedges? If so, then how do you answer to the fact that you are now selling for a lower nominal price than back in 1980! And, in inflation-adjusted terms, you are well behind! You, sir, are a fraud!"

Mr. Gold's smile remained unchanged, his countenance pleasant as always. "I'm sorry, but I really don't understand what you are talking about."

Mr. Reason again took to his feet. "Mr. Cuomo, if I may?"

"Oh, alright. Have at it."

"The defense calls Terry Coxon of The Casey Report. Mr. Coxon, would you be so kind to answer Mr. Cuomo's question."

Coxon made his way from a seat at the back of the courtroom where he had been enjoying the show and walked over to stand next to the witness box. Unable to help himself, he reached out and gave Mr. Gold a pat on the arm.

"So, Mr. Coxon," Son-of-Cuomo barked, "How do you explain that in 1980, gold touched $850. And here, 28 years later, it is trading for less than that – even though inflation has been persistent throughout the period. The claim that gold is an inflation hedge is simply false!"

Speaking slowly, to be sure that Mr. Cuomo understood, Coxon replied...

What moves gold isn't the rate of inflation but the change in the rate of inflation.

When people expect higher inflation, they bid up gold. When people expect lower inflation, demand for gold drops, even though "lower" may still be very high. That's why gold trended down in the 1980s, even though the inflation rate was high. The inflation rate was high, but it was declining.

There is a simple reason for this relationship. Gold and the dollar are both a store of value. Gold is more reliable in the long run, and the dollar is more reliable over shorter periods. Because they do somewhat the same thing for their owners, they are competing products, but with different attributes.

For example, the cost of holding dollars for their usefulness as a store of value is the gradual erosion of purchasing power -- price inflation. In a period of rising inflation, using dollars for storing value becomes relatively more expensive than using gold. So the demand for gold increases. And since the supply of gold – in ounces – is nearly fixed, the price per ounce goes up.

To sum it up, the price of gold is lower today than in 1980 because the rate of inflation now is lower -- much lower -- than in 1980.

Judge Market looked thoughtfully at Mr. Gold. "Mr. Cuomo, any more questions for this witness?"

"Not at this time, Your Honor," Cuomo said, flicking an imaginary piece of dust off the sleeve of his silk suit as Coxon returned to his seat and the bag of popcorn he had left there.

"But I do have a question for you!" he said, with a glare at Mr. Gold. "You sit there so calm, nonchalant, even. The public looks to you to remain a bastion of stability in challenging times. But as the financial crisis has swept over the land, you have been gyrating wildly. I accuse you of luring in investors by pretending to be calm, but in actual fact being dangerously volatile!"

Mr. Gold smiled and shrugged. Again, Mr. Reason took to his pins.

"I'd like to call Jeff Clark, editor of Big Gold. I believe he has some charts that might help in answering that charge. Mr. Clark."

His step enthusiastic, Clark walked briskly up to the bailiff and handed him two charts, which were, in turn, dutifully walked up to Judge Market.

"We'll call these exhibits A and B," said Judge Market, pulling on a pair of tortoise shell specs for a closer look.

From the wings, an overhead projector was presented and Clark walked over to it, flipped it on, and laid flat a transparency. Helpfully, the bailiff lowered the lights a touch.

"I think gold has gotten a bum rap," Clark began, his face aglow from the light of the projector and, perhaps, his passion for the subject at hand.

"In fact, despite recent weakness, between January 1, 2007 and October 10, 2008, when I prepared this chart, gold is up 42.6% while the bellwether S&P 500 is down 36.9%.

"For my second chart, I'd like to address the notion that gold is more volatile than stocks," Clark said, sliding exhibit A from the projector and replacing it with exhibit B.

Mr. Cuomo, thinking about the whupping his own portfolio of Wall Street darlings had taken of late, turned to Jeff Clark and almost spat out, "Since we're on the topic of stocks, let's talk about the big gold stocks. They were supposed to do better than the physical metals, but they have been hammered just as hard or even harder than many other stock sectors!"

In the back of the room, Biggie Goldshares examined his shoes, while Clark cleared his throat and said...

No stock has escaped undamaged in the global carnage, including gold stocks. The down-drafts have been breathtaking, and it's easy to imagine that gold stocks will just keep falling. Here's what happened...

For starters, hedge funds continued deleveraging, which can cause significant moves in market prices due to their use of margin. Withdrawals in U.S. hedge funds hit $43 billion in September alone. Meanwhile, mutual funds and "basket of commodities" ETFs continued selling off due to disappointed, or frightened, investors. This means the good was sold along with the bad. Add in the intensifying fear in the marketplace and few buyers were to be found.

Second, as the sea of red numbers continued splashing across headline news, investors fled in droves. Many simply didn't want to be the last one out of what they believed was a burning building, so "Dump everything!" was the mantra. Many stocks, in a perverse use of logic, were sold because they had value. Lots of investors simply fled to cash, which is where investors reflexively go when they see a market rout.

Lastly, right or wrong, gold stocks are perceived by some as riskier than your average IBM or GE. Further, few gold stocks pay dividends, and the ones that do only yield 1-2%. Some sellers might have stuck around if they were getting 8-10%.

So, is that it for gold stocks? Look at the reasons outlined above: where does it say investors sold because inflation is dead? Where does it say the public left because the government has promised not to print money to solve their problems? Where does it indicate gold is no longer viewed as a safe haven? Has mankind lost interest in war? Does the dollar's recent rise mean its ills have been cured? Banks are fine? The economy has a bright future?

The bottom line: the base case for gold stocks remains intact, because at some point the public will see them as the place to go for profit. Gold will rise, and regardless of what the general market is doing at the time, gold stocks will separate and follow gold up. The best days for gold stocks still lie ahead, because a much higher gold price is assured by all the recent efforts to stave off a recession. Since gold stocks were pulled down by a general market panic and for reasons unrelated to fundamentals, our advice is to hold on. We're confident their day will come. And we'll sell when the problems that have yet to push gold to new inflation-adjusted highs have all played out. In the meantime, we need to be steady while others are fearful.

From the back of the room, a hand shot up. Judge Market, already resolved that this was to be no ordinary proceedings, looked over his glasses at the owner of the hand.

"Yes? And who are you? And why are you interrupting?"

"Louis James, senior editor of the International Speculator," the mysterious stranger spoke up loudly for the courtroom to hear. "I would like to add a historical fact related to gold stocks in a crisis."

"Mr. Cuomo, any objection?"

In reply, Son-of-Cuomo simply shrugged and dropped into his seat.

"Go ahead, Mr. James," Judge Market said, rocking back in his chair, his eyes attentive.

Approaching the witness stand, James turned to the assemblage and proceeded.

Homestake Mining Company (now part of mining giant Barrick Gold, NYSE.ABX) offers a worthwhile illustration of the potential of gold stocks even during depressions. As a bit of a background, for more than 100 years, the company operated the Homestake mine in South Dakota. For you television fans, you may recognize the Homestake as being a centerpiece in the recent HBO series Deadwood.

In any event, in 1935, right in the middle of the Great Depression, Homestake recovered enough gold to make $11.39 million in net income, a record that stood for nearly 40 years – and that was at a time when the U.S. government had set the price of gold at $35 per ounce. Homestake shares showed some volatility but weathered the great stock market crash of 1929, ending the year slightly up. From 1926 to the end of 1935, they went ten-to-one, soaring from $50 to $500.

With fluctuations as you'd expect, they held on to those gains until taking off again during the 1970s bull market for gold. When you get home, you can learn more about it with some rather ugly but eye-opening charts available at this website: http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/Exchange/9807/Charts/SP500/HomestakeHist.gif.

Cuomo rose to his Gucci-shod feet with a wicked look on his face. "Mr. James, since you are here, maybe you could tell the jury why it is that Mr. Gold's known associate, Junior Goldshares, has done even worse, almost consistently losing money for investors over the past year. Lots and lots of money! What can you possibly say in Junior's defense?"

"Sure, happy to oblige," said the ever-obliging Mr. James, then launched into the answer.

In hindsight, it would have been nice if we'd taken even more profits than we did in August of 2007 and gone to cash – and now had that capital available to back up the truck for today's screaming buys. But the economic house of cards, which appears to finally be coming apart, could have done so last fall. At the time, cashing in on base metal plays, which can be expected to suffer with a slowing economy, and holding on to precious metals plays, for which the opposite is true, made perfect sense.

We would certainly go to cash rather than hold on to any conventional investment that has exposure to "toxic paper" or that can be expected to do poorly in a slowing economy.

But gold's day in the sun is coming soon, and we still believe the stocks give us leverage on that rising star. So, as stated in the most recent edition of the International Speculator, we're not selling anything unless we think the company doesn't have what it takes to make it through to the other side.

Of course, some investors might want to do some strategic tax loss selling, then look to buy back in the new year. The problem is that often times once you are out of the market, you can miss the big moves while waiting for the right moment to jump back in.

"Not much consolation for investors who have already lost money to Junior Goldshares while waiting for the big returns to materialize," sniffed Cuomo, looking meaningfully at the jury.

"No, it's not," James agreed. "No one likes to take an investment loss. But I have to say something here in Junior's defense. Namely, I have to remind folks of the speculator's credo, because no one's ever made a secret out of the fact that Goldshares are speculative in nature.

And that credo goes like this: "Speculators invest 10% in the hope of receiving a 100% return, while investors invest 100% in the hope of a 10% return."

In the International Speculator, a very apt name for the topic we cover, it has been our constant warning that investors should invest in Goldshares with no more than 20% of their portfolio. That's for the simple reason that while these stocks can offer big rewards – life-changing rewards, in fact – investors in the sector must be willing to accept big risks. Well, today, because of panic dumping, we are seeing the worse side of Goldshares.

Even so, for illustrative purposes, let's do the math on the losses that an investor who limited their investments to just 20% of their portfolio would have suffered with Goldshares. Assume, for example, that you lost 75% on the 20% of your portfolio that you allocated to the sector. In that case, your net loss on your overall portfolio would have been just 15%. Not fun, but not particularly bad, all things considered.

Conversely, take an investor who was 100% invested in the S&P 500 over the period mentioned by Jeff Clark earlier. In that case, they'd now be down almost 40%. Actually, looking at the market action today on my iPhone, the losses would be even worse than that.

"Now, hold on!" Mr. Cuomo sputtered. "All of this is good and well, but you can't all honestly be saying that you still think gold and even gold shares are still a good investment!"

Mr. Reason, stood again. "One more witness?"

"Oh, all right, but I want an answer to my question!" Cuomo barked, adding with a dramatic flourish, "The world wants an answer, nay, demands it!"

"Call your witness," Judge Market said, unimpressed.

"The defense calls David Galland, managing director of Casey Research.

A handsome, well-dressed man, his sublime intelligence palpable even from across the room, rose from the galley and approached the witness stand where Mr. Gold smiled happily at him.

"Okay, whoever you are, start talking," Cuomo said sharply. "You tell the jury how it is you could possibly be bullish about anything related to precious metals at this time. I mean, for gawd's sake, man, the global economy itself is collapsing. It is deflation that investors must be worried about. And yet, and yet... are you going to stand there and actually tell me you think investors should hold on to their precious metals investments? You are, I contend, either mad or deluded, or both at the same time!"

Unflustered by the bluster, Galland began to speak.

Economies and investment markets are complex systems, which is to say that predicting them with any certainty is an impossibility. Thus, my comments should not be taken to reflect certainty, but rather the best interpretation I can make of the situation as we see it.

For some years now, we have been warning that the house of cards, which has been built on a fiat monetary system, would come tumbling down.

It was because of the excess and the distortions that this system make inevitable that Doug Casey and others in the organization looked at the tea leaves and saw a Greater Depression, but one of an inflationary nature.

So, here we are, with the crisis upon us. There is no question that there is a massive deleveraging going on as individuals and corporations look to rebuild their stocks of ready money by dumping assets of all description. Real estate and equity markets are crashing as a result at the same time that U.S. Treasury instruments rise in value even though their yields are negative and falling. While buying into an instrument with a negative yield, at this point in time, many feel it is better to lose some money at a measured pace than take the sort of beatings being doled out in competing financial instruments.

Of course, as U.S. Treasuries are denominated in dollars, the inflow into those instruments has helped strengthen the dollar, putting pressure on gold and silver, which are, per Terry Coxon above, viewed as a competitive form of money. You can see that correlation in the chart here that Bud Conrad, who couldn't make it today because he is preparing for a trip to New Zealand, sent over.

The panicked reaction of investors in all sectors is understandable. The crisis we are now witnessing is not just of a once-in-a-generation scale, but once in a century. And so the scramble for safe harbors and cash is perfectly understandable. It's why Treasuries are so popular, and it's why gold has largely held its own in the broader scheme of things.

"Do you have a point to make?" Cuomo sneered from his seat.

Galland nonchalantly replied:

I was merely setting the stage for where we are at this point in history. And by that I mean, here and now, October 24, 2008. You see, when panic and confusion are the watchwords of the day, as they now are, there are two attributes of the successful investor that become especially important. The first is to stay calm. The second is to try to look beyond the immediate.

Many investors have, like the participants in the Charge of the Light Brigade – the anniversary of which, by the way, is tomorrow, October 25 -- have misread the signals and rushed straight into the cannons of the bear market, being wiped out in the process. Or, in their rush for the rear, they have dumped everything indiscriminately, suffering unnecessarily big losses on great investments.

Will the market continue to rig for deflation for the immediate future? Absolutely. And for the next little while, we can expect nothing other than bad economic news. Therefore, caution in all things financial is called for. Of course, if you have a good reserve of cash, then you could take positions in the inverse stock market ETFs and short positions on banks, financials, and real estate plays recommended in The Casey Report. But in a market as uncertain as this, such positions should be approached carefully, because of the increasing presence of governments in the markets.

Specifically, with each passing day, the risk increases of market-distorting government interventions, including short-sale bans, trading halts, direct interventions in individual stocks, increased margins on targeted commodities, etc. That greatly increases the risk for short-sellers.

"Are we going to get back to the topic of Mr. Gold et al. at some point? I have a hair appointment at 2:00 pm," Cuomo said, looking down for his reflection on the highly polished top of the table in front of him.

"Yes. Right away," said Galland.

You see, most of our recommended investments are not short-term in nature, but rather look for big trends that you can invest in when they are deeply out of favor. Our base case about the nature of the crisis, and especially the government's reaction to it, has not changed. In fact, if a year ago, you had asked us to estimate the amount of money the governments of the world would unleash in an attempt to head off an economic downturn, none of us, not even Doug Casey, our resident guru now wandering the highlands of Argentina, would have come remotely close to estimating the actual numbers being deployed.

To put some meat on that point, over the last month and a little bit, the monetary base of the United States has increased by a previously unimaginable and unprecedented 20%.

And our own Bud Conrad now estimates next year's U.S. government deficit at better than 10% of GNP, an also unprecedented number. And that doesn't even factor in the impact on the deficit from the fall-off in tax revenues that is inevitable given the likely depth of the downturn.

And it gets worse than that, because if you step back just a bit, you'll realize that, while financial markets have been devastated, the damage to the real economy is just now getting started.

Which is to say that the scope of the government's monetary exertions to "fix" everything are only beginning to ramp up. The Democrats, who look likely to control the whole shebang in Washington, are already calling for yet more stimulus and expensive intervention, including, this week, a call for the government to guarantee the nation's defaulting mortgages. Given that 265,968 mortgages went into foreclosure in September alone, this potential bit of largess is unlikely to come cheap.

"Has anyone ever told you that you're long winded," Cuomo asked.

"Yes, they have. It is a personal problem I struggle with every day.

Be that as it may, investors today have several choices, or some combination thereof, they need to make in face of the economic crisis.

They can choose to try and time this market over the short term, but if they do, they better use some very tight controls and pay a lot of attention, because literally anything can happen.

They could also choose to sell everything, take the tax losses, and sit in cash until that point when the inflation we see as inevitable makes the cost of holding that cash too expensive.

Or they can set aside enough cash to assure that their quality of life is not at risk in a collapsing economy and cautiously begin searching out the extraordinary values to be had in gold and other inflation hedges. There is no rush, but one would want to be positioned ahead of the big demand for these inflation hedges we see coming when the wall of government money begins to hit the economy next year.

As Doug Casey recently put it, and as the ghost of Rothbard seconded above, gold's highest and best use is as money, and sometimes it can also be a terrific investment. With the caveat that the near-term deflationary pressures will continue to periodically whip up headwinds for gold and other inflation hedges, we think that Mr. Gold, Ms. Silver, and the resource share clan are screamingly good investments. Personally, I am content with my resource holdings and am holding tight.

"Mr. Cuomo, do you have any further questions or comments before I pass judgment?" Judge Market asked.

"Only that I think these gold bugs are lunatics because everyone, but everyone now thinks that we are going into a deep deflation," Mr. Cuomo said dismissively. "I rest my case."

"Yes, that is so," Galland responded. "But, sooner than most people expect, we think that everyone, but everyone will begin to believe that it is a historic level of inflation they need to most worry about. At that point, Mr. Gold and all his friends will be waiting for them."

"Mr. Reason, do you have any closing comments?"

"No, sir."

"Then would the defendants rise," the judge intoned.

"In light of the evidence presented here today, and because a sound judgment in this case involves the passage of time, I'm going to postpone judgment on this case, and release the defendants with the stipulation that they report back here in six months. At that time, we will update our arguments and Mr. Gold, you and your friends had better have made amends by that time, or else. Do you understand?"

"Not really," Mr. Gold said brightly, "but I'll be back."

Funeral for an Economy

Years ago, I was asked to be one of six pallbearers for an elderly in-law in Montreal, the first time I had ever been asked to perform that somber service.

On the appointed day and hour, the pallbearers -- which included, I addition to myself, four elderly contemporaries of the departed as well as the deceased's younger son, who was of a similar age to my own -- assembled at the foot of the fifty or so stairs leading up into the imposing church to wait for the hearse. As befitted the occasion, we were all dressed in our best suits and spoke quietly among ourselves.

With the crowd assembled inside, the transport arrived and two burly attendants opened the door of the long, black vehicle and slid the large casket out on a purpose-built gurney. I can recall one of the attendants looking at the many steps leading to the church, and then back at the six of us pallbearers, and making a concerned face. He then instructed us on the technique involved in carrying a casket, watched as we positioned ourselves, and said a helpful "One, two, three, lift," which we did.

As the attendant slipped the gurney back into the hearse, leaving the six of us holding the large box carrying our dear friend and relative in mid-air, a shock went first through my body, and then my mind. The casket was too heavy!

It literally felt like someone had asked me to carry a pallet of bricks. But there I was, dressed in my finest, struggling to hold on to the front left rail of the elegant casket, looking with a silent whimper at the fifty steps.

In any other circumstance, I would have let go of the weight with a loud yowl, followed by a stream of obscenities at whomever it was that had played such a bad joke on me. That, as you can imagine, was not possible given the circumstances.

And so, surprising even myself at the inner strength I was able to muster, I lifted my foot onto the first step and hauled my burden unsteadily up the narrow stairs, not evoking in my mind's eye the toils suffered by the everyday Egyptian pyramid slave.

The process was repeated, painfully, step after step, sweat now pouring out of every one of my pores. In my cranium, red claxon horns blaring, simultaneously warning me that I was either going to split a gut or drop the remains of my dear friend and in-law onto the steep steps... after which, as sure as night follows day, the conveyance would begin a quick and dangerous backwards slide down the steps to an unhappy conclusion.

It was then that my straining brain remembered my fellow pallbearers, the dear departed's old friends. If I, a young man in the prime years of life, was almost done for, how could the poor old gentlemen possibly be bearing up? Oh, the tragedy, the human emotion that poured forth from me as I thought of how they must be suffering, and so I risked a concerned backward glance.

Only to see to my everlasting shock, that each was as unshaken as they had been thirty steps below, their elegant suits unruffled, their brows as dry as a freshly powdered infant. Except one, the young son of the deceased, who had been assigned the position on the rails at the far right rear of the troupe. His face was red as a beet, his face as wet as if in a shower, his eyes bulging and the veins on his temples writhing like snakes. In short, his countenance mirrored my own.

At first my brain could make no sense of the scene, but then I noticed that the four elder gentlemen, their faces somber but relaxed, were not in any definition of the word actually "lifting" anything, but rather had their hands resting lightly, daintily even, on the same rails that the two youngest members of the party were clutching as if for life itself.

Somehow, and to this day I still can't imagine how, we made it to the top of the stairs and into the church and then back down again an hour later, but I distinctly remember laughing out loud at the memory that evening when stretched out on a couch, exhausted to my core. And I laugh at it now, the memory of those elegant gentlemen going through the pretense of labor while the able-bodied carried all the weight.

So, why do I relate that scene today?

It is because it strikes me as a good metaphor to the potential of what may come to pass in the years just ahead as the government looks to pay for its many programs by raising taxes on the most productive of society.

While the Obamites, for instance, talk about modest tax increases on the rich, they fail to add into their calculations the impact of letting the Bush tax reductions expire. That one act alone will, over time, add the weight of hundreds of billions, trillions even, in taxes to the backs of the successful. And it will see a return of the estate tax, a tax that I find personally repugnant, given that the money it takes will have made it through the many tax harvestings I will have put up with throughout my career, making it to the finishing line only to have the state confiscate some large percentage of it rather than having it go to my far more deserving heirs.

And I suspect, politicking concluded, once the extent of next year's deficits is apparent, all promises about keeping taxes down will be swept aside for the hot air they are.

But with each new tax passed, the government increases the risk that the casket will be dropped.

How Long Will the Foreigners Support the Dollar?

With a U.S. government deficit in excess of $1 trillion next year, how long will foreigners be willing to invest in government T-bills and the like? Not overly long, we suspect. A suspicion heightened by the following item off the wires this week...

BEIJING (Dow Jones)--China should be very cautious in using its massive foreign exchange reserves to purchase foreign financial institutions, a senior Chinese official said Sunday.

Zheng Xinli, vice director of the China Communist Party's Central Policy Research Office, said at a forum that China should instead use its foreign exchange reserves to buy foreign resource companies, oil fields, and iron ore, copper and aluminum mines in foreign countries to meet China's demand for the resources.

China's foreign exchange reserves are the world's largest and last stood at $1.9 trillion at the end of September.

Zheng said the global financial crisis gives China a chance to internationalize the yuan.

He urged China to accelerate the pace of the yuan's convertibility reform, in an attempt to allow the Chinese currency to play a key role in the region.

On the topic of China, there was also this, this week... another of many signs that the Chinese remained focused on their future economic needs and are not afraid to act to take advantage of the current financial chaos to buy what they need on the cheap...

(Dow Jones)--China Development Bank may raise the small stake it holds in global mining giant Anglo American PLC (AAL.LN) as the value of the miner's shares has been falling on a worsening economic outlook, the South China Morning Post reported Monday, citing unnamed sources.

"CDB has a stake in Anglo American and it is actively looking at options for that stake," said one source.

"Alternatively, since it sees itself as a bridge between Anglo American and China, it could bring in other parties to take a stake," the source said.

The report didn't say how much China Development Bank owns in Anglo American, but said the bank "evidently" lent US$805 million to Chinese tycoon Larry Yung to fund his purchase of a 1.13% stake in Anglo American in 2006.

Anglo American spokesman James Wyatt-Tilby said in the report the terms of the financing placed ultimate ownership of the stake with CDB.

Credit Sucks and Don't Forget It

Friend and correspondent Sunni forwarded this in, this week.

On average, Americans have eight credit cards apiece and 20 percent of those cards are maxed out, reports CardWeb.com, which tracks the lending industry.

Americans now hold more than $850 billion in credit card debt, four times as much as in 1990. About 58 percent of cardholders do not pay down the entire balance each month. That group carries an average card debt of more than $17,000, according to the Consumer Federation of America."

This week, American Express announced that in the third quarter, they had suffered a 59 percent year-over-year decrease in net income from their credit card division.

This is yet another area in the economy we see getting much worse before it gets better.

Laughing Out Loud (When No One Else Is Looking)

Having received a nice response from you all after last week's humor installment, and having received an influx of new entries, I thought I'd repeat the exercise this week again.

This week's entry comes from friend Beth G... a revised definition of financial terms.

CEO - Chief Embezzlement Officer

CFO - Corporate Fraud Officer

BULL MARKET - A random market movement causing an investor to mistake himself for a financial genius.

BEAR MARKET - A 6- to 18-month period when the kids get no allowance, the wife gets no jewelry, and the husband gets no sex.

VALUE INVESTING - The art of buying low and selling lower.

P/E RATIO - The percentage of investors wetting their pants as the market keeps crashing.

BROKER - What my broker has made me.

STANDARD AND POOR – Your life in a nutshell

STOCK ANALYST - The idiot that just downgraded your stock.

STOCK SPLIT - When your ex and their lawyer split your assets equally between themselves.

FINANCIAL PLANNER - A guy whose phone has been disconnected.

MARKET CORRECTION - The day after you buy stocks.

CASH FLOW - The movement your money makes as it disappears down the toilet.

YAHOO - What you yell after selling it to some poor sucker for $240.00 a share.

WINDOWS - What you jump out of when you're the sucker who bought Yahoo at $240.00 a share.

INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR – Past-year investor who's now locked up in a nuthouse.

PROFIT – An archaic word no longer in use.

Miscellany

I am running really, really late today... so I will sign off right after mentioning that Alex in Calgary, who technically sponsored the first phyle in his coffee shop, would like to organize an ongoing group. If you are interested, contact phyle@caseyresearch.com.

As I sign off, accompanied by Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture (the song aficionados of the movie "V" will recall this from the pivotal scene), I see the DJIA is off over 400 points, and gold has pulled back from the abyss and is now trading at $730.

Frantic, exciting, challenging, and sometimes tiring times we live in.

Hang in there... until next week, thank you for reading and for subscribing...

Best Regards,

David Galland
Managing Director

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.

Views from Vancouver

David Galland — Wed, 21 May 2008 16:02:57 GMT

By David Galland, Casey Research

With the downturn in the precious metals markets making even the most stalwart investors question their instincts; it's good to have some advice from the field about what is really going on out there. Here today David Galland, of Casey Research (publishers of Casey's International Speculator) offers some insights into the current state of the precious metal... and what to look for in the companies that mine it.

I have just returned from my bi-monthly pilgrimage to Vancouver, known by many as the Mecca of Mining – or at least to the junior mining exploration sector – to check in on our research team there and to reacquaint myself with the buzz in this hotbed of hot stocks.

If I were pushed to name one impression over all others gained during my trip, it would be the general state of gloom hanging over the place. Were I a writer of the genre of Cormac McCarthy, I might try to describe the mood thus...

"He arrived to a dark sky and laid down on the cold cement and felt the wet of it soak through the back of his suit. He wanted to call a cab but wanted more to sleep here and now."

This, of course, is a far cry from the Vancouver vibe in frothy times, when the deal flow is humming and the investors are biting at every new stock like trout at live bait. In those happier days, the community of junior mining "professionals," a term I use loosely, are a positively effervescent lot. With their fine Italian leather shoes, shiny suits and attentively coiffed hairdos, they positively bubble over with the money they are making by selling large handfuls of the freshly printed paper that is mostly the stock of their trade.

But with a damp fog enveloping the sector since last August, the streets of the town are quiet, the conversations subdued. One sure sign of how dire the outlook is, is that I was asked four or five times, "So, what do you think about technology plays?"

(For those of you new to the Vancouver market, it may be helpful to think about it like one of those multi-colored, multi-cartridge pens most often found in close proximity to members of the local high school chess club. When red is the color of the day, then red it is. But when that falls from favor, a quick click and you are writing in green or perhaps turquoise. In the Vancouver market, when mining is out of favor, the promoters go "click" and just like that, their unwanted mining shells become technology plays.)

While I don’t sense that things have gotten quite that bad, there is no question that they are bad. But bad is a relative term, because it is in a market like this that the smartest speculators plant the seeds of fortune.

On that topic, a couple of further observations...

It’s a buyers market. My many conversations over the past two days have been punctuated by tales of well-known promoter types being unable to close financings, even small ones. Translation: if you are going to invest at this point, be selective, try wherever possible to get into private placements where you can get a share and a warrant... and be firm on the terms you will require in exchange for your money. The mining promoters need you a lot more than you need them.
On a practical level, when a mining promoter tells you that you better hurry up and get your money in because a deal is going to close, be skeptical. If you like the management, and you like the project, tell him that you are only investing in deals with a two-year warrant on good terms.
Stick with quality. Make sure your portfolio is made up only of quality companies that are well cashed up and able to deliver on their aspirations. A number of "wannabe" companies are running out of cash and will either have trouble finding that cash or be forced to offer terms that will be significantly dilutive to existing shareholders.
Watch the cost side of the equation. On companies that are in the feasibility phase, look hard at the potential for bad news on the capital expenditure front. Few things will send a stock down harder than the revelation that the mine they had expected to bring in for $400 million will now cost upwards of $1 billion.

As for the opportunity, the Wall of Worry about the sector now looms so high, it is almost as if we have been pushed back to the "Stealth" phase, the phase where no one wants to hear about the Canadian junior exploration stocks. That spells opportunity, because when there are only sellers and few buyers, the only direction a stock can go is up... once the dust settles. But only for the quality companies; the paper tigers are doomed.

The bottom line: Keeping your eyes firmly fixed on the prize and today’s soft markets means you can get positioned into great companies at deep discounts from where they should be trading. And certainly will be trading, when the broader market understands that the commodities bull market is very much intact and that if you want to buy into the sector, you invariably will have to do it on a Canadian exchange.

David Galland is managing director of Casey Research, publishers of Doug Casey’s International Speculator, now in it’s 28^th year. New subscribers are invited to try a subscription for three full months with the security of a 100% money-back satisfaction guarantee. Learn more and sign up now.