The Room : Recession

The Room - 10/17/2008

David Galland — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:31:14 GMT

Dear Reader,

Keeping up with the complex drama now flashing across the global screen is becoming more challenging with each passing day.

In lazier days, a scene might be allowed to unfold at a measured pace, the interactions between major characters developed through subtle nuance and lingering shots and close-ups of, perhaps, the furrowing of a brow or the sly upturning of the corner of a mouth.

These are not those days.

Instead, we are living in the world of 30-second commercials, directed by a speed-addicted music video director, strung together in a nonstop explosion of two-second jump cuts.

One minute stock markets are soaring, the next crashing. Gold jumps $20, then falls $40. Banks fail, banks get bailed out. Politicians elbow each other out of the way to throw billions, trillions even, into deep, dark holes. Oil tumbles, then bounces, then tumbles again.

While the volatility has allowed me to make some fun money through the all-terrain investment vehicles of futures and options, it has also made the task of trying to keep current on the news and, more importantly, on what's important, daunting indeed.

Even so, it is Friday morning and so, cup of coffee at hand and the music turned up on Citizen Cope's Bullet and a Target (the very same position that the Fed now finds itself in), I turn to the task at hand... the task of trying to make some sort of sense out of the chaos.

Given the frenetic nature of the markets, I hope you'll forgive me if my commentary this week is similarly frenetic.

Unintended Consequences

As you likely know, we are not optimistic about the outlook for real estate, that lynchpin of the U.S. economy. This pessimism is evoked by a number of factors, starting with the simple fact that residential housing increased by about 50% between 1992 and 2007, massively outpacing population and income growth over the period. As you absolutely know, much of that excess inventory is in the hands of individuals who simply can't afford to pay the freight.

Then there is our hardened belief that the equivalent of an express train wreck is about to happen in the 4 – 6 trillion dollar U.S. commercial real estate market. There will be a lot less in the way of Ho! Ho! Ho! this holiday shopping season, and a lot more Oh... Oh... Oh's.

And none of it is helped by the inevitable rise in interest rates, which are today at near 50-year lows. While we might not be quite at the bottom, we're close... after which we expect a persistent rise as the government bailouts flow through the inflationary pipeline. Of course, wounded housing markets react about as well to rising interest rates as I do to the prospect of my taxes going up in the next administration.

Unfortunately for the housing market and by extension the U.S. economy, we are already seeing the ghosts of what's to come. This just in from Bud Conrad...

The result is that housing will be further hurt with the higher rates and will continue to fall in price.

On the same topic, the news is out this morning that in September, single-family home starts in the U.S. fell to the lowest level in 26 years. Just 544,000 new homes would be built over the next 12 months (if the trend were to stabilize here, which it won't).

Just so you have the right perspective, at the peak of the bubble, annualized housing starts in the U.S. were running at 2,265,000 units, so we're seeing about a 75% decrease.

By the time this is over, it wouldn't surprise me to see housing starts fall to 10% of the peak.

Of course, housing is far more than just "another" economic stat. In addition to the tragic financial and emotional implications of coming up short on the mortgage on a personal and even societal basis, there are the direct consequence to the broader economy. No more excess equity to borrow against to fund shopping sprees, and none to allow for a comfortable retirement for far too many.

This is, and will continue to be, a big problem for the economy. While there is no soft solution at this point, the best we could hope for is that the damage will be quick to come and quick to pass. But the only real way for that to happen is for house prices to fall to the point where ready buyers are available. And that entails workouts between lenders and borrowers, or outright foreclosures, to clean up the mess and allow the market to function as it certainly can, and will again... if left to its own devices.

Unfortunately, the plans now being bandied about by the government envision pretty much the polar opposite of letting the market clean itself up. Rather, they involve taxpayers buying defaulting mortgages and even the imposition of a moratorium of some duration on foreclosures. Most people read news such as that and shrug it off. It may help to view these ideas through a narrower spectrum.

For example, imagine you are the president of a small bank and you had lent money in good faith to someone in the neighborhood. We'll call him Joe as that seems to be a popular name for these sorts of examples these days.

For reasons only known to him, Joe has stopped paying on his mortgage, leaving your little bank on the hook for $200,000. Following procedure, you have Mrs. Smith down in the lending department send Joe a nice letter asking him what's up, to which she receives no response. So you personally send him another letter, this one offering to have him down to the bank to have a chat and see if you can work things out.

No response, no money.

So, uncomfortable at having to perform the duty, you give Joe a call and he admits he is in over his head. When you offer to help him work out a payment plan, he calls you a blood sucker and hangs up on you.

Pained by the outcome of your loan, because you'd rather be getting paid back on the agreed-upon terms, you call up your lawyer and reluctantly authorize the expense of beginning the foreclosure proceeding. At that point, you know you will likely spend thousands and the better part of a year trying to get back your property (and it is your property). But what choice are you left with?

And then you hear – as does Joe - that Congress is going to pass a moratorium on foreclosures, and you reach into the locked drawer of your desk for the flask you keep there for such occasions. Joe, meantime, heads down to the local deli for a six pack to celebrate free rent for the foreseeable future, perhaps paying for his purchase by selling off the copper pipes he's ripped out of the guest bathroom.

This exercise is, of course, little more than the morning musings of a sleep-deprived mind, and I am well aware that the circumstances surrounding the defaulting on loans are as varied as humanity itself. Even so, the underlying principles are the same. There is a contractual agreement between a lender and a borrower that no one had to be waterboarded to sign. In the event of a failure to perform on the part of either party, it is up to the two parties alone to resolve -- with the help of an impartial judiciary if an impasse occurs. Interjecting an overreaching government run by perfect-worlders into the process can only gum up the works.

And, I would contend, result in just the sort of unintended consequences now being reflected in jumping mortgage rates. Or, for that matter, the entire housing mess in the first place... much of which is the unintended consequence of Greenspan ratcheting down interest rates instead of pouring himself a nice cup of tea and watching as the participants in the dot-com mania received their just desserts.

Personally, I am shocked by the rising cacophony of calls for more, not less, government regulation. Given the widespread chanting now going on in favor of elevated levels of oversight, retribution, taxation, meddling, and outright nationalization, it is clearer than ever that the views I just expressed are in a minority. And the situation is only going to get worse as the next wave of well-intentioned government operators step up to the controls... controls that are being firmly bolted onto the machinery of markets.

We are about to enter a dark period for the free markets. That's the bad news.

The very good news is that, seeing it coming, you can anticipate where the next unintended consequences will occur and position yourself to profit.

Getting Stupid

Despite gold weakening over this week, we remain utterly unconcerned about gold... and I couldn't mean that more sincerely. In fact, I just now paused for a moment to email my broker to sell a $750 put option on gold.

While somewhat off topic, I'll provide some details because I love this kind of trade (which I learned about at our Futures and Options Summit, as an aside).

Selling a $750 put earns me a fat premium – the higher the volatility, the higher the premium -- of $6,300. That money goes straight into my account. While there is a bit of nuance (for example, the potential for an inconvenient margin call), the worst case is that if gold is trading below $750 in March of 2009, when the option settles, I'll be on the hook to buy 100 ounces of gold at $750. Actually, less than that, because of the premium I have received. If at expiration, gold is at or above $750, I will have earned the premium with no money down.

The trick, of course, is to want to own the underlying commodity at option price. And you can use this sort of strategy for stocks, too.

Using futures and options, which I earlier referred to as the all-terrain vehicles of the investment world, gives you a nearly limitless number of opportunities to profit... regardless of the direction of markets. (We'll be launching a trading service soon, but that is a story for another day.)

But there are opportunities outside of futures and options. In fact, the junior resource sector, which has been a big disappointment of late, is now officially reaching stupid levels of valuations.

On that front, this week I was looking at a high-quality junior gold exploration company that is being followed in our International Speculator letter. The company has been advancing a big deposit in a great location in Canada and has just released its first resource estimate. The report confirms that the company has proven up just shy of 5 million ounces in a near-surface deposit, and the deposit is still wide open, so you can expect them to add significantly to the resource in the months ahead.

Generalizing, in an "okay" market, gold in good ground sells for around $50 per ounce. And Ontario, Canada, the ground where this deposit is located, is some of the best (as opposed to, say, the Congo). In a better market, gold in the ground might sell for $80 to $100 per ounce. And in a heated-up market, such as we saw back in 2005, valuations can rise as high as $150 or even $200 (which would be steeply overvalued, at anywhere near today's prices).

So, what value is now being assigned to the 5 million ounces of gold (plus blue sky) this very well-run junior is sitting on? Dividing the market capitalization of the company by the number of ounces of gold gives us a valuation of an unbelievable price of just $5.20 per ounce.

Okay, okay, I can almost hear you saying, "What's the problem with the company? I bet they are low on cash, and so shareholders are going to get hugely diluted when they go back to the market to finance."

To which I reply, "Nope – they have enough cash in the bank to cover an estimated two years of operations." In other words, we have looked at the company in depth, and there is nothing wrong with it – other than the broader market and forced selling by cash-strapped funds and investors.

And, as good as this company is, there are any number of other quality juniors – virtually all of which are now selling for the sorts of prices you might have expected to pay back in 1998, before the gold price took off, and before the companies had even found anything. But in this case, the company has 5 million ounces on the books.

And it is not just in futures and options and junior golds where you can find opportunities now. There are some great businesses that have been as heavily punished by non-discerning selling as bad businesses.

While caution remains the watchword of the day for the majority of your portfolio, if you have the capacity, be vigilant for the sort of stupid values just discussed. No need to rush in, but rather buy in tranches, maybe taking positions in 20% increments over the next six months. It may take awhile for you to realize the big returns -- there is a real threat to the equity markets later this year as aggressive tax-loss selling meets up with the retraction in consumer spending in the traditional holiday shopping season -- but after that, things, for the right businesses, selling at the right valuations, should begin to look up.

Given our view of where the economy is headed, you'll need to pick your battles carefully... and we'll be on your side every step of the way... but the time to begin laying out your plans should begin now, and not after gold is racing for the moon with the gold stocks close behind.

So, no big rush... just some food for thought. Of course, we'll continue to keep our many ears close to the ground on your behalf.

The Greater Repression

In my spare time, I'm working on a separate article titled "The Greater Repression," the theme of which is that one of the outcomes of the current financial crisis will be an acceleration in the growth of the state, and the coercion that that implies.

On that topic, did you read how Henry Paulson got the heads of the nine major banks to sign on to the Treasury's plan to partially nationalize them? He basically called them into a room, put a one-page document in front of them and informed them that they were required to sign it. Some excerpts from a story out of the New York Times from earlier this week...

...by 6:30, all nine chief executives had signed — setting in motion the largest government intervention in the American banking system since the Depression and retreating from the rescue plan Mr. Paulson had fought so hard to get through Congress only two weeks earlier.

What happened during those three and a half hours is a story of high drama and brief conflict, followed by acquiescence by the bankers, who felt they had little choice but to go along with the Treasury plan to inject $250 billion of capital into thousands of banks — starting with theirs.

Mr. Paulson announced the plan Tuesday, saying "we regret having to take these actions."

Pouring billions in public money into the banks, he said, was "objectionable," but unavoidable to restore confidence in the markets and persuade the banks to start lending again.

... All told, the potential cost to the government of the latest bailout package comes to $2.25 trillion, triple the size of the original $700 billion rescue package, which centered on buying distressed assets from banks. The latest show of government firepower is an abrupt about-face for Mr. Paulson, who just days earlier was discouraging the idea of capital injections for banks.

... "It was a take it or take it offer," said one person who was briefed on the meeting, speaking on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private. "Everyone knew there was

only one answer."

(You can read the full New York Times article by clicking here.)

But wait! Thanks to a top-secret Casey Research hidden video cam, you can actually watch a video clip of the meeting itself!

The video segment covers the pivotal point in the meeting when Paulson makes a convincing argument as to why bank presidents should fall in line and get on the team. Watch it by clicking here now.

No question about it, we are not only in uncharted waters economically but politically as well. All the media reports on the crisis have painted the free market as the culprit and called on the government to fix everything, whatever it takes.

It is like inviting a wolf into your house to get rid of a mouse. Sure, the mouse may go away (at least temporarily), but then the real trouble begins.

Bretton Woods II

This week, a number of you brought to my attention a rising call from the heads of some governments for a return to something that resembles the discarded Bretton Woods agreement, an agreement that had as a central tenet the convertibility of paper currencies into gold.

Naturally, we salute the notion of a return to a more disciplined approach to the handling of government finances than that which is now favored, and which might be loosely expressed by imagining a conversation such as "Hey Hank, Bennie here. Listen, I'm running short, can you print up a hundred billion or so and shoot them over when you get a chance? Thanks. No, no rush. Tomorrow afternoon would be fine. Best to the Missus, see you down at the club."

That the prime minister of Britain and the head of the European Central Bank have both referenced Bretton Woods this week can only be taken as encouraging. In time, we are convinced, circumstances will force a return to such discipline, with a system based on gold, or at least a mix of tangibles, including gold.

But I wouldn't start holding my breath. For starters, Bretton Woods was almost unilaterally shaped by the U.S. government to take unto itself the keys to a global monetary hegemony. It would border on delusional to think the U.S. will hand those keys off to anyone else until forced to it by events out of its control. Thus, while we might see a sit-down of top finance ministers at some point in the next year (in a six-star seaside resort, one might assume), the actual business of crafting a new monetary order will drag on and on and on.

The potential game changer will be if the currency crisis we foresee as inevitable reaches the point where no one wants any unbacked currency almost at any price. You'll know when that point is approaching when the price of gold blows through $5,000.

Burn, Baby, Burn

Last week, I shared my new basement digs for a day with Brian the electrician, who was putting in a fan and upgrading some fixtures. In addition to being a fine judge of music, commenting as he was putting away his tools at the end of the day that "The music here was the best of any job I've ever been on," our conversations revealed that he is also a financial analyst of no small potential.

"Early last year when I saw all the building going on and the prices of houses going up, I told myself that this couldn't last. So I let go of my employees and sold my new pick-up truck back to the dealer and bought a used one. I've been putting money aside ever since."

Smart guy. Of course, I asked him how business is now.

"Real slow," he answered in the cautious patois that marks a native New Englander. "Except for this one company that deals with fire and damage," he added. "They've been real busy, and they expect to be a lot busier."

"Oh, why?" I inquired.

"Well, apparently, it's because so many people have been putting in wood-burning stoves, trying to save on energy costs and all that."

"I wonder if it could also be because sometimes a fire can solve a problem," I asked. "You know, like a mortgage you can't afford or a business that is failing, if you get my drift."

"Yep," he said with a knowing nod, "and there's that, too."

I was reminded of that conversation the following day as I was watching cable television while laboring down at the gym on the stairway to good health, otherwise known as the cursed StairMaster (it's the only time I watch cable, because I refuse to have it at home).

Through sweat-stung eyes, I watched video coverage by the ScareMasters – CNN, in this case -- of a wildfire somewhere in California. From the bird's-eye perspective of a helicopter cameraman, I watched as flames jumped a road and began doing their worst to what looked to be a dealership specializing in large pick-up trucks.

"Why," I panted to myself silently, "didn't the dealer, who surely knew the fire was approaching, gather around some folks and drive those nice trucks out of harm's way?"

Then I remembered my conversation with Brian the electrician and nodded knowingly to no one, imagining in my mind's eye the owner of the dealership watching the same broadcast and dreaming of a fat insurance check and a nice, long holiday followed by a fresh start. Who knows, perhaps he'll turn to selling the new fuel-efficient cars that U.S. car companies, freshly cashed up themselves with a nice $25 billion handout, will soon be producing with the aid of their five million new employees (I think that was the number bandied about by Obama in the debate).

But I digress. Because in addition to the economic motives for the pending wave of mysterious fires that are likely to descend on the nation, I fear a social motive.

In that regard, I have read and even heard on talk radio (which I occasionally listen to in order to keep my blood heated to the point where I won't fall asleep behind the wheel, a particular problem I have on any drive of more than about 30 minutes) that the Republicrats are all steamed up about the purported voter fraud being perpetuated by the lefties of Acorn.

Now, I can't say, because I can't know, whether or not Acorn and the Demopublicans are actually in the process of stealing votes, but I will say that that particular line of attack is one that has the potential to result in serious consequences.

Think it through.

Let's say that the drumbeat about Acorn really takes hold and fires up the imagination of McCain loyalists, as it certainly seems to be. Okay, now let's say that Obama wins, maybe thanks to a couple of squeakers in states such as Ohio. Could we perhaps see some serious civil disturbance, and maybe even worse, as good, patriotic Americans pick up their rifles and decide that their country has been taken over, unjustly, by terrorist lovers?

Could happen.

Okay, now let your mind swing the other way. That the Republicrats manage to challenge voter registrations in said key states and McCain actually wins? At that point, might the dashed aspirations of Obama's many admirers spill over into the streets? Certainly not out of the question.

Now, I am not saying that people shouldn't be vigilant about vote fraud... but it strikes me as the sort of issue that one wants to tread very carefully on – to double- and even triple-check the facts on the ground – before starting with a lot of arm waving.

Especially in an environment as politically charged and economically challenged as we are currently living in.

It has been a long time since I watched, as a teenager, the cities of America burn. And if I can make it all the way through to my long nap without seeing it again, that would be just fine.

In the final analysis, it won't really matter who wins – and I know that grates with many of you – but it's true. The economic stage has been set and the furniture cemented into place. The leading actors in the next act will be, as if marionettes controlled by the hands of a god, made to follow, not lead, the events that are now both inevitable and imminent.

The only question now is, will the transition to what's next be calm and orderly, or will the old war cry "Burn, Baby, Burn" be heard again?

I really don't know what makes the idea of the presidency so appealing that people would go through such personal trauma to attain the station. If you could, and did, walk in tomorrow and offer me the office, I would politely thank you for the offer and escort you as quickly as socially acceptable to the front door.

Laughing Between the Tears

On any given day, I swear I am going to delete all my email accounts, put the boots to my cell phone, and retreat to a nice, quiet cave. But then I get an email from a friend with a whopping good joke, and I forgive Mr. Email from stealing so much of my time.

This week, I received a few at least somewhat related to the current crisis and so thought I'd pass them along. This might become an occasional feature.

The first three came to me via Hugo in London...

For Geography students only: What's the capital of Iceland? Answer: About Three Pounds Fifty...

Quote of the day (from a trader): "This is worse than a divorce. I've lost half my net worth and I still have a wife."

Here's another one, from subscriber and correspondent Ronin...

Now we are trusting the economy of our country to a pack of nit-wits who couldn't make money running a brothel and selling booze?

Today, I received the following from the hard-working researcher/editor Shannara Johnson.

As the topic is Sarah Palin, those of you who are Obama fans will especially appreciate it... but so will anyone with a sense of humor or an appreciation for creativity and technology. Click the link here: http://www.palinaspresident.us/. After you click, an interactive photo will load. Clicking on the items in the room and on the desk makes fun things happen!

Joke of the Week

This came to me via Clyde Harrison, one of the smartest (and funniest) guys working in the commodities sector today...

Chuck replied, 'Well, then just give me my money back."

The farmer said, "Can't do that. I went and spent it already."

Chuck said, "Ok, then, just bring me the dead donkey."

The farmer asked, "What ya gonna do with him?"

Chuck said, "I'm going to raffle him off."

The farmer said, "You can't raffle off a dead donkey!"

Chuck said, "Sure I can. Watch me. I just won't tell anybody he's dead."

A month later, the farmer met up with Chuck and asked, "What happened with that dead donkey?"

Chuck said, "I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two dollars apiece and made a profit of $998."

The farmer said, "Didn't anyone complain?"

Chuck said, "Just the guy who won. So I gave him his two dollars back."

Chuck now works for Goldman Sachs.

Miscellany

Phyles. Herb in Jacksonville is looking for additional phyle members. Ditto, Ron in Southern British Columbia is going to try to start one. And I have had some correspondence with Vermonters interested in getting together. Not sure when or where, but if you contact us, we'll try to set something up with some of the Casey crew. As always, if you are interested in meeting up with other Casey subscribers, drop Kristen a note at phyle@CaseyResearch.com.
Bud in New Zealand. Bud Conrad will be the keynote speaker at the CFA Society of New Zealand's Fourth Annual Forecast Dinner in Auckland, Thursday, November 6. I am sure that he'd be happy to take time during his trip to meet up with subscribers in the area. Drop us a note at info@CaseyResearch.com and we'll try to set something up.

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

As is my habit, I turn (with no small sense of suspense) to the screens to see how the day is going for things financial. I see that the DJIA is up 166 points on news that consumer confidence has fallen the most on record. Now, there's a reason for a stock market rally!

And gold is down, again, to $784 in spot markets, while oil has come back a bit... to just a touch over $70 per barrel. And that gold stock that just announced a 5-million-ounce deposit? I just took a glance at the portfolio page of the International Speculator, on our web site, and see that it is down another 11% today!

My next task after signing off is to call my broker. I could, and probably will, take a loss over the short term, but I don't care, because I would kick myself if I missed the bounce on that particular stock.

(As an aside, I am not being coy by not sharing the name of the stock with you... I have mentioned it to provide a real-life example of how stupid valuations are getting in the resource sector. It would be unfair to existing International Speculator subscribers to share the name here, in the open. They are entitled to buy their fill without any added competition. I hope you understand.)

And with that, I must sign off by thanking you sincerely for spending some time with me this week, and for being a subscriber to a Casey Research publication.

Hang in there – and hang on tight – because who knows where this joy ride is heading next.

David Galland

Managing Director

Casey Research, LLC.

The Room - 09/26/2008

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

September 26, 2008

Dear Readers,

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

Everything has changed.

Everything is changing.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We don't care.

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

From a correspondent in Switzerland...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ed. Note

The Casey Report

Try our 3-month no-risk trial now.

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

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

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

The Bailout: Behind the Scenes

By Donald Grove

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Always the optimist.

Regards, Don

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

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

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

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

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

From Ron Paul...

Dear Friends,

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

The events of the past week are no exception.

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

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

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

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

There goes your country.

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

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

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

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

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

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

In liberty,

Ron Paul

Quotes from the Quislings

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

Here's my Rogues List...

Laurence Fink

BlackRock Inc

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

About Those Foreigners...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Musical Interlude

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

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

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

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

Explosions in the Sky

The Birth and Death of the Day

It's Natural to Be Afraid

All of a Sudden I Miss Everyone

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

KRS1 - Sound of Da Police ...

NWA - F*** Da Police

Pink Floyd - Another Brick in the Wall Pt. 2

Public Enemy - Fight the Power.

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

JS Bach's Toccata and Fugue

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

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

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

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

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

www.generalfuzz.net

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

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

Gypsy Soul

Obsession Confession

Slash

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

How about Classical Gas for a movin' song?

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

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

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

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

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

McPalin Is Toast

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

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

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

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

Huh? What?

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

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

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

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

Miscellaney

Phyling On

phyle

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'll leave it at that...

Until next week,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room 09/19/2008

David Galland — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:43:31 GMT

September 19, 2008

Dear Readers,

Hi, I am Olivier Garret, this week’s editor of The Room.

What a rough week out there. My mind wanders as I drive at a crawl (I am not known to be a patient driver) behind a car full of “leaf peepers,” as Vermonters affectionately call the tourists who invade our state every autumn. I wonder how my friend David Galland is doing in Portugal, sipping the local wines with no access to his emails? It may be the worst week to be without market news -- or perhaps not…

Hopefully David is enjoying himself while celebrating an old friend’s birthday with a group of other newsletter editors and industry peers.

Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed Chairman Bernanke are not exactly having a day at the beach as they try to solve our nation’s problems. By the way, this past week, it seemed to me that Lehman drew the wrong lottery number while AIG appears to have hit the jackpot. I wonder how many other “private enterprises” will be lucky enough to get bailed out at taxpayers’ expense in the next few months: WaMu, Wachovia, and hundreds of other financial institutions, GM, Ford, Delta, United?

Where Is the Bottom of the Markets?

For several years, we have been warning about the emerging crisis in our publications, and during the past few months, The Casey Report has been emphasizing that what started as a subprime mortgage issue is now quickly evolving into a full-scale depression. I actually wish that our analysis had been flawed and that the government officials who had claimed that the subprime crisis was contained and the markets would rebound in the second half of the year had been right.

Unfortunately, the Fed’s quick fixes did not stick and current events are reinforcing our conviction that this is much more than a normal cyclical correction. It seems as though no securities are being spared these days. Of course, the financials are taking a beating as expected, but we are feeling the ripple effect in all sectors of the economy, including commodities and the junior sector.

Recession fears usually negatively affect the commodities market, as investors expect industrial activity and consumption to decline. This time, however, the very sharp correction of recent months in commodities has been amplified by the need for liquidity on the part of many hedge funds and institutional investors.

Is this the end of the commodity bull market? I am convinced that we are actually feeling the effect of a relatively short-lived, albeit very painful correction. As the Fed and the Treasury continue to intervene in the market, they continue to lose ground and credibility, caught between a sharp recession and strong inflationary pressures. In an effort to bail out the financial sector (soon to be followed by the broader insurance, auto, and airline industries), they have no choice but to start injecting hundreds of billions in liquidity into a contracting market place. This, in turn, will contribute to the makeover of a stagflation period of historical proportion that will make the ‘70s look like a tea party.

Is it time to run for the exit? My answer is a definite “No,” but don’t take my word alone for it. I would like to quote a short excerpt from a fascinating interview of one of the most respected players in the resource markets, Rick Rule. You can read the full interview in this month’s edition of BIG GOLD. Here it is:

David Galland

Rick Rule

So Why Are We Still Bullish on Commodities?

In spite of a sharp recession, the rest of the world will not stop (although it may experience downturns for a while). The aspirations of hundreds of millions of emerging middle-class Chinese and Indian citizens will eventually be attained -- they will continue to work hard to see their standard of living climb and will increase their consumption of food, energy and durable goods. This, coupled with the inflation and debasement of the dollar, will inevitably start a new run for tangible commodities long before this crisis is over.

It is hard not to panic in the current environment and not to run for cover. Instead, we believe it is time to adjust our strategy, taking new input into consideration, of course, but generally speaking, stay the course: continue to invest in precious metals, energy, and other commodities, and buy stocks of discounted top-quality producers and juniors. Some reallocations could also be used to minimize tax liabilities for the year.

In the meantime, make sure that if some of your stink bids get filled, you take money off the table as soon as you can on short-term news. Over the last few weeks, we have seen some great stocks get hit hard by redemptions, then rebound somewhat (20%, 30%, or 50% in a few days). The trend could continue downward for a few months before we see a real turnaround in the resource markets; in the meantime one needs to use the current volatility to acquire great stocks cheaply and take some quick profits. Last week, our Casey Energy Confidential alert provided an opportunity for double-digit gains within a couple of days on several stocks. Subscribers were able to recover their initial investment and retain free positions on some great stocks.

More than ever, we believe in gold and quality gold stocks. I would like to share with you an article recently sent by Nicholas Pingitore, one of our readers:

SHUIT Happens!

HUI Index Components
Company Name	Symbol	% Weighting	Market Cap (9/11/08)
Barrick Gold	ABX	15.83%	23.35 billion
Goldcorp Inc	GG	14.98%	17.72
Newmont Mining	NEM	11.91%	16.3
Randgold Resources Ads	GOLD	6.57%	2.45
Iamgold Corp	IAG	6.43%	1.32
Eldorado Gold Corp	EGO	5.80%	2.02
Agnico-Eagle Mines	AEM	5.49%	6.31
Gold Fields Ltd Adr	GFI	5.21%	4.64
Kinross Gold	KGC	4.96%	7.29
Harmony Gold Mining Adr	HMY	4.80%	2.67
Yamana Gold	AUY	4.12%	5.27
Hecla Mining	HL	3.91%	0.54
Coeur d'Alene Mines	CDE	3.54%	0.77
Northgate Minerals	NXG	3.47%	0.32
Golden Star Resources	GSS	2.99%	0.28
TOTAL MARKET CAP			91.25 Billion

The total market cap of the HUI is less than $92 billion. Now compare that figure with the below chart of diversified companies.

Company Name	Symbol	Market Cap (9/11/08)
Johnson & Johnson	JNJ	197.12 billion
Microsoft	MSFT	244.42
Exxon Mobil	XOM	386.07
Intel	INTC	111.49
General Electric	GE	270.98
Proctor & Gamble	PG	219.23

Editor’s note: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and AIG used to be in the above list but we had to write their market cap down to almost $0 and take them out...

the largest un-hedged miners in the world!

http://www.commodity-trading-solutions.com/

Back to Olivier – as I am not a regular columnist for Casey Research, I would like to share a little bit of my personal experience.

Can Our Government Save Us from All Evil?

All of the rhetoric from our politicians on what our government should do to protect its citizens reminds me of a period 18 years ago when I traveled frequently on business throughout what was then Eastern Europe.

I remember arriving in Warsaw about twelve months after the fall of the Berlin Wall in East Germany; the city was grim, dark, and polluted. The best hotel in the city was in a state of disrepair with broken fixtures. Service was poor and the food was horrendous (the hotel was still state-run).

http://www.poloniatoday.com/history13.htm

I traveled around the country to the famous city of Gdansk, seat of the Solidarity revolution and one of the largest ship building ports on the Baltic Sea. On the road, I met a few smoky Trabants, some local versions of Fiats (1960s design), and many horse-drawn carriages (trucks were rare then). Everywhere I went, life was grim. Most enterprises were state-run with large bureaucracies and very low productivity.

Throughout this trip, as well as many prior trips to Yugoslavia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Romania, I remember being horrified by the state of disrepair, sadness, and darkness of the communist bloc societies.

My trip to Poland in 1990 was in the aftermath of the fall of the Berlin Wall; in Warsaw, there was suddenly a glimmer of hope in the midst of the darkness. Many locals immediately started to set up “shops” on the sidewalks, trying to sell whatever miserable belongings they could spare in order to trade them for something else they needed.

Over the next 3 years, I returned to Poland several times, and each time I discovered progress in this country’s steady march away from the yoke of 50 years of state dictatorship. With each trip, I saw gigantic state enterprises shutting down with all of the disruption and pain it caused in people’s lives. These inefficient monsters were soon replaced by smaller, more nimble entrepreneurial firms. Streets began to look cleaner and brighter, with new paint on many buildings and new cars parked along the roads. For many people, standards of living were visibly improving; others were still the victims of the harsh transition to capitalism.

In 2006, I returned to Poland after 13 years of absence. I found in Warsaw a modern and vibrant city that could rival many other Western European cities of similar size. It was clean, modern, with signs of new wealth throughout its middle class. Although I am sure there are still some people left on the margins of society, they have become a small minority.

In all, it took 15-plus years of hard work and entrepreneurship to rebuild a modern society out of the destruction brought by 50 years of socialism. The Poles rejected overwhelmingly their central government and adopted many of the free-market ideas that made for the early success of America. Their journey was often painful, but they transformed their country into a better, more prosperous land. They quickly became more successful than their East German neighbors, who were led to believe that their salvation was to come from their fellow West Germans rather than through their own enterprise and hard work.

It is interesting to me that after having “won” the Cold War and having freed Europe, the United States is gradually becoming a centralized state where we abandon capitalism and individual liberties in the name of fear of failure or terrorism. Not all is perfect in Poland, but they have moved in the right direction (at least until their integration into the EU), while capitalism and entrepreneurship are being trampled in the U.S.

Recessions are painful and difficult to deal with, but it is better to poke the bubble early than to prolong the pain. I do not know any other alternative than to let the market correction take its course. Delaying the burst of a bubble only makes the pain worse when it finally explodes.

I spent several years of my working life restructuring businesses. Many people have asked me: How difficult is it to lay off half of the employees of a distressed business? How can you do it? Invariably, my answer is: very easily. I look at the remaining half and know that if I do not make a difficult choice today, the business will close and the other half will lose their jobs as well.

After failures and bankruptcies, people and nations have the opportunity for a fresh start; with innovation and hard work, generations of Americans have managed to better their lives and those of their children. I can’t say I feel we have achieved the same in the last 10-20 years.

Back to what comes next. I have asked our Chief Economist Bud Conrad to share a few comments and a chart that illustrates the dilemma faced by Paulson and Bernanke:

Bud correctly points out that as our domestic consumption slows, China and other exporters to the U.S. will see a decline in their activity that will be accompanied by a corresponding reduction in the financing of our debt. Continued injection in liquidity by the Fed will contribute to further devaluation of the dollar.

Foreign lenders see their U.S. investments being hit by the combination of currency devaluation and write-offs of stocks and bonds. The only possible way for our government to retain and attract foreign funds will be to increase interest rates. This will be a very challenging decision as long as our economy is in a recession. In spite of calls to ease interest rates in the short run, it will be difficult for the Fed to continue to support a policy of negative real rates if it needs to encourage foreign investment.

At the risk of being redundant, I have also asked Louis James to give us his thoughts on current events. Here is what he has to say:

International Speculator

It’s currently the third image down

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwzYtdA6y_U

Boobus Americanus

Casey Investment Alert

International Speculator

Options & Futures

Last month, several attendees to our Chicago Options & Futures Intensive asked me if Casey Research would ever consider launching an Options Alert to complement The Casey Report. At the time, I responded that Doug, David, and I had discussed the possibility of launching such a service within six months but that we would only do so if we found a very experienced editor for this service.

I now have the pleasure of announcing that Sally Limantour, a 30-year veteran floor trader on the Chicago Commodities Exchange, has decided to join our team and launch this new alert service for us. In addition to being a professional options and futures trader, Sally is teaching online intensive training classes for traders and is a talented newsletter writer. I have asked Sally to write a short note to introduce you to her world.

A Ride to the Rescue

Multiple Personalities

Buck Broke Mountain

Especially in these tumultuous times, options and futures provide unique investment opportunities to profit from almost any major trend and to tailor investments to literally any risk/reward strategy. The Casey option alert will be a unique service that will combine both educational and trading advice. We anticipate launching this service during the second half of October and will keep you informed as soon as details are finalized.

And from the Desk of Doug Hornig…

chutzpah

sturm und drang

that’s

Olivier again for the closing remarks.

Panama

At Casey Research, we do not usually announce conferences until we have picked a destination, a topic, and a date. Last month in Chicago, we announced to attendees that we were planning a conference in Panama in November and that details would come in September. Unfortunately, it turned out that we could not finalize all of the arrangements to our satisfaction in order to make it happen for this date, and we will have to delay this event until after the turn of the year. We thank you for your patience and will let you know as soon as we have secured a venue and planned the program. Stay tuned…

TV?

Many of you have had the opportunity to hear Bud Conrad at our conferences, but have you ever seen him on TV? As one might expect, with the developing crisis, the mainstream media are beginning to pay attention to what the Casey Research contrarians have to say. In the past several weeks, it seems that the opinions of Doug Casey, David Galland, Terry Coxon, and Bud Conrad have been heavily sought by Fox Business, CNBC, the Boston Globe, and Dow Jones Newswire (WSJ), to name a few. In case you have missed Bud’s latest appearance on CNBC, I have included the link below.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=852271347&play=1

Before I leave you to take my second son, a high school senior, for a seven-hour drive to New Jersey to visit Princeton University, I wanted to continue David’s tradition and let you enjoy a very appropriate song for these trying times.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeo0_3gN190

While it has been a tall order to fill in for David, he will fortunately be back at the helm next week.

Thank you for being our subscribers. It truly is a pleasure to work for such a fine group of sophisticated investors. I look forward to the opportunity to meet many more of you during future conferences or travels to cities where Casey Phyles get together.

Olivier Garret
CEO
Casey Research

Where Is the Economy Going in the Next Six Months?

David Galland — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:04:21 GMT

By Bud Conrad
Chief Economist,
The Casey Report - Casey Research

As investors, the question we have to focus most of our attention on just now is what impact the credit crisis, the bursting housing bubble and the actions of the U.S. government will have on the economy and investment markets in the next six months.

We have seen the Fed and the federal government move to panic mode as they try to keep the system afloat. As expected, they have cut rates, as well as having given away checks and rearranged the Federal Reserve's entire balance sheet.

The underlying problems have not been fixed with this massive bailout. There are still many credit pot holes out there and new lending remains highly constrained. Even the government tax rebate checks, rather than boosting the domestic economy, were largely absorbed by higher oil prices. The resulting cut-back in consumer spending, coupled with ongoing constrictions in lending, will cause a severe slowing of the economy.

But the much bigger implication is that the Fed is busy pouring more gasoline on the fire by fighting the collapsing housing bubble, a housing bubble created by excess liquidity, with yet more liquidity. That is the key point that should be taken from this mess. The dollar is now firmly on an even steeper slope to its ultimate demise. Other currencies will be sliding down the same slope, so another paper currency is not the answer.

This, then, is a high-level context for many of our investment recommendations in the months ahead.

Short Term Projections

1. The housing decline is not yet done, because we will need another year to unwind foreclosures in the pipeline. In addition, the exuberance shown by appraisers at the height of the housing bubble still has a long ways to go to fully deflate. What is that house on the market down the road really worth? At this point, no one knows... and no one will know until it and many others are bought by willing buyers (as opposed to unwilling lenders taking them onto their books in a foreclosure).

2. Consumers in the U.S. are not able to expand credit and are increasingly concerned about the outlook for the economy, so they will slow spending both at home and on imports.

3. The financial/banking system is weaker than understood. The complexity of the global system and the ubiquitous presence of interlocking financial and credit instruments and literally trillions of dollars in derivatives has left the world's banks teetering on the edge.

Adding a push from behind, we have broadly rising inflation and soon the persistently higher interest rates that are the bane of fixed-income investors and financial institutions in general. As the dollar continues its fall, and the banks continue to come under pressure, the lack of confidence in these keystones of the modern financial system will deepen. Already, the Sovereign Wealth Funds that rushed in early in the credit crisis to prop up the big investment houses are now signaling that, at least for the time being, they are going to step back and watch how things shake out.

4. A slowing economy - recession - coupled with inflation, creates a condition often referred to as stagflation, presenting much bigger policy challenges for the government than one or the other alone.

5. The food crisis. Shortages of food production come from rising energy and fertilizer costs. Rising demand comes from a shift in diet, especially in emerging markets, where increasing prosperity leads the citizenry to add more protein to their diets. Important shortages in grains have arisen that don't allow for a bad crop year. Most concerning is that these shortages are occurring despite good crop production last year, an occurrence that can be blamed, in part, on the diversion of some agriculture production for ethanol and bio-diesel.

These food shortages have already contributed to a doubling and tripling in the price of grains over the last two years. But even these elevated prices have not been sufficient to offset the higher costs of the energy required to produce the crops. And, despite today's higher prices, agriculture still lags the price increases seen in many other commodities.

[For more information on the subject of food, watch my recent appearance on FOX Business News here.]

The result of this is that the inflation rate, interest rate, food, energy and precious metals are heading higher as the dollar is debased.

Higher rates are not good for housing and stocks. In the long term, they will recover in nominal terms, though not in actual terms. That's because, while their nominal prices may return to current or near current levels, the dollars used to express their value will have much reduced purchasing power... making those assets a mediocre investment for the foreseeable future.

Finally, it is important to recognize that the world remains in the throes of a deep and serious crisis. While many analysts will express the view that the worst is over or that, after a modest downturn, things will bounce back just like they always have, our view is that what we will actually witness going forward is a fairly steady occurrence of crisis and panic. The crisis will accelerate, moving faster, even, than in previous major shifts such as that witnessed in the 1970s.

While history may find we are too pessimistic at this point in time, in our view it is far better to prepare for a worsening crisis and hope that it does not materialize, than to expect business as usual.

Bud Conrad is the Chief Economist of Casey Research, LLC., publishers of Doug Casey's International Speculator which provides unbiased research and recommendations on the highest quality junior exploration companies.

Casey Research has also recently launched a brand new monthly advisory, The Casey Report, which focuses on the most powerful trends now driving the U.S. and global economy, and how to profit from those trends. As a special introductory offer, when you subscribe to either the International Speculator or The Casey Report before the end of July 2008 you will receive the other free of charge for as long as you remain an active subscriber. Plus, your subscription comes with a full three month money back satisfaction guarantee... so you have nothing to lose when you try these publications today. Learn more about this special offer now.

The Bursting Commodities Bubble

David Galland — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:24:00 GMT

A steadily growing drumbeat is sounding throughout financial mediadom; a major commodities blowout is in the cards. The most widely quoted reason is a U.S. recession that will sympathetically pop the commodity bubble.

It seems to me that these views are intertwined with a changed perception of how the economy works. A new paradigm if you will.

People used to pay homage to the notion of a business cycle, a somewhat predictable and even stately progression of economic growth leading to excess, followed by a corrective recession. After which the cycle would begin anew.

In today's bold new world, however, most investment observers overlay onto the business cycle a shifting series of rapidly rising - and falling -- sector-focused bubbles.

Because of their noticeable size and influence, it seems to me that the bubbles can mask the underlying business cycle to some extent. Case in point, we all easily recall the dot.com bubble but have a harder time recalling what the prevailing economic times were in the late 1990s. What came after the dot.com bust? Why, the housing bubble, of course.

Of course, bubbles have always occurred. But they appeared only periodically, every generation or so. Prior to the dot.com bubble that heralded in this new era, economic activity was more broadly distributed. When times were good, the sectors that normally benefited, all benefited in something of a range.

Today, however, while most remain somewhat range bound, a single sector appears, Godzilla-like, to cast a shadow over the broader financial landscape. It is that sector that then receives the lion's share of the focus and the investment flows, quickly becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Of late it has been the turn of the commodities to stalk the land. And, if you believe the pundits, it is time for the monster to be brought low. If not by Mr. Market alone, then with the help of the regulators with all their many WMDs (Weapons of Market Disruption).

Before commenting on whether or not I believe they may succeed, a brief observation on the origin of this new bubble era.

In my view, it is largely due to the massive amount of money in various forms sloshing around the globe, most of which emanates from the Quicky Print Fiat Money Machines which have been reliably chugging away at central banks around the globe for decades now. One of the primary outcomes of this odd chapter in monetary history is that the notion of the value of money has been pretty much thrown out of the window... though not one person in a thousand understands that the game has changed.

For example, the Chinese are correct in thinking their reserves include 1.4 trillion foreign currency units, but that fact is increasingly disconnected from any reliable measure of future value.

Underscoring the point, 1 trillion U.S. dollar units set aside 5 years ago are today, adjusted for inflation, worth just $620 billion. But who can say what those 1 trillion units will be worth five years hence?

While it would require far more electro-ink than time allows for today, it is my contention that the utility of the fiat monetary system is beginning to fade. After all, at its core, the acceptance of unbacked money is an act of faith.

And people are losing faith in the fiat currency units they are being asked to accept in exchange for their many labors, or in return for their tangible assets -- and what is more tangible than commodities?

Back to the Bubble

So, are commodities merely the latest bubble, a bubble now resting up against a pin? Or is something else going on?

In my view, the explanation hinges on the difference between, say, a dot.com fantasy company run by a couple of twenty-somethings and, say, oil... the stuff you use to get to work in the morning... or to assure the icicles stay on the outside of your windows.

As much as you might enjoy the software offered by your favorite dot.com, when push comes to shove, you could probably manage without. Oil? Food? Good luck.

To a lesser or greater degree, the same acid test can be applied to the value-add of Bear Stearns and the other financial stocks versus, say, the iron that supports your local highway bridges. Or the copper that is so important to all manner of electronics.

Or even houses and condos bought on speculation by people who couldn't afford them versus the nickel needed to create the stainless steel that is everywhere.

It is my simple contention that while selected commodities can and will get ahead of themselves (and probably already have)... the underpinning reality for their higher prices has far more to do with the value of the currency units they are priced in than with some broader investment fad. To this date, I can count on one hand the number of friends of mine outside of the business circles I run with who have made any investments in commodities.

Add into the equation the clear supply and demand challenges for many of the core commodities and the bubble doesn't seem quite so bubbly.

Here's a picture of commodities against both the U.S. dollar and the major currencies (ex-dollar).

And gold?

Well, while useful in certain industrial applications, gold as a commodity has a unique utility - it is considered as tangible money the world over. It is portable, easily divisible, durable and unquestionably accepted around the world. In an environment of a global crisis in confidence in fiat money, gold will provide a critical function that will only grow in importance in the months and years just ahead.

In short, the occasional corrections aside, this show is far from over.

How do you protect your assets in times of economic decline? Which investments provide safety when blue-chip stocks, government bonds and mutual funds do not?

You'll find specific answers and actionable advice in our new FREE special report The Recession Tool Kit - 9 Winning Strategies to Profit from Crisis. Including: a nest egg for rainy days and how to buy it... lucrative, low-risk investments that every prudent investor should have... how to make money instead of losing it... and much, much more.

You don't want to miss this special report. To get your Recession Tool Kit FREE today click here.

The Room 3/24/08

David Galland — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:52:56 GMT

Dear Reader,

It used to be of no little pride in the small New England town where Casey Research is headquartered that school went forward, no matter the weather. Hail, 8-foot-high snow drifts, ice rain and, should they have occurred hereabouts (which they didn't), I am fairly sure that even hurricanes and tornadoes would not have kept the school administration from its daily labors in the brainwashing of innocent youth.

That all changed when, earlier this winter, a school bus missed the turn on a gently sloping hill and rolled onto its side, fortunately causing no serious injuries (for some reason, which continues to baffle me, the police will stop and ticket you for driving without a seat belt, yet school buses are systematically unequipped with same).

The accident, no doubt, made the school officialdom aware of some previously unexamined legal consequence because the school now delays the morning opening or closes down tight on what appears to me to be so much as a semi-reliable report that a single threatening snowflake has been observed in the general vicinity.

And so it is that, with a modest snowfall in process, the kids are home again today, lounging about and, because it is Friday when I write from home, crowding me out of my office (which counter-intuitively also serves as their toy room). Which leaves me to write to you from a couch upstairs, with stern instructions to the kids that while I may appear to be in residence, they should assume I am a figment of their youthful imaginations until I have finished writing this weekly epistle.

While it is typically with a good deal of pleasure that I sit down to reminisce about the action of the week just ending, this week again, the volume of news coupled with the magnitude of that news makes the task daunting. But no amount of dithering will make the task go away, so here we go.

"Commodities Drop, Rally in Dollar, Stocks Vindicate Bernanke"

That headline is not mine, it is from Bloomberg this morning. Bloomberg's enthusiasm is based, as hard as I find it to believe, on little more than that the Fed cut the rate it charges banks to borrow by "just" 75 basis points this week, and that the stock market rallied, then fell, then rallied again in response.

The herd was, apparently, expecting 1%. Further, not only were they expecting this, they were mentally prepared to accept a 1% cut as a sign that the economy remained in dire straits and that, as a result, the Fed would have to continue its loose money policy. According to the punditry, a 75 bps cut indicates that Bernanke and Co. have drawn a line in the sand, signaling they were going to be restrained in their approach to the crisis now stalking the land. Further, this show of confidence portends that the worst of the crisis is nearly behind us.

Ready to push the trigger to buy more commodities on a 1% rate cut, the market instead rushed into buy stocks and sell commodities... then changed its mind and sold stocks and commodities... then bought stocks again, but still sold commodities.

Gold, silver, oil, grain... you name it, if it shows up under the heading Commodities in the back of your favorite paper, then it got hit.

But of course, there was a whole lot more going on this week. We'll come back to the commodities momentarily. First, however, we need to walk up a few floors to get a better view of the bigger picture.

Problem Solved?

Now, you will excuse me if I seem a touch skeptical, but I can't help but notice that short of climbing aboard helicopters rigged to carry pallets of dollars, the Fed is now doing exactly what we have been expecting it to: provide all the liquidity it can muster using its near mystical powers of money creation.

In addition to yet another deep cut in the Fed Funds rate, they are now making the almost unprecedented move (at least since the Great Depression) of lending money to non-commercial banks, in the process effectively putting taxpayers on the hook for $30 billion in suspect collateral from Bear Stearns.

And that's just one of many moves of late, including cutting discount rates by a total of 1%, to 2.5% over the past week alone, and opening up new lending facilities that allow the investment banks to borrow directly from the Fed using as collateral the same sort of suspect paper that brought down Bear.

Playing their part, three of the biggest investment banks, Goldman, Morgan Stanley and, importantly, Lehman, announced that they were going to access this new lending facility, whether they need to or not, in order to remove the "stigma" (their term) of stepping up to the window, so to speak.

Give that some thought for a second. What they were saying for all the world to hear was that they were going to engage in what is effectively an institutional shell game... a deliberate attempt to obfuscate which of the banks are actually in trouble. As a shareholder in one of these companies, you won't have any idea whether your bank is accessing this emergency facility because it is, in fact, in trouble.

Given the estimates that the assets being carried as capital on the books of Bear Stearns were worth only 10% of what was being posted, and the herd-like business practices of the big investment houses, the odds are fairly high that Bear Stearns is not the only institution teetering on the brink.

Yet this week investors seemed to actually buy the idea that the worst is now over, and that the all-clear signal will soon be sounded.

What to believe? Whom to believe? Could the Fed have finally figured out the right combination to re-open the safe of prosperity? And what of the commodities, especially gold?

This week I have received a larger than usual amount of incoming emails presenting all sorts of theories. Some have it that JPMorgan, the world's largest bullion bank, was in real trouble with shorts on gold and had been buying the metal back, helping to fuel its meteoric rise of late, but that the liquidity provided by the Fed has now taken the pressure off and allowed them to stop or slow their buying (our own Bud Conrad has been looking into this notion, but so far has uncovered no solid proof).

As for the financial sector and, by extension the rest of the market, we can't know for sure what's going on behind the scenes, because the government and the big banks are playing it very close to the vest. But we can, from our higher perch, try to sort the unknown from the known, and start with the latter.

This week we had a major bank failure (as predicted many months ago by Bud). Despite Jim Cramer's firm belief in the firm, Bear Stearns, the fifth largest U.S. investment bank and a firm tightly connected as a counter party to hundreds of billions in derivative agreements, suffered a good old-fashioned meltdown.
We know that the share price of Bear Stearns has fallen from over $150 last year to as low as $2.00, and what is left of the firm is now being sucked into JPMorgan, but only because the Fed has agreed to stand behind the deal to the tune of $30 billion, an intervention the likes of which was last witnessed in the Great Depression.
We also know that the vultures were starting to circle Lehman, another member of the big five U.S. investment banks. Absent the Fed's aggressive intervention, the odds were fairly high they would have been next to get hit with the equivalent of a run. This is why the Treasury and the Fed worked so hard to get the Bear Stearns deal cobbled together over a single weekend, before the markets reopened and Mr. Market could recommence beserking. From where I sit, it appears that we came within hours of seeing another of the nation's largest financial institutions crash, potentially taking down the whole house of cards.
And we know the Fed dropped the Fed Funds rate by 0.75, only the second time in the last decade that it has cut rates by an amount that large.

We know some other things as well. For instance, that commodities have been on the equivalent of a one-way-up escalator in recent months. And we know that no market goes in only one direction for any sustained period of time, and so a correction was inevitable. Gold, oil, the grains... they all had to take a breather. And so they have.

But Let's Try to Keep This All in Perspective...

What has actually occurred over the last month, between February 21 and March 20?

	Gold	Silver	Copper	Oil	Bear Stearns	JPMorgan	Lehman
21-Feb-08	$945.00	$17.98	$3.77	$98.39	$82.23	$43.07	$54.14
20-Mar-08	$925.75	$17.53	$3.62	$104.49	$5.96	$45.97	$48.65
Gain or Loss	-2.0%	-2.5%	-4.1%	6.2%	-92.8%	6.7%	-10.1%

Okay, so gold and silver are off a little, copper a bit more, oil is still up, Bear Stearns is a smoking hole in the ground, JPMorgan is up a bit, and Lehman is down 10%. Other than Bear Stearns and, to a lesser degree, Lehman, I'm not seeing anything so earth shattering. (Sure, gold recently took a high dive off the $1,000 per ounce mark... but it is still over $900, a level that not one in ten thousand investors, if asked a year ago, would have expected it to trade at. And oil over $100? Forget about it.)

There are a few more things we know. For instance, that consumers are debt strapped and the housing bubble has burst and is deflating rapidly. And that falling home prices are wiping out the net worth, discretionary spending power and positive sentiment of the U.S. consumer who has, heretofore, shown a seemingly unlimited willingness to go into debt up to their eyeballs to keep the world economy afloat. That is now changing.

We also have proof, if proof was needed, that the government will do whatever it takes to avoid a meltdown. While they are shoving the walnut shells around so fast that it's hard to figure out where the pea is these days, what is increasingly clear is that there is only one real plan at this point: to apply as many billions of dollars as they feel is necessary to keep the ship of state afloat.

And while some might like to think that the country is not in a recession, at this point I am going to put it down as fact that a recession is now underway and that we need to be worried about it becoming much uglier than that.

Blame it on Smokey the Bear

A good way to understand both the degree and the nature of the current crisis is to look at the state of the nation's western forests. Before the 1940s, forest fires were allowed to run their course, just as they had over the millennia. But then the government adopted a policy to fight every fire, a battle epitomized by the introduction of the iconic Smokey the Bear. What has happened since is a massive build-up in the fire risk in federally managed forests.

The following is from a CATO Institute document on the topic...

Since the advent of the Smokey Bear era in the 1940s, tree density in federal forests has increased from 50 per acre to as much as 300 to 500 per acre. Federal forests are filled with dense stands of small, stressed trees and plants that combine with dry deadwood to provide virtual kindling wood for forest fires.

According to Forest Service statistics, some two-thirds of federally held forested lands are in deteriorating health.

The consequence of governmental meddling in the forest is that when a fire now breaks out, it is exponentially larger, more dangerous and more expensive to fight. Nationwide, the forested area now at extreme risk is equal to an area about the size of the state of California.

One of these days, and probably sooner rather than later, there will be a forest fire of biblical proportions... and Smokey's real-life brethren, along with houses and all that moves or doesn't, will go up in smoke.

Similarly, by continuously tampering with the business cycle, the government has led us to the point where the dried underbrush is piled high and just waiting for a match. The Fed was able to throw a quick tanker load of water onto the Bear Stearns fire... but that doesn't mean we are anywhere near out of the woods. (Don't you just love it when your metaphors snap so nicely in line? I sure do!)

Which Brings Up an Interesting Question

Given virtually unlimited power, including the ability to create money out of nothing, or to change any rule or law or convention, bend any arm, or ban or hinder trading in any commodity... just how much power can the U.S. government apply to the problems now besetting our economy and, by extension, the world?

Or, looked at from the reverse angle, given its unlimited power, is there any way Paulson, Bernanke, et al can fail to stabilize things?

It is an interesting discussion, and one that requires more analysis and data than I'm in a position to provide sitting here on my couch on a Friday morning. (We will go into it in more detail in a special report on the crisis that is being worked up for paid subscribers, and which should be issued following our Scottsdale Crisis & Opportunity Summit next week.)

I will, however, comment just a bit further.

Let's start with the proposition that the government has absolute power, which is largely the case these days, especially because the populace is so numb to large numbers that outrage at the beggaring of future generations no longer seems to be of any concern to anyone.

So, the Fed can effectively pump out all the money it needs to "get her done" and if that doesn't do it, then the Treasury can step back in. This approach, from a policy maker's perspective, is quite attractive because it essentially papers over the problem. Look at it this way. If housing prices fall, on average, 20% nationwide, but the currency depreciates at the same level, then housing weakness would be masked... ditto 20% of stock market losses. In case that point is not clear, look at it like this. If your house is worth $100,000 and it loses 20%, its value would fall to $80,000. But if the dollar was to simultaneously lose 20%, then the price of the house would remain $100,000. The average person would be clueless they have just taken a 20% haircut. Pretty cool, eh?

Unfortunately for the government, there are natural limits to everything. In this case, the most immediate threat to this plan resides in the trillions of dollars held by foreigners.

In recent decades these foreigners, trading partners mostly, have been willing to swap our inflation in exchange for market share within the U.S., the greatest consumption engine on the planet (as an FYI, the eurozone just surpassed us).

But that inflation is beginning to be felt back home: in China, in the Middle East, Russia and everywhere between. At some point, the pain, and the realization that inflation in the U.S. is only going to get worse, is very likely to make these dollar holders get serious about breaking their links with the dollar, and dumping the trillions they now hold.

And while U.S. consumers are well aware that everything costs more these days, no matter what the jury-rigged CPI tells them, it is when the foreigners start repatriating our dollars that the real pain of inflation will begin. At that point, the fire starts in earnest.

I call this the Point of Mugabe, named in honor, of course, of Robert Mugabe, the supreme overlord of Zimbabwe. A dictator with absolute power in all matters, Mugabe's maladministration of his country's economy has finally reached the point where today, as much as he dictates against it, inflation runs in excess of 100,000% annually. While the sheeple of that country seem either particularly stupid, beaten down or tolerant, sooner rather than later Mr. Mugabe's ridiculous regime will come to an end, and probably not in a manner that he will find personally pleasant.

In the final analysis, I remain convinced that the praise of Bernanke et al based on their extreme actions this past week will find its way into the history books along with quotes such as these...

"The end of the decline of the Stock Market will probably not be long, only a few more days at most." --Irving Fisher, November 1929

"I see nothing in the present situation that is either menacing or warrants pessimism... I have every confidence that there will be a revival of activity in the spring, and that during this coming year the country will make steady progress." --Andrew W. Mellon, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, December 1929

And, of course, my favorite recent example... Jim Cramer's rant that people should not take their money out of Bear Stearns, just a day before that firm collapsed. You can watch history in the making by clicking here.

We'll have a lot more on this topic in our upcoming special update report on the crisis, which will be sent to all paid subscribers the week after next.

What's Coming

In my reading for the above, I came across the September 2007 edition of the International Speculator and its lead article, Preparing for Crisis . I thought the following excerpt was worth sharing, not just because it shows how spot-on Bud Conrad, the chief economist of this operation, has been in forecasting the specifics of the unfolding crisis, but because it is still as useful today as then in understanding how things are likely to keep rolling out (the full article has much more detail, well worth reviewing). Here's the excerpt.

The credit crisis will not end soon. Here's what we think is coming.

More Defaults. The bulk of the subprime loans are adjustable rate mortgages. The continuing reset of up to $50 billion per month of subprime ARMs will keep mortgage defaults growing, which will keep home prices falling, which means that more of the defaults will turn into unrecoverable losses for the investors holding the paper. The hedge funds that haven't thrown in the towel on subprime mortgages will collapse one by one.
The economy will slow down. Lending to risky customers has dried up. Earnings of most corporations will slide because consumers, who can no longer turn to home equity loans and whose credit cards are already maxed out, will cut spending. The mounting losses in CDOs and the continuing defaults in the housing industry will precipitate a severe credit crunch. The capital of many banks is about to shrink, which will hamper their ability to lend.
Stocks will fall. The next phase down in the stock market will come from reduced earnings estimates for 2008. We could see an auto company or a big bank announce insolvency. Fear, and then the fear of fear itself, and the fear of being the last one out the door will take over. Big, 300 or 400 point moves - mostly down - will become regular events. People have forgotten, but they are going to be reminded, that stocks have, until fairly recently in history, normally yielded about twice as much as bonds, simply because they're riskier.
Dollar down. While U.S. citizens are looking to build cash - another source of pressure on spending and investment - few foreigners now want U.S. dollars or dollar-denominated debt. After the failure of large U.S. institutions begins and the Fed turns the printing presses on full blast in an attempt to keep liquidity in the system, flight to safety will mean a flight from the dollar. How fast they will print is hard to guess. They've already started, but will probably panic as the economy slows, and then turn the presses to high. The dollar will fall in purchasing power. Interest rates will rise across the board, with low-quality paper hurt the worst.

If you are not yet receiving the International Speculator, now is a great time to sign up. With the 3-month risk-free guarantee, you can take a leisurely look at the publication to see if it's right for you. Check it out.

Show Me the Money!

This week we have, as you'd expect given gold's steep plunge, received some email wondering when the junior gold stocks we tend to favor in the International Speculator (among other investments that we feel are appropriate to the current environment) will pick themselves off the mat and get on with the business of making serious money.

This is, of course, a topic I have discussed at some length recently, so I won't go into the topic much again here (look back over the past couple of issues, using the archive link below).

But I will say, again, that I remain convinced that the next big move in the junior explorers is still ahead, and will come as the big gold stocks once again confirm the new reality that they are becoming cash machines. And they begin using their newly beefed-up balance sheets to acquire the deposits needed to replenish their depleting reserves. If you keep selling ounces without replacing them, in time, you are nothing but a shell... and so replacing reserves is a business dictate.

On that front, Barrick just announced that it will spend $10 billion to acquire new mines and resources over the next little while. You can read the story here:

And there's this. This week, PricewaterhouseCoopers released its Mining Deals 2007 Annual Review... which, among other prognostications reported on in an article on same by the folks at MineWeb, included these...

"2008 looks set to see mining deals reach very high record levels as super-consolidation takes place in the market."

Despite the credit crunch, the report finds "little evidence of a slowdown in [mining] deal activity."

"Underpinning these trends is the quest for world scale, resource acquisition and resource diversification," the analysts asserted.

The study noted that exploration costs are at all-time highs, permitting takes longer, and mining companies are facing skills' shortages. "These are significant barriers to meeting what is a major upturn in world demand."

(read the full MineWeb article on the topic by clicking here.)

This is all just the tip of the iceberg if you ask me, and it bodes very, very well for the juniors that are already sitting on a discovery. Yes, it is frustrating that some of our favorites have fallen with the broader markets lately... but this is a sector you need to be patient with.

On that topic, yesterday someone asked me if our subscribers were early adopters. And, after a moment's thought, I answered, "Yes. They are looking to get in early on a trend, and in investments that will provide far bigger returns than average."

Early adopters, however, have to possess both patience and a tolerance for risk. If not, then you may be invested in the right sector, but with the wrong temperament... a recipe for disaster. To wit, you won't have the emotional staying power to get you through the inevitable down swings and so you will invariably sell at exactly the wrong time, on a big setback. By contrast, an individual with the right temperament will continually look to buy under the market and, when that corner of their portfolio dedicated to the quality gold juniors is topped off, will look to continually upgrade at lower prices. Because they won't be chased out by the volatility, they'll still be there to collect the big profits as the endgame unfolds.

This is also why investing only with money you can afford to lose and still sleep well is so important. It assures you don't get over-emotional and greatly improves your odds of staying the course. And in the worst case that we are wrong and these stocks only head down to more or less a total wipeout, you might be discomforted, but you won't be put out of the house.

I guess what I am saying is that we have never made any bones about the volatile nature of these stocks. Please be clear on why you are buying them, and don't kid yourself into thinking they couldn't go down 50% even from here. They can. But we wouldn't be recommending them, or investing in them ourselves, if we didn't think this was a play that will blow the doors off almost any other investment you could be making just now.

Energy Chart of the Week

Public displays of hand wringing over America's dependence on foreign oil have become very popular, but little attention has been paid to how natural gas imports fit into the U.S. energy equation.

[click to enlarge]

Twenty years ago, the United States' natural gas production met nearly all domestic demand, but that is changing - and quickly.

The current situation is nowhere near as dire as America's predicament with oil supplies, of which 60% come from net imports. But the trend of imports making up a greater share of consumption is accelerating at a more rapid pace for "natty" than it is with crude oil. From 1985 to 2007, America's reliance on crude oil imports doubled, but its reliance on natural gas imports has nearly quadrupled.

Because the vast majority of natural gas imports come from Canada - normally considered a safe source of supply - little fuss has been made. If America has to buy more natural gas from its neighbor to the north, what's the big deal? They've been a steady supplier in the past, and it's not the sort of place where rebels run amuck blowing up pipelines, disrupting the supply chain (as has been the case in Mexico).

Under NAFTA's proportionality clause, Canada is bound to send 60% of its natural gas to the United States. The problem is that Canada's natural gas production is declining. Making a bad situation worse, the tar sands require huge amounts of natural gas to ramp up their heavy oil operations. Canadian winters aren't getting any warmer either, which - coupled with a growing population - has meant steady growth in Canada's natural gas consumption.

At recent debates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been arguing over who would be most qualified to tear up the NAFTA agreement. Lost in this storm of campaign rhetoric was Canada's response. "You might not want to renegotiate NAFTA if you knew how badly you need that oil and gas" was the message from Jim Flaherty, Canada's finance minister. The Canadian government would jump at any chance to wiggle out of NAFTA's proportionality clause, and a Democratic president might give them the opportunity.

The good news is that natural gas imports no longer arrive solely via the pipeline; they also arrive by ship through the emerging global market in liquefied natural gas (LNG). So the United States is not restricted to Canada when looking for natural gas supply, as it was even just twenty years ago. The bad news is that many of the biggest suppliers of LNG are located in the Middle East and Russia - precisely the regions that America wants to become less reliant on for its future energy needs.

[Ed. Note: Over coffee early this morning, I re-read the latest edition of the Casey Energy Speculator. In addition to a number of other excellent articles, it included a fascinating article on "run of river" energy projects, a "green" energy technology that has tremendous upside. It produces power from rivers, without damming them, and with relatively minor disturbance to the environment. The article includes two recommendations, one low risk, one high risk. If you are not yet a subscriber, learn more about giving it a trial run. ]

China Still Is Selling Us More and More

Bud Conrad took a break from his preparations for our sold-out Scottsdale Summit to send over the following chart he thought you would find of interest.

[click to enlarge]

There are a couple of take-aways from that chart, but the one that pops out at me is that it is a picture of American manufacturing being shipped overseas. As a result, while there is no question that a weakening dollar will help American manufacturers, the fact that their ranks have been reduced to such a degree, will likely mute the benefits.

Real Estate, Real Trouble

I ran into the mother of a close friend and a former partner at the store the other day. I don't think I would be exaggerating if I said she was the powerhouse real estate broker here in the resort town that is the headquarters of Casey Research. She is the quintessential über-agent, "can do," "get it done" and "never say die" kind of individual. Always an upbeat word about the local market and tough as nails, when needs to be, to get the sale. Yet, in our check-out conversation she made no bones about the fact that her views on the local real estate market are far less positive these days. In fact, her words were along the lines of, "I don't think that house prices are going to come back for another decade."

In a discussion on the topic of real estate with my mother, who holds down the family fort on the Big Island of Hawaii, she related a tale that I had heard before, but thought relevant to the current market, and so asked her to write down the facts of the case. Here they are:

"Grandpa bought a large house in August of 1929. The address was 10 Sutherland Road, Montclair, N.J. The price was about $45,000. He finally sold it for slightly less in 1945 after trying for years. I have an excellent photo of the house but can't send it until later today when (and if) I manage to reinstall another all-in-one with scanner. Love, Mom"

Could real estate really go down and stay down for 20 years? As hard as it seems to imagine, the answer is yes. This is a topic I'll have more on next week, when I share an interview with one of your fellow subscribers who is a professional real estate appraiser of many years and great experience from Northern California.

And That, Dear Readers, Is It for this Week...

I'm off tomorrow to our Scottsdale Summit. Next week's edition, written on the fly (literally) will likely be a bit reduced. The U.S. stock market is closed for Easter, but I can't even begin to imagine what thrills and chills it has for us next week.

We live in interesting times, indeed.

As always, thank you for taking time to read these hastily assembled thoughts... and, of course, for subscribing.

Warm regards,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room 3/17/08

David Galland — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:33:53 GMT

Dear Reader,

You don't need me to tell you, but the $1,000 mark is the latest to fall beneath gold's mighty rise.

Even so, as a benchmark, the number $1,000 is meaningless. It represents no new high in the inflation-adjusted prices that count. And it is not attached to a magic switch that assures, once flipped, the price must subsequently march to the $1,200 forecasted for this year by our own Bud Conrad. (Who is now poking with his fork at the suspicious-looking meat resting on his dinner plate in China where he is visiting.)

Of course, decisively taking out the $1,000 level will, undoubtedly, result in yet more features in the mainstream media and cause yet more regret in the minds of those who have dumbly stood by while watching gold break through the whole numbers divisible by 100. In time, these factors will contribute to a mass migration towards the yellow metal.

But the real significance is one I briefly touched on in closing last week. To wit, so far this quarter, gold has consistently traded much higher than the average price received by the highly visible major gold producers in breaking the right sort of records last quarter.

A bit more detail...

In the fourth quarter of 2007, despite recent comments by certain less-than-attentive observers that the company was still hindered by hedges, Barrick Gold, the world's largest gold producer, was able to realize an average price of $799 per ounce of gold it sold. (That's actually about $10 higher than the average price that gold traded at during the quarter.)

Against those revenues, the company had an average cost per gold ounce sold of just $375, resulting in operating cash flow of some $748 million, better than double that from the previous quarter.

Now, let's jump ahead to some point in late April when Barrick releases its first quarter 2008 results. If prices hold at the average for the month to date, then the average price of gold for the quarter will ring in at $930, or $141 higher than the average price for the last quarter. Assuming no significant change in cost structures over the quarter, and assuming the same level of sales as last quarter, Barrick's first-quarter operating cash flow numbers will rise by another $300 million, pushing the total over the $1 billion mark for the first time in the company's history.

Repeat this record-breaking story pretty much across the industry (a story we continue to follow in more detail in BIG GOLD, which this month extends its analysis into big silver ... learn more) and you have a story that will tell very, very well when compared to the smoking holes that most sectors have left in the brokerage statements of their erstwhile adherents.

Waxing metaphorically, the herd is slow to move, but as the fire of crisis grows to the point where it is visible to all, the herd will move to the safety of gold. We'll be waiting.

The Best-Laid Plans

In recent commentaries, I have mentioned how it is that the fates of nations sometimes hinge on an accident or an unexpected event that renders the best-laid plans worthless, sometimes with catastrophic results. This week's honorable mentions go to...

Hillary Clinton. Recently we learned that the young girl who was at the heart of the most successful political ad of the season, the one showing her sleeping in the middle of the night and the phone ringing threateningly. As you may recall, the voice-over artist rhetorically asks a question along the lines of, "Who do you want to be there to answer it; youth, or that seasoned veteran of such things, "Ma Hil" herself?"

Given the wide acclaim the ad received, followed by two quick primary wins, I had thought Hil's reinvigorated efforts at doing in Mr. Obama had finally succeeded, and that, like the victim of an alley-way knife attack, he was stumbling toward his fate.

But all that changed when the girl, now a young woman, came forward and announced that she was, in fact, an ardent Obama supporter. And even worse for the ever-aspiring Mrs. Clinton, the young actress, perhaps hoping to expose her talents beyond feigning sleep, was only too happy to accept every opportunity to appear on various talk shows and, using her full dramatic range, to espouse the dim view she took of the Clintons' ad.

It is hard to say, yet, if this blunting of the Senator's momentum will prove the final stumbling block, but it very well could. One thing is for sure, voters in the remaining primary states won't be further swayed by that particular ad. And, so, perhaps, the history books will soon record Mr. Obama as the next president. Now some of you likely don't think that this is catastrophic, and I don't want to suggest it will be (though I can say that I am already no fan of his proposed changes in tax policy)... but if he does become president and his term in the highest office does turn out to be catastrophic, then historians may point to a sleeping girl when publishing dissertations that include "what if" scenarios.

The Beijing Olympics. While I haven't thoroughly researched the topic, general commentary has it that China is viewing the upcoming Beijing Olympics as a matter of some national pride... a "coming out" party of sorts, during which they shall display the country's many marvels for all the world to gawk at. Proof of how serious they are about making a good impression may be provided by the fact that they are moving entire industries in order to reduce the city's infamous pollution. And, in an attempt to outdo all others that have come before, they were even going to risk life itself to have the Olympic torch dragged up to the very top of the world... Mt. Everest.

But that may have been the one bridge too far, the misjudgment that catches the attention of the fickle finger. For, as you are probably aware, since 1951 cartographers have been obliged to include the north side of that formidable mountain on a map within the borders of China, and not the independent nation formerly known as Tibet which the Chinese overran in that year, causing some consternation among many, most vocally Richard Gere and his kindred spirits in Tibetan monkdom.

This week, we read that certain parts of Tibet are aflame, and that Chinese troops have moved in to provide the monks with some on-the-spot reeducation. While I can't know, I suspect the odds now favor things going from bad to worse for the Chinese Olympics. If I'm right, then next up we'll see the government of some country or another announce it will, in protest, not participate. It is not inconceivable, even, that the increasingly politically correct United States could bow to pressure to yank the yanks and who knows where things lead from there. I guess we'll have to read the history books to find out.

(When dealing with political topics, one should always tread cautiously. My references to President Obama are, of course, pure conjecture. Senator Clinton has shown herself to be a formidable opponent and so cannot be written off at this point. Likewise, while I continue to think the odds are long against McCain, even a victorious campaign by that elder songster is not out of the question. But forced to it at this point, I'd have to give the tip to Obama. And lest you might wonder which presidential aspirant I actually favor, I will go on record here as being firmly on board for "None of the Above.")

Geologists Rule!

You may have seen the article this week about the soaring demand for geologists, a story we have been following in the International Speculator for some years. The bottom line is that Canadian schools are now graduating just 1,200 geologists a year, which stacks up against demand for better than 9,000. (University programs for geology in the U.S. have all but disappeared in favor of courses related to saving the environment.)

As a result, the starting salary of a freshly turned-out geo now exceeds that earned by a similarly launched MBA by a fairly considerable margin.

While I am pleased as punch to see our hard-working friends in the business being so handsomely rewarded, there is a much more important point to be made here. Namely that with industry demand for geos now outstripping supply by more than 7.5 to 1, the logical move for the producers, which must continuously replace their depleting reserves, is to become increasingly more aggressive about acquiring the junior exploration companies, especially those topped off with good projects.

There is an old adage that says "The best place to find a mine is next to another mine." These days you might modify those pearls of wisdom by saying, "The best place to find your next mine is not by kicking a lot of rocks, but by scrolling through the 'Has Metal' ratings of the exploration stocks followed in our International Speculator." (Has Metal being how we indicate which of those companies we follow already have a significant discovery under their belt, and are, generally speaking, just waiting to sell it off to a major.)

In other words, while the producers can start from scratch and try to find the talent needed to discover their next major gold deposit, they will likely find it more efficient and time saving to simply buy up an exploration company that already has the goods. It is not too late to get positioned in those companies, but it soon will be.

[Warning - blatant pitch coming! Start now, and within a couple of minutes you'll be viewing the entire list of International Speculator "Has Metal" recommendations. It's as simple as taking us up on our fully guaranteed trial subscription offer.

If at any point during your first 3 months, you don't find the International Speculator to be worth every penny you pay, we'll refund all those pennies... so you have nothing to lose for giving it a try. Frankly, if you're not already a subscriber, I can't see why you wouldn't sign up today. Follow the link just below...

Click to Learn More About the 3-Month
International Speculator Trial Subscription]

Expert Reveals Wolves Pose No Danger to Sheep

This week I read with some amusement that Standard & Poor's had sounded the "all clear" signal, stating that the worst of the subprime crisis was over. Kevin Brekke, our Switzerland-based editor, came across a similar item earlier in the week and felt moved to write. Here it is...

If you were a hesitant sheep, alone in a field, at dusk, nervously scanning the shadows for anything resembling a pair of fangs or pointed ears, would that headline provide some comfort, some confidence, possibly lulling you into relaxing, letting your guard down, and munching on some tasty clover? Uh-huh, I thought so.

Well, then, how about this:

Economists See US Avoiding Recession
or this,

Experts' Forecast Sees No Recession
If you were a hesitant small investor, feeling alone and in the dark about the markets and the economy, nervously scanning the headlines for anything to help you protect your life's savings, would that headline provide some comfort, some confidence, possibly emboldening you to snap up some bargains in today's beaten-down stocks? And maybe buy some California real estate, and, heck, why not head over to Electronics World and see what's on sale?

Do you think that maybe that's the reaction those headlines were designed to trigger?

I must admit that, although suspect from the start, the headline got my attention. So I reviewed the article and guess what - the author had some other enlightening and insightful observations on the economy, such as:

The U.S. may experience negative growth for 1Q2008

Sluggish job growth for balance of '08

Housing doldrums to persist "for a very long time"

GDP growth for the year of 1.5%

Now, any reasonable person digesting this report, possessing but a modest degree of objectivity, could readily conclude that the author would only admit to what can't be denied - the current environment of bad to worsening conditions - and then supplement it with encouraging predictions of what is just a quarterly report or two away. And if the economy is to grow at an annual rate of 1.5%, with the first quarter likely to be around (or below) zero, then the next three quarters have some heavy lifting to accomplish, a scenario that looks increasingly unrealistic.

But a recession? No.

My point here is that the headline for this report could just as misleadingly have read:

Experts' Report Sees Negative First Quarter GDP
But then that headline doesn't have quite the same reassuring tone, now does it?

One editor's version of this story that hit the wires mentioned the author of this report was an academic and an economist. A quick Internet search of the author uncovered some "coincident indicators." The author is a Ph.D., graduated Princeton, a published academic, holds a university department chair, and is "a frequent visiting scholar at the International Monetary Fund and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System." Sound familiar?

As a random comparison, Ben Bernanke is a Ph.D., graduated Princeton, a published academic, held a university department chair, has contact with the IMF, and is the head of the Federal Reserve System. A coincidence?

A published yet obscure and mostly unknown economist writes a report and Wham! it hits the AP news wire and web pages like a topless photo of Paris Hilton. Now how do you suppose that happened? And who do you think shaped the headline?

With the number of vested interests intent on continuing with the status quo, the confidence game will be kept on life support for as long as needed, and by questionable means. The Fed, the dollar, our government, our banks, our economy, the markets, all rely on the confidence of those dependent on, and profiting from, more of the same. Numbers are fudged, statistics skewed, data manipulated, balance sheets doctored, news sanitized, and headlines managed. Backing and filling operations run around the clock to keep the façade of confidence intact.

The new realities we face will require more than scanning the headlines and watching a few minutes of BigFinancialChannel. Investors today, of all stripes, will need the vigilance to fully vet the information on which they base their investing decisions.

And that's exactly what we at Casey Research strive for every day. As it becomes increasingly difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff, and avoid getting the chaff, investors are supplementing their universe of ideas with the help of newsletter advisory services.

But for those stuck in the old paradigm, blind to the shifts occurring around them, well... Hey! Look over there, fellow mutton-chops. There's some juicy Google shares. Let's munch on those for the moment.

How You Know When the Economy Is in Trouble

This week the moving trucks pulled up in front of the offices of Carlyle Capital Corp, the publicly traded fund operated by the Carlyle Group. The trucks were sent in by the folks down the street at JPMorgan Chase & Co and Citigroup, among others, when Carlyle failed to meet $400 million in margin calls. The long and short was that they seized Carlyle's assets in an attempt to squeeze what remaining value was left in the firm, yet another victim of the ballooning credit crisis.

Now, in case you are unfamiliar with Carlyle, they may be the best-connected firm in the world, boasting a current or former board of directors and major investors that include a veritable Who's Who in the World.

Among the listed members, I found...

Former President Bush, former British Prime Minister John Major, Saudi Prince Al-Walid, George Soros, James Baker III, Colin Powell... the list literally goes on, and on.

These are, without exaggeration, among the most powerful people in the world. So why would the major NY banks, which owe so much of their success to their political connections, engage in such a distinctly unfriendly act as calling in the $400 million and, by doing so, essentially torpedo Carlyle's fund beneath the water line?

All I can come up with is that this is a sign of the deep, deep trouble these and other institutions are in. While the heirs of JPMorgan's carefully built empire may horribly regret the limited choices left to them, the knowledge that there are only a limited number of seats left in the life boat has guided them in their decision, I believe, to place a firm hand on the expensively coiffed head of Carlyle and shove it underwater in the scramble for safety.

David Rubenstein, a principal in Carlyle, sat for an interview with Bloomberg, in which, they report, he was heard to say...

"We have made a lot of money with, and for, these banks and this is a hiccup in a 20-year relationship. We don't think any of them have any animus [sic] toward us and we're not antagonistic toward them."

Using our top secret Casey Quote Translator, Model X-III, we uncover that what Mr. Rubenstein was actually saying was...

"The ingrates, how dare they! Who do they think they are messing with? Oh, boy, oh boy, just wait until the next time the bastards want something from the government, any government, then we'll make them pay! YOU HEAR ME! IT WILL BE NOTHING BUT DARKNESS AND PAIN!!"

Watch out below...

Are You a Skeptic?

Doug Hornig, who edits our Daily Resource PLUS, sent in the following item that I thought instructive and worth sharing...

It occurs to me that Internet credibility is a subject of interest that might fit in the Room sometime, or Doug's End Notes in the International Speculator. We've become so conditioned to getting information from the Net that it can interfere with our good common sense and healthy skepticism. That's why I always keep Snopes.com close to hand.

Case in point: there's an email currently making the rounds. I got it from a mutual friend. Now I love the guy and respect him quite a lot, but we do disagree on some topics about which I find him, well, myopic. He will, it seems, believe anything that supports his view of the terrorist threat or trashes liberals. Thus he sent me a related email, from which I excerpt the following:
This week, the University of Kentucky removed The Holocaust from its school curriculum because it "offended" the Muslim population which claims it never occurred.

This is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving into it.

Now, that seemed unlikely to me. I don't know much about Kentucky, except that they usually have a terrific basketball team, but I couldn't imagine that a major American university would do such an absurd thing. So I went to Snopes and found that, of course, I was right to be skeptical. It's a hoax.

What's especially fun in this case is how the hoax evolved. It's a bit like the old game of Telephone. The story got started when the history department in one small school in northern Britain (the UK) did in fact stop teaching the Holocaust. Someone picked that up and started the rumor that the same thing applied to all UK schools. Then some moron saw that story, thought that UK meant University of Kentucky, and started spreading that rumor.

So, as always with the Net, caveat emptor.

David again.

I would extend Doug's comments to include being skeptical about your sources of information. I have to bite my cheek when I travel around the web world looking at precious metals-related content, and come across ads for various information services being offered by people that I know for a fact have next to no knowledge on the topic, but have only just opportunistically jumped onto the bandwagon. Even worse, there are any number of such services being promoted by people paid to tout the stocks they wax so poetically about. I grit my teeth, wanting to write articles here naming names and pointing fingers, but resist... because who needs the legal hassle.

But, as you are skeptical about stories you receive in emails, so should you be skeptical about the information services you choose to help guide you in your investing.

New Trend: The End of Printed Books

While it dates me, I can still remember the smell that emanated from the very first fax machines. And the joy of being able to move from a manual typewriter to an IBM Selectric.

Even more telling, I can recall, having been involved in a business requiring printing, slogging down to the typesetters and watching as they arranged lead type into frames in preparation for printing.

I remember 8-track audio tapes and know that my children will look back in the future and similarly remember VHS and cassette tapes in much the same way.

What's next? Say goodbye to printed books...

With Amazon's über-successful launch of the Kindle electronic book reader leading the way, and showing the way... coupled with the increased environmental sensibilities now gripping the minds of humanity, the idea of cutting down forests to fill libraries is an idea whose time has passed.

Especially when you consider that, with Kindle, you can actually download full-length books, wirelessly, from pretty much anywhere, in less than a minute. Now nobody loves a proper book more than I, but the idea of loading up your reading device with the latest book you want to read while nestled comfortably in your chair, or while waiting in the airport for yet another delayed fight, is pretty appealing.

Finish the first book in a series and want to go right on to the next? Click and you are good to go.

And further iterations of the readers are now inevitable, given the demonstration of solid market demand. For instance, you could sign up to automatically receive notification that the latest books by your favorite authors are now available.

In short, I think the book readers are here to stay and will soon dominate, leading to the demise of all but art books.

What are the consequences of this shift? For starters, there is probably a big opportunity coming for whichever company captures the space. At this point, Amazon and Sony are in the lead, but it could easily be some other company that takes the lead (never count out Microsoft or Google when it comes to this sort of thing). It could bring the cost of books down.

Of course, on the downside, traditional book printers will need to change or die.

In time, of course, we'll somehow see this feature built into an all-in-one device (phone, Internet, book reader)... but I think that is some years away because no one wants to read a book on a tiny screen.

For the heck of it, if you have any thoughts on how an investor might play the end of traditional books (or wish to disagree with my hypothesis), drop me a line at david@caseyresearch.com and I'll publish the best ideas.

(Since we're on the topic of personal communication technology, going on nothing other than a couple of ads I have seen during my rare viewing of commercial television, I would say that Sprint is in trouble. They are heavily advertising a two-for-one deal on a phone that looks like some cheap toy. Its primary feature seems to be a slide-out keyboard that allows you to type in small type on a tiny black and white screen... a sign that the company is well out of touch with the times, if you ask me.)

End Notes

I have another 10 pages of notes, but less time than required to do them justice, so I will summarize some of the other items that caught my eye this week...

* Making the World a Safer Place. The Consumer Product Safety Commission is being revamped, restaffed and its funding boosted. As part of this new initiative, the cap on fines that the agency can now levy against companies failing to report product hazards will rise from $1.8 million to as much as $20 million, if the Senate bill passes. Using standard operating procedure on these things, Senator Pryor, the bill's sponsor, commented, "The vote is a victory for the health and safety of children."

About time, some will say. Just more regulation and more burden on U.S. manufacturers, I say. When was the last time you or someone you know was hurt by a faulty product?

* Running out of gold. I came across some interesting comments this week by Kevin McArthur of Goldcorp. Here's an excerpt of his remarks...

Goldcorp Inc expects the price of gold to top $1,000 an ounce and stay there for a long time, a development that will allow the company to improve operating margins, Chief Executive Kevin McArthur said on Monday.

In a wide-ranging interview at the Reuters Global Mining Summit, McArthur, who is also president of the Canadian gold producer, said he thinks the price of gold, which was at $973 an ounce on Monday, is not "anywhere near a bubble."

"We are not replacing the reserves that we're mining, and yet demand continues to grow worldwide. We're going to run out of gold," he said of the global gold industry.

* Derivatives Next? The good folks at moneywatch.com had an interesting article discussing Warren Buffett's dim view of the size and scope of derivatives, and postulating that if that bubble starts to deflate, things will go from catastrophic to, well... whatever is two or three times catastrophic. The author, Paul Farrell, kindly provides the latest data from the Bank of International Settlements to illustrate just how big the derivatives bubble, now at $516 trillion, really is...

U.S. annual gross domestic product is about $15 trillion
U.S. money supply is also about $15 trillion
Current proposed U.S. federal budget is $3 trillion
U.S. government's maximum legal debt is $9 trillion
U.S. mutual fund companies manage about $12 trillion
World's GDP for all nations is approximately $50 trillion
Unfunded Social Security and Medicare benefits $50 trillion to $65 trillion
Total value of the world's real estate is estimated at about $75 trillion
Total value of world's stock and bond markets is more than $100 trillion
BIS valuation of world's derivatives back in 2002 was about $100 trillion
BIS 2007 valuation of the world's derivatives is now a whopping $516 trillion

* Bank Runs... Dust Bowls Next? My somewhat more pessimistic partner, Doug Casey, wrote again over night that... "The only thing I'm actually pretty sure about is that we're in for the biggest economic/social/financial/political upheaval ever." For those of you aware of Doug's solid record in forecasting these sorts of things, those are words worth noting.

Along those lines, this week we learned that foreclosures in the U.S. had jumped by 60% in February, and bank seizures doubled (a category that now includes the snowboard shop down the street).

Further evidence that this downturn is taking a turn towards Doug's point of view, I came across two items of interest.

The first had to do with a long line-up that formed outside of the Boca Raton Housing Authority when that institution offered up housing vouchers. The scene turned ugly, requiring the services of the local constabulary which these days arrives dressed as if going to war. You can view the photos here... and to keep your finger on the pulse, you should. If you have a similar reaction as I did, you may get a creeping feeling on the back of your neck.

The second involves a tent city that the city of Ontario, California set up in a field at its airport last year, an attempt to help out the area's homeless. The tent city has now expanded from 20 residents to over 250, with many, many more trying to get in. The local government is unsure what to do from here, and so is trying to reduce the influx by letting in only those with some sort of identification proving they are from the area. Where does it lead? Where does it end? I don't know. Photos here.

* Flat Tax... Hah! Years ago, I had lunch with Donald Alexander, who had then just retired as the head of the Treasury. During our lunch, the much younger version of myself asked him "Hey, didn't the American Revolution start over the issue of taxation without representation? Well, my generation never got to vote on income tax, what are the odds of a do-over?" At which point, I remember him dismissively waiving his hand and commenting with something that I recall as disdain, "You're all wet."

While I still like that idea of a re-vote, I'm not holding my breath. Instead, as discussed last week, I'd happily settle for a 10% flat tax. But this week, we learn that if either of the democratic contenders come into power, taxes will be anything but flat. In fact, according to Bloomberg...

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both propose significant changes to the tax code that would add to its complexity. His plan emphasizes income inequality, while hers seeks to change Americans' behavior.

Obama's proposal would shift the tax burden toward the rich from low- and middle-income workers. Clinton proposes targeted tax breaks designed to change the way Americans use energy, save money and care for elders.

Obama, 46, "seems to have focused on redistribution," said Michael Graetz, a professor at Yale Law School in New Haven, Connecticut, and a former Treasury official.

Clinton, 60, "is proposing tax credits for everything short of flossing your teeth," said Lee Sheppard, a tax lawyer and columnist at Tax Analysts in Falls Church, Virginia.

The two candidates' plans -- especially Clinton's -- would further complicate a tax system that experts say is already Byzantine. Obama would tweak and augment current laws, while Clinton would introduce even more rules by adding at least nine new credits with complex qualification requirements, phase-outs and sliding scales.

And That's It for This Week...

Sorry to have gone on so long, once again, especially after my comments last week about tightening things up. But we live in a very busy world just now.

As I often like to do, a quick check of the screens as I wrap up shows me that gold is holding strong at $999 and the U.S. stock market is, once again, getting hammered... with the DJIA down 235 points, erasing the misplaced optimism that briefly flared after the Fed's $200 billion gambit to trick the markets earlier this week.

I came across a blog earlier in the week that was kind of sad. It was populated by day trader types, every one of them lamenting about the personal pain they had suffered by jumping back into the financials prematurely. As they told it, they each had figured things just couldn't get any worse... only to learn the hard way that, yes, they could. Elsewhere, I read the views of a pundit, whose name now escapes me, that earlier this week would have been a good time to buy Bear Stearns because, according to him, the company was, despite appearances, a picture of health. At one point today, the market disagreed so vehemently with his advice that it sent the shares of the wounded Bear down a record 53%.

And they say gold is risky.

That's it for now. Until next week, thank you for reading...

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room 3/3/08

David Galland — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:52:08 GMT

Dear Readers,

It's getting to the point where even the most determined optimist is having a hard time finding a good reason to roll out of bed.

Among just the smattering of news that crossed the lens this week...

Producer prices rose 7.4 percent in January from a year ago, coming on the heels of the news last week that the Comedic Politicized Inflation (CPI) index has risen over the last 12 months at the highest year-over-year rate in decades.
The National Association of Purchasing Management's business barometer has fallen to the lowest level since 2001, beginning to reflect a knock-on slowdown in consumer spending.
And, according to the U.S. Commerce Department today, what modest growth in spending there is, is now coming from inflation and not from confident consumers mobbing local electronics shops to load up on the latest and greatest.
On that latter point, consumer confidence in the U.S. is reliably reported to have grabbed its chest and slumped to the ground, or at least to levels last seen only in 1992.

And no wonder, given that housing prices, the single most important component of the net worth of so many people, are crashing; in December they fell by the most on record, off 9.1% from the year before.

(During a cross-country ski slog over the weekend, a friend who is a housing contractor by trade told me he has not seen a slowdown like this in his 20 years in the business. He knows of only one new house on the flight path to be built in these parts. The property holder has six different contractors scraping it out in a bidding war to get the job, assuring that the victor ultimately receives as a reward a dry and meatless bone at best.)

If the housing sector slowdown with its rising foreclosures and defaults isn't enough to keep our optimist abed, he would have to do no more than flick on the morning news to learn of soaring food prices, a crashing dollar and a tumbling stock market.

No sooner had a trembling hand secured a double dose of Advil, topped off with a cold compress, then he would hear a report of hundreds of millions and maybe even billions of dollars worth of new and unexpected losses being suffered by municipalities, banks, and sundry financial institutions on purportedly "safe" instruments concocted in earlier, more positive times. This week, for instance, we hear that the supposedly invincible Goldman Sachs may take it in the chops for as much as $11 billion due to "variable interest entities," a form of conduit, our faltering optimist learns as he falls back on his pillow in a fatalistic swoon, that holds close to $800 billion in assets, some significant percentage of which are now considered suspect.

At this point, the only folks able to view the unfolding carnage with any casualness are the super-rich for whom almost any conceivable loss would still leave them the requisite funds to live like the royalty of old... and the relatively small handful of investors who've been smart enough to have moved assets out of harm's way and into gold and other commodities early on (a group that I continue to hope includes you, with the help of our various services).

Interestingly, this week it was revealed that the California Public Employees' Retirement System can be counted among the few that have been seeing the nature of the unfolding crisis in the right light, and has at least begun to act appropriately. Calpers, according to Bloomberg...

...the largest U.S. pension fund, may increase its commodities investments 16-fold to $7.2 billion through 2010 as raw materials prices surge to records.

Calpers, which has about $240 billion in assets, agreed at a Feb. 19 board meeting to hold between 0.5 percent and 3 percent of its assets in commodities, spokesman Clark McKinley said. The Sacramento, California-based fund last year put $450 million into commodities, its first such investment.

The agreement is the fruit of Chief Investment Officer Russell Read's efforts since joining in 2006 to boost returns by shifting funds into raw materials and markets such as China and India. Oil has soared above $100 a barrel, wheat breached $13 a bushel for the first time, and gold and platinum climbed to the highest ever since Calpers began investing in commodities.

"We plan on ramping up the program by hiring additional staff," McKinley said by phone yesterday. "We are excited about commodities, which have performed exceptionally well for us."

To which we say, welcome aboard! Better late than never, so hats off to the obviously competent Mr. Read.

Of course, as the pension funds, like the hedge funds, mutual funds and institutional funds in general tend to run in packs, this news can only help solidify the base under our current favorite investments.

Listen and you can almost hear the chat around the polished-wood-encased water coolers strategically positioned around finely appointed pension managers' offices worldwide.

"Did you hear, Calpers got into commodities last year?"

"Yeah, smart buggers. And here we are with our bonuses slashed -- slashed, I say! -- to only $2 million, just because we invested in AAA bonds!"

"Well, if commodities are good enough for Calpers, who are we to argue, eh?"

"Race you to the trading desk!"

Pile on in, we shout enthusiastically, daydreaming about selling our appreciated resource stocks to the stampeding herd a ways down the road.

But that, fellow travelers, is about the only golden lining to be found in the chaos now gripping the world. And while a good investment brings a warmth not unlike a crackling fire and a hot toddy on a cold day, the toddy loses much of its flavor when one considers the impact that the unfolding crisis will have on our less well-prepared friends, family and fellow countrymen (and women, as the case may be).

Commenting on the news in an email exchange from New Zealand this morning, Doug Casey had this to say...

"My own feeling is that by the time this cycle is over, people are going to be shocked by how high gold goes. But it will be a sideshow compared to the circus the Greater Depression will put on."

Unfortunately, however, the news for the unprepared gets much, much worse. There are two areas that I would like to comment on in a bit more depth, starting with Bernanke's testimony.

Bernanke Pushes the Button

Yesterday, while engaged in my periodic physical exertions, or more specifically, while I was clinging to the handles of a medieval masochistic device sternly labeled the "Stair Master" down at the local facility for such things, I managed to snake out a finger to the television monitor to tune into Chairman Ben's testimony in front the House Financial Services Committee.

It was, I noticed when the camera pulled back from Bernanke's oddly detached countenance, a sparsely attended affair. In fact, it seemed to my sweat-filled eyes as if there were no more than five or so members of elected officialdom in the gilded chamber.

(But, hey, why should members of Congress be interested in anything to do with the economy? It's not like there's anything going on these days. Whether or not Roger Clemens is doping - now THAT is worth packing the chambers for!)

In all seriousness, however, Bernanke's testimony yesterday was far more important than most people understand, least of all those now doing "service" in government. Far be it from me to be critical of the pandering class, but I was appalled at how unbelievably, well, stupid the questions were that were pushed toward Bernanke by the handful of Congressmorons who bothered skipping the brunch put on by the American Lawyers Association down the hall in order to be present.

Bernanke's testimony was important because in it he made it abundantly clear that the Fed - and by extension the U.S. government - was coming down firmly on the side of inflation.

Those of you who have been with us for any length of time know that we have been calling for things to arrive at a location loosely identified as "between a rock and a hard place." It has been our consistent belief that the Fed would inevitably be forced to make a decision between letting the economy collapse under the weight of its many debts and obligations, or letting the dollar collapse by shifting into default mode. Which is to say, trying to inflate the country out of trouble.

The specific quote from Bernanke's testimony you want to pay attention to was this...

"The Federal Open Market Committee will be carefully evaluating incoming information bearing on the economic outlook and will act in a timely manner as needed to support growth and to provide adequate insurance against downside risks."

Note the lack of reference to run-away-inflation that is already making itself known here, there and everywhere.

The news that the Fed is again opting for inflation, while coming as no surprise to us, caught the gold bears flat-footed by sending gold sharply higher, to over $970 as I write.

Speaking from an entirely personal basis, I am, of course, cheered by the rise in gold, thanks to a long-held position in a gold ETF and a portfolio stuffed to the gills with the higher-quality gold exploration and energy stocks of the sort followed in our International Speculator and Casey Energy Speculator services. But there is a real risk arising... a true tipping point... that I am not so sure I'll be happy to see.

While there are many factors that might push the economy over the edge, the one to watch closely now are the foreign holders of the U.S. dollar. As we have mentioned more than once, the amount of U.S. dollars in the hands of foreign holders is at historic levels. In fact, the level of holdings, estimated at as much as $16 trillion, is unprecedented by an order of magnitude.

At this point in the game, we would expect to see wealthy foreign individuals cashing in their dollars for all manner of alternatives, including other currencies, tangible property and, of course, gold and other tangible assets. Given the price of tangibles at this point, that trend is likely well underway.

Diversification out of the dollar by institutional holders is likely also underway. But after that, if pushed to it, will come the big kahunas: the foreign governments and their many trillions.

Up until this point, that they have been reluctant sellers can be understood in much the same way you can understand the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction when discussing the pros and cons of launching nuclear strikes against your similarly armed adversaries. At what point, however, do the foreign governments come to the conclusion that the other side has already "pushed the button"?

Watching Ben Bernanke, there is a reasonable chance, were I a foreign holder, that I might come to the conclusion that he has done the equivalent of just that.

Regardless, the pressure is growing daily on the economies of the Middle East and Asia, which have to date helpfully reinvested the money they have received in exchange for their goods into U.S. Treasury securities. And, by doing so, effectively imported our inflation back home. Even if they wish to continue avoiding the nuclear option, they will at some point be forced to it by the U.S. pursuing a monetary policy one could correctly term "Everyone for themselves!"

Make no mistake that once the tipping point is reached -- and if the Fed makes yet another steep cut at its next meeting on March 18, that could do it -- then things have the potential to shift from crisis to catastrophe almost overnight.

What impact would a true collapse in the dollar have on the global economy? It is a topic we'll continue to poke at here and in our various publications. But for now, keep your eyes wide open and your head down.

I'll touch on the second serious development this week, but the lunch bell has just rung, so I'm going to pass the baton over to Bud Conrad, who has sent over a couple of items he thought you'd find of interest...

Bud on Bernanke

In alarming testimony to the House Financial Services Committee, this week Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke declared: "We have a problem ... the spreads between the Treasury rates and lending rates are widening, and our policy is essentially, in some cases, just offsetting the widening of the spreads, which are associated with signs of illiquidity."

I said at the Denver Summit, and since in articles, to watch out when the Fed cuts and long-term rates don't drop.

It means that the rate-cutting process of printing money to buy Treasuries in an attempt to provide liquidity to lower rates is failing. The confidence in the ability of Bernanke, or anyone else, to stop the collapse is lost when people become aware that printing money makes it worth less. The Fed action becomes the fear, rather than the solution. At this point further cuts won't help the economy, because long-term and riskier rates will reflect that loss of confidence.

(Ed. Note: Bud Conrad recently gave a wide-ranging interview for the Gold Report on where the economy, gold, energy, food and interest rates may be headed. You can view it by clicking here.)

A Trip Down Memory Lane

Our own Terry Coxon sent along a link to a video of Richard Nixon announcing the end of gold convertibility, pointing out that I would especially enjoy the reference to "international speculators."

You can see Nixon make the announcement by clicking here.

The canceling of convertibility was, of course, a seminal event as it left the world with a pure fiat monetary system, an experiment which has subsequently resulted in the steady deterioration of all paper currencies, among other ill effects (including unchecked growth in government, thanks to the removal of any real obstacles to spending).

Will the whole house of cards implodes some day, forcing a return to a gold standard or some other system that forces fiscal restraint? If I was a betting man, I would place large sums that the answer is "yes"... it is inevitable.

In fact, the collapse may have already begun.

Energy Chart of the Week

By Chris Gilpin, Contributing Editor, Casey Energy Speculator

[click to enlarge]

Gasoline prices are comprised of several costs: transportation of oil (usual from some distant corner of the globe), refining costs and profits, more transportation of gasoline (to get it from the refinery to the gas station), taxes from every level of government, and the cost of buying the crude it all started from. This last cost has mounted, and now oil prices hold a greater and greater influence over gasoline prices.

In 2004, oil prices rose 50% from $30 to $45 roughly, and this created a corresponding 26% rise in gasoline prices. In other words, gasoline prices increased half as fast as oil prices did.

As oil prices have risen, the oil cost of gasoline has begun to dwarf all other components. Now when oil prices go up, it will cause a much steeper rise in gas prices. If oil were to make another 50% jump from $100 to $150 - which we think is quite possible in the next year or two - gasoline prices would rise at a rate closer to 35%. The U.S. average for regular-grade gasoline hovers around 310 cents per gallon right now with oil near $100; a 35% increase would lift it to 419 cents per gallon.

The rogue factor in all these calculations is refining capacity. Last spring, a spree of unplanned refinery outages pushed gasoline prices higher when oil had retreated to $60. By the time refining capacity came back online, oil was marching to $100. By having one major cost replace the other, gasoline prices have stayed between 280 and 310 cents per gallon since April 2007.

This may have created a false sense of security among motorists, who saw oil move up twenty or thirty dollars without much of a corresponding rise in gasoline prices. This spring refineries have scheduled their normal outages to switch from winter to summer-grade gasoline, but how many unplanned outages will occur? The U.S. oil-refining infrastructure is outdated and badly in need of replacement, but permitting a new refinery in the Lower 48 has proven to be a near impossible task. It's reasonable to expect a growing number of unplanned outages at refineries in the years ahead, and if any of these correspond with another jump in oil prices, then prices at the pump would roar to new heights.

As a motorist, it's all very annoying. The best tactic is to hedge your rising fuel costs with energy stocks that will benefit from higher oil prices - or trade in your car for one of those Flintstone vehicles. But I hear they can be rather hard on the feet.

[Ed. Note: If you are looking to profit from energy, you owe it to yourself to check out the Casey Energy Speculator. And it couldn't be easier, given that subscriptions come with a 3-month, no-questions-asked, 100% money-back guarantee. Check out the current profit-packed edition by clicking here now.)

The Other Important News of the Week

Last week I pointed to the breaking news Fitzroy MacLean of our Without Borders publication tipped me to, about German intelligence officers paying a Liechtenstein bank employee US$5.9 million to steal a disk containing the names of all the German account holders.

In writing this news up, I posited that the Germans likely also got the account names of non-Germans, "...giving the German government a very nice trading card."

It didn't take long for my intuition to be proved right, as it was announced this week that the Germans were now cooperating with friendly governments around the world so they, too, could corner tax miscreants.

Confirming the point, one of our subscribers sent along a news item from New Zealand about how that country's Internal Revenue Department is offering anyone with an offshore account, especially of the Liechtenstein variety to, in essence, come out with your hands up or else. If you are a New Zealander with assets in the pilfered bank, I have no doubt you are sweating bullets.

Here in the U.S. of A., the Internal Revenue Service is also working hand in glove with the Germans to hunt down the tax cheats.

This is a trend firmly in motion, with serious implications.

First, now that executives and even lower-level employees of banks in tax havens with the right levels of access have seen the going market price for client names, and that rather than being brought up on criminal charges for breaking confidentiality agreements, they will be saluted by officialdom around the world, there will be a rush to capitalize. All that the person needs to do is to grab the list, download the file, or whatever, and make it past the front door to collect on the waiting riches.

In addition to the considerable personal problems this will cause the account holders, it effectively spells an end to the idea of financial privacy.

And that is an important battle to be lost by anyone who values individual freedom. Look at it this way, until recently countries knew that if they squeezed too hard, money would begin slipping across the borders to undeclared safety. With that escape route closed, they can now squeeze ever harder.

Even so, human nature being what it is, you can expect the same people - at least those not in jail following the global witch hunt that will soon extend to the Caymans, Andorra, or any other jurisdictions where the bankers have been accommodative to privacy seekers - to look for other ways of hiding wealth.

Of course, gold, diamonds and other readily portable and fungible assets will find favor. Setting the stage for the battle in the war of the state against the individual: a new round of government confiscations of gold and other such assets, "in the public interest."

I can't see this happening imminently, and we should be able to see it coming, but the threat that it could happen in the next decade, along with foreign exchange controls and similar acts of desperation by the tax farmers, is real.

Now let me be clear. I am not in favor of tax cheating. Per the fresh example from Liechtenstein, the risks are too high and, in my view, always have been. But that doesn't mean that I can't lament the fact that the system is moving closer and closer to the point where you won't be able to enjoy any level of privacy in relation to your financial affairs.

Visa's $19 Billion IPO a Scam?

During the course of dinner with a highly positioned financial services executive the other night, he told me that Visa and MasterCard had lost a major lawsuit related to hidden charges, and that it will cost them a lot of money and force them to change their business in a number of detrimental ways.

Almost immediately thereafter I read that Visa was planning a $19 billion IPO. Coincidence, I wondered?

Curious, I decided to dig a bit. I hadn't gotten very far when I came across a very coherent analysis on the situation by Mish Shedlock. You can read it by clicking here.

Could the broader investment community catch on to the true intent of the IPO, dooming it and by doing so, maybe, lead to yet another giant stumbling? While that remains an outside possibility, it is by no means out of the question given the impact of the lost lawsuit, and that the credit card companies are almost certain to be next to feel the pain of consumer belt tightening.

I suspect most people wouldn't be unhappy if the credit card companies took it in the neck.

On that theme, years ago I interviewed a senior credit card company executive and over the course of our meeting, I mentioned to him that I had recently caught a charge for "lost credit card insurance" on my bill. It was for something like $46 a year - for nothing, as far as I could tell. Indignant, because I hadn't approved the charge, I called the service center and no sooner were the words of complaint out of my mouth than the representative said, "No problem, sir. That charge will be removed." In other words, no questions or pushback at all.

"Oh, that!" my new acquaintance, the credit card executive, commented, a smirk on his face. "That was the idea of the guy in the office next to me. We were running behind on the quarterly numbers and he came up with the idea to bump the revenue."

"You mean," I asked, a somewhat stunned look on my face, "that you simply hit all the credit cards with a $46 charge?" (And we're talking about hundreds of thousands of accounts.)

"Yep. It was a big winner, because most people don't look very hard at their bills."

"But that must be illegal," I said dismayed.

"Probably," he said with a dismissive shrug.

He didn't get the job.

Of course, the flip side of Visa running into trouble will be yet another form of credit that gets tighter... and more costly.

Miscellany

Lines of Lawyers. As predicted, lawyers armed with thick briefcases and high-digit display calculators are increasingly jostling each other in the long lines that are starting to form at the doorsteps of the wounded financial service industry behemoths.

This week, HSH Nordbank, a German sector public bank (translation, they have clout), announced it was going after UBS bank for "hundreds of millions" in subprime losses. As the piling on grows, we'll start to see the major bank failures that our own Bud Conrad has been forecasting these past months. Followed, natch, by the helicopters' worth of bailouts, courtesy of taxpayers.
High-Stakes Shell Game. In a classic shell game, the banks are trying to prop up the AAA ratings of the insurers standing behind the hundreds of billions of dollars of toxic waste now eating away at their portfolios. While cost effective -- $3 to $5 billion is a lot cheaper than the carnage that will follow a downgrade -- the odds are high that they'll invest the money, the insurers will get downgraded anyway, costing them their investments and the value of their portfolios. Unless, of course, the same helicopters show up with yet more taxpayer largess to keep the insurers intact. It would not surprise me in the slightest to see, even, the de facto nationalization of a failing rating agency.
In the "Remember, We're All Only Human" Department ... I came across another anecdote about another of the esteemed members of the judiciary, one Robert Somma, a federal bankruptcy judge appointed by President Bush in 2004. It appears he has stepped down from the bench after police found that he had crashed his Mercedes into another car while drunk and wearing a dress, fishnet stockings and heels, and carrying a purse. "He's a highly respected member of the bar," said a fellow judge, "and remains so." I don't care about his dress code, live and let live, I say... but next time, take a cab.
Look Before You Leap. There was news out this week that Norilsk, the Russian mining giant, was ordering a fleet of super icebreakers to take advantage of the melting of Arctic ice, opening up new routes across the top of the world. Someone might want to tell them not to place their deposit yet, because the Arctic ice hasn't just re-formed, it's thicker than ever. Here's the reference.

That's It for This Week

Major developments are afoot, with the term "We live in interesting times" barely covering it.

While we expect things to continue in a similar vein, and to likely grow steadily worse for some months and maybe even years to come, the best approach at this point is to assure that you and your family come out okay.

It's like the warnings that the flight attendants give during their briefings on the topic of what one should do should yellow oxygen masks start falling on your head while in flight. If you don't first take care of yourself, before turning your attention to the less well positioned, you could find yourself wiped out and of no use to anyone.

As I close my weekly musings, I see that gold is solidly planted at $971, oil is parked over $101 and the long-suffering DJIA is off yet another 295 points.

Wall Street types like to look down their nose at people who invest in gold, silver and other commodities... but they may have to revisit their prejudice, given that the broader U.S. stock markets have been essentially flat over the last 5 years... which means, adjusted for inflation, their favorite sector has been a loser for half a decade now. Decidedly not the case for the precious metals, energy and other commodities.

Until next week, thanks for reading and for subscribing...

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC

The Room : Recession

The Room - 10/17/2008

Unintended Consequences

Getting Stupid

The Greater Repression

Bretton Woods II

Burn, Baby, Burn

Laughing Between the Tears

Miscellany

The Room - 09/26/2008

The Bailout: Behind the Scenes

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

Quotes from the Quislings

About Those Foreigners...

A Musical Interlude

McPalin Is Toast

Miscellaney

The Room 09/19/2008

Where Is the Bottom of the Markets?

So Why Are We Still Bullish on Commodities?

S*HUI*T Happens!

Can Our Government Save Us from All Evil?

Options & Futures

And from the Desk of Doug Hornig…

Panama

TV?

Where Is the Economy Going in the Next Six Months?

Short Term Projections

The Bursting Commodities Bubble

Back to the Bubble

The Room 3/24/08

"Commodities Drop, Rally in Dollar, Stocks Vindicate Bernanke"

What's Coming

Show Me the Money!

Energy Chart of the Week

China Still Is Selling Us More and More

Real Estate, Real Trouble

And That, Dear Readers, Is It for this Week...

The Room 3/17/08

The Best-Laid Plans

Geologists Rule!

Expert Reveals Wolves Pose No Danger to Sheep

Economists See US Avoiding Recession

Experts' Forecast Sees No Recession

Experts' Report Sees Negative First Quarter GDP

How You Know When the Economy Is in Trouble

Are You a Skeptic?

New Trend: The End of Printed Books

End Notes

And That's It for This Week...

The Room 3/3/08

Bernanke Pushes the Button

Bud on Bernanke

A Trip Down Memory Lane

Energy Chart of the Week

The Other Important News of the Week

Visa's $19 Billion IPO a Scam?

Miscellany

That's It for This Week

SHUIT Happens!