The Room : Taxes

The Room – 05/15/2009

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

Dear Reader,

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

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

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

Or how about these headlines...

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here’s the story…

Tax Revenues Tanking

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

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

Here’s what’s going on:

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

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

What are the implications of this tanking tax revenue?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So, what does all this mean?

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

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

Super Fed, Super Cop?

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

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

video of testimony by the Inspector General

anything

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

Sharks Eat Sharks

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

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

Linked here

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

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

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

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

Guardian: MPs' expenses
Linked here.

Telegraph: MPs' expenses
Linked here.

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

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

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

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

Eat Dirt

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Word from the (Mexican) Street

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

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

Star Trek – “Stayed Wide Awake”

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

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

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

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

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

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

Miscellany

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

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

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

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

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room – 04/17/2009

David Galland — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:22:00 GMT

Dear Reader,

Being new to a profession is always a challenge. The neophyte wants to impress his superiors, but lacking experience, is left to rely upon what natural skills he possesses. And, often, will try to make up for any shortcomings in specific skills by displaying a double dose of enthusiasm and energy.

Our new president, for example, has a great many skills related to successful politicking, but none at all specifically related to the task of being president of the world's most powerful country. This is not a job that one can prepare for.

And so We the People, his new bosses, are left to observe Obama leaning heavily on his considerable political skills – and his obvious energy – in an attempt to impress.

He is trying to do so through a constant stream of new pronouncements emanating from the White House, or wherever Mr. Obama happens to be standing at the moment. On one day he wishes to put an end to nuclear weapons, on the next to reach an accommodation with the Iranians. While he’s at it, he'll be (maybe) pulling the troops out of Iraq, but redeploying them into Afghanistan and maybe even Pakistan.

Hopping on Air Force One to bask in foreign adulation, he might close the afternoon by announcing he’s going to rescue the indebted mortgagees while dealing with bank insolvency. With hardly time for a deep breath, we see commitments to salvage the U.S. car industry -- but without overly inconveniencing its unionized workers -- followed by a promise to tackle the thorny question of immigration. Over afternoon tea or perhaps a Seder supper, he pronounces that help is on the way for Mexico in its “war” with its drug gangs, then over breakfast dedicates himself to assembling an “armada of allies” to wipe the earth clean of Somali pirates.

Worried that those initiatives may fail to impress, Obama’s administration then treats us to news that it will reform the tax code (if only to tighten the weave of the net) and close down the world's "tax havens." Further, before this December, if the Obamites have their way, carbon emissions in the United States will be smashed down to the levels of 50 years ago (which is to say that what is left of American manufacturing will soon become Indian or Chinese manufacturing). In support of that goal, a comprehensive cap-and-trade program will be initiated, invoking tens of billions of dollars in new taxes on American enterprises each year.

While I have the chronology wrong, the actual list of initiatives proposed so far by the energetic Obama is correct, though not complete. In fact, the list goes on and on… and expands even as I write: with the administration’s encouragement, the EPA is set to declare carbon dioxide -- you know, the stuff that makes plants grow -- a threat to public health.

In any event, the point I am trying to make, other than to offer President Obama a kindly word of advice that maybe he should take a deep breath and pause in his many exertions, is that rather than impressing, he is increasingly at risk of blowing all of his considerable store of political capital and going down in the history books as something of a failure.

There is a saying in marketing that I've always found true, and I think it is very appropriate in this instance. Namely, "The more you emphasize everything, the less you emphasize anything."

I, for one, am getting dizzy from watching Mr. Obama's antics and trying to understand exactly what he’s looking to accomplish, other than endeavoring to impart the impression that he’s accomplishing a lot. But there is a big difference between creating an impression and actually delivering the goods.

Sooner rather than later, I suspect, Congressional Democrats -- looking just over the horizon at the next election -- will realize that not only is the economy on tilt but so perhaps is their president, at which point he will be forced to begin a program of massive backpedaling with serious consequences to his credibility.

For those of you who are supporters of Mr. Obama and hoping for the best from his administration, now might be a good time to drop him an email suggesting he might wish to rein in his goals before spinning into oblivion. For those of you who don't particularly care for Mr. Obama, at the pace things are going, I think you’ll find your worst fears about the ambitious president will remain unrealized.

Alternatively, finding himself all of a sudden at risk of becoming marginalized and being fired at the end of his four-year probation period, Mr. Obama might take a serious gamble to regain his relevance – a war with Pakistan? While one can only hope not, stranger things have happened.

Why Do You Buy Gold?

As you can see from the chart below, since the latter part of February, the GLD gold ETF has been on a down trend, reflecting the underlying action in gold.

The retracement, while unwelcome, is understandable given the news about persistent deflation in widely followed indices such as the consumer price index. Also pushing things in the wrong direction, there are the U.S. dollar’s recent gains against the euro. And, as discussed here last week, we've also heard that the IMF is going to be dumping a fair bit of gold in its attempt to rebuild its war chest.

Not exactly cheery news for our favorite yellow metal. In fact, in any other than the Bizarro World in which we now live, the chart for GLD would be looking a lot worse than it is. As you can see more clearly in this next chart, the volume in GLD has fallen off quite a bit of late, which is a good proxy for broader interest in gold. Granted, we live in a particularly volatile and unpredictable age, which means anything can and likely will happen on any given day that can change virtually anything or even everything. But the odds are pretty good that absent one of those "shocker" incidents, gold is likely to remain range bound, perhaps even trend lower, until the inflation that has been baked into the cake by the government’s massive infusions of money makes itself known.

Which brings me to a question: Why do you buy gold?

Being clearly able to answer that question is the only way you can intelligently determine both the quantity of gold you ultimately buy and the timing of when you will buy (and eventually sell).

I mention this because on far too many occasions, I have had conversations with individuals, or received emails from subscribers, who view gold with an almost romantic affection. That's a mistake. As Doug Casey recently wrote, it's important not to fall in love with something that cannot love you back.

While gold can backstop your portfolio and place a solid foundation under your net worth, in the final analysis it is simply an asset, albeit one with unique properties that make it an especially attractive form of money.

It’s because of those unique properties that many of you own gold, as a form of insurance against inflation and other forms of monetary mayhem. In our view, that is the most important reason to own gold, especially these days. Viewed through that lens, the latest price setbacks for gold should be of almost no concern, unless you have not purchased your full allocation to the metal -- in which case, beginning to buy on the dips makes sense.

On the other hand, if you're a speculator in gold, your challenge becomes trying to discern gold’s current trading range so that you can buy when it's low and sell when it’s high. Reflecting the extreme volatility that grips almost all markets, gold's trading range these days is fairly wide, roughly between $800 and $1,000.

Frankly, absent a shocker event, I see no reason for gold to break out of that range decisively anytime real soon… at least not until we see the inflation that is the inevitable outcome of the Fed’s determined destruction of the dollar and U.S. government deficits of a magnitude that would bring tears to the eyes even of the late Lord Keynes.

Entourage

As you may have heard, our media star president is heading off to the Summit of the Americas next week to engage in another round of photo opportunities with other politicians.

Given the obvious importance of the event, it is no wonder that he is taking an entourage of over 1,000 important U.S. delegates, including wife Michelle's full-time makeup artist, a presidential first.

So what are the lofty goals of this important summit?

According to the AP…

Obama's priority list for the trip that begins Thursday is stacked with matters of concern across the Western Hemisphere – the crippling recession, the warming of the planet, the trafficking in drugs, the gloom of poverty. Crime, despair and political unrest south of the border can all undermine U.S. interests.
In order to meet and discuss these many challenges, the princely sum of $80 million will be spent by summit organizers, an amount that does not include the staggering sums involved with transporting the Obamas and their entourage to the Caribbean island where the summit will be held.

Not to worry, I am sure that all 1,000 of our delegates are necessary and worth the cost of sending them on their spring break and putting them up in the style they are quickly becoming accustomed to.

Interestingly, as is the case with these highly staged events, the outcome has already been decided and the post-summit agreement already drafted. Again, according to the AP...

The draft summit agreement, negotiated laboriously, speaks broadly about cooperation on climate change, education, safety and prosperity. But it makes no direct mention of the overarching crisis of the time, the global economic swoon. In fact, most of it was negotiated before the crisis hit with full force last fall.
If you excuse me for being a bit of a skeptic, a Grinch even, don't you think this all could have been handled with a couple of conference calls? Because as you and I both know, in the final analysis nothing will come out of this grand holiday other than a noticeable increase in local rum sales.

All of which moves me to ask, is anybody actually keeping a tab on the president's tab? Does no one now occupying the polished corridors of power in Washington understand that the economy is wrecked, and that every dollar counts?

Is anybody out there?

Ed. Note:

Entourage

Opportunity Knocks?

The chart shown here is of the CRB commodities index. A couple of things jump off the page, at least to me. The first is, that was one hell of a slide in commodities prices. The second is that it sure looks like it's trying to put in a bottom.

The contrarian in me tells me that this is a picture of a very interesting opportunity in the making. Again, no guarantees the commodities complex can't go lower, but the simple fact is that people need to eat, to keep the power on, and to actually produce the things necessary for daily life. Thus, looking for opportunities to get intelligently positioned in the commodities complex, with the expectation of a double or better over the next five years (without leverage… with leverage, the returns could be manifold that), seems to make a lot of sense.

Rest assured that in The Casey Report -- and for those of you with a higher net worth and a familiarity with futures and options, the Casey Trend Trader – we will be sharing a variety of strategies to get positioned in this trend.

The Down Low

Upon reading that Homeland Security has issued a report this week warning about the rising threat from "right wing extremist" groups brought to mind a topic I’ve been meaning to comment on for some time.

The topic is simply, armed revolution.

While I doubt their ability to get the specifics right, I suspect the general thesis of the Homeland Security report is probably correct. Namely, that some Americans may be willing to go to the mats should the U.S. government continue to infringe upon their rights, with stronger gun control measures being a likely tripwire.

Supporting that contention, below is an excerpt from an email that someone forwarded to me – not in support of the idea, but rather to show me that there are those willing to entertain the idea of a gun-battles-in-the-street sort of revolution.

(Note: The term "Three Percenters” refers to the 3% of colonialists who, the authors of this email allege, were the minority who actually took up arms against the British in the American Revolution, versus the 97% who were largely just bystanders. In the modern context, it is this 3% who are supposedly ready to grab arms and use them against the government.)

Below is the excerpt… which, as you will read, is inflammatory stuff.

Three Percenters today do not claim that we represent 3% of the American people, although we might. That theory has not yet been tested. We DO claim that we represent at least 3% of American gun owners, which is still a healthy number somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 million people. History, for good or ill, is made by determined minorities. We are one such minority. So too are the current enemies of the Founders' Republic. What remains, then, is the test of will and skill to determine who shall shape the future of our nation.

The Three Percent today are gun owners who will not disarm, will not compromise and will no longer back up at the passage of the next gun control act. Three Percenters say quite explicitly that we will not obey any further circumscription of our traditional liberties and will defend ourselves if attacked. We intend to maintain our God-given natural rights to liberty and property, and that means most especially the right to keep and bear arms. Thus, we are committed to the restoration of the Founders' Republic, and are willing to fight, die and, if forced by any would-be oppressor, to kill in the defense of ourselves and the Constitution that we all took an oath to uphold against enemies foreign and domestic.

We are the people that the collectivists who now control the government should leave alone if they wish to continue unfettered oxygen consumption. We are the Three Percent. Attempt to further oppress us at your peril. To put it bluntly, leave us the hell alone. Or, if you feel froggy, go ahead AND WATCH WHAT HAPPENS.

(As an aside, I’m sure Homeland Security appreciates it when these self-described revolutionaries make their identities well known by sending around broadcast emails.)

Supporting the notion that people are loading up out of concern that the government has designs on their weapons is this citation from Bloomberg…

sales

I can attest to the fact that the local gun store is clearly thriving; it has recently undergone a top-to-bottom renovation in order to more comfortably accommodate its many patrons. The trend toward more gun sales is also evident in the share price of Smith & Wesson (SWHC) over the last six months…

So, it’s not out of the question that the stage may be set for what could turn into a series of confrontations between the government and its harshest critics.

Some random thoughts...

As is true of almost all successful species, it’s human nature to want to group together. This tendency toward the collective is perfectly understandable in that it allows for a more efficient sharing of resources. There are other benefits, including a sharing of the protective duties and chores that would otherwise take an inordinate amount of time and/or resources should each individual be forced to undertake them. While I personally shy away from most forms of collectivization, that so many gravitate toward that condition is easily understood.
Along with this natural desire to collectivize, it is equally natural for an individual or individuals to assume power of the collective, once formed. As often as not, the group encourages and even demands that a particular individual or individuals assume the reins of power. We can all recall the kids who, even in our kindergarten classes, would naturally assume a leadership role and be supported in that role by many.

Perhaps this is related to a subconscious quest for better genes, or simply because most people prefer it when others stronger than themselves take on the responsibility of decision making. Regardless, the tendency to gravitate to power is a clear and present human trait.
Which brings me back to the “Three Percenters.” Imagine, for a moment, the logical outcome if this group were to actually rise up and win the day? In my construct, all this would achieve is that the national collective would replace the current leadership with that of another sort. While I am not any more enamored of the current power elite than I was of the bumblers they replaced, I suspect that I might like living under the rule of the Three Percenters even less.
While I don't doubt that we'll see incidents of violent pushback against the current government, and maybe even something as dramatic and devastating as the Oklahoma bombing (notably carried out by a veteran of Gulf War I), the idea that a group of homegrown revolutionaries could actually outgun our modern army is ludicrous.

There is a significant difference between 1776 and the situation today. Not only does the U.S. government not have to deal with long supply routes, as was the case with the British, but today even the best-equipped gun shop has nothing in stock to remotely compare with the sophisticated armaments the U.S. government has at its disposal, thanks to decades of massive military budgets. When we can take out houses in Peshawar using drones operated by technicians comfortably seated in a Nevada command post, how much trouble, really, will it be to handle a small cadre of malcontents operating in Poughkeepsie?
The danger, therefore, doesn’t come from the outbreak of a guerrilla war here in the U.S. -- although dramatic incidents and perhaps even large-scale riots are almost a certainty over the next 10 years -- but rather from the government’s reaction to these events.

Already, local police are being equipped and trained to view even commonplace crime with a military sensibility. And we have seen a breathtaking degradation in individual liberties in response to the 9/11 attacks.

Of course, this degradation is not apparent to most, other than as modest inconvenience at airports. That’s because most of us will never experience the dire consequences of a negative assessment of our email records and other similar intrusions upon our privacy – picture a door being kicked in in the middle of the night followed by a quick trip to a dark cell. Even so, the fact that the government has been willing to cross previously unimaginable lines in its fight against real and imagined terrorists is a clear indicator that, should domestic disturbances begin to reach anything approaching a regular tempo, the response could be extreme.

So what is one to do? Given humankind's tendency toward collectivization, and for the collective to be controlled by a small power elite that will not generally give up the reins once taken, it seems logical to me that the only sane response that we as individuals who value our individual freedoms can have is to learn the fine art of keeping a low profile. Or, to use modern slang, to keep things on the “down low.”

Put another way, trying to swim against a powerful river, a river that stretches back to the very beginning of human time on this planet, will only wear you down and eventually pull you under.

In my opinion, people should spend a lot less time worrying about the collective and a bit more time thinking about the steps that they can take as an individual to enjoy an excellent life while simultaneously keeping out of harm's way.

To be sure, that might involve eventually coming to the conclusion -- as some Jews did in Germany pre-WWII -- that as warmly as one might feel about their hometown, to remain in place is to risk everything. By the time the sentimentalists were being packed up for camps, the realists had already set up shop in far less dangerous climes.

In the current instance, as much as we may complain about the growing power and meddlesomeness of the U.S. government, most people are able to go through their lives largely unaccosted – saved by the tax man. But that doesn't mean you should be blind to the hard historical evidence that any country, no matter how enlightened it might seem, can and will change... and in some cases, dangerously so.

It is for this reason that my globetrotting partner Doug Casey has long advocated having at least one foot in another country. And by "one foot," I mean some percentage of your assets, ideally some property, and at least a working knowledge of the place and some local connections.

Don't get me wrong, I think the United States of America is a great place, and the odds are good that as bad as things might get, it will remain in solid contention as one of the top five countries in the world in which to reside. But if things took a decided turn for the worse, long before I would even begin to get it into my head to grab up arms, I’d be headed for the nearest international airport.

Having traveled the world extensively, I can say with complete confidence that there are many, many other countries where one can live an exceptional and fulfilling life, even if – or maybe even especially if – you don’t have very much money.

I apologize if this comes across as rambling or disappoints those of you looking only for investment advice, but I think the point is important... the point being that we each have to deal with the realities of where we live, and getting overly heated up serves no real purpose. Sure, join up with your fellows in protesting higher taxes, write your congressman, and make your voice heard – but don't overlook the need to also organize your life in such a way that you generally fly below the radar of the powers-that-be, and so that you can move on to friendlier climes in the unlikely event that becomes a necessity.

Most of all, don't forget to smell the roses.

To quote Robert Friedland speaking at our recent Las Vegas summit, "The situation is hopeless, but it is not serious."

Tax This!

Given that this week encompassed the dastardly date of April 15, I thought at least a passing reference was in order.

To assist in making a reference, I turn to the folks at Reason magazine who have put together a worthwhile short video on the topic, which you can view by clicking here.

Elsewhere, I thought it was interesting to read this week that the governor of Texas publicly pondered the idea of Texans seceding from the union, should the federal government continue its insane tax-and-spend ways. Here's what he had to say on the subject...

"We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot," Perry said Wednesday.
And, of course, as I'm sure you have been reading about, there has been an outbreak of anti-tax "tea parties" around the country.

So there's hope. The situation is hopeless, but not serious.

That’s It for This Week!

Before signing off today, I would like to thank all of you who responded to my solicitation last week for feedback on whether the U.S. should sell "economic citizenships." The views I received were roughly split down the middle, with half in favor of a program that offered citizenship in exchange for a significant investment in U.S. real estate, and the other half dead set against anything that would allow more foreigners into the country. Next week, when I have a bit more time, I'll try to share some of the juicier excerpts from both sides of the argument.

As I sign off just after midday on Friday, April 17, I see that the Dow has stalled out and is flat on the day. Given that today's news includes that Citigroup's earnings were stronger than estimated, as well as the profits earned by GE -- I cannot help but take it as a very bad sign for the stock market that it has not managed to mount a further rally.

Meanwhile, gold has fallen again and is now trading at $868 per ounce. It could go lower, but per above, at this stage in the game, with the longer-term fundamentals for gold firmly in place, its short-term price action is of very little real concern.

Until next week, thank you very much for reading and for subscribing to one or more Casey Research services!

Sincerely,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room – 04/03/2009

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

Dear Readers,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

G20 Meeting, Who Cares?

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

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

Run for cover? Hardly.

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

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

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

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

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

The IMF

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

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

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

Read the complete paper here

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

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

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

Ed. Note

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

Read it here.

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

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

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

Read his essay by clicking the link here.

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

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

The IMF's Gold

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Closing Door

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The door is closing, the noose tightening.

Letters from You

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

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

Miscellany

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research

The Room – 03/27/2009

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

Dear Reader,

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

“So, how’s biz?”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Quick Musical Interlude, Then Something Different

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Eat the Rich

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Supporters of Capitalism Are Crazy, Says Harvard

everyone knows

that

(

From

Mises Daily

by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. )

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

(From CounterCurrents.Org)

What’s Not to Support?

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

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

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

Not So Fast

Remember Wen?

March 23 (Washington Post)

***

March 25 (Bloomberg)

***

March 25 (Bloomberg)

Timothy Geithner

Zhou Xiaochuan

Barack Obama

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

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

9:02 p.m.

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

***

Barack Obama

Paul Volcker

Peter Orszag

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

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

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

***

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

***

EPA Greenhouse Gas Declaration May Pressure Congress

General Motors Corp.

American Electric Power Co

David Bookbinder

…

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

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

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

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

Worth Watching… Closely

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

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

address the crisis

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

extra $100 million

targeting the guns and money from inside the U.S

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

Obama Announces Plans for More Funding for Afghan War

(Washington Post)

***

The End of Summer(s)?

The Innovator's Dilemma

(Adrianna Huffington writing in The Huffington Post)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Fusion Centers” Expand Criteria to Identify Militia Members

(FOX News, 3/23/09)

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

Glimmers of Hope

Gordon Gets a Thrashing

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

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

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

AIG, I Quit!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Politician I Can Support

(Press TV, March 25)

Some Concluding Thoughts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Miscellany…

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

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

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

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

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

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

Always good advice.

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

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room – 03/06/2009

David Galland — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:22:00 GMT

March 6, 2009

Dear Readers,

Of late, it seems as though I have gotten sideways with the technology deities.

First, as reported recently, was my accidental deletion of an hour-and-a-half recorded interview with trading gurus Dave Hightower and Terry Roggensack.

Then, yesterday, while waiting to put in a phone appearance on the U.S. Global Funds Webinar that many of you sat in on, I carefully put my speaker phone on mute (you can tell it's on because the button lights up) and set about trying to wolf down a chicken salad sandwich before it became my turn to talk.

This led to being reminded of several of life's little lessons. Including...

Eating quickly is never a good idea, because it can lead to aspirating, as opposed to swallowing, one's food.
Once aspirated, a fairly decent-sized piece of food – say, for example, chicken salad – can actually make its way up through one's sinus passages. In fact, with enough coughing, hacking, turning red, grabbing of the throat, choking and blowing, the aspirated morsel can actually traverse the nasal passages and exit through the nose.
And, finally, I was made to recall the fallibility of technology when I learned, after the fact, that a lit-up mute button is no firm guarantee that the phone is actually muted.

It was only when someone stuck their head into my office to let me know that my close run with lunch was being broadcast live that I became aware of the latter point. To which I whispered incredulously, "But that's impossible... I have it on mute, see!" In reply, I received a shrug and a statement that was as accurate as it was succinct, "Must be broken."

For those of you on the call, and especially my fellow presenters, whose carefully prepared presentation, I was later told, was disrupted on multiple occasions, my sincere apologies.

And to the technology gods, I supplicate in your general direction.

Before moving on to more substantive topics, a quick "thank you" to everyone who submitted entries for my growing category of dramatic music. While there were many excellent additions to the library – and I will share more in weeks to come – the hands-down winner this week was sent from Phil of our New Zealand contingent.

You may have seen this particular piece of music/video... because apparently over 1.5 million viewers have. But I hadn't and so really enjoyed the setup and the unlikely singer's powerful delivery. Real goose bump stuff, guaranteed to bring a smile to your day. Enjoy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEo5bjnJViA

I might add that the humble phone salesman went on to become an acclaimed opera singer – according to PR Newswire, "his debut album ‘One Chance' stormed to the top of the charts in 13 countries and notched up an astounding 27 platinum and four gold awards." His second album "Passione" is due to being released in April. Proof that even in these days, which are often filled to the brim with hopeless-seeming news, dreams can and do come true.

And now, on to the decidedly less entertaining aspects of our modern world.

Desperate Measures

As I write, the U.S. stock market is not yet open, on Friday, March 6. Yesterday was yet another bad-hair day for stock investors, with the DJIA off 281 points and the S&P 500 off 30 points to 682.

At this point, it is hard to see what Team Obama will do, or even can do, in the attempt to stop the bleeding-out of equities markets.

I mean, consider!

They have announced increases in capital gains taxes, and that didn't work!
In tandem, they announced that the dwindling number of people who still have money to invest should rather give more of that money to the government in the form of higher taxes. And that didn't work.
Members of the Obama administration have gone out of their way in recent weeks to let the financial markets know that, in their expert opinions, the crisis is only going to worsen. In fact, just this week, Goldman Sachs's Secretary of the U.S. Treasury Mr. Geithner, speaking at yet another Senate hot-air festival, reminded potential investors that "this is still a deepening recession and a deepening credit crunch." Those sentiments were echoed by the president himself, who helpfully pointed out that, should the government fail to act with appropriate vigor, things could move from "crisis into a catastrophe."

And yet, the stock market stubbornly refuses to mount anything resembling a solid rally. Go figure.

Hold the phone!

The nice thing about an online discount trading account is how quickly you can place a trade: in this case, buying an inverse S&P ETF, which I just did. We'll check in later to see how the trade works out.]

So, what's Team Obama to do? Besides taxing and trash talking the economy, that is? Well, that and promising to beggar our great-grandchildren by opening the spigots on a tidal wave of monetary Kool-Aid, served up by a new army of fresh-faced Obamacrats?

This is no idle question: while the voting masses will give the prez his 100 days and probably more, a systematic failure in the economy over the next few years is unlikely to be rewarded at the polls. Should such a failure continue to gain steam, Obama risks being labeled even by his own as a false messiah, at which point, out come the stones.

The fact is, despite its many powers and foot soldiers, there's only so much that government can do at this point... and none of it without the steep potential for unintended consequences and naked risk. In no particular order, here's a quick summary of the possible measures left to the increasingly desperate government:

Suspend Mark-to-Market Rules. On March 12, a House Financial Services subcommittee will be gathering for free lattes, donuts, and a chat about suspending mark-to-market accounting standards. Simply defined, financial institutions are now required to establish, for accounting purposes, the fair value of their assets, using as a basis the "price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date."

The problem, of course, is that there currently isn't a market for much of the toxic paper now clogging the pipes of banks and other financial institutions. By exposing the folly of past decisions made by these institutions, mark-to-market rules have required these giants of finance to regularly fess up to the huge losses they have incurred.

Hypothetically, by suspending or modifying the rules, the operators of the many beggared institutions could straighten themselves up, adjust the old school tie, run a comb through their thinning but well-coifed hair, and announce that the toxic stuff was actually worth something. The "something" would, of course, be based on this model or that which imputes an elevated valuation at some distant point in the future.

With their persistent capital problems relieved, the bankers would then entice investors back to their equity by speaking in their most stentorian tones while pointing to a fresh set of metrics designed with special appeal to "value" investors.

Or, at least, that's how things are supposed to work out.

The people I have spoken with on this topic have expressed opposing views on whether mark-to-market as it now stands will be nudged over the side of the sinking ship. One well-placed money manager told me that he thinks it's unlikely it will be dumped, but that, if it is, the stock market could stage a 60% rally from here.

Another told me that there was no way that the government will tamper with it, because they would worry (correctly, in my view) that changing the rules in any material sense could be the final straw in destroying the thimbleful of credibility still retained by the financial institutions.

Personally, I think the potential of a change to these rules is very real – with the rationale for doing so announced in double-speak that positively drips of good intentions and sound practices. As to the reaction of the market, who can say? If the changes coincide with a general fatigue among the bears, and are possibly supported by some encouraging buying from friendly parties, they could spark a rally, and maybe a big one.

On the other hand, it could also put the match straight to the powder and result in an explosive collapse.

I wish I could be a bit firmer in my opinion of how this could shake out, but conjecture is all that is possible at this point. I'll keep trolling around for informed opinions, but the key thing now is to watch the upcoming hearings closely, and to watch for the trial balloons that the government likes to send up before making its decision. Knowing what's coming is half the battle, even if only as a signal to run for even deeper cover.
Bad Bank. Speaking of trial balloons, the government has floated veritable blimps with the phrase "Bad Banks" emblazoned across their girths.

A picture of the latest Bad Bank plan, snipped out of the Wall Street Journal, is shown here.

Adding some context to the graphic, the idea is for the government, along with the private sector, to pony up as much as $1 trillion to buy distressed assets.

As the graphic helpfully points out, "Investment managers who agree to put up a certain amount of capital would run the funds."

That caption may be translated as "Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan and other Wall Street insiders will be able to borrow money from the government on extremely favorable terms, with no recourse for failing to repay, as long as they agree to invest it back into the Bad Bank fund. As a reward for providing cover for this operation, the banks would earn billions in fees earned off the bulk of the money deposited in the fund, which will come directly from the Treasury. Big party follows."

Turning to the next caption over, we see that "Investors, such as pension funds, would be able to participate in the funds."

I think I have this part straight. What they are saying is that now that the Friends Of Obama (previously known as Friends of Bush) are well positioned, the investment managers are going to search the world over for the last of the really stupid pension and money managers, a moniker aptly applied to anyone willing to invest in a toxic soup of bad-asset-backed securities. They may find a few who can both drool and write a check at the same time, but not many.

In reality, what will likely happen is that (a) the government will print up another trillion to buy the bad assets, then (b) pay their buddies billions to "take a meeting" at a posh eatery a few times a week. Meanwhile, the financial institutions who sold the toxic stuff off to the Bad Bank fund will be able to sally forth to greener pastures, leaving the taxpayers with the bill for the bailout... and the bankers' many lunches.

Do I think we'll see a Bad Bank? Almost certainly. Will it solve the problems besetting the economy? No. Rather, it will just continue the process of transferring the liabilities from where they belong onto the back of the already overburdened taxpayer.

But it could result in a stock rally, if only for a limited time, and only for the stocks of the companies doing the dumping of the toxic stuff.

As for the overburdened taxpayers: as Doug Casey writes in his Casey Report lead article this month, "Street Fighting Man," taxes are a strong possible trigger for social unrest. It may already be starting, with the first proverbial (for now) shots fired this week in Hoboken, New Jersey, when a mob tarred and feathered the mayor in effigy for refusing to deal with oppressive levels of taxation. More on that story here.
Fed Buys Long-Term Treasuries. The Fed has, periodically, floated the idea of stepping into the market to buy long-dated Treasuries, should the need arise.

We think the need will arise, because of (a) the sheer scale of the government financings that will be required this year, and (b) the fact that foreigners are running out of cash due to domestic spending need and falling exports to the U.S., and maybe even running out of patience with the now official U.S. policy of monetary prolificacy. As foreigners have been about the only buyers of long-dated U.S. Treasuries in recent years, the shortfall caused by their reduced participation can only be made up by taxes – but tax revenues are plummeting right along with the engines of commerce that throw those off as byproduct – or by printing fresh dollars.

Which means, simply, printing is the only answer that will pop to officialdom's mind (the others require inconvenient free-market solutions).

So, what happens when the Fed is forced to begin buying up the longer-term paper?

For a time, interest rates might go down – simply because the primary buyer, the Fed, won't demand higher yields on its money. But rates won't stay down, because nothing will say inflation louder than the Fed becoming the lender of last resort to the Treasury, the self-described spender of last resort. At that point, the price of gold begins to soar, with interest following along in fairly short order.

As I am moving fast, I'm glossing over a new round of stimulus spending, and another after that – but those are pretty much taken as givens for now. And I'm sure I'm overlooking other desperate measures the government might take – for example, exchange controls or the creation of a dual currency system (one for the locals and one for the foreigners) -- but those will be more of a reactive nature following the broader collapse and the return of price inflation.

Of course, the government has the option of calling the whole thing off and turning their attention to supporting the free market... scraping the convoluted and counterproductive tax system in favor of a flat tax... reducing regulations... cutting government spending... but that's just silly talk.

In any event, if you have any thoughts on the topic, drop them my way at david@caseyresearch.com. In the meantime, the above seems a good list of trial balloons to keep a watch out for in the darkening skies.

Kindle Two

As readers of any duration are aware, my recent run-ins with technology aside, I have a fixation of sorts about Amazon's Kindle reading device. As I have described in far too much detail in prior missives, I think the K-I-N-D-L-E spells D-O-O-M for anything other than children's and coffee table book publishers, and I'm not so sure about the former.

Given that the other members of my immediate family agree on the many merits of the Kindle, most nights a scuffle of the friendly sort for the use of it occurs. That, and because I didn't need any other encouragement, really, caused me to rush out and buy the new Kindle as soon as it became available.

While I didn't think it possible, Amazon has outdone itself, smoothing out every first-generation bump and producing a truly elegant new reader.

I'm not going to go into any detail here, because there are now numerous articles on version two, but I will give it my wholehearted endorsement. It is more streamlined, functional, and just all around better than V.1, and that was already best of class, in my firmly held opinion.

Coincidently, this morning subscriber, correspondent, and fellow Kindle aficionado Ryan D. wrote in to suggest that we make our publications more Kindle-friendly (there is a function that allows you to email yourself documents to read on the Kindle, and apparently our letters currently don't "translate" very well). Jumping on the idea, I sent Ryan's email on to our production team, and they have already answered that this seems a task we can manage. And so, if I have anything to do with it (and I do), we will.

Not sure how long it will take, but we'll keep you posted.

Letters from You

I received a couple of letters this week that I thought worth sharing. In the first, D. White takes Jerry C. to task for the ditty on taxation he provided for last week's edition of this missive.

As I read D. White's comments, I chuckled -- but in a chagrined sort of way -- because I had entirely failed to register the point of contention to which she refers, and I near simultaneously remembered that the week before, I had shared the song "It's a Man's World" by James Brown and Pavarotti. Am I a subconscious sexist? I hope not... because I'm certainly not a conscious one.

In any event, here's the letter...

"Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids."

Well, let's see – there were no cars – so there goes the motor vehicle taxes, license taxes, gas taxes, etc. Of course, at that time, most people couldn't even afford a horse, streets were polluted by equine waste, a trip of 20 miles was a major production, and many people rarely or never left the town they were born in. I guess you think that we were all better off that way. The country may have been the most prosperous in the world (the Brits of that time probably disagreed), but life expectancy was lower, infant and maternal mortality higher, and the standard of living much, much lower. Read "The Jungle" for more details on how swell things were.

Mom had no choice but to stay home and raise the kids. And if anything happened to Dad, they were all likely to wind up in the poorhouse or county farm (they still existed), because she had no opportunity for decent employment. I think most women are grateful for their expanded horizons, Jerry – but perhaps you are the barefoot-and-pregnant kind of guy. If that's the case, let's hope that medical science (funded by the government) quickly gives you a chance to try being Mr. Mom. I'll be happy to personally chain you to the stove – which 100 years ago was much more dangerous than today and the cause of many house fires and women's deaths when their long skirts went up in flames.

Then, to liven up my day, I received this...

All I can say is, thank god Obama is willing to try to do something to unstick the system. Sarcastic philosophical rantings aren't doing it for me... nor do they help our country.

Richard

Here's the response I hastily dashed off in Richard's direction...

So, let me ask you a straight-up question. What is the economic theory – the past examples, if you will – of a government spending and taxing its way out of trouble? How exactly does that work?

The nation is bankrupt and, as would be the case with an individual, it has to come to grips with that fact. Grabbing another handful of credit cards and heading back to the mall solves nothing. It just makes things worse.

I can, and will, comment in whatever tone I see fit when I see a continuation of the same stupid and dangerous policies that got us here in the first place. Hell, I'd even happily go for the extra 40% tax increase that I will have to pay if Obama's budget passes, if it was part of a plan that actually had a chance of working.

But I am indignant at the idea that government should do "something" just "because," with zero basis in even rudimentary economics.

I hope that his rigorous actions give you a lot of personal comfort – that temporary comfort will be paid for by your great-grandchildren.

I include that last correspondence not to show that I can get my hairs up when pushed to it, but rather to stress that the skeptical comments I make now and again really aren't about Obama, per se... but rather, about his administration's clear willingness to stay the course -- the same course but even accelerated – as his predecessors.

Unlike, apparently, the often-contradictory Mr. Limbaugh (who, for instance, called for drug dealers to be shot at the same time he was a secret drug addict), I have no desire to see Mr. Obama fail... provided, of course, that we first define "success."

If in "succeeding," the Obama administration turns the nation into a socialist paradise, trapping my capital with exchange controls, and then slowly (or not so slowly) confiscating it for the "greater good," then I guess I'd prefer him to fail.

On the other hand, if his financial shell game somehow managed to get the country through to greener pastures and better days, then clearly that is an outcome I'd have to salute.

The problem is that, using history as our guide and seeing a litany of new initiatives that hardly help, and in many cases, actively hamper the enterprising individual, the only realistic conclusion I can come to is that the government remains stubbornly on the road to ruin.

The sign post for Bush's road read "To Baghdad." Obama's reads "To a Perfect World."

Both lead off a cliff.

On That Topic...

Thanks to subscriber Matt F. for sending this along...

The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that, my dear friend, is about the end of any nation.

You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

Dr. Adrian Rogers

Miscellany

Get Well Soon, Bud. In addition to his never-ending quest for truth in economics, our own Bud Conrad likes to engage in somewhat dangerous sports... like windsurfing off the coast of Northern California and, apparently, riding ten-speed bicycles too fast on city streets. Fortunately, it was his left arm he broke in three places, and not his right. Get well soon, Bud.
Phyle News.
- Alex C., who runs the first-ever Casey phyle at his coffee shop in Calgary, is looking to hold a get-together at some point in March.
- John is looking to start a phyle in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area.
As usual, if you are interested in participating in these or other gatherings of Casey subscribers around the country – and the world – drop us a note at phyles@caseyresearch.com.

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

As I sign off, I see that the stock market has reversed rather sharply from its early enthusiasm and is now down 35 points. More to the point, the short position I put on as I began to write you today is about $800 to the good.

To be clear, I am definitely not a day trader. But given the news that greeted the opening bell this morning, that U.S. unemployment is at 8.1%, the highest in 25 years, the early rally made no sense. Ergo, the quick application of a short position.

Importantly, I was comfortable allocating a modest portion of the speculative corner of my portfolio to shorting the broader market, figuring that even if I do badly today, the stream of bad news is certain to continue into next week, and likely next month, and even next year. So, provided I can afford to weather a setback, which can happen at any time, then I am pretty confident I'll be able to close out the position within the week for a nice gain. And if the bottom falls out again this afternoon, then I'll make this a day trade after all and bank the short-term gain. At which point, I might take the family out to a nice dinner, enjoyed without any undue haste.

Adding a little frosting to the cake, I see that gold once again refuses to be pushed down and has bobbed back up to $939. While it is certainly not inconceivable – and maybe inevitable – we'll see it back in the 800s again before the final lift-off, there is no question we are showing firm support in here. And, as hard as we look, we can't see anything in the way of a serious obstruction to it holding up and going higher. Ditto, silver is starting to get pretty interesting, but that is a topic for another day.

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

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room – 02/27/2009

David Galland — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 20:07:00 GMT

February 27, 2009

Dear Readers,

This morning, as I was looking over dispatches from correspondents around the world – from Ed in Alberta… Sadia in the UK… Baldy in Indonesia… the “General” in Portugal… and Nitin in Katmandu – I began to appreciate what it must have been like to be on the news desk during World War II.

I am trying not to be overly pessimistic, but there’s no denying the mass of bad news coming to us from all fronts: the forces of collectivism are using the cover of the crisis they largely created, aided and abetted by capitalism’s quislings, to roll over the individual.

Even so, contained within the dire reportage is also some very good news for you personally, and I’ll touch on that as well in today’s missive.

The Bad News

As fully anticipated, with its first budget plan, the Obama administration has fired a salvo into the side of the productive classes. (For those of you who are not U.S. citizens, feel free to use Team Obama as a proxy for what is likely to occur where you reside.)

Yes, we expected the $1.75 trillion budget deficit, which will, by the time all is said and done, come in a lot closer to the $2.5 trillion number anticipated some months ago by our own Bud Conrad.

Yes, we expected the government to begin raising taxes, which they are proposing to do with vigor – starting with an increase of $1.4 trillion on the people who earn in excess of $250,000 a year. “Right on!” shouts the mob, on the way out the door to burn Porsches.

For no other purpose than to keep the record straight, it’s worth noting that thanks to the government’s steady dose of inflation, $250,000 today will only buy you 77% of what it would have in 1998… and 56% of what it would have in 1988.

A decade from now, given the inflation rate we expect, the dollar’s purchasing power will erode by another 50%, and probably a lot more than that. In fact, at the current rate of money creation, by the time the dust settles, $250,000 might be the annual wage commanded by burger flippers.

But, hey, look at the bright side, at that point everyone will be rich!

The further details of Obama’s budget plan are a hodgepodge of this and that, some of which we even agree with (like cutting business subsidies). On the whole, however, the overarching mandate appears to be to thrust the hand of government, like some motion picture kung fu villain, deep into the heart of American enterprise.

And government’s expansion is far from over. Even as I write, the news continues to pour in…

Citigroup to get another $25 billion bailout from the U.S. Treasury.
Treasury officials work on bailout plan for auto parts manufacturers.
President Obama exploring automatic workplace pensions and an expansion of unemployment insurance.
AIG, now a government lap puppy, takes another big loss, and is again looking to its master for another handout.
Speaking of lap puppies, Fannie Mae, has lost another $25 billion and is looking for $15 billion more from the Treasury. The value of this zombie institution’s net assets is now a negative $105 billion, and eroding. Great investment of your tax dollars, eh?
Then there’s the new administration’s cap-and-trade green tax… a stunning new initiative that will bring many U.S. businesses to their knees. (You can read more about it here.)

There is more, so much more, including a $638 billion reserve fund for healthcare reform in the president’s budget that loudly broadcasts that, “Yes, we’re going there.” There being nationalized health care.

But you already read too much and don’t need me to rehash things as they are.

I will, however, comment on the way things will be, because in that, at least, we can find some good news.

The Good News

My fellow citizens of planet Earth, it is now abundantly clear that the trend toward socialism in all its many disguises is about to, once again, shift into high gear.

We’ve been here before, encouraged by the words of Karl Marx, a distinctly unsuccessful individual (to read his life story is to read of almost unending misery, poverty, and discontent) but a decidedly successful phrase-coiner, knocking the world off its axis with his “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

While no one with any real sense of history, not to mention economics, can take any overt joy at the prospect of the dark clouds of collectivism looming high in the sky above us, there is, if you pay close attention, a very big opportunity in all of this.

Namely, we are now presented with a relatively rare chance to see with some clarity into the future.

Imagine if eight years from now you could step into a time machine and zip right back to this very moment. How much money do you think you could make?

Well, just because the chattering masses have the blinders on as they march forward to their collective penury doesn’t mean we need to join them. And, if we are even a little bit careful, we won’t.

So, what is it about the future we can now see? Some broad strokes…

Currency depreciation.
More taxes.
Rising interest rates.
A price capitulation in real estate, with a collapse in commercial.
Exchange controls (now that Team Obama is raising your taxes, you don’t really think they’re going to let you pick up your wealth and leave, do you? The window for global diversification will soon be closing.)
The return of mega-labor unions.
Trade wars, shooting wars, and other forms of heightened geopolitical tension.

(This is a topic we are discussing at greater length, backed up with specific recommendations, in the March edition of The Casey Report, which will be released on or around March 3. Among its many highlights, Doug Casey is just putting the finishing touches on his article titled “Street Fighting Man” about the prospects for social unrest.)

Provided you keep your personal wealth profile low (there was a reason Sam Walton, founder of Walmart, drove a beat-up pick-up truck), your financial powder dry, and, maybe most important of all, retain your sense of humor, the opportunities in the unfolding crisis will be abundant

We’ll do what we can to help you spot those opportunities in our various services. If you are unsure which of our services is right for you, don’t hesitate to try them all… we offer very generous trial subscriptions, most of which come with a full money-back guarantee if you don’t find the service a good match. We have no interest in trying to rope you into a service that isn’t exactly right for you, so don’t feel bad at all if you try a service and later cancel for a full refund. We’re just happy to have the opportunity to share our research with you.

You can learn about all our services, of course, at CaseyResearch.com.

Ed. Note

Casey Trend Trader

not

Casey Trend Trader

learn more about our Trend Trader trial offer here

Whatever you do, don’t be complacent about what’s coming.

We are long past the point where doing nothing is an option. Review your personal finances, cut out unnecessary expenses, talk to your accountant about tax planning, and, if you’re a U.S. citizen, consider moving at least some of your wealth out of the country while you still can (but please, don’t try to hide it… that’s a fool’s errand). If you own gold, only you and your spouse, if you have one, should be aware of it.

Ask yourself, “If I just dropped in from eight years in the future, what measures would I take?”

Now, take them.

A Musical Interlude

This week, I have been listening – repeatedly, according to certain innocent bystanders -- to the following tracks.

For the rock & rollers among you, Can’t You Hear Me Knocking from the Rolling Stones kicks off with one of my personal favorite guitar riffs. Listen to it here.

And for pretty much anyone, an odd but really well-done duet by James Brown and Luciano Pavarotti singing “It’s a Man’s World,” which was sent along by subscriber David B. in response to last week’s call for dramatic music. Now, I don’t know if this song is as sexist as its title makes it seem (I haven’t listened closely to the words), but watching James Brown doing his natural best to match vocal talents with Pavarotti is, alone, worth the price of admission. Which, in this case, is just a click on the link here.

Have some dramatic music you want to share? Shoot it my way at David@caseyresearch.com.

A Golden Opportunity

While it’s still a long shot, one possible outcome of the deluge of paper money about to hit the global economy may be that governments will be forced by simple math back to a gold standard: when you dump trillions of freshly created paper into the market, inflation must soar.

And because governments produce nothing, the servicing of all their many debts and new spending programs gives rise to the real risk that the inflation could devolve into a Zimbabwe-like downward spiral. At that point, the intelligentsia, uncomfortable at the sight of glowering pensioners growing tired of living on dog food, may be forced back to a sound money system.

For the most part the citizenry has no memory of a gold standard, and even less understanding of same. We expect that to change. And, in fact, an early straw in the wind showed up this week in the form of a YouTube video sent along by subscriber Peter F.

You really must watch this, given that it is an excerpt from a major cable news personality, Glenn Beck, who manages to wax intelligently on matters involving the gold standard. There may be hope after all.

Watch it by clicking here.

Meanwhile, rather than wait for government to act on gold convertibility for their currencies, individuals the world over are doing their own conversions by trading their paper currencies for the hard stuff in record amounts.

Rand Refinery Ltd.

Johan Botha

Many of you have written to us expressing concern about the potential for direct action by the U.S. government against gold, – now that it’s returning to its dominant role as a sound money – including an outright ban or confiscation. We don’t see any signs of that yet, but we’re vigilant.

Damn Foreigners

The rising power of the mob in virtually all of the world’s democracies invariably leads to geopolitical tensions.

That’s because the ruling elites know they need to pander to the blunt-force voting blocs if they are to retain their elevated status. And there are few issues more unifying to the mob than the sight of filthy foreigners taking advantage at the expense of the locals. Whether it’s the damn illegal wetbacks who dare to cut our lawns or wash our restaurant dishes on the cheap, or the crafty Chinamen willing to work for pennies a day to feed their families – thereby taking food out of the very mouths of good union folks here in the U.S.A. – fanning the flames of nationalism is as easy as drawing breath for any politician worthy of the label.

And so we’ll be seeing a lot more of that, too, as politicians on both sides of the spectrum revert to script in redirecting the blame for what is now unfolding, and what is yet to come, to anywhere other than where it belongs.

This is a dangerous game.

For starters, the U.S. is now deeply, deeply in debt to the rest of the world. While the Chinese have, so far, been tolerant, their recent demands for some form of guarantee before they buy any more U.S. agency debt is a clear signal that their patience with the U.S. government’s prolificacy is not without limits.

Some of you might protest that the Chinese and other foreign trading partners, looking for a commercial advantage by keeping our currency high, encouraged the U.S. government to spend, spend, spend by engaging in a policy well described as lend, lend, lend. And you are right. But since when does anyone have to take a loan, just because it’s offered?

At any point during the decades-long run-up in federal government spending, the reigning morons in the Washington swamp could have “just said no.”

Instead, they said “yes,” embarking on foreign adventures… spending trillions on building and then largely ruining the world’s biggest military apparatus… offering financial backing to liar loans… launching the mutant health care scheme that goes by the name of Medicare… and… and… agreeing to whatever other thick, fat-laden slice of pork the politicians thought the lazy-minded voteriat would find agreeable.

We don’t need to look overseas for people to blame. The culprits are still knocking around the halls of power, just wearing new ties (with cute little donkeys on them instead of elephants), their blubbery lips retrained to spout off about the need for new subsidies to promote this or that green energy project “for our children” (conveniently forgetting that their cousin Bob happens to be a big shareholder in said project).

Sorry about that. Got a little carried away, listening once again to Can’t Hear Me Knocking at high volume.

I need to move on, because I have to get back to editing The Casey Report, and because I just got invited to make an appearance this afternoon on Fox Business.

But before I go, I want to bring this down to a more human level by sharing the contents of an email I received this morning from Baldy in Indonesia.

I guess we’ll find out just how splendid isolation really is…

Look for the Union Label

By Donald Grove, Casey Research Washington Correspondent

After last week’s edition of this exercise in fulminating, subscriber Buster H., sent along the following note:

I am surprised you have not mentioned the major stealth labor union executive order signed (without any media coverage) by Obama on Feb. 6. Read the text here.

After reading the referenced document, I shot off a note to Donald Grove, our tireless Washington correspondent, asking him to turn over a few stones to get to the bottom of the story. Here’s his report…

Unions played a big role in putting Obama in the White House. His campaign website assured his labor backers that he would “fight for passage of the [so-called] Employee Free Choice Act” (which would eliminate secret ballots and leave workers who don’t want a union vulnerable to harassment), “ban the permanent replacement of striking workers, increase the minimum wage and index it to inflation to ensure it rises every year,” and “increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs.” Once safely ensconced as the nation’s chief executive, it was time for Obama to remember those who put him there.

On January 30, with inauguration festivities still a fresh memory, Obama signed three union-friendly executive orders reversing a series of Bush administration executive orders dictating how federal contractors are to deal with union workers.

Obama said, “We cannot have a strong middle class without strong labor unions. We need to level the playing field for workers and the unions that represent their interests. I do not view the labor movement as part of the problem. To me, it's part of the solution.”

AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, who attended the signing ceremony, said “The executive orders are the first step in a long road to restore balance between workers and corporations. As the weeks and months continue, we thank God that we have a president, vice president, and Congress who are determined to fix our economy so that it works for everyone.”

On February 6, the president tossed labor another bone. While this fourth labor-friendly executive order does not require executive-branch agencies to use project labor agreements on construction projects, “it is the policy of the Federal Government to encourage executive agencies to consider requiring the use of project labor agreements in connection with large-scale construction projects in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement.” Unions love these agreements, which were prohibited by the Bush administration.

Michael Steele, the new chairman of the Republican National Committee, had a different take, however. He said, “President Obama’s executive order will drive up the cost of government at a time when we should be doing everything possible to save taxpayer dollars. federal contracts should go to the businesses that can offer taxpayers the best value – not just the unions who supported the Democrats’ campaigns last year. Quietly signing executive orders to pay back campaign backers undermines Obama’s promise to change Washington. It is a disappointment for Americans hoping for more transparency and less politics-as-usual in Washington.”

According to two of America’s largest construction industry trade groups, the president’s orders would limit the number of workers hired on new federal jobs to build roads, bridges, and buildings – the very projects touted as creating millions of new jobs as part of the stimulus package. Jerry Gorski, national chairman of the Associated Builders and Contractors, said that 84% of the country's construction workers are not in labor unions. “If the purpose of these projects is to get Americans back to work, why would we pick an approach that would allow only a small percentage of the construction workforce to participate?” Brian Turmail, speaking for the Associated General Contractors, said Obama’s executive order “takes the contractor out of the process of negotiating with their employees and puts the government in that role.”

Here are the orders for those who wish to scrutinize.

2009-01-30 Notification of Employee Rights under Federal Labor Laws
2009-01-30 Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers under Service Contracts
2009-01-30 Economy in Government Contracting
2009-02-06 Project Labor Agreements

A couple have not yet appeared on the White House Briefing Room at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office.

I’m sure many of you will recall this inspirational jingle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNTpOnZqeUo

Thank God it’s Friday!

Regards, Don

State Sovereignty – Saying “No” to the Feds

By Shannara Johnson

David again. There have been a number of articles recently about the possible break-up of the Eurozone. Before those of us in the U.S. get too smug, we might want to wonder if something akin to that could happen here. “Never!” I can hear some of you exclaiming, and you are probably right. But we are very much heading into unchartered waters, with a serious power grab on the federal level that leaves the states with much of the costs associated with complying with the spate of new regulations.

Shannara Johnson, a senior researcher and editor here at Casey Research who touches almost everything you read from us – quite amazingly so – found the time to dig in on something of a revolt now brewing in capitals around these 50 states. Her report follows…

Drowned out by the fiscal calamities of recent months, there is a new “movement” in the United States; one that has, incredibly, received little attention from the mainstream media. Not so united anymore, an increasing number of states have been introducing resolutions to declare sovereignty.

Now, to clarify this, a declaration of sovereignty is not the same as secession. Rather, it is the assertion of states’ rights – rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution and have been, in the view of many state governments, eroded or usurped by the bigwigs in Washington, DC.

In the words of Arizona state Rep. Judy Burges, “We are telling the federal government that we are a sovereign state and want to be treated as such. We are not a branch of the federal government.”

The states are pointing to the 9th and 10th Amendments, which affirm, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” and “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Even though it’s not secession, it is definitely a warning shot. The resolutions demand that the Obama administration “cease and desist” from unrestrained government expansion; they also imply that federal laws and regulations that violate the 10th Amendment can be nullified by the states.

So far, ten states have recently drafted or are about to draft bills to declare sovereignty: Oklahoma, Arizona, Missouri, Michigan, Hawaii, Montana, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Washington, and Texas. And according to analysts, up to 20 more states may follow suit this year, including Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nevada, Maine, and Pennsylvania.

The complaints mainly revolve around federal legislation imposed on the states without their consent; pet peeves include gun control laws, martial law provisions, freedom of religion and speech, and out-of-control federal spending.

“Live Free or Die” state New Hampshire’s resolution is one of the harshest:

NH Representative Dan Itse told FOX News’ Glenn Beck, “It’s a line in the sand to tell the federal government that they are no longer allowed to transgress the Constitution, and if they do, then they’re nullifying the Constitution.”

So far, so good. Here at Casey Research, ever the small-government advocates, we might be inclined to applaud the gutsiness of the states’ lawmakers. However, as Beck pointed out in his interview with Itse, some things just don’t add up.

For example, despite tough words and fingering the revolvers strapped to their hips, many governments of the very same states that are declaring sovereignty do not seem to mind holding their hands out for their share of the stimulus money the Obama administration is dangling in front of them. They just don’t like to be told by the feds how to spend it.

The Washington Times reported that Republican governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina “aggressively opposed the stimulus plan. However, in a Thursday morning interview on CBS’ ‘The Early Show,’ Mr. Sanford said his state would accept money from the stimulus bill. Opposing the plan ‘doesn’t preclude taking the money,’ said Mr. Sanford.”

Pragmatism or hypocrisy? Tad DeHaven of the Cato Institute chooses the latter, noting that about a third of average total state spending comes from the federal government. Brian Riedl, a budget analyst at the Heritage Foundation, agrees: “To a large degree, states are scapegoating their budget problems on Washington. It’s tough to be sympathetic for states and local governments when they go $467 billion in federal grants last year.”

Tax Revolt – Part I

Friend and mining stock guru Rick Rule sent the following along this week…

Actual “Letter to the Editor” from the February 5th edition of the Wichita Falls, Texas Times Record News...

Dear IRS,

I am sorry to inform you that I will not be able to pay taxes owed April 15, but all is not lost.

I have paid these taxes: accounts receivable tax, building permit tax, CDL tax, cigarette tax, corporate income tax, dog license tax, federal income tax, unemployment tax, gasoline tax, hunting license tax, fishing license tax, waterfowl stamp tax, inheritance tax, inventory tax, liquor tax, luxury tax, Medicare tax, city, school and county property tax, real estate tax, Social Security tax, road usage tax, toll road tax, state and city sales tax, recreational vehicle tax, state franchise tax, state unemployment tax, telephone federal excise tax, telephone federal state and local surcharge tax, telephone minimum usage surcharge tax, telephone state and local tax, utility tax, vehicle license registration tax, capital gains tax, lease severance tax, oil and gas assessment tax, Colorado property tax, Texas, Colorado, Wyoming, Oklahoma, and New Mexico sales tax, and many more that I can't recall, but I have run out of space and money anyway.

When you do not receive my check April 15, just know that it is an honest mistake. Please treat me the same way you treated Congressmen Charles Rangel, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, and ex-Congressman Tom Daschle and, of course, your boss Timothy Geithner. No penalties and no interest.

Ed Barnett
Wichita Falls

P.S. I will make at least a partial payment as soon as I get my stimulus check.

Tax Revolt – Part II

Thanks to subscriber and periodic correspondent Jerry C. for sending this along…

Tax the table at which he's fed.

Tax his tractor, tax his mule,

Teach him taxes are the rule.

Tax his work, tax his pay,

He works for peanuts anyway.

Tax his cow, tax his goat,

Tax his pants, tax his coat.

Tax his ties, tax his shirt,

Tax his work, tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco, tax his drink,

Tax him if he tries to think.

Tax his cigars, tax his beers,

If he cries, tax his tears.

Tax his car, tax his gas,

Find other ways to tax his ass.

Tax all he has, then let him know,

You won't be done till he has no dough.

When he screams, then tax him some more.

Tax him till he's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin, tax his grave, tax the sod in which he's laid.

Put these words upon his tomb,

“Taxes drove me to my doom...”

When he's gone, do not relax,

It’s time to apply the inheritance tax.

Accounts Receivable Tax, Building Permit Tax, CDL License Tax, Cigarette Tax, Corporate Income Tax, Dog License Tax, Excise Tax, Federal Income Tax, Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA), Fishing License Tax, Food License Tax, Fuel Permit Tax, Gasoline Tax, Gross Receipts Tax, Hunting License Tax, Inheritance Tax, Inventory Tax, IRS Interest Charges/IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax), Liquor Tax, Luxury Taxes, Marriage License Tax, Medicare Tax, Personal Property Tax, Property Tax, Real Estate Tax, Service Charge Tax, Social Security Tax, Road Usage Tax, Sales Tax, Recreational Vehicle Tax, School Tax, State Income Tax, State Unemployment Tax (SUTA) Telephone Federal Excise Tax, Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax, Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes, Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax, Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges Tax, Telephone State and Local Tax, Telephone Usage Charge Tax, Utility Taxes, Vehicle License Registration Tax, Vehicle Sales Tax, Watercraft Registration Tax, Well Permit Tax, Workers Compensation Tax.

Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago and our nation was the most prosperous in the world.

We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

What happened? Can you spell P-O-L-I-T-I-C-I-A-N-S?

David again. If you are not yet tired of this week’s bashing of government, read the following opinion piece titled “America’s biggest problem is big government” by Dr. Gary Wolfram of Hillsdale College. It’s worth a read. Click here.

Miscellany

Toronto Phyle. On March 3rd at 7:30 p.m., the Toronto Phyle will be hosting three members of the Casey Research team, all of whom are in town for the annual Prospectors and Developers conference. If you are going to be in the area and want to connect with other Casey subscribers as well as Jeff Clark, editor of BIG GOLD, Doug Hornig of the Daily Resource, and Louis James, our senior researcher and editor of the CIA and International Speculator, drop us a note at phyles@caseyresearch.com and we’ll get you the details.
In Other Phyle News… Oren in Israel… John in Boise, ID… Michael in the Quartzsite/Parker, AZ, Blythe, CA area… plus other individuals in Edmonton, Alberta… Kingston, NY, and Wichita, KS, are willing to host subscriber get-togethers. Drop us a note at the email address just above, and we’ll get you connected.

And that, dear readers is that for this week. As I look at the screens, I see that the stock market, after having opened up sharply lower, is now down just a little… while gold is trading at $940, well off from its latest run-up near the $1,000 mark. That’s okay. This is not a sprint we are in but the early days of a grueling trek to what’s next. Gold will be a critical part of our financial travel kit and, at times along the way, a pretty good trading sardine, too. For instance, if it gets knocked back into the mid-$800s.

Stay the course.

Before signing off, I would like to give a special thanks to all of our many correspondents. Over the years, we have built a large and robust international network that now serves as an early-warning system for our team. You collectively make our task of scanning the world for what is important far easier… and individually, you make my job all that more agreeable.

For those of you who will be making it to Vegas, let’s grab a beer together. And for those who won’t, a toast in your general direction.

On the topic of Vegas, or more specifically, our upcoming Crisis & Opportunity Summit, we never did quite get around to sending out a big promotion, but the conference is all but sold out at this point. We can take a few more registrations, but just a few. By this time next week, it will be a complete sell-out. So, if you’re still interested, and you should be, the time to act is now. More info here.

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

Sincerely,

David Galland
Managing Director
Casey Research, LLC.

The Room - 10/24/2008

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

Dear Readers,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

They are about to find out.

The Trial of Gold

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

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

The trial of Gold had begun.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Yes?" asked Judge Market, looking grumpy.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Oh, alright. Have at it."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Mr. Cuomo, any objection?"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Unflustered by the bluster, Galland began to speak.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Galland nonchalantly replied:

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

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

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

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

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

"Yes. Right away," said Galland.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"No, sir."

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

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

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

Funeral for an Economy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So, why do I relate that scene today?

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

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

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

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

How Long Will the Foreigners Support the Dollar?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Credit Sucks and Don't Forget It

Friend and correspondent Sunni forwarded this in, this week.

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

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

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

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

Laughing Out Loud (When No One Else Is Looking)

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

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

CEO - Chief Embezzlement Officer

CFO - Corporate Fraud Officer

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

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

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

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

BROKER - What my broker has made me.

STANDARD AND POOR – Your life in a nutshell

STOCK ANALYST - The idiot that just downgraded your stock.

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

FINANCIAL PLANNER - A guy whose phone has been disconnected.

MARKET CORRECTION - The day after you buy stocks.

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

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

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

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

PROFIT – An archaic word no longer in use.

Miscellany

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

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

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

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

Best Regards,

David Galland
Managing Director