The Historic Gold and Bond Bull-Market Tango

Under the Gold Standard, or any other metallic standard, the value of money is not really derived from gold. The fact is, that the necessity of redeeming the money they issue in gold, places upon the issuers a discipline which forces them to control the quantity of money in an appropriate manner; I think it is quite as legitimate to say that under a gold standard it is the demand of gold for monetary purposes which determines that value of gold, as the common belief that the value which gold has in other uses determines the value of money. The gold standard is the only method we have yet found to place a discipline on government, and government will behave reasonably only if it is forced to do so--Friedrich A. Hayek 

The Historic Gold and Bond Bull-Market Tango 

Remember my outlook on Gold last February? 

What you are about to see is a defining monumental process in financial history!  

Lo and Behold, Gold’s phenomenal rise against central banking’s Fiat Money standard! 

Aside from all other (fiat) currencies, gold prices broke to record highs this week against the last holdover, the USD.  

Oh, Gold!!!! February 23, 2020  

 

From the US perspective, record USD gold prices have been attained as USTs hit record low yields amidst a flattening curve. Furthermore, gold prices have surged along with a resurgent buildup of global negative-yielding bonds, even as personal savings rate hit record highs.  

There are those who want to excoriate Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman for saying that inflation was everywhere and always a monetary phenomenon. But he also proposed the Permanent Income Hypothesis. The Permanent Income Hypothesis, according to the Wikipedia, supposes that a person's consumption at a point in time is determined not just by their current income but also by their expected income in future years—their "permanent income". In its simplest form, the hypothesis states that changes in permanent income, rather than changes in temporary income, are what drive the changes in a consumer's consumption patterns. Its predictions of consumption smoothing, where people spread out transitory changes in income over time, depart from the traditional Keynesian emphasis on the marginal propensity to consume. It has had a profound effect on the study of consumer behavior, and provides an explanation for some of the failures of Keynesian demand management techniques. 

Though the monetary mechanism is necessary for inflation to occur, it is insufficient. Other real factors are material to its existence. 

The surge in personal savings appears to reinforce Friedman’s PIH theory.   

The deflationary impact of a recession must be remedied by an increase in savings.  

Wrote the dean of the Austrian school Murray N. Rothbard*,  

Furthermore, deflation will hasten adjustment in yet another way: for the accounting error of inflation is here reversed, and businessmen will think their losses are more, and profits less, than they really are. Hence, they will save more than they would have with correct accounting, and the increased saving will speed adjustment by supplying some of the needed deficiency of savings. 

*C. Secondary Developments of the Business Cycle; Man, Economy, and State, with Power and Market 

Even in the Philippines, the same process is in motion. This excerpt showcases how businesses are likely to react to the disruptions caused by work stoppage policies to contain the virus. 

From Philstar (August 2): Enterprises hit by the pandemic may have to pause operations temporarily once their cash flow turns negative and consider other opportunities in agriculture and digital space, Presidential Adviser on Entrepreneurship and Go Negosyo founder Joey Concepcion said. “My advice to many of our MSMEs (micro, small and medium enterprises) and I always share this with them: You have to have a plan. You have to remain cash flow positive and if you turn cash flow negative, at a certain point in time, don’t wait until it depletes your entire working capital or even your family’s savings.” “Close the business for the time being because it’s not going to be worth wasting all your family’s savings and it will create more problems for you. That’s my advice to many of our entrepreneurs,” he said in an interview on the The Chiefs aired on One News.” This counsel goes against the mainstream ivory tower based ludicrous prescription that one should take advantage of low rates and borrow to spend. 

Furthermore, based on the analysis of sectoral balances, fiscal deficit equates to net private saving or private sector surplus. So the financing of the US record deficit would translate to massive increases in domestic and or foreign private savings. 

That buildup of savings appears to be consistent with the recent spike in deficits. 

However, the US isn’t the only nation experiencing unprecedented deficits. Most of the world have ramped up public spending such that McKinsey and the IMF expect the global deficit to reach a historic $11 trillion in 2020! That’s about 12% of the $90 trillion global GDP. 

So if sopping up of savings wouldn’t be sufficient, global central banks are likely to be filling in the vacuum through debt monetization. Global debt hit a record of $258 trillion or 331% of the Global GDP in the 1Q. But debt issuance picked up speed in the 2Q, according to the Reuters, "Overall gross debt issuance hit an “eye-watering” record of $12.5 trillion in the second quarter, compared with a quarterly average of $5.5 trillion in 2019, the IIF said. It noted that 60% of those issues came from governments". 

Nevertheless, the current amount of money printing may be inadequate to offset structural deflationary forces embedded in the system, such as excessive debt, overcapacity in several significant sectors, and zombie financing, as well as, recent policies used to constrict the spread of the pandemic.   

For instance, even after the $2.2 trillion bailout package called the Cares Act and the $3 trillion expansion of the Federal Reserve’s assets, the US GDP suffered a 9.5% YoY (32.9% quarter annualized)! But their stock markets rocketed instead. 

For a broader purview of the economic damage caused by recent policies to contain Covid-19:  Singapore suffered a 41.2% contraction quarter on quarter and 12.6% year on year. Hong Kong shrank by 9% YoY. The Euro-zone area declined by 12.1% YoY while the US suffered a 9.5% YoY (32.9% quarter annualized) even after the $2.2 trillion Cares Act and the $3 trillion expansion of the Federal Reserve’s assets. China escaped a recession by posting a positive 3.2%. 

As an aside, the Philippines will be reporting its 2Q GDP on August 6th. Based on the PSA’s data on Gross Regional Domestic Product, the NCR and CALABARZON area contributes about 52% of the total statistical economy (2018).  Along with the rest of Luzon, during the ECQ or MECQ period, economic activities were mostly suspended within these areas.  And strict quarantine policies were also implemented in parts of Visaya and the Mindanao region.  If only 30% of the capacity of the CALABARZON and NCR had been in operations in 2Q, not counting other parts of the nation, how much loss of output will these translate to?    

Lastly, inflation is not set on the stone by Federal Reserve asset purchases or QE as exhibited by the immediate post World War II era. Though monetary actions matter, again, many other factors will determine inflation’s appearance.   

 

As the Eurodollar wiz Alhambra Partner’s Jeffrey Snider wrote of the Fed’s inflationary panic episodes post-World War II:  

Like the 1947-48 bond buying episode (the Fed’s inflation panic), we’re supposed to believe that the central bank played the pivotal role in keeping the financial situation orderly, trading off that priority by risking an inflationary breakout. Bullshit. That’s the myth that has been conjured, hardly in keeping with the reality of the situation. 

Sure, the Fed monetized the bills during WWII, but so what? The depressionary conditions rampant throughout the markets and economy led the private system to easily monetize everything else, the vast majority. Even the Fed’s inflation panic in bond buying was a tiny drop in the bucket. 

Yields said so. 

Furthermore, record money supply’s transmission into street inflation represents a time-consuming complex process that will have to confront opposing forces that may offset its impact. And there will be action-reaction feedback loops that contribute to the process.   For instance, if money creation adds to the money supply, debt defaults subtract to it. 

That is, should global central banks succeed in the re-combusting of inflation, this would only happen when inflationary monetary forces overwhelm deflationary structures, which would take time. 

As I concluded last February, 

Whether street inflation surges or not, in reaction to the massive supply-side disruptions from a crucible of real adverse forces in the face of central bank actions, the escalating uncharted experiments on monetary inflation have pointed to the magnification of uncertainty on a global scale. 

The bottom line: Gold's uprising against central banking fiat currencies warn that the world is in the transition of entering the eye of the financial-economic hurricane! 

Infographics: All of the World’s Money and Markets in One Visualization

An infographic on the estimated stock of the world's money, credit and asset markets from the Visual Capitalist. They write:

All of the World’s Money and Markets in One Visualization

How much money exists in the world?

Strangely enough, there are multiple answers to this question, and the amount of money that exists changes depending on how we define it. The more abstract definition of money we use, the higher the number is.

In this data visualization of the world’s total money supply, we wanted to not only compare the different definitions of money, but to also show powerful context for this information. That’s why we’ve also added in recognizable benchmarks such as the wealth of the richest people in the world, the market capitalizations of the largest publicly-traded companies, the value of all stock markets, and the total of all global debt.

The end result is a hierarchy of information that ranges from some of the smallest markets (Bitcoin = $5 billion, Silver above-ground stock = $14 billion) to the world’s largest markets (Derivatives on a notional contract basis = somewhere in the range of $630 trillion to $1.2 quadrillion).

In between those benchmarks is the total of the world’s money, depending on how it is defined. This includes the global supply of all coinage and banknotes ($5 trillion), the above-ground gold supply ($7.8 trillion), the narrow money supply ($28.6 trillion), and the broad money supply ($80.9 trillion).

All figures are in the equivalent of US dollars.

Courtesy of: The Money Project

A bonus chart from the late economist John Exter with his eponymous Exter's Pyramid

The table represents the proportionality of fiat money/credit/derivatives with gold (chart from goldcore.com)

Russia’s Collapsing Ruble is a Textbook Example of Fiat Inflation

Last February I noted that “Russia suffers from both property bubble fuelled by credit inflation and runaway local government debt”, such that a domestic turmoil had already been occurring even outside the current collapse of crude oil (which began last July) and sanctions imposed by Western nations. Economic sanctions came a month after. 

The Russian ruble has already been plagued by capital flight from residents rather than from foreigners. I warned too “The point worth repeating is that every conditions are unique and that there are no “line in the sand” or specific thresholds before a revulsion on domestic credit occurs”

Presently, as the ruble collapse continues, the average Russians have reportedly been concerned over the risks of  bank runs

At the Mises Blog, Carmen Elena Dorobăț lucidly explains the growing risk of what  I warned earlier as “revulsion on domestic credit” on Russia as textbook symptom of fiat inflation (bold mine)

In January 2014, 33 Russian rubles exchanged for one US dollar. In December 2014, the amount has more than doubled, reaching 77.2 rubles per dollar on December 16^th, a day some dubbed Russia’s Black Tuesday. Russian central bankers raised interest rates by 6.5% overnight, and spent $2 billion to stave off the depreciation. In total, propping up the currency has cost $10 billion since the beginning of the month, and $70 billion since the beginning of the year.

In spite of it all—or because of it all—Russia’s problems are far from over. Default looms closer, as its foreign (public and private) debt is estimated at around $600 billion, and foreign-currency reserves only at $300 billion. The government appealed to the public to be ‘calm and rational’, stressing the need to keep rubles and sell foreign currency. Russians did however go to buy more durable goods, such as cars and home appliances; and although there’s no flight into real goods yet, the tendency is forming in that direction.

The media, economists, and Putin himself blamed Western financial sanctions over the Ukraine conflict—together with other ‘nuisances’ such as oil prices—for Russia’s woes. Indeed, these factors precipitated the slide in purchasing power: sanctions made many local companies unable to refinance their dollar debts, and low oil prices drained some of Russia’s foreign currency reserves. With fewer (and more expensive) imports, rubles were spent and re-spent on domestic goods, where they bid up prices and led to double-digit inflation. But at the bottom of it lie, as you’d expect, mainly monetary factors. Over the last 16 years, the Bank of Russia’s balance sheet rose from about 9 billion rubles to 2.1 trillion this month (an all-time high), while monetary aggregates increased up to a factor of 30 over the same period. Part of the new money was printed to directly fund (military) industries or state-owned companies.

In this light, Russia’s case isn’t special, but just a textbook example of currency collapse due to fiat inflation. It resembles the more recent experiences in Argentina or Venezuela, as well as a possible future of the United States, if for some reason or another the dollar can no longer make its way into foreign (Chinese) bank vaults. But it is nevertheless an interesting development for two reasons. First, it shows just how important international central bank cooperation is for the inflationary policies of national governments. At the moment, Russia cannot rely on other monetary authorities to pressure their banking systems into rolling over its debts. Nor can it rely on an IMF loan, as it did in the 1998 emerging market crisis. Its tensioned political relations have left it alone to pick up the pieces of its reckless monetary policy.

Second, it would seem that both the media and the general public are most disillusioned with a government that loses control over the monetary system. As a result, this week has been perhaps the only time over the last year when Putin’s grip on power has been in doubt. It’s no surprise, however, given that in a world of fiat currencies, bank notes are only backed by other bank notes, and by a fickle, passing trust.

As I wrote below “Take away credit and liquidity, confidence dissipates which means that the whole structure collapses.” This applies not only to stocks but to the incumbent monetary system.

Former Fed Chief Paul Volcker on the Gold Standard

Writes Ralph Benko at the Forbes.com (bold added)

There is an almost superstitious truculence on the part of world monetary elites to consider the restoration of the gold standard.  And yet, the Bank of England published a rigorous and influential study in December 2011, Financial Stability Paper No. 13, Reform of the International Monetary and Financial System.  This paper contrasts the empirical track record of the fiduciary dollar standard directed by Secretary Connally and brought into being (and then later administered by) Volcker.  It determines that the fiduciary dollar standard has significantly underperformed both the Bretton Woods gold exchange standard and the classical gold standard in every major category.

As summarized by Forbes.com contributor Charles Kadlec, the Bank of England found:

When compared to the Bretton Woods system, in which countries defined their currencies by a fixed rate of exchange to the dollar, and the U.S. in turn defined the dollar as 1/35 ^th of an ounce of gold:

• Economic growth is a full percentage point slower, with an average annual increase in real per-capita GDP of only 1.8%
• World inflation of 4.8% a year is 1.5 percentage point higher;
• Downturns for the median countries have more than tripled to 13% of the total period;
• The number of banking crises per year has soared to 2.6 per year, compared to only one every ten years under Bretton Woods;

That said, the Bank of England paper resolves by calling for a rules-based system, without specifying which rule.  Volcker himself presents as oddly reticent about considering the restoration of the “golden rule.” Yet, as recently referenced in this column, in his Foreword to Marjorie Deane and Robert Pringle’s The Central Banks (Hamish Hamilton, 1994) he wrote:

It is a sobering fact that the prominence of central banks in this century has coincided with a general tendency towards more inflation, not less. By and large, if the overriding objective is price stability, we did better with the nineteenth-century gold standard and passive central banks, with currency boards, or even with ‘free banking.’ The truly unique power of a central bank, after all, is the power to create money, and ultimately the power to create is the power to destroy.

The coming horrid consequences from the rampant unsound money policies based on the incumbent fiduciary dollar-central banking standard will eventually force the world to look and consider not only the re-adaption of gold standard but even possibly a depoliticization of money (which means End the FED, end central banking).

End the Fed movement have been sprouting even in Germany (see video below)

Video: Peter Klein on the Fundamental Flaws of Thomas Piketty’s view of Inequality

Professor and Mises Institute’s Executive Director Peter G. Klein exposes on the fundamental flaws of Thomas Piketty’s view of inequality. From the Mises Blog

I’d like to add more...

The above chart is from Picketty’s book. 

Editors of the New York Sun uses Picketty’s chart to expose on a major source of inequality—the fiat money standard—which unfortunately Mr. Piketty fails to account for.

From the Zero Hedge [bold fonts and underline original]

Well, feature the chart that Professor Piketty publishes showing inequality in America. This appears in the book at figure 9.8; a similar version, shown alongside here, is offered on his Web site. It’s an illuminating chart. It shows the share of national income of the top decile of the population. It started the century at a bit above 40% and edged above 45% in the Roaring Twenties. It plunged during the Great Depression and edged down in World War II, and then steadied out, until we get to the 1970s. Something happened then that caused income inequality to start soaring. The top decile's share of income went from something like 33% in 1971 to above 47% by 2010. 

Hmmm. What could account for that? Could it be the last broadcast of the “Lawrence Welk Show?” Or the blast off of the Apollo 14 mission to the Moon? Or could it have something to do with the mysterious D.B. Cooper, who bailed out of the plane he hijacked, never to be seen again? A timeline of 1971 offers so many possibilities. But, say, what about the possibility that it was in the middle of 1971, in August, that America closed the gold window at which it was supposed to redeem in specie dollars presented by foreign central banks. That was the default that ended the era of the Bretton Woods monetary system.

That’s the default that opened the age of fiat money. Or the era that President Nixon supposedly summed up in with Milton Friedman’s immortal words, “We’re all Keynesians now.” This is an age that has seen a sharp change in unemployment patterns. Before this date, unemployment was, by today’s standards, low. This was a pattern that held in Europe (these columns wrote about it in “George Soros’ Two Cents”) and in America (“Yellen’s Missing Jobs”). From 1947 to 1971, unemployment in America ran at the average rate of 4.7%; since 1971 the average unemployment rate has averaged 6.4%. Could this have been a factor in the soaring income inequality that also emerged in the age of fiat money? 

This is the question the liberals don’t want to discuss, even acknowledge…

The New York Sun’s conclusion

There is an irony here for Monsieur Piketty. It was France who gave us Jacques Rueff, the economist who had the clearest comprehension of the importance of sound money based on gold specie. He was, among other things, an adviser of Charles De Gaulle. It was De Gaulle who in 1965, called a thousand newspapermen together and spoke of the importance of gold as the central element of an international monetary system that would put large and small, rich and poor nations on the same plane. We ran the complete text of Professor Piketty’s book “Capital” through the Sun’s own “Electrically-operated Savvy Sifter” and were unable to find, even once, the name of Rueff.

The same kind of inequality induced by central banking fiat money bubble blowing policies plagues the Philippines.

It’s funny how the statist mindset works.

Step 1. Statists adapt bubble blowing policies. But when a bust surfaces, they blame capitalism for various societal ills such as “inequality” (straw man). This leads to Step two:  calls for more financial repression via inflationism and taxes which leads back to Step 1.

So the statist logic has all been about circularity or doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Some people call this insanity.