The Zombie-fication Of Financial Markets

World markets appear to be increasingly transmogrifying into zombie markets.

This from the New York Times,

``A week after rattling global bourses and annoying allies with a unilateral ban on some forms of financial market speculation, Germany went much further Tuesday, proposing a law that would greatly broaden restrictions on several instruments that investors use to bet against stocks, bonds and currencies.

``Despite criticism that market regulation will be toothless unless it is enacted globally, the German finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, on Tuesday proposed extending a ban on what the draft legislation called “certain transactions that amplify the crisis.”

``There is broad support for such measures among leaders on both sides of the Atlantic, and some of the proposed rules are already in effect in the United States. Other European nations, however, have complained about Germany’s decision to act alone.

``“What the Germans are doing would be all the more effective if it were done at a coordinated European level,” Chantal Hughes, a spokeswoman for Michel Barnier, the European Union internal markets commissioner, said Tuesday.

``The draft law, released Tuesday by the German Finance Ministry, expands a ban on so-called naked short-selling to all stocks that have their primary listing in Germany, as well as on government bonds issued by euro countries.

``The law, which will take at least until September to win passage in Parliament, would also ban naked short-selling of the euro, and enshrine a ban on use of so-called credit default swaps to bet against European government bonds."

What the news reveals is how mainstream politicians think. They believe they can:

1.control or manipulate the markets at will, with no unintended effects. (yes, they seem to think that as deified entities, they are far superior to market forces and above the laws of scarcity)

2. prevent markets from revealing their natural state by controlling price signals. Thus, a market collapse markets isn't in their books. (yet the markets have been collapsing)

3. paper over solvency issues with massive liquidity injections and price control measures.

More demand for zombification...

From BCA Research,

``History shows that whenever authorities limit the commitment to a particular value, it encourages investors to quantify their worst case scenario (which during times of financial sector strains can be horrific), leading to a panic and meltdown. It is only once policymakers provide a credible unconditional commitment to put an end to the turmoil that investors’ fears calm, allowing financial markets to stabilize. Unfortunately, the “open-ended” nature of European policmakers’ commitment has come into question: German authorities moved to prevent speculative attacks by banning naked short selling for 10 German bank stocks as well as for CDS on regional government debt. Similarly, the ECB continues to reiterate their intent to sterilize purchases of public and private debt securities, i.e. not quantitative easing. The decision on short selling should not be a large surprise given that the primary motive of German politicians to participate in any rescue package has been to protect their domestic banks. The only good news is that German lawmakers have approved its country’s share of the $1 trillion bailout package. Still, the ECB will need to be much more forceful in its reflationary efforts. Bottom line: The ECB should reassure markets that any expansion of its balance sheet will be unwound in an orderly fashion once the economy is on a stable footing. In the meantime, substantial quantitative easing must be undertaken."

First of all, the claim of "history" as reference is dubious. That's because all these debt binges, rescue efforts and reflationary measures, have been unprecedented in scale and in scope, so there is basically no basis for comparison.

Besides in our own Asian crisis, an open-ended rescue was not an option, instead we were prescribed to adapt "austerity" programs via structural adjustment programs (SAP).

Only today, do we see the "need" for massive or aggressive substantial quantitative easing. In short, money printing as a policy is selective and conveniently applied, where it involves the developed nations. It becomes not only a fashion but a false sense of entitlement.

Yet as we keep pointing out, even Keynesian Hyman Minsky believes that massive government intervention leads to systemic bubbles by engendering the moral hazard conditions that sow the seeds of a bubble.

And likewise, as noted above, substantial QE's or money printing won't solve the solvency issues. They merely "kick the can" or defer and even aggravate the day of reckoning. Yet, history has never been quite digested, but misrepresented.

In the words of Thomas Paine, ``I remember a German farmer expressing as much in a few words as the whole subject requires; "money is money, and paper is paper."

``All the invention of man cannot make them otherwise. The alchemist may cease his labors, and the hunter after the philosopher's stone go to rest, if paper can be metamorphosed into gold and silver, or made to answer the same purpose in all cases."

If printing money is, indeed, the elixir to the world's problem, then Zimbabwe should have been the most prosperous and the world's largest exporter.

Besides, based on this line of reasoning, why do we or anyone need to work, if, at all, money printing can solve the issue of scarcity? Why do we even need the markets?

Governments Will Opt For The Inflation Route

``Many false arguments are used to defend inflationism. Least harmful is the claim that a moderate inflation does not do much harm. This has to be admitted. A small dose of poison is less pernicious than a large one. But this is no justification for administering the poison in the first place. It is claimed that in times of a grave emergency the use of means may be justified which in normal times would not be considered. But who is to decide whether the emergency is grave enough to warrant the application of dangerous measures? Every government and every political party in power is inclined to regard the difficulties it has to cope with as quite extraordinary and to conclude that any means for combatting them is justified. The drug addict, who says he will abstain from tomorrow on, will never conquer the drug habit. We have to adopt a sound policy today, not tomorrow.”-Ludwig von Mises, Interventionism: An Economic Analysis, Inflation and Credit Expansion

It’s pretty naïve for any expert to suggest that governments won’t be inflating away their liabilities. That’s principally a function of “Post hoc ergo propter hoc” (after this, because of this) fallacy. That’s also because they have retrofitted on their selected facts to their argument which leads to their preferred conclusion-deflation.

First, such argument betrays the incontrovertible avalanche of evidences from the current actions of policymakers.

And most importantly, the primary sin of such flawed argument is that it basically ignores the political nature of governments and its inflationary tendencies.

For instance, the US Federal Reserve continues to expand its balance sheet this week. According to the Wall Street Journal Blog, ``The Fed’s balance sheet expanded again in the latest week, rising to $2.072 trillion from $2.069 trillion, but the expansion highlighted the recent shift in the makeup. The increase came solely from purchases of mortgage backed securities, Treasurys and agency debt.”

Figure 3: T2 Partners: Why There Is More Pain To Come

Possible reasons for these current actions by the US Federal Reserve:

One, the US Federal Reserve could be positioning against expected losses arising from forthcoming mortgage resets from Alt-A and prime mortgages (see figure 3) as well as potential bank losses from the struggling commercial real estate mortgages.

And second, the US Federal Reserve could be providing “liquidity” (euphemism for inflating the system) in anticipation of the seasonal weakness for the stock market.

Or most likely it could be a combination of both factors.

Policy Support For Stock Markets

While the Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke doesn’t explicitly declare that Federal Reserve policies are meant to directly/indirectly support the US stock market to paint the impression of recovery, we must be reminded that Mr. Bernanke sees the stock market as playing a very crucial role in the macro economy which, for him, deserves support.

As he wrote in 2000, A Crash Course for Central Bankers, ``History proves, however, that a smart central bank can protect the economy and the financial sector from the nastier side effects of a stock market collapse.” (bold highlight mine)

So ignoring the policy biases, if not the underlying ideology which undergirds such biases, of the incumbent authorities would seem like a major misdiagnosis.

Mr. Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge provides us with very convincing evidence (see figure 4)

Figure 4: Zero Hedge: Correlation Of S&P 500 Performance With Fed Monetization Activities Since Start Of QE

Notes Mr. Durden (bold highlights mine), ``since the launch of the Fed's Quantitative Easing, aka Monetization, program, the value of the Total Securities Held Outright on the Fed's Balance Sheet has increased by $917 billion- from $584 billion to $1.5 trillion. This has been accompanied by an almost linear increase in the S&P 500 Index, from 721 at QE announcement on March 18 to 1033 yesterday. This $917 billion in extra liquidity, instead of igniting an inflationary spark, as the QE program was designed to do, is now (metaphorically) sloshing around bank basements.

``As a reminder: the most recent reading of Total Deposit Reserves was... $886 billion dollars: An almost dollar for dollar match with the increase in Securities Held Outright of $917 billion. And instead of this excess money hitting broader aggregates such as M2 or MZM, it is held by the banks, who proceed to buy securities outright on their own, either Treasuries or Equities. Apply the proper "money multiplier" to get the monetary impact on the S&P 500, as a result of the banks not lending these excess reserves, and instead simply speculating with it, and you will likely get the increase in the market cap of the S&P since the launch of QE.”

So like in China, where the explosion of bank lending have seeped through the real estate markets and stock markets, it is likely that the extra reserves provided for by the Federal Reserve to its banking system has equally powered the US stock market to its present levels.

As you may observe, the political decision making process (choosing to support one industry over another) is vastly intertwined or deeply entrenched with the performance of asset pricing dynamics.

Political Nature of Inflation

Will the US refrain from inflating away its system?

Harvard’s Professor Kenneth Rogoff gives as a clue, `` Government backstops work because taxpayers have deep pockets, but no pocket is bottomless. And when governments, particularly large ones, get into trouble, there is no backstop. With government debt levels around the world reaching heights usually seen only after wars, it is obvious that the current strategy is not sustainable…

``We are constantly reassured that governments will not default on their debts. In fact, governments all over the world default with startling regularity, either outright or through inflation. Even the U.S., for example, significantly inflated down its debt in the 1970s, and debased the gold value of the dollar from $20 per ounce to $34 in the 1930s.”

So the US is faced with two choices, either inflate or default.

Yet the most attractive choice for the current crop of policymakers would likely be the inflation route.

Aside from economic ideology, the immediate triumphalism from present policies as manifested in the market actions will unlikely prompt for ‘policy exit’ soon. Why stop the party when everything has gone groovy?

The party has to go on, even if policymakers today chatter on “exit strategies”.

This has been general the theme from the officialdom seen from Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper, China’s Premier Wen Jiabao, Governor Mervyn King of the Bank of England, Subir Gokarn, a candidate for the for the deputy governor’s post at the Reserve Bank of India, European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet, and US Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Donald Kohn.

Yet it would take humongous amount of money (or debt/credit) to sustain the present system.

Mr. Doug Noland of the Credit Bubble Bulletin estimates that $2-2.5 trillion of new or fresh credit is required to support the financial system.

And with markets dependent on government backstop, the only principal source of credit creation would likely emanate from the US government.

Mr. Noland writes (bold emphasis added), ``In this post-Wall Street Bubble environment, only government and government-related Credit retains sufficient “moneyness” in the marketplace. Systemic reflation today depends on a massive inflation of this government helicopter “money.”…

``As I have stressed repeatedly, in the neighborhood of $2.5 TN of non-financial Credit growth is required to stem systemic implosion – a massive Credit expansion with only our federal government up to the challenge. It is this fundamental facet of Bubble economies – a maladjusted economic structure sustained only through ongoing Credit excess – that prohibits Washington from extricating itself from very public “private sector” intrusions. Fixated on the notion of sustainable recovery, policymakers will not be Dialing Back from massive borrowing, spending, or market backstopping endeavors. And this gets to the core of the unquantifiable costs of failing to rein in Credit and asset Bubbles during the boom.”

For global governments (especially for those havocked by the bubble) working to extend their presence over the marketplace reveals of the operating political nature of the inflation process. The G-20s recent move to “strengthen financial regulation” is an example of such manifestation.

The more the government intervention becomes entrenched into the system or the marketplace, the greater their perceived need for inflation.

As Professor Thorsten Polleit explains (bold highlights mine), ``Under a regime of government-controlled money, it is a political decision whether or not the money stock changes — that is, whether there will be ongoing inflation (a rise in the money stock) or deflation (a decline in the money stock).

``Governments have a marked preference for increasing the money stock. It is a tool of government aggrandizement. Inflation allows the state to finance its own income, public deficits, and elections, encouraging a growing number of people to coalesce with state power.

``A government holding a monopoly over the money supply has, de facto, unlimited power to change the money stock in any direction and at any time that is deemed politically desirable.”

Hence, where the marketplace operates under the iron visible hands of governments, the understanding of the role and the incentives driving governments’ policymaking is pivotal to the analysis of asset pricing dynamics.

Ponzi Financing Requires The Intensive Use Of The Printing Press

Nonetheless it would probably take increasingly more than $2.5 trillion of credit to sustain the present system going forward, as the marketplace has been operating under Ponzi financing dynamics.

Policymakers appear to be in admission that the current conditions of the global economy seem operating under the backdrop of rising asset prices instead of a vigorous economic recovery, hence their alleged aversion to withdraw stimulus programs presently in place.

This phase is otherwise known as Ponzi financing.

The credit cycle as defined by Hyman Minsky constitutes 3 stages: Hedge financing, Speculative financing and Ponzi Financing.

As we described in September 2008 article, Global Markets: From “Minksy Moment” To The “Mises Moment”, ``Minsky’s model actually basically depicts of the credit cycle underpinning the business cycle, where credit transforms from a function of HEDGE financing (ability to pay principal and interest) to SPECULATIVE financing (ability to pay interest only, which needs a liquid market to enable refinancing and debt rollovers) and finally to PONZI Financing (basic operations cannot service both interest and principal and strictly relies on rising asset prices to service outstanding liabilities).”

In other words, the key to sustaining the credit cycle of Ponzi financing means sustained elevation of asset prices. It commands the feedback loop mechanism of collateral values and lending activities.

To quote George Soros, ``When people are eager to borrow and the banks are eager to lend, the value of the collateral rises in self-reinforcing manner and vice versa. Thus the act of lending activates a reflexive relationship.”

And that means a pyramiding scale of credit growth in order to maintain the momentum or trend of rising prices.

Yet this serves as another characteristic of the inflation process.

As Professor Hans F. Sennholz wrote (bold emphasis mine), ``But as certain as there must be a readjustment, just as determined are our planners to stave off the day of reckoning. And it is true that this can be done — temporarily. The consequences of policies of inflation and credit expansion, as far as the trade cycle is concerned, can temporarily be postponed through an intensification and acceleration of the depreciation process.

``That is to say, our monetary planners can temporarily avert the inevitable decline and readjustment through an intensified operation of the printing presses. As all political parties are dead set against any economic readjustment, they are all ready and determined to resort to this tasty but tragic medicine in case the boom economy should taper off during their tenure of office.”

Thus, the printing press will continue to be the key towards asset pricing dynamics.

Essentially, deeply embedded mainstream economic ideology, policy biases, the political nature of governments, the incentive (political benefits) of governments to inflate, privileges (minimal costs) from seignorage and the preference for credit driven economic growth or Ponzi financing are the principal factors that would influence governments to favor inflation as a means of addressing over-indebtedness.

As we concluded in The US Dollar Index’s Seasonality As Barometer For Stocks, ``Bottom line: Inflation is a political process. It would be difficult, if not suicidal, to take a contradictory stand against US authorities, when we recognize that the policy thrust has been to use the technology known as the printing press, to achieve a substantially reduced purchasing power for the US dollar.”

It wouldn’t be prudent to resist, oppose or contradict the general market trend and or of governments adamantly pursuing the inflation route.

That would be tantamount to standing in front of a speeding truck.

Do Governments View Rising Gold Prices As An Ally Against Deflation?

``One day the price of gold will be higher than the Dow Jones.”-Dr. Marc Faber

As gold nears its all time high see figure 7, public awareness in gold seems to be snowballing.

Figure 7: World Gold Council: Two Remaining Currencies Where Gold Has Yet To Establish Record High

There are only two major currencies wherein gold trades below its record high; one is the US dollar and the other is the Japanese Yen.

The chart above courtesy of the World Gold Council was last updated February 13^th. But as of last Friday’s close, Gold in US dollar terms was seen nearly leveling on its previous high at 1,004.

When gold rises across all currencies, this is symptomatic of a systemic monetary disorder than just mere inflation. There appears to be an accelerating realization that paper currencies issued and guaranteed by the global governments are becoming less sacrosanct, or people have been exhibiting diminished “faith” on the present financial architecture or this has been reflective of paper money’s “race to the bottom” or the effect of the collective efforts by governments to debauch or even destroy their currencies.

Nonetheless, a recent article at the Financial Times had this unusual observation; it noted that rising gold prices seem to be operating under the auspices of governments.

This from Mr. Steve Ellis of RAB Gold Strategy at the FT.com,

``Speaking to central bankers, this is the first time I can recall them actually favouring a high gold price. Normally they see high gold prices as a lack of trust in the financial system (not to mention their ability as central bankers). Alan Greenspan, the former Fed chairman, for example used to target a gold price of around $400 to $500 an ounce.

``Recently, the central bankers have become more enamoured of higher gold prices as it would suggest that their attempts to stave off deflation were starting to work.

``Central bankers in favour of higher gold prices? Things really have changed.”

Gold’s moniker, the “barbaric metal” had been contrived by interventionists because it functioned as rabid nemesis to elastic currency or the ability of authorities to inflate the system to appease the political gods.

Thus, could central bankers truly see gold as an ally against their campaign deflation?

Three reasons why we think this is possible.

Inflation Expectations Needs To Be Reshaped

One, for central bankers, it’s all about signaling channels. This is usually known as the managing of inflation expectations, where the central bank communicates to the markets their policy intentions as to project stability.

In a recent speech, US Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke said, ``increased clarity about the FOMC’s views regarding longer-term inflation should help to better stabilize the public’s inflation expectations, thus contributing to keeping actual inflation from rising too high or falling too low.”

You see central bankers believe that inflation can function like a light switch that can be turned on or off, or like a genie that be called in and out of his lamp.

Unfortunately, this is an academic and bureaucratic delusion. In as much as authorities failed to predict the catastrophic consequences of a bursting bubble, they’ve nonetheless equally botched any attempt to rein its deflationary reaction. So they are now hoping that by unduly taking on the inflation risk, they can manage to steer it successfully once the crisis pasts. But like the recent activities, the inflation genie will most likely elude them, until the next crisis surfaces.

Yet by pushing and maintaining interest rates at near zero levels, and the policy shift to adopt the tactical measures of “quantitative easing”, most major central banks (US, Swiss, UK, Japan) appear to be communicating their desire to reignite inflation as means to restore the credit flow.

However, this hasn’t been the entire truth, as we have repeatedly pointed out- the colossal debt structures of the bursting bubble economies require governments to inflate away the real debt levels.

In addition, government’s use of the fiscal medicine to deal with national or domestic economic malaise serves as a parallel approach to stoke inflation in the economy regardless of how ineffectual such efforts are.

Nevertheless, we have almost every government in the world today rehabilitating their domestic economies by instituting inflationary policies. Thus, if gold’s rise should signify as resurgent “inflation” then governments are likely to reticently “cheer” on it.

Enhancement of the Balance Sheet of the US Federal Reserve

Two, if the aim of the US Federal Reserve is to enhance its balance sheet, a revaluation of gold reserves might be necessary.

Using the “backing theory”, which means that the currency’s worth is determined by the underlying assets and liabilities of the issuing agency (wikipedia.org), the Federal Reserve’s attempt to debase its currency is done by absorbing more toxic assets to its balance sheet.

According to Philipp Bagus and Markus H. Schiml, ``Since the crisis broke out, the Fed has continuously weakened the quality of the dollar by weakening its balance sheet. In fact, the assets the Federal Reserve holds have deteriorated tremendously. These assets back the liability side of the balance sheet, which mainly represents the monetary base of the dollar. The assets of the Fed, thereby, hold up the value of the dollar. At the end of the day, it is these assets that the Fed can use to defend the dollar's value externally and internally. Thus, for example, it could sell its foreign exchange reserves to buy back dollars, reducing the amount of dollars outstanding. From the point of view of the buyer of the foreign exchange reserves, this transaction is a de facto redemption.” (bold highlight mine)

Hence, under the backing theory, it isn’t just quantitative easing (printing of money) that determines the currency value but also the qualitative aspects (or what it buys for the asset side of its balance sheet).

Again from Mssrs Bagus and Schiml, ``Despite of all these efforts, credit markets still have not returned to normal. What will the Fed do next? Interest rates are already practically at zero. However, the dollar still has value that can be exploited to keep the experiment going. Bernanke's new tool is the so-called quantitative easing. Quantitative easing is when a central bank with interest rates already near zero continues to buy assets, thus injecting reserves into the banking system. In fact, quantitative easing is a subsection of qualitative easing. Qualitative easing can be defined as the sum of the policies that weaken the quality of a currency.”

Simply said, as the Federal Reserve increasingly digests poor quality of assets into its balance sheet, this effectively reduces its equity ratio from which would eventually translate to its insolvency.

Hence, this would leave the US Federal Reserve with only two options, according to Mssrs Bagus and Schiml, ``Only two things can save the Fed at this point. One is a bailout by the federal government. This recapitalization could be financed by taxes or by monetizing government debt in another blow to the value of the currency.”

``The other possibility is concealed in the hidden reserves of the Fed's gold position, which is only valued at $42.44 per troy ounce on the balance sheet. A revaluation of the gold reserves would boost the equity ratio of the Fed.”

High gold prices would eventually be required for gold to be revalued to enhance the balance sheet of the US Federal Reserve.

End To Gold Manipulation?

Lastly, the surging gold prices suggest an end to possible gold manipulation.

It has been long contended by groups like the GATA that central bank gold reserves has been unofficially “sold”, through lease, swaps and derivatives to the markets, hence gold stashed in the central bank books have simply been accounting entries.

Mr. Robert Blumen of Mises.org cites a report from where a broker endorsed the suspicion of gold manipulation; says Mr. Blumen, ``The major conclusion of the report is that the western central banks have sold a larger fraction of their gold reserves than they acknowledge in their official statements. The gold has entered the market through derivatives such as leases, swaps, the writing of call options against the gold. The sale of the gold is obscured in the central banks books through the representation of leased, swapped, and otherwise encumbered, aggregated together with actual physical gold held in vaults as a single asset on their books. An estimated 10,000-15,000 tons of gold has entered the market since 1996 (compared to an official number of 2,000-3,000) through these mechanisms, according to the report. The purpose of these covert gold sales is part of a larger effort to disable the functioning of inflation indicators, which operate to limit central bank credit expansion.”

Gold’s recent rise has been primarily investment demand driven, see figure 8.

Figure 8: gold.org: Surging Investment Demand

The implication of which is a shift in the public’s outlook of gold as merely a “commodity” (jewelry, and industrial usage) towards gold’s restitution as “store of value” function or as “money”.

The greater the investment demand, the stronger the bullmarket for gold.

If the estimated number of 10,000 to 15,000 tons, is anywhere close to being accurate, then this translates to 40-50% of world central bank gold reserves of 29,697.1 tonnes (gold.org as of December 2008) as having been “shorted”.

Therefore, “short” positions in a rampaging gold bullmarket will extrapolate to additional national balance sheet losses. This implies that world governments, whom are net short positions, will likely be net buyers in the near future.

Although I haven’t been totally convinced about the “gold manipulation theory”, I am, however, open to it, in the understanding of the political nature of central banking. Central bankers don’t want competition or interference from gold, thus, the odds that price controls may have attempted in the past.

The implication is that the bullmarket in gold will possibly be accelerating once governments’ covers open short positions. And if we see $100 dollar a day moves, perhaps this theory might be validated.

And since the gold market is an iota or about 6% or $5 trillion (165,000 tonnes of above ground gold) relative to the overall financial markets, this suggests that a bullmarket market will likewise spillover to important key commodities as silver, copper and oil.

Moreover, any panic into gold will likewise see a panic to own producers, which functions as proxy to gold by virtue of reserves.

For now, central bankers would likely to be “sleeping with the enemy”.