Tuesday, June 12, 2012

As Oil Prices Slump, China Imports Record Amount of Oil

China has not just been buying RECORD amounts of gold, it seems that China has also been gobbling up RECORD amounts of crude oil.

From Bloomberg,

China, the world’s second-biggest oil consumer, increased crude imports in May to a record high as refineries raised processing rates and oil prices declined.

The country bought a net 25.3 million metric tons, or 5.98 million barrels a day, more than it exported last month, according to data published today on the website of the Beijing- based General Administration of Customs. That compares with the previous high of 5.87 million barrels a day in February.

The jump in oil purchases helped spur a 12.7 percent gain for the nation’s imports last month, exceeding economists’ estimates. Refineries boosted processing rates last month as some facilities resumed operations after scheduled maintenance while Brent oil in London entered a so-called bear market on June 1 after sliding more than 20 percent from this year’s peak.

“International crude oil prices have been falling in the past two months, so more crude was probably shipped in to fill commercial and state emergency stockpiles” as prices could rise again, Gong Jinshuang, a Beijing-based senior engineer at China National Petroleum Corp., the nation’s biggest oil company, said by telephone.

Purchases cost an average $120 a barrel, compared with about $123 in April, Bloomberg calculations from the customs data showed. China’s imports of crude were 25.48 million tons in May, while exports were 180,000 tons

image

A chart of soaring oil imports from Zero Hedge who rightly points out that this means China seemingly has not been hoarding the USD

Gold and oil functions as benchmark commodities or as lead commodities.

And as I recently pointed out

It could also be possible that China’s quickening pace of gold hoarding could be as insurance against a potential cataclysmic currency crisis that could be unleashed from political responses by major central banks to avert a global recession.

Add oil to the insurance factor or “flight to real value” on the increasing risk of a crack-up boom (currency crisis)

As the great Ludwig von Mises explained

with the progress of inflation more and more people become aware of the fall in purchasing power. For those not personally engaged in business and not familiar with the conditions of the stock market, the main vehicle of saving is the accumulation of savings deposits, the purchase of bonds and life insurance. All such savings are prejudiced by inflation. Thus saving is discouraged and extravagance seems to be indicated. The ultimate reaction of the public, the "flight into real values," is a desperate attempt to salvage some debris from the ruinous breakdown. It is, viewed from the angle of capital preservation, not a remedy, but merely a poor emergency measure. It can, at best, rescue a fraction of the saver's funds.

By the way, I have been reiterating the point that financial markets will be faced with sharp volatilities in both direction but with a downside bias.

image

Yesterday oil spiked up on the news of Spain’s bailout, but got smashed at the end of the trading session.

Clearly boom bust dynamics at work.

China’s New Loans Unexpectedly Surged in May

Some good news in China.

From Bloomberg,

China’s new loans exceeded estimates in May and more money went into longer-term lending, signaling support for investment projects that may help to prevent a deeper economic slowdown.

Local-currency lending was 793.2 billion yuan ($125 billion), the People’s Bank of China said on its website yesterday. That was the most on record for the month of May and more than analysts’ 700 billion yuan median forecast. Loans extended for a year or more accounted for 34 percent of the total, up from 28 percent in April.

Premier Wen Jiabao’s efforts to engineer a resurgence in the world’s second-biggest economy may be aided by the jump in lending and signs of resilience in exports. At the same time, industrial-output growth was close to the lowest since 2009 in May, indicating additional measures will still be needed after last week’s interest-rate cut.

“Over the past several months, investors have been concerned that a large share of loans was for short-term financing, and hence would not help boost growth as much as large investment projects,” said Zhang Zhiwei, the Hong Kong- based chief China economist at Nomura, who previously worked for the International Monetary Fund. “The rising share of medium and long-term loans in May helps address this concern.”

HSBC Holdings Plc (5) said new loans may surge to as much as 1 trillion yuan this month. Nomura’s Zhang said the proportion of longer-term lending remains “relatively low” and has room to rise as banks lend more to infrastructure projects.

‘More Impressive’

M2 money supply grew 13.2 percent last month from a year earlier, compared with an estimate of 12.9 percent, yesterday’s report showed. The gain was 12.8 percent in April. New lending was up from 681.8 billion yuan in April.

“The lending figures are all the more impressive because loan growth in the first half of the month was reportedly extremely weak,” said Mark Williams, an economist at Capital Economics Ltd. in London who formerly advised the U.K. Treasury on China. “These figures point to a sharp rebound in lending in late May and suggest that banks and borrowers have responded rapidly to the government’s new emphasis on supporting growth.”

The nation’s top economic planning agency, the National Development and Reform Commission, is speeding approvals for investment projects. Baosteel Group Corp. and Wuhan Iron & Steel Group last month secured permission to build factories after previous delays caused by overcapacity concerns.

Efforts to bolster growth also include reductions in bank reserve requirements and delays in tightening rules for lenders’ capital. China has no plan to introduce stimulus on the scale unleashed during the global crisis in 2008, according to the state-run Xinhua News Agency.

image

While this may put a floor on the current downdraft, it is not clear where the bulk of the longer-term lending is coming from.

Since there has been NO declared fiscal stimulus (YET) while the private sector seems on a lull, signs are that most of these growth emanates from state owned companies (SOEs), such as Baosteel Group Corp. and Wuhan Iron & Steel Group.

If this is true then China’s stealth stimulus have been redirected to SOEs.

Up to what extent will this covert stimulus be? That should be the main question.

China’s shadow banking system from SOEs, local and regional government agencies have already been faced with huge loans of questionable quality to the tune of $1.7 trillion. The implication is that China’s government will either tolerate further inflation of her existing bubble or that such dramatic (but desperate) moves may be symbolic—engineered to spur a bandwagon effect to fire up ‘confidence’ or perk up the ‘animal spirits’—and thus be limited.

Like how global financial markets initially responded to announcement of Spain’s bailout, where embattled bulls surged out of the gate but whose rally eventually foundered as reality sunk in, short term spikes—from bailouts or as the above account—should be reckoned as knee jerk reactions rather than sustainable trends.

Further vigilance is required. Pay close heed to the Shanghai index, the yuan and the commodity markets/currencies.

Monday, June 11, 2012

Quote of the Day: An Inevitable Unity to Market Phenomena

And it was realized that there is an inevitable unity to market phenomena that even power cannot undermine. It was discovered that in the social arena there is something at work that even the one holding power cannot bend and to which, in achieving his ends, he must conform no differently than in submitting to the laws of nature. In the entire history of human thought and the sciences, there has never been a greater discovery.

That’s from the great Ludwig von Mises, The Myth of the Failure of Capitalism in Volume 2 of the Selected Writings of Ludwig von Mises (sourced at the Mises Blog)

Many people carry the insane notion that they can defeat the laws of nature whether in sports, the financial markets, economics or socio-political policies. And the crowd just loves them. Unfortunately nature eventually prevails and exposes the fabled emperor has really no clothes.

At the end of the day, the market system conforms best to the laws of nature.

Does your Philhealth Contribution Help the Poor?

There has been this politically correct idea which attempts to rationalize private sector contribution to the Philippine national health universal coverage as having a charity effect of helping the underprivileged or the needy.

Let us examine if this claim is valid.

First what is PhilHealth?

From Wikipedia.org, (bold original)

The Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) was created in 1995 with the aim of placing a renewed emphasis on achieving universal coverage. It is categorized as a tax-exempt, government-owned and government-controlled corporation (GOCC) of the Philippines, and is attached to the Department of Health. It states its goal as insuring a sustainable national health insurance program for all.

So the essence of Philhealth’s function is supposedly a “national health insurance program”

But does Philhealth’s concept of insurance match with the real definition of insurance?

Here is the defintion of Insurance from Wikipedia.org (bold original)

Insurance is a form of risk management primarily used to hedge against the risk of a contingent, uncertain loss. Insurance is defined as the equitable transfer of the risk of a loss, from one entity to another, in exchange for payment. An insurer is a company selling the insurance; the insured, or policyholder, is the person or entity buying the insurance policy. The amount to be charged for a certain amount of insurance coverage is called the premium. Risk management, the practice of appraising and controlling risk, has evolved as a discrete field of study and practice.

So the concept of insurance is the EQUAL transfer of risk from contributors in exchange for payments called as Premium.

If I do not make a claim today on my insurance coverage funded by my accrued premium payments, then my share of my claim to the company’s resources gets transferred to OTHER premium payers who are in demand of the use of resources for one reason or another. Insurance thus is a transfer of risk from ONE premium payer to OTHER premium payer/s where the insurer tries to profit from matching the distribution of assets and liabilities over time.

Let us find out if there is an EQUAL transfer of risk based on how Philhealth is funded?

Again Wikipedia.org, (bold original, italics mine)

Funding for the scheme varies based on the population covered, although the majority of funds flow from general taxation. Premiums for the formal sector are set by law to be up to 3% of monthly income. Premiums for both the poor and the informal sector are 1,200 pesos annually (about 25 USD). However, the cost of insurance for the poor is fully subsidized by the central and local governments. National government allocate more than 9 billion pesos annually to meet its three-year target.

Funding by population is as follows:

-Formal sector: Employer and the employee split the required premium 50/50%.

-Indigents: Central and local governments fully subsidize, with local governments contributing (on average) 25% of the premium and national government contributing (on average) 75% of the premium.

-Retirees: Lifetime free membership for those who are 60 years old and older and have paid 10 years worth of premiums during employment in the formal sector.

-Non-poor, Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs), and others not eligible for other three categories: Premiums paid by individuals, referred to as the individual paying program (IPP).

Apparently there is NO equal transfer of risk as “premium” payments are mostly paid for or subsidized by taxes.

Who are covered by Philhealth’s programs? (italics mine)

PhilHealth coverage is theoretically available to the entire population. The enrollment process differs based on the population group. For example, all formal sector workers must enroll at the start of employment. The poor are identified and enrolled by the local government.

The population is tagged to one of the four major population categorizations:

-Formal sector

-Indigents that are financed by central and local governments

-Retirees (non-paying members) who have already paid 120 months of membership

-The individual paying program (IPP) for those not eligible for the other three categories

The benefits package is essentially the same for each population group. The exception is for indigents and the Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) who have additional outpatient primary care benefits (with the providers paid by capitation) however these benefits are available only through public providers.

However, the enrollment process for each population category differs. For the formal sector, employees are enrolled upon the start of employment. It is mandatory that all employees enroll in health insurance. No exceptions are allowed for the size of the company. For the poor, the local government determines “poorness” and enrolls those who are determined poor. For the rest of the population there is open enrollment—one can walk into a local enrollment office anytime to enroll.

Is Philhealth an insurance company?

No it isn’t. There is NO equal sharing of risk and thus is NOT qualified as an insurance company in the conventional terms.

Instead, Philhealth is a health coverage WELFARE program (verbally embellished by the term "insurance") funded mainly by taxpayers and complimented by an employment MANDATE (or as a form of tax on BOTH the employer and the employee).

So taxpayers get an additional whammy from a barrage of existing taxes: VAT, income, capital gains, estate tax, inflation tax among the many others. Of course, this is aside from Philhealth contributions which has been put in place in the name of universal health coverage.

The impression that taxes help the poor is deceptive. Taxes help the politicians and the bureaucracy which uses the poor as justification for coercive extraction of resources from the private sector. Taxes also serve as redistribution from productive use of resources towards consumption which diminishes investment and employment opportunities.

Aside, the welfare state promotes the culture of dependency and entitlement, as well as, reckless behavior which do not alleviate the position of the poor.

In reality, taxes help keep the “poor” poor

Does your contribution to Philheath fund the needy?

If we based this claim on coverage, then the rich, middle-class and most importantly the OFWs, whom has special treatment through “additional outpatient primary care benefits” have likewise been beneficiaries of everyone’s contribution.

So the claim that Philhealth benefits the poor is a BLATANT MISREPRESENTATION as the health welfare program’s coverage has been asymmetrically distributed, with a bias towards OFWs.

In fact, benefits are skewed AGAINST the poor based on access to Philhealth, let me repeat the last paragraph,

However, the enrollment process for each population category differs. For the formal sector, employees are enrolled upon the start of employment. It is mandatory that all employees enroll in health insurance. No exceptions are allowed for the size of the company. For the poor, the local government determines “poorness” and enrolls those who are determined poor. For the rest of the population there is open enrollment—one can walk into a local enrollment office anytime to enroll.

Because of the employment mandate, the formal sector has automatic enrollment-access while the “poor” will have to be screened by local politicians.

In short, access to Philhealth has been politicized and largely depends on the interests of local officials who may use Philhealth as means to secure votes or for other personal agenda.

The “poor” is, thus, not privileged under this TRANSFER or REDISTRIBUTION program.

Bottom line: Based on the above, the claim that private sector’s contributions to Philhealth have the “charitable” consequences to the poor is unfounded and baseless or propaganda from mouthpieces of the government.

Postscript: Accounts of corruption or malversation of funds or dipping on the coffers of the welfare institution aggravates the plight of the poor which underscores the waste and inefficiencies from such programs.

Expect a Continuation of the Risk ON-Risk OFF Environment

Today’s controversial split decision loss by World champion and Filipino boxing legend Manny Pacquiao serves as a vivid example of the self-imposed limits of nature on people.

As I pointed out on my blog[1], about 2 hours prior to the Pacquiao-Bradley match, Pacquiao has almost reached the natural speed limits of boxers, where the law of diminishing returns from ageing will turn the tide against him. Pacquiao’s contemporaries, the greatest boxers of the pasts, essentially sought retirement by mid-30s. Mr. Pacquiao is 33 and turns 34 this December.

And contrary to popular expectations, today’s match reveals that the venerable (in sports, not in politics) Filipino champion Manny Pacquiao is just like everyone else, a mortal. A victory from a rematch will not take away the laws of nature. The Pacquiao-Bradley fight heralds the twilight of the Pacquiao boxing era.

Pacquiao’s experience applies to the markets, the inflationism is a policy that will not and cannot last.

For the past few weeks, I have been emphasizing on this[2].

Like it or not, UNLESS there will be monumental moves from central bankers of major economies in the coming days, the global financial markets including the local Phisix will LIKELY endure more period of intense volatility on both directions but with a downside bias.

I am NOT saying that we are on an inflection phase in transit towards a bear market. Evidences have yet to establish such conditions, although I am NOT DISCOUNTING such eventuality given the current flow of developments.

What I am simply saying is that for as long as UNCERTAINTIES OVER MONETARY POLICIES AND POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTS PREVAIL, global equity markets will be sensitive to dramatic volatilities from an increasingly short term “RISK ON-RISK OFF” environment.

And where the RISK ON environment has been structurally reliant on central banking STEROIDS, ambiguities in political and monetary policy directions tilts the balance towards a RISK OFF environment.

Proven True: Sharp Volatility on Both Directions With A Downside Bias

This week, local markets confirmed my assessments.

Today’s dramatic volatilities have been representative of the gross distortion of the financial markets from sustained interventionism in various forms.

Unlike Pacquiao’s predicament, while it may be so that peak inflationism has yet to be reached, I believe that we are nearly there. All it would probably take is a global recession which will likely be met by the fully loaded firepower of central bankers.

Because the Phisix missed the selloff during the previous week as global markets got clobbered which I suspect has been due to some interventions by non-market forces, Monday’s 3.4% quasi-crash seems like a belated ventilation of the downside volatility that I have been concerned with.

clip_image001

Yet bulls remain in the hopeful that stock markets will continue to climb, I am not sure. Again, evidences don’t seem to confirm this and that the conditions I have stated above has yet to be met.

Also the current actions in the Phisix serve as a wonderful example of the tradeoffs between magnitude and frequency, where the frequency of accrued small gains can easily be wiped out by rare short bout/s of huge moves.

One of my favorite radical thinkers Nassim Nicolas Taleb called this the Turkey problem.

I explained in February of 2011[3]

clip_image002

The Turkey is fed from day 1 and so forth, and as a consequence gains weight through the feeding process.

From the Turkey’s point of view such largesse will persist.

However, to the surprise of the Turkey on the 1,001th day or during Thanksgiving Day, the days of glory end: the Turkey ends up on the dinner table. The turkey met the black swan.

The turkey problem is a construct of the folly of reading past performance into the future, and likewise the problem of frequency versus the magnitude, both of which serves as the cornerstone for Black Swan events.

In short, to avoid being the turkey means to understand the risk conditions that could lead to a cataclysmic black swan event (low probability, high impact event).

And this is why it has been IMPERATIVE to establish the underlying risk conditions affecting the marketplace rather than simply guessing on where short term fluctuations are headed for.

Given the current conditions, I wouldn’t want to be the turkey that ends up on the dinner table.

I would rather identify a trend that can provide me the opportunities for measured price moves in the face of established risk conditions given a time window to work on. Luck, to paraphrase the distinguished French chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur[4], favors the prepared.

In other words, determining the whereabouts of the stages of the boom bust cycle should be more of the priority than just the price levels.

clip_image004

Volatility has been ubiquitous and not limited to the Phisix. The US S&P 500 has been experiencing the same degree of turbulence.

Under current environment it would be very risky to interpret sporadic moves as sustainable trends.

clip_image006

Even gold has not been spared from drastic pendulum swings.

While I am still exceedingly bullish gold over the long run, I think there will equally be strong vacillations on both directions. Perhaps gold will undergo a consolidation phase first. But a severe downside move cannot be discounted.

Yet going back to the Phisix, the major Philippine bellwether was down only by 1.35% over the week which means 60% of Monday’s losses had been recovered.

clip_image008

At the world markets, this week’s performance has been in sharp contrast with that of the previous.

Monday’s quasi-crash by the Phisix has partially been offset by intra-week succession of gains whose rebound comes in the light of a global rally founded on multiple reports of rescues.

The markets cheered when ECB’s president Mario Draghi declared that “We monitor all developments closely and we stand ready to act”[5]. Also proposals for a grand rescue mechanism via a regional banking union had been floated[6] to the delight of steroid addicted markets.

Meanwhile, the US Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke employed the same I will backup the markets spiel with “As always, the Federal Reserve remains prepared to take action as needed to protect the US financial system and economy in the event that financial stresses escalate”[7] US markets soared.

India’s Prime Minister also chimed in to promise more engagement of fiscal spending on infrastructure projects[8].

Notice that outside Russia’s equity markets, the best gainers had been stock markets which made promises of rescues, particularly the India, US, Germany and France.

Ironically, the reaction has been different for those who actualized easing policies.

Australia pursued policy easing by chopping policy interest rates by 25 basis points for mortgages and business loans[9]. However, Australia’s stock market seems to have ignored the monetary stimulus by closing almost unchanged for this week.

clip_image010

More dramatically, China also did respond by cutting of interest rates for the first time since 2008, coupled with the further loosening of controls over lending and deposit rates[10]. Yet instead of recovering, China’s major equity bellwether, the Shanghai index slumped by 3.88% this week.

Again the Shanghai index also manifested the same volatility symptoms as with the rest. The difference is that the downside of China’s equity markets has been more elaborate and possibly signifies the admission of the severity or depth of China’s economic junctures and possibly too of the manifestations (or say protests) of the inadequacy of policy responses.

The point to emphasize is that financial markets has been vastly distorted and importantly, have been held hostage by politics.

As the illustrious Ayn Rand rightly explained[11],

When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see money flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed.

Risk ON-Risk OFF: Capital Flight, Bursting Bubbles and Political Gridlock

If the solution to the current crisis is about having more “stimulus”, then it would be ironic to have seen trillions upon trillions of dollars of “stimulus” thrown into the system, since 2008, and yet see the crisis linger, if not intensify.

Mainstream thinkers have been utterly lost or confused with the current situation for the simple reason that the commonsensical approach of keeping one’s house in order has been eschewed and substituted for the philosopher’s stone of bailouts and money printing. In a world based on aggregates, commonsense is a scarcity while fantasies are in abundance.

Where the problem has been about the lack of competitiveness and economic opportunities from too much regulation, bureaucracy and welfare spending, the propounded solution has been to “tax”, “spend”, “inflate”, “regulate” or “centralize” as if government can increase productivity by edict or by throwing money from helicopters.

Common sense also tells us that if these things worked we don’t need to work at all.

clip_image011

Yet when the law of diminishing returns for these interventionist measures becomes apparent, they ask for more of the same set of actions. The problem of debt requires to be solved by more debt (see above [12]). It’s like if your problem has been about alcohol then you should take more alcohol!

clip_image012

For the mainstream, money is wealth. Print money and everything gets solved. These have been the same prescription that has been complicating today’s crisis scenario with “exit” and “drachmaisation” therapy.

Yet instead of people willing to accept sacrifices for the “common good” as so expected by omniscient mainstream experts, reality reveals the opposite, people run and hide for cover.

There has been accelerating exodus of foreign money from Spain’s banking and financial system as shown above.

Dr Ed Yardeni notes[13],

According to data compiled by Spain’s central bank, foreigners reduced their deposits at Spanish credit institutions by 102.3 billion euros from a record high of 547.1 billion euros during June 2011 to 444.7 billion euros during March. In March alone, the outflow was 30.9 billion euros, and it probably accelerated during April and May…

The TARGET2 balances are more or less consistent with the trends in M2 money supply measures over the past year showing that they are falling in Spain and Greece while rising in Germany. On balance, M2 in the euro zone was up 2.8% y/y during April. This suggests that while the area's depositors are moving their funds from the periphery to the core countries, they aren’t fleeing the euro. However, the recent plunge in the euro suggests that they may be starting to shift funds into the US dollar.

Such exodus or capital flight out of the crisis affected EU nations has been destabilizing money supply conditions around the world.

Residents of these economies obviously don’t like to get robbed of their savings through the loss of purchasing power or through policies of devaluation. Devaluation theory is getting hit right smack on the faces of statist experts.

clip_image013

I pointed out last week that Swiss bonds have turned negative.

The same with Denmark’s 2 year bonds[14] as resident and foreign money flees Greece, Italy, Portugal or Spain. People from these nations would rather pay Swiss and Denmark’s central banks for safekeeping of their money than risk real losses from devaluation and the real risk of a collapse of the banking system.

clip_image015

The US Federal Reserve has partly countered the surges of capital flows by contracting their balance sheet.

This is perhaps comes along with the culmination of Operation Twist[15]—or the selling bonds with maturities of 3 years and below, which should lead to a decline of money supply and which eventually implies of negative effects on the markets. I would suspect that the gold markets have been sensing this thus the current volatility

Of course, once the episode of today’s capital flight from the Eurozone diminishes (which should amplify the money contraction), the FED will likely try to neutralize this by replacing or buy back of the assets which they earlier sold. Unfortunately the FED does not know beforehand when this will be happening, thus will only resort to reactive measures.

The uncertainty in the monetary actions should lead to heightened volatility that would be transmitted into the markets.

Hence, we should EXPECT very volatile markets ahead.

clip_image017

There could be another problem for further monetization of debts. Even if central bankers decide to print more money as another temporary patch to the current turmoil, the availability of their preferred asset[16], government bonds, has accounted for a steep decline. This implies that any future central bank purchases will likely be centered on mortgages and or privately issued securities (equities?).

The bottom line is that the combined effects of interventionism through price controls and bailouts which had prevented markets from clearing malinvestments or misallocated overpriced resources ALONG WITH sharp vacillations of capital flows as consequence of capital flight AND indecisive central bankers in the face of steroid dependent markets have been prompting for the recent market stresses.

This hasn’t been about imaginary ‘liquidity traps’ but of people’s subjective responses to perceived to political risks and policy uncertainties.

Yet as of this writing Spain has asked for $125 billion of rescue fund[17] as firewall from a potential fallout from the elections in Greece.

Does this imply a smooth sailing for the markets? We will see.

image

And as ramifications to the current dislocations in the monetary sphere out of policy indecisions and of political standoffs, it’s really hard to be unrealistically sanguine when forward indicators of factory activities have shown a synchronized decline[18]. The UK and Eurozone are in a recessionary mode, China is on the borderline while the US seems to be rolling over.

One offsetting factor has been today’s reported surge in China’s external trade[19]. Again this should be monitored rather than taken at face value given all of the above.

Yet we should ask; what if today’s (Pavlovian) stimulus conditioned markets become blasé to further promises from policy procrastination? How would the markets respond?

Again we need to seek clarity in all these than just recklessly plunging into markets centered on the belief that rescues would inherently come along and ride like a white knight to save the proverbial damsel in distress. The reality is that money does not grow on trees.

Thus we should expect the continuation of the Risk ON Risk OFF environment until concrete actions would have been taken.

It is only from here where we can have a sense of direction. And where we can assess and decide as to what position to take.

It is unfortunate that Pacquiao had to lose, but reality has long been staring at him which he denied, and may continue to deny. Many thought he was impervious and invincible too. They were all wrong.

The same with popular expectations for sustained bailouts, reality stares at our faces which we continue to deny. Yet the mounting intensity of crisis upon crisis has been admonishing us of the increasingly tenuous system. Public opinion will be proven wrong too.

Yet I am not saying that we should all be 100% cash. I am saying is that we should get less exposed to equities and overweight cash until conditions change. If the ECB and the FED collaborate on a maximum overdrive to stuff their balance sheets in exchange for green pieces of papers marked by Benjamin Franklins to the public, then we should make a swift move back into commodity based insurance positions. I suspect that come the next phase of interventions, it won’t be a risk ON risk OFF landscape but possibly one of STAGFLATION.

In the meantime be very careful out there.


[1] See On Manny Pacquiao’s Boxing Career, June 10, 2012

[2] See The RISK OFF Environment Has NOT Abated, May 27, 2012

[3] See Dealing With Financial Market Information February 27, 2012

[4] Wikipedia.org Louis Pasteur

[5] Bloomberg.com Draghi Says ECB Is Ready To Act As Growth Outlook Worsens, June 6, 2012

[6] See Eurozone’s Proposes Grand Bailout: Regional Banking Union, June 7, 2012

[7] Telegraph.co.uk Ben Bernanke says Fed ready to act if crisis intensifies, June 7, 2012

[8] See HOT: India Joins Pledge for Stimulus June 7, 2012

[9] Reuters.com ANZ cuts variable mortgage rates by 25 basis points June 8, 2012

[10] See HOT: China Cuts Lending Rates and Deposit Rates, June 7, 2012

[11] Rand, Ayn Atlas Shrugged Money padworny.com p. 387

[12] Price Tim Fixed Cobden Center March 12, 2012

[13] Yardeni, Ed Europe June 4, 2012 yardeni.com

[14] Bloomberg.com Denmark Government Bonds 2 Year Note Generic Bid Yield

[15] Wikipedia.org History of Federal Open Market Committee actions

[16] Zero Hedge, Presenting Dave Rosenberg's Complete Chartporn June 1, 2012

[17] Bloomberg.com Spain Seeks $125 Billion Bailout As Bank Crisis Worsens, June 10, 2012

[18] Yardeni Ed, Global Manufacturing June 5, 2012 yardeni.com

[19] Bloomberg.com China May Export Growth Tops Estimates As U.S. Demand Rises, June 10, 2012

Sunday, June 10, 2012

Argentina’s Snowballing Capital Flight

This should be another slap on the face for inflationistas or people who myopically advocate inflation as economic elixir.

From Reuters,

Argentine banks have seen a third of their U.S. dollar deposits withdrawn since November as savers chase greenbacks in response to stiffening foreign exchange restrictions, local banking sources said on Friday.

Depositors withdrew a total of about $100 million per day over the last month in a safe-haven bid fueled by uncertainty over policies that might be adopted as pressure grows to keep U.S. currency in the country.

The chase for dollars is motivated by fear that the government may further toughen its clamp down on access to the U.S. currency as high inflation and lack of faith in government policy erode the local peso.

"Deposits keep going down," said one foreign exchange broker who asked not to be named. "There is a disparity among banks, but in total it's about $80 million to $120 million per day."

U.S. dollar deposits of Argentine banks fell 11.2 percent in the preceding three weeks to $11.5 billion, according to central bank data released on Friday. The run on the greenback has waxed and waned since November, after President Cristina Fernandez won a second term on promises of deepening the state's role in the economy.

From May 11 until Friday, data compiled by Reuters from private banks showed $1.9 billion in U.S. currency had been withdrawn, or about 15 percent of all greenbacks deposited in the country.

Feisty populist leader Fernandez was re-elected in October vowing to "deepen the model" of the interventionist policies associated with her predecessor, Nestor Kirchner, who is also her late husband.

Since then she has limited imports, imposed capital controls and seized a majority stake in top energy company YPF.

Earlier, Argentina’s central bank President Mercedes Marcó del Pont even mocked at the laws of economics and haughtily declared that printing money does NOT lead to inflation.

Like in the Eurozone, what governments and their minions say and what people do always clash: The prospects of intensifying devaluation worsened by concerns over capital controls and other forms interventionism have been prompting people to turn to black markets, take refuge on foreign currencies and flee the Argentine banking system altogether

Joel Bowman at the Daily Reckoning has a nice take on this

The Argentinean government’s policy of theft via inflation has created a demand for the relative safety of US dollars. Obviously, a massive flight from pesos would create considerable headaches for the Argentine State and its efforts to control “its” people…and their taxable income. And so, even though there is no official rule preventing the purchase of US dollars (or any other foreign currency), Argentina’s equivalent to the IRS, AFIP, has made it virtually impossible to do so through regulated channels (i.e., banks).

Therefore, the informal exchange houses do a roaring trade responding to a very real and honest demand for US dollars. And there’s still enough business left over to maintain a vibrant market for the “green rate.” This exchange rate is even less official than the unofficial “blue rate.”

The “green rate” is offered by los arbolitos — i.e. “little trees” — who stand along Florida Street waving their arms (like little trees) and offering their exchange services. That rate, currently at 6.20 pesos to the dollar, is quite literally the “street price” for dollars.

The nearby chart shows the wide — and rapidly widening — gap between the official exchange rate and the blue rate, the most often quoted parallel dollar rate.

clip_image001

Exactly as you would expect, the more money the government prints, and the tighter the capital controls they impose, the greater the urgency to swap pesos into dollars…and the higher the unofficial exchange rates soar.

Clearly, this is a trend that cannot continue indefinitely.

The Argentine State is scrambling to outlaw the consequences of its own recklessness. For years now, Argentina’s Central Bank (BCRA) has brought forth freshly inked fiat notes by the billions to pay for unaffordable election promises. Our North American readers will recognize this crafty monetary prestidigitation as “money printing.”

The practice is nothing new, of course — neither here nor in any country where the tyranny of the mobjority — democracy — enjoys the power to decide the cost to be levied on the minority.

What seems peculiar about Argentina’s case is the government’s Herculean effort to ignore the immutable laws of economics in their pursuit of grand larceny. The country has seen five currencies in just the past century, averaging a collapse every twenty years or so. In 1970, the peso ley replaced the peso moneda nacional at a rate of 100 to 1. The peso ley was in turn replaced by the peso Argentino in 1983 at a rate of 10,000 to 1. That lasted a couple of years, and was then replaced by the Austral, again at a rate of 1,000 to 1. To nobody’s surprise, the Austral was itself replaced by the peso convertible at a rate of 10,000 to 1 in 1992. During the past four decades, when all was said and done, after the various changes of currency and slicing of zeroes, one peso convertible was equivalent to 10,000,000,000,000 (1013) pesos moneda nacional.

Obviously Argentinians haven’t learned, yet they are adversely responding to such policies via capital flight. Nevertheless sustained capital flight should help starve the beast.

While stock markets have functioned as to flight to safety against governments going into a maximum inflation overdrive, apparently Argentina’s worsening capital controls has been sending their benchmark index the Merval into a steady downhill as Argentinians seem fearful that their savings could be seized anew like in 2001.

clip_image002

Inflationism constitutes part of, or a mixture of the many other repressive measures from an increasingly despotic government such as higher taxes, price controls, capital controls, nationalization, protectionism and other forms of anti-market interventions. So whatever interim gains will be offset by lower real economic growth.

Argentina seems likely headed for for another sordid chapter of hyperinflation.

The other hyperinflation candidates are neighboring Venezuela, communist North Korea or any European crisis affected nations who will severe ties with the EU.

On Manny Pacquiao’s Boxing Career

This morning, much of the Philippines will be in a standstill as World Boxing champion local idol Manny Pacquiao goes back into the ring.

As a former boxing enthusiast (during my teenage days), I’d say that Manny Pacquiao is past his prime and will likely succumb to a younger player than he is, perhaps as days go by.

I’m not predicting that he will lose this or today’s match. But I am saying that the chances of continued victories will likely diminish if he persists to fight. This will be pronounced especially when he gets to fight younger boxers. It’s simply called the law of diminishing returns brought about by ageing.(unless technology comes to Mr. Pacquiao's rescue)

As a physical contact sport, age and mental condition are what fundamentally matters. Others like physical conditioning, ring technique and tactics are subordinate to this.

Unknown to many, most of Manny Pacquiao’s great victories came against pugilists older than he is (Marco Antonio Barrera, Juan Manuel Marquez, Oscar de La Hoya, Joshua Clottey, Shane Mosley) or at his age level (Ricky Hatton and Antonio Margarito). Only Miguel Cotto has proven to be the younger player whom Pacquiao recently beat.

In addition, the typical retirement age of many boxing legends is at the mid-30s.

The unbeaten Rocky Marciano made a comeback and retired by age 36. The great Muhammad Ali, my favorite hang up his gloves by age 39, but this came amidst back-to-back losses and the emergence of his Parkinson’s disease.

In short, based on the track record of great boxing legends, Pacquiao’s window of boxing greatness has been narrowing.

And there is always the psychological factor. Mike Tyson has been a great of example of a champion consumed by psychology particularly of hubris.

Mr. Pacquiao’s record as politician has not been smooth either. Corruption has been attributed to him, a recent dispute with the local tax agency the BIR shows that he is not an ally of the incumbent administration, and lastly, “God told me to retire”, for me, is a sign of admission of the actual state of his physical condition and of mental stress, where religion becomes his escape mechanism, or as means to endear himself with voters.

In reality, contrary to the popular opinion, it would not be Floyd Mayweather Jr., who will likely beat him, who again is older than Pacquiao and who is more mentality stressed than he is and will likely lose to Pacquiao, but some younger foe.

Of course reality bites, Mr. Pacquiao’s fame, fortune and political career have all been tied up with his boxing career. Once Mr. Pacquiao retires this privilege will erode overtime, as with all of the local celebrity sporting forebears.

So he may push his boxing career to the limits or take unnecessary risks in order to struggle to preserve this privilege.

[UPDATED to ADD: 28 years old Tim Bradley split decisions 33 years old Manny Pacquiao]

Saturday, June 09, 2012

10 Signs of a Sociopath; The Worst Get on Top

The recent unfortunate slapping incident during a TV debate by a Greek politician looks like signs of a sociopath.

Naturalnews.com talks about the risks of associating with people with sociopath traits.(bold original)

Sociopaths are masters at influence and deception. Very little of what they say actually checks out in terms of facts or reality, but they're extremely skillful at making the things they say sound believable, even if they're just making them up out of thin air. Here, I'm going to present quotes and videos of some legendary sociopaths who convinced everyday people to participate in mass suicides. And then I'm going to demonstrate how and why similar sociopaths are operating right now... today.

Why cover this subject? I've seen a lot of people get hoodwinked, scammed or even harmed by sociopaths, and it bewilders me that people are so easily sucked into their destructive influence. I want to share with NaturalNews readers the warning signs of sociopaths so that you can spot them, avoid them, and save yourself the trouble of being unduly influenced by them.

Much of this information is derived from the fascinating book,The Sociopath Next Door(http://www.amazon.com/Sociopath-Next-Door-Martha-Stout/dp/0767915828), which says that 4% of the population are sociopaths. The book is a fascinating read.

Aside from being hoodwinked from their glib persuasions, sociopaths or psychopaths don’t take the responsibility for their actions, and thus, resort to blaming others for their mistakes, as explained by author Michael Cross (video on this link, thanks to an anonymous commenter)

Yet here are the ten signs to look for, again from Naturalnews.com

10 Signs for Spotting a Sociopath

#1) Sociopaths are charming.Sociopaths have high charisma and tend to attract a following just because people want to be around them. They have a "glow" about them that attracts people who typically seek guidance or direction. They often appear to be sexy or have a strong sexual attraction. Not all sexy people are sociopaths, obviously, but watch out for over-the-top sexual appetites and weird fetishes.

#2) Sociopaths are more spontaneous and intense than other people. They tend to do bizarre, sometimes erratic things that most regular people wouldn't do. They are unbound by normal social contracts. Their behavior often seems irrational or extremely risky.

#3) Sociopaths are incapable of feeling shame, guilt or remorse.Their brains simply lack the circuitry to process such emotions. This allows them to betray people, threaten people or harm people without giving it a second thought. They pursue any action that serves their own self interest even if it seriously harms others.

#4) Sociopaths invent outrageous lies about their experiences.They wildly exaggerate things to the point of absurdity, but when they describe it to you in a storytelling format, for some reason it sounds believable at the time.

#5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and "win" at all costs.They hate to lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies, even to the point of logical absurdity.

#6) Sociopaths tend to be highly intelligent, but they use their brainpower to deceive others rather than empower them. Their high IQs often makes them dangerous. This is why many of the best-known serial killers who successfully evaded law enforcement were sociopaths.

#7) Sociopaths are incapable of love and are entirely self-serving. They may feign love or compassion in order to get what they want, but they don't actually FEEL love in the way that you or I do.

#8) Sociopaths speak poetically. They are master wordsmiths, able to deliver a running "stream of consciousness" monologue that is both intriguing and hypnotic. They are expert storytellers and even poets. As a great example of this in action, watch this interview of Charles Manson:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIfGj_55FHI

#9) Sociopaths never apologize.They are never wrong. They never feel guilt. They can never apologize. Even if shown proof that they were wrong, they will refuse to apologize and instead go on the attack.

#10) Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say becomes truth merely because they say it!Charles Manson, the sociopathic murderer, is famous for saying, "I've never killed anyone! I don't need to kill anyone! I THINK it! I have it HERE! (Pointing to his temple.) I don't need to live in this physical realm..."
Watch Charles Manson saying this at the 3:05 mark of this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIfGj_55FHI

Read the explanations of the above qualities here.

Well, as previously pointed out, there are parallel traits between politicians and psycho-sociopaths.

[UPDATED to ADD: As an aside, although sociopaths may rise in the corporate world, their actions are limited by profits and losses. This is unlike politics, where mistakes would, ironically, have politicians call for more of the same set of actions which brought them to such conditions. Besides, since government is a mandated monopoly, there are no market prices for their activities, example police are paid for in salaries but we cannot establish the real worth of their services, hence there is no way to make politicians or the bureaucracy accountable in the same way as the markets operate. Thus politicians usually come away clean from their blemishes.]

That’s because the nature of politics seamlessly fits into the adaption of these qualities such that people with these characteristics tend to rise to the occasion to assume the role of leadership.

The great Friedrich von Hayek said that in politics, the only worst people get on the top.

Explains Mises Institute’s Doug French, (bold emphasis mine)

F.A. Hayek famously argued in The Road to Serfdom, that in politics, the worst get on top, and outlined three reasons this is so. First, Hayek makes the point that people of higher intelligence have different tastes and views. So, as Hayek writes, “we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive instincts prevail,” to have uniformity of opinion.

Second, those on top must “gain the support of the docile and gullible,” who are ready to accept whatever values and ideology is drummed into them. Totalitarians depend upon those who are guided by their passions and emotions rather than by critical thinking.

Finally, leaders don’t promote a positive agenda, but a negative one of hating an enemy and envy of the wealthy. To appeal to the masses, leaders preach an “us” against “them” program.

Quote of the Day: Distinguishing the Environmentalist from the Conservationist

An "environmentalist" is a totalitarian socialist whose real objective is to revive socialism and economic central planning under the subterfuge of "saving the planet" from capitalism. He is "green" on the outside, but red on the inside, and is hence appropriately labeled a "watermelon."

A conservationist, by contrast, is someone who is actually interested in solving environmental and ecological problems and protecting wildlife and its habitat. He does not propose having government force a separation of man and nature by nationalizing land and other resources, confiscating private property, prohibiting the raising of certain types of animals, regulating human food intake, etc. He is not a socialist ideologue who is hell bent on destroying capitalism. He does not publicly wish that a "new virus" will come along and kill millions, as the founder of "Earth First" once did. More often than not, he seeks ways to use the institutions of capitalism to solve environmental problems. There is even a new name for such a person: enviropreneur. Or he may call himself a "free-market environmentalist" who understands how property rights, common law, and markets can solve many environmental problems, as indeed they have.

That’s from Professor Thomas DiLorenzo on the coming Earth Summit