Is Ben Bernanke Turning The US Federal Reserve Into A Dictatorship?

``The deepest policy errors are lodged in the public’s expectation and belief that central banks and governments can alleviate recessions and in the public’s giving these organizations the legal power to do what they do (or tolerating their power grabs). Further errors lie in listening to mistaken experts who continue to justify these counterproductive methods and laws, and in failing to learn from experience that the policies that central banks and governments use to fight recessions make them worse and turn them into deeper recessions and depressions.”- Michael S. Rozeff, The Fed’s Exploding Balance Sheet: What It Means and Reviving the Revolution

Dictatorship means absolute rule.

Given the recent turn of events, it is noteworthy to point out that the recent actions undertaken by the US Federal Reserve appear to be evolving towards such an end.

While one may argue that given today’s emergency conditions, rapid responses from central authorities may be required to help ease the crisis, such assumption is fallaciously grounded on the infallibility of the central authority, where wrong decisions may present as systemic risk for our globalized society.

To quote Friedrich A. Hayek in Pretense of Knowledge, ``To act on the belief that we possess the knowledge and the power which enable us to shape the processes of society entirely to our liking, knowledge which in fact we do not possess, is likely to make us do much harm. In the physical sciences there may be little objection to trying to do the impossible; one might even feel that one ought not to discourage the overconfident because their experiments may after all produce some new insights. But in the social field, the erroneous belief that the exercise of some power would have beneficial consequences is likely to lead to a new power to coerce other men being conferred on some authority. Even if such power is not in itself bad, its exercise is likely to impede the functioning of those spontaneous-ordering forces by which, without understanding them, man is in fact so largely assisted in the pursuit of his aims.” (italics mine)

Some of the recent events indicative of the dictatorial tendencies:

One, the Fed has activated the use of its emergency powers to bypass legal requirements or procedures,

This from Bloomberg, ``The Federal Reserve took advantage of emergency powers to authorize the auctions that officials felt were necessary to ease a credit squeeze, concluding it otherwise lacked legal permission to do so.

``The Fed bypassed requirements for prior notice and public comment when writing the regulations to implement today's agreement with the European Central Bank and three other central banks. The Fed's official notice today said any delay caused by following standard procedures would have been ``contrary to the public interest.''

``Such actions, while used ``sparingly'' over the years, were justified today because the new rules probably carry few costs, a former Fed attorney said. The action today was part of a coordinated effort with other central banks to alleviate a global growth slowdown, acting after interest-rate cuts failed to allay concerns that banks will reduce lending.

``It's something that they normally don't do,'' said Oliver Ireland, who worked as a Fed counsel for more than two decades and is now a partner at Morrison & Foerster in Washington. ``If you look at doing things to stabilize volatile markets, I don't think it's very hard to find good cause. There's no tangible harm to anybody.''

``The Fed uses the bypass powers regularly when changing the rate on direct loans to banks, though rarely when publishing broader rule changes. The Administrative Procedure Act requires federal agencies to give public notice and solicit comments on regulatory changes though with exceptions, Ireland said.

Two, the Federal Reserve has used its ‘war powers’ to also bypass its organization’s hierarchal decision making process.

Again from Bloomberg (italics mine), ``The district chiefs’ authority over borrowing costs has been marginalized in the past two months as Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and the Fed Board of Governors in Washington made their own decisions on emergency measures to flood the economy with cash.

“The Board has usurped authority,” said William Poole, former president of the St. Louis Fed and now a senior fellow at the Cato Institute in Washington. “This dramatic change in policy direction has not been announced or even acknowledged.”…

``A conference call last month showed how little say the central bank’s 12 regional presidents now have in some of the Fed’s biggest decisions…

``Regional bank presidents don’t have a vote when the Board uses emergency powers to lend to firms other than banks in “unusual and exigent circumstances,” as it’s done repeatedly this year.

``The district-bank chiefs by design are supposed to offer a counterbalance to the Board, and in the past haven’t been shy about challenging chairmen. In February 1994, former chairman Alan Greenspan had to argue against four presidents who wanted to raise rates at least a half percentage point, compared with his own preference for a quarter-point move.

Three, the Federal Reserve has remained intransigent to repeated requests for transparency or the disclosures on the recipients of the recently extended loans.

Again this from Bloomberg, ``The Federal Reserve refused a request by Bloomberg News to disclose the recipients of more than $2 trillion of emergency loans from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.

``Bloomberg filed suit Nov. 7 under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act requesting details about the terms of 11 Fed lending programs, most created during the deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

``The Fed responded Dec. 8, saying it’s allowed to withhold internal memos as well as information about trade secrets and commercial information. The institution confirmed that a records search found 231 pages of documents pertaining to some of the requests.

These acts of suppression of the access to information signify as common traits for dictatorships. To quote Ronald Wintrobe in “The Political Economy of Dictatorships”,

``Democratic institutions (such as freedom of speech, freedom of information, elections, a free press, organized opposition parties and an independent judiciary) all provide means whereby dissatisfaction with public policies may be communicated between citizens and their political leader. The dictator typically dispenses with these institutions and thus gains a freedom of action unknown in democracy.”

Lastly, the Federal Reserve is now mulling the path to issue its own debt instruments,

This from Wall Street Journal, ``The Federal Reserve is considering issuing its own debt for the first time, a move that would give the central bank additional flexibility as it tries to stabilize rocky financial markets.

``Government debt issuance is largely the province of the Treasury Department, and the Fed already can print as much money as it wants. But as the credit crisis drags on and the economy suffers from recession, Fed officials are looking broadly for new financial tools.

``Fed officials have approached Congress about the concept, which could include issuing bills or some other form of debt, according to people familiar with the matter.

``It isn't known whether these preliminary discussions will result in a formal proposal or Fed action. One hurdle: The Federal Reserve Act doesn't explicitly permit the Fed to issue notes beyond currency.

Figure 2: St. Louis Fed: Federal Reserve Bank Credit and Federal Reserve Holdings of US Treasuries

While others don’t see anything sinister to the possible intent of the Fed to issue debts in lieu of the rapidly depleting holdings of the US treasuries in its portfolio (see figure 2) or to “destroy” some of the paper it has recently been printing or as added arsenal for contingent use, the obvious consolidation of power seems to be giving rise to an all powerful “omnipotent” institution.

Why is this important to us even when are about 7-8,000 miles apart?

Because the world’s monetary system is anchored upon the de facto international currency standard in the US dollar. And anything that impacts the state of the US currency will likely send ripples across the world.

To quote Axel Merk of Merk Investments, ``The only leadership that seems to be emerging is from the Federal Reserve determined to print not just billions, but trillions of dollars to provide the backstop to all economic activity; at the same time the policies are an insult to any potential buyer of securities the Fed has targeted, as the intervention keeps yields artificially low. As China has been one of the premier buyers of these securities, namely Treasury bonds and agency securities, this is a clear message by the Fed that Chinese investments to finance U.S. deficits is no longer welcome; why else would the Fed depress the return for potential buyers during a time when unprecedented amounts of debt need to be raised? While we are provocative in our allegation, it is at best an unintended consequence, at worst highly deliberate. Intentional or not, it may coerce Asian buyers of U.S. debt to reduce their holdings to allow the U.S. dollar to weaken. The Fed may believe that it does not need the free market to set rates as it can use its own balance sheet to set economic policy; this ill-perceived view is also shared by economists that believe modern central banking is stronger than market forces.” (bold emphasis mine)

Figure 3: BIS: Central Bank Assets and Open Market Operations

And as we have long predicted, all these point towards more evidences of a seismic shift towards politically based actions than just targeted at economic concerns.

Central banks all over the world have been seemingly desperate enough to resort to “saving” the status quo, an attitude founded on the modern day central banking paradigm of economic growth brought about by credit or inflation and foisted to the public, by flooding the world with money (see figure 3), absorbing much these losses and adopting more innovative “socialistic” means to flex its recently acquired muscles in order to salvage a rapidly festering system.

As Jesús Huerta de Soto, professor of economics at the Complutense University of Madrid, wrote in Financial Crisis and Recession, “…nothing is more dangerous than to indulge in the "fatal conceit" — to use Hayek's useful expression — of believing oneself omniscient or at least wise and powerful enough to be able to keep the most suitable monetary policy fine-tuned at all times. Hence, rather than soften the most violent ups and downs of the economic cycle, the Federal Reserve and, to a lesser extent, the European Central Bank, have most likely been their main architects and the culprits in their worsening.”

7 Philippine Rural Banks Taken Over; Emerging Cracks In The System? (updated)

Suddenly some small local rural banks emerge to declare bank holidays or are being taken over by the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corp PDIC.

The Philippine Central Bank, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) provides a list:

-Rural Bank of Paranaque (Placed under PDIC receivership by the Monetary Board on 9 December 2008)

-Rural Bank of Bais based in Negros Oriental ( placed under PDIC receivership by the MB today, 11 December)

-Pilipino Rural Bank based in Cebu (placed under PDIC receivership by the MB today, 11 December)

-Rural Bank of San Jose based in San Jose, Batangas (placed under PDIC receivership by the MB today, 11 December)

-Philippine Countryside Bank based in Cebu

-Dynamic Bank (RB of Calatagan) based in Batangas

-San Pablo City Development Bank

-Nation Bank based in Bacolod City

While the BSP rightly asserts that the following banks “represent only a tiny fraction of the banking system and that this reaffirms the BSP’s assessment that the banking system remains stable, highly-capitalized, and highly liquid” and further downplayed these events as having systemic repercussions by advising “the public to avoid making sweeping judgment on the condition of individual banks based on pure speculation as these tend to be self-fulfilling”, they haven’t disclosed the reasons behind why these 7 banks suddenly folded up (as these institutions will yet be subjected to investigations).

It is our guess that given the interrelated nature of the global banking industry, these banks have been similarly impacted as with other small banks elsewhere, on exposures to toxic instruments or have seen their capital adequacy ratios shrink on the account of severe markdowns of its asset values.

If more of these “bank holidays” should occur then naturally there will be heightened concerns over the emergence of possible “cracks” in the system.

Only transparency and rapid response by the authorities can assuage the public from being overwhelmed by “self-fulfilling speculations”.

***

Latest Update:

We'd like to thank reader m2md for giving us more information about the said foreclosed banks. These banks reportedly fall under an umbrella organization that does selling pre-need plans called the "Legacy Group Banks" from which the Supreme court earlier issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). In short, a domestic issue. See article here.

Earlier Update:

We received a comment suggesting that these bank holidays could have been due to the possible flawed business models adopted by the affected Rural Banks-attracting deposits with above market interest rates and similarly carrying above market interest loan portfolios.

Perhaps.

But this translates to the sensitivity of these rural banks’ portfolios to the country’s economic performance, which equally means that for these banks to fold suggests of a drastic slump in parts of the Philippine rural economy over the recent past quarters or so- or where these banks are located. But this doesn’t seem so.

Aside, our domestic version of “subprime lending” would also have surfaced gradually or could have popped up one at a time than altogether in just one month.

So for us, the issue boils down to a matter of timing.

If there has been anything that has dramatically changed for the worst over the same period, it is the global financial markets.

We are 2 months from the global meltdown and 3 months from the Lehman bankruptcy (September 15), which makes us suspect some causal association.

Besides, as we noted these may not be just about foreign toxic waste in the affected rural bank’s portfolios but also due to inadequate capital ratios brought about by losses in financial assets that have impacted the banks balance sheets.

But of course, correlation doesn’t imply causation, which is why BSP’s transparency matters.

So we’d have to wait for the official BSP pronouncements on these and keep vigil over the trend of bank holidays-if, at all, they might signify the proverbial “Canary In A Coal Mine”.

Influencing Gold and Silver Markets, Backwardations Imply Higher Gold and Silver Prices

In Stock Market Investing: Will Reading Political Tea Leaves Be A Better Gauge?, we argued that today’s financial market can’t be used as reliable signals for interpreting future trends simply because financial markets especially in the US seem to be operating under the profound “influence” by the government.

And it seems that such “influences” have likewise been extended to the precious metal markets. Some agents of the banking sector, which has been under the lifeline of the US Federal Reserve, seems to have built heavy short positions in both the silver and gold markets.

Here is the excerpt (which includes charts) from Resource Investor’s Gene Arensberg,

``As of December 2, as gold closed at $783.39, the CFTC reported that 3 U.S. banks had a net short positioning for gold on the COMEX, division of NYMEX, of 63,818 contracts. The CFTC also reported that as of the same date all traders classed by the CFTC as commercial held a collective net short positioning of 95,288 contracts.

``That means that just three U.S. banks accounted for 66.97% of all the commercial net short positioning on the COMEX for gold futures.

Courtesy of Resource Investor (Source CFTC for Bank Participation, Cash Market for gold)

``For silver, it’s even more startling. On December 2, as silver closed at $9.57, exactly 2 U.S. banks held a net short positioning of 24,555 contracts. The CFTC reports that as of the same date all traders classed as commercial held a net short positioning of 24,894 contracts. So, the 2 U.S. banks, with one particular Fed member bank probably holding almost all of it, held a sickening 98.64% of all the collective commercial net short positioning on the COMEX, division of NYMEX in New York.

Courtesy of Resource Investor’s Gene Arensberg

``Exactly two U.S. banks have practically all the COMEX commercial net short positioning on silver. For a little context, 24,555 net short contracts means that the two banks held net short positions on December 2 for 122,775,000 ounces of silver with silver at $9.57. The COMEX said on December 4, that there were 80,239,857 ounces total in the “Registered” category, so these 2 malefactor banks held net short positioning equal to about 153% of the amount of deliverable silver in ALL the COMEX members’ accounts.

``And people wonder why both silver and gold moved into backwardation over the past two or three weeks? People are apparently worried that they won’t be able to take delivery of gold or silver metal from the COMEX in the future. They'll pay a premium now to get it now.”

In other words, the historical backwardation seen in the gold-silver markets accounts for as the brewing disparities between the precious metals’ physical markets relative to the financial markets or prices in the financial markets don't seem to be in synch with what has been going on in the physical markets.

To quote Professor Antal E. Fekete, ``Gold going to permanent backwardation means that gold is no longer for sale at any price, whether it is quoted in dollars, yens, euros, or Swiss francs. The situation is exactly the same as it has been for years: gold is not for sale at any price quoted in Zimbabwe currency, however high the quote is. To put it differently, all offers to sell gold are being withdrawn, whether it concerns newly mined gold, scrap gold, bullion gold or coined gold…(emphasis mine)

For us, the most probable explanation for such attempts to influence the precious metal markets is to create the impression that “inflation” remains subdued or contained. The US government wants to stoke “inflation” in the asset markets (stocks and real estate), but not in the commodity markets.

To add, by keeping the impression of contained "inflation", this allows authorities to liberally expand its theater of operations as it continues to wage war against debt deflation.

Moreover, such backwardation can also be read as the unintended effects from the distortions brought about by the attempt to influence the gold and silver market prices and as growing indications of the weakening foundations of the US dollar.

Again quoting Professor Feteke, ``Backwardation will pull in stocks from the moon as it were, if need be. The cure for the backwardation of any commodity is more backwardation. For gold, there is no cure. Backwardation in gold is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon: it is a reminder of the incurable pathology of paper money. It dramatizes the decay of the regime of irredeemable currency. It can only get worse. As confidence in the value of fiat money is a fragile thing, it will not get better. It depicts the paper dollar as Humpty Dumpty who sat on a wall and had a great fall and, now, “all the king’s horses and all the king’s men could not put Humpty Dumpty together again.” To paraphrase a proverb, give paper currency a bad name, you might as well scrap it.

``Once entrenched, backwardation in gold means that the cancer of the dollar has reached its terminal stages. The progressively evaporating trust in the value of the irredeemable dollar can no longer be stopped.” (emphasis mine)

A prolonged backwardation suggests that price suppression schemes will only build unsustainable pressures underneath which will eventually find a release valve and consequently be vented in prices. Thus, gold and silver prices are likely to zoom to the moon!

Weaning Away from a Bailout Culture? Crack Up Boom Next?

A sense of desperation led us to deduce that Americans have drastically turned towards the bailout syndrome to seek relief from their economic and financial travails.

And such sentiment has been powerful enough to have even driven the recent election outcome. And because of popular demand, the political landscape appears to have likewise accommodated such sentiment.

But times could be changing, as Americans appear to be waking up to the realization of the futility of embracing bailouts as elixirs.

That’s if we go by the polls.

Courtesy of Gallup

According to Gallup, ``With lawmakers weighing the prospect of a multi-billion dollar bailout for the U.S. auto industry, Gallup finds Americans falling out of favor with its $700 billion predecessor. Since October, Americans have flipped from being more positive than negative on the Wall Street bailout, 50% to 41%, to being slightly more negative than positive, 47% to 46%."

And the same dynamics seem to be surfacing even in the auto industry.

Courtesy of Gallup

According to Gallup, ``A slight majority of 51% of Americans say they oppose the federal government's giving major financial assistance to the Big Three U.S. automotive companies, while 43% favor it -- representing a slight decrease in support compared to three weeks ago. However, if it is stressed that one of the Big Three companies were certain to fail without government assistance, support rises to the majority level of 52% and opposition falls to 42%.

All these reminds us of the admonition of Ludwig von Mises, ``But then finally the masses wake up. They become suddenly aware of the fact that inflation is a deliberate policy and will go on endlessly. A breakdown occurs. The crack-up boom appears. Everybody is anxious to swap his money against "real" goods, no matter whether he needs them or not, no matter how much money he has to pay for them. Within a very short time, within a few weeks or even days, the things which were used as money are no longer used as media of exchange. They become scrap paper. Nobody wants to give away anything against them.”

Could these signal the emergence of a crack up boom?

Living In Interesting Times

Financial markets today have been experiencing bouts of irrationality if not plain insanity.

To consider, instead of getting compensated by loaning money to the US government via the purchase of US Treasuries, lenders LOSE money!

Chart from Bespoke Investment

Three month T-Bill yields have turned Negative!

And investors have been piling on, this from Marketwatch.com ``The Treasury Department sold $32 billion in four-week bills Tuesday at a yield of zero, implying investors purely wanted the assurance that they would get their principal back. Investors bid $128 billion at the auction, more than four times the amount available. Yields on one-month debt have plunged from about 1.80% in June. "I have never seen this before," said Michael Franzese, head of government bond trading at Standard Chartered. "It's all about capital preservation for the turn of the year, not capital appreciation.”

From our end, this remarkable development implies of a bubble at work.

Next, stock market volatility in the US is at record levels if one measures volatility from the perspective of absolute daily changes!

Chart from Bespoke

This from Bespoke Invest, ``Up until the start of 2008, a daily move of 4% in a 50-day period was noteworthy. From 1945 through 2007, the S&P 500 had 49 one-day moves of 4% or more, which is an average of less than one per year. This year we've had 28! For a market as big as the United States to average a 4.02% daily change over a 50-day period is truly astounding. This is the type of volatility that we see in frontier and emerging markets -- not the biggest, most developed market in the world. The volatility bubble won't last forever, and being long it at this stage of the game is a very risky bet.” (emphasis mine)

It’s been a wild rollercoaster ride out there.

Next, following the first official “rally” or “bounce” in US equities markets, Bespoke Invest says this had been the third worst bear market.

Chart from Bespoke

Again from Bespoke Invest, ``As shown, the bear market that ran from 10/9/07 to 11/20/08 is the third worst ever with a decline of 51.93%. The bears that ended in June of 1932 (-61.81%) and March of 1938 (-54.47%) are the only two that had bigger declines without a rally of 20%.”

All these seem to indicate that we are in some sort of a crossroad.

China’s “Healing” Equity Markets: The New World Market Leader?

Despite the overload of streaming bad news and pessimism, few have noticed that prior to the “recovery” or “bounce” (depending on the bias of the observer) in the US markets, China’s market has been gradually stabilizing.

courtesy of stockcharts.com

The red arrow shows China’s Shanghai index in a seeming recovery mode (from late October) even as the US S&P have touched a milestone low (blue arrow) in mid November.

To consider, during the advent of today’s bear market, China’s Shanghai index have turned lower almost simultaneously with other Asian benchmarks despite the limited exposure to foreign investors.

And to further allude that China’s Shanghai has suffered the most pain compared to the neighbors after losses tallied to 70% at its nadir.

While it is arguable that today’s recovery may simply be representative of a mere bounce, technical picture appears to indicate otherwise.

The Shanghai composite has broken the bearish year-to-date trend line (pink) aside from the 50-day moving averages (blue) which may point to a segueing to the market cycle process known as a “bottom”.

Of course since today’s global trade structure has put a lot of weight into China…

Courtesy of nationmaster.com

China could signify as a huge driver in shaping the global economy and markets.

And as the region increasingly integrates, this probably would imply for a regional recovery.

So we should probably keep watch with some of the key Asian indices as Japan’s Nikkei. Japan's major benchmark appears to be on its way to test its resistance levels at 9,500 and the 50 day moving averages to corroborate China’s seeming transitioning phase.

And because China in the recent past had accounted for an important consumer for commodities, then we might also add that for China’s bottoming process to be further confirmed, we need to see an equivalent turn in commodity prices as in copper, oil and other base metals, something that has, as of the moment, been missing.

Will China lead the next phase of the market cycle?

Stay tuned.

How Political Tea Leaves Will Shape The Investment Landscape

``One key attribute that gives money value is scarcity. If something that is used as money becomes too plentiful, it loses value. That is how inflation and hyperinflation happens. Giving a central bank the power to create fiat money out of thin air creates the tremendous risk of eventual hyperinflation. Most of the founding fathers did not want a central bank. Having just experienced the hyperinflation of the Continental dollar, they understood the power and the temptations inherent in that type of system. It gives one entity far too much power to control and destabilize the economy.” Dr. Ron Paul, The Neo-Alchemy of the Federal Reserve

Never has ascertaining the probabilities of the rapidly evolving highly fluid macro environment been as critical today in shaping one’s portfolio or even in anticipation of the how to allocate resources in the coming business environment.

Why? Because future revenue streams, productivity levels, earnings and all other micro metrics, aside from market or business cycles, will all depend on the outcome from the present set of policy choices.

While the investment field shudders at the thought mentioning such ominous phrase; ``it’s different this time”, well, it hard to say it but it does seem different this time.

As we noted in last week’s Stock Market Investing: Will Reading Political Tea Leaves Be A Better Gauge?,

``Even as global governments have been rapidly anteing up on claims to taxpayers’ future income stream by a concoction of “inflationary” actions such as lender of last resort, market maker of last resort, guarantor of last resort, investor of last resort, spender of last resort and ultimately buyer of last resort, a credit driven US economic recovery isn’t likely to happen; not when governments are tightening supervision or regulatory framework, not when banks are hoarding money to recapitalize, not when borrowers are tightening belts and suffering from capital losses on declining assets and certainly not when income is shrinking as unemployment and business bankruptcies rise on falling profits, and most importantly not when the collective psychology has been transitioning from one of overconfidence to one of morbid risk aversion.

``Thus the best case scenario for the credit driven “economic growth” will be a back to basics template-the traditional mechanisms of collateralized backed lending based on borrower’s capacity to pay. But these won’t be enough to reignite the Moneyness of credit. Not even under the US government’s directive.”

We found our assertions pleasantly echoed by the world’s Bond King in his latest outlook; from PIMCO’s Mr. William Gross (who confirms our cognitive biases-emphasis ours)

``My transgenerational stock market outlook is this: stocks are cheap when valued within the context of a financed-based economy once dominated by leverage, cheap financing, and even lower corporate tax rates. That world, however, is in our past not our future. More regulation, lower leverage, higher taxes, and a lack of entrepreneurial testosterone are what we must get used to – that and a government checkbook that allows for healing, but crowds the private sector into an awkward and less productive corner.”

So as global governments take up the shoes from the private sector, the outcomes as reflected by market conditions and on the economic landscape will obviously be different, see Figure 1.

Figure 1 Gavekal: Portfolio Distribution In Different Environments

From Gavekal’s Brave New World is a simplified template where we see basically four economic environments; from which a long term theme, at the moment, has been struggling to emerge, albeit under a current, possibly temporary, dominant theme which are being battled out by government forces.

But nonetheless, we can identify whence our recent past, posit on the present environment and identify possible outcomes.

From the privilege of hindsight the most obvious is the inflationary boom, which was characterized by a credit inspired boom in almost every asset classes across the world, but in contrast to the template, this includes a boom in government bonds!

Today we are seeing the opposite- a market driven deflationary bust, where the unwinding debt burden has prompted for a reversal of the former order or an across the board selling except for US treasuries and the US dollar. Thus the characteristics as described in the template are presently still being perfected.

Yet, given the observable actions of governments, one may infer that the current deflationary bust phase is being engaged in with a tremendous surge of inflationary forces (bailouts, guarantees, lending, capital provision, etc.) in the hope to restore the former order.

And this has been the source of the fierce debates encapsulating the investment industry; will today’s deflationary bust outrun inflationary forces and transit into a modern day global depression? Will the unintended consequences of the concerted inflationary injections by global central banks result to a US dollar crisis or inflationary bust or hyperinflationary depression? Or will Goldilocks be resurrected with government stilts?

Deflation and Endowment Effects

The basic problem is the house of cards built upon by an unsustainable credit structure from which the world’s economy has been anchored upon, see figure 2.

Figure 2: courtesy of contraryinvestor.com: Unsustainable Credit Market

As we previously noted there are basically two ways to preside over such predicament. One is to allow market forces to reduce debt to levels where the afflicted economy could pay these off. Two, is to reduce the real value of debt via inflation. Of course, there is always the third way: the default option.

But since we believe that the US government and the other debt laden economies are likely to avoid the third option, as their taxpayers have been aggressively absorbing the losses, these relegate us to the first two options.

Deflation proponents (mostly Keynesians) argue that the central bank measures are proving to be impotent when dealing with the tsunami of debt because losses have simply been staggering to drain “capital” than can be replaced and which has similarly devastated the credit system beyond immediate repair. Hence, the global central bank actions are unlikely to rekindle a credit driven (inflationary boom) economic recovery.

In addition, they argue that because of the credit prompted seizure in the banking system its spillover effects to the real economy will lead to a much further decline in aggregate demand which accentuates the overcapacity in the global trade network which will further transmit deflationary forces worldwide.

Moreover, they’ve boisterously indulged in a public blame game in the context of trade balances. They accuse the current account surplus economies, who still seem reluctant to abide by their behest of absorbing declining world aggregate demand via their prescribed policies of increasing domestic consumption, of being ‘beggar thy neighbor’. Some of them have even implied that the continued thrust towards mercantilism in today’s recessionary as “Protectionism In Disguise” (PID).

This of course, according to our self-righteous omnipotent camp will lead to further deflation as excess capacity will forcibly be dumped into the markets and may result to countervailing protectionist actions.

Grim indeed.

The bizarre thing is that Keynesians have been fighting among themselves: the insiders or policymakers believe that eventually their actions will triumph, while the outsiders believe that their sanctimonious wisdoms represent as the much needed elixir to the present predicament.

Yet all of these exhibits nothing more than the cognitive bias of the “endowment effect” or placing a higher value on opinions they own than opinions that they do not.

The rest is speculation.

End Justifies The Means: The Gathering Inflation Storm?

There are two ways one can categorize all these competing analysis.

One, means to an end- (free dictionary) something that you are not interested in but that you do because it will help you to achieve something else; or applied to the recent events, the analysis that “my way has to be followed” regardless of the outcome.

Yes, the US and many European governments have practically followed nearly all Keynesian prescriptions short of outright nationalizations of the affected industries, yet NO definitive progress.

In short, we see many analysis based on the strict adherence to ideological methodologies than the actual pursuit of economic goals.

Of course, this will have to be wrapped with technical gobbledygook, such as liquidity trap, debt trap, and assorted claptraps (possibly even crab traps), to entertain and wow their audience, especially catered to those seeking easy answers or explanations to the performance of today’s market as the trajectory for the future.

Two, end justifies the means- (free dictionary) in order to achieve an important aim, it as acceptable to do something bad or the end result determines the course of action.

As we have earlier said the major alternative recourse to deal with an unsustainable debt structure is to ultimately inflate the real value of debt, which essentially shifts the burden from the debtor to the creditor.

And there have been rising incidences of voices expressing such direction:

This from Atlanta Federal Reserve President Dennis Lockhart (Wall Street Journal) ``A direct path to recovery is unlikely, as we have seen, events arise that knock us off the path to a stable credit environment…the Fed retains a number of options to help the economy.” (highlight ours)

This from former IMF Chief Economist Kenneth Rogoff whom we earlier quoted in Kenneth Rogoff: Inflate Our Debts Away!

``Modern finance has succeeded in creating a default dynamic of such stupefying complexity that it defies standard approaches to debt workouts. Securitisation, structured finance and other innovations have so interwoven the financial system's various players that it is essentially impossible to restructure one financial institution at a time. System-wide solutions are needed….

``Fortunately, creating inflation is not rocket science. All central banks need to do is to keep printing money to buy up government debt. The main risk is that inflation could overshoot, landing at 20% or 30% instead of 5-6%. Indeed, fear of overshooting paralysed the Bank of Japan for a decade. But this problem is easily negotiated. With good communication policy, inflation expectations can be contained, and inflation can be brought down as quickly as necessary.

This from a commentary entitled “Central banks need a helicopter” by Eric Lonergan a macro hedge fund manager at the Financial Times (highlight mine),

``What is lacking is a legal and institutional framework to do this. The helicopter model is right, but we don’t have any helicopters…Central banks, and not the fiscal authorities, are best placed to make these cash transfers. The government should determine a rule for the transfer. It is the government’s remit to decide if transfers should be equal, or skewed to lower income groups….The reasons for granting this authority to the central bank are clear: it requires use of the monetary base. Granting government such powers would be vulnerable to political manipulation and misuse. These are the same reasons for giving central banks independent authority over interest rates.”

Let’s go back to basics, the reason governments are inflating the system away (albeit in rapid phases) is because of the perceived risks of destabilizing debt deflation. Yet you can’t have market driven deflation process without preceding government stimulated inflation. Thereby deflation is a consequence of prior inflation. It is a function of action-reaction, cause and effect and a feedback loop- where government tries to manipulate the market and market eventually unwinds the unsustainable structure.

Our point is simple; if authorities today see the continuing defenselessness of the present economic and market conditions against deflationary forces, ultimately the only way to reduce the monstrous debt levels would be to activate the nuclear option or the Zimbabwe model.

And as repeatedly argued, the Zimbabwe model doesn’t need a functioning credit system because it can bypass the commercial system and print away its liabilities by expanding government bureaucracy explicitly designed to attain such political goal.

As Steve Hanke in the Forbes magazine wrote, ``The cause of the hyperinflation is a government that forces the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe to print money. The government finances its spending by issuing debt that the RBZ must purchase with new Zimbabwe dollars. The bank also produces jobs, at the expense of every Zimbabwean who uses money. Between 2001 and 2007 its staff grew by 120%, from 618 to 1,360 employees, the largest increase in any central bank in the world. Still, the bank doesn't produce accurate, timely data.”

In other words, the Rogoff solution simply qualifies the ‘end justifying the means’ approach, where the ultimate goal is political -to reduce debt in order for the economy to recover eventually or over the long term for political survival, than an outright economic end. Yet because of the vagueness of such measures, there will likely be huge risks of unintended painful consequences. But nonetheless, if present measures continue to be proven futile, then path of the policy directives could likely to lead to such endgame measures-our Mises moment.

Yet, the Rogoff solution simply cuts through the long chase of the farcical rigmarole advanced by deflation proponents who use their repertoire of technical vernaculars of assorted “traps” to convey a deflation scenario. When worst comes to worst all these technical gibberish will simply evaporate.

Moreover, deflation proponents seem to forget that the Japan’s lost decade or the Great Depression from which Keynesians have modeled their paradigms had one common denominator: “isolationism”.

Japan’s debacle looks significantly political and culturally (pathological savers) induced, while the Smoot Hawley Act in the 1930s erected a firewall among nations which essentially choked off trade and capital flows and deepened the crisis into a Depression.

This clearly hasn’t been the case today, YET, see Figure 3.

Figure 3: US global: Global Central Banks Concertedly Cutting Rates

There had been nearly coordinated massive interest rate cuts this week by several key central banks; the Swedish Riksbank slashed its rates by nearly half, cutting 175 bp to 2%, followed by the Bank of England, which slashed rates by 100bp (last month it cut by 150 bp), while the ECB was the most conservative and cut of 75bp. Indonesia followed with 25 bp while New Zealand cut a record 150bp to 5% (guardian.co.uk).

And as we quoted Arthur Middleton Hughes in our Global Market Crash: Accelerating The Mises Moment!, ``the market rate of interest means different things to different segments of the structure of production.”

If the all important tie that binds the world has been forcible selling out of the debt deflation process, then as these phenomenon subsides we can expect these interest rate policies to eventually gain traction.

And it is not merely interest rates, but a panoply of distinct national fiscal and monetary policies targeted at cushioning such transmission.

Remember, even in today’s globalization framework, the integration of economies hasn’t been perfect and that is why we can see select bourses as Tunisia, Ghana, Iraq or Ecuador defying global trends, perhaps due to such leakages.

The point is there is no 100% correlation among markets and economies. And when the forcible selling (capital flow) fades, the transmission linkages will focus on other aspects as trade or remittances which have varying degrees of external connections relative to their national GDP.

Thus, considering the compounded effects of individual economies and their respective national policy actions, market or economic performances should vary significantly.

The idea that global deflation will engulf every nation seems likely a fallacy of composition if not a chimera.

Reviving Smoot-Hawley Version 2008?

Next, there is this camp agitating for a revised form of protectionism.

They accuse nations with huge current account surplus, particularly China, for nurturing trade frictions amidst a recessionary environment-by obstinately opting to sustain the present trade configuration which is heavily modeled after an export led capital intensive investment growth.

The recent surge of the US dollar against the Chinese Yuan and China’s recent policies of providing for higher rebate and removal of bank credit caps have been interpreted to as being implicitly protectionist.

The alleged risks is that given the slackening of aggregate demand, China’s export oriented growth model could pose as furthering the deflationary environment by dumping excess capacity to the world.

Echoing former accusations of currency manipulation, but in a variant form, the adamant refusal by China to reduce its export subsidies (via Currency controls etc.) at the expense of domestic consumption, is seen by critics as tantamount to fostering protectionism and thus, should require equivalent punitive sanctions.

Recessions are, as seen from the mainstream, defined as a broad based decline in economic activity, which covers falling industrial production, payroll employment, real disposable income excluding transfer payments and real business sales.

But recessions or bubble bust cycles are mainly ``a process whereby business errors brought about by past easy monetary policies are revealed and liquidated once the central bank tightens its monetary stance,” as noted by Frank Shostak.

In other words, when China gets implicitly or explicitly blamed for “currency manipulation” or for failing to adopt policies that “OUGHT TO” balance the world trade, it assumes that the US, doesn’t carry the same burden.

But what seems thoroughly missed by such critics is that the extreme ends of the current account or trade imbalances reflect the ramifications of the Paper-US dollar standard system. You can’t have sustained and or even extreme junctures of imbalances under a pure gold standard!

Besides, since the supply or issuance of currencies is solely under the jurisdiction of the monopolistic central banks, which equally manages short term interest rate policies or the amount of bank reserves required, then the entire currency market operating under the Paper money platform accounts for as pseudo-market or a manipulated market.

To quote Mises.org’s Stefan Karlsson, ``Any currency created by a central bank is bound to be manipulated. In fact, manipulating the currency is the task for which central banks were created for. If they didn't manipulate the currency, there would be no reason to have a central bank.” (underscore mine)

In addition, the fact that the US functions as the world’s reserve currency makes it the premier manipulator- for having the unmatched privilege to extend paper IOUs as payment or settlement or in exchange for goods and services.

We don’t absolve the Chinese for their policies, but perhaps, by learning from the harsh experience of its neighbors during the Asian crisis, the Chinese have opted to adopt similar mercantilist nature to protect its interest but on a declining intensity as it globalizes.

The point that Chinese authorities are considering full convertibility of the yuan, as per Finance Asia (emphasis mine), ``The Chinese authorities should raise the profile of the renminbi during the global financial turmoil and get ready for the currency’s full convertibility, according to Wu Xiaoling, deputy director with the finance and economic committee of the National People’s Congress”, or this ``Wu, who was a deputy governor of the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) until earlier this year, told a seminar in Beijing in November that the renminbi should become an international reserve currency in tandem with its full convertibility, reflecting a renewed interest in loosening control of the currency as the country becomes more deeply integrated in the world financial system. She said it was difficult to find an alternative reserve currency but added that the renminbi was ready to become an international currency to replace the dollar,” equally demonstrates the political thrust to gain superiority by becoming more integrated with the world via reducing mercantilist policies and adopting international currency standards.

But, unlike the expectations of our magic wand wielding experts, you don’t expect them to do this overnight.

Figure 4 Gavekal: China Reserves Outgrow China’s Trade Surplus & FDI

Also during the past years, China’s currency reserves didn’t account for only trade surpluses or FDI flows, but as figure 4 courtesy of Gavekal Capital shows, a significant part of these reserves could have emanated from portfolio or speculative flows even in a heavily regulated environment.

Thus, the recent surge of US dollar relative to the Yuan may not entirely be a policy choice but also representative of these outflows given the current conditions. The fact that China’s real estate has been decelerating and may have absorbed most of these speculative flows could reflect such dynamics.

Nonetheless Keynesians always focus on the aggregate demand when recessions or a busting cycle also means a contraction of aggregate supply.

Malinvestments as seen in jobs, industries or companies or likewise seen in supply or demand created by the illusory capital or “money from thin air” which would need to be cleared. Or when the excesses in demand and in supply are sufficiently reduced or eliminated, and losses are taken over by new investors funded by fresh capital, then the economy will start to recover.

Again Frank Shostak (highlight mine), ``Contrary to the Keynesian framework, recessions are not about insufficient demand. In fact Austrians maintain that people's demand is unlimited. The key in Austrian thinking is how to fund the demand. We argue that every unit of money must be earned. This in turn means that before a demand could be exercised, something must be produced. Every increase in the demand must be preceded by an increase in the production of real wealth, i.e. goods and services that are on the highest priority list of consumers (we don't believe in indifference curves).”

The point is whatever decline in aggregate demand also translates to a decline in capacity as losses squeezes these excesses out. Today’s falling prices may already reflect such oversupply-declining demand adjustments.

Said differently the calls to maintain or support “demand” by means of more government intervention aimed at propping up of institutions, which are not viable and can’t survive the market process on its own, isn’t a convincing answer. The pain from the adjustments in debt laden Western economies is also felt but to a lesser degree in Asian economies.

Likewise, imposing undue protectionist sanctions to suit the whims of such pious and all knowing experts, will likely have more unintended consequences, foster even more imbalances and or risks further deterioration of the present conditions.

Forcing China to radically reform, without dealing with the structural asymmetries from today’s fractional reserve banking US dollar standard, won’t resolve the recurring boom-bust cycles. This simply deals with the symptoms and not the cause.

Changing The Rules Of The Game By Inflation

``The truth is that no investment asset is inherently safe. Risk or safety is an attribute of price.”-James Grant, Little logic to bond world amid current risk phobias

Inflationary or deflationary outcome will ultimately be decided politically.

If the US government decides to safeguard its currency and allow for these market adjustments to occur, then there could be a deflationary unwind. However, this isn’t going to be politically palatable.

Yet, given the extent of the recent aggressive policy maneuvers, the penchant to use up all the available arsenal by the US Federal Reserve or by the President elect Obama (e.g. to engage in the “single largest investment program”) and or their respective ideological underpinning, all these tilts the risks towards greater than expected inflation, if not hyperinflation.

For us, deflationists have been underestimating the government’s capability to destroy their currency. It doesn’t take complex mathematical equations to do so. It only takes basic universal economic laws-exponential growth of supply of money relative to goods or services.

So far, Fed Chair Ben Bernanke’s outline to deal with this ‘deflation’ problem has gradually been implemented according to his playbook. In a worst case scenario, Mr. Bernanke in his 2002 speech elaborated the nuclear option (underscore mine),

``But the U.S. government has a technology, called a printing press (or, today, its electronic equivalent), that allows it to produce as many U.S. dollars as it wishes at essentially no cost. By increasing the number of U.S. dollars in circulation, or even by credibly threatening to do so, the U.S. government can also reduce the value of a dollar in terms of goods and services, which is equivalent to raising the prices in dollars of those goods and services. We conclude that, under a paper-money system, a determined government can always generate higher spending and hence positive inflation…

``Although a policy of intervening to affect the exchange value of the dollar is nowhere on the horizon today, it's worth noting that there have been times when exchange rate policy has been an effective weapon against deflation. A striking example from U.S. history is Franklin Roosevelt's 40 percent devaluation of the dollar against gold in 1933-34, enforced by a program of gold purchases and domestic money creation. The devaluation and the rapid increase in money supply it permitted ended the U.S. deflation remarkably quickly. Indeed, consumer price inflation in the United States, year on year, went from -10.3 percent in 1932 to -5.1 percent in 1933 to 3.4 percent in 1934. The economy grew strongly, and by the way, 1934 was one of the best years of the century for the stock market. If nothing else, the episode illustrates that monetary actions can have powerful effects on the economy, even when the nominal interest rate is at or near zero, as was the case at the time of Roosevelt's devaluation.”

Applied today, the problem is to devalue against what?

During the great depression, the US dollar devalued against gold, but today’s monetary system which has no gold for its anchor, has nothing to devalue against.

``Unlike fiscal policy, which encourages other countries to "free ride" on any US expansion, the attraction of US monetary expansion is that it will force a global response. When the United States expands its money supply, thus putting pressure on the dollar to weaken, Asia and the United Kingdom will quickly follow suit to prevent their currencies from strengthening,” wrote Peter Boone and Simon Johnson for Peterson Institute for International Economics (emphasis mine).

In other words, once the political path has been chosen, then either a global currency war ensues, where all countries will be massively printing money in a race to the bottom or the global central banks undertake a coordinated approach – a new monetary standard that would allow for such devaluation to take place by using an anchor, possibly arising from IMF’s Special Drawing Rights SDR (as suggested per George Soros), a multilateral based currency, or partial reactivation of gold’s convertibility.

However, gold is unlikely to be a priority considering that it would seriously hamper the global political leadership’s power, as it would limit or hamper government expenditures.

Moreover, perhaps we can’t have the typically known “US dollar crisis” simply because if the central banks who are major currency reserve holders decide to head for the exit doors or liquidate all at the same time or simultaneously, there won’t be any buyers, not the private sector or not the US government itself, which makes these an unlikely event.

So the most likely path will be a change in the rules of how the games are played, and this would most likely involve a rather big dose of inflation.

CDS Market/Default Risk Ranking: Philippines Maintains 12th Place, Europe Dominates Monthly Laggards

Bespoke Investment gives us a colorful snapshot of the pecking order of the cost of insuring debts of various nations, as measured by changes in Credit Default Swaps.

Based on month to month changes, according to Bespoke, ``Ireland, Austria, Greece, and the UK have seen default risk rise the most over the last month. All have risen close to or more than 100%. US default risk has risen the 8th most at 68%.”

Among the 10 worst monthly performers, notice that except for the US which ranks 8^th, European countries have dominated the field.

While we may not have the sufficient explanation on why the markets have priced in serious jitters to many European sovereign debts, we suspect that this has been related to

1) credit risks concerns via banking exposures to the Balkan States, which had overheated and whose internal bubbles has imploded, and possibly combined with

2) the recent deleveraging which has heightened liquidity strains in economies with accentuated budget deficits as below courtesy of Danske …

We also understand that Europe’s economy has been more dependent on the banking sector than the capital markets relative to the US. And when the cardiac arrest engulfed the global banking industry last October, the region’s banks, which carried substantial toxic instruments, saw its lending flows to the real economy critically impaired.

Thus, credit driven economic slowdown plus accentuated budget deficits compounded with credit risk exposure to the Balkans may have raised the market’s concern over many of the European nation’s default risk.

National CDS Ranking according to prices.

More from Bespoke, ``Since then, default risk has risen for all but two of these countries (Lebanon and Argentina). Below we provide the current credit default swap prices for these countries, along with where they were trading one month ago and at the start of the year. As shown, Argentina, Venezuela, and Iceland have the highest default risk, with Russia not far behind. Germany, Japan, and France all have lower default risk than the US at the moment. It now costs $60 per year to insure against US default for the next five years. While this may not seem high, it was at $8 earlier in the year, and $36 one month ago.”

Nonetheless, the CDS market shows how exposures to toxic papers, credit bubbles or failed government policies have largely impacted national credit ratings.

Hence, to engage in the narrative generalization that emerging markets reflect a similar state to toxic waste papers that prompted this crisis is to engage in a fallacy of division.

What we should watch is how the markets will price US CDS, as the world's reserve currency, to reflect on the market's approval or disapproval of present policy actions. A continued march upward could signify strains in its privileged status.

Meanwhile, the Philippines maintained its 12^th ranking with minor changes relative to the rest, on a month to month basis. That should be a relief.