Thursday Humor: Obama “Fixes” The Economy

As the President loses his Millennial voting base, despite “fixing” Obamacare, his populist push for a raise to the minimum wage (who wouldn’t want more money than ‘market rates’ for doing the same shit) and class-warfare-inspiring inequality speech may be his party’s last best hope. However, in the meantime, if US citizens can tear themselves away from X-Factor for 30 seconds, the following clear concise chart shows how easy it is to create 140,000 jobs… Our question… why not raise the minimum wage to $100?


 

And in case you were unclear why this doesn’t work… (as we discussed here and here):

The minimum wage sounds nice on the surface: workers earning $8 per hour would certainly be better off if they were earning $12 per hour instead. But economics professor Antony Davies explains that this view of the minimum wage overlooks an important detail: The minimum wage does not force employers to pay a particular wage to every worker; it forces employers to pay a particular wage to every worker they choose to keep. While the minimum wage may be well-intentioned public policy, it often huts the very workers most in need of our help.

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/rZRw6wYn2Eo/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Nelson Mandela Has Died: Obama Addresses The Nation – Live Feed

After struggling for many months, Nelson Mandela has passed away at age 95. Leaders from South Africa’s Zuma, New Zealand’s Key, UK’s Cameron, and now President Obama seemed to be ready with prepared statements and Obama is due to address the nation at 1720ET to mourn the “inspirational leader, remarkable man.”

  • *ZUMA SAY MAY MANDELA’S SOUL `REST IN PEACE’
  • *KEY SAYS MANDELA “INSPIRATIONAL LEADER, REMARKABLE MAN”
  • *U.K.’S CAMERON: DOWNING ST TO FLY FLAG AT HALF MAST FOR MANDELA

 

By way of interest, here is the handwritten note committing Mandela to prison…

 

 

 

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/vKywz1RGvZQ/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Bitcoin – A Cost-Benefit Analysis

David Woo's earlier discussion of the 'maximum' fair value for Bitcoin, we thought his colleague Ian Gordon's view on the advantages and disadvantages of the virtual currency were worth noting. Woo believes Bitcoin can become a major means of payment for e-commerce and may emerge as a serious competitor to traditional money transfer providers. As a medium of exchange, Bitcoin has clear potential for growth, in his view, but its high volatility, a result of speculative activities, is hindering its general acceptance as a means of payments for on-line commerce…

 

Via BofAML's Iam Gordon,

A cost-benefit analysis

Money/currencies are generally thought to have three distinct roles: as a unit of account, medium of exchange, and store of value. To the extent that Bitcoin offers users many benefits and efficiencies as a medium of exchange, this means it possesses some fundamental value that may increase over time as it gains wider use. However, as a unit of account and store of a value, it has considerable shortcomings which we believe will ultimately hinder it from ascending to international currency status. In this section we will review Bitcoin’s advantages and disadvantages in more detail.

Advantages

As a medium of exchange, Bitcoin is attractive as it offers low transaction costs. It does so by eliminating the need for a central clearing house or financial institution to act as a third party to financial transactions. Using a decentralized, peer-to-peer network, transactions are verified independently by network users (i.e., miners) who are rewarded for their work with newly minted Bitcoins. In addition, it provides an alternative payment method to users who may not have access to credit or debit cards, or, other forms of electronic payments.

Bitcoin offers an attractive alternative to cash in terms of security, transparency of transactions, and counterfeiting. Bitcoins reside in an encrypted format on their owner’s computer, making it difficult, though not impossible, for hackers to access and steal electronically. Physical Bitcoin theft is also possible, but it seems no easier to carry out on a large scale than for cash.

In addition, given their digital format, Bitcoins are much easier to carry than cash, which could be a particular benefit in economies where large scale transactions are conducted in cash. Bitcoin also offers the benefit of being easier to track than cash given that each coin contains an electronic record of each transaction that coin has gone through since it was created. Not only is each transaction recorded on each Bitcoin, but all transactions are recorded in an online public ledger, offering a level of transparency that is not available with cash. Such transparency offers regulators means to track potentially illicit activity. Lastly, the digital format with automatic verification also makes it impossible to counterfeit.

There is a finite supply of Bitcoins. The design of Bitcoin seeks to mimic the supply of gold in that the system will create a finite supply of the currency, which its proponents see as a way to protect its value from profligate governments or central banks. The system is designed such that the supply of Bitcoins will increase over time until it reaches a total supply of 21 million. In order to achieve this target, the incremental supply of new Bitcoins will decrease geometrically by 50% every four years.

Bitcoin’s relative anonymity is advantageous to citizens of crisis countries. It has been reported that some believe Bitcoin can be used by those seeking to avoid evade high taxes, capital controls, and confiscation. For example, there was a sharp increase in Bitcoin interest on March 16 when Cypriot authorities, as part of their European assistance package, were prepared to implement a private sector haircut of deposits (Chart 5). Additionally, China has also seen a sharp increase in Bitcoin activity and now accounts for a majority of transactions when broken down by currency, likely reflecting the currency’s value as an outlet for those wanting to avoid capital controls or potential confiscation (Chart 1).

“Winner Takes All” market ensures that increasing acceptance and popularity of Bitcoin increases likelihood of success. As Bitcoin becomes more popular, competitors will face higher barriers to entry, making it less likely they will be successful in supplanting Bitcoin’s market share. Several other digital currencies with similar features to Bitcoin have been introduced with limited success. However, we believe the structure of the digital currency market is one of “winner takes all” whereby as Bitcoin becomes more popular and is easy to use, consumers will have much less incentive to experiment with an alternative currency with similar features.

Bitcoin offers large benefits (from an asset allocation perspective) given its negative correlation with risk sensitive assets, much like gold. For example, following the October FOMC meeting in which the market interpreted the statement as suggesting a less accommodative stance of policy than was anticipated, gold fell as much as 1% in the aftermath while Bitcoin fell 3%.

Disadvantages

Bitcoin’s role as a store of value is seriously compromised by its elevated price volatility. The dollar price of Bitcoin has moved 10% on a daily basis since its inception including days when the price moved 190% from that day’s highs to lows. It can be argued that these swings reflect shifts in estimates about the fundamental value of Bitcoin as more people become aware of it, or, use it. For example, the Bitcoin’s dollar price increased 50% to $785 following a Senate Hearing on November 18th after which a couple regulators took a more positive stance towards the use of Bitcoin as another form of payment. This is consistent with indications from European officials on Bitcoin. However, it is more likely a function of the highly speculative nature of the market which produces such unstable returns amidst very low circulation and poor liquidity as investors are enticed by the extreme return opportunities. High volatility also undermines Bitcoin’s role as a medium of exchange as large retailers are much less likely to accept it as a form of payment with prices so volatile (Chart 6). Stores accepting it now are effectively internalizing the costs of this volatility and not passing it onto consumers, but we would not expect such likely unprofitable practices to last.

Regulators could try to impose controls that would increase the transaction costs for using Bitcoin despite its efficiency and the transparency relative to cash. Firstly, the government is unlikely to want to promote a new currency that could be viewed as one that could help facilitate “black market” activities, or, tax evasion. As a result, regulators are currently thinking about how Bitcoin will fit into the broader payment and tax system, and what makes sense in terms of regulation. The bottom line is any new regulation will raise Bitcoin’s transaction costs, offsetting and/or eliminating one its main benefits. In addition, the ease with which Bitcoin can be used internation
ally increases the need for international regulatory coordination. While coordination raises the risk of an uneven regulatory landscape for Bitcoin, stringent regulation by a few large countries/regions would significantly increase the costs of using Bitcoin, thus limiting its usefulness as a medium of exchange.

The quality of Bitcoin exchange security, where consumers exchange dollars for Bitcoins (and vice versa) is suspect. For Bitcoin users not able to mine their own Bitcoins, their only alternative is to exchange their local currency for Bitcoins at an exchange. Aside from the FX risks these customers take, a large number of Bitcoin exchanges have been hacked with large amounts of customer Bitcoins stolen. In one reported case Bitcoinica, an exchange, lost 18,547 Bitcoins from its deposits after its systems were hacked. More recently, a European exchange called BIPS lost 1,295 Bitcoins (or $990,000) following a security breach. As the vast majority of potential Bitcoin users cannot mine their own Bitcoins, exchanges will be critical for linking local currencies with Bitcoin. Without deposit (FDIC) or investment (SIPC) protection, Bitcoin users/investors have little recourse to retrieve stolen funds so in addition to investment risk they are also carrying credit risk.

Seigniorage is currently accruing to the “miners” of Bitcoins who have the fastest CPUs. Over time this will undercut seigniorage as a source of revenue for the government as they do not control the creation of Bitcoins. This means the government will have an incentive to crack down on Bitcoin if it becomes too big.

A 50 minute wait before payment receipt confirmation is received will prohibit wider use. Fifty minutes is the time needed for enough additional blocks to be added to the chain to protect against double spending. This is less of an issue for two parties that know each other because they trust the other will not double spend, but when dealing with an anonymous counterparty this creates a high level of unhedgeable risk. As a result, in the absence of a central counterparty verifying transaction/clearing Bitcoin is likely to remain illiquid, and will prevent it from becoming a significant international currency.

Bitcoin’s use as an international currency will likely be hindered by the fact that it is not a legal tender. Unlike fiat money, nobody is under any obligation to accept Bitcoins as a mean of payment. Therefore, its value is only as good as the perception of its worth by its users. Without a backstop buyer, Bitcoin could disappear very quickly should perceptions of its usefulness decline. Repeated bouts of volatility and further cyber-attacks which put consumer and investor money in jeopardy will certainly inform this perception even as Bitcoin does offer many benefits. Some aspects of the characteristics of Bitcoins (e.g., it is not centrally cleared and there is a confirmation delay) makes us doubtful about its potential in the OTC market (where most FX trading turnover is executed), even though we cannot rule out that a non-deliverable forward market could emerge.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/J5J9iJ6y9XE/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Deutsche Bank Exits Commodity Trading, Fires 200

It is amazing what a few short months of intense regulatory scrutiny, a few multi-billion fines, and the occasional janitorial arrest can do to fraudulent bank business lines. First, recall that as we showed a week ago, and as we have been saying for the past five years, banks were recently “found” to manipulate, in a criminal sense, pretty much everything. Then recall that yesterday the European Union lobbed the biggest monetary fine in history against bank cartel behavior, with the guiltiest party, at least based on monetary amounts, being Deutsche Bank. So now that outsized profits as a result of illegal “trading” become virtually impossible to procure, what is a self-respectable criminal enterprise to do? Why shut down all formerly infringing lines of business of course. Which is what Deutsche Bank just did, which announced a few hours ago that it has pulled the plug on its global commodities trading business, cutting 200 jobs in the process (200 jobs that will certainly be able to find a job in a jurisdiction where criminal trading behavior is still not as intensely scrutinized).

Germany’s largest bank (whose total notional derivative exposure relative to German GDP has to be seen to be believed), which was one of the top-five financial players in commodities, will cease energy, agriculture, base metals, coal and iron ore trading, it said in a statement. What will DB keep? Drumroll: only precious metals alongside a limited number of financial derivatives traders. Because one always need to be able to sell “paper-backed” gold derivatives in order to keep the price of gold low while the NY Fed keeps procuring the hundreds of tons of physical gold demanded by the Bundesbank. That, and of course, because gold is the only product in the history of banking to have never been manipulated.

Reuters has more:

The cuts are expected to largely fall on its main commodity desks in London and New York.

 

The move comes as the financial sector’s role in commodity trading has been squeezed by lower margins, higher capital requirements, and growing political and regulatory scrutiny of the role of banks in the natural resources supply chain.

DB’s justification for the shutdown is quite amusing:

“This move responds to industry-wide regulatory change and will also reduce the complexity of our business… The decision to refocus our commodities business is based on our identification of more attractive ways to deploy our capital and balance sheet resources,” said Colin Fan, co-head of Corporate Banking & Securities at Deutsche Bank, in a statement.

Such as mortgage orgination? Just kidding. It’s not as if anyone even pretends banks are anything more than just taxpayer-backed hedge funds.

Then again, Deutsche had figured out which way the wind blows as long as a year ago, when the head of global commodities trading David Silbert suddenly picked up and left:

Deutsche Bank was among the first financial firms to try and challenge the long dominance of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley in commodities trading a decade ago, but suffered a series of ups and downs and personnel changes over the years, including the departure of global chief David Silbert a year ago.

 

Silbert’s departure was the first sign that the bank was withdrawing from the one-time billion-dollar business, which had included a substantial U.S. and European power and gas book, a major market-making operation in oil options, and base metals trading.

 

“Silbert built up Deutsche Bank’s commodity group to make it a top five contender in the space of five years and then left rather than pull down the house he built,” said George Stein, managing director of New York-based recruiting firm Commodity Talent LLC.

 

“The destruction of the commodities business at Deutsche Bank is one more sign that the large global banks no longer see commodities as viable,” Stein added.

As for everybody else…

The bank announced the decision to staff at a meeting shortly after lunch on Thursday, with around half the 200 traders affected clearing their desks and leaving immediately, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Supposedly these are the traders at high risk of being subpoenaed and with whom DB wants to cut ties as quickly as possible, so as to be able to claim full ignorance of all their actions (see: every other bank in history).

Finally, DB’s loss is someone else’s gain.

Not all banks are scaling back in the sector, however. London-headquartered Standard Chartered, which does a lot of its business in emerging markets, said this month it plans to double revenues from its commodities business in the next four years and plans to add 10-20 staff to its existing team of 100 in the next six months.

 

Global commodity merchants such as Vitol, Glencore and Mercuria, which are not as affected by growing regulation, are also looking to step into the vacuum left by the big U.S. and European financial heavyweights. Asian-Pacific and South American banks, including Australia’s Macquarie and Sao Paulo-based BTG Pactual, are also expanding their commodities businesses.

Then again, since these far smaller and non-government backed entities will hardly have the balance sheet to suppress commodity prices either up or down, even as equities trade in Bernanke’s lala land, commodities may soon become the only market with some semblance of normalcy.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/bEXLcrbmoII/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Stocks Tank 5 Days-In-A-Row As 52-Week Lows Reach 3-Month High

"Good news" once again proved the undoing of the equity market (which some bright spark on TV said "has priced in the taper") and bonds and bullion also fell. Despite the ubiquitous late-day ramp to VWAP (thanks to to JPY selling and VIX stomping), equities closed red for the 5th day in a row for the first time since mid-September. Perhaps most notably, new 52-week lows reached its highest in almost 4 months. Volume was above average yet again as Treasuries saw yields hammered higher with the belly underperforming +4.5bps as 7Y broke above 2.20% to near-3-month highs. The USD sold off – driven more by EUR strength as Draghi disappointed in his jawboning – which proved to stumble all the carry trades as USDJPY moved back below 102. Gold and Silver were volatile but ended the day lower. VIX closed back over 15% for the first time in over 2 months and its reaching extreme inverted levels for 2013 into tomorrow's all-important NFP print.

 

52-Week Lows are rising rapidly…

 

USDJPY did its best to accompany stocks with EURJPY to jumpy (and the late-day pump failed at VWAP)…

 

As can be seen here once again the VWAP pump late on was perfect and failed perfectly…

 

This is the owrst 5-day run in 2 months – but there is still plenty of gains off the debt-ceiling lows…

 

VIX is extremely inverted (but not at extreme absolute levels)…

 

As VIX continues to diverge notably…it seems equity holders want protection badly…

 

Treasury yields are surging into NFP

 

Gold and Silver slipped…

 

Credit markets reamin saturated and unimpressed…have gone nowhere in 7 weeks!!!

 

Also, don't expect a huge short-squeeze tomorrow – the shorts are not in…

 

Charts: Bloomberg


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/2Ct6Ew4GkEk/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Kyle Bass Warns When "Everyone Is 'Beggaring Thy Neighbor'… There Will Be Consequences"

"There are going to be consequences to central bank balance sheet expansion all over the world," Kyle Bass tells Steven Drobny in his new book, The New House of Money, adding "It’s a beggar-thy-neighbor policy, but everyone is beggaring thy neighbor." The Texan remains concerned at QE's effects on wealth inequality and worries that "at some point this is going to ignite and set cost pressures off." While Gold-in-JPY is his recommended trade for non-clients, his hugely convex trades on Japan's eventual collapse remain as he explains the endgame for his thesis, "won't buy back until JPY is at 350," and fears "the logical conclusion is war."

Excerpted from Steven Drobny's The New House Of Money,

Drobny: You’re on the tape saying that dollar/yen is going to 200.

Bass: If I’m right, it will go much further than that. I don’t think it will hit 500, but in crises, currencies swing too far. They can start discounting 15% or 20% rates out ad infinitum because they are in a full bond crisis. But once they flush the debt and have a reset, you’re not going to have 20% rates ad infinitum. We’ve committed more capital to the currency market, but all of the convexity is in the bond market.

Drobny: Recently we’ve seen the yen move your way and everyone is getting excited about “The Japan Trade” – is this the big move you’ve been looking for?

Bass: No, this is just the beginning. It’s not the real move. The real move happens when it runs away from the authorities and they lose control.

Drobny: At what point do you go the other way and buy Japan?

Bass: When the yen is 350 and they’ve wiped out their debts.

Drobny: Let’s play out your Japan scenario. If the yen goes to 350 and Japanese government bond yields go to 20% and they can no longer finance themselves such that it becomes a financial disaster, what are the implications for the rest of the world?

Bass: Well, policymakers have been changing the rules, which is challenging for macro hedge funds. But that’s the beauty of this situation.

Drobny: What if they decide to just knock a few zeros off the debt?

Bass: In the end, they may be forced to do so.

Drobny: What if they bought the whole debt stock at 1% yield?

Bass: That’s the St. Louis Fed’s school of thought, which contends that countries that have their own central banks can print their own currency and will never fall. For the world’s sake, I wish that were true. For the last 2000 years, it hasn’t been true, and I don’t believe it to be true. If it is true, I’ll lose 150 basis points a year and move on. Our core portfolio will be fine. Still, if it were true, then why even have fiscal policy? We don’t need a fiscal policy if that’s the case – we could just spend the money however we want. Policymakers don’t believe there are consequences to their actions, but the consequences will come. Economic gravity will actually set in.

Drobny: But you don’t suffer the consequences if you are out of office. That’s the next person’s problem.

Bass: The point is that no one will make those difficult decisions unless they’re forced to make them. The politics of all these situations tell me how this is going to play out, and that’s through massive central bank balance sheet expansion and capital controls.

The Fed recently wrote a paper that actually endorsed capital controls if done concurrently with other nations. It’s hard for me to fathom that capital controls can ever be a great idea, but this is what you’re going to see.

We are in a period that will be characterized by enormous cross-border capital flows. How will it play out? Let’s assume that I’m right about Japan. What happens then? Nominal interest rates in the US and Germany go negative. The Pavlovian response is to fly to perceived safety; this is why we’re not betting against US rates. In fact, we’re receiving rates in Europe and Australia right now because some sort of stagflation will play out first, before you start to see the real problems in Japan. If you look at history and try to understand what has created despotic rulers and wiped out populations financially in the past, and what happens next, the logical conclusion is war.

Drobny: Who is the war going to be between?

Bass: I’m not exactly sure, but it seems to me that the aggressor in Asia is China and they don’t get along with Japan.

Post-World War II, Japan has been constitutionally limited, such that they cannot declare war. But current Prime Minister Abe is talking about rewriting the constitution so that they can actually declare war again. That’s not stabilizing for the region. Nationalism is rearing its head as we speak.

A third of the population in Japan is over the age of 60, and a quarter is over the age of 65. To put this into context, in the broader developed world only about 8% of the population is over 65. At a point when these people need the money the most, they could lose 30-40% of their savings, maybe more in terms of purchasing power. The social repercussions bother us more than the financial repercussions because the social fabric of Japan will either be stretched or most likely torn, and we don’t know what’s going to happen next.

Drobny: Besides Japan, what bothers you?

Bass: There are going to be consequences to central bank balance sheet expansion all over the world. Look at currency cross rates. If all central banks are expanding at the same rate, the cross rates aren’t moving, but your purchasing power, in terms of goods and services in the country where you live, is diminishing. You’re not focused on real returns, you’re preoccupied with the cross rates. It’s a beggar-thy-neighbor policy, but everyone is beggaring thy neighbor.

I really worry about the true cost of goods and services, but people are preoccupied by the dollar/euro exchange rate to gauge the relative strength of the European economy. You see this preconditioned response and even macro players say things like, “Oh, buy the Nikkei at week end.” They’re picking up a dime in front of a bulldozer. Japanese industry has been hollowed out. The exchange rate may stop the decline for a certain period of time but it’s a secular decline. The people that own Japanese equities right now are tourists. But this creates opportunities in the marketplace.

Bass On inflation,

When you look at what’s going on from an inflation perspective, central banks have printed about $10 trillion dollars since the beginning of the crisis. The first $4-5 trillion went into re-equitizing heavily leveraged structures and bringing down rates. The second $4-5 trillion is making its way into the monetary base, and even though the multiplier is not working, at some point this is going to ignite and set cost pressures off. Again, it won’t be demand-pull, which is technically a good kind of inflation. Rather, it would result from too much money in
the system.

Bass On QE's effects on wealth inequality,

It will show up in food in the early stages. Global QE is filtering its way into asset prices. Those closest to the proverbial spigot are enjoying the printing the most with most in the middle and lower class not feeling the love at all. All you have to do is look at the gap between median income and mean income growing ever wider. This means the rich are getting richer while the rest stay stagnant or even decline.

Drobny: If you could do only one trade for the next ten years – non-risk-managed…

Bass: Actually, the answer to this one is easy – I would buy gold in yen.

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ANrUj76bN_A/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Kyle Bass Warns When “Everyone Is ‘Beggaring Thy Neighbor’… There Will Be Consequences”

"There are going to be consequences to central bank balance sheet expansion all over the world," Kyle Bass tells Steven Drobny in his new book, The New House of Money, adding "It’s a beggar-thy-neighbor policy, but everyone is beggaring thy neighbor." The Texan remains concerned at QE's effects on wealth inequality and worries that "at some point this is going to ignite and set cost pressures off." While Gold-in-JPY is his recommended trade for non-clients, his hugely convex trades on Japan's eventual collapse remain as he explains the endgame for his thesis, "won't buy back until JPY is at 350," and fears "the logical conclusion is war."

Excerpted from Steven Drobny's The New House Of Money,

Drobny: You’re on the tape saying that dollar/yen is going to 200.

Bass: If I’m right, it will go much further than that. I don’t think it will hit 500, but in crises, currencies swing too far. They can start discounting 15% or 20% rates out ad infinitum because they are in a full bond crisis. But once they flush the debt and have a reset, you’re not going to have 20% rates ad infinitum. We’ve committed more capital to the currency market, but all of the convexity is in the bond market.

Drobny: Recently we’ve seen the yen move your way and everyone is getting excited about “The Japan Trade” – is this the big move you’ve been looking for?

Bass: No, this is just the beginning. It’s not the real move. The real move happens when it runs away from the authorities and they lose control.

Drobny: At what point do you go the other way and buy Japan?

Bass: When the yen is 350 and they’ve wiped out their debts.

Drobny: Let’s play out your Japan scenario. If the yen goes to 350 and Japanese government bond yields go to 20% and they can no longer finance themselves such that it becomes a financial disaster, what are the implications for the rest of the world?

Bass: Well, policymakers have been changing the rules, which is challenging for macro hedge funds. But that’s the beauty of this situation.

Drobny: What if they decide to just knock a few zeros off the debt?

Bass: In the end, they may be forced to do so.

Drobny: What if they bought the whole debt stock at 1% yield?

Bass: That’s the St. Louis Fed’s school of thought, which contends that countries that have their own central banks can print their own currency and will never fall. For the world’s sake, I wish that were true. For the last 2000 years, it hasn’t been true, and I don’t believe it to be true. If it is true, I’ll lose 150 basis points a year and move on. Our core portfolio will be fine. Still, if it were true, then why even have fiscal policy? We don’t need a fiscal policy if that’s the case – we could just spend the money however we want. Policymakers don’t believe there are consequences to their actions, but the consequences will come. Economic gravity will actually set in.

Drobny: But you don’t suffer the consequences if you are out of office. That’s the next person’s problem.

Bass: The point is that no one will make those difficult decisions unless they’re forced to make them. The politics of all these situations tell me how this is going to play out, and that’s through massive central bank balance sheet expansion and capital controls.

The Fed recently wrote a paper that actually endorsed capital controls if done concurrently with other nations. It’s hard for me to fathom that capital controls can ever be a great idea, but this is what you’re going to see.

We are in a period that will be characterized by enormous cross-border capital flows. How will it play out? Let’s assume that I’m right about Japan. What happens then? Nominal interest rates in the US and Germany go negative. The Pavlovian response is to fly to perceived safety; this is why we’re not betting against US rates. In fact, we’re receiving rates in Europe and Australia right now because some sort of stagflation will play out first, before you start to see the real problems in Japan. If you look at history and try to understand what has created despotic rulers and wiped out populations financially in the past, and what happens next, the logical conclusion is war.

Drobny: Who is the war going to be between?

Bass: I’m not exactly sure, but it seems to me that the aggressor in Asia is China and they don’t get along with Japan.

Post-World War II, Japan has been constitutionally limited, such that they cannot declare war. But current Prime Minister Abe is talking about rewriting the constitution so that they can actually declare war again. That’s not stabilizing for the region. Nationalism is rearing its head as we speak.

A third of the population in Japan is over the age of 60, and a quarter is over the age of 65. To put this into context, in the broader developed world only about 8% of the population is over 65. At a point when these people need the money the most, they could lose 30-40% of their savings, maybe more in terms of purchasing power. The social repercussions bother us more than the financial repercussions because the social fabric of Japan will either be stretched or most likely torn, and we don’t know what’s going to happen next.

Drobny: Besides Japan, what bothers you?

Bass: There are going to be consequences to central bank balance sheet expansion all over the world. Look at currency cross rates. If all central banks are expanding at the same rate, the cross rates aren’t moving, but your purchasing power, in terms of goods and services in the country where you live, is diminishing. You’re not focused on real returns, you’re preoccupied with the cross rates. It’s a beggar-thy-neighbor policy, but everyone is beggaring thy neighbor.

I really worry about the true cost of goods and services, but people are preoccupied by the dollar/euro exchange rate to gauge the relative strength of the European economy. You see this preconditioned response and even macro players say things like, “Oh, buy the Nikkei at week end.” They’re picking up a dime in front of a bulldozer. Japanese industry has been hollowed out. The exchange rate may stop the decline for a certain period of time but it’s a secular decline. The people that own Japanese equities right now are tourists. But this creates opportunities in the marketplace.

Bass On inflation,

When you look at what’s going on from an inflation perspective, central banks have printed about $10 trillion dollars since the beginning of the crisis. The first $4-5 trillion went into re-equitizing heavily leveraged structures and bringing down rates. The second $4-5 trillion is making its way into the monetary base, and even though the multiplier is not working, at some point this is going to ignite and set cost pressures off. Again, it won’t be demand-pull, which is technically a good kind of inflation. Rather, it would result from too much money in the system.

Bass On QE's effects on wealth inequality,

It will show up in food in the early stages. Global QE is filtering its way into asset prices. Those closest to the proverbial spigot are enjoying the printing the most with most in the middle and lower class not feeling the love at all. All you have to do is look at the gap between median income and mean income growing ever wider. This means the rich are getting richer while the rest stay stagnant or even decline.

Drobny: If you could do only one trade for the next ten years – non-risk-managed…

Bass: Actually, the answer to this one is easy – I would buy gold in yen.

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ANrUj76bN_A/story01.htm Tyler Durden

China: Forces of Movement and Forces of Order

In every organization, including the Chinese Communist Party, there are forces of movement and forces of order.  The forces of movement have moved into ascendancy in China and this was signaled by establishment of the special economic zone in Shanghai and the program emerging from recent Third Plenary Session.  However, the uncertainty over implementation kept domestic and foreign investors cautious.

 

Yesterday’s announcement by the People’s Bank of China will help reassure investors and the pace of implementation may be more aggressive than anticipated.  Financial reforms will be rolled out in the next three months and “most” of the reforms will be implemented within a year.  Moreover, these reforms may be duplicated in other special economic zones. 

 

That said, it is still unclear whether “most” reforms include liberalization of capital flows.  For example, individuals employed in the zone are supposed to be allowed to buy foreign assets easier.  It is to allow foreign companies operating in the zone to buy Chinese assets.  This could dramatically alter Chinese capital flows, if allowed to the fullest extent. 

 

It is also true that of the various institutional stakeholders in China, the PBOC is typically among the strongest advocates of liberalization, though its overall influence is debatable.   Nevertheless, it matches the signal we picked up from our recent discussions with Chinese officials.  The tone of much of the off-the-record comments reflect a awareness that the forces of order have subverted and/or blocked reforms.  At the same time, these officials seemed unusually confident the forces of reform have the upper hand.

 

Of course, the forces of order are not defeated and have to be co-opted.   The quid pro quo may be over politics and security, which the forces of reform will have to respect vigorously, which may be in part, what the escalation of tensions over the disputed islands reflect.  Nor are Chinese officials, including the forces of reform, willing to discuss openly the contradiction between the modernizing economy and the continued rise of the middle class on one hand and the arcane and inflexible political system on the other.  

 

The forces of movement are aware of the track record.  Of the 124 emerging market countries that sustained 5% or more growth for a 10-year period since 1980,  52% were representative governments and 48% were authoritarian governments.    The type of political regime is a poor predictor of the ability to sustain growth. 

 

Both the forces of movement and order are celebrating this week’s news from SWIFT, that the renminbi has surpassed the euro in global trade finance, with an 8.66% share of letters of credit and collection last month (euro share 6.64%).  The US dollar share is 84.96%.  At the start of last year, the RMB’s shares was a little less than 2%.   An estimated 20% of China’s trade is now invoiced in RMB compared with 1 % four years ago.  Some industry forecasts suggest it can reach 33% in the coming couple of years.  

 

SWIFT says the RMB is the 12th most used currency for transactions on its global payments system in October.  Its growth rate of 1.5% on the month was less than the 4.6% overall growth.  This means that the RMB’s market share slipped to 0.84% from 0.86%.   According to BIS figures, daily RMB turnover averaged $120 bln in April and nearly 4-fold increase since 2010 and places in into the ninth position overall. 

 

The Deputy Governor of the PBOC said recently (Nov 20) that it is no longer in the national interest to continue accumulating foreign exchange reserves, which stood at a  little above $3.6 trillion at the end of Q3.  However, this was not a policy indication as China appears to be still accumulating reserves.  Moreover, while some pundits read this as a blow to the US, this has been the US Treasury position for a long time.   

 

The announcement earlier today that bans Chinese banks from trading Bitcoins is perfectly consistent with the reformist agenda.  There are no Bitcoin instruments, like notes or bonds.  The Bitcoin is not backed by gold, silver or commodities.   The apparent anonymity lends itself to money laundering and illegal capital movement.  Just as the forces of movement embrace greater capital market liberalization, they have to vigorously clamp down on extra-legal forms.

 

The message was driven home by the fact that the decision to ban banks from trading Bitcoins was made jointly by five different government entities, including the PBOC, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the China Banking Regulatory Commission, China Securities Regulatory Commission and China Insurance Regulatory Commission.  Going forward virtual currency trading platforms will have to register with telecommunication authorities.   

 

Lastly, we note that privately Chinese officials appear to be increasingly concerned about the surge in bond yields since mid-year.  China’s 10-year bond yield has risen about 120 bp since early July to almost 4.8% at the end of November.   Like Japanese government bonds, though for different reasons, the vast majority of Chinese bonds are owned by domestic entities.

 

Domestic insurers, pension funds and commercial banks alone hold about 75% of the government’s debt.    We suggest three forces that have driven Chinese bond yields higher:  increased supply, the rise in global yields and the rise in headline inflation from 2.1% in May to 3.2% in Oct. 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/lpUHSY4JBRA/story01.htm Marc To Market

THE WTF COMEX TRAVESTY

THE WTF COMEX TRAVESTY 

By  of Winter Actionables

 

Despite the knot in my stomach, I’m proceeding directly to the available Comex forensics. The gold and silver Commitment of Traders report is highly revealing. The data is for Tuesday, Nov. 26, when gold was trading at 1,243.

The settlement price on Monday was 1,222. The managed money boyz, (aka Slingers) have now ramped up their biggest short position since early July’s low at 77,658 contracts (7.766 million ounces). With this week’s net managed money long position down to 15,961 contracts from 34,531, we can see from the report that about a third of this was reduced longs, perhaps from stop hunting. But again, two-thirds of this week’s operation was raw naked short selling.

On the other side of this bizarre trade: Since Oct. 29, the large commercial combined net short position has fallen an extremely large 78,551 contracts (7.856 million ounces) to a near-record low of 28,236 contracts net short. After Monday’s assault, I would imagine the previous July 9 record was broken and these positions are even more extreme.

 

Chart source: GOTGold

 

Silver slingers reported a new COT record high 27,808 lots short. The previous record was on June 25 with 26,512 shorts at $19.52 silver.

 

Chart source: GOT Gold

 

Once piece of information in the report was particularly stunning. The producer/merchant category, which basically is defined as players (such as miners) who actually produce and supply actual physical gold to the Comex, has gone to 5,960 producer contracts long (596,000 oz). This is unprecedented! As you can see, producers have never been long gold since the series began. Even at the bottom in 2009, they were still short.

The supposed purpose of an exchange is to allow producers to price hedge future production. With the Slingers completely distorting the market, this concept has been abandoned. Turning over a whole new leaf, producers now plan to take gold from someone else. Who that might actually be isn’t exactly clear, as naked paper shorts have no real gold to deliver. A subscriber asked where miners sell their gold nowadays. Good question. It sure isn’t the Comex, nor do I think it’s the LME (London Metal Exchange). Instead, these exchanges shuffle pieces of paper around after speculative attacks. There are six cash delivery markets in the world now, and some offer premiums. Nobody talks about it, but why wouldn’t miners just sell there?

 

Chart source: GOT Gold

 

But the 5,960 producer contracts long (596,000 oz) might be a key forensic pointing to something else. Nobody is more likely to bring in the armored trucks and clean out what little registered gold remains in the Comex than a player in an industry that is being completely abused by these paper attacks. Incidentally, there were 590,800 ounces of registered gold left at the Comex before Monday’s paper dump. About the same as the producer longs. Naturally, with 6,770 December futures still standing on Tuesday and this historic revelation about the producers being long, one wonders about what’s up.

Following the sequence of this is a little challenging because these reports are issued  in different time zones, on different days and sometimes with a lag. Additionally, the banker’s participation report (BRC) is due out on Friday, and I can only imagine how extremely long the U.S. bullion banksters are at this juncture. Bankers were long nearly five million ounces a month ago at $100 higher prices.

Another report, the number of ounces raided out of the GLD and shipped off to China, sometimes doesn’t update or comes with a delay. There were no redemptions Monday. Tuesday’s report showed that only about 58,000 oz was pulled out of the GLD.  That is not sufficient to feed this beast. Over 17 million oz has been extracted YTD and they are down to 27,109,000 oz. The question of the day: does GLD still have this in vaulted physical gold or do they now need to run it down too?

The data for the Shanghai deliveries of real gold tend to show up at its site a little after 4 a.m. EST. Last night, a healthy 369,100 ounces of real gold were delivered.

The registered gold report at the Comex is very convoluted, ad hoc and piece meal. I believe that is because issues are deferred, laxly enforced, given promises and convinced to leave their gold. If a producer who is now long starts asking for gold, it will be an entirely different story, a game changer. This can be tracked here and the low inventory levels are evident enough.

 

 

As the Comex opens for trading, the remaining open interest (OI) for December will be reported. Going into Tuesday it as now 6,770. This would would take issue notices and whatever was rolled over to February. The actual issuance tally for the day isn’t reported until late in the evening. Since I need to get this posted, and to maintain some continuity I will have to put that OI number up in the comments section in this post. The same will be true of the daily issue reports going forward, so check back to this post.

These issue report show up late at night and are also sometimes delayed. The one last night was posted at 9:22 p.m. and shows 609 contracts out of 658 (65,800 oz) issued from Nova Scotia to JP Morgan. This is for Dec. 4 delivery.

 

At the margin, and in perhaps what is a dry run on India’s punitive import fees on gold, Sri Lanka has thrown in the towel and has removed its 100% surcharge. Once the jewelry industry there gets back on its feet, that country can soon be another source of heavy duty gold smuggling into India.

 

Subscribe to Winter Actionables here. 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/Z-HP0MJoRc4/story01.htm ilene

What Does It Take To Be Middle Class?

Submitted by Charels Hugh-Smith of OfTwoMinds blog,

By standards of previous generations, the middle class has been stripmined of income, assets and purchasing power.

What does it take to be middle class nowadays? A recent paper, The Distribution of Household Income and the Middle Class, used Census data to discuss what sort of income it takes to qualify as middle class, but reached no firm conclusion: people tend to self-report that they belong to the middle class based on income, but income is not the only the metric–indeed, it can be argued that 12 other factors are more telling measures of middle class membership than income.

In Why the Middle Class Is Doomed (April 17, 2012) I listed five "threshold" characteristics of membership in the middle class:

1. Meaningful healthcare insurance
2. Significant equity (25%-50%) in a home or other real estate
3. Income/expenses that enable the household to save at least 6% of its income
4. Significant retirement funds: 401Ks, IRAs, etc.
5. The ability to service all debt and expenses over the medium-term if one of the primary household wage-earners lose their job

I then added a taken-for-granted sixth:

6. Reliable vehicles for each wage-earner

Author Chris Sullins suggested adding these additional thresholds:

7. If a household requires government assistance to maintain the family lifestyle, their Middle Class status is in doubt.
8. A percentage of non-paper, non-real estate hard assets such as family heirlooms, precious metals, tools, etc. that can be transferred to the next generation, i.e. generational wealth.
9. Ability to invest in offspring (education, extracurricular clubs/training, etc.).
10. Leisure time devoted to the maintenance of physical/spiritual/mental fitness.

Correspondent Mark G. recently suggested two more:

11. Continual accumulation of human and social capital (new skills, networks of collaborators, markets for one's services, etc.)

And the money shot:

12. Family ownership of income-producing assets such as rental properties, bonds, etc.

The key point of these thresholds is that propping up a precarious illusion of consumption and status signifiers does not qualify as middle class. To qualify as middle class (that is, what was considered middle class a generation or two ago), the household must actually own/control wealth that won't vanish if the investment bubble du jour pops, and won't be wiped out by a medical emergency.

In Chris's phrase, "They should be focusing resources on the next generation and passing on Generational Wealth" as opposed to "keeping up appearances" via aspirational consumption financed with debt.

What does it take in the real world to qualify as middle class? Let's start by noting that real (adjusted for inflation) income has barely budged in 40 years, while household income has declined: Soaring Poverty Casts Spotlight on ‘Lost Decade’:
 

According to the Census figures, the median annual income for a male full-time, year-round worker in 2010 — $47,715 — was virtually unchanged, in 2010 dollars, from its level in 1973, when it was $49,065.Overall, median household income adjusted for inflation declined by 2.3 percent in 2010 from the previous year, to $49,445. That was 7 percent less than the peak of $53,252 in 1999.

Here is a chart of the real income of the lower 90% and the top 10%, which by definition cannot be "middle class":


The top 10% takes home 51% of all household income:

Here are my calculations based on our own expenses and those of our friends in urban America. We can quibble about details endlessly, so these are mid-range estimates. These reflect urban costs; rural towns/cities will naturally have significantly lower cost structures. Please make adjustments as suits your area or experience, but please recall that tens of millions of people live in high-cost left and right-coast cities, and millions more have high heating/cooling/commuting costs.

The wages of those employed by Corporate America or the government do not reflect the total cost of benefits. Self-employed people like myself pay the full costs of benefits, so let's "get real" and count *all* costs paid to maintain a middle-class lifestyle.

1. Healthcare. Let's budget $13,000 annually for healthcare insurance. Yes, if you're 23 years old and single, you will pay a lot less, so this is an average. If you're older (I'm 60), $13,000 a year only buys you and your spouse stripped down coverage: no eyewear, medication or dental coverage–and that's if your existing plan is grandfathered in. (If you want non-phantom ObamaCare coverage, i.e. a Gold plan, the cost zooms up to $2,000/month or $24,000 annually.)

Add in co-pays and out-of-pocket expenses, and the realistic annual total is between $15,000 and $20,000 annually: Your family's health care costs: $19,393 (this was before ACA).

Let's say $15,000 annually is about as low as you can reasonably expect to maintain middle class healthcare.

2. Home equity.< /b> Building home equity requires paying meaningful principal. Let's say a household has a 15-year mortgage so the principal payments are actually meaningfully adding to equity, unlike a 30-year mortgage. Let's say $5-$10,000 of $25,000 in annual mortgage payments is interest (deductible) and $15-$20,000 goes to principal reduction.

3. Savings. Anything less than $5,000 in annual savings is not very meaningful if college costs, co-pays for medical emergencies, etc. are being anticipated, and $10,000 is a more realistic number given the need to stockpile cash in the event of job loss or reduced hours/pay. So let's go with a minimum of $5,000 in cash savings annually.

4. Retirement. Let's assume $6,000 per wage earner per year, or $12,000 per household. That won't buy much of a retirement unless you start at age 25, and even then the return at current rates is so abysmal the nestegg won't grow faster than inflation unless you take horrendous risks (and win).

5. Vehicles. The AAA pegs the cost of each compact car at $6,700 annually, so $13K per year assumes two compacts each driven 15,000 miles. The cost declines for two paid-for, well-maintained clunkers. Average cost of auto ownership: $8,946 per year. let's assume a scrimp-and-save household who manages to operate and insure two vehicles for $10,000 annually.

6. Taxes. Self-employed people pay full freight Social Security and Medicare taxes: 15.3% of all net income, starting with dollar one and going up to $113,700 for SSA. Since an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $66,193 or more puts you in the top 25% of earners, let's use a base income (self-employed) of $68,000 to calculate our SSA/Medicare taxes: that's about $10,000 annually.

Property taxes: These are low in many parts of the country, but let's assume a New Jersey/New York/California level of property tax: $10,000 annually.

Income tax: Since the mortgage interest is only $5-$10K a year, itemized deductions are less than the standard deductions of around $18,000. One-half of the self-employment tax is deductible, as well as the health insurance and IRA retirement contributions, so that's another $30,000 in deductions. That leaves about $20,000 in taxable income and about $3,000 in Federal tax, and let's assume $2,000 in state and local taxes for a total of $5,000.

7. Living expenses: Some people spend hundreds of dollars on food each week, others considerably less. Let's assume a two-adult household will need at least $12,000 annually for food, utilities, phone service, Internet, home maintenance, clothing, furnishings, books, films, etc., while those who like to dine out often, take week-ends away for skiing or equivalent will need more like $20,000.

8. Donations, church tithes, community organizations, adult education, hobbies, etc.: Let's say $2,000 annually at a minimum.

Note that this does not include the cost of maintaining boats, RVs, pools, etc., or the cost of an annual vacation.

Here's the annual summary:

Healthcare: $15,000
Mortgage: $25,000
Savings: $5,000
Retirement: $12,000
Vehicles: $10,000
Property taxes: $10,000
Other taxes: $15,000
Living expenses: $12,000
Other: $2,000

Total: $106,000

Oops. That's more than double the median household income. OK, let's assume the mortgage is a bit high, ditto the property taxes. Let's say we need "only" $96,000.

Oops again: our tax calculations were based on $68,000 in self-employed net earnings. To earn $96,000, our taxes are going to skyrocket, as we're still paying the full 15.3% SSA/Medicare taxes while we'll jump into the 25% tax bracket when our taxable income exceeds $35,000. Since we'll be paying at least $15,000 more in SSA and income taxes, then we're up to $111,000 as the minimum household income to maintain a middle class lifestyle for two self-employed adults.

An individual earning $111,000 is in the top 10% of all wage earners. A household earning $111,000 is in the 80%-90% income bracket–the lower half of the top 20%. This suggests that the "middle class" has atrophied into the 10% of households just below the top 10%. Households in the "bottom 80%" are lacking essential attributes of a middle class lifestyle that was once affordable on a much more modest income.

Note that this $111,000 household income has no budget for lavish vacations, boats, weekends spent skiing, etc., nor does it budget for luxury vehicles, SUVs, large pickup trucks, etc. There is no budget for private schooling. Most of the family income goes to the mortgage, taxes and healthcare. Savings are modest, along with living expenses and retirement contributions. This is a barebones budget.

If costs had stagnated along with wages, it would take a lot less to maintain a middle class lifestyle. But costs for most middle class essentials have skyrocketed. I was struck by something I read recently in a history of the Tang Dynasty in China, circa 700-900 A.D. When costs are cheap, goods and trade are abundant and prosperity is widely distributed. Once costs rise, trade declines and living standards stagnate. Poverty and unrest rise.

Here are a few charts that illustrate the pressures on the middle class:
Wages have risen modestly while debt has increased enormously.

Social Security taxes have skyrocketed:

So have property taxes: they rose right through the last recession even as property values tanked:

Labor's share of national income has plummeted:

Interest income has fallen through the floor (thank you, Federal Reserve):

The bedrock of Main Street, small business, has cratered:

Net worth of the middle income households has been reduced to a sliver:

As costs have risen faster than incomes for decades, households have been priced out of the middle class. By standards of previous generations, the middle class has been stripmined of income, assets and purchasing power.

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/t_B5vcMWTSs/story01.htm Tyler Durden