Friday, July 31, 2009

Weak Treasury Sales...Bond Vigilantes Rolling Into Town?

Anyone want to puchase debt at an artificially low interest rate from a party that's highly unlikely to be able to pay you back? Anyone?

Surprisingly...you're not alone! The Treasury auctioned off another $39 billion last Wednesday (it's crazy that we get immune to seeing these huge numbers) in an auction that "drew poor demand."

It really looks like the government will have to monetize a lot of debt (as previously laid out in an excellent guest article we ran a few months ago - link below).

Heavy monetization usually leads to inflation. Problem is, the inflation/hyperinflation call appears to be the most obvious one on the planet right now. And the obvious call is often not what plays out in the world of investing.

So can the Fed inflate its way out of this? Or is Robert Prechter correct that you can't beat deflation in a credit based system?

Further reading on this topic:

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Why Green Shoots Are Just Compost in The Greater Depression

In this week's installment of Conversations With Casey, Doug's doing a little yardwork...moving down those pesky green shoots!

The stock market may be up, but are economic conditions really improving? Also - who the heck is going to buy all the debt the US Treasury is issuing?

Enjoy this week's bearish rant, courtesy of the legendary Doug Casey...





Doug Casey on Mowing Down Green Shoots

(Interviewed by Louis James, International Speculator)

L: So, Doug, we're sitting here in Vancouver, epicenter of many of our investments, thinking about the future. Meanwhile, the U.S. Treasury has announced some mind-boggling debt auctions for next week. Any comments?

Doug: Yes, the size of this auction coming up, $235 billion, is really rather shocking - especially when you consider that that's roughly the cost of the entire Viet Nam war. That was considered off the scale and lasted ten years. This action is just in one week. It's an amount that annualizes to $12 trillion - and it's still just starting.

They are going to have to borrow even more money to bail out all of the other banks that are going to fail (which is going to completely bankrupt the FDIC) and all the pension funds that are going to fail (which are insured by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation). And there are lots of other financial catastrophes still on the runway.

This $235 billion is just a drop in the bucket - and I'm not entirely sure where they're going to get this money. If I were a foreigner and I already owned massive amounts of U.S. debt, would I want to buy that much more? That's especially questionable when any intelligent person can see that interest rates are being artificially suppressed. That makes buying this debt a guaranteed loss. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

The Chinese have, say, $2 trillion in foreign-denominated reserves, of which they say about $1.4 trillion is U.S. paper. They realize they're holding a burning match; they want to get rid of what they have, not buy more. But here's the scary thing: even if the Chinese lent the U.S. all their $2 trillion of FX, it would only cover this year's U.S. borrowing. Where is the U.S. going to get next year's? Because next year, it's going to need even more.

Let me be as clear as possible. There's no way out of this without major structural changes. It's not going to be just a disaster. Catastrophe is a better word.


L: Well, we heard today that the government of Dubai did a public offering of debt, and it had to be rescued by Abu Dhabi, because no one else would take it. We've heard other, similar stories. You'd think that at some point, these people would begin to worry that there might be a limit to how much debt they can peddle.

Doug: It seems to me that it's almost the endgame for this financial system. Since the depression of 1929 to 1946, we've had a worldwide economic boom; in its early stages it was quite real, since it was based on the savings that were accumulated during the depression. But over the last generation, starting in the 1980s, we've had a phony boom, driven entirely by debt.

The whole world is awash in debt. Individual consumers are head over heels in debt. State and local governments are head over heels in debt and going bankrupt. National governments all over the world are deeply in debt. And businesses that are catering to old patterns of consumption are going to find they have no earnings to service their debt with, and their assets are unsalable at acceptable prices.

One of the problems we've got here is that people confuse paper money with real capital. This is an important distinction that's being overlooked. Capital is actually just another word for "savings" - the excess of production over consumption. I can't emphasize that enough.

Unfortunately, people are used to thinking of capital as being the same as the dollar bills or other paper money in their wallets - and that can be created out of thin air. But capital can't be created out of thin air.

So, I'm very concerned that all these governments are going to destroy the world's monetary system in tandem. I don't know exactly how it will end up, but it's going to be really ugly. This is compounded by the fact everybody is looking to the governments to solve these problems. Government is the cause of these problems. And the people it employs are not the best and the brightest (how that ridiculous canard ever got traction astounds me) but the poorest and worst part of humanity.

Boobus americanus is looking to the type of people employed by their DMV or the TSA - albeit sporting prestigious degrees and expensive suits - to solve a millennial economic crisis. Good luck, suckers.

There are lots of reasons I say that the Greater Depression is going to be even worse than I think it's going to be.


L: That's a pretty negative view, Doug. What about all these green shoots we keep hearing about? Improved housing numbers, improved unemployment figures, the Dow up over 9,000 again... There are all these signs of recovery, but you say you don't see any green shoots. Are you myopic, or is everyone else in the world wrong?

Doug: I don't want to be seen as a perma-bear who's negative on the economy no matter what happens, but this is a time when I'm very happy to be a contrarian. In fact, I'm not negative. The future should be, and can be, better than all but what the most optimistic science fiction proposes.

So let me put it this way: I've believed for many years that the Greater Depression was in the cards, simply because I believe that cause has effect, and actions have consequences. All the distortions and misallocations of capital caused by government interventions in the economy have to be liquidated. So, no, I don't see any green shoots.

The talk of green shoots is all PR, because the morons running the government actually believe the economy is based on psychology. In fact, psychology has zero to do with it. If it did, then all the Zimbabwe government would have to do to solve their depression would be to slip everyone a Prozac tablet every day. But maybe we've already tried that here, since something like 50 million Americans are already on antidepressants....

There may seem to be green shoots in the same way it seemed that way for a while in 1930. After the stock market went down for six or eight months, it reached a temporary plateau and bounced back up. People thought it was just another recession, that they'd pull through as they did after World War I.


L: Safe to get back in the water.

Doug: Safe to get back in the water. But that's not the way it is this time. For example, people are now saying that housing is looking up because the rate of collapse has slowed. Of course, nothing goes straight down - or up - without retracements. The fact is that there's been immense overbuilding in housing for a long, long time. It's been the epicenter of speculation in the U.S. and many other places around the world.

There's a huge supply of square footage that people simply can't afford to live in. Even if Obama were to freeze people's mortgages, so they don't have to move out of their houses and into tent cities - who's going to pay the real estate taxes on those houses? The local governments are bankrupt, so, if anything, they'll want to raise real estate taxes.

And even if the federal government pays the local taxes - who's going to pay the utilities? Right now, oil and natural gas are at relatively low levels. When you see oil going back up over $100 - which I think you will in the next few years - and when you see natural gas doubling, or even tripling, in the next few years, people aren't going to be able to pay their utility bills.

Besides, all these McMansions are going to have a lot of deferred maintenance. The fact is that people have been living way above their means in terms of housing.

The same thing is true of cars. People have bigger, newer, more expensive cars than they did during the last recession, and they have lots more of them. Cars are on average of much higher quality now, unlike those of the 1970s - which you might call the first federal period of auto manufacturing; those were perhaps the worst cars ever made. During the 1980 - 1982 recession, the average car in the U.S. fleet was something like seven years old, and the average family didn't have more than one or two cars. Today, most cars are way above those of past years in quality. They basically last forever, the car fleet is almost brand new, and Americans have lots of cars.

What makes that even more troubling is that cars are no longer minor assets on most people's balance sheets. Back in those days, if they didn't buy them for cash, most people bought cars with a two- or maybe three-year financing. Now, everyone finances cars for five years or even leases them for that long. They've gone from being a minor asset to a major liability on families' balance sheets.

So, forget about the auto industry recovering. That's not going to happen. No green shoots there. In addition to the fact the cars that will be made by a nationalized and bankrupt GM and Chrysler will be politically correct crap. Nobody but people like Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi will want to be caught dead in them.

Forget about housing, forget about autos, forget about almost anything you hear about on the news. For years, the whole world has overconsumed and lived above its means. It was great fun while it lasted, but now the party's over - and for a long time. You won't see any green shoots.

What you are going to see is lots more corporate bankruptcy and lots more unemployment.

All those people giving $150 massages and $40 haircuts are going to find that people can no longer afford them. Professions like personal trainers are going down the toilet. There are going to be lots of unemployed carpenters, financial planners, mortgage brokers, department store clerks, and car salesmen.

On the bright side, there will be legions of unemployed lawyers - unless they're bankruptcy specialists.

There are so many businesses - almost everything you look at, from restaurants to car washes - that are still catering to old patterns of production and consumption.

Many people are simply not going to be able to afford these things anymore, so lots more people who have been hanging on by their fingernails are going to fall off the cliff. What are they going to do to provide goods and services in a new world? I think the world is going to change more radically in the next ten years than it did from 1929 to 1945.

So, forget about green shoots. If you believe in them, you're going to be in for a sucker punch.


L: What about the companies that are rebounding, like Goldman Sachs?

Doug: Goldman is a special situation. Much of their competition has gone out of business, so a lot of what business there is, is going to Goldman. And they're very politically connected, so they'll be handling lots of state-sponsored deals. It's so brazen as to be shameless. I wouldn't be surprised if the American hoi polloi - with no jobs, no houses, no money, and no prospects - react in a most unpleasant manner against people who appear to be profiting from their distress.



L: Do you even believe Goldman's numbers, or is it all a function of them being able to change the rules that govern how they book things?

Doug: That's a good question. What can you believe today? The government has a vested interest in casting everything in the most favorable light possible. And the newspapers, magazines, and TV more or less parrot what they're told. I prefer not to clutter my mind with what official sources say but make my own observations and interpretations of what others put together. And my view is that the Greater Depression has barely even started.



L: What about recent reports that Americans actually have started saving again?

Doug: I believe that. That's definitely a major part of the cure, a very favorable thing. It's a sine qua non - critically important. Naturally, and stupidly, the government and mainstream economists are all against it. I say stupidly not as a pejorative, but in the sense that "stupid" means "an unwitting tendency towards self-destruction." They don't want to see people saving (the only cure), they want to see people consuming and spending. They're trying to prolong the totally unsustainable patterns of production and consumption the Long Boom engendered.

Fortunately, the average person is watching out for his or her own welfare, despite that being the opposite of what conventional economists are telling them to do. Saving is the only solution to the depression. In addition to massive deregulation, huge tax cuts, and the institution of a sound currency. But since those things are totally in the hands of the government, you can forget about them happening.

Look, you can't solve the problems created by decades of building debt with a few months of higher savings. It has to go on for years to rebuild the capital base.


L: Okay then, for the person who's expecting the sucker punch you mentioned, what's the best way to play it? Shorting masseuses and restaurants? Wall Street? What?

Doug: I want to go for the low-hanging fruit. What the stock market does and what the economy does are really two different things. Stocks could actually skyrocket because of all the dollars the government is creating. People might want to buy stocks because they actually are equity; they represent real wealth. I suspect that in this depression, the stock market isn't going to bottom until we're looking at dividends in the ten percent range across the board, after being cut from present levels, which implies a much lower stock market.

But do I want to make a bet that way?

Not particularly. All that money creation could drive the stock market up in spite of much lower earnings and a bad economic situation.

It seems to me that the sure bet is to be short bonds. Interest rates are going way up. Why? There will be tremendous demand for capital, of which there's a limited supply. Interest rates are the price of capital. So they're going up for that reason - and because of the trillions of paper dollars the government is creating, inflation is going to skyrocket. High inflation will itself guarantee high interest rates.

So, the trade of the decade is going to be to short long-term bonds and to go long precious metals (which are the only financial assets that are not also simultaneously someone else's liability). These are two excellent investment plays, but there are many others. We go into a lot of detail on the best ways to play them in The Casey Report and the International Speculator.

However, just as important is political diversification. The main risk you have is your own government. You have to diversify your assets out of the control of your government. This is even more important than picking the right investment today.


L: Great advice - thanks Doug.

Doug: Till next time.

To the editors of The Casey Report, shorting interest rates is one of their favorite investments of 2009... and there are different ways to do it. Learn all about how you can participate in the huge gains this investment promises in Chief Economist Bud Conrad's new report - just click here.



More recent Conversations With Casey:

All Green Across the Screen Today...The Rally Lives On

The screens were flashing all green today, as our noted "all or nothing" trade resulted in everything moving up today!

Except for? The dollar, of course!

This screen shot from Barchart.com reflect a bull market in, well, everything!

Of note, Treasuries were up today - who the heck is still buying these things? A mystery to most market observants, indeed.

Meanwhile Green Shoots have proven to be unkind to the Greenback, which closed down today, just a shade above it's low for 2009.

So what do you think - is the dollar toast, or is it poised to climb if/when this rally finally cools off? If you haven't already, please take a minute to give us your take in our dollar sentiment survey.

Results will be published on Sunday, so stay tuned!

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Huge Oil Inventories Just Reported

This morning, the US Department of Energy reported, well, HUGE inventories in oil. Oil's decline hastened on the news.

I'm wondering if oil has placed in its short term top, on it's way back down to the $40 range, or perhaps lower (maybe even $20 as predicted here?)

After rallying north of $140 last summer, oil will post a decidedly "lower high" if we have indeed already seen the short term top in the black goo. Whether or not it posts a lower low remains to be seen, but I wouldn't rule it out.

Many folks get outright pissed if you suggest that oil could fall...in fact a recent outraged commenter referred to me as a "moron."

Now that very well may be the case, but let me ask, who could have pictured $3 natural gas, when prices looked like they'd never dip below $10 again, and everyone was talking about Peak Drilling in North America?

Peak Oil is not as scary when demand evaporates faster than supply comes offline. Sure, things may get ugly again if and when the global economy actually recovers, but that won't help your portfolio in the interim. If you're thinking long term, I commend you, that's just not for me any longer.

And remember that the last time oil rolled over, the equity markets were soon to follow. It will be interesting to see if a top in oil again precedes a stock market collapse.


Hat tip to The Daily Crux for digging out this link.

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Detailed Review of Foreign Investment in US (Hint: It's Crashing)

In the inflation/deflation debate, there's certainly no shortage of moving parts factoring into the outcome. Thus, I have to admit that although I've been leaning towards the deflation side of late, at the end of the day I don't have a clue (nor does anyone else, honestly).

One strong argument on the inflation side is that there are just not enough foreign investors to choke down all of the US debt that is being flooded onto the market.

This is the first case of mutual assured destruction we've seen since the Cold War, this of the financial variety rather than the nuclear variety. If you think the long bond is toast, you'll want to pay close attention to this piece, as our stellar guest author team of David Galland and Bud Conrad peel back the covers on the latest in foreign investment in the US.

And boy, it's not pretty...

***

Foreign Investment in the U.S. – Going Down, Down, Down

By Bud Conrad and David Galland, Editors, The Casey Report

Here at Casey Research, we’ve been watching the actions of foreign holders of U.S. dollars as closely as a Las Vegas pit boss watches a card player on a $1 million winning streak.

Many of those in the deflation camp largely, or entirely, ignore the potential role these foreign holders may play in the drama now unfolding. But in fact, foreigners have, over the last decade, been by far the single most important source of buying for U.S. Treasuries.

Given the Treasury’s need to flog on the order of $3 trillion worth of its unbacked paper this year just to keep the government’s doors open – and that is a four- or fivefold increase over 2008 – the foreign buyers not only have to show up for the Treasury auctions, they have to show up in droves.

In mid-July, the Associated Press reported that “Foreign demand for long-term U.S. financial assets dropped by the largest amount in four months in May, as Japan and Russia trimmed their holdings of Treasury securities . . . foreigners actually sold $19.8 billion more long-term U.S. securities than they purchased in May. That compared with net purchases of $11.5 billion in April.”

Below you see the big picture of all cross-border flows in May as published by the U.S. Treasury. It shows both foreign investment in the U.S. and U.S. investment abroad. It includes Treasuries, agencies, corporate bonds, equities, and short-term instruments like T-bills. Foreigners bought a lot of T-bills when the credit crisis became acute.


This should be a serious situation with a big drop in foreign investible funds for meeting U.S. borrowing needs. The borrowing by households and business has dropped close to zero, decreasing demand, while government borrowing has jumped but is still smaller than the private borrowing drop. The Fed has added some lending.

A look at just the longer-term Securities (not T-bills) is even more convincing of the slowing of lending by foreigners:


This decrease in credit should pressure rates higher.

And here is the breakdown of foreign investment into the U.S. Foreigners only continued to buy Treasuries, shunning new investment and selling off agencies in the riskier real estate market.


It’s not for nothing that the Goldman Sachs Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner is hotfooting it around the world lately, last week to Saudi Arabia and the UAE… last month to China.

The purpose of his trip, Geithner told reporters in Paris, he was doing this tour ”to make sure we keep working with governments around the world to continue to provide enough support to lift this global economy back to a sustained pattern of growth."

Translation: Look here, we’re all in this together. If you jump ship now, we’re all doomed… DOOMED, I say!

But the fact remains that the foreign holders of U.S. dollars have it within their ability – either deliberately or inadvertently as the result of a panic setting in – to literally destroy the U.S. currency.

The latest report shows Russia and longtime monetary ally Japan edging toward the door. China and the oil-exporting nations continue to convert an increasingly moderate amount of their trade surplus into Treasury bills – but not on a nearly large enough scale to meet the inflated (and inflating) borrowing needs of the utterly bankrupt U.S. government. And how long will they continue to show up, when an increasing number of other foreign buyers start selling their Treasuries? No one likes to be the last one to leave a party, especially when the bananas flambĂ© has tipped over on the floor and the curtains are on fire.

Put simply, the only thing now standing between the U.S. dollar holding its own and an almost overnight debasement (and history has shown us that when things go wrong with a currency, they can go wrong very quickly) is the willingness of foreigners to play nice. This was never a threat that the Japanese had to deal with during the worst of their recent dark days, but it’s a very real risk here and now in the United States.

That that risk sits on top of the monetary inflation that has been the steady response of the U.S. government so far – and will continue to be its response as the economy further erodes – is not something to be sniffed at.

On July 17, Bloomberg reported that “China’s finance ministry failed to meet its debt-sale target for a third time in two weeks at a 182-day bill sale, according to traders at Galaxy Securities Co. and China Citic Bank in Beijing. The ministry had tried to sell 20 billion yuan of bills and only sold 18.51 billion yuan, traders said. The average yield for the bills sold was 1.6011 percent, they said.”

Here’s our take on this news item: The problem from the Chinese government's point of view is that they were not able to borrow as much money as they wanted, in the light that they are now spending at a very fast clip with a big stimulus program to keep their own economy (bubble?) growing. So how can they fund the spending? They can sell off the stash of foreign-currency-denominated holdings they are sitting on. That could mean Treasuries dumped on the world market.

There are other alternatives, like getting the People's Bank of China to print up some new money for the government, which would inflate the renminbi (RMB) and decrease its international price and attractiveness. They might like to let the RMB fall to encourage exports and keep relative worker pay low on the world competitive scene. But they are also trying to make the RMB a world currency by itself, so they don't want it to look weak and at risk.

Our guess is that they are selling Treasuries and not telling.

[Ed. Note: In latest news this week, Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao said China “will use its foreign exchange reserves to support and accelerate overseas expansions and acquisitions by Chinese companies.” Jiabao called it China’s “going out” strategy. Going out (with a bang), though, may be a better description of what the U.S. will ultimately do.]

This is what The Casey Report, Casey Research’s flagship publication, does: spotting budding trends in the economy and the markets, and then devising ways to profit from them. A strategy that – as thousands of happy subscribers can vouch for – is paying off... and paying off big. Right now, one of our favorite plays, and surest bets, on the economic quagmire we’re in is an investment that is almost guaranteed to be a winner. Let Casey Chief Economist Bud Conrad tell you all about it in his free report. Click here to learn more.

Press Your Luck or Pass? An 80's Game Show and the Bear Market Rally

In honor of our ongoing bear market rally - which appears to be getting a bit long in the tooth to say the least - I thought we should channel the wisdom and charisma of the legendary Peter Tomarken.

You may remember Peter as the host of classic 80's game show Press Your Luck. In the spirit of history rhyming if not repeating, let's tune in with our heroes of yore to see if we can glean how much longer this raging campfire of a good time can continue in the equity markets.

Going long stocks today? Know someone who is? Repeat after me - no whammies, no whammies...


Aaaaaaaaand stop!

Taxes on Stripper Poles? Say it Ain't So!

CNN reports that states are digging deep to repair budgets that appear beyond hope. Republican Jack Murphy, a Georgia state Senator, proposed a "pole tax" that would have charged club patrons a $5 entrance fee.

Doesn't Jack realize that the cab drivers will all have $5 off coupons for the dudes they drop off?

Fortunately cooler heads prevailed, and the bill was voted down.

Now calling Mary Jane to the stage - because we know the hippy lettuce is probably next on the tax list!

Further research on this topic: BBQ, Beer, and Contrarian Investment Indicators

That'll be $5/head boys - government says so.

Dollar, Yen, Australian Dollar Rally Today - Where to Next?

It's another "all or nothing" day in the markets - with equities down, the US Dollar and Japanese Yen are, of course, up. This time joined by - surprise - our old friend, the Australian dollar (ugh - got chased out of that position too early :( )

Looking at a 6-month chart of the dollar, it's doesn't look pretty - or does it? Is the dollar on a one-way train to the cellar, or is it finding a bottom and ready to party?

Is the dollar about to fall out of bed...or just the basement window?
(Source: BarChart.com)

Take our quick poll and let us know what you think the dollar's going to do over the next 2-3 months. We'll be tallying the results this week, in order to compile an unofficial "dollar sentiment" index for readers!

Monday, July 27, 2009

Jim Rogers: I Would Not Be Buying Chinese Shares Right Now

Legendary investor and China bull Jim Rogers told Bloomberg that he hasn't bought any new Chinese stocks since November. He said they've risen too far, too fast, and that they will "probably collapse" at some point. Then, he'll buy more.



Rogers is investing in commodities in lieu of equities as a way to play the China story.


Here's a video of his interview on Bloomberg (click the Video tab to view)


Great comments from Jim, as always - he's fired up!


More recent insights from Rogers:


Exclusive Interview With Leading Blogger MarketFolly

We have a special treat for readers today...we were fortunate recently to conduct an interview with Jay from MarketFolly.com, one of the very top blogs on finance and investing. Jay places a special focus on what the gurus are buying, especially the who's who of hedge fund managers.

His coverage is second-to-none, a true must-read. We broke this interview up into two parts. Part 1 is below, with part 2 coming soon...enjoy! (And be sure to check out MarketFolly.com for more of Jay's great coverage and insights)

***

CBM: Jay, can you give us a little background about your investment philosophy?

MF: My investment philosophy is really a hybrid of multiple styles but it really comes down to just long/short equity. Firstly, I like to focus on macro/secular themes. Then, I like to drilldown the fundamentals of whatever the sector/industry may be that I'm looking at for the 'why'.

Lastly, I like to use technical analysis to set buy points, sell points, and stops to determine the 'when' and the 'how.' I'm an equities guy and always have been, though I occassionally get into other asset classes when opportunities arise. So, I use the best of both worlds in my hybrid approach as I think you can never have too much information.

CBM: I’d love to hear a little about your evolution as an investor…what led you to develop this outlook on the investment world?

MF: I started investing and began tracking and learning from some of the big name hedge fund managers (Julian Robertson, Seth Klarman, David Einhorn, etc). Then I dabbled in trading in a separate account to try it out and had some success there too. So I started to see the benefits of both styles and tried to develop my own style to kind of combine both. So, I like to keep a core equity position and then trade around the other portion as certain signals dictate.

CBM: OK very cool. That’s a perfect lead-in to MarketFolly, your blog…what inspired you to start it?

MF: Yea I started MarketFolly.com since I noticed there was an empty niche in the financial blogosphere. No one was really tracking hedge fund movements in depth. So, since I was already tracking hedge funds for myself, I figured I could extend my familiarity on the subject to others interested.

I started to track numerous hedge funds on the blog and then added more commentary on numerous other topics as it went along. In the end, I thought I could provide a useful resource for others since I do it for myself anyways, so it worked out well.

CBM: When you started blogging, did you ever imagine you’d develop such a large following? Your readership is huge!

MF: No way. I started really cranking out content on a regular basis back in July of 2008 with 0 readers. Then, a year later, MarketFolly has over 4000 subscribers and receives over 6,500 hits on the site each day.

Needless to say it never ceases to amaze me how fast it has grown. I'd attribute it to the fact that I've just stepped right into a specific niche in the financial blogosphere.

CBM: That's amazing - good for you. So now tell us a little about how you gear MarketFolly towards your readers. Especially as it pertains to your personal research and investment philosophy.

MF: Well, MarketFolly's prime content is our hedge fund portfolio tracking series. Four times a year we siphon through tons of hedge fund 13F filings to determine what the big managers have been buying and selling. We're currently tracking 40+ funds and have plans to add even more, but we'll probably need some help to do so! We also cover the various 13D and 13G filings that funds make throughout the year too.

Additionally, we just started our hedge fund manager profile series over the past few months where we take a look at the background and investment styles of some of the best managers in the game. Then lastly, we focus on hedge fund news, macro trends, and market commentary. We'll post up some technical analysis, some secular themes we might be seeing, etc.

Basically, I just like to cover everything that I find interesting in my own research, with an obvious emphasis on hedge funds since that's what readers mainly come to the site for. We've got a nice blend of both institutional and retail investors/traders so there is a little bit of something for everyone on the site.

Stay tuned for Part 2 of this interview, coming soon! In the meantime, be sure to visit MarketFolly.com for the latest low down from hedge fund land.

Ed note: MarketFolly turned the tables and interviewed me as well - you can read the piece here.

Are you bullish or bearish on the US dollar?

We're going to have a little fun and conduct a short experiment - let us know, are you bullish or bearish on the US dollar?

Click here to take our poll

I'd like to see if we can gauge popular sentiment, to see if this provides us with an indicator of sorts - be it leading, or contrary!

If you need a time frame, let's say short term - over the next 2-3 months, do you expect the dollar to be trading higher or lower?

Results will be published, so check back later this week!

How to Get Started Trading the Markets - The Right Way

How do you master the maddeningly difficult exercise of trading? As we mentioned this morning, paper (imaginary) trading just doesn't cut it. You don't have the stomach churning fear of losing money when the market goes against you.

No, the only way to do it is to get out there and do it yourself. I read a good piece of advice yesterday actually - start with a stake so small, you won't mind losing it...because you probably will the first time!

Then you can examine what went wrong, and improve your methods next time.

Trading is fascinating because it's a constant learning process. If it were easy, there would be a lot of millionaires running around who made their fortune in the market, and that's simply not the case.

It is possible to become "good" though, I truly believe that (and I say that not as someone who is good, just someone who tries to learn and improve everyday). To help you on your quest to master the markets, I hope this guess piece by expert trader Jeffrey Kennedy is a helpful one, as he tackles three basic tenets of trading...

***

The Three Phases of a Trader's Education: Psychology, Money Management, Method
July 27, 2009

By Jeffrey Kennedy

The following is an excerpt from Jeffrey Kennedy’s Trader’s Classroom Collection. Now through August 10, Elliott Wave International is offering a special 45-page Best Of Trader’s Classroom eBook, free.

-----------

Aspiring traders typically go through three phases in this order:

Methodology. The first phase is that all-too-familiar quest for the Holy Grail – a trading system that never fails. After spending thousands of dollars on books, seminars and trading systems, the aspiring trader eventually realizes that no such system exists.

Money Management. So, after getting frustrated with wasting time and money, the up-and-coming trader begins to understand the need for money management, risking only a small percentage of a portfolio on a given trade versus too large a bet.

Psychology. The third phase is realizing how important psychology is – not only personal psychology but also the psychology of crowds.

But it would be better to go through these phases in the opposite direction. I actually read of this idea in a magazine a few months ago but, for the life of me, can’t find the article. Even so, with a measly 15 years of experience under my belt and an expensive Ph.D. from S.H.K. University (i.e., School of Hard Knocks), I wholeheartedly agree. Aspiring traders should begin their journey at phase three and work backward.

I believe the first step in becoming a consistently successful trader is to understand how psychology plays out in your own make-up and in the way the crowd reacts to changes in the markets. The reason for this is that a trader must realize that once he or she makes a trade, logic no longer applies. This is because the emotions of fear and greed take precedence – fear of losing money and greed for more money.

Once the aspiring trader understands this psychology, it’s easier to understand why it’s important to have a defined investment methodology and, more importantly, the discipline to follow it. New traders must realize that once they join a crowd, they lose their individuality. Worse yet, crowd psychology impairs their judgment, because crowds are wrong more often than not, typically selling at market bottoms and buying at market tops.

Moving onto phase two, after the aspiring trader understands a bit of psychology, he or she can focus on money management. Money management is an important subject and deserves much more than just a few sentences. Even so, there are two issues that I believe are critical to grasp: (1) risk in terms of individual trades and (2) risk as a percentage of account size.

When sizing up a trading opportunity, the rule-of-thumb I go by is 3:1. That is, if my risk on a given trading opportunity is $500, then the profit objective for that trade should equal $1,500, or more. With regard to risk as a percentage of account size, I’m more than comfortable utilizing the same guidelines that many professional money managers use – 1%-3% of the account per position. If your trading account is $100,000, then you should risk no more than $3,000 on a single position. Following this guideline not only helps to contain losses if one’s trade decision is incorrect, but it also insures longevity. It’s one thing to have a winning quarter; the real trick is to have a winning quarter next year and the year after.

When aspiring traders grasp the importance of psychology and money management, they should then move to phase three – determining their methodology, a defined and unwavering way of examining price action. I principally use the Wave Principle as my methodology. However, wave analysis certainly isn’t the only way to view price action. One can choose candlestick charts, Dow Theory, cycles, etc. My best advice in this realm is that whatever you choose to use, it should be simple. In fact, it should be simple enough to put on the back of a business card, because, like an appliance, the fewer parts it has, the less likely it is to break down.

For more trading lessons from Jeffrey Kennedy, visit Elliott Wave International to download the Best of Trader’s Classroom eBook. It’s free until August 10.

-----------

Jeffrey Kennedy is the Chief Commodity Analyst at Elliott Wave International (EWI). With more than 15 years of experience as a technical analyst, he writes and edits Futures Junctures, EWI's premier commodity forecasting service.

Health Care Reform - What a Joke!

I've been keeping quiet on the subject of healthcare reform, because, well, what is there to say? It's a joke...we need less regulation, not more...and after all, who is going to pay for it? Nuff said.

For the final word on the subject, let's turn it over to our favorite cartoonist, Mr. Steve Sack.


You can check out more of Steve's great cartoon's here. He's been gracious enough to give us permission to post them from time to time.

More from Steve Sack: Obama and the US Treasury

Hyperinflation? Not in Airline Tickets

Even with oil north of $60, airline tickets are incredibly cheap right now. This latest example of price deflation just popped into my Inbox, courtesy of Jet Blue:


Why "Paper Trading" Is Worthless

What's the best way to get your feet wet trading/investing?

Many folks will tell you that trading on paper is the best way to get started. Our buddy Brian Hunt writes today that this advice is crap!

Becoming a good trader isn't just about learning about charts or buying cheap assets. It's about suppressing the desire to "make it all" on one big trade... learning how to take small losses... and learning when it's time to simply sit out the game for a while.

Paper trading doesn't get you any "live fire" training on overcoming your emotions. It's like trying to learn how to hit a baseball by swinging an imaginary bat. So what's the new trader to do?



I agree wholeheartedly with Brian. When I was a senior in college, my good friend Joe and I each opened up a Scottrade account with $500, the minimum amount allowed.

We loaded all of our eggs in one basket - he bought Bally's Total Fitness, and I was fortunate enough to buy Dick's Sporting Goods.

Every day, every hour, we'd watch the tickers on our respective stocks. If DKS ended Friday on a positive note, I'd be on a high through the weekend. When Bally's tumbled, I was razzing him on his lack of investment prowess.

It was great fun, and addicting, and most important of all, educational. My stomach would churn if DKS slumped a few bucks - at one point my paper losses almost totalled $80! Fortunately for me, DKS rallied and by the time graduation had come around, I had nearly doubled my initial stake.

So if you find yourself watching a market from the sidelines, please realize that the best way to learn it inside and out is to actually get in the game! You don't have to put a ton of capital on the line - just start with a small stake, and see what you can make out of it!

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Doug Casey Rips the Supreme Court - Says They "Don't Matter"

Ah, another classic from Doug Casey this week, as he rips into the Supreme Court...and that's just for starters!

His opinions are polarizing for sure - either you love him or hate him, and I personally can't get enough of Doug's stuff...I always laugh out loud at least a few times.

Enjoy this week's guest piece...



July 22, 2009 | Visit Online Version | www.CaseyResearch.com

Doug Casey on Judging Justices

(Interviewed by Louis James, International Speculator)


L:Doug, you wrote in an email that you've been shaking your head over the latest antics of Supreme Court nomination and appointment. Care to tell us why?

Doug: Well, the whole thing is a pointless circus. The whole uproar over the "wise Latina" remark is irrelevant, and all the hours of intense scrutiny people are devoting to examining the alleged thoughts of Sotomayor are a waste of time. It serves absolutely no useful purpose whatsoever.


L: None whatsoever? Wouldn't it matter if a justice got in who might be more harmful than another to the economy or civil liberties?

Doug: No, not at all. The kind of justice who might do some good could never make it through our highly politicized appointment process, so it's a choice between Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber. It just doesn't matter. But, for what it's worth, Sotomayor seems to have all the wrong instincts.

Besides, the Supreme Court has drifted so far from what it's supposed to do that the court itself doesn't matter.

The Supreme Court has a very simple mission; it's supposed to safeguard the Constitution. The U.S. Constitution and its first ten amendments (the Bill of Rights) were adopted and ratified simultaneously. Though imperfect, it's actually a pretty clear and easy-to-understand document. All a Supreme Court justice should have to do is read the Constitution to see if the law in question is constitutional, in other words, falls within the authority spelled out in the Constitution. It's that simple, and it doesn't take a lawyer - in fact, a lawyer's training, with all its emphasis on precedent and interpretation, is the exact opposite of what you want in a Supreme Court justice.

So the weight of precedent and so-called law that has built up over the years is basically junk. Most decisions reflect not what the Constitution says, or even what's equitable, but the political views of the judges - who are all political appointees.

The vast majority of the Supreme Court's precedent should be scrapped. They should start from scratch, and with a copy of the Constitution in hand, and strike down any law that the Constitution does not specifically authorize. Article One, Section 8, makes it absolutely clear that any powers not given to the government in the Constitution are reserved to the states and to the people. Amendments 9 and 10 of the Bill of Rights reinforce that. But they're completely disregarded, like everything else in that document, which was made to shield the individual against the state.


L: That would eliminate most of the federal government - the SEC, the FDA, HEW, HUD, DOA, DOT, IRS, BATF, FBI, CIA, and who knows how many other agencies - leaving little besides the military and the post office.

Doug: Yes, and I would go further and say that it's not just the Supreme Court but the entire U.S. government that no longer serves any useful purpose.

Although the U.S. Constitution is perhaps the best in the world, because a) it's very brief, and b) other than spelling out some technicalities like the number of senators per state, or that the president must be born in the U.S., it mostly describes what the government can't do, not what it can - and certainly not what it should. But it's not perfect by any means.

Why, for instance, does it designate the Post Office as a function of government? In point of fact, anything that needs doing in a free society will be done by entrepreneurs, for a profit. If nobody can make a profit doing something, it's proof the good or service isn't wanted or needed.

The minimalist government described in the Constitution would be a vast improvement over the one we have now, which is completely counterproductive. It does the exact opposite of what is needed economically and meddles all over the world creating enemies we wouldn't otherwise have.

But getting back to the law, the state of the law in the U.S. is ridiculous in the extreme. We have so many laws and regulations implementing them, their volumes fill entire libraries. Nobody can even read the amount churned out every day, let alone what's been accumulated at an accelerating pace over the years. Forget about understanding the law thoroughly and being able to administer it with justice. The whole system is a farce. The saying "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" is fatuous in today's world.

And that's only on a practical level. More fundamentally, one must ask: What is justice?

I've always liked to think about it as getting what you deserve. And what do you deserve? Only what you've earned. All these people who think they deserve free health care, or a job, or a plasma screen TV, simply because they radiate heat at 98.6 degrees, or because they were born in a certain place, or because they have a certain skin color - it's all bunk. There's no such thing as a "just" wage. There's only what you earn.


L: I agree with you about the entitlement mentality, of course, but that's not really a matter of justice, it's just another politically created cancer eating out the heart of what was once the most creative and prosperous society on earth. On the other hand, your idea of relating justice to earnings is new to me - and it maps very well, because, for a company, earnings can be negative. So, if you do something wrong in life, that is to say, you aggress upon others and harm them or their property, you owe them some sort of restitution in order to set things right again (or as right as can be). So, as an individual, you can deserve to pay for your crimes - it's a negative earning on your personal income statement.

Doug: Right. Yes. Putting someone in prison does nothing to make the victim whole. Most people are in prison for victimless crimes anyway. And what happens if a company really screws up? It goes bankrupt.


L: And can ultimately be liquidated... which is what happens to people who do too much harm to others. Or it's what should happen, in a just society.

Doug: Yes, exactly. Listen, all of this is much simpler than people make it out to be. All you really need to know about justice, you learned in kindergarten: Keep your hands to yourself and keep your promises. Those are the only two laws we really need in society: Don't harm other people or their property, and do what you say you're going to do.

But perhaps it's possible to simplify things even further. Following the example of physicists, who are always trying to simplify their laws and boil them down to fewer, more all-encompassing principles, I've simplified these two basic laws that make profitable social interaction possible, into one. The whole of the law should be:

Do What Thou Wilt... But Be Prepared to Accept the Consequences.


That's all you really need to understand. Everyone, even a child or a dog, can understand it.

So all this hoopla over Supreme Court nominations is all a fantastic waste of time. You'd be better off watching paint dry - who knows, you might think of some valuable new idea during that quiet time.


L: I won't disagree. But this isn't very encouraging to investors; you're basically saying that the U.S. is hosed, and nothing and no one can save it.

Doug: Theoretically, yes, it can be saved. But practically... I'm saying that there's no politically feasible way to appoint a Supreme Court that would put the U.S. back on a constitutional basis of operation. That would indeed be exactly what the economy needs; it would get the government completely out of the way, allowing the market to liquidate all the accumulated mistakes of decades of mismanagement, and thus clearing the way for solid, healthy, and even sustainable growth, to use a word that's popular today. But that's not going to happen.

The good news, however, is that the government creates an excellent environment for speculators. The whole Supreme Court side show tells me that the trends we're betting on are solid. And that means that the kinds of investments we recommend in The Casey Report remain on track.

We're expecting the actions of the U.S. and other government to be highly inflationary, but that won't show up until after price destruction from the downturn slows. Bets on rising interest rates, a weakening U.S. dollar, etc. may stress our intestinal fortitude pretty severely in the short term. That makes the futility of expecting anything useful from the U.S. Supreme Court an encouraging sign; many will suffer as the economy worsens, but smart investors who identify the underlying causes correctly need not be among them.


L: So... are you an optimist or a pessimist?

Doug: I'm a pessimistic optimist, of course.


L: Okay then - thanks for your time.

Doug: Till next week.

Recognizing, analyzing, and betting on budding trends in the economy and markets is what The Casey Report does... and what has made its subscribers handsome returns in the past. For example, in 2007, way before "subprime meltdown" was a household term, we saw trouble brewing on the horizon. We advised our subscribers to short bond insurer MBIA, a company that seemed to stand squarely in the way of the avalanche thundering downhill - and we were right, bagging a total return of 1,166%.

While that deal is done, there's always another one... and right now we've found another potential mega-winner. Let Casey Chief Economist Bud Conrad tell you about his favorite investment of 2009 - just click here.
Forward today's conversation with Doug to a friend

About Casey | Forward this email | www.CaseyResearch.com




Marc Faber Says China's Growing at 2-3%, Not 8%

Guru Marc Faber scoffs at China's latest reported GDP numbers - remarking that the Chinese government knows their GDP numbers three years in advance!

He estimates that when all sectors in China are averaged out, the country is likely growing at 2-3% per year - a far cry from the 8% that is being reported.

Furthermore, he comments that China has an overinvestment bubble, which is not fixed by adding more stimulus.

I'd be a bit careful about China, he says.

I love the Morgan Stanley analyst who comes on after Faber and says he is turning wildly bullish on China based on more aggressive earnings growth estimates...I wanna smoke the green shoots he's having!

Here's Faber's full interview on CNBC:



Bud Conrad Likes the Short Play on Interest Rates

Here's a short clip of Bud Conrad, Casey Research's Chief Economist, on CNBC last Thursday. Bud has been pounding the table for investors to buy gold (since much lower prices) and short long bonds for some time.

The buy gold trade has been a good one thus far, and Bud now believes that betting on long term interest rates to rise is THE trade to make right now.

He starts talking around minute 4:20.













TBT and RRPIX are two of the most popular ETF plays on this trade.

If you like what Bud has to say, you may want to check out The Casey Report, where he provides his in-depth analysis each month.

Saturday, July 25, 2009

How the Chinese Gov't Goosed Intel's Results - This Week in Commodities!

If you're bearish like me, you may have found yourself wondering earlier in the week:

How the hell did Intel report results that good?

Intel is not a company that juices quarterly results (cough, GE, cough) - so the odds are they really did sell as many chips as advertised. But how? Is the green shoots crowd correct?

I grilled some of my Intel contacts this week to shed some light on the mystery.

Answer: The Chinese Government!

Not reported in the mainstream media, internal executives quiety admitted internally that the Chinese government made "large purchases" during Q2.

That fits - China seems to be driving everything right now. The commodity recovery. The stock market recovery - you think the US is hot...the Shanghai index has boomed 85% from its lows!

But how sustainable is this? I have to wonder. This is a V-shaped recovery that appeared to be impossible a few months ago.

China's been juicing the money supply for sure...I just read that the Chinese money supply shot up over 28.5% in June alone. Now that's a recipe for a good time.

I'm just skeptical that any of this can end well. Seems like the drunk on a big binge, who gets up the next morning and cracks open a beer. Sure the old "hair of the dog" is an effective short term solution, but eventually, all good things must come to an end.

So I believe caution is still the order of the day (and I wish I was following my own advice, as you'll see below). Markets can, of course, continue to surprise us to the upside - but I can't figure out what's different fundamentally now, as very few excesses seem to have been corrected. Thus, I'm cautious that the March lows will be taken out again before this is all said and done.


Business Idea - Barter, Anyone?

Had a random idea while waiting in line for my morning coffee yesterday. With tax rates on the rise globally, shouldn't we see a dramatic rise in barter?

Cash transactions are easily traced, and thus taxed. Barter is supposed to be taxed, but much easier to doctor up.

I could see businesses increasingly turning to barter as a means of obtaining goods. Plus, you're now insulated from currency risk, as the goods have their own inherent value. I know there are some barter exchanges out there, some publicly traded.

Just a random thought to share, which you may be able to apply profitably in your investing or entrepreneurial ventures. I'll continue to noodle on this topic, and please comment or email any thoughts on over.


Quick Reader Survey - Please Share Your Thoughs!

I tossed together a quick 3-question reader survey, and I'd appreciate it if you could take a minute or two to share your thoughts and suggestions with me using the survey link here.



Positions Update

Should have kept my cash under the mattress...

Went long cotton...my timing was impeccable :)

I bought the break own - then cotton broke right down! Still, there does appear to be a support shelf around the current price level, so I will hold for now. Will sell on the customary 15-day low stop.


Current Account Value: $24,803.91

Cashed out: $20,000.00
Total value: $44,803.91
Weekly return: -9.8% :(
2009 YTD return: -51.2% :(

Prior year's results: --> Don't try this at home...this is what is known as wreckless trading
2008: -8%
2007: 175%
2006: 60%
2005: 805%

Initial stake: $2,000.00

Friday, July 24, 2009

What's the Deal With Natural Gas - Is It Cheap, or Not?

It seems like these days, EVERYONE is looking a natural gas prices, wondering "how could they be so low?" As recently as a few years ago, "The Natty" was selling for over $16 - how could it now be languishing just above 3?

It's often said in the commodity world that the best cure for high prices is high prices. That's exactly what's happened in the natural gas market, as North America's "peak natural gas" situation has been reversed by the miracles of innovation.

The free market solving our energy needs - what a novel idea, huh!

So if the cure for high prices is high prices, is the reverse also true? Is natural gas destined to bounce back, as suppliers inevitably turn off production that is no longer profitable. Read on to find out in this excellent piece, shared with us by noted guest author David Galland...

***

Is Natural Gas Cheap?
By David Galland, Casey Research

At the height of its late 2005 rally, natural gas in the U.S. was selling for just over $16/MMBtu, 350% higher than today’s price of $3.56. The oil/gas ratio, now over 18, is an all-time high… suggesting that natural gas is dirt cheap. So, it’s a buy, right?

In a phrase, not exactly.

According to a recent report by Natural Gas Intelligence, U.S. natural gas available for production “has jumped 58% in the past four years, driven by improved drilling techniques and the discovery of huge shale fields in Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and Pennsylvania, according to a report issued Thursday by the nonprofit Potential Gas Committee (PGC).”

According to the report, the increase in gas discoveries and production improvements means that North America shouldn’t have to be concerned about gas supplies for up to 100 years!

Dr. Marc Bustin provided an overview of the situation in the May edition of Casey Energy Opportunities.

***

In the United States, the tremendous growth in natural gas resources and estimated recoverable natural gas, particularly from gas shales, just in the last two years (Figure 1) is sending tremors through the entire industry. These tremors include the risk of making obsolete the proposed $26 billion Alaskan and $16 billion northern Canadian pipelines to tap northern gas resources and a slue of proposed LNG terminals... unless they are for export!

The numbers currently kicked around are that something around 2,000 trillion cubic feet of gas are technically recoverable in the United States. At current production rates, this supply would last about 90 years.

Some analysts are predicting that even if the U.S. economy recovers in the next year, the amount of gas discovered to date in gas shales will severely dampen any increase in gas price for some time. According to a new study by energy consulting firm CERA (Cambridge Energy Research Associates), new technologies for unconventional gas fields are being applied so successfully that supply is essentially no longer a driver in either production or price in the North American gas market – whatever the market wants, North American gas fields can supply. CERA reports that natural gas production in the Lower 48 states has risen a startling 14% from 2007 to 2008, for example.


Major shale areas or formations in the U.S. and the estimated recoverable natural gas in 2006 and 2008. Modified from Daily Oil Bulletin (May 4, 2009).

Given the increase in production and the small slide in demand, the price of natural gas has fallen to around $3.50-$4.00 per MMBtu (down from $13 per MMBtu last summer). At these prices, many gas prospects are uneconomic, and thus there has been a marked decline in the number of wells being drilled. Rig activity (how many rigs are operating) is down about 50% in North America.

But here is where an interesting feedback mechanism kicks in. One of the characteristics of unconventional shale gas wells, and to a lesser extent natural gas wells in general, is that the production rate declines through time. Most shale wells’ production rates decline 60 to 90% in the first year. If you were a gas company trying to survive amidst today's low prices, the rate of return on your capital investment would also be painfully low for a significant amount of gas if this were your initial year of production.

Another complementary fact is that over 50% of natural gas consumed in the United States today is from wells drilled less than three years ago, and 25-30% of the gas produced today comes from wells drilled last year (Figure 2).

Hence it follows that if there are 50% fewer wells drilled this year (from the drop in rig activity), new production will decline about 35-40% by the end of the year, so there will be gas shortages. Those will in turn lead to higher North American prices, which in turn should lead to additional drilling.

Historical gas production in the U.S. showing the percentage of production from vintage of well (modified from Chesapeake April 2009 Investor presentation from original data of HIS Energy)

Everything else being equal (which it's not, this being the real, not the mathematical world), gas prices and drilling will see-saw until an equilibrium is reached. In detail, of course, things are more complicated, but it is pretty clear that gas prices will have to rise within the year, and the big losers will remain the more expensive plays that require higher gas prices to be economic.

Where will the gas price end up in the short term? A poll of analysts by Reuters suggests $6 MMBtu in 2010 (Daily Oil Bulletin, May 4, 2009), but I don’t think I would bet on a gas price based on a vote by analysts. At the same time, it's an interesting coincidence (or not – coincidence, that is) that many prospects become economic at around the $6 MMBtu range. Among them are the Haynesville and Marcellus shales – and it's no large leap from there to see their tremendous gas production potential acting as a buffer to gas prices going much higher in the near term.

***

Thus, while there may be some seasonal and relatively short-term trading opportunities in natural gas, the overhang of ready supply places a fairly firm cap on the price. Which begs the question, which big-trend energy opportunities should be getting our attention today?

Marin Katusa, who heads the Casey Research energy team, answers the question by, correctly, cataloging the opportunities according to geography.

In North America:
  1. Geothermal -- the most interesting of the alternative energy sources, by a wide margin.
  2. Nuclear.
  3. Oil.

In Europe:
  1. Unconventional gas has, by far, the most upside.
  2. Unconventional oil.
  3. Small hydro (such as run of river).

In Africa:

First and foremost, you want to avoid infrastructure plays (pipelines, refineries, etc). Then you want to look for areas with huge oil potential, which have been held off the market by concerns over political risk. I like what Lukas Lundin is doing in Ethiopia, Somalia, and Kenya, hunting for “elephants” with the idea of eventually selling the discoveries off to the Chinese.

In Asia:
  1. Liquid Natural Gas (LNG)
  2. Coal Bed Methane (CBM)

Lessons to Learn

There are a couple of useful lessons to be derived by investors looking to tap into the virtually unlimited opportunities in energy.

First, just because something is “cheap” doesn’t mean it can’t stay cheap, regardless of historical ratios -- if there has been a fundamental shift in the supply/demand equation. Which is very much the case with North American natural gas.

Secondly, geological and transport considerations make much of the energy complex a “local” market.

For example, while North America enjoys an abundance of natural gas, Europe is forced to rely on the heavy-handed Russians for the bulk of supplies. As you read this, there are companies looking to break the Russian grip by applying the same unconventional gas technologies that have so successfully built gas supplies in the U.S. -- technologies that are only just now being applied in Europe. Early investors could reap huge profits.

In short, the real opportunities are not found by simply “investing in energy” but rather by taking the time to understand the structural differences within the energy complex and cherry picking the special situations that invariably exist in a sector this large.

David Galland is the managing director of Casey Research, LLC., a private research firm providing independent analysis and investment recommendations to individual and institutional investors in North America and over 100 other countries around the globe. To learn more about the monthly Casey Energy Opportunities advisory, including a special three-month, fully guaranteed trial subscription, click here now.

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

5 Easy Ways to Invest in Sugar...and Other Agricultural Commodities

One of the commonly asked questions on our recent reader survey (appreciate you checking it out here if you haven't already) was:

How can I invest in sugar, and other agricultural commodites, without having to trade futures themselves?

Opening a futures account IS a big pain - and learning also takes time - so many folks want to know how they can get in on Jim Rogers' favorite markets without opening up a futures account.

If that's you, here are some ideas for you to consider. And a heads up that I do intend to cover the basics of getting started with futures at some point...just need some time to put that information together.

Easy ways to invest in agriculture, from the comfort of your regular brokerage account:
  • PowerShares DB Agriculture Fund (DBA) - Consists of roughly equal parts corn, soybeans, wheat, and sugar. Not something I'd buy and hold for 10 years, but something you can trade in/out of fairly safely. I'd consider buying the breakouts, and setting a trailing stop.
  • Jim Rogers Agricultural Index (RICIA) - Despite the fact that this is supposed to track the Rogers Index itself, it scares me a bit, because I've never understood who was behind it. I've also seen RJA mentioned, which may be worth a look, but I can't vouch for it personally. Instead, I would recommend...
  • Direct investment in the Rogers index via Uhlmann Price Securities - The official fund. They do have a minimum investment level, I'm not sure what it is right now. If you want to buy and hold a basket of commodities/agriculture for the next 5-10 years, this is probably the best way to do it, and it's hard to see how you could go wrong.
  • Potash (POT) - Can include many of the other fertilizer guys here as well. Analogy here is that you're buying the guys that make the "picks and shovels" for the coming agriculture boom. Don Coxe likes this method of playing the ag boom. Requires some stock picking, unless you just pick up an index of these guys...which would be...
  • Market Vectors Agribusiness ETF (MOO) - An index of the picks and shovels guys.
  • Livestock Index (COW) - Bonus pick! This one is simple...it's just lean hogs and live cattle futures. The play on agricultures is that cattle and hogs eat grains - a lot of grains - so rising input prices should eventually result in rising meat prices. This is one you probably also want to buy on a breakout, and have a trailing stop.
Were these suggestions helpful? Anything else you'd like to explore in future columns? Leave a comment and let me know!

Why Trade Deficits Don't Matter, and Other Knocks to Common Wisdom

Nice job by our friends over at Hard Assets Investor with a great interview of Marc Chandler, who is head of currency strategy at Brown Brothers Harriman.

About 8-minutes in running time, and I'd say definitely worth a watch. Chandler has some interesting (dare I say - contrarian?) views on:
  • Trade deficits - they don't really matter any more
  • Prosperity in the US is actually increasing, despite what mainstream reports say
  • Socialism vs. Capitalism - the US and Europe are more closely aligned than commonly believed, even before the crisis

I just added Chandler's book to my reading list - will do a review afterwards in this space.

Your Stimulus Dollars at Work...An Airport for Nobody

Here's a funny, and disturbing, piece put together recently by ABC News, where they profile an airport funded by good old fashioned pork barrel dollars.

There's a commercial at the beginning - it's well worth the 30-second wait. Be sure to forward this to any friends of yours who believe another stimulus plan is a good idea :)

Breakdown of World Supply and Demand for Gold

Out of the entire commodity sector, gold has the greatest tendency to disconnect from its underlying supply and demand fundamentals. Still, though, the fundamentals act as a rubber band on its price - when supply overtakes demand, prices will eventually fall.

And of course, the opposite is also true. Thus, gold bulls are keeping an eye on this year's supply/demand situation, to see if this is the year that demand overtakes supply.

Seasoned commodity investors know that when this happens - look out! Prices can really do moonshots, because prices for commodities occur at the margins - and when there's nothing at the margin, it's a bidding war for what's left.

Here's guest author Doug Hornig diving into the fundamentals for gold this year...

***

Supply Side Economics –
How Is Gold Going to Fare This Year?

by Doug Hornig, Casey’s Gold & Resource Report

Gold started the summer doldrums looking strong and has retreated since, but what are its prospects for the rest of the year and beyond? That will largely be determined by the interplay between supply and demand; let’s take a look at the supply side.

Reports of dwindling supply are accurate in some areas; however, the story is not that simple. Unlike most metals that are consumed in industrial use, most of the gold ever mined is still around. Gold is forever. Thus newly mined, refined, and fabricated gold is not all that’s entering the marketplace; there are multiple ways of meeting demand. Here’s a look at each.

Breaking Rocks

Imagine that you could turn back the calendar to late 1848, as word was beginning to spread about the gold discovery at John Sutter’s sawmill on the South Fork of the American River in Coloma, California. Would you have loved gold enough to be one of the 49ers who responded to its siren song?

Those were heady times. The Golden State – though it wouldn’t officially receive its apt nickname until 1968 – had a seemingly endless supply of yellow metal, much of it just lying in remote creek beds, waiting to be scooped up. The French Ravine in Sierra County yielded single nuggets of 426 oz. in 1851 and 532 oz. in 1855. By 1869, the record was a monstrous 1,893-ounce specimen from the Monumental Mine in the Sierra City district.

The days of fabulous discoveries are not entirely gone. As recently as 1980, Kevin Hillier, a lucky Aussie following beeps from a metal detector, dug up a nugget that tipped the scales at 876 troy ounces. And in Ruby, Alaska, in 1998, bulldozer operator Barry Clay was stunned to see a 294-ounce nugget roll off the dirt pile ahead of his blade.

Modern commercial producers, though, aren’t looking for fist-sized nuggets, or even the fingernail-sized flakes that many 49ers hoped to find at the bottoms of their pans. Today, a major gold strike might grade out at 5 grams per ton of rock, and economical recovery is routinely done at significantly lower levels.

The easy-to-get stuff is largely gone. With demand rising, miners are struggling to produce ever more gold from ever-lower grades of ore. And they’re falling behind.

The CPM Group’s 2009 Gold Yearbook, one of the bibles of the industry, notes that world gold production peaked in 2001, after increases in 14 of the 15 prior years (despite a vicious bear market). Production increased only fractionally in 2001, to 82.1 million ounces, and has declined in five of the seven years since. And substantially so, with 2008 production coming in at only 74.6 million ounces, a more than 9% drop.

There are a number of simple reasons for the production decline. The older, more productive mines are playing out; newer mines tend to be lower grade; fresh mega-discoveries have become rare; cost of extraction has soared; environmental regulations are more stringent; and greedy governments demand a growing slice of the revenue pie.

South Africa has been particularly hard hit. After ruling the roost for nearly a century, it dropped to second place in production, behind China, in 2007; and into third, behind the U.S., last year. South African output topped out in 1970, at 32 million ounces, and has since fallen off more than 75%. Some miners now must burrow two miles underground to bring up something usable, and the country appears about played out.

Though the U.S. does hold the #2 spot, at 7.6 million ounces in 2008, it too has experienced a long slide. From the 1998 peak of 11.9 million ounces, it’s fallen every year but one, for a 36% overall decline.

There are some bright spots. Russia, still mostly unexploited, continues slowly but steadily ramping up production, delivering 5.9 million ounces to market in 2008. And China’s industry is growing by leaps and bounds. It captured world leadership in 2007 and cemented that position last year, with production of just over 9 million ounces.

In addition, there are some very large, well-defined deposits waiting to come on line. Kinross/Barrick’s Cerro Casale project in Chile, with 23 million ounces of gold reserves, is scheduled for a 2012 commencement; Barrick’s Pueblo Viejo in the Dominican Republic (20.4 million ounces) is slated for 2011; Newmont’s Boddington Expansion (13 million ounces) is targeted for the third quarter of this year.

But other elephant-sized discoveries are problem-laden. NovaGold/Barrick’s Donlin Creek project in Alaska (30 million ounces) is so remote it may never be economical; Barrick’s Pascua Lama on the Chile/Argentina border (18 million ounces) has been beset by anti-mining NGOs; and Las Cristinas in Venezuela (16.9 million ounces) probably will be developed only if Hugo Chavez is in the mood.

Considering the present state of the industry and the limited opportunities for developing new mines, we think it likely that gold production will fail to meet consumption for years to come. Either the price must rise to mute demand, or the shortfall must be made up from elsewhere.

The Gnomes of Zurich (and Beijing, and…)

For the past two decades, central banks have been dishoarding their gold at a pretty decent clip and have been a major source of the metal hitting the market.

Before 1999, each central bank was free to sell whatever amount it cared to. But in that year, the 15 largest European central banks (excepting only Britain) adopted a Central Bank Gold Agreement (CBGA). Although not a signatory, the U.S. sponsored the CBGA – allegedly to promote stability in the gold market – and adheres to it on an informal basis.

Under the five-year terms of the agreement, participating central banks are limited to selling an aggregate total of 500 metric tons (or 16.1 million ounces, if you think retail) of gold in any given year. The current CBGA period expires this September, but the agreement is widely expected to be renewed.

Since 2005, the trend has been notably down, with a particularly steep drop-off from 2007 to 2008. Among CBGA banks, 2007 sales were right at the limit, 15.9 million ounces, but that plunged nearly two-thirds, to 5.8 million ounces, in ’08. And the CPM Group estimates that 2009 will see another CBGA sales decline, to about 5 million ounces.

Central banks not only show increasing reluctance to part with their gold, some are now net buyers. Russia led the way in this department, adding nearly 2 million ounces to its holdings in 2008.

Then there is China. That country has made a lot of noise lately about its waning confidence in the long-term value of its forex holdings, primarily U.S. dollars, and has been aggressively trading them for tangible assets. Many analysts believed that the buying spree would likely include gold, but no one could say for sure. China’s internal financial affairs are rather less than transparent to outsiders.

However, the conjecture is now confirmed. In April, the People’s Bank of China stunned the markets by announcing that over the past six years, it had been quietly adding 14.6 million ounces to its reserves.

China’s announcement had little immediate effect. But considering China’s elevated position in the world economic pecking order, other governments are sure to take notice and follow its example.

How Much for the SOB’s Wedding Ring?

The supply source that’s taken the biggest leap forward in recent times is the recycling business. So-called “scrap gold” includes rings from failed marriages, earrings with missing mates, out-of-fashion bling – and anything else that’s been gathering dust in the jewelry box. Old electronics, too. A ton of discarded cell phones will yield 150 grams of gold, 30 times what a miner gets from an average ton of ore.

People are hip to the rising gold price, and they’re parting with their unwanted baubles en masse. It’s big business. TV ads soliciting scrap abound, including one during the Super Bowl; Internet recyclers have proliferated; and in some suburban neighborhoods, gold has replaced Tupperware as the focal point for social gatherings.

The flood of scrap has hardly been insignificant. CPM reports that it rose an estimated 18.9% in 2008, to 38.5 million ounces, following a 23.3% jump in ’07. Scrap sellers are bringing to market more than half as much gold as all the world’s miners.

The CPM Group does predict that the trend in scrap will start slowing, but still forecasts a rise of perhaps 5% this year, to 40.5 million ounces.

CPM gives two reasons for the projected slowdown. First, so much has already been melted down that sellers may be reaching the point where they will want to hang on to whatever’s left. And second, refineries are running at capacity and have little further capability for turning earrings into ingots.

As long as the price of gold remains high and economic distress continues, people who are hurting will keep swapping metal for dollars. And tons of scrap, melted down and released back to consumers, definitely serve as a drag on the gold price.

How much scrap will be recycled in the next few years is unknown, and so the effect on the market remains to be seen. The safest assumption is that this year will be much like the last, with gold’s ascent comparably retarded -- meaning, not much.

Conclusion

While the market will be well supplied with new gold in 2009, whether it will exceed or lag consumption is the $64,000 question. Both jewelry and industrial consumption are on the wane, leaving investment demand as the driver. It is heavy and getting heavier, as more and more people come to believe in the wisdom of having some physical metal in their possession. Or at least investing in a paper proxy such as the SPDR Gold Trust, which in a few short years has risen from nothing to the sixth largest gold owner in the world.

Gold is increasingly viewed by investors as what it’s been throughout history: a safe-haven asset whose value can be counted on in hard times. Thus we recommend to our subscribers to keep one-third of their portfolio in physical gold. But the real money is made in gold-related investments, such as royalty companies and medium to large gold producers with millions of ounces under their belt. Our current favorite is such a slam-dunk winner that we call it “48 Karat Gold.” Click here to read our report.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

When Will Debt Deflation Turn Into Hyperinflation?

We know that, right now, we are most likely in a period of "debt deflation." Wages are falling. Prices also appear to be falling - though this is open for debate, as there are smart people who believe prices are steady or even rising. For example, Marc Faber recently said he's surprised that prices are not falling faster during this downturn, which may be an ominous sign for inflation.

But for the sake of argument, let's say that at this moment in time, we are experiencing debt deflation. When, then, will the printing of money create price inflation? Tomorrow? Next month? Next year?

I read a great explanation today in Agora's 5 Minute Forecast, where they quote guru Rob Parenteau:

When it comes to the fate of the U.S. dollar, “Two tsunami waves are crashing in to one another,” Rob Parenteau told us last night, “debt deflation on one side, and policy inflation on the other.” Rob delivered quite a speech at our first ever meeting of the Richebacher Society, amid the spectacular views of the hotel’s rooftop lounge. Our highlight came during a period of open dialogue between Rob and Riche Society members when he was asked how will we know when deflationary period is over and inflation -- or hyperinflation -- begins?

The answer, said Mr. Parenteau, is found in credit and wages. No matter how inflationary the government may be, true hyperinflation can’t be had until the consumer has access to excessive credit and his wages rise as the value of money falls. In the current environment, where credit is tight and wages are falling, rapid inflation would only be possible if there were a true crisis of confidence in the dollar. If that were to happen, he assured us, it’d be pretty obvious.

So while the current deflationary environment exists, what do we do with our money? Here's a guest article from Mr. Deflation himself, Robert Prechter, who shares 10 Things You Should and Should Not Do During Deflation.

And if you're looking for more ideas, Tom Dyson has a few as well. Tom writes the 12% Letter, an excellent publication that digs out high income ideas. Yesterday in DailyWealth, Tom had this to say about deflation:

Airline fares are also down. I just bought a nonstop ticket from Florida to Las Vegas for $120 on Southwest. This peak summer-season ticket probably would have cost twice that much last year.

Local retailers are offering big discounts, too. Last weekend, I saw three retailers advertising liquidation sales with entire store discounts of at least 50%.

Even Internet retailers are using heavy discounts. I bought some bicycle equipment online last week. I got a 40% discount on the retail price... then another 20% discount as part of a Fourth of July sale.

The Federal Reserve may be inflating our currency, but when it comes to the prices of the goods and services I use, I only see deflation.

Cheap credit is the cause. Credit's been too cheap – on and off – for the last three decades. Cheap credit caused savers to spend more than normal and entrepreneurs and businesses to borrow and build more than normal. It led to overinvestment in production and service capacity.

Last year, we reached the peak of the credit and price boom... and now prices are falling. We're in what economists call a "debt deflation."


To read Tom's full article, click here - and I'd also recommend you check out the 12% Letter if you enjoy his insights.

Monday, July 20, 2009

Gold Stocks Weakening...Ominous Sign for Bullion?

Breakfast was easy this morning, as I continue to wipe plenty of egg off my face from my recent deflationary call on the markets.

I moved my wife's 401K stash from gold stocks into pure cash, as I thought gold was looking toppy and not acting well. Since that time, gold fell a bit, and has since rallied. This morning I saw gold over $950, and thought I'd better recheck my hypothesis.

While gold itself has held up alright over the last month, gold stocks have not - while always leveraged on the price of the metal itself, they've seem to especially be leading the way down over the past month.

In the spring, gold stocks lead the way UP...they now appear like they could be leading the way DOWN.

Gold stocks (red) seem to be leading gold (blue) on the way down.

The next few weeks will be interesting, as the stock market rally appears to be weakening, at least from a technical standpoint (we're overbought here in the short-term). Let's see what happens to gold, and we'll find out if gold stocks have foretold the future, or are merely sounding a false alarm.

Great Marc Faber Video Interview (Says No Way Around US Inflation)

Here's a fantastic Marc Faber interview by Newsmax (hat tip to The Daily Crux for linking to this piece).

Some quick notes on Faber's insights:
  • Doesn't see any way out of inflation in the US...even if deflation hits, the Fed will monetize more and more debt
  • Though thinks we could have temporary bouts of deflation
  • Can't see how the US will solve its debt problem
  • Thinks the Chinese should dump US Treasuries while they still can
  • The economy will be down in the dumps for a long time


Marc Faber is one of the sharpest investors in the world, and is author of the excellent book: Tomorrow's Gold: Asia's age of discovery.

For more of Faber's recent insights, check out: Marc Faber: You Don't Want To Be In Cash.

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Trading With the Wave Principle - Free Video

As regular readers know, I'm starting to get my feet wet with the Elliott Wave Principle...can't yet say I'm a total believer yet, but I am definitely finding some value from the practice.

Here's a free 5-minute primer video by Elliott Wave International's Chief Commodity Analyst Jeffrey Kennedy, as he takes a look at wave theory as it applies to a chart of palladium.

Wave theory can make your head spin, but thus far I've found it very interesting to say the least. I especially am intrigued with how it's inherent goal is to trade counter to popular sentiment.






The Versatility of The Wave Principle
In this classic Elliott Wave International educational video, Chief Commodity Analyst Jeffrey Kennedy demonstrates the versatility of The Wave Principle by showing you how to identify high-probability trade set-ups at-a-glance, and in any market. Watch the video and then find out how to access Jeff's current high-probability commodity forecasts FREE during EWI's FreeWeek - but only until July 22.


The Versatility of The Wave Principle


Get the best daily commodity picks FREE, but only until July 22!

Saturday, July 18, 2009

Centrally Planned Entrepreneurship, More Anecdotal Deflation

On Thursday, I gave a pitch for my startup (Chrometa, auto time capture) at a business innovation showcase here in Sacramento.

A traditional business plan pitch is fairly formulaic - you talk about the pain point you're addressing, your solution, your market, why your team can get it done, etc. Big focus on the market in something like this - how big is it, how can you reach and sell to it.

What really struck and nauseated me on Thursday were the number of companies that talked about their alignment with current government initiatives. At least half. One presentation even had a head shot and quote from Obama about his push for green energy or some crap like that.

I'm not knocking the entrepreneurs...they can run their companies how they choose. What bothers me is the free market taking a back seat to centrally planned government initiatives.

Why not build a product that people or businesses want and sell it to them? That is SO 20th century. This day in age, you pick out an important federal initiative - green, clean, healthcare, etc - and step on up to the trough of stimulus hand outs.

Dear reader, this is not healthy economic behavior. This, I'd imagine, is how you'd run a startup in the old Soviet Union.

This is not the first time, of course, that I've noticed this pandering going on in startup circles - which are traditionally more or less bastions of pure capitalism - but this is the most extreme I've seen it to date. Seems like everyone wants to get their hands on stimulus funds or grants.

When in Rome, I guess...or maybe when in Moscow.

Bulls who are waiting for small businesses to innovate and lead us out of the recession may be waiting longer than usual. There's a lot of effort being wasted in chasing these centrally planned initiatives.


Is This Blog the Ultimate Contrarian Indicator?

To say that I was wiping the egg off my face this week after this bearish post from last Sunday would be an understatement. Lately I have been forecasting less often, as I try to weigh different positions, and ultimately use the charts to see if they support a hypothesis. Perhaps you should take my forecasts and start trading against them!

For what it's worth, I do remain bearish on nearly everything in the medium term here. We still have not seen commodities decouple from stocks and currencies - hence if you believe the market is ultimately heading lower, than caution should also be exercised when looking at these other markets as well.

Uncorrelated markets suddenly traded in perfect harmony when the Great Deleveraging hit - and if we see another bout of it, I can't see a reason why anything will be spared, at least in the short term.

Yes, people will still need to eat, and we'll keep an eye on the food complex in particular - but caution is still the order of the day for me.


More Anecdotal Deflation

Our office in downtown Sacramento gives us a bird's eye view of the continuing unfolding
disaster here in the People's Republic of California. It is fascinating, amusing, and sad, all at the same time.

While intriguing to see a socialist experiment blow up right before my very eyes, with helpless government officials continuing to turn a bad situation worse, there are real people and businesses affected, which is not so cool...at least in the short term.

The state recently added a 3rd furlough day - so state workers now have been handed a forced 15% pay cut, in return for 3 Fridays off a month. Most would not make that trade if given the choice themselves.

The effects on the city economy are very real. Shop owners and employees I've spoken with on "Furlough Fridays" are bummed out - the coffee shop guy next door to my office described yesterday morning as "very slow". My favorite tea shop in town has also experienced a notable drop off on Fridays - half of their customers are state workers, the owner told me.

This is deflation, no doubt about it. Wages are cut. Businesses are hit. They keep prices steady or lower then to lure in bargain shoppers, who have less money to spend.

In a case like the one I'm seeing unwind right before my eyes, the inflation scenario sounds like an academic exercise.

While the state goverment has its hands tied, because it cannot print money, the Federal government is the only entity that could reverse this trend. I suppose if they printed money, restored workers full pay, and made up the different with the newly minted currency, that would eventually be inflationary.

That's the only way I can see the Fed getting this new money into the system. Banks will not lend it, and that doesn't seem likely to change anytime soon. Only public works projects that are paid with newly minted money seem like the only option.

Still, can they print it fast enough to stave off the credit deflation we're seeing left and right? I'm starting to think not.


Quick Reader Survey - Please Share Your Thoughs!

I tossed together a quick 3-question reader survey, and I'd appreciate it if you could take a minute or two to share your thoughts and suggestions with me using the survey link here.

It's always great to connect with you, and your feedback and input help me figure out where to focus my energies...namely on stuff you like, and stuff you'd like to see more of.



Positions Update

Still scared...


Current Account Value: $27,511.18

Cashed out: $20,000.00
Total value: $47,511.18
Weekly return: 0%
2009 YTD return: -45.8% :(

Prior year's results: --> Don't try this at home...this is what is known as wreckless trading
2008: -8%
2007: 175%
2006: 60%
2005: 805%

Initial stake: $2,000.00

Thursday, July 16, 2009

$20 Oil Just Around the Corner? Energy Expert Predicts It

Crude oil expert Philip Verleger, who correctly predicted oil would hit $100 back in 2007, is now forecasting $20...this year!

Verleger says that supply is outpacing demand by 1 million barrels a day - and with the global economy not really improving, a warm winter could prove to be "devastating" for oil prices.

This jives with the outlook for crude that we looked at last Friday - there's just too much of it right now!

I imagine that $20 oil would probably destroy commodity prices across the board. Be very careful with your long positions, and if you are enterprising/brave, there may be some great short plays to be had in the very near future.

Hat tip to our friends at The Daily Crux for this nice find.

Doug Casey on How to Stash Gold Bullion

Here's some great guest commentary from Doug Casey, as he riffs on various investment topics. Today he shares his insights about how to stash bullion safely away from the watchful eye of the government.

The picture of Doug below really cracks me up. I find his musings both insightful and hysterical, and we'll be featuring these conversations each week in this space.

By the way if you haven't read any of Doug's books yet - I read Crisis Investing for the Rest of the 90's a few week ago, and thought it was fantastic. I had avoided the book for awhile due to the title...but was very impressed that Doug actually foresaw a lot of the current crisis as far back as 1992. Definitely a fun, engaging read, and I'll try to do a review at some point.




Doug Casey on Nuts & Bolts: Handling Bullion

(Interview by Louis James, International Speculator)

L: Doug, we get a lot of questions about how to handle significant amounts of bullion. So let's talk about physical gold, and what to do with the stuff. First off, do you really think that people should put as much as one-third of their asset portfolios into physical gold?

Doug: Yes, I do, and at considerable risk of repeating myself, I'll tell you why:

First and foremost, precious metals bullion is the only financial asset class you can own that is not simultaneously someone else's liability. When you own an ounce of gold, you own an ounce of gold. It's not just a piece of paper that conveys a right to it from parties that may or may not even exist if and when you want to turn their liability into an actual, unencumbered asset in your pocket.

With today's markets suffering from volatility and disruptions of truly historic proportions, that sort of solidity is worth a lot - as you can see from gold's continuing strength. The dollar is in huge trouble and is on its way to reaching its intrinsic value, which is very bullish for gold.

Second, gold is natural money. It's uniquely well suited for use as money. Aristotle explained why, over 2,000 years ago, but in brief, it's because it's convenient, consistent, durable, divisible, and has intrinsic value (or, in Austrian economic terms, it has high intersubjective value).

So, if things get really bad and push comes to shove, you'll always find someone willing to take your gold in exchange for things you need. Come hell or high water - actually, especially in cases of unleashed hell and high water - your bullion will still be an acceptable form of payment... long after people stop bothering to pick up paper money blowing along the cracked streets of dying cities.

Third, gold offers excellent speculative upside at this time, precisely because the markets are so turbulent, with relatively little downside risk - again for the same reason; the fear factor will keep gold prices strong for the foreseeable future and could drive them to the moon with little notice. That's not a ride you want to miss.


L: What about people for whom one-third of their portfolio constitutes a substantial sum - much more than you can stuff under a mattress? Do you use Perth Mint Certificates?

Doug: You're right. Carrying a significant amount of value in gold coins is bulky - and forget about silver, which gets extremely bulky for larger dollar amounts. That's an important consideration given how critical it is to diversify your assets internationally, so you're not totally controlled by your own government.

It's still legal to carry gold coins across borders. Gold isn't currently considered a "monetary instrument," so you can still arguably carry, say, 100 Krugerrands (worth about $100,000) across a border legally, even though you're supposed to declare "monetary instruments" in excess of $10,000 in most places these days. But a large amount of gold could get you referred to a TSA supervisor, and I'd rather see a dentist who doesn't believe in anesthesia than that. The rules and their interpretation are quite Kafkaesque. Although I promise that none of the TSA's 50,000 employees will have ever heard of Kafka.

Vehicles like the Perth Mint Certificate are excellent choices for securing larger amounts of gold. They basically boil down to outsourcing your storage and security needs to a highly respected and secure vault, and in the case of PMCs, they are backed by the government of Western Australia. You own the gold, not just a paper or electronic promise representing gold, and can take delivery via FedEx any time you want. And the certificates are transferable, so there's some liquidity to owning gold in this way, without having to take delivery. (Click here for more information on the PMC programs' with our friend's at Kitco or Asset Strategies.)

But that's for after you've set yourself up with all the physical gold you want in your possession. Because as good as PMCs are, it's still only a piece of paper you have in your actual physical possession. It's only one step removed from physical gold, but a step removed, just the same.

If you are worth many millions, it's obviously problematic to go around with several million in gold bullion on you, but you should have at least a few hundred thousand dollars of gold in your personal possession. The rest can be held in things like PMCs or GoldMoney.com, another good alternative. GoldMoney.com stores your gold in London and Zurich and allows you to transfer it electronically, which is quite convenient. I've known Jim Turk, who runs it, for many years and have a great deal of confidence in him. The last alternative is a safe deposit box in a foreign country.

Be careful with that, however. I was just in Switzerland last week, and they have gone from simply discouraging Americans to unilaterally closing accounts held by Americans (unless you also live in Switzerland and are a resident of the country). They're sending checks to last known addresses, so you can't have a dormant account anymore, like in the old days. And it's even worse; if you're an American with a safe deposit box in Switzerland, watch out, because they are closing those as well. If they can't find you, some of the banks are opening the boxes and removing the contents. They set the stuff aside somewhere, not in a safe deposit box anymore.


L: What - they just dump the stuff in a cardboard box and shove it into a corner of the basement until you come and get it?

Doug: Well, not cardboard, but it's serious. You can't have a safe
deposit box in Switzerland anymore, certainly not with a major bank
(though there are private companies in Switzerland that still offer
the service). And it'll happen in other countries too


L: Switzerland isn't even Switzerland anymore.

Doug: I know. Switzerland was an idea, and like America, it doesn't exist anymore.


L: So, are safe deposit boxes anywhere safe any longer? The long arm of the law is long indeed when it comes to the U.S. IRS.

Doug: That's right. These agencies can do pretty much anything they want, and it's become very problematical. You could establish a safe deposit box in Russia, and they wouldn't be likely to cooperate with the U.S. tax authorities, but you'd be at risk from their own bureaucrats with guns. I'd forget about Europe - wouldn't trust any of those governments.

Of the remaining possibilities, I favor Uruguay. Hong Kong might not be bad, since the Chinese aren't going to roll over for U.S. officials, and Thailand has always been very neutral. Panama is a reasonable possibility. Canada is a possibility. With the exception of Canada, these places have the advantage of not getting a lot of American traffic, so it's less likely that U.S. authorities will bother with the time and expense it takes to bully a foreign power into submission. Switzerland was well known and frequently used as a financial shelter, and that's why it became the focus of so much arm-twisting by various tax authorities.


L: What about skipping the safe deposit boxes then, and going private? Would it make sense to leave smaller caches in various countries with people you trust?

Doug: Yes, it would, but you have to watch out for the mistake W.C. Fields made, of opening a new bank account in every new town he went to. After a while, he had hundreds of bank accounts and forgot where they all were. You don't want all your eggs in one basket - but you also don't want so many baskets you can't watch them all.

You've got to be thoughtful and innovative. The governments are changing the rules, and you have to think of ways to keep ahead in the game. Think for yourself and be independent.

And this doesn't just apply to Americans. The U.S. government is the big problem in the world today, but there are certainly other problems. The French and the Germans, for example, are pressuring the Swiss in the same way that Americans are.


L: Anything people should think of stashing, besides gold?

Doug: Well, they keep raising the taxes on cigarettes - a pack now costs $10 in some places in the U.S, that's 50 cents per individual cigarette. If you're American and are going to be storing things, you probably can't go wrong building a stash of cigarettes. Even if you don't smoke - or perhaps especially if you don't smoke - every time you return to the U.S., you should buy the maximum amount of duty-free cigarettes allowed and store them.

The other thing Americans should do is buy a lot of shotgun shells, 9mm, .45, .223, and .308 ammo. Even if you don't shoot, you can set those aside and store them too, because they're going to be taxed and regulated to the nth degree. And properly stored, they keep for a very long time.

In fact, anything regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms -- one of the most corrupt, dangerous, and useless of all federal bureaucracies -- is likely to go up considerably in both price and value. It's perverse that the U.S. has a bureaucracy to regulate the three things you need for a hunting trip or a good party. Maybe their next trick will be to convert the DEA into the Bureau of Sex, Drugs, and Rock 'n' Roll.


L: I used to write about the wisdom of stashing the "3 Gs": gold, guns, and generators. All three are useful in and of themselves and have high resale values.

Doug: Yes, exactly. I hate to sound like an alarmist, but I really do think things are going to get scary - and if they don't, you can still sell these commodities in the future.


L: What about diamonds?

Doug: I wouldn't do diamonds. That's a really specialist market, and diamonds have long seemed to me to be subject to artificial pricing. There are at least two separate technologies now that create totally flawless, real diamonds. They are indistinguishable from natural diamonds, except that they don't have any flaws. But people will figure out how to introduce some flaws into those too, so I think the diamond market is in for a collapse at some time in the future. I could go on - let's just say that for many reasons, diamonds are the one gemstone I wouldn't touch.


L: Besides, they are less liquid. Relatively few individuals are trained to evaluate the color, clarity, cut, etc. of diamonds, whereas it's easy to identify a gold Eagle and know how much it's worth.

Doug: That's right. And they are not divisible -I just wouldn't touch them at all.


L: Okay. Is there anything else you would put in your safe deposit box today? Cash?

Doug: I wouldn't put any significant amount of currency in one; that's a guaranteed depreciating asset. I used to collect stamps, but no longer. I have no opinion on them as investment vehicles, but I came to realize that they are all relics of government monopolies, and I just didn't want them anymore.

Rare coins are tricky too, though I've always enjoyed collecting ancient Greek and Roman coins, which are actually a form of genuine artwork. But I've never seen the fascination with collecting slugs turned out by the U.S. Mint.

In general, I focus on gold bullion coins.


L: Okay, Doug, thanks for another interesting conversation.

Doug: You're very welcome - I hope this helps some of our readers protect their wealth in the tumultuous times ahead. That's a primary focus of our new Casey Gold & Resource Report, and, of course, of the International Speculator, both of which I highly recommend for more information on the subjects we've covered.

EDITOR'S NOTE:
Dear Subscribers, we have discontinued use of the Questions for Casey link in Conversations with Casey. The intent for the link was not to offer personal investment advice or for Q & A in general, but rather to gather suggested topics, either timeless or topical to the day, for discussion in Conversations With Casey. We apologize for any misunderstandings.
Forward today's conversation with Doug to a friend

About Casey | Forward this email | www.CaseyResearch.com

© 2009 Casey Research.





Wednesday, July 15, 2009

How to Profit From Boneheaded Cap and Tax (errr, Trade) Regulations

Is Global Warming a real threat to the planet...and the future of the human race? I used to be convinced so, based on hard, scientific data.

Nowadays, I'm not so sure - I'd classify myself as skeptical to say the least. And I believe that even if we are warming the planet with our carbon emissions, the last entity I would entrust our fate on planet Earth to would be the Federal Government!

Never to let a good crisis go to waste, our political machine has started to act, whether you like it or not. So let's get beneath the hood and take a critical eye to the new "Cap and Tax" regulations that may be coming soon...

***

The Carbon Cap: The Newest Form of Taxation

By Doug Hornig, Editor, Casey Research


It’s possible that no concept in history has ever come so far, so fast, and with so little substance behind it, as “global warming.” Or, to be precise, anthropogenic global warming (AGW) – the kind caused by us puny humans rather than by that fireball that keeps the planet habitable.

We’re extraordinarily lucky. If present thinking is correct, the first single-celled living organisms may have appeared as much as 3½ billion years ago, and it would appear that once life arrived, it never went away. That’s a very long time for conditions to have remained favorable enough to keep the chain from breaking.

As the eons unspooled, Earth’s climate varied, sometimes wildly. It has been much hotter than it is today, and much colder. (One current theory holds that the average surface temperature has regularly oscillated between 120° and -50°F.) Nearly all of the changes have been due to variations, some of them cyclical, in the amount of solar radiation reaching the surface of the planet. Through it all, life endured, because of the existence of carbon.

Now, rather suddenly, carbon is the designated boogey man. Individually and collectively, we are told, we must work on reducing our “carbon footprint,” or else something awful is going to happen. The headlines are terrifying: we’ll have hellacious droughts, monster hurricanes, and entire cities disappearing beneath the waves.

Well, perhaps. In a climatic feedback system as complex as Earth’s, anything is possible. More likely, though, is that we’ll see none of the above. Or at least not because of anything humans do or fail to do.

The simple (yes, inconvenient) truth is that scientists don’t even know whether the planet is warming at all, let alone if AGW has any role in causing it. The data are inconclusive at best. Most of those dire predictions you’ve read are based upon computer modeling, and anyone who watches the nightly weather forecast knows how infallible that tends to be.

Yet the truth has not prevented the AGW theory from being presented to the public as fact. Its proponents have so captured the media that Al Gore’s Nobel Prize is a huge story, while the Manhattan Declaration of 2008 gets nary a mention in the press. The latter, endorsed by hundreds of prominent citizens, including two hundred climate scientists, concluded that “current plans to restrict anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a dangerous misallocation of intellectual capital and resources that should be dedicated to solving humanity’s real and serious problems.”

Sadly, that misallocation is about to get a whole lot bigger. If the Obama administration has its way – and it is expected to, since there’s no meaningful opposition – carbon caps will soon be coming to every American town.

If you’re unfamiliar with the concept of a carbon cap, it’s simple. It’s a tax. The president wants to reduce per-capita U.S. carbon emissions to 14% below 2005 levels by 2020, and 83% by 2050. And he’s promoting this as a good idea by suggesting that it will pour $646 billion into federal coffers between 2012 and 2019, through government auctions of the rights to emit greenhouse gases. Those rights would be sold to energy companies, manufacturers, utilities, or anyone else who “pollutes” the air with carbon dioxide. And they could be traded.

Leave aside the question of whether reducing human carbon emissions is truly a valid goal; and whether we need another huge tax; and whether the government will do anything constructive with an infusion of our money, to the tune of nearly two-thirds of a trillion dollars. Instead, just consider the consequences.

The cost of everything will go up, as the affected businesses compensate for their lost revenue. If carbon credits are auctioned at the lower end of the projected range (between $13 and $20 a ton), estimates are that the average price of gasoline will jump by 12 cents a gallon and the average electricity bill by 7%.

Worse, though, is that the pain will be unevenly distributed. As the Detroit News editorialized, the cap-and-trade plan “is a giant dagger aimed at the nation’s heartland -- particularly Michigan. It is a multi-billion-dollar tax hike on everything that Michigan does.”

That is, it penalizes states and regions with large manufacturing bases and coal dependence for electricity, and rewards places with larger populations but light industry and cleaner power plants. As Michael Morris, CEO of coal-heavy American Electric Power, put it: “It is a clear transfer of the middle part of the country’s wealth to the two coasts.” Small wonder that politicians from California and New England are such enthusiastic supporters.

For what to expect here, we can look to Europe, where cap-and-trade is firmly established. While it has worked, in the sense of lowering carbon emissions (though not by as much as anticipated), its effects have been stifling. For example, the Washington Post cited “the Dutch silicon carbide maker that calls itself the greenest such plant in the world, but now can't afford to run full-time; the French cement workers who fear they're going to lose jobs to Morocco, which doesn't have to meet the European guidelines; and the German homeowners who pay 25 percent more for electricity than they did before – even as their utility companies earn record profits.”

This is what’s coming to your town, if Congress capitulates to the White House. The bill that will bring us cap-and-trade recently squeaked through the House with just a single vote to spare. It faces an uncertain future in the Senate, where opposition is stiff. Modifications surely will be made. But with Al Franken having cemented the Democratic super-majority, it’s a lock to pass in some form or other.

Ever-savvy, the market isn’t waiting. Although no cap is yet in place, carbon credits have already arrived. There’s even a place to trade them, the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), founded in 2003. And companies are busily buying and selling in anticipation.

How does it work? CCX’s website explains: “CCX emitting Members make a voluntary but legally binding commitment to meet annual GHG [greenhouse gas] emission reduction targets. Those who reduce below the targets have surplus allowances to sell or bank; those who emit above the targets comply by purchasing CCX Carbon Financial Instrument® (CFI®) contracts.”

In other words, some outfits are stocking up on purchased credits, against the day when they’ll be required by law. Others are speculating that the value of those credits will go up once the federal cap is in place. And some are making a lot of money simply by selling carbon reductions they’ve already made.

Among the players are expected names from the heavy industry and utilities sectors: DuPont, Ford, Reliant, American Electric Power, Potash Corp., Waste Management, and so on. But it’s a very long list, and on it are tech companies like IBM and Intel; retailers like Safeway; Miami-Dade County, Florida and Sacramento County, California; the University of Idaho and half a dozen other schools; even the Embassy of Denmark.

There’s no secret key to why so many want a piece of this action. It’s going to be a very, very big business. If European standards are applied to the U.S., we’re talking about a quarter-trillion dollars of credit trading a year.

Investors – if they’re well heeled enough and willing to assume a lot of risk -- can participate directly in carbon credit trading. Or they can buy stock in the parent of CCX, which is publicly traded in London.

But there are other ways to profit from this unstoppable force.

For example, by investing in select junior exploration companies focused on alternative energies, oil, or uranium. But in these volatile times, it is vital to not only invest in the right companies but to use the right investment strategies. Like the 20-60-20 rule or the Casey Free Ride Formula described in our new, FREE special report Profiting in a New Era. Applying these tactics can make the difference between losing your shirt or winning big -- click here to learn more.

Uh Oh - Leading Indicator Baltic Dry Index Turns Down

I have no idea what's going on with the markets right now. Just when things look most ominous, they fire up again this week big time...isn't that the way markets always work!

Well for what it's worth, our friend Brian Hunt made an astute ovservation that the Baltic Dry Index has turned down once again...this classic shipping measure is often a leading indicator of economic activity. The BDI turned lower ahead of the last downturn...actually falling right through the floor...so this could be an ominous sign for the stock market, today's rally not withstanding.

Subprime Disaster Passes the Torch to Option ARM

The WSJ reports that option adjustable-rate mortgages (Option ARMs) are taking the torch of the housing disaster from subprime mortgages.

Yes, the circle of death rolls on in the US housing market - what started as a subprime fiasco is evolving into a more inclusive party, with Option ARMs rolling up, kegs and cigars in hand.

A couple of months ago, we published a guest piece by Doug Hornig, who pointed out that Option ARMs would be the next shoe to drop in the real estate disaster. Here's the chart once again that Doug included in the previous article - yikes!

Stratfor: US Will Lead Global Economic Recovery

Here's a nice contrarian viewpoint put forth by Stratfor - they believe the US will be the first country to lead the world's global economic recovery, starting as early as the 3rd quarter of this year. And then Asia's recovery won't be far behind.

Stratfor produces excellent analysis about geopolitical ongoings...basically a "personal CIA" delivered to your email box. They are long term bullish on America, so I find their views to be an interesting counterbalance to most of the stuff I read.

Monday, July 13, 2009

US Consumers on Pace to Pay Down Debt in...138 Years?

US households are paying back their debts at a glacial pace reports the Federal Reserve.

Household debt peaked at $13.9 trillion in 2008 (with a "T"). Amidst all the deleveraging and pain of the last 18 months, total debt has inched down just a hair, to $13.8 trillion.

At this rate, the US consumer will pay down their debts in another 138 years or so - should go by in a heartbeat!

Until the household balance sheet in America is more under control, it's hard to picture a sustained economic recovery...at least one that is fueled by the consumer. And since the consumer accounts for 70% of GDP in the US, this seems foreboding to say the least.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

Return on Capital? How About Return OF Capital!

I've come to the conclusion that in roughly March of 2008, the general tide shifted from inflation to deflation for the first time since World War II. Since that shift, everything we have seen has been pretty much deflationary.

Oil is half of where it was about a year ago. Ditto for corn and soybeans. Gold, after pushing $1,000 last summer, is now languishing just above $900.

The dollar, meanwhile, has rallied - and is perched much higher than it was a year ago. And that's after a year of solid "quantitative easing"...who would have guessed!

What I'm getting at is that the common wisdom last summer was that the dollar was screwed, and that we'd see deflation for a little bit, then wild inflation as a result of the money printing. I bought into this hypothesis whole hartedly myself...it seemed to make sense. Perhaps too much sense.

Well I can now safely say that I was either early, or wrong - and in trader's parlance, that's the same thing!

I thought that if inflation reared it's head, the commodity markets would be the first to know about it. And a few months ago, I thought we may have been experiencing a mini inflationary boomlet.

Now in retrospect, perhaps this was all just a standard fare bear market bounce.

In any case, I now can't find anything that indicates we're not still in a deflationary environment. Gold, as mentioned, can't break through $1,000. Wake me up when that happens.

And the US dollar...maybe the sickest currency in the history of the planet...actually is behaving just fine. Can you believe that?

The US dollar looks...just fine, actually!
(Source: Barchart.com)

Folks, I never thought I'd say this...but I think cash...specifically US dollars...are the place to be for the moment.

Now I could be wrong - I'll be the first to admit. So how will we know? If the dollar starts to really fall out of bed, it's crucial that we have our fingers on the trading triggers. A move down could happen swifty and violently.

But until further notice - I think the trade to be in...is no trade at all. Just cold hard cash.

Right now, it's all about "Return OF Capital" - it's the new "Return On Capital"...for the 4th Turning!


Quick Reader Survey - Please Share Your Thoughs!

I tossed together a quick 3-question reader survey, and I'd appreciate it if you could take a minute or two to share your thoughts and suggestions with me using the survey link here.

It's always great to connect with you, and your feedback and input help me figure out where to focus my energies...namely on stuff you like, and stuff you'd like to see more of.



Positions Update

Got killed this week...and I am out! Here's my new positions...so much for diversification:


Current Account Value: $27,511.18

Cashed out: $20,000.00
Total value: $47,511.18
Weekly return: -9.8% :(
2009 YTD return: -45.8% :(

Prior year's results: --> Don't try this at home...this is what is known as wreckless trading
2008: -8%
2007: 175%
2006: 60%
2005: 805%

Initial stake: $2,000.00

Friday, July 10, 2009

The Outlook for Crude Oil From a Top Industry Exec

Last night I had the opportunity to sit down with PG, who is the head of a small refinery based in Texas. We talked about the economy, and most specifically, crude oil - where the price may be heading, and supply/demand considerations.

(OK it's my father-in-law...we were having an after-dinner beer...but I'll take his insights on the energy complex against any of the talking heads on financial TV! He's been in the refining business for over 25 years, and really knows his stuff.)

***

On the price of oil...

Oil fundamentals don't support $70 crude oil. There is plenty of oil right now. Oil should be priced in the $40's and $50's based on fundamentals.

On the new potential CFTC regulations...

That would be good for refiners, because it would drive the price of crude down as the speculative premium is chased out of the market. (Brett note - looks like they may have started to break in already!)

Break-even prices for crude oil...

Although crude should be priced below $60, it actually needs to stay above $60 to keep North America drilling. A LOT of supply has come offline in the US and Canada, because often it doesn't make sense to drill below $60.

Could we see another price spike...

If and when global demand comes back, the price of oil will skyrocket. The high level of oil and gasoline prices today - with global demand in the gutter - is a testament to how tight supplies are. ANY real move on the demand side could send prices up...very fast!

***

Brett again - I wouldn't be surprised to see crude oil trade between $40 and $60 for some time. Now crude does have a history of going much higher...and much lower...than anyone expects.

I just think that with all the supply on the market, we're going to need to see a real recovery to the global economy to see a sustained rise in oil prices. And I just don't see any signs of that yet. But when oil does start to rise, we could be in for a helluva shock!

Thursday, July 09, 2009

Obama to Hold Performance Review With Every American Worker

Here's an update on the government efforts to revive the economy...courtesy of The Onion, here's your afternoon entertainment!


Obama To Hold Job Performance Review With Every American Worker

How Long Do Bear Markets Typically Last?

We've been discussing market and societal cycles in great detail recently, as we try to uncover clues as to how this current mess is going to continue to unfold. History may not always repeat, but to quote Mark Twain, it certainly rhymes.

I have little doubt that we are now in a secular bear market - so the key question for me is, based on previous market cycles, how long is this one likey to last?

Nothing like a little history reading to shed some light...I recently became fascinated with The Fourth Turning, a fantastic book about societal cycles in America (check out my recent review and summary here). It was a topic that even came up at our 4th of July BBQ!

Thus I was quite excited when David Galland interviewed Neil Howe, co-author of The Fourth Turning, in June's installment of The Casey Report (one of the my two fav pubs).

So I'm fortunate to be able to present a guest article by David, where he gives a great synopsis of his chat with Howe. It was really cool for me to see Howe's latest opinion and take on where we are at in terms of "Turnings"...hope you enjoy!

***

A 20-Year Bear Market?
By David Galland, Casey Research

In November of 1997, my partner and co-editor of The Casey Report, Doug Casey, wrote an article titled “Foundations of Crisis,” which leaned heavily on the research of Neil Howe and the late William Strauss.

Howe and Strauss have written many books on how generations determine the course of history and how they will shape America’s future. Their forecasts on a wide variety of indicators have turned out to be amazingly accurate. They were among the first to predict (back in the late 1980s) the rise of Boomer-driven culture wars and the simultaneous rise of Gen-X-driven free agency and distrust of government. And they were completely alone back then in predicting, for the post-X “Millennial Generation” (a label they coined), a decline in youth crime and risk taking and an increase in youth civic engagement that would first become apparent around the year 2000. Guess what? For the last ten years, everyone has been noticing exactly these trends among teens and 20somethings.

Howe and Strauss also made extensive predictions, based on generational aging, on how America’s entire social mood would likely change, in dramatic fashion, during our current 2000-2010 decade. To quote Doug’s prescient 1997 article:

“… an excellent case can be made the U.S. is approaching another time of secular crisis, a Fourth Turning, with an expected due date of 2005 – seven years from now – plus or minus a few years in either direction.

The Stamp Acts catalyzed the American Revolution, the election of Lincoln catalyzed the Civil War, the Crash of ‘29 catalyzed the Depression/WW II era. What might precipitate the elements now floating in solution? The answer is practically any random event that's sufficiently traumatic. Any of the theses of current disaster/action novels and movies will do nicely. Perhaps the accidental or intentional release of a super plague vector. The crashing of an airliner into the Capitol during a joint session. An all-out assault on the IRS computers by an armed group – or perhaps the computers just melting down due to the Year 2000 Problem. Perhaps a financial disaster that cascades into the Greater Depression. In any of these, or a hundred other scenarios, the federal government would almost certainly act precipitously and with a heavy hand, which would bring on a whole other set of consequences.

There's no way of telling where the Crisis will lead, or how it will end. That's going to depend not only on exactly who's in control, but what they do, who they're up against, and a hundred other variables we can't even anticipate.

One thing that seems certain is that real crisis brings out strong leadership. Because of its age and size, it will come from the Boomer generation, and it will be in the mold of Roosevelt or Lincoln – both very dangerous precedents. The boomers in elderhood will be dogmatic, harsh, puritanical, and quite willing to burn down the barn in order to destroy whatever rats they see. Admix that attitude to a time resembling the Revolution, the Civil War, or WW II, overlain with today's ethnic strife, urbanization, financial overextension, and powerful, compact new weaponry in the hands of foreign fanatics out to teach the Great Satan a lesson and it's a real witch's brew.

As eye-opening as Doug’s predictions were, they brought us only to the onset of the current crisis. Consequently, we thought it both timely and important to check back with the source of much of the research he relied on. And so it was that I spent several hours talking with Neil Howe, co-author of the seminal work on generational cycles, The Fourth Turning, and, just recently, the subject of the DVD “The Winter of History.” Howe is not just an historian, but also a Washington DC-based economist and demographer. While our conversation covered a great many topics, the overriding focus was on how things are likely to unfold from here.
Many bullish readers won’t be thrilled to hear Howe’s latest findings about the future, but given his predictive track record, dismissing them out of hand could be a costly mistake.

The summary outlook, according to Howe, is that we are in the very early stages of a 20-year period of economic and institutional upheaval – an era denominated by a crisis during which we’ll likely witness the tearing down and reconstruction of many aspects of society as we know it.

As individuals, understanding Howe’s views and taking some reasonable precautions makes a lot of sense. As investors, those views also have the potential to make us a lot of money.

Following is my high-level recap of my long conversation with Neil Howe, along with some general thoughts on the investment implications of a 20-year bear market.

Remember the Sixties?

If you’re old enough -- or possess even a rudimentary sense of history -- think back to the 1950s, with roller-skating waitresses, crew cuts, and nuclear families of the sort represented by the iconic Leave it to Beaver. Fathers worked, while many mothers stayed home. Life had a certain predictable quality and, as far as anyone knew, would continue along the same lines for time immemorial.

But then something happened… the 1960s. Literally no one saw it coming. It was as if someone had flipped a switch that electrified America and, quickly, the world. Most everything changed, and a society accustomed to conformity was blown away with a fierce individualism expressed with long hair, sex, drugs, and rock and roll, topped off with civil disobedience and bloody riots in the streets.

What happened?

According to Neil Howe, in the mid-1960s, generational change pushed society around a dramatic corner as idealistic, individualistic young Baby Boomers (born 1943 to 1960) rebelled against the midlife leadership of their G.I. Generation parents (born 1901 to 1924).

These periods of transitions are part of a larger cyclical pattern made up of four distinct eras, or “Turnings,” each lasting approximately 20 years. It can be helpful to think of the four turnings as you might think of the four seasons, repeating predictably in their own natural rhythm. A full cycle of turnings takes place over a period of about 80 to 90 years -- roughly the span of a long human life. A new turning begins as a new youth generation comes of age, bringing a new social ethic that compensates for the excesses of the midlife generation then in power.

While we don't have the space here to go into the full details of Howe’s research, it’s important to the topic at hand that we quickly recap the Four Turnings.

The First Turning is referred to by Howe as a High. As this follows a period of crisis, one of the hallmarks of a First Turning is a heightened sense of community and collective optimism, driven in part by the fact that the society has just come through a difficult and challenging time. Consequently, during First Turnings, societal institutions tend to be strong while individualism is weak. The post-World War II “High” of the mid-1940s through early ‘60s is the most recent example of a First Turning.

The Second Turning, called an Awakening, typically starts out feeling like the high tide of a High, with signs of progress and prosperity everywhere. But just as everything seems to be going along swimmingly, large swaths of society begin to chaff under the social conformity of the High, beginning to gravitate to more individualistic pursuits and demanding that their personal interests come first. You may recognize the “Consciousness Revolution” of the mid-1960s through early 1980s, correctly, as the Second Turning.

Next up, the Third Turning, which Howe calls an Unraveling, is much the opposite of a High. To wit, individualism dominates, while institutions are increasingly weak and discredited. Quoting Howe on the Unraveling…

"This is a time when social authority feels inconsequential, the culture feels exhausted, and people feel bewildered by the number of options available to them. It is a time of celebrity circuses and a tremendous amount of freedom and creativity in our personal lives, but very little sense of public purpose.

The most recent Third Turning began in the mid-‘80s with Morning in America, and continued through the ‘90s. Previous periods of Unraveling in American history were also decades of cynicism and bad manners. Think of the 1920s, the 1850s, the 1760s. And history teaches us that the Third Turnings inevitably end in Fourth Turnings.


Finally, there is the Fourth Turning, called a Crisis. The recent Third Turning appears to be winding down, and we are currently on the cusp of a Fourth Turning. This is a time of great turmoil, when society’s basic institutions are torn down and rebuilt, and seemingly insurmountable problems are addressed. During Fourth Turnings, America engages in a struggle for its very survival and redefines its identity as a nation. Large wars are often a part of this process. The American Revolution, Civil War, Great Depression, and World War II were all features of past Fourth Turnings.

In sum, Howe’s research has shown that, with remarkable predictability, history is not a straight line extending toward a better and brighter (or increasingly awful) future, but rather a repeating cycle of the four distinct social eras. These four turnings have recurred with remarkable consistency throughout Anglo-American history, as Neil Howe outlines at length in Generations and The Fourth Turning. It is therefore no accident that America has experienced great cataclysms or “Crises” about every 80 years. Travel back eighty years from Pearl Harbor Day, and you land in the middle of the Civil War. Eighty years before that takes you to the Revolutionary War. If the rhythms of history hold, America is now poised to enter another Fourth Turning.

Bad News, Potentially Good News

You don't need me to tell you that the United States and in fact the world are now facing a plethora of intractable problems. The world's former powerhouse economy, the U.S., is now the world's largest debtor nation – and by a wide margin. The nation has trillions in unpayable liabilities coming due on Social Security and Medicare, to name just two of many broken government programs weighing on the country. And our much vaunted democracy is increasingly dysfunctional – rotten to the core, truth be known – thanks largely to entrenched special interests and a voting public clamoring for their own piece of the pie, while trying to hand the bill off to somebody else.

Meanwhile, the economy – despite rigorous jawboning by the government and its many friends in the large banking institutions -- is in serious trouble, with the housing market buffeted by tsunami-like waves of defaults, foreclosures, overvaluations, historic levels of personal debt, and tight credit that has left the U.S. government as the sole lender in many markets.

Bernanke and his ilk may see green shoots, but what they're really seeing is the deep, green sea rising up once again to bury the economy.

That's the bad news.

The potentially good news, if you credit Howe’s research, is that the Crisis we’re now entering will change pretty much everything. While this change will entail a great deal of pain and a reduced standard of living for a large number of people, by the time the Crisis subsides, society will have pretty much remade itself in ways that no one can predict at this point.

Put another way, today's intractable problems will be solved... one way or another.

What's Next

When discussing what's likely to follow next, Neil Howe turns to his generational profiles and points out that the rising societal power today belongs to the generation he calls the Millennials, individuals born between 1982 and 2004. They are a “Hero” generation, just like the G.I. Generation that coped so well with the turmoil of the Great Depression and World War II -- the last Fourth Turning. Coddled as children, the G.I.s were ultimately called upon to help society through a dark and dangerous period and rose to the occasion. Again, quoting Howe on the Millennials…

“These are today's young people, who are just beginning to be well known to most Americans. They fill K-12 schools, colleges, graduate schools, and have recently begun entering the workplace. We associate them with dramatic improvements in youth behaviors, which are often underreported by the media. Since Millennials have come along, we’ve seen huge declines in violent crime, teen pregnancy, and the most damaging forms of drug abuse, as well as higher rates of community service and volunteering. This is a generation that reminds us in many respects of the young G.I.s nearly a century ago, back when they were the first boy scouts and girl scouts between 1910 and 1920.

Unlike the Baby Boomers, who are largely individualistic and anti-establishment, the Millennials are good team players. We hear a lot these days about working together for a common cause, volunteerism, and the need for stronger government institutions, largely because these are the new priorities of the Millennial Generation.

As you may recall, out of the devastation of World War II, a spate of transnational political and economic institutions were born, including the United Nations, the World Bank, the World Health Organization, and the International Monetary Fund. By the time the current Fourth Turning is over, expect more of the same -- but probably even bigger and more ambitious.

What Does This Mean to You?

Most importantly, if Howe is right, this crisis is far from over. In fact, when I asked him where we are today on a scale from 1 to 10 -- with 10 representing as bad as the crisis will get -- he replied that we are at either 2 or 3. In other words, the worst is very much yet to come. And, per above, he expects this period of turmoil to take 20 years to play out. Thus, if nothing else, you may want to continue approaching matters of personal finance cautiously.

Secondly, if you're the type of individual that tends to get steamed up by larger and more intrusive government programs, you may want to take a few deep breaths and resolve yourself to the fact that this phenomenon is likely to get far worse before we see a return to celebration of individual rights. (And the cycle shows that we will see such a return -- about 40 to 50 years from now, when the next Second Turning comes around.)

If it is any consolation, the Millennial Generation places a great deal of weight on teamwork and the notion of doing things "smart." That doesn't mean, of course, that the various programs that are kicked off in an attempt to fix the many problems now confronting society will in fact turn out to be technically smart. But they will almost certainly be better thought out than some of the numbskull initiatives we've seen over the last 20 years.

You can also take some comfort in the fact that Millennials are builders, not destroyers. By contrast, the individualistic Boomers that dominate today’s aging political class are world-class dissenters, radio talk show aficionados always ready to scrap it out for their beliefs. Millennials want to skip the philosophical debate and get straight to fixing things.

Other insights about Fourth Turning periods gained from my conversation with Neil Howe…
  • Government grows powerful, and sweeping new legislation is enacted. The old 1990s rule was: just compete and stay off the state’s radar screen. The new 2010s rule will be: better have a presence in Washington so you’re not dealt out of the “new” new deal. One political party tends to dominate. The Democrats under FDR during the last Fourth Turning offer a good example. While Neil Howe doesn't think it will necessarily be the Democrats this time around, they are certainly in the pole position at this point.
  • While public history speeds up, personal life slows down. Families will spend more time together, like in the old Frank Capra movies. Ever more households will be multi-generational, a trend now spurred by Boomers with large, empty McMansions and Millennials without jobs. There will be a blanding of the pop culture, with the entertainment of the young (put Miley Cyrus or “High School Musical” on fast forward) increasingly regarded as tamer than the entertainment of the old.
  • Innovation tends to stagnate, while a few new technologies will be chosen to be adopted on a large scale. We will see the equivalent of canals or railroads or interstates being built across America. To borrow from Carlotta Perez’ four-stage description of technological revolutions, we are moving from the “innovation” to the “implementation” stage.
  • New laws and regulations will do less to referee a free market and more to pursue one or another national priority. They will increasingly favor the large producer over the retail buyer, investment over consumption, planning over risk, debt over equity. Businesses will hustle to reposition themselves. Anti-trust will weaken.
  • The authority and obligations of community will strengthen at all levels, from local to national and possibly beyond (if our alliances prove durable). Personal reputation and membership will matter more. A “new localism” will reshape town and urban planning. A global slide toward national or regional protectionism will loom as a real danger.
  • It is too early to tell whether the crisis will ultimately be inflationary or deflationary, though we at Casey Research come down on the side of inflation for the simple reason that the government possesses the means to inflate. Due to the gold standard, that was not the case early in the Great Depression.
  • In the past, Fourth Turning periods have always resulted in the nation redefining who we are in some essential way. That was certainly the case during the American Revolution, when we transitioned from a British colony into a collection of independent states -- and the Civil War, when those states were hammered into a single nation. And, again, after World War II, when the U.S. went from being a relatively isolated nation to a global empire. A wild card, for instance a terrorist nuke going off in a city anywhere on the planet, could similarly take the country, and the world, into unforeseeable new directions.
  • Baby Boomers will continue to be respected for their cultural achievements (it’s not a fluke of history that Boomer music and other entertainments are still wildly popular among the young), but will be increasingly ignored in the political debate. The term “senior citizen,” already in decline, will disappear entirely. And if push comes to shove, Boomer’s financial interests – including Social Security – will be subjugated “for the greater good.”
  • There will be a growing push to rebuild the middle class. The wealthy and the impoverished alike will both come under pressure thanks to new pro-middle class initiatives. If you are a high-income earner, it’s a certainty your taxes are going up, and likely by a lot. If you want to make a fortune, don’t pursue the niche or the “long tail.” Invent the next big brand that will appeal to Everyman.
Don’t Worry, Be Happy

That is, at best, a sketch of my long conversation with Neil Howe and doesn't do justice to his research. If nothing else, however, I hope I’ve succeeded in giving you at least some sense of the man and his unique research and encouraged you to think outside the box about the nature of today’s crisis.

A couple of final observations.

First, Neil Howe is not a negative person, nor a professional doomsayer. Rather, he is a social scientist and historian with decades of experience in the social sciences. As you speak to him, you get the sense that he doesn’t view the world through any particular philosophical bias, but rather is simply reporting what his research is telling him about the current players on the global stage, and which act we are currently in.

Secondly, speaking as a Baby Boomer and someone with a lifelong distrust of government and its meddling institutions, talking to Neil left me feeling oddly relaxed -- letting go, if you will, of some of the frustration that has been building within me as I watch the nanny state grow more and more bloated.

That is not to say we won't continue to speak out against government waste and prolificacy. We will. But it seems increasingly clear that we’re now caught up in a powerful trend toward bigger, not smaller, societal institutions -- and that these institutions will, over the period ahead, change the world as we know it.

Of course, being active investors, at the same time we raise our voices in protest, we’ll deal with the reality of the situation by strategically positioning our portfolios to profit from the coming changes.

And so, like the Rockefellers and J.P. Morgan during the Great Depression, we’ll make the trend -- to matter how negative -- our friend. You may want to consider doing so yourself.

Making the trend your friend is more important than ever, if your assets are to make it through the Fourth Turning intact. The Casey Report discovers and analyzes budding economic trends and turns them into hands-on, actionable recommendations for its subscribers. Read the latest report from Casey Chief Economist Bud Conrad about our favorite investment of 2009… a play on an all but inevitable economic development. Click here to read more.

Wednesday, July 08, 2009

US National Debt Clock - A Must See Link

Whoa, check this out...a nifty "US National Debt Clock" that was neatly crafted by a concerned, fiscally responsible citizen.

Warning: You may crap your pants.

And a must see deficit video...Press Secretary Gibbs says "billion" instead of "trillion"...and is quietly corrected.

Richard Russell on the Disappearing Dividends

Nice scoop by the Daily Crux - Richard Russell's comments about current dividend levels...or lack thereof!

The second quarter of 2009 was a dismal one for corporate dividends. Standard & Poor's recorded an all-time low of 233 dividend increases plus resumptions and extras. During the April through June period, the 7,000 publicly-owned companies that S&P follows, were down 45.8% in dividend increases from a year ago.

Russell has been around the block more than a few times, and is as sharp as they come. Heed his message loud and clear - talk of green shoots is cheap, show us the money!

At historic stock market bottoms, dividend levels typically average around 6%. That's why it's called a bottom...tough to go wrong investing when yields are that high.

Where are yields now? A paltry 3% last time I saw. We'd need to see the S&P around 450 to see dividend levels where they should be at market bottom!

And if you're not buying a stock for the dividend, that means by default you're buying it in hopes of a rising mulitple. Well multiples are quite high across the board right now, and earnings continue to evaporate right before our eyes...so I would take a long, hard look at every stock you own that doesn't yield some serious dough.

Looking for quality, high-yielding stocks? Tom Dyson is your man - check out his 12% Letter here. And Tom knows how to go long AND short...crucial in today's nutty environment.

Five Important (Contrarian?) Real Estate Trends

It's Christmas in July! Maybe not quite, but I do derive similar (twisted?) satisfaction whenever an email from our local real estate agent pops into my Inbox!

Yes, you may remember our friend from past gems like the dumbest explanation of inflation - ever.

Well she's back...and making less sense than ever before. Without further adieu, I present:

***

5 Important Real Estate Trends to Watch

1. Bank held repossessions are having a lower influence on the market. That may be good news to sellers in the short term (especially sellers who have been waiting for things to get better). Listen to the statistics we've seen that support our conclusion. Link removed to protect embarassment.

2. Real estate market updates are now being made on internet video! Watch our new version of real estate TV at: Ditto

3. Buyers should do whatever they can to buy a home in the next few months. Watch four powerful reasons to buy a home now rather than wait at our website.

4. California Association of REALTORS(r) now offers a buyer's protection plan that can offer buyers worried about their jobs peace of mind. Read the details about this great first-time homebuyer program.

5. Home buyers are doing their own home searches, driving by the properties then having their brokers show them only the ones they like. This latest trend saves everyone time and money, especially when the better buys are going fast. To assist you further we'll even set up our computers so that you'll be one of the first to know about hot new listings. Call us at the number below to sign up for a free targeted home search.

***

Hurry...do whatever you can to buy a home!

How about another hot tip from our friend? Here's a look into duplexes...with investment math that's too good to be true!

Looks Like Another Wave of DE-flation...Here's What To Do

Uh oh, looks like a nasty wave of deflation may be coming back to the markets in a big way!

Last time we saw this movie, just about everything except for the US dollar was completely ravaged.

I sold my two remaining futures positions this morning, and now have moved most of my assets into cash. Now may be a good time for you to do something similar - might be time for us to cash out and just head to the beach for the rest of summer.

Last summer/fall, I wish I had done this...but of course I tried to trade my way through things (big mistake).

Well if deflation really is back, what should we do? I thought it'd be the perfect time to check in with Mr. Deflation himself, Robert Prechter.

I started reading Prechter's insights recently, and not a moment too soon - he has saved me considerable short term pain over the last few weeks.

I was turned onto Prechter by a very sharp fellow in our local investment group, who credited Prechter's newsletter for keeping him out of gold and equities during the last bit of deleveraging. (He's the only one in our group who didn't get slammed last year).

So I hope you enjoy and learn from this mini "deflation survival guide" from Dr. Prechter.

***

10 Things You Should and Should Not Do During Deflation
July 8, 2009

This article is part of a syndicated series about deflation from market analyst Robert Prechter, the world’s foremost expert on and proponent of the deflationary scenario. For more on deflation and how you can survive it, download Prechter’s FREE 60-page Deflation Survival eBook, part of Prechter’s NEW Deflation Survival Guide.

The following article was adapted from Robert Prechter’s NEW Deflation Survival eBook, a free 60-page compilation of Prechter’s most important teachings and warnings about deflation.

By Robert Prechter, CMT

1) Should you invest in real estate?

Short Answer: NO

Long Answer: The worst thing about real estate is its lack of liquidity during a bear market. At least in the stock market, when your stock is down 60 percent and you realize you’ve made a horrendous mistake, you can call your broker and get out (unless you’re a mutual fund, insurance company or other institution with millions of shares, in which case, you’re stuck). With real estate, you can’t pick up the phone and sell. You need to find a buyer for your house in order to sell it. In a depression, buyers just go away. Mom and Pop move in with the kids, or the kids move in with Mom and Pop. People start living in their offices or moving their offices into their living quarters. Businesses close down. In time, there is a massive glut of real estate.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 16

2) Should you prepare for a change in politics?

Short Answer: YES

Long Answer: At some point during a financial crisis, money flows typically become a political issue. You should keep a sharp eye on political trends in your home country. In severe economic times, governments have been known to ban foreign investment, demand capital repatriation, outlaw money transfers abroad, close banks, freeze bank accounts, restrict or seize private pensions, raise taxes, fix prices and impose currency exchange values. They have been known to use force to change the course of who gets hurt and who is spared, which means that the prudent are punished and the thriftless are rewarded, reversing the result from what it would be according to who deserves to be spared or get hurt. In extreme cases, such as when authoritarians assume power, they simply appropriate or take de facto control of your property.
You cannot anticipate every possible law, regulation or political event that will be implemented to thwart your attempt at safety, liquidity and solvency. This is why you must plan ahead and pay attention. As you do, think about these issues so that when political forces troll for victims, you are legally outside the scope of the dragnet.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 27

3) Should you invest in commercial bonds?

Short Answer: NO

Long Answer: If there is one bit of conventional wisdom that we hear repeatedly with respect to investing for a deflationary depression, it is that long-term bonds are the best possible investment. This assertion is wrong. Any bond issued by a borrower who cannot pay goes to zero in a depression. In the Great Depression, bonds of many companies, municipalities and foreign governments were crushed. They became wallpaper as their issuers went bankrupt and defaulted. Bonds of suspect issuers also went way down, at least for a time. Understand that in a crash, no one knows its depth, and almost everyone becomes afraid. That makes investors sell bonds of any issuers that they fear could default. Even when people trust the bonds they own, they are sometimes forced to sell them to raise cash to live on. For this reason, even the safest bonds can go down, at least temporarily, as AAA bonds did in 1931 and 1932.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 15

4) Should you take precautions if you run a business?

Short Answer: YES

Long Answer: Avoid long-term employment contracts with employees. Try to locate in a state with “at-will” employment laws. Red tape and legal impediments to firing could bankrupt your company in a financial crunch, thus putting everyone in your company out of work.

If you run a business that normally carries a large business inventory (such as an auto or boat dealership), try to reduce it. If your business requires certain manufactured specialty items that may be hard to obtain in a depression, stock up.

If you are an employer, start making plans for what you will do if the company’s cash flow declines and you have to cut expenditures. Would it be best to fire certain people? Would it be better to adjust all salaries downward an equal percentage so that you can keep everyone employed?

Finally, plan how you will take advantage of the next major bottom in the economy. Positioning your company properly at that time could ensure success for decades to come.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 30

5) Should you invest in collectibles?

Short Answer: NO

Long Answer: Collecting for investment purposes is almost always foolish. Never buy anything marketed as a collectible. The chances of losing money when collectibility is priced into an item are huge. Usually, collecting trends are fads. They might be short-run or long-run fads, but they eventually dissolve.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 17

6) Should you do anything with respect to your employment?

Short Answer: YES

Long Answer: If you have no special reason to believe that the company you work for will prosper so much in a contracting economy that its stock will rise in a bear market, then cash out any stock or stock options that your company has issued to you (or that you bought on your own).

If your remuneration is tied to the same company’s fortunes in the form of stock or stock options, try to convert it to a liquid income stream. Make sure you get paid actual money for your labor.

If you have a choice of employment, try to think about which job will best weather the coming financial and economic storm. Then go get it.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 31

7) Should you speculate in stocks?

Short Answer: NO

Long Answer: Perhaps the number one precaution to take at the start of a deflationary crash is to make sure that your investment capital is not invested “long” in stocks, stock mutual funds, stock index futures, stock options or any other equity-based investment or speculation. That advice alone should be worth the time you [spend to read Conquer the Crash].

In 2000 and 2001, countless Internet stocks fell from $50 or $100 a share to near zero in a matter of months. In 2001, Enron went from $85 to pennies a share in less than a year. These are the early casualties of debt, leverage and incautious speculation.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 20

8) Should you call in loans and pay off your debt?

Short Answer: YES

Long Answer: Have you lent money to friends, relatives or co-workers? The odds of collecting any of these debts are usually slim to none, but if you can prod your personal debtors into paying you back before they get further strapped for cash, it will not only help you but it will also give you some additional wherewithal to help those very same people if they become destitute later.

If at all possible, remain or become debt-free. Being debt-free means that you are freer, period. You don’t have to sweat credit card payments. You don’t have to sweat home or auto repossession or loss of your business. You don’t have to work 6 percent more, or 10 percent more, or 18 percent more just to stay even.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 29

9) Should you invest in commodities, such as crude oil?

Short Answer: Mostly NO

Long Answer: Pay particular attention to what happened in 1929-1932, the three years of intense deflation in which the stock market crashed. As you can see, commodities crashed, too.

You can get rich being short commodity futures in a deflationary crash. This is a player’s game, though, and I am not about to urge a typical investor to follow that course. If you are a seasoned commodity trader, avoid the long side and use rallies to sell short. Make sure that your broker keeps your liquid funds in T-bills or an equally safe medium.

There can be exceptions to the broad trend. A commodity can rise against the trend on a war, a war scare, a shortage or a disruption of transport. Oil is an example of a commodity with that type of risk. This commodity should have nowhere to go but down during a depression.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 21

10) Should you invest in cash?

Short Answer: YES

Long Answer: For those among the public who have recently become concerned that being fully invested in one stock or stock fund is not risk-free, the analysts’ battle cry is “diversification.” They recommend having your assets spread out in numerous different stocks, numerous different stock funds and/or numerous different (foreign) stock markets. Advocates of junk bonds likewise counsel prospective investors that having lots of different issues will reduce risk.

This “strategy” is bogus. Why invest in anything unless you have a strong opinion about where it’s going and a game plan for when to get out? Diversification is gospel today because investment assets of so many kinds have gone up for so long, but the future is another matter. Owning an array of investments is financial suicide during deflation. They all go down, and the logistics of getting out of them can be a nightmare. There can be weird exceptions to this rule, such as gold in the early 1930s when the government fixed the price, or perhaps some commodity that is crucial in a war, but otherwise, all assets go down in price during deflation except one: cash.

– Conquer the Crash, Chapter 18
……….

For more on deflation, download Prechter’s FREE 60-page Deflation Survival eBook or browse various deflation topics like those below at www.elliottwave.com/deflation.
Robert Prechter, Chartered Market Technician, is the world's foremost expert on and proponent of the deflationary scenario. Prechter is the founder and CEO of Elliott Wave International, author of Wall Street best-sellers Conquer the Crash and Elliott Wave Principle and editor of The Elliott Wave Theorist monthly market letter since 1979.

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

Get Real! Brazil's Debt Rating Passes California

Who would have predicted the day when California would be paying it's bills with IOU's, while Brazil is stockpiling it's reserves?

If you did, congratulations...and get ready to cash in that longshot ticket! Sean Hyman reports that Brazil's debt rating is now inching higher than California's plummeting credit rating.

In fact for some great insights on what may happen with California IOU's, here's what Steve Sjuggerud wrote today's in DailyWealth:

The government of California is broke. If you're unfortunate enough to receive California "patacones" try to get rid of them. Use them to pay your taxes, sell them to the knuckleheads on Craigslist... do whatever you can.

But don't hold them. The historical record of broke governments issuing IOUs doesn't offer much promise. The "reward" of 3.75% interest versus the risk simply isn't worth it.

(Note: Steve writes an outstanding monthly newsletter called True Wealth, which is worth a serious look if you don't already subscribe)

So how should you invest?

If you're a California vendor getting paid with IOU's - get rid of them! Sell them below face value if you must.

And if you're looking for a play on Brazil, the Brazillian Real is not a bad way to go...it's been on a tear this year. BZF is the ETF symbol...or you could also open a Real-denominated CD with Everbank.

Or even better...head down to the beach for some volleyball and sun :)

Why 650 is a Generous Fair Estimate for the S&P 500

Nice video on CNBC featuring economist David Rosenberg...I really enjoyed his insights here, and would highly recommend a watch of this piece.

Rosenberg believes this recent rally has priced in good news up until 2011 or 2012...and thinks 650 is a generous fair value for the S&P based on current fundamentals.

He also thinks the dollar has stabilized, despite the rampant speculation of its impending demise.

And a great quote from Rosenberg: When all the forecasters and experts agree, something else is going to happen.













Hat tip to The Daily Crux for their nice find of this piece.


"Did I Say Billion? I Meant Trillion" (in Deficits...But Who's Counting)

Having trouble keeping track of the government's runaway spending. You're not alone!

Check out White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, as he talks about the budget deficit in "billions" mistakenly...and is later corrected that he should have said "trillion."



Hat tip to The Casey Report for their link to this amusing gaffe.

More Government Meddling in the Commodity Markets

The Wall Street Journal reports that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission is considering introducing position limits for "all commodities of finite supply."

Uhhh...wouldn't that just be all commodities?

Anyway, let's get a quote from CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler:

"My firm belief is that we must aggressively use all existing authorities to ensure market integrity."

Sounds like more government meddling in markets to me...like when Los Federales decided to "crack down on short sellers" when the equity markets were tanking. I've read that Gensler is being pressed on by a Senate subcommittee that wants to wipe out "evil commodity speculation."

What will this mean for commodity traders? One inside source I trust believes that tighter position limits could cause commodity prices to tumble severely...at least in the short term.

So be very, very careful out there, fellow trader. Follow your stops, and let's keep an eye on this developing story.

Looking for a down to early weekly wrap of the commodity markets? Sign up for our free weekly series This Week in Commodities!

Monday, July 06, 2009

Something Cooking in the Lumber Market?

Our friend Tom Dyson over at DailyWealth says that something may be happening in the world of lumber, according to one of his industry sources...Tom writes:

I have an "on the ground" contact who's seeing something else altogether... Don runs a large lumber supply depot outside Orlando. Last week, he sent me a "special commodity alert."

"Over the last 30 days," he wrote, "there have been significant increases in the lumber and plywood markets."

Pine 2x10s have increased 22% in the last 30 days.
Treated pine 2x6s have increased 29%.
Pine 2x6 borates are up 31%.
Spruce 2x4s are up 37%.
Spruce 2x6s are up 44%.
15/32 Oriented Strand boards are up 7%.
15/32 Plywood is up 12%.

It looks like there's something stirring in the lumber market. It could be a local aberration in Orlando... or it could be something bigger. I'm not sure, and neither is Don.

Let's keep an eye on the Chicago futures price to see if it confirms Don's view. In the meantime, I'll hunt for more clues from lumberyards in other parts of the country...

Lumber prices are low, low, low - this is definitely something worth keeping an eye on.

PS - If you like Tom's stuff as much as I do, you may want to check out his outstanding newsletter The 12% Letter, which I read religiously myself.

Last Call on the Pound Sterling Rally?

It might be time for us to grab a pint...and short one of our favorite whipping boys once again.

The British Pound - the only currency that may actually be sicker than the US dollar (two turds circling the bowl really) - looks like it's recent rally may be running out of steam.


Grab a pint...and short the Pound?
(Source: Barchart.com)

The BP has plummeted since early 2008 - from around $2, all the way down around $1.37 at it's low earlier this year - and is now back up around $1.62. That looks like a standard fare retracement to me of roughly 40%.

With the dollar starting to look frisky once again, we could see the BP get smacked down once again soon.

If you'd like to short the BP, the ETF FXB is probably the easiest way to do it.

The trouble with shorting the Pound straight up is that you're short in dollar terms - so if you prefer to hedge with another currency, you may want to pair it up with a long position, such as say FXA (the nice, sound Australian dollar).

Crude Oil Hits Five-Week Low...Time For Another Nose Dive?

If there's one thing to say about the crude oil market, it certainly trends well...both ways. Check out this chart:

Crude oil takes a turn lower.
(Source: Barchart.com)

We've been hearing energy gurus for weeks scratching their heads, saying there's plenty of crude to meet demand today. But prices kept on climbing.

Well, now prices are no longer climbing. We first noticed that something might be amiss a couple of weeks ago, when crude failed to rally on bullish news.

It might be time to add crude oil to your suspect list of commodities that are vulnerable in the short term...you can put it right next to gold.

USL is the double-long ETF that you may want to take a look at shorting...if you've got the stomach to make this trade!

Sunday, July 05, 2009

BBQ, Beer, and Contrarian Investment Indicators

Welcome back from the long weekend - I hope you had a great 4th celebration. Even us folks who are not so keen on the Federal Government can appreciate many of the founding values of our country...despite how frustrated it is when Constitution seems to be a forgotten document...in a world where "whatever it takes" is Uncle Sam's new mantra!

After a great weekend of beer, BBQ, and socializing, I thought it'd be interesting to reflect on some data points I gathered from folks...to discern the social mood and outlook from the people I spoke with. Of course this is a completely ad hoc sample...the qualification being that these folks either had a beer with me, or served me a beer, over the last two days!

I hope these anecdotes will be entertaining, and perhaps even a bit insightful, as we engage in the challenging, humbling exercise of trying to figure out where the world is heading...so that we can invest accordingly.

If you have any anecdotal stories, I'd love to hear them - drop a comment below, and let's see what we come up with!

The Hot Bartender Who Disapproves of Money Printing

Regular readers know that we've been on a deflationist kick over the last couple of weeks - simply due to the contrarian appeal of it all. Since the collapse hit, I've believed that inflation - more specifically hyperinflation - would be the end result, mostly because the government can print as much money as it wants.

Honestly, though, what the hell do I know? The common sense consequence of money printing is price inflation...but what if common wisdom is incorrect here (as it often is!)

Anyway this Friday evening, some friends and I were at a new bar (with a fantastic happy hour, and an even better bartender, "Shelley" (stage name to protect the innocent :) ) - very good looking, and quite patron friendly).

Shelley's a very nice girl who you'd initially surmise to be a "knee jerk liberal". Lives in Northern California...into raw foods and organic farms...all that good stuff.

We got into a conversation about some boondoggle going on a few blocks away at the State Capitol (Sacramento), and I figured I'd toss a pseudo-libertarian comment into the fray, see if we kick start anything interesting.

Me: The only way to fund that idiotic program would be to print up the money.

Shelley: Ha, yeah, and then comes hyperinflation.

My heart skipped about four beats...best bartender ever.

Now I thought it was very interesting she didn't say merely "inflation", but "hyperinflation." Pretty impressive financial acumen - and also another hyperinflation data point.

We'll keep our ears open for deflation talk from bartenders...right now it's 1-0 in favor of IN-flation.

Renting: The New Buying

Markets don't bottom when everyone is looking for the bottom. They bottom when there is a
final capituation in which the market basically vomits all over itself.

When nobody wants to talk about stocks, that's when you want to back up the truck.

The housing market has been in free fall for about 4 years now, and I've been intrigued to watch the shift in social mood.

Back in 2004, I recall riding the MUNI in San Francisco, and overhearing a conversation between two other riders about how "housing never went down". The common mantra in the Bay Area at the time was that even if housing goes down in some locations, it never goes down in the Bay Area, because there's such limited supply.

Bay Area home prices are now down over 50% from the peak.

The first year or two of the downturn, we heard a lot of the "now is a great time to buy" bad advice. Home buyers were trying to catch the bottom of the market before it went back up again. In reality, all they caught was a falling knife.

Yesterday we hosted a 4th of July BBQ in our backyard (of our rental). I recall when we moved into it nearly 3 years ago, and we had people over, often the first question was around when we would buy our own place.

This year, I noticed a lot of the shine seems to have come off home ownership. When I mentioned that we rented the place and didn't own it, the feedback around renting was more positive than I remember. Several of my friends who are home owners even said they wouldn't mind being renters themselves.

Not necessarily a bottom in the real estate market, but maybe we're getting closer.

As an aside - real estate is often a terrible investment during a depression. The first thing folks do when they hit hard times is they bunk up together, cutting their own housing costs, and sending a lot of supply on the market.

During the salad days of the 80's and 90's, you had people really "spreading out" across the country. Times were good, money was flush - hey let's go grab our own place.

Today in 2009 - maybe not so bad to stay with family. If unemployment continues to worsen, this could be a wild card in the real estate market that I don't hear many people talking about...another potential monkey wrench in a recovery. Why buy two homes when one cozy place will suffice?

So it seems like we are starting to see a bit of a shift in the social mood about renting and home ownership, but we may have a ways to go.

How Long Do Turnings Last?

For the past month or two, one of my favorite discussion topics has been The Fourth Turning - the book/concept that society goes through cycles. And every 80 years in the US, a crisis hits - The Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the Great Depression/WWII, and potentially the mess we're in now.

I'll tell you, this has been a real hit at weddings and cocktail hours - people think I'm nuts when I say "Hey, we're in the 4th Turning...get used to it, we're screwed!"

Again yesterday, I had a few friends who I had previously floated this "odd ball" idea to come up to me and start asking me about these societal cycles! How long did you say Turnings last? Are we almost out of this one?

To me it seems like people are beginning to resign themselves to the fact that this is a depression, not a recession, and that things are going to be bad for awhile.

This is very important because the stock market could have a hard time maintaining these levels when folks start to accept the cold, hard reality that the recent "green shoots" rally was built on optimism that just isn't materializing.

And we may have gotten a taste of this at the end of last week, with the disappointing unemployment numbers. Maybe "less bad" is no longer a good thing.




Quick Reader Survey - Please Share Your Thoughs!

I tossed together a quick 3-question reader survey, and I'd appreciate it if you could take a minute or two to share your thoughts and suggestions with me using the survey link here.

It's always great to connect with you, and your feedback and input help me figure out where to focus my energies...namely on stuff you like, and stuff you'd like to see more of.



Positions Update

No trades this week...I'm watching the trailing stops on each position (A$ and sugar), and will sell on a 15-day low.

Honestly I don't know whether the A$ is correcting or out of gas - so I'll let the market tell me.

If you're looking at either of these trades, I personally wouldn't initiate a position here...I'd wait for a breakout to a new high to confirm that the trend is still UP!


Current Account Value: $30,499.46

Cashed out: $20,000.00
Total value: $50,499.46
Weekly return:
2009 YTD return: -38.0% (I like to think it takes skill to lose this much money in 6-months :) )

Prior year's results: --> Don't try this at home...this is what is known as wreckless trading
2008: -8%
2007: 175%
2006: 60%
2005: 805%

Initial stake: $2,000.00

Thursday, July 02, 2009

Marc Faber: You Don't Want to be in Cash

Just caught the latest Marc Faber TV interview on Bloomberg. Some quick notes on his thoughts:
  • Believes the March 6 stock market lows were major lows for awhile
  • If the S&P drops towards 800, we'll see new stimulus plans and loose money...and if it drops towards 700, we'll see even more...thus the lows are likely to hold
  • The economic recovery will be very disappointing
  • You don't want to be in cash or bonds, due to inflationary concerns
  • Gold is attractive as a hedge against inflation
  • Thinks the dollar and bonds could rally in the near term, but longer term, he's looking for a weak US dollar and strength in commodity prices
You can watch the full interview here.

Marc Faber is one of the sharpest investors in the world, and is author of the excellent book Tomorrow's Gold: Asia's age of discovery.

For an interesting counterpoint to the hyperinflation fears, check out my recent piece: Is Deflation "So 2008"? Hyperinflation Trade Looking Crowded

3 Techical Indicators for Gold...That Don't Look Good

Nice dive into the current technicals of gold by commodity expert Brad Zigler at Hard Assets Investor. Brad takes a look at Relative Strength Index (RSI), Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD), and good old fashioned Volume.

Down to earth explanations of these indicators can be tough to come by, but this piece will give you the low down in plain, easy to understand English.

Incidentally, all three indicators seem to be hinting that the near term direction for gold could be down.

Stocks for the Long Run? Stop Smoking Those Green Shoots!

My dad, regular blog reader and link contributor, just sent me a classic "stocks for the long run" article, published over on Fidelity.com. This piece is a real gem - with the author genuflecting at the feet of the chief stock cheerleader himself, Mr. Jeremy Siegel, author of Stocks for the Long Run. We've even got some recent quotes and insights from Siegel in the article!

Maybe they'll get a hold of the author of DOW 36,000 next week.

Anyway how about we have a little fun and punch a few holes in this beauty.

We now present highlights from: Buy stocks now - and hold them (with our own sarcastic comments)
  • #1 - Opening red flag... The article is published on Fidelity.com. Expecting impartial stock advice on Fidelity.com is like expecting a libertarian slant on Recovery.gov. Or bearish commodity news on CommodityBullMarket.com :)
  • #2 - Wow, really?... Making predictions about short-term market moves is extremely hazardous, as Siegel well knows. Like me, he failed to predict the collapse in the financial system last September and its impact on the markets. "I didn't see the balance sheets of these banks and investment banks," Siegel says. "I didn't realize they held so many subprime mortgages."
  • Dear reader - please, if you're going to buy a "stock for the long run" - take a look at the balance sheet. If you can't figure out what's on the balance sheet...you may want to hold off on buying the stock.
  • #3 - Swami predicts... -At any rate, Siegel thinks the economy has probably turned up already: "We're going to have a faster recovery in the second half of the year than most people think. The upward slope on the V will not be as steep as usual, but we're not going to have an L-shaped economy, either."
  • From the guy who was blindsided by the subprime meltdown...a contrarian indicator?
  • #4 - Easy short candidate... He's also bullish on high-yield "junk" bonds, even though they have rallied strongly this year after tumbling in 2008.
  • Nothing like jumping into a rally in the 8th inning! Buy high, sell higher!
  • #5 - Stock jocks rejoice... "Tell me what investment will do better than stocks today," Siegel says. "Real estate is in the doghouse. Commodities aren't cheap. Bonds, except for junk bonds, are overpriced. Treasury bonds are ridiculously overpriced."
  • I can't wait for his next book 15-years from now entitled: Farmland for the Long Run

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

Dennis Gartman on Gold, Nat Gas, Currencies, and More!

Great Dennis Gartman interview over on The Globe Investor. Here are a couple of quick hits, and you can find the full interview here.

Gartman's thoughts on:
  • Gold: Someone or something is leaning on gold at $980-$1000 and I’ll let that seller be sated before I venture back to the long side. So will I sell gold short? No.
  • Natural gas: The best way to play natural gas is not to play at all.
  • Stocks to own: I want to own the movers and makers of “stuff.” Grains; water; base metals… that sort of thing
Thanks to our friends at The Daily Crux for linking to this post.


Low Acreage Propels Cotton "Limit Up"


The smallest acreage for cotton in 26 years has propelled the fluffy material "limit up" for the day, in what amounted to almost a delayed reaction from traders, as cotton was initially down yesterday when the report came out. Likely due to the weakness shown by the other grains.

You'd think that with cotton supplies continuing to shrink rapidly, a run up toward $1 is only a matter of time. October cotton futures closed today at 58.63.

Taking a look at the chart - maybe cotton is indeed getting wound up to make a run here. A solid pop over 60-cents would be a strong cry to "hop aboard"!

Cotton prices have resembled one of those lame kiddy park rollercoasters this year.
(Source: Barchart.com)

A "New Look" Government Motors? HAHAHAHA

We now find our fallen (past) hero, Government Motors, nestled under the protective wing of the United States Government, sheltered from the harsh conditions of the "free market."

Some folks actually believe this cover from reality is all that GM needs in order to right the ship, and, to borrow a phrase from REO Speedwagon and GM's 2001 commercials, "Keep on Rollin' " once again.

I'm sure you're stunned to hear that I'm a bit skeptical of this whole rouse! But lets go in with an open mind...could us free market snobs be wrong? Can GM remake itself?

Guest author Olivier Garret dives into the early "new" GM to see what the future may hold for the fallen giant...

***

A “New GM”?
By Olivier Garret, CEO, Casey Research

A friend of mine mentioned to me that he was surprised that “bankrupt GM” was spending some serious advertising dollars to try to lure customers to its website.

My comment to him: It makes sense, if it is done properly!

Yes, it is often necessary for a distressed company to communicate with its customers (advertise) and assure them that the future is brighter. That said, GM appears to have it all wrong once again.

What brought GM to where it is today is a lack of focus on what mattered to its customers – while it was losing market share to competitors that built higher-quality cars at competitive prices and strived to anticipate what customers needed. GM tried to remake its image several times over the past 20 years… without ever changing.

You might remember the slogan “An American Revolution.” The fact is, GM was led by insiders and bureaucrats. They climbed to the helm of the corporate ladder, not because they were good leaders but because they were effective at corporate politics and financial management. While GM employs scores of very competent and dedicated mid-level managers and union workers, they never got a clear signal or a commitment from the top that the company’s culture had to change in order to survive. People then did what they do best: they tried to protect the status quo and retain their perks. It worked for many years.

Unfortunately, the world of manufacturing has changed, and the strategies that made GM the world leader between the ‘40s and ‘60s have not worked since then. The company has needed a complete makeover for decades, and yet it has failed to embrace real change.

In this respect, bankruptcy could be an incredible opportunity for General Motors to get a fresh start and leave the chains of its legacy behind once and for all. It would be able to focus on building a successful company around its best assets (many great people, some good products, and physical assets). If the company could commit to doing much more than just a financial reorganization, it would have a bright future ahead.

So I looked for visible signs of change at the “New GM,” its first post-bankruptcy communication with its customers.

But let me first summarize the key elements of a “crisis” communication campaign. To be successful, it needs to be:
  • Reassuring. Show that the company is in control of its destiny.
  • Focused on the customer. What is the company doing for them (more exciting cars, more reliability, financing programs, excellence in service)? The message needs to be credible and – in the case of GM – should demonstrate how the new GM is different from the old one:
- Focused on fewer models – the best – to make them even better;
- Committed to improved productivity, as it means more value for the same price;
- Run by people that truly love cars vs. accountants – Henry Ford was an industrialist that knew cars, lived and breathed them; Wagoner never inspired the same passion).
  • Truthful. Unless the company is committed to meaningful changes, why bother? Customers will be disappointed by the message if they find out that the reality does not match expectations built by the campaign. This will lead to failure, as customers don’t forgive disingenuousness.
  • Vibrant and exciting. Why should a customer come back to GM? While “vibe” won’t be successful by itself, it is an essential differentiation tool to keep people interested in the rebirth of an American icon.
So, what is the initial verdict?

After I let the ads entice me to visit the new GM website, I landed on a page titled “Our Mission.”

Here are my impressions: The page I landed on was cold and boring, almost amateurish. Also, I did not get their “mission.” There was a bold statement saying, “Reinventing the company,” yet they talked about a new battery lab, the SAAB spin-off, and the Penske purchase of Saturn. No sign of excitement, passion, or true change. Note to GM: Talking about yourself does not engage your customers.

Alright, maybe I didn’t land on the page where GM meant for me to go first. So I checked the “Our Company” page… with the same sinking feeling.

Couldn’t GM marketers find a better picture of Fritz Henderson or a more engaging subject matter to tell me what they are going to do for me, their potential customer? By the way, Mr. Henderson has been with GM since 1984. Is he the guy that will change the culture of the company? Can he really make GM a leading carmaker after being part of the management team that took it on a downward spiral for a quarter of a century?

Oh wait! I can see that GM just appointed a new chairman: Edward Whitacre. He must be the inspiring new leader. Interestingly enough, Mr. Whitacre is a retired chairman of AT&T. He spent 43 years in the telecom industry; he hardly looks like a man whose life’s passion is cars.

A quick googling of Mr. Whitacre’s background tells me that he brings with him a real passion for technology (he didn’t even have a computer in his office at AT&T), the Boy Scouts of America (he was their national president from 1998 to 2000), and M&As (the highlights of his career in telecom). Not exactly the profile I had in mind for GM’s leadership at this point… oh well.

Further down on the page is an article on the GM/Segway joint venture. Clearly the new PUMA must be the answer to GM’s customers most pressing needs. To me, though, it looks like a rolling coffin that will at best serve a small niche of yuppies, or airport security staff, or municipal police force. Hardly what GM needs for a makeover.

(Photo: Reuters)

The next article tells me that the era of combustion engine vehicles is just about over. (If that’s true, why should I buy a car now?) But rest assured, even though the “New GM” may not have what I need today, it is working on tomorrow’s vehicles.

Well, if I remember correctly, GM’s competitors were the ones that produced the first commercially successful hybrids, while GM was promoting monstrous, gas-guzzling Hummers. Why should I trust that these guys now have a“feel” for the market? Do they truly understand where the future lies for this industry?

Maybe it is because President Obama stated that the American car industry will lead the green revolution and bring us the solution to the U.S. energy dependency problems. If I were Mr. Henderson and my job security were contingent on serving the wishes of my largest shareholder instead of the needs of my “potential” customers, my best strategy would be to pursue an all-electric vision. All I really needed anyway would be another five years before I could get full pension benefits guaranteed by the U.S. taxpayer.

My conclusion: Unfortunately, the first piece of communication from the “New GM” is all but reassuring; it fails all the tests for a successful crisis management campaign, leaving the visitor anything but excited about the struggling company. It leads me to believe that the “New GM” may have to file again shortly after emerging from its current “pre-packaged” bankruptcy. Alas, by that time, there will be a lot more job losses, and the brand will probably never recover.

I have been convinced for years that bankruptcy could save our domestic auto industry. However, I never had in mind a politically driven process like this – Washington technocrats and union leaders getting together and concocting this kind of an ill-conceived “solution.”

What I envisioned was a much more standard process where all the stakeholders put their claims in front of a restructuring team and a bankruptcy court. Then they collectively try to find the best compromise to move forward. They generally end up accepting significant losses but will vote in support of a plan that highlights a clear path to recovery and hope for future upside. In the absence of such a plan, they will push for liquidation and try to preserve the few assets they still have.

In some cases, the company cannot “remake” itself. Liquidation may then turn out to be the best thing that can happen. New owners pick up the pieces for ten cents on the dollar, and with a low-cost investment, they can start a truly new company focused on well-defined opportunities/customer needs. These new companies could again become icons of American entrepreneurship.

In either case, the American taxpayer would not be on the hook for tens or hundreds of billions of dollars, and the “New GM(s)” might have a chance to survive and thrive. Of course, this is not what is happening here. So, speaking with the legendary Mogambo Guru… second note to GM: You’re all freakin’ doomed.

All things considered, GM will most certainly not save the U.S. economy… or even be a part of it in the long run. And if you want to preserve and even multiply your assets, we wouldn’t recommend investing in GM – or any “blue-chip stock” – at this time. Instead, take a look at our Chief Economist Bud Conrad’s favorite investment of 2009… a play that is almost guaranteed to pay off handsomely this year. Click here to learn more.