Tag Archives: central bank policy

Who Cares? by Robert Gore

For the record, SLL has no clue whether the Fed will or will not raise its federal funds target rate by twenty five basis points (one quarter of one percent) this week. Goldman Sachs is far more plugged into the Fed than SLL. They have said for some time that the Fed won’t raise the rate and SLL will go with that. Our lack of insight about the imminent move is exceeded only by our disinterest.

Supposedly a hike will unleash Armageddon, while standing pat will stoke a monster equity rally. We’ll see, but keep in mind financial markets’ long history of responses contrary to consensus predictions. The intense preoccupation on the decision is unhealthy, like old people whose sole topic of conversation is their ailments and medications. It betrays all sorts of misconceptions, chief of which is that the economy and financial markets are puppets dancing on strings controlled by the Fed puppeteer.

It is true that the during the eighty months the Fed has held the federal funds rate at zero and instituted three quantitative easings, the stock market has rallied and the economy has staged a feeble recovery. That does not amount to Quod Erat Demonstrandum (QED), the Latin phrase denoting that the proposition—Fed omnipotence—has been demonstrated. Fed easing failed to prevent market crashes and economic contraction after stock market tops in 1929, 2001, and 2007. Similarly, there have been numerous instances when the economy and stock market have done quite well in the face of constrictive Fed policies. The Fed’s interest rate moves usually follow, rather than lead, moves in the Treasury debt market. Whether that is because markets are anticipating the Fed or are actually leading it is a discussion best left for another day.

Once upon a time, the US economy managed to function without a central bank. It had its ups and downs, but the Industrial Revolution remains the high point for the American economy in terms of economic growth and rising per capita incomes. It is an apex of technological, scientific, and industrial discovery, innovation and progress. However, studied indifference to that period, along with an embrace of the shibboleth that government and central bank control of the economy are necessary and proper, are cornerstones of statist conceit. This Fed-centric view feeds into media and Wall Street inertia and intellectual rigor mortis. It is far easier to endlessly discuss the actions of a small group of monetary mandarins, to use David Stockman’s phrase, than it is to figure out what’s really going on in the $17 trillion US economy or the $77 trillion global economy.

Right now, the most salient trend, the reality that shapes all other realities, is debt, which globally stands at about $200 trillion. Central banks have something to do with that debt, of course, ballooning their balance sheets, monetizing sovereign debt and other assets, and suppressing interest rates. However, after an underwhelming recover they force fed, it is clear that all this debt has led only to malinvestment, overproduction and overconsumption, and funded a speculative mania that has systematically mis-priced financial assets and divorced markets from underlying economic reality. Now, with economies sputtering, commodity prices crashing, global trade shrinking, widespread gluts of raw materials and manufactured goods, and anemic growth in consumption, it is clear that the marginal value of an addition dollar, yen, euro, yuan, or real of debt has gone negative, even with zero or negative official interest rates in much of the world. The stage is set for a global debt contraction.

Since 1994, the balance sheets of the world’s central banks have grown from $2 trillion to $22 trillion, 13 percent per year. Impressive indeed, but put that up against the world’s $200 trillion in debt. A 10 percent “correction” in global debt would in effect wipe out the entire two-decade central ban increase. One can argue about multiplier effects magnifying the impact of central bank credit, but with the marginal value of debt going negative, those multiplier effects have gone missing. In the US, the Fed’s balance sheet expansion has only improved the economic prospects of Wall Street speculators, and have not reverberated and multiplied in the real economy.

The debt contraction, heralded by the carnage in commodities, will be much more severe than a 10 percent correction. Debt is interlinked—one entity’s debt is another’s asset—and once it begins to unravel significantly, (housing and mortgage finance in 2008, commodities and emerging markets laden with almost $10 trillion in dollar-denominated debt in 2015) it creates a chain reaction of further unraveling. In 2008 it was stopped only by huge infusions of government and central bank debt and transferring private debt to public balance sheets. The 2008 measures forestalled, but will not prevent, an ultimate reckoning. Total world debt has grown, central banks’ balance sheets are engorged, interest rates are about as low as they can go, and governments are running into financing and political constraints on deficit financing. Against his backdrop, whether or not one central bank raises one interest rate all of 25 basis points will be treated—after whatever market spasms the decision elicits—as the irrelevancy that it is.

One final note. Some commentators have argued that the Fed will raise its rate this week to maintain its credibility. That’s laughable. The Fed was set up as a way to disguise the transition from real money, gold, to fiat debt. For over 100 years it has obfuscated that purpose, disguised its intentions, surreptitiously intervened in markets, and piously maintained its supposed “independence,” zealously fighting all perceived challenges, although it is the financial, political, and regulatory handmaiden for the banking industry. It has no credibility left to maintain, just a set of pretenses that many in the financial industry expediently profess to believe. Whatever decision Janet Yellen and her merry muppets reach, the Federal Reserve will have the same amount of credibility after the decision that it had before it: none.

HISTORICAL FICTION THAT’S BETTER THAN HISTORY AND BETTER THAN FICTION

TGP_photo 2 FB

AMAZON

KINDLE

NOOK

The Global Credit Supercycle: Full Frontal, by Tyler Durden

From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Over the past several years, one of the prevailing, if completely incorrect, conventional wisdom memes was that the US, and especially the private sector, had undergone a deleveraging and was ready to load up on debt again. This was wrong because as we showed over the years, the only deleveraging which US households underwent was due to defaults and nothing to do with voluntary debt reduction.

Furthermore, the compounding effect of soaring student loans – which at $1.1 trillion eclipse the total credit card debt of the US – is one of the reasons why the US labor participation rate is at 38 year lows: millennials are unwilling and unable to enter the labor force opting to rollover student loans instead (until said loans are forgiven), while aged workers, those 55 and over, thanks to ZIRP crushing the income-creating capacity of their savings, don’t have the resources to exit the labor force.

As for US banks whose “fortress” balance sheets have supposedly never been more solid due to the collapse in net leverage, here is a chart showing total US commercial bank cash balances when adding the $2.5 trillion in “transitory” Fed excess reserves, and what happens if one were to “pro-forma” the Fed’s monetary spigot out of bank balance sheets.

To continue reading: The Global Credit Supercycle: Full Frontal

Europe’s Biggest Bank Dares To Ask: Is The Fed Preparing For A “Controlled Demolition” Of The Market, by Tyler Durden

SLL would not put anything past central banker, including a “controlled demolition,” although it is doubtful that they could keep such a demolition within the desired parameters. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Why did we focus so much attention yesterday on a post in which the IMF confirmed what we had said since last October, namely that the BOJ’s days of ravenous debt monetization are coming to a tapering end as soon as 2017 (as willing sellers simply run out of product)? Simple: because in the global fiat regime, asset prices are nothing more than an indication of central bank generosity. Or, as Deutsche Bank puts it: “Ultimately in a fiat money system asset prices reflect “outside” i.e. central bank money and the extent to which it multiplied through the banking system.”

The problem is that the BOJ and the ECB are the only two remaining central banks in a world in which Reverse QE aka “Quantitative Tightening” in China, and the Fed’s tightening in the form of an upcoming rate hike (unless the Fed loses all credibility and reverts its pro-rate hike bias), are now actively involved in reducing global liquidity. It is only a matter of time before the market starts pricing in that the Bank of Japan’s open-ended QE has begun its tapering (followed by a QE-ending) countdown, which will lead to devastating risk-asset consequences. The ECB, which is also greatly supply constrained as Ewald Nowotny admitted yesterday, will follow closely behind.

But while we expanded on the Japanese problem to come in detail yesterday, here are some key observations on what is going on in both the US and China as of this moment – the two places which all now admit are the culprit for the recent equity selloff, and which the market has finally realized are actively soaking up global liquidity.

Here the problem, as we initially discussed last November in “How The Petrodollar Quietly Died, And Nobody Noticed“, is that as a result of the soaring US dollar and collapse in oil prices, Petrodollar recycling has crashed, leading to an outright liquidation of FX reserves, read US Treasurys by emerging market nations. This was reinforced on August 11th when China joined the global liquidation push as a result of its devaluation announcement, a topic which we also covered far ahead of everyone else with our May report “Revealing The Identity Of The Mystery “Belgian” Buyer Of US Treasurys”, exposing Chinese dumping of US Treasurys via Belgium.

We also hope to have made it quite clear that China’s reserve liquidation and that of the EM petro-exporters is really two sides of the same coin: in a world in which the USD is soaring as a result of Fed tightening concerns, other central banks have no choice but to liquidate FX reserve assets: this includes both EMs, and most recently, China.

Needless to say, these key trends covered here over the past year have finally become the biggest mainstream topic, and have led to the biggest equity drop in years, including the first correction in the S&P since 2011. Elsewhere, the risk devastation is much more profound, with emerging market equity markets and currencies crashing around the globe at a pace reminiscent of the Asian 1998 crisis, while in China both the housing and credit, not to mention the stock market, bubble have all long burst.

To continue reading: Is The Fed Preparing For A “Controlled Demolition”?

More Bone-Smoking Garbage, by Karl Denninger

While the raiments of the empresses and emperors of central banking are still being fawned over by their courtiers in government and the press, there’s a growing number of observers, their eyes wide open, who are proclaiming the truth: the central bankers are naked! From Karl Denninger, on a guest post from theburningplatform.com:

I read this twice before realizing the last name of the author perfectly fit the so-called “fix” for 2008 — and the premise that “they could do that again.”

By the end of the week, stocks, currencies and commodity prices weren’t crashing any longer but financial markets were far from settled. Over the past 10 days, markets have plummeted, paused, recovered and fallen again. There’s little sign the anxiety is lifting.

Until recently investors had been preoccupied with the weakness of the post-2008 recovery. Now some are asking whether 2008 might come round again. It’s an especially disturbing possibility because, on the face of it, the policy options for responding to another slump are fewer than last time. Governments have run big budget deficits to support demand, so there’s less so-called fiscal space for a new round of stimulus, or so the thinking goes. Interest rates are still at zero, and even the advocates of quantitative easing recognize that it ran into diminishing returns. What’s left?

Clive goes on to raise the old flag once again; that the “effective remedies” could once again be trotted out.

There’s a problem with this premise: They didn’t work the last time.

My evidence? All of those measures are still in place!

If they were effective then they could have been withdrawn. They were not, any more than opiates are effective at resolving the source of pain. Oh sure, opiates mask pain (at the cost of making you stoned out of your mind!) but they don’t fix whatever is causing the pain itself.
What’s worse, of course is that in order to maintain their effectiveness you must continually increase the dose of these monetary instruments exactly as tolerance does the same thing with opiates. In the case of opiates you eventually reach a “coffin corner” as there is a depressant effect on the body that has a hard upper limit; when you reach it the user’s respiration and heart stop, and that’s the end of the show. As the effective dose ratchets upward you eventually reach the point where either the user accidentally takes too much and dies, or worse reaches the point that the effective and lethal doses cross and he dies that way.

In the case of so-called “monetary stimulus” the facts are in at this point — the 2008 nostrums did not work. Yes, the stock market went back up. But here’s the rub — they “worked” by increasing the debt in the system, and since GDP is computed in units of currency you must back out of the GDP equation the additional units that were added.

If you do this you’ll find that from the time of the crisis to today GDP has in fact expanded by less than 1% a year. Since the population expands by about 1% a year in the United States (and has been for the last 50 years or so) this means that on a per-capita basis GDP has actually been negative the entire time.

Read that last paragraph however many times you need to until it sinks in: There has been no economic growth in real terms on a per-person basis since the economic crisis. Zip. Zero. Nada.

To continue reading: More Bone-Smoking Garbage

Stanley Fischer Speaks——-More Drivel From A Dangerous Academic Fool, by David Stockman

No one, as David Stockman reminds us, is as dangerous as a well-educated fool, and Washington and Wall Street are full of them. From Stockman at davidstockmanscontracorner.com:

With every passing week that money markets rates remain pinned to the zero bound by the Fed, the magnitude of the financial catastrophe hurtling toward main street America intensifies. That’s because 80 months—– and counting—–of zero interest rates are fueling the most stupendous gambling frenzy that Wall Street has ever witnessed or even imagined. Sooner or later, therefore, this mother of all financial bubbles will splatter, bringing untold harm to millions of households which have been lured back into the casino.

The truth is, zero cost in the money market is irrelevant to main street. As we have repeatedly demonstrated the household sector is stranded at “peak debt” and, consequently, there is no interest rate low enough to elicit a spree of pre-crisis style consumer borrowing and spending. Based on the clueless jawing that occurred this weekend at Jackson Hole, the following simple chart that I laid out last week bears repeating:

On the eve of the financial crisis in Q1 2008, total household debt outstanding—including mortgages, credit cards, auto loans, student loans and the rest——– was $13.957 trillion. That compare to $13.568 trillion outstanding at the end of Q1 2015.

That’s right. After 80 months of ZIRP and an unprecedented incentive to borrow and spend, households have actually liquidated nearly $400 billion or 3% of their pre-crisis debt.

Likewise, zero money market rates are irrelevant to legitimate business finance. That’s because no sane executive would finance the life blood of his enterprise—–the working stock of raw, intermediate and finished goods——in the overnight money market; and, self-evidently, free overnight money is beside the point when it comes to funding long-term, illiquid but productive assets such as plant, equipment and software.

In fact, the only impact that free money market funding has on corporate America is round-about and perverse. To wit, it flushes money managers into a desperate quest for yield and provides stock speculators with endless opportunities to load up their trucks with zero cost carry trades, thereby driving the stock averages to lunatic heights.

As a result of this double-whammy, the C-suites of corporate America have been turned into glorified gambling parlors. The stock option obsessed executives domiciled there are endlessly and overpoweringly presented with the opportunity to sell cheap corporate credit to yield-hungry fund mangers and use the proceeds to buyback their own over-priced stock or to acquire at a hefty premium the equally over-priced stock of their competitors, suppliers and customers, or any other company that Wall Street bankers happen to be peddling.

To continue reading: More Drivel From A Dangerous Academic Fool

Manipulation = Fragility, by Charles Hugh Smith

Charles Hugh Smith is on a roll—two guest posts on SLL in one day! From Smith at oftwominds.com:

In markets distorted by permanent manipulation the most powerful incentive is to borrow as much money as you can and leverage it as much as you can to maximize your gains in risk-on asset bubbles.

A core dynamic is laying waste to global financial markets: the greater the level of central bank/government manipulation, the greater the systemic fragility.

One key characteristic of this fragility is that it invisibly accumulates beneath the surface stability until some minor disturbance cracks the thinning layer of apparent stability. At that point, the system destabilizes, as it has been hollowed out by ceaseless manipulation, a.k.a. intervention.

There are a number of moving parts to this dynamic of steadily increasing fragility.

One is that any system quickly habituates to the manipulation, that is, the system soon adds the manipulation to its essential inputs.

For example: if you lower interest rates to near-zero, the system soon needs near-zero interest rates to remain stable. Raising rates even a mere percentage point threatens to fatally disrupt the entire system.

Another is that permanent intervention (i.e. manipulation, or to use a less threatening word, management) strips the system of resilience.

When participants are rescued from risk by central bank/central state authorities, they take bigger and bigger gambles, knowing that if the bet goes south, the central bank/state will rush to their rescue.

One of the core sources of resilience is a healthy fear of losses. If you’re going to face the consequences of your actions and choices, prudence forces you to either hedge your bets or diversify very broadly, so if bets in one sector go south you won’t be wiped out.

To continue reading: Manipulation = Fragility

The Central Bankers’ Malodorous War On Savers, by David Stockman

From David Stockman at davidstockmanscontracorner.com:

Well, that didn’t take long!

After just three days of market turmoil the monetary politburo swung into action. This time they sent out B-Dud to promise still another monetary sweetener. Said the head of the New York Fed,

“From my perspective, at this moment, the decision to begin the normalization process at the September FOMC meeting seems less compelling to me than it was a few weeks ago.”.

Needless to say, “B-Dud” is a moniker implying extreme disrespect, and Bill Dudley deserves every bit of it. He is a crony capitalist fool and one of the Fed ring-leaders prosecuting a relentless, savage war on savers. Its only purpose is to keep carry trade speculators gorged with free funding in the money markets and to bloat the profits of Wall Street strip-mining operations, like that of his former employer, Goldman Sachs.

The fact is, any one who doesn’t imbibe in the Keynesian Kool-Aid dispensed by the central banking cartel can see in an instant that 80 months of ZIRP has done exactly nothing for the main street economy. Notwithtanding the Fed’s gussied-up theories about monetary “accommodation” and closing the “output gap” the litmus test is real simple.

To wit, artificial suppression of free market interest rates by the central bank is designed to cause households to borrow more money than they otherwise would in order to spend more than they earn, pure and simple. Its nothing more than a modernized version of the original, crude Keynesian pump-priming theory—–except it dispenses with the inconvenience of getting politicians to approve spending increases and tax cuts in favor of the writ of a small posse of unelected monetary mandarins who run the FOMC and peg money market interest rates at will.

To continue reading: The Central Bankers’ Maodorous War On Savers

Is This Black Monday Crash The BIG ONE? It Doesn’t Matter, by Raúl Ilargi Meijer

Raúl Ilargi Meijer of theautomaticearth.com gets it right:

After losing 11% last week, Shanghai this morning was down almost -9% at one point, after lunch went back up to -6.5%, and ended its day at -8.49%. A Black Monday for sure, but is this the BIG ONE? It really doesn’t matter one bit. Unless perhaps you persist in calling your self an investor, in which case we pity you, but not for losing your shirt. Because God knows we’ve said enough times now that there are no functioning markets anymore, and therefore no-one who can rightfully lay claim to the title ‘investor’.

Plenty amongst you will be talking about economic cycles, and opportunities, and debate how to ‘play’ the crash, but all this is useless if and when a market doesn’t function. And just about all markets in the richer part of the world stopped functioning when central banks started buying assets. That’s when you stopped being investors. And when market strategies stopped making sense.

Central banks will come up with more, much more, ‘stimulus’, but what China teaches us today is that we’re woefully close to the moment when central banks will lose the faith and trust of everyone. After injecting tens of billions of dollars in markets, which thereby ceased to function, the global economy is in a bigger mess then it was prior to QE. The whole thing is one big bubble now, and we know what invariably happens to those.

More QE is not an answer. And there is no other answer left either. Those tens of trillions will need to vanish from the global economy before any market can be returned to a functioning one, and by that time of course asset prices will be fraction of what they are now. It may not happen today, but that doesn’t matter: what’s important to know is that it WILL happen.

And if you keep being out there trying to outsmart a non-functioning market, you’ll get burned as badly as the millions of Chinese grandmas who already lost 20%+ so far just this month. And that’s just on their share holdings; Chinese property ‘markets’ will be at least as badly burned.

To continue reading: Is this Black Monday Crash The BIG ONE?

Why the Bear of 2015 Is Different from the Bear of 2008, by Charles Hugh Smith

From Charles Hugh Smith at oftwominds.com:

Are there any conditions now that are actually better than those of 2008?

It’s tempting to see similarities in last week’s global stock market mini-crash and the monumental meltdown that almost took down the Global Financial System in 2008-2009. The dizzying drop invites comparison to the last Bear Market that took the S&P 500 from 1,565 in October 2007 to 667 on March 9, 2009.

But this Bear is beginning in circumstances quite different from 2007-08. Let’s list a few of the differences:

1. Then: Markets and central banks feared inflation, as WTIC oil had hit $133 per barrel in the summer of 2008.

Now: As oil tests the $40/barrel level, markets and central banks fear deflation.

2. Then: China had a relatively modest $7 trillion in total debt, considerably less than 100% of GDP.

now: China’s debt has quadrupled from $7 trillion in 2007 to $28 trillion as of mid-2014, an astonishing 282% of gross domestic product (GDP)

3. Then: Central banks had a full toolbox of unprecedented monetary surprises to unleash on the market: TARP, TARF, BARF (OK, that one is made up) rescue packages and credit guarantees, quantitative easing (QE), zero interest rate policy (ZIRP) and direct purchases of mortgages, to name just the top few.

Now: The central bank toolbox is empty: every tool has already been deployed on an unprecedented scale. Every potential new program is simply a retread of QE, yield curve bending, asset purchases, etc.–the same old bag of tricks.

4. Then: Central banks had a relatively clean slate to work with. Interventions in the market and economy were limited to suppressing interest rates in the post-dot-com meltdown era.

Now: Central banks have never stopped intervening since 2008. The market is in effect a reflection of 6+ years of unprecedented central bank interventions.

Rather than a clean slate, central banks face a global marketplace that is dominated by incentives to speculate with leveraged/borrowed money established by 6 years of central bank policies.

5. Then: Interest rates had rebounded from the post-dot-com lows in 2003. The Fed Funds rate in 2006-07 was above 5%, and the Prime Lending Rate exceeded 8%.

Now: The Fed Funds Rate has been screwed down to .25% for 6+ years–an unprecedented period of near-zero interest rates.

To continue reading: Why the Bear of 2015 Is Different

He Said That? 8/22/15

Who can forget Jim Cramer’s timeless rant back in August 2007? He blew a gasket back then, demanding the financial authorities do something to save his underwater portfolio the financial system. He might have a heart attack or a stroke when this infant financial crisis reaches full maturity. For old time’s sake, here’s Jim Cramer: