|
How Central Bankers Fritter Away Their Time (and Ours)
*A trivial game of bluff. It is played using randomly picked currency from
your wallet. The denomination does not matter.
Gold has topped $600/oz. for the first time in 25 years. Unfortunately, for
real contrarians, it is making front page news. However, financial media commentary
remains fairly ignorant on the subject. The preferred explanations for gold's
rise are mostly benign: it's the Chinese and the Indians (ooh, they just love
bangles, it's part of their culture); it's the allocation to commodities that
has grown so popular (tangible assets are the rage with all the savviest hedge
funds-the Chinese need so much more stuff); it's the difficulty of bringing
new mines into production (you know, the tree huggers hate mining so much);
it's the central banks who have decided that selling gold was not such a great
idea in the first place and have now shied away from dumping their reserves
(just a bunch of stupid bureaucrats, anyway). These "explanations" all have
an element of truth. Any reader of our past website articles would have seen
it coming.
However, the Wall Street Journal, CNBC and the equivalent will not tell you
that gold is rising because there is a surfeit of paper assets. They will not
tell you that a rise in the gold price has historically been a harbinger of
bear markets in bonds and stocks and hard times for the financial business.
The Pavlovian response of the financial media to the crossing of the $600 threshold
was as predictable as their inability to comprehend or to portray the significance.
In truth, the price of gold at $600 is no big deal. In 1980 dollars, it is
only $300. If prior highs mean anything, a target of $1700 in today's dollars
is what investors should be thinking about. In our view, gold remains cheap,
another sign that the financial markets continue to under-price risk. Investors
should worry less about whether this particular moment is a good or bad entry
point and ponder the implications of sailing through uncharted waters without
a lifeboat.
A seasoned investor, looking at the recent histrionics in the precious metals
markets, could be forgiven for thinking: (1) wait for a substantial pullback,
or (2) it's all over. Bull markets conspire to throw most investors off the
scent so that as few as possible climb aboard or last for the entire ride.
Recent volatility is not climactic, terminal action, but rather, a demonstration
of how little physical gold there is in relation to paper assets seeking safety.
As with most markets, gold is smarter than those who observe it. One can only
try to guess what the surge in the metal is saying. We know that gold thrives
on credit worries causing investors to re-price safety by marking up the metal.
But on the surface, there appear to be no credit worries. Foreign central banks
continue to extend credit to US consumers and businesses by accepting dollar
denominated IOU's for their exports. Domestically, not even the weakest of
borrowers, sub-prime and junk credits, are turned away from the spigots of
liquidity. How then can we explain the puzzle of a rising gold price against
contracting credit spreads? The chart below shows that the history of gold
versus credit spreads has correlated positively until very recently:

The recent disconnect in this series suggests the possibility of a tectonic
shift in the structure of credit. One very good explanation might be the proliferation
of credit default swaps (CDS). In a recent interview (March 24, 2006-Welling
@Weeden) by Kate Welling, Michael E. Lewitt states: "Credit derivatives have
been a major enabler of the current credit bubble. The advent of credit derivatives
freed speculators from the constraints of the cash bond market, enabling them
to place bets on individual credits -- regardless of the amount of debt actually
outstanding." Mr. Lewitt added that in many cases, the notional value of credit
derivatives exceed the amount of underlying debt by several times. The OCC
numbers below reflect CDS exposure for banks only and does not include that
of hedge funds.
Top 5 Derivative Dealers*

Source=Office
of Comptroller of Currency (*JP Morgan,BofA,Citibank,Wachovia,HSBC)
Hedge funds and money center banks dominate credit swap issuance and this
activity is an important component of their income. Could the phenomenon of
unregulated sectors of the financial industry extending de facto credit be
a recipe for disaster? Without credit default swaps, marginal borrowers would
be shut out from credit, the global economy would lapse into recession, and
bad investments would be wiped off the books. Instead, CDS's keep weak credits
afloat, compound bad investment decisions, and deepen the ultimate retribution
from misdirected capital.
Traditional credit analysis centered on how the borrower would repay his debt
based on the study of balance sheet and cash flow statements. In our new system
of credit default swaps, traditional credit research is replaced by a financial
market version of particle physics applied to bets on the future trading price
of debt instruments. Debt repayment is an incidental thought.
As long as interest rates all along the yield curve do not become unruly,
the game can continue. Market confidence in Fed policy is a key component of
this apparent stability. By raising interest rates so far, the Fed appears
to be in control, and the financial markets are soothed by the perceived wisdom
of their actions. But who will be comforted if the Fed is still raising rates
a year from now to 8% or 9%? Lewitt notes that the Fed should keep raising
rates not because inflation is the big issue, but because of credit speculation.
What is the tipping point on the cost of money for credit basket cases? Gold
knows that there is a ceiling to the Fed's "discipline" and is anticipating
the day when the Fed's affectation of sure handedness becomes patently meaningless.
Signs of trouble ahead for financial assets frequently emerge in the foreign
exchange market. It is true that the recent weakness in the dollar reinforces
a bearish outlook for financial assets. But because the foreign exchange value
of the dollar reflects government policies rather than free market forces,
those expecting the dollar to "fall out of bed" may have to wait a while longer.
We expect a dollar crash, but later rather than sooner. No important trading
nation wants the dollar to implode because it would deflate American buying
power and cause global recession. For the foreseeable future, it is in the
common global interest to pretend that the dollar is worth more than it is.
While there may be some further weakness ahead, be prepared for coordinated
intervention to prop up the greenback. This could even include attacks on the
gold price. For what the matrix of CDS derivatives is to the universe of weak
credits, the dollar is to global commerce. There are no present day analogues
to Jacques Rueff or Charles de Gaulle to speak the truth about the dollar.
Instead, muddle-headed policy makers of all nationalities prefer to play liar's
poker to distract attention from substantive issues. They would prefer to be
overtaken by a monetary crisis, which would allow some to play the hero, instead
of dealing proactively.
Is the price of gold rising or is the value of assets measured in dollars,
yen, or euros falling? It would be an easy question to answer if currencies
were anchored to a fixed, universally accepted benchmark of value. In the absence
of such a reference point, it is much more difficult to ascertain economic
returns, and more likely that investment mistakes will continue. The common
perception is that the price of gold has been rising. However, it is more illuminating
to see that assets, commonly thought to be generating acceptable investment
returns, are falling in terms of gold or real money. The underperformance of
home prices, commodities, equities, and bonds relative to gold (see charts)
anticipates that the mass culture of the investment world will come to reassess
the attractiveness of these capital destinations.

Source: MacroMavens, LLC

Source: MacroMavens, LLC

Source: MacroMavens, LLC
Dollar denominated treasury debt, not gold, is the modern world's benchmark
of value, the global unit of account and store of value. Gold was written out
of the script long ago. The metal was demonetized and demonized by policy makers
in the 1970's. For example, William Simon, Secretary of the Treasury under
Nixon, complained that there was just not enough of it to go around. The risk
free treasury rate has displaced the barbaric relic as the universal anchor
of financial asset valuation. Equity market valuation models are dependent
on the "risk free" returns from government debt. Home mortgage rates have a
similar link, and by extension, housing prices. Tradable goods, pouring across
our borders from recently built (and theoretically profitable) foreign factories,
are attractively priced to US consumers because foreign governments accept
and hold for investment US government issued paper at yields deemed suitable
for such purposes by a committee of Fed governors.
But how does the world figure out the real investment return on US government
paper? It is a simple proposition, and it must, to be so widely used. The chart
below shows the relationship between the so called real interest rate and gold.
The "real" is the nominal rate on 90 day treasuries less the latest twelve
month consumer price index (CPI). It can be seen from the chart that the historical
relationship between gold and real rates is inverse. High real interest rates
are poison to the metal.

What the chart does not show is that the "real" interest rate is qualitatively
different from its antecedent of 25 years ago when gold scaled the $800 mark.
The real interest rates of the 1970's and those of 2006 are not apples to apples.
What has changed is the measurement of the CPI. Had that index been measured
consistently over the past twenty five years, today's real interest rates would
be a negative 300+ basis points instead of a positive (but still paltry) 1.1%.
What has changed and why? Policy makers, of all political persuasions, felt
that a fixed measure of inflation was every bit as inconvenient and restrictive
as the gold standard. The intent and effect of such changes has been to deceive
the public as to the real value of the dollar and thereby to devalue all government
obligations including, and possibly especially, social security payments.
How did they get away with it? The Byzantine answer reflects the machinations
of unaccountable "public servants" remote from public oversight. The first
notable change was courtesy of Arthur Burns, the longest serving Fed Chairman
prior to Greenspan. He introduced the notion of a "core" inflation rate in
1973-74 to marginalize the impact of food and energy. That clumsy and artless
first step set the precedent for multiple successive tweaks in the measurement
process which are expertly documented by John Williams on his excellent web
site, www.shadowgovernment.com.
The changes include geometric weighting, hedonic pricing, chain weighted pricing,
seasonal adjustments, intervention analysis and more. Please go to the website
for extensive discussion of the details.
The bi-partisan movement to alter the CPI gained full force during the Clinton
administration and was driven, according to Williams and others, by Michael
Boskin, chief economist to the first Bush administration and Fed Chairman Alan
Greenspan. The Boskin Commission proposed numerous changes to the calculation
of inflation and the recommendations were implemented during the first term
of the second Bush administration. The Commission produced a lengthy report,
cloaked in the rhetoric of academia and therefore incomprehensible to public
understanding, similar in spirit to the pages of disclosure one can find in
the footnotes and prospectuses of the junkiest of junk investments. The chart
below shows the CPI calculated in a manner consistent with pre-Boskin methodology
compared to what is reported to create the appearance of tame inflation. Today's
inflation rate exceeds 6%, versus the supposedly tame 3+% widely reported.
Among other side effects is the reduction of social security benefits, which
Williams calculates would be 43% higher under the old methodology.

Our simple thesis is that a unit of account as flawed as the dollar renders
intelligent capital allocation decisions all but impossible. The macro economic
implications are not good. False reads on investment returns across a wide
spectrum, if repeated over many years, lead to capital destruction and potentially
severe economic contraction. If the dollar is not what it seems to be, so are
returns on capital.
The central investment rationale for gold is that paper is untrustworthy.
The trust in dollar assets displayed by world central banks and public officials
is a mere convenience to camouflage disorder in public finances and unmanageable
economic imbalances. Dollar deception, both intentional and unwitting, has
succeeded for decades. The pictures below show a few paper currencies vaporized
by inflation.

Is there a fundamental difference between the Reichsmark, the Zimbabwe Dollar,
and the US dollar? The answer is no. They are all government backed cash notes.
There is a relative difference, however, in that the current global monetary
regime centered on the US dollar has far greater resources to back it up than
the others. This explains why it has taken 25 years for the dollar to lose
half of its value. (All data based, of course, on official statistics.) Poor
Zimbabwe , without such resources, introduced the latest version of its dollar
in 1999, only to see it lose every bit of its value by the close of 2005.
Not the least among the resources propping up the dollar is the residue of
trust enjoyed by this brand of paper currency that has been earned over centuries
of history. Its demise has been managed with great skill and subterfuge. Therefore
the pace has been slower and at times imperceptible compared to the more notable
flameouts. Still, the end result, however long it takes to materialize, will
be the same. It will be replaced, redesigned and redefined. Do not doubt that
the game of liar's poker will continue with replacement dollars. It is unlikely
that politicians will ever appreciate or understand the difference between
cash and money. For the political class, cash in the form of state issued IOU's
will always be the preferred form of legal tender. How else would they ever
be able to play liar's poker? Imagine trying to do that with real money that
has kept is value for more than two millennia.

|