April 20, 2024

Federal Reserve Policies Have Put The Nation On The Road To Economic Chaos

October 27, 2012 by 4 Comments

By Axel Merk

The FOMC has crossed the Rubicon: our analysis suggests that the Federal Open Market Committee is deliberately ignoring data on both growth and inflation. At best, the FOMC’s intention might have been to not rock the markets two weeks before the election. At worst, the FOMC has given up on market transparency in an effort to actively manage the yield curve (short-term to long-term interest rates):

  • On growth, economic data, including the unemployment report, have clearly come in better than expected since the most recent FOMC meeting. FOMC practice dictates that progress in economic growth is acknowledged in the statement. Instead, the assessment of the economic environment is verbatim. Had the FOMC given credit to the improved reality, the market might have priced in earlier tightening. The FOMC chose to ignore reality, possibly afraid of an unwanted reaction in the bond market.
  • On inflation, the FOMC correctly points out that inflation has recently picked up “somewhat.” However, it may be misleading to blame the increase on higher energy prices, and then claim that “longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.” Not so, suggests an important inflation indicator monitored by the Fed and economists alike: 5-year forward, 5-year inflation expectations broke out when the Fed announced “QE3”, its third round of quantitative easing where the emphasis shifted from a focus on inflation to a focus on employment. This gauge of inflation measures the market’s expectation of annualized inflation over a five year period starting five years out, ignoring the near term as it may be influenced by short-term factors:
Inflation Expectations

The chart shows that we have broken out of a 2 standard deviation band and that the breakout occurred at the time of the QE3 announcement. In our assessment, the market disagrees with the FOMC’s assertion that longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable. At best, the FOMC ignores this development because they also look at different metrics (keep in mind that the Fed’s quantitative easing programs manipulate the very rates we are trying to gauge here) or has a different notion of what it considers longer-term stable inflation expectations. At worst, however, the FOMC is afraid of admitting to the market that QE3 is perceived as inflationary.

In our assessment, inflation expectations have clearly become elevated. Ignoring reality by ignoring growth and inflation may not be helpful to the long-term credibility of the Fed. Fed credibility is important, as monetary policy becomes much more expensive when words alone don’t move markets anymore.

Please sign up to our newsletter to be informed as we discuss global dynamics and their impact on gold and currencies.

Axel Merk

Axel Merk is President and Chief Investment Officer, Merk Investments
Merk Investments, Manager of the Merk Funds

Filed Under: Currency debasement, Featured, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Global Gold Production Set For Major Decline As South African Mines Close

October 26, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Global gold production could drop sharply as South African miners plan to dismiss thousands of workers for illegally striking.  South African precious metal miners have been beset by labor unrest for months as workers protest low wages and dangerous working conditions.  The latest disruption came Wednesday as South Africa’s largest gold miner announced plans to dismiss about 12,000 workers.

South Africa’s biggest gold miner by output, AngloGold Ashanti Ltd., said Wednesday it will begin a process to dismiss about 12,000 workers, following in the footsteps of other mining companies desperate to end crippling strikes.

If AngloGold follows through on its threat, it means more than 35,000 mining workers at several companies have been dismissed for illegally striking in recent weeks. The mass firings have prompted criticism from unions and the government, but so far have not provoked a repeat of the violence that sparked national labor unrest in South Africa in August.

Several major South African gold and platinum producers are struggling to end weeks of wildcat strikes that have halted thousands of ounces of gold and platinum production and caused billions of rand in lost revenue.

Gold production problems in South Africa run deeper than merely resolving a labor/management dispute over low wages.  The cost and effort to mine gold has grown exponentially as the easy to reach grades of gold ore have been depleted.  Miners have had to dig much deeper to reach low grades of ore with a corresponding increase in extraction costs.  South Africa, once the leading country in gold production has dropped to fifth place.

Courtesy wikipedia.com

In 2006, South Africa produced 272,128 kilograms of gold, but by 2011 output had plunged by 30% to only 190,000 kilograms.  With workers no longer willing to work for what amount to slave labor wages, along with declining ore reserves, gold output from South African mines will continue to decline dramatically.  SBG Securities analyst David Davis says “Almost all of the gold mines on strike are mature.  These mines were going to have to be restructured and downsized anyhow in the next 12 to 36 months.”

Further reductions in future global gold supply will continue based on the constantly increasing costs of mining lower grade ores and the lack of major new gold discoveries.  According to the US Geological Survey, gold production decreased in every year from 2001 to 2008, a remarkable statistic in light of the huge increase in gold prices during that period of time.  Gold sold for only around $300 per ounce in 2001 compared to today’s price of over $1,700 per ounce.

Over the past three years from 2009 to 2011, gold production increased as miners went all out to take advantage of surging gold prices.  According to the World Gold Council, mine production rose from 2,611 tonnes in 2009 to 2,822 tonnes in 2011.  The previous production peak for yearly gold production occurred in 2001 at 2,600 tonnes.  As the current situation in South Africa shows, much of the recent increase in gold production came as mining companies desperately worked old mines to depletion while paying workers as little as possible.   Those days are now over and South African gold production will continue to plummet.

Ironically, gold production soared from 1981 to 2000 as gold declined in price from $750 per ounce in 1981 to under $300 by the turn of the century.  Gold miners were forced to produce as much gold as possible to stay in business as revenues constantly declined due to the drop in the price of gold.

Absent major new discoveries of large gold deposits, gold mining production could decline substantially in future years.  Declining supplies, along with massive currency printing by central banks worldwide, will create the perfect storm for a continuation of the decade long bull market in gold.  Note to Ben Bernanke – no, you can’t print gold.

Filed Under: Currency debasement, Featured, Gold, Platinum Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Would A Romney Victory Cause Gold To Collapse?

October 25, 2012 by Leave a Comment

By Axel Merk & Yuan Fang

Monetary Cliff?

As the presidential election is rapidly approaching, little attention seems to be getting paid to the question that may affect voters the most: what will happen to the “easy money” policy? Federal Reserve (Fed) Chairman Bernanke’s current term will expire in January 2014 and Republican candidate Mitt Romney has vowed that if elected, he would replace Bernanke. Given the tremendous amount of money the Fed has “printed” and the commitment to keep interest rates low until mid-2015, the election may impact everything from mortgage costs to the cost of financing the U.S. debt. Trillions are at stake, as well as the fate of the U.S. dollar.

Should Obama be re-elected, Bernanke might continue to serve as Fed Chairman; other likely candidates include the Fed’s Vice Chairman Janet Yellen and Obama’s former economic advisor Christina Romer. With any of them, we expect the Fed policy to be continuingly dominated by the dovish camp, and moving – with varying enthusiasm depending on the pick of Fed Chair – towards a formal employment target, further diluting any inflation target. We are not only talking about Bernanke and the other two candidates’ individual policy stances (though all three are known as monetary “doves”, i.e. generally favoring more accommodative monetary policy), but also the composition of voting members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), as we will discuss below.

If Romney were to be elected, a front-runner for the Fed Chairman post is Glenn Hubbard, Dean of Columbia Business School and a top economic adviser to Romney. Hubbard has expressed his skepticism about the mechanism that Bernanke used to boost the economy. In our analysis, an FOMC led by Hubbard (or another Romney appointee) will be leaning toward mopping up the liquidity sooner. Extending forward guidance to mid-2015 will also be under question. It will no doubt add uncertainty to monetary policy and increase market volatility.

More importantly, however, a “hawkish” Fed Chair, i.e. one that favors monetary tightening, might put to the test Bernanke’s claim that he can raise rates in “15 minutes”. Technically, of course, the Fed can raise rates by paying interest on reserves held at the Fed or sell assets acquired during various rounds of quantitative easing. The challenge, no matter who the Fed Chair is going to be, is the impact any tightening might have on the economy. Bernanke has cautioned many times that rates should not be raised before the recovery is firmly “entrenched.” What he is referring to is that market forces may still warrant further de-leveraging. If the stimulus is removed too early, so Bernanke has argued, the economy might fall back into recession. A more hawkish Fed Chair, such as a Glenn Hubbard, may accept a recession as an acceptable cost to exit monetary largesse; however, because there is so much stimulus in the economy, just a little bit of tightening may well have an amplified effect in slowing down the economy. Keep in mind that European countries are complaining when their cost of borrowing rises to 4%, calling 7% unsustainable. Given that the U.S. budget deficit is higher than that of the Eurozone as a whole, and that our fiscal outlook is rather bleak, it remains to be seen just how much tightening the economy can bear. Our forecast is that with a Republican administration, we are likely to get a rather volatile interest rate environment, as any attempt to tighten may have to be reversed rather quickly. Fasten your seatbelts, as shockwaves may be expressed in the bond market and the “tranquility” investors have fled to by chasing U.S. bonds may well come to an end. Foreigners that have historically been large buyers of U.S. bonds may well reduce their appetite to finance U.S. debt, with potentially negative implications for the U.S. dollar.

Let’s dig a little deeper and look at who actually decides on interest rates: it is the voting members of the FOMC that ultimately make the imminent monetary policy decisions, rather than the noise creating pundits and non-voting members.

Three factors will further boost the dovish camp, which already dominates the FOMC committee:

    • Two previously vacant seats on the Fed’s Board of Governors were recently filled by Jeremy Stein and Jerome Powell this May. Like other board governors, both Stein and Powell appear to be in favor of Bernanke’s dovish policy. Stein was a Harvard economics professor and used to be more ‘hawkish’ before he took office. But in his first keynote speech as a board governor on Oct. 11, Stein openly supported QE3 and called for continuing asset purchases in absence of a substantial improvement in the labor market. Jerome Powell was a lawyer and private equity investor as well as an undersecretary under George H.W. Bush. Powell has also expressed support for more easing, with inflation an afterthought. Their appointments not only fill all voting seats at the Fed for the first time since 2006, but also further increase the board’s dove-hawk ratio from 9-1 to 11-1. The influence will also carry on to the following years, as board governors hold non-rotating voting rights.
    • Additionally, four current voting members will be replaced next year, including Richmond Fed president Jeffrey Lacker, who has dissented in every FOMC meeting this year. Regional Fed Presidents, unlike Governors, vote on a rotating basis. In 2013, Kansas Fed president Esther George is likely to be the only voting member who appears to hold a hawkish stance. George has expressed her opposition to QE3 and the Fed’s balance sheet expansion, echoing her predecessor Thomas Hoenig’s hawkish tone. But given that she is not a Ph.D. economist, her passion and influence is likely to be more on regulatory than monetary issues; we doubt she will be as vocal as Hoenig or Lacker. In our assessment, the FOMC committee may be “über-dovish” in 2013.
    • Finally, Minneapolis Fed President Narayana Kocherlakota, who was known as a monetary policy hawk, has recently shifted to a more dovish stance. He surprised the market with remarks supporting the Fed’s decision to keep rates extraordinarily low until the unemployment rate has fallen below 5.5%, as long as inflation remains below 2.25%. Kocherlakota will be a voting member in 2014, but his shift of stance will weaken the hawkish voice. With fewer dissidents on the board, the Fed may continue to err firmly on the side of inflation and stick to to its mid-2015 low rate pledge.

No matter who wins the election, we will see a policy dilemma for the Fed in the coming years: On the one side, should economic data continue to surprise to the upside, it will be increasingly difficult for the Fed to carry on its dovish policies. On the other side, if the Fed were to abandon its current commitment, we foresee rising market volatility. The U.S. economy is likely to face a “monetary policy cliff” in addition to the “fiscal cliff”. With easy money, inflation risks may well continue to rise, possibly imposing higher bond yields (lower bond prices) and a weaker dollar. With tight money, the Fed may induce a bond selloff. Historically, because foreigners are active buyers of U.S. bonds, the dollar has weakened during early and mid-phases of tightening, as the bond bull market turns into a bear market. It’s only during late phases of tightening that the dollar has historically benefited as the bond market turns yet again into a bull market. We encourage investors to review their portfolios to account for the risk that bonds may be selling off, taking the U.S. dollar along with it.

Please sign up to our newsletter to be informed as we discuss global dynamics and their impact on gold and currencies. Please also register for our Webinar on Thursday, November 8th, 2012, where we will focus on implications on China and Asian currencies.

Axel Merk

Axel Merk is President and Chief Investment Officer, Merk Investments

Yuan Fang is a Financial Analyst at Merk Investments and member of the portfolio management group.

Filed Under: Currency debasement, Featured, Gold, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

The Fed’s Efforts To “Print” New Jobs Is Failing – What Does The Fed Do Next?

October 25, 2012 by Leave a Comment

In an effort to expand credit and spur job creation, the Federal Reserve has massively expanded its balance sheet with the most aggressive monetary policies in the history of the Federal Reserve.  Since the start of the financial crisis, the Fed instituted two rounds of quantitative easing under which over $2.75 trillion of debt securities were purchased by, in effect, printing money.

The first two phases of quantitative easing resulting in soaring stock and gold prices but did little to reduce the unemployment rate which has remained stubbornly high.  In early September, Fed Chairman Bernanke went all in on his aggressive monetary policies with the announcement of QE3 under which the Fed will conduct open-ended asset purchases.

The Federal Reserve said it will expand its holdings of long-term securities with open-ended purchases of $40 billion of mortgage debt a month in a third round of quantitative easing as it seeks to boost growth and reduce unemployment.

“We’re looking for ongoing, sustained improvement in the labor market,” Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said in his press conference today in Washington following the conclusion of a two-day meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee. “There’s not a specific number we have in mind. What we’ve seen in the last six months isn’t it.”

Stocks jumped, sending benchmark indexes to the highest levels since 2007, and gold climbed as the Fed said it will continue buying assets, undertake additional purchases and employ other policy tools as appropriate “if the outlook for the labor market does not improve substantially.”

Bernanke is enlarging his supply of unconventional tools to attack unemployment stuck above 8 percent since February 2009, a situation he called a “grave concern.”

Bernanke said the open-ended purchases would continue until the labor market improved significantly. “We’re not going to rush to begin to tighten policy,” he said. “We’re going to give it some time to make sure that the economy is well established.”

While the U.S. has “enjoyed broad price stability” since the mid-1990s, Bernanke said, “the weak job market should concern every American.”

Although Bernanke’s goal is laudable, many consider his extreme monetary policies ineffective while massively debasing the value of the U.S. currency.  Printing money is not the primary precursor for job creation or increased national wealth, and the latest economic results prove this assertion.  Sales revenues of America’s largest corporations have declined for six consecutive quarters and companies have fired the largest number of employees since 2010.

Courtesy Wall Street Journal

If economic conditions continue to deteriorate, expect Bernanke to implement even more extreme unconventional monetary policies,  all of which would involve money printing on an unimaginable scale.

The ludicrous assertion by Fed Chairman Bernanke that the U.S. has “enjoyed broad price stability” since the 1990’s is revealed as an outright falsehood by the Fed’s own statistics on the loss of purchasing power of the U.S. dollar.  Meanwhile, gold, the only currency with any intrinsic value is reflecting the true extent to which the U.S. dollar has been debased by Fed policies.  As the economy weakens and the Fed expands its monetary madness, the price of gold will continue to soar.

 

Filed Under: Currency debasement, Featured, Gold, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Why The Fed Is Committed To Higher Inflation

September 20, 2012 by Leave a Comment

By Axel Merk

Is the Fed’s goal to debase the U.S. dollar? The Federal Reserve’s announcement of a third round of quantitative easing (QE3) might have been the worst kept secret, yet the dollar plunged upon the announcement. Here we share our analysis on what makes the FOMC tick, to allow investors to position themselves for what may be ahead.

We have heard policy makers justify bailouts and monetary activism because, as we are told, these are no ordinary times: extraordinary times require extraordinary measures. Acronyms are needed, as we are told that things are complicated. We respectfully disagree. It’s quite simple: we have had a credit driven boom; we have had a credit bust; and Fed Chairman Bernanke thinks monetary policy can fix it. Merk Senior Economic Adviser and former St. Louis Fed President William Poole points us to the fact that the Soviet Union, Cuba and North Korea have one thing in common: monetary policy could not have compensated for the shortcomings of the respective regimes. The successor nations to the Soviet Union, as well as China had economic booms because they opened up, not because of printing presses being deployed. Monetary policy affects nominal price levels, not structural deficiencies. In the U.S., the economy may be held back because of uncertainty over future taxes (the “fiscal cliff”) and regulation; monetary policy cannot fix these.

But the above experiences have something else in common: they refer to lessons of recent decades. Bernanke, in contrast, is a student of the Great Depression, the 1930s. Bernanke firmly believes that tightening monetary policy too early during the Great Depression was a grave mistake, prolonging the Depression. Never mind that there had been major policy blunders by the Roosevelt administration that might have been driving factors; Bernanke’s research squarely focuses on how history would have evolved differently had his prescription for monetary policy been implemented.

The reason why Bernanke thinks tightening too early after a credit bust is a grave mistake is because a credit bust unleashes deflationary market forces. Left untamed, a deflationary spiral may ensue driving many otherwise healthy businesses into bankruptcy. Nowadays, we hear “it’s a liquidity, not a solvency crisis.” With easy money, the Fed can stem the tide. Whenever the Fed has the upper hand, the glass is half full, “risk is on” as traders like to say; but then it appears that not quite enough money has been printed and, alas, the glass is half empty, “risk is off.” The high correlation across asset classes is, in our assessment, a direct result of the heavy involvement of policy makers. Sure, markets may move up when money is printed; the trouble is everything moves up in tandem, making it ever more difficult to find diversification, so that on the way down, investors find protection. It’s for that reason, by the way, that we focus on currencies: why bother taking on the noise of the equity markets if investors buy or sell securities merely because they try to front-run the next perceived intervention of policy makers? In our assessment, the currency markets are a great place to take a position on the “mania” of policy makers. Note that if one does not employ leverage, currencies are historically less risky than equities.

So we know Bernanke wants low interest rates. But there’s more to it: as we saw earlier this year, a string of good economic indicators sent the bond market into a nosedive. Treasuries were bailed out by subsequent mediocre economic news, allowing bond prices to recover. The challenge here, in our assessment of Bernanke’s thinking, is that the bond market can do the tightening for you. When Bernanke bragged in his Jackson Hole speech in late August that a well-behaved bond market is proof that his policies are well received, we had a more somber interpretation: the reason the bond market is well behaved is because the economy is in the doldrums. Let all the money that has been printed “stick”, i.e. let this economy kick into high gear. Sure, Bernanke says he can raise rates in 15 minutes (he can pay interest on deposits at the Fed), but given the leverage in the economy, any tightening that comes too early might undo all the “progress” that has been achieved so far. Differently said – and we are putting words into Bernanke’s mouth here – Bernanke has to err on the side of inflation.

But how do you err on the side of inflation, without the bond market throwing a fit? A central banker is most unlikely to ever call for higher inflation. You do it with “communication strategy”, a commitment to keeping interest rates low; you do it with quantitative easing, i.e. buying Mortgage-Backed and Treasury securities; you do it with Operation Twist, depressing yields by buying longer dated Treasury securities. But, “when inflation is already low…” as Bernanke stated in his 2002 “Helicopter Ben” speech, “the central bank should act more preemptively and more aggressively than usual.” How do you do that? First, you create an open-ended buying program, so that the market cannot price in all easing within moments of the announcements. And more importantly, you break the link between monetary policy and inflation. Bernanke wants to make sure investors realize that policy is now tied to a “substantial improvement in the labor market” rather than its inflation target. It’s only then that the Fed can go all out on promoting growth without having the bond market sell off.

Does it work? Judging from the initial market reaction, no. Bond prices have fallen, inflation expectations as expressed in the spreads between inflation protected Treasury securities (TIPS) and underlying Treasuries have shot higher. It might be because the dust from the Fed’s bombshell hasn’t settled; or it might be that the Fed hasn’t had time to intervene in the market by buying TIPS (while not extensively, the Fed has been buying TIPS on occasion) depressing inflation indicators.

Either way, however, many observers have wondered whether lowering interest rates a tad further is really the panacea the economy needs. Part of it is that mortgage rates aren’t falling at this stage, if for no other reason than banks have such dramatic backlogs, that they have little incentive to open the floodgates even more for further refinancing activity. But even without such backlogs, how many more projects are worth financing with the 10-year bond trading at 1.6% versus 1.8%? Interest rates are low, no matter how one slices it.

That leaves one other interpretation open. Don’t take our word for it, but read the 2002 Helicopter Ben speech: “Although a policy of intervening to affect the exchange value of the dollar is nowhere on the horizon today [in 2002], it’s worth noting that there have been times when exchange rate policy has been an effective weapon against deflation.” The argument here is that a lower dollar boosts exports and thus the economy. Ignored is the fact that Vietnam might try to compete on price, but an advanced economy should work hard to compete on value added. As such, we are only providing a dis-incentive to invest in competitiveness if the Fed’s printing press provides the illusion of competitiveness. We use the term printing press because it is Bernanke in the aforementioned 2002 speech that refers to the Fed’s buying of securities (QEn) as the electronic equivalent of the printing press.

So don’t let anyone fool you. Things are not complicated. In our assessment, the Fed may be out to debase the dollar. Investors may want to get rid of the textbook notion of a risk-free asset, as the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar may increasingly be at risk. There is no risk-free alternative, but investors may want to consider a managed basket of currencies including gold, akin to how some central banks manage their reserves, as a way to mitigate the risk that the Fed is getting what we think it is bargaining for.

Please sign up to our newsletter to be informed as we discuss global dynamics and their impact on gold and currencies. Engage with me directly at Twitter.com/AxelMerk to comment on Merk Insights and to receive provide real-time updates on the economy, currencies, and global dynamics.

Axel Merk
President and Chief Investment Officer, Merk Investments
Merk Investments, Manager of the Merk Funds

Filed Under: Currency debasement, Featured, Gold, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , ,

$10,000 Gold Possible As Fed Ramps Up Money Printing

September 17, 2012 by Leave a Comment

In the wake of the near death of the financial system in 2008, the Federal Reserve engaged in two rounds of quantitative easing and pumped trillions of dollars into banks and other financial institutions.  Ben Bernanke insists that such drastic actions by the central bank were necessary to prevent a depression, a claim that economists will no doubt be debating for decades.

What may not be open to debate, however, is the wisdom of the Fed’s decision to engage in non stop money printing with the announcement of QE3.  A policy tool previously applied to prevent a financial collapse has now become a routine operation in a desperate attempt to ramp up economic growth.  The Federal Reserve seems oblivious to the fact that no nation in history has ever increased its wealth and real economic growth by resorting to the printing presses.

Three most probable outcomes of the Fed’s open ended money printing operations:

1. Continued decline in economic growth.

Following the Fed’s announcement of another round of permanent QE, Egan-Jones Cuts U.S. Rating.

Egan-Jones Ratings Co. cut its credit rating for the U.S. one level to AA-, citing the potential for the Federal Reserve’s third round of large-scale asset purchases to weaken the dollar and drive up inflation.

U.S. debt to gross-domestic-product has risen to 104 percent from 66 percent in 2006, Egan-Jones said today in a report. The firm lowered the U.S. to AA in April. Yields on 10- year Treasuries have fallen five basis points since the end of that month to 1.86 percent.

The Fed’s latest program will “stoke the stock market and commodity prices, but in our opinion will hurt the U.S. economy and, by extension, credit quality,” Egan-Jones said. “The increased cost of commodities will pressure profitability of businesses, and increase the costs of consumers, thereby reducing consumer purchasing power.”

The Fed yesterday announced its third round of large-scale asset purchases since 2008, saying it will buy $40 billion of mortgage debt a month. The central bank didn’t set any limit on the ultimate amount it would buy or the duration of the program. Policy makers also extended the prospect of near-zero interest rates until mid-2015 and said policy will stay accommodative “for a considerable time” even after the economy strengthens.

2. Continued destruction of the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar. 

Federal Reserve policies have contributed to a dramatic decline in the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar for decades, resulting in a lower standard of living for Americans.  Expanded money printing will accelerate this trend.

3. Continued increase in the price of gold.

Courtesy: Kitco.com

The decade long rally in gold will dramatically accelerate.  A Barron’s interview asks Could Fed Miscalculations Lead to $10,000 Gold?

These are times that try an asset manager’s soul. The world’s economy is a soft-paste porcelain vase set on a wobbly plant stand in the heart of an active earthquake zone. The Middle East is sending out foreshocks of war. The South China Sea is a smoking caldera of tension. Social unrest in the EU threatens tidal waves. And, according to the agitated rats and snakes of the financial press, China is headed into a recession.

Hedging against the most pessimistic case without crippling the upside potential of a better or even miraculous case appears to be as unsolvable as the proverbial Gordian knot. Alexander the Great “solved” the intellectually challenging knot riddle by severing it with his sword. Scott Minerd, chief investment officer of Guggenheim Partners, offers a more reasoned but equally simple solution to the hedging conundrum: gold. In extreme circumstances—like miscalculations regarding inflation by the Federal Reserve—the metal could hit $10,000 per troy ounce, he asserts. Thursday, after the Fed disclosed its latest financial-stimulus scheme, the metal rose about 2% to $1,768.

Minerd frets about the Fed’s ability to reduce its swollen $2.9 trillion balance sheet if rates suddenly were to rise. Because the assets have longer-term durations, their market value immediately would tumble. If rates rose 1%, the Fed would have a $150 billion capital deficit, he says. This would have negative ramifications for the dollar. Minerd says the über-wealthy have been migrating toward hard assets like gold, real estate, and art. Every portfolio should be partially composed of such assets, he asserts. Is yours?

Gold and Silver Blog has long argued that gold would eventually advance to at least $5,000.  The latest Fed actions make that price target seem conservative.

Filed Under: Currency debasement, Featured, Gold, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Fed’s Open Ended Money Printing Will Destroy The Purchasing Power Of U.S. Dollar

September 14, 2012 by Leave a Comment

By Axel Merk

May we suggest a Twitter version of today’s FOMC statement: “Don’t worry, be happy! ” – No, the economic outlook hasn’t improved. In fact, the Fed may want you to take a valium to stomach the ride ahead. Alternatively, if you don’t get mollified by the Fed’s “communication strategy”, you may want to consider taking action to protect the purchasing power of your hard earned dollars.

Here’s the challenge: the Federal Reserve (Fed) wants to keep interest rates low across the yield curve (from short-term to long-term rates) to aid the economic recovery. But good economic data might send the bond market into a tailspin, i.e. raise long-term rates and thus cause massive headwinds to the economic recovery. We got a taste of how quickly the bond market can sell off earlier this year when the economy appeared to pick up some steam. Higher interest rates would further encourage the major deleveraging that market forces still warrant, not a desirable scenario from our understanding of Fed Chairman Bernanke’s thinking.

Engaging in further rounds of asset purchases (“Quantitative Easing”, “QE3”, “QEn+1”) may alleviate some of those upward pressures on interest rates, but the moment a program is announced, the market prices it in and looks ahead, threatening to mitigate any lasting impact of QEn+1. Picture the Fed as trying to hold a carrot in front of the donkey, well, market, to make us believe another stimulus is coming, without actually giving it. That way, the Fed can print less money to achieve its goals. The Fed calls it communication strategy.

Some have suggested a more open-ended approach to asset purchases. But that would likely come with some sort of guidance as to when to stop it, such as when a certain level of unemployment or nominal growth is reached. Given that everything Bernanke has done has been signaled well ahead of time (the blogosphere is full of the “best kept secret”, the likelihood of more QE), introducing a completely new concept is rather un-Bernanke-ish. You may not agree with Bernanke, but as an investor please don’t act surprised.

In recently released FOMC minutes, the Fed tells us that it might communicate to the market that rates may remain low even as the economy recovers. Bingo! We have long argued that Bernanke considered the early monetary tightening during the Great Depression as a grave mistake, as it undid all the “progress” that had been achieved. But more to the point, the Fed needs to get our attention away from the economy. By keeping the link to the economy, the Fed will always struggle to keep the upper hand on the bond market. So forget about the carrot: we need valium, not carrots. By communicating with the market that rates will remain low independent of how the economy might perform, the bond market just might not be selling off as aggressively as economic growth picks up.

That’s exactly the path we believe the Fed is going to go down. It will be interesting, however, to see what the Fed’s explanation will be. We doubt they will use the valium analogy. Some Fed watchers would like to see a nominal GDP target or something similar, but don’t bet your donkey on Bernanke going that far.

The basic challenge is – and we are interpreting here as we don’t think the Fed or any central banker in office would ever frame it this way: the Fed wants to have inflation, wants to move the price level higher to bail out home owners, wants to push up nominal wages, and wants to push up nominal GDP to make the debt burden more bearable. But the Fed doesn’t want the market to price in inflation, as that would push interest rates up.

That’s why we may be heading ever more into the “Land of Make-Believe.” But as investors enjoy their valium, the U.S. dollar is at risk of melting away under their feet. Drugged up, we are too busy laughing at Greece and doling out advice to Europe to notice that our “don’t worry, be happy” approach might lead to rather unhappy purchasing power. If you think you are above the fray, let me just ask whether you have watched the euro in recent months? As of late, that perceived weakling of a currency appears to be giving the greenback a run for its money. We are not suggesting that investors dump their U.S. dollars and exchange them all for euros. However, we would like to encourage investors to consider embracing currency risk, for example through a managed basket of currencies, as a way to manage the risk posed to the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar. Adding currency exposure to a portfolio may have valuable diversification benefits.

Some sympathize with the ever greater complexity of monetary activism around the world. But it’s really rather simple: there’s too much debt in the world. To deal with the debt, countries may deflate, default or inflate. In the US, we have what both Bernanke and his predecessor Greenspan have called the printing press; as such, so their argument goes, the U.S. dollar is safe – in nominal terms at least. Greece is not capable of procuring valium, which creates a different set of challenges. But stop pitying Greece and consider taking action to protect your purchasing power at home.

Please sign up to our newsletter to be informed as we discuss global dynamics and their impact on gold and currencies. You can also engage with me directly at Twitter.com/AxelMerk where I provide real-time updates on the economy, currencies, and global dynamics..

Axel Merk
President and Chief Investment Officer, Merk Investments
Merk Investments, Manager of the Merk Funds

Filed Under: Bullion Sales, Currency debasement, Featured, Gold, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why Gold Will Outperform Bonds

September 14, 2012 by 2 Comments

By Vin Maru

This past week was a major catalyst for the precious metals, as they closed the week up strongly based on strong fundamentals for the sector. We have been anticipating the next catalyst for the PM sector to start making a strong advance, and we got it with a coordinated effort from central banks around the world. They will print whatever is necessary to fight off deflation and another financial collapse. Here are a few headlines we saw from the media lately:

“Gold Prices Gain on German Ruling”, “ECB to launch ‘outright monetary transaction’ plan”, and “IMF’s Lagarde backs ECB-bond buying plan”

This afternoon, the FOMC meeting concluded and was followed by a press conference by Ben Bernanke. The precious metals market has been on a strong uptrend over the last month in anticipation of additional bond buying and stimulus (AKA Quantitative Easing).  Over the last month, the fed has hinted that they will stimulate if needed but never actually pulled the trigger. Precious metals still rose in anticipation of coming QE.  Well, he finally did it and the metal prices are up on this news, below is some commentary on what the fed announced. See Reuters article about this QE.

This looks to be stimulus like the original QE 1 and 2 and this is super bullish for gold, like it was back in 2009 and 2010.  This starts off another major uptrend for gold and it will be going to $3500 over the next few years.  Now is the time to be getting invested again, it’s almost an all in moment on any pullback and then its onwards and upwards from here.  We can expect this QE to last indefinitely just like we can expect a low interest rate environment for an extended period of time.  It’s QE to infinity and gold will definitely shine.

ECB Bond Buying Program

With headlines like these, the world markets are proven to be irrational in their approach to dealing with debts; the central banks around the world will print and by up bonds as needed. The West may have saved themselves for the moment, but this really opens up the door for moral hazard and the mindset that debts don’t matter has been rationalized around the world. The Western central planners rationalize their action by stating the bond buying program will be sterilized. The hazard is that other central bankers around the world will also engage in sterilized bond buying and supporting of governments, all of which is backed by nothing except faith. They claim the bond buying is sterilized because the central banks print money to buy bonds of the governments to keep yields low and then make up new bonds to sell to other central banks and all of this financial alchemy is based on buying and selling of foreign currency bonds. To learn more about currency intervention and how the bonds could be sterilized, you can read about it here.

They claim the net effect is there is no increase in the monetary base, but any rational human can see this is pure manipulation and gaming the system. With no new monetary base, the money supply in the system does not increase and it is very similar to Operation Twist. The net effect of the new bond buying program is there will be no direct stimulus to the economy and the governments will continue to be supported by the central banks. The new bonds issued by the government will carry lower interest rates, which will then be supposedly paid back to the CBs over an extended period of time. The old government debt will be rolled over and extended from this bond buying program and only small amounts of additional interest will be paid on these new bonds, which tax payers will eventually have to pay one way or another. The governments will then have to accommodate the additional interest payments on the new debt which could eat into budgets, so they will either tax more or reduce some of their spending. The paper currency Ponzi scheme will be allowed to continue and coup d’état over the financial system has been accomplished by the central bankers. The idea is that bad loans and debts do not matter anymore in an attempt to keep the system afloat, eventually that will fail and precious metals will prosper as a result.

With keeping interest rates low, bonds have virtually no upside from here since interest rates can’t go much lower from here.  Savers will be forced to speculate in order to create yield and precious metals will benefit over the next few years from a negative yield interest rate environment.  Business with tons of cash on the sidelines will be forced put that money to work in search of economic returns and banks with tons of cheap cash on hand will be loaning out more money to qualified people and businesses. Deflation and collapse is no longer an option, the system will be supported and soon the market will be talking about expansion and growth again. Money will be put to work even though the western economies may stagnate over the next decade. The market will soon look beyond the Euro and US mess and move forward in search of yield.  It may continue looking at emerging markets for growth and opportunities, but it definitely look to precious metals for safety from the depreciation of paper currencies.

Once we start seeing this money turning over in the system, the velocity of money will increase significantly which will then lead to higher inflation, this is when we can expect gold to really shine.  While the upside for bonds will be limited in a low interest rate environment, the upside for gold is unlimited from endless printing of fiat currencies and bonds by all central bankers and governments around the world.  The upside for the price of bonds is limited to interest rates going to zero and they can be printed to infinity.  The amount of gold available in the world is fixed to current inventory plus expected additional supply.  Because supply is limited, gold’s price could go to infinity to equally match the unlimited printing of bonds and currency units which are used to purchase them. So in the end, bond prices are limited on the upside while supply is infinite, while gold supply is limited and it’s price is limitless in a world based on fiat currencies—which would you rather own?

Gold Update

In the last 2 weeks, gold has made a great break out move above $1620 and then $1660-$1680. The price is now holding strong above $1720 as central bankers are planning on bond buying programs and additional stimulus in a coordinated effort to avoid a deflationary spiral. This opens up the door to QE to infinity, they will print since there is no other option and precious metals will benefit from this. Gold and silver are going much higher in the years to come, but it won’t be in a straight line. Expect volatile moves to the upside and swift corrections, but the general trend for the next few years is towards higher prices. Keep with the trend and buy the dips and sell into major strength if you plan on trading the paper markets. If you purchased the physical metals during this past summer, you may want to consider holding on to them, we may not see these prices again, ever.

The RSI is rising and starting to move above 80, which could be getting into overbought territory, however the MACD is in a slow steady trend higher over the last couple of months. Look for new support to be around $1680 (which would be a good opportunity to add to positions) and short term overhead resistance to be at $1780-1800 (sell trading positions currently open) which has been overhead resistance back in November and February, at which time we could see a significant correction. If the gold market clears $1800 and holds on a closing weekly basis, we could retest the previous highs and go on to make new highs .

The HUI Gold Miners Index

The HUI clearly broke the downtrend line by gapping up above it late last week. The RSI is still rising and so is the MACD. If gold makes a move to $1800, expect the HUI to rise towards 500 before taking a break and correction. This would be a great time to sell open trading position in the next few weeks, especially after any news from the Fed about stimulus and QE. The fact that gold and the HUI has risen so much in the last month based on expectations for QE and the indicators are getting close to  overbought territory.  We may see an initial jump in price for the HUI index after any announcement, then a minor correction as much of this news could be priced into the metals and the miners.  Watch the reaction of the metals and the HUI later this week and next, but if the advance higher starts stalling out, you may want to consider closing trading positions and book some profits.

More than likely towards the end of this month/early next month, we could start to see a minor correction going into October and November as election approach, the market may take a breather. We may also see some strong year end selling this year, especially coming from the US as their tax laws on capital gains are scheduled to change next year. It would be a good time to start new positions or add to current holdings during that correction.  We can expect the trend to continue higher as the metals go on to make higher highs and higher lows over the next 6 to 9 months.

If you enjoyed reading this article and are interested in protecting your wealth with precious metals, you can receive our free blog by visiting TDV Golden Trader.

Filed Under: Currency debasement, Featured, Gold, Gold Stocks, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

Fed’s Easy Money Policies Will Continue – Why Bernanke Must Err On The Side Of Inflation

August 28, 2012 by Leave a Comment

By Axel Merk

To print or not to print? Odds are that Fed Chairman Bernanke has been contemplating this question while drafting his upcoming Jackson Hole speech. The one good thing about policy makers worldwide is that they may be fairly predictable. As such, we present our crystal ball as to what the Fed might be up to next, and what the implications may be for the U.S. dollar and gold.

First off, we may be exaggerating: on process rather than substance, though. That is, Bernanke isn’t just thinking about whether to print or not to print as he is sitting down to draft his speech. Instead, he considers himself a student of the Great Depression and has been pondering policy responses to a credit bust for some time. Consider the following:

  • Bernanke has argued that going off the gold standard during the Great Depression helped the U.S. recover faster from the Great Depression than countries that held on to the gold standard for longer.
    • Bernanke is correct: subject to many risks, debasing a currency (which going off the gold standard was) can boost nominal growth. Think of it this way: if the government takes your purchasing power away, you have a greater incentive to work. Not exactly the mandate of a central bank, though.
    • Note by the way that by implication, countries that hold on to the gold standard invite a lot of pain, but have stronger currencies. Fast forward to today and compare the U.S. to Europe. While neither country is on the gold standard, the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet has increased more in percentage terms than that of the European Central Bank since the onset of the financial crisis. Using a central bank’s balance sheet as a proxy for the amount of money that has been “printed”, it shouldn’t be all that surprising that the Eurozone experiences substantial pain, but the Euro has been comparatively resilient.
    • Possibly the most important implication: Bernanke considers the value of the U.S. dollar a monetary policy tool. When we have argued in the past that Bernanke might be actively working to weaken the U.S. dollar, it is because of comments such as this one. This is obviously our interpretation of his comments; a central banker rarely says that their currency is too strong, although such comments have increasingly been made by central bankers around the world as those pursuing sounder monetary policy have their economies suffer from competitive devaluations elsewhere.
  • Bernanke has argued that one of the biggest mistakes during the Great Depression was that monetary policy was tightened too early. Here’s the problem: in a credit bust, central banks try to stem against the flow. If market forces were to play out, the washout would be severe and swift. Those in favor of central bank intervention argue that it would be too painful and that more businesses than needed would fail, the hardship imposed on the people is too much. Those against central bank intervention point out that creative destruction is what makes capitalism work; the faster the adjustment is, even if extremely painful, the better, as the recovery is healthier and stronger.
    • If the policy choice is to react to a credit bust with accommodative monetary policy, fighting market forces, and then such accommodation is removed too early, the “progress” achieved may be rapidly undone.
    • We are faced with the same challenge today: if monetary accommodation were removed at this stage (interest rates raised, liquidity mopped up), there’s a risk that the economy plunges right back down into recession, if not a deflationary spiral. As such, when Bernanke claimed the Fed could raise rates in 15 minutes, we think it is a mere theoretical possibility. In fact, we believe that the framework in which the Fed is thinking, it must err on the side of inflation.

Of course no central banker in office would likely ever agree with the assessment that the Fed might want to err on the side of inflation. But consider the most recent FOMC minutes that read:

  • An extension [of a commitment to keep interest rates low] might be particularly effective if done in conjunction with a statement indicating that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy was likely to be maintained even as the recovery progressed

As the FOMC minutes were released three weeks after the FOMC meeting, many pundits dismissed them as “stale”; after all, the economy had somewhat improved since the meeting. Indeed, it wasn’t just pundits: some more hawkish Fed officials promoted that view as well. But to make clear who is calling the shots, Bernanke wrote in a letter dated August 22 (the same date the FOMC minutes were released) to California Republican Darrell Issa, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: “There is scope for further action by the Federal Reserve to ease financial conditions and strengthen the recovery.” Various news organizations credited the faltering of an incipient U.S. dollar rally on August 24 with the publication of this Bernanke letter.

For good order’s sake, we should clarify that the Fed doesn’t actually print money. Indeed, printing physical currency is not considered very effective; instead, liquidity is injected into the banking system: the Fed increases the credit balances of financial institutions in accounts held with the Fed in return for buying securities from them. Because of fractional reserve banking rules, the ‘liquidity’ provided through this action can lead to a high multiple in loans. In practice, one of the frustrations of the Fed has been that loan growth has not been boosted as much as the Fed would have hoped. When we, and Bernanke himself for that matter, have referred to the Fed’s “printing press” in this context, referring to money that has been “printed”, it’s the growth in the balance sheet at the Federal Reserve. That’s because the Fed’s resources are not constrained; it’s simply an accounting entry to pay for a security purchased; that security is now on the Fed’s balance sheet, hence the ‘growth’ in the Fed’s balance sheet.

Frankly, we are not too concerned about the environment we are in. At least not as concerned as we are about the environment we might be in down the road: that’s because we simply don’t see how all the liquidity can be mopped up in a timely manner when needed. At some point, some of this money is going to ‘stick’. Even if Bernanke wanted to, we very much doubt he could raise rates in 15 minutes. To us, it means the time for investors to act may be now. However, talking with both existing and former Fed officials, they don’t seem terribly concerned about this risk. Then again Fed officials have rarely been accused of being too far sighted. We are concerned because just a little bit of tightening has a much bigger effect in an economy that is highly leveraged. Importantly, we don’t need the Fed to tighten: as the sharp selloff in the bond market earlier this year (and the recent more benign selloff) have shown, as soon as the market prices in a recovery, headwinds to economic activity increase as bond yields are rising. That’s why Bernanke emphasizes “communication strategy”, amongst others, to tell investors not to worry, rates will stay low for an extended period. This dance might get ever more challenging.

In some ways, Bernanke is an open book. In his ‘helicopter Ben’ speech a decade ago, he laid out the tools he would employ when faced with a collapse in aggregate demand (the credit bust we have had). He has deployed just about all tools from his toolbox, except for the purchase of foreign government bonds; recently, he shed cold water on that politically dicey option. Then two years ago, in Jackson Hole, Bernanke provided an update, specifying three options:

  • To expand the Fed’s holdings of longer-term securities
  • To ease financial conditions through communications
  • To lower the interest rate the Fed pays on bank reserves to possibly 10 basis points or zero.

We have not seen the third option implemented, but the Fed might be discouraged from the experience at the European Central Bank: cutting rates too close to zero might discourage intra-bank lending and cause havoc in the money markets.

As such, expect Bernanke to give an update on his toolbox in Jackson Hole. The stakes are high as even doves at the Fed believe further easing might not be all that effective and could possibly cause more side effects (read: inflation). As such, we expect him to provide a framework as to why and how the Fed might be acting, and why we should trust the Fed that it won’t allow inflation to become a problem. For investors that aren’t quite as confident that the Fed can pull things off without inducing inflation, they may want to consider adding gold or a managed basket of currencies to mitigate the risk to the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar.

Please sign up to our newsletter to be informed as we discuss global dynamics and their impact on gold and currencies. Please also follow me on Twitter to receive real-time updates on the economy, currencies, and global dynamics.

Axel Merk
President and Chief Investment Officer, Merk Investments
Merk Investments, Manager of the Merk Funds

Filed Under: Currency debasement, Featured, Gold, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

75% Of Americans Believe The Fed Should Be Audited – Why It Won’t Happen

July 30, 2012 by 2 Comments

Most Americans under 30 have a strange sense of unease that something is very wrong with the way things are going in America.  If you are 60 or older and can remember with nostalgia how life in America was prior to the days of blatant  and corrupt crony capitalism, you know for sure we are heading in a very wrong direction at an accelerating pace.

I can remember the days when the average worker could support his family without putting his wife to work, without having to give up on having children, without having to worry about banks going under, without having to worry about an implosion of the financial system and without the expectation that the government would provide handouts to solve every little one of life’s problems.

Gradually, it has begun to dawn on the average American of all ages that the Federal Reserve may be at the heart of the nation’s financial problems.  Much has been written about this, but two graphs sum up the situation quite nicely.  Since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913, the value of the dollar has declined to a fraction of what it was once worth and since the abandonment of the gold standard, government debt has reached levels that are no longer sustainable without further debasement of the paper dollar.  The American public is beginning to connect the dots.

Ron Paul has been a lonely voice in spreading the message about the Fed but has finally reached a milestone with the House passage of his proposed “Audit The Fed” legislation.  In an update Ron Paul notes that 75% of the American public supports his bill according to a recent poll.

Last week the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed my legislation calling for a full and effective audit of the Federal Reserve.  Well over 300 of my Congressional colleagues supported the bill, each casting a landmark vote that marks the culmination of decades of work.  We have taken a big step toward bringing transparency to the most destructive financial institution in the world.

But in many ways our work is only beginning.  Despite the Senate Majority Leader’s past support for similar legislation, no vote has been scheduled on my bill this year in the Senate.  And only 29 Senators have cosponsored Senator Rand Paul’s version of my bill in the other body.  If your Senator is not listed at the link above, please contact them and ask for their support.  We need to push Senate leadership to hold a vote this year.

Understand that last week’s historic vote never would have taken place without the efforts of millions of Americans like you, ordinary citizens concerned about liberty and the integrity of our currency.  Political elites respond to political pressure, pure and simple.  They follow rather than lead.  If all 100 Senators feel enough grassroots pressure, they will respond and force Senate leadership to hold what will be a very popular vote.

In fact, “Audit the Fed” is so popular that 75% of all Americans support it according to this Rasmussen poll.  We are making progress.

Of course Fed apologists– including Mr. Bernanke– frequently insist that the Fed already is audited.  But this is true only in the sense that it produces annual financial statements.  It provides the public with its balance sheet as a fait accompli: we see only the net results of its financial transactions from the previous fiscal year in broad categories, and only after the fact.

We’re also told that the Dodd-Frank bill passed in 2010 mandates an audit.  But it provides for only a limited audit of certain Fed credit facilities surrounding the crisis period of 2008.  It is backward looking, which frankly is of limited benefit.

The Fed also claims it wants to be “independent” from Congress so that politics don’t interfere with monetary policy.  This is absurd for two reasons.

First, the Fed already is inherently and unavoidably political.  It made a political decision when it chose not to rescue Lehman Brothers in 2008, just as it made a political decision to provide liquidity for AIG in the same time period. These are just two obvious examples.  Also Fed member banks and the Treasury Department are full of former– and future– Goldman Sachs officials.  Are we really to believe that the interests of Goldman Sachs have absolutely no effect on Fed decisions? Clearly it’s naïve to think the Fed somehow is above political or financial influence.

Second, it’s important to remember that Congress created the Fed by statute.  Congress therefore has the full, inherent authority to regulate the Fed in any way– up to and including abolishing it altogether.

My bill provides for an ongoing, thorough audit of what the Fed really does in secret, which is make decisions about the money supply, interest rates, and bailouts of favored banks, financial firms, and companies.  In other words, I want the Government Accountability Office to examine the Fed’s actual monetary policy operations and make them public.

It is precisely this information that must be made public because it so profoundly affects everyone who holds, saves, or uses US dollars.

Will the bill pass the senate, considering the incestuous and corrupt self dealing relationships between too big to fail banks, government and politicians?  Probably not in our lifetimes, but at least public awareness of the problem is growing.  Ron Paul might have added in his update that the vast majority of Americans no longer believe they are ruled with the consent of the governed.

Filed Under: Featured, Gold, US Debt Crisis Tagged With: , , , , , , ,