SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TobagoJack who wrote (35653)6/11/2008 6:14:15 PM
From: elmatador  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 217573
 
Ready to divert USD keeping outside to avoid poisoning BRL. That's the reason for the Sovereign Fund. That avoids sending interest rates to stratosphere.

Who will blink? China? The US?



To: TobagoJack who wrote (35653)6/11/2008 6:24:44 PM
From: elmatador  Respond to of 217573
 
sending USD out: InBev Makes $65 a Share Bid for Anheuser-Busch

Vale goes after copper, gold, and molybdenum producer Freeport-McMoRan (NYSE: FCX);



To: TobagoJack who wrote (35653)6/11/2008 6:40:05 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217573
 
A lovely sea of green today. Nice.

A good piece from Jesse's. Should've been titled "Stagflation Is A Bitch Or Who is Ben Channeling Today?"

jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com

Fedspeak turned decidedly hawkish this week, and market participants responded accordingly, moving up expectations for a rate hike to as early as this August. But Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke really ready to follow through? The answer could make or break the Dollar in the coming weeks.

Recall that just last week, Bernanke sent clear signals that rising near-term inflation expectations effectively put an end to the Fed’s rate cutting. But Bernanke’s concerns were quickly overtaken by events in two separate directions at the end of the week. First, on Thursday European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet surprised markets by suggesting that the ECB’s next move might be a rate increase, as early as next month. Trichet’s comments were a slap in the face to traders betting that the interest rate differential between the US and Europe would narrow; instead, it looked like the opposite would happen, and markets needed to adjust accordingly. Dollar down, oil up – neither of which the Fed wanted to see. But this was only a prelude to Friday’s debacle that followed the release of the May employment report.

Market participants were looking for a stronger employment report. Initial unemployment claims fell last week, while the ADP report suggested the private payrolls actually increased. Instead of a strong report, the BLS reported what should have been expected – a continued erosion of the labor market. On the establishment side, the nonfarm payrolls decline was largely consistent with the story told by initial claims. On the household side, the jump in the unemployment rate was shocking, but was magnified by a surge of teenagers entering the job market (presumably seeking additional gas money).

I think discounting this impact is appropriate, at least until we see the June numbers. Still, even adjusting for the teen influx, the report was undeniably weaker than most expected, and brought into question the ability of the Fed to hold rates steady this year, let alone raise them. This realization sent the Dollar into a tailspin, while oil, aided by renewed tensions in the Middle East, rocketed to a new high.

Friday’s price action likely confirmed what Fed officials only grudgingly considered up to now – that they need to take seriously the idea that US monetary policy is directly impacting commodity prices, contributing to a deterioration of US inflation expectations. Bernanke was quick to react, downplaying the employment report, claiming that the risk of a substantial downturn has dissipated over the last month, and, to top it off, claimed that policymakers would “strongly resist” any rise in inflation expectations.

But does anyone believe Bernanke can follow through on this threat? According to MarketWatch, Fedwatchers are lining up to call his bluff. Across the Curve succinctly, and colorfully, describes the situation:

I think the 2 year part of the curve is oversold. I think (I know) the economy is weak. It is an election year and the unemployment rate just jumped to 5.5 percent. The housing market is a debacle. The Fed’s favored metric the core PCE has strayed very little from the top end of its prescribed range. Hemingway and Fitzgerald are not writing novels about World War One and this is not the Weimar Republic. The credit markets are frayed frazzled and fragile. Recovery has barely begun.

And hence we see the crux of the problem for Bernanke. Deserved or not, he has a credibility problem; at this point, he is seen as simply an inflationist hell-bent on fighting the Fed’s ghosts of the Great Depression. It is just so hard to believe that he would raise rates in the current environment, regardless of inflation expectations. We could believe Trichet. We could believe former Fed Chairman Paul Volker. But Bernanke? Still, with central bankers around the globe shifting gears to tackle rising inflation (see Bloomberg and WSJ), Bernanke may not have much choice. Any hint of hesitation to follow on the Fed’s part will likely renew the attack on the Dollar and push oil prices even higher, thereby undoing the recent string of jawboning.

But hiking rates is an equally dangerous path. Most obviously, the economy is clearly in a precarious position, temporarily held together by the flow of fiscal stimulus and cheap money. Raising rates would almost certainly upset this delicate balance. Furthermore, higher rates threaten to intensify and lengthen the housing downturn; a 30-year conventional mortgage is already at 6.25%. Note also the Fed would be raising rates into what many believe will be the second wave of mortgage problems, the Alt-A and option adjustable mortgages that reset beginning in 2009. If the Fed starts raising rates meaningfully at this point, anticipate the yield curve to invert early next year, signaling a recession in 2010.

Another risk is political. Normally, I would not place much weight on the importance of an election year, but to initiate a tightening campaign with rising unemployment and stagnating real incomes gives me pause. The political response is all too predictable: Why is the Fed so eager to support Wall Street in their hour of need, but equally eager to abandon Main Street when unemployment is rising? Indeed, I would not be surprised to see some Senators start jawboning the Fed by the end of this week. With four spots on the Board open for the next Administration to place, independence of the Fed cannot be taken for granted.

Bottom Line: The Fed has no one to blame for their predicament but themselves. Bernanke & Co. cut rates too deeply, fighting a battle against deflation that never was. Now they are backed into a corner; either raise rates and risk upsetting a very fragile economy, or stay the path and risk the inflationary consequences. If the Fed is truly concerned about the Dollar and commodity prices – and their open talk about currency values implies real and serious concerns – Bernanke will have to follow through with his newfound hawkish side. The bluntness of Fedspeak looks to signal a dramatic shift in thinking on Constitution Ave., and that argues for a rate hike by September, earlier than I had previously expected, and I cannot rule out an August move. Such a move is not without considerable risk for the economy



To: TobagoJack who wrote (35653)6/12/2008 3:40:55 AM
From: Crimson Ghost  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 217573
 
Why Oil Prices Are So High

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

How to explain the oil price? Why is it so high? Are we running out? Are supplies disrupted, or is the high price a reflection of oil company greed or OPEC greed. Are Chavez and the Saudis conspiring against us?
In my opinion, the two biggest factors in oil’s high price are the weakness in the US dollar’s exchange value and the liquidity that the Federal Reserve is pumping out.

The dollar is weak because of large trade and budget deficits, the closing of which is beyond American political will. As abuse wears out the US dollar’s reserve currency role, sellers demand more dollars as a hedge against its declining exchange value and ultimate loss of reserve currency status.

In an effort to forestall a serious recession and further crises in derivative instruments, the Federal Reserve is pouring out liquidity that is financing speculation in oil futures contracts. Hedge funds and investment banks are restoring their impaired capital structures with profits made by speculating in highly leveraged oil future contracts, just as real estate speculators flipping contracts pushed up home prices. The oil futures bubble, too, will pop, hopefully before new derivatives are created on the basis of high oil prices.

There are other factors affecting the price of oil. The prospect of an Israeli/US attack on Iran has increased current demand in order to build stocks against disruption. No one knows the consequence of such an ill-conceived act of aggression, and the uncertainty pushes up the price of oil as the entire Middle East could be engulfed in conflagration. However, storage facilities are limited, and the impact on price of larger inventories has a limit.

Saudi Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi recently stated, “There is no justification for the current rise in prices.” What the minister means is that there are no shortages or supply disruptions. He means no real reasons as distinct from speculative or psychological reasons.

The run up in oil price coincides with a period of heightened US and Israeli military aggression in the Middle East. However, the biggest jump has been in the last 18 months.

When Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, the average price of oil that year was about $27 per barrel, or about $31 in inflation adjusted 2007 dollars. The price rose another $10 in 2004 to an average annual price of $42 (in 2007 dollars), another $12 in 2005, $7 in 2006, and $4 in 2007 to $65. But in the last few months the price has more than doubled to about $135. It is difficult to explain a $70 jump in price in terms other than speculation.

Oil prices have been high in the past. Until 2008, the record monthly oil price was $104 in December 1979 (measured in December 2007 dollars). As recently as 1998 the real price of oil was lower than in 1946 when the nominal price of oil was $1.63 per barrel. During the Bush regime, the price of oil in 2007 dollars has risen from $27 to approximately $135.

Possibly, the rise in the oil price was held down, prior to the recent jump, by expectations that Democrats would eventually end the conflict and restrain Israel in the interest of Middle East peace and justice for the Palestinians.

Now that Obama has pledged allegiance to AIPAC and adopted Bush’s position toward Iran, the high oil price could be a forecast that US/Israeli policy is likely to result in substantial supply disruptions. Still, the recent Israeli statements that an attack on Iran was “inevitable” only jumped the oil price about $8.

Perhaps more difficult to understand than the high price of oil are the low US long-term interest rates. US interest rates are actually below the rate of inflation, to say nothing of the imperiled exchange value of the dollar. Economists who assume rational participants in rational markets cannot explain why lenders would indefinitely accept interest rates below the rate of inflation.

Of course, Americans don’t get real inflation numbers from their government and have not since the Consumer Price Index was rigged during the Clinton administration to hold down Social Security payments by denying retirees their full cost of living adjustments. According to statistician John Williams, using the pre-Clinton era measure of the CPI produces a current CPI of about 7.5%.

Understating inflation makes real GDP growth appear higher. If inflation were properly measured, the US has probably experienced no real GDP growth in the 21st century.

Williams reports that for decades political administrations have fiddled with the inflation and employment numbers to make themselves look slightly better. The cumulative effect has been to deprive these measurements of veracity. If I understand Williams, today both inflation and unemployment rates, as originally measured, are around 12 per cent.

By pumping out money in an effort to forestall recession and paper over balance sheet problems, the Federal Reserve is driving up commodity and food prices in general. Yet American real incomes are not growing. Even without jobs offshoring, US economic policy has put the bulk of the population on a path to lower living standards.

The crisis that looms for the US is the loss of world currency role. Once the dollar loses that role, the US government will not be able to finance its operations by borrowing abroad, and foreigners will cease to finance the massive US trade deficit. This crisis will eliminate the US as a world power.

Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com