Mike Arnold

 

The slope of Volume on the markets has been down for some time now and I’ve mentioned it several times. Market Volume is simply the number of shares trading hands each trading day.  Reduced volume over time is a key symptom of the markets during the Great Depression years. I’m not saying we are in that same type of economic depression but we can and should see very similar symptoms at some point in our history since humanity has a tendency toward recurring cycles.  This being the case, a major downturn extended over time should have a similar effect on the psychology of our citizens as they can afford less and will take fewer risks out of fear.  I’m also not saying to avoid investment opportunities. 

It would be easy to dismiss the volume downtrend of the markets by simply saying “Of course it’s down, since the markets are doing poorly.  It’ll come back when the markets start going up again”.  The problem is the only other measurable and extended time in our market history which shows such a loss of interest, is during the Great Depression.  This being the case, we should pay close attention to risk, especially Time Risk.  If you invest in a poorly performing market which has an extended loss of interest, it only makes since that the longer you are in, the greater your losses or underperformance can be.  Maybe this is why we see so many people abandoning the idea of holding positions indefinitely.  And, unfortunately, many already abandoned the strategies associated with more advance investing, like options strategies.  In a market this short, it may be that only advanced strategies have any real chance of producing reasonable returns for the risk taken.  This would be in the form of good old-fashioned trading, hedging, and very picky stock selection.  Back to the good old days of smart investing outperforming buy and hold.  Maybe we should call this advanced strategy platform ”Gain and Capture”.

 

 

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Greece is only 2% of the US GDP. Why does such an economically small country have enough impact on the US as to drive our stock markets down? Because, like so many things, the country is heavily leveraged, owing much to other countries. It should have no real impact, and yet it does. Governments must learn to exist within the means of their citizens and the citizens themselves must learn to be productive and not dependent.

 

It’s the 1930′s gold grab all over again, maybe.  Sure feels like it, looks like it, walks and talks like it.

Today the Fed is suing banks over mortgage drivel.  Drivel because the Fed helped cause it, and drivel because their only remaining point of first bailing them out and then suing them is to force a sea change in currency for the Fed’s own benefit.  And of course congress can “window-dress” and make themselves look good in the media.  That’s all it is.  The Banks did what the Government designed the banking business to do, and in support of the Government’s creations called Freddie and Fannie.  Everyone should care.  They are trying to force banks to release deposits back into the Fed.  Didn’t we read in the news that the banks had paid back the bailout money?

Like the late 1920′s and early 1930′s, there’s been a lot of cash hoarding going on in corporate America, as well as asset realignment.  In the days of the Great Depression there were not enough dollars circulating because of hoarding.  Those who had lots of currency wanted to control more of the government as well as the people they employed.  In the 1930′s the Federal Government of the United States of America virtually outlawed the ownership of Gold and forced the banks to move all gold into the Federal Reserve Deposit in consideration of the Fed’s full faith and credit to guarantee cash.  Nobody seems to have seen the famous Fort Knox gold ever since.  But that’s not the point.

The reason they did that, back in the 1930′s, was to flush cash out of hoarding accounts and back into public distribution.  What good is cash if it isn’t trading hands?  Velocity at which money moves is very important to the economy.   The method the U.S. used is highly questionable, taking everyone’s gold and giving them dollars instead.  Sounds okay to you?  Well, right after the Fed confiscated the gold, through an act of congress creating a law to do so they reset the price of Gold to double what it was and effectively increased the value of the Federal deposit while cutting the value of the dollar in half.  Snap!  The rest of the depression years were spent trying to overcome the negative effect of doubling the cost of living overnight.

So here we are, this many years later, and maybe this action against the largest banks is very similar.  They can’t force banks to deposit gold again, since they don’t have gold on deposit like they did long ago.  This may not have the full effect and fury of resetting the Gold and Dollar price, but it may be one of several steps to cause much of the same effect over time.  It’s a bit early to tell because we have to see what happens with the dollar.  One thing is obvious, through fines levied on banks, quite a few billions of dollars could end up in the Fed’s account very soon and then some other action to cut the value of the dollar in half could take place.  If this happens it could be very hard on the citizens of the country.

Why would the Fed do this today?  Several reasons come to mind:

1. Increasing the deposits through payments of billions of dollars in fines can allow the government to circulate more currency without printing it.

2. The Fed can then afford to issue more debt which can then be leveraged by banks and other institutions.  Feds get cash, then they sell bonds, the banks leverage the bonds.  That’s like you using a credit card to secure another credit card; chasing debt with debt.

3. If they find a way to reset the value of the dollar, they can effectively lower the cost of  Federal debt.

4.  Causes the value of the dollar to sink low enough that those who hold dollars in large hoarded amounts will want to free them up, thus creating higher circulation.

5.  They can afford more bailouts with cheaper dollars and that means more regulation and therefore more control.

6. Increases the net power of the U.S. Fed in terms of currency control.  Imagine a King who circulates his own money with his image stamped on it.

7. Citizens become even more dependent since they cannot afford the new cost of living.

8. It’s a way to bankrupt the system quietly.  At that point they may also have the option of replacing the currency with a completely new one.

Maybe this is the only way to manage the currency, debt, and productivity crisis when we come to this point in the economic cycle.  Maybe there is no better way.  Reducing hoarding is a positive but maybe there is a better way to cause the dollar to be more valuable in circulation.  When investment in business, employment, and other things can give a higher return than the simple yield/risk model in a bank account, then people will put their money to work.  When fear is high, risk is out of control, there are few options, and it is normal to hold cash.

There is a possibility that over-regulation, over taxation, and the high cost of fees, fines, and employment overhead such as employment tax, insurance, and other benefits, actually add up to cause a reduction in productivity of investment.  Because of this firms and those who hold cash must choose to avoid the risk of new business.

This is how our system of freedom and opportunity depends on less government.  This is how it works.  The more value government takes out of the system of free enterprise, the less opportunity its citizens will feel they can afford.

Now you must ask the question of how to prepare for the dollar to collapse, if it does.

 

No doubt Japan has suffered a tragic loss of life and property, and the risk of nuclear radiation is real.  The problem here is the apparent panic sell-off which is already out of proportion with reality and more in proportion to a real war.  What’s pushing this negative market activity?  Is it just the news, or is it some other fear? Disproportionate is right, unless you are banking on another quake and tsunami.  I seriously doubt the productivity of the Japanese people has been impacted enough to warrant a collapse in their corporate world.

Maybe the markets are down because of the number of Americans who begin standing around pointing fingers at others, trying to blame them for being unprepared for one of the worst quakes and tsunamis in history.  Reminds me of what happens when I honk at someone to move out of the way and their reaction is to either hit the brakes and look around or stop and stare at you.  Few ever get what the honking is about, or they are just angry and impolite enough not to care.

It is kind of sad to see American news focusing on a few boats bashed around by a wave, or one guy being washed out to sea in comparison to the overall tragedy in Japan.  Really though, the comparison may be better explained by how little economic effect it will have compared to the surviving population.  Japan will survive, and so will America.

Although this sell-off in Japan is disproportionate, it may actually be the correct thing in comparison to where the markets were.  It may be that a correction was at hand and the quake, tsunami, and reactors simply allowed the markets to face the truth.  I really can’t say for sure.  In the U.S. this simply is helping the markets get on with a correction which was already forming and may help it end that much sooner.

Overall, humans need to get a bit better grip on reality.  If they would stop hyping up prices in commodity, stock, realty, and other markets we wouldn’t be as susceptible to large sell-off activity.  Imagine if people invested according to the merits of valuation and earnings rather than speculation of future value and the psychological need to participate with the crowd.  But then that would imply people would be doing their own homework and understand the risks they take.  On the other side of things, if people were not as inclined to over-react there wouldn’t be as much opportunity for those who know how to play the game of risk and investment.

 

The NYSE was sold out yesterday to the German Boerse exchange in a merger deal.  A major icon of our American ingenuity and capitalist structure has truly been sold out to a foreign entity.  Even if they try to say Americans still have an interest in it, it’s like you owning one share of Walmart and thinking you can control the company; not enough votes.

We may as well take all the stuff out of the Smithsonian and put it all on Ebay.  How about if we give a patent and copyright to China for the American Flag?  The amazing thing is the press isn’t reporting that we’ve been sold out and it’s just being treated like the sale of a bank branch.  Much of the world’s economy, the real and free part, was exchanged through the NYSE.  The name will even disappear soon.  The NYSE was created in 1792.

Being a member of the NYSE was prestigious.  I really don’t know what it will mean now that descendants of Prussia will be in control.   The amazing thing is the sale price was only $10 Billion.  Shall we sell our bridges and canals to India or how about give them as a gift to Iran?

We have such an incredibly failed government…

Read more here:  http://bit.ly/ghrmkQ

 

SMIDs (small-mid size businesses) employ at least half of the workforce in this country.  Corporate jobs are not the only jobs around yet our government is focused on dealing more for large corporation benefit because of the big dollars they represent.  Small business represents half or more of the voter base indirectly but do have a greater impact on local government through state and local taxes.  Anyone can own a small business including teenagers on the internet and retired people running a small business of any type, which I’m sure we will see even more. 

SMIDs offer the best way for Americans to fight against socialism.  There is no doubt whatsoever that this country has voted in a very socialist congress and president.  We don’t need socialism since we already have social programs in place to help those who really need help, despite the few that abuse that system.  In any case, the point is that true freedom is the ability to decide how to live your life.  The ultimate form of that freedom is not in owning a house but in owning the ability to not be in debt for that house, to have financial freedom, the ability to enjoy life.  Good business owners have that.  They can decide how much to earn, how much to spend, how much to invest, and most importantly for their lifestyle, when to do these things. 

SMIDs help control taxes in an environment in which our representatives would have everyone making a good living pay even more into their coffers of ill-will.  We really have the butting of heads between ill-will and goodwill.  Goodwill is the ongoing viability of a business or venture and ill-will is the opposite.  The government’s ill-will would take as much as possible from SMID business owners and damage their ability to prosper and grow.  In opposition, the effective business owner has the ability to operate with some tax rules that allow write-offs; discounts for employees to some degree; and control of forces effecting net income by writing off expenses, assets, and fees.  All this activity creates cash flow for suppliers and advisors of the business owner as well.  A lot of people feel they enjoy writing off their home mortgage interest and they should also realize business ownership is a multiple of that.  The knowledge a business owner gains in dealing with smart business concepts is key to our economy.

SMID owners become very aware of our taxation problems and can educate family and friends.  Through the process of learning about their tax liability and the resulting shock and awe of the ridiculousness of it, owners become acutely aware of the need for better legislative representation!  They learn what it takes to successfully profit in the environment of business ownership and generally become advocates of smarter government along with smart business.  This advocacy can have a direct impact on employees when business owners take the time, and they should, to educate them on how the process works, limitations on benefits imposed upon the owner by tax law and regulations, and how to work better as a team to enhance the business so it benefits employer and employee alike.  This knowledge of the average owner and employee should have an impact on future elections of government representatives. The evidence of this is the current effort of the federal government to employ more people and compete for those votes which will favor big government and corporations over small and mid-size business.  This is a fight, not just for the right to make a good earning, but also for true freedom.

Our freedom depends on the abilities of SMID owners and their partners.  If the U.S. Government continues to be in direct competition with business in this country and move forward with the effort to remove the ability of employers to provide enticing benefits to employees, the social impact will move us closer to economic failure similar to that of the Soviet Union.  That failure represents socialism’s negative impact on maintaining and growing a good quality standard of living which the U.S. enjoyed for so long.  We don’t want to be another Soviet Union for any reason.  China also represents a low standard of living in comparison to the U.S.  Independent business owners are much more capable of taking care of employees and their needs than the government will ever be.  The difference is in taking a number to stand in line for benefits or having an employer who needs and wants to keep employees healthy and happy so they can be much more productive.  When a business and its employees are successful they have a direct positive impact on the economy and are more able to expand and provide more products and services.

SMID partners must create opportunity as well.  Partners are those who use the services or provide services to a business.  If the efficiency of the business and its employees is high, then the services and demands they represent are high as well.  Customers benefit from a lower overall cost since they receive higher efficiency, and this directly impacts the next customers in line.  Nobody wants to purchase low quality goods and services since the replacement costs end up doubling the overall cost!  Example: In the past, Xerox offered copier equipment with a 5 year fix or replace guarantee which none of their competitors offered.  To compare total cost of ownership on a $15,000 copier all one had to do was assume that in any of the 5 years the unit could fail to the point it might have to be replaced.  A one to one comparison showed that a competing unit discounted to $12,000 had a 5-year risk of actually costing $24,000 if it failed and had to be purchased again.  Which would you buy?  It was a simple decision.  Quality of employees and quality of services is important to the economy and the ability of increasing the number of consumers, of which the Federal Reserve is always hopeful of.

SMIDs as consumers are the segment most likely to grow our standard of living and consumer economy.  Because small and mid-size business owners enjoy economies of scale, even if their net revenue is low, they can purchase more goods and services.  If they expand their business and customer base they also expand their economies of scale.  This can happen rapidly!  Remember the technology bubble?  The expansion, based on demand, was incredible.  The money available to invest in these ventures seemed unlimited.  Yes,  it got out of hand, but look at the previous expansion of the SMIDs in the 1980s and 1990s.  Prior to the tech bubble we were enjoying a comparably low cost of capitalization, expansion of good quality services, an increase in technological breakthroughs, and at the same time an increase in employee benefits to a level never before seen.  Prior to the 80s hardly anyone had a retirement plan and most people were on a cash basis for retirement based on what they had saved in the bank.  Our standard of living increased dramatically throughout the 80s and early 90s.

Every successful SMID is like adding another wealthy or near-wealthy entity to the country even if the owners do not become very wealthy.  A business owner may take home only 5 figures but the business itself may generate a gross in multiples of 7 figures.  That cash flow has to go somewhere!  It does.  It goes to employees, suppliers, taxes, fees to banks and professional services, utilities, charities, and in some ways to customers who save money on convenience and services.  A well-run business can spend money like a very wealthy individual can.  Yes, I realize not all businesses are run efficiently but many are – just look around you and especially in the older business districts of your community.  Some of those companies have been around long enough that their low overhead cost alone allows them to hire more people and expand into new products because they can afford to do so.  When they finally decide to spend they are more likely to make a quality decision that not only makes more money for the business but also for all of those involved. 

SMIDs can employ more people rapidly.  SMIDs are quick to notice uptrends in the economy and because of their size they are able to move quicker on new business opportunities than their large corporate counterparts.  They have the ability as a group to suddenly expand the employment base since they have fewer obstacle between the decision maker and the employee in the form of a ridiculous legal moat called Human Resources ,which so often is merely a group of attorneys trying to protect the firm from what they believe could be rogue employee complaints.  This wouldn’t be such a problem if the government didn’t automatically impose higher expenses each time an employee needs to be terminated.  It’s still a problem for SMIDs but there are fewer layers to go through.  Remember the days when managers hired and fired?  Now corporations refer potential employees to HR at the home office. 

Small and mid-sized businesses only survive if they benefit people.  Unlike the   Government which is neither intended to benefit employees nor able to do so, it seems, at least not in an efficient form; SMIDs must create value for everyone involved.  Employees, providers, and customers must feel it is worth doing business or they will go elsewhere.  This really goes without saying.  A government entity can only enforce participation in the form of regulations that reduce choice and cause stress, as it flexes its muscle to impose its position on the citizens.  As a competitor of SMIDs the government is truly a destructive force to society.

 

Goldman Sachs vs. The People?  How about the entire banking and brokerage business vs. the people.  I think so.  First, I am astonished at which people have bought off on the idea that we need a $700 Billion bailout.  What for?  The big wigs like Paulson would have you think this is 1930 all over again, but it isn’t! I will describe the differences:

1930′s: Large corporations were merging like crazy and the number of solvent corporations dropped from the thousands to about 200!  The remaining companies were hoarding cash into their accounts like crazy.  Workers made enough to live but few saved and even if they did it could disappear in a local private bank when it went under.  There were fewer and fewer jobs because of massive automation and fewer companies to employ people.  As the economy turned upside down, Congress passed laws to grab much of the gold in the country and hold it in the reserve to guarantee the dollar.  However, within a short period of time they took the dollar off the gold standard and by law repriced the dollar at half it’s previous value, thus creating inflation but increasing the value of the gold reserves!  All in a few years.  Only about the top 1% of the wealthiest people in the country had cash.  Real estate had collapsed because of borrowing from stock accounts, previously run up in value, which collapsed as cash constraints prevented investors from covering margin and withdrawing to make payments on real estate (Glass-Steagall).  At the beginning of the Great Depression there were few laws on the books regarding the handling of money, the Treasury, and controls.  Most came into being over the next 10 years.

Today: In comparison, there are many companies employing many people, in very diverse markets.  Most markets segments can weather the storm of a banking downturn.  I know for sure, since I study corporate earnings reports, that many companies have been increasing cash deposits dramatically over the last 4 years or more, a major red flag of the Great Depression.  Why?  Because the dollar was becoming cheap and at the same time hard to spend as corporations became more efficient.  So they banked it and started earning interest.  Many companies today could have negative earnings and growth but still show a positive net because of the amount of interest they earned on cash and cash equivalent accounts.  It is not likely we will reach anywhere near 20% unemployment.  We could in fact see a dramatic slowdown with a true depression in much of the world but not in the United States, because we have laws and regulations on the books which didn’t exist before the Great Depression.  Many individuals have cash in accounts, money markets, retirement accounts and they don’t need more debt or credit.  Not everyone has a bad mortgage.  Another big difference is that middle market business, those below $200 Million in valuation, have also been saving cash and finding alternative lines of credit, mostly from private accredited investors, for several years and they are prepared to go somewhere other than the bank for cash flow needs.  The Fed is not in the business of a gold grab at this time, the dollar has already fallen, and we are likely to see the dollar increase in value rather than collapse.  However, the dollar could collapse if the Fed decides to print too many of them anyway.  Still the amount of cash in the system, the number of jobs currently filled, the breadth of business of all types, the lack of a Dust Bowl, although we have had Hurricanes, and many more things do show that the last thing the general public needs is more debt!

All this being said, and the understanding that we are not going to fall back into a Great Depression with massive unemployment and a dramatic lack of real cash in the trading and consumer markets, the fact that companies and regional banks have increased cash deposits, makes one wonder why they need the $700 Billion to bail out the big international firms.  And it really is for them, more than for the citizens.  There are a lot of wrongs in place and this huge debt/credit increase will just simply allow them to continue to run a market that is overbuilt on credit.  Why would anyone want that?  Why give the Treasury, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and more a brand new shiny credit-card?  We all need to get off the credit wagon and back to the basics of buying what we can afford. 

Just think about what has been happening to all that money in the first place, prior to the need for a bailout.  Much of it goes to large bonuses to CEO’s and other corporate managers.  It disappears into leveraged accounts which balloon up the credit lines as much as 9times the deposit in some cases, and then can be margined again in other accounts, many times, by using repurchase agreements and insurance.  The money was used to speculate on oil, gas, corn, ethanol, and many more commodities.  They bet on higher and higher prices in futures contracts until citizens had to pay over-inflated prices for everything.  Much of this inflation comes from this activity as well as China absorbing higher and higher commodity amounts and jumping into the futures markets.  And remember that much of the money, obviously a significant portion, comes form sub-prime mortgages thanks to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.  Whew!  What a deal!  They were betting that the poor people of the country could pay enough of their 100% loan mortgage payments to keep this monster fed for higher and higher prices!

Now think about this!  They  want us to fork over $700 Billion more so that they can snap up all the bad debt, mortgages, homes… however they categorize the final assets, and then they want to hold them until prices go back up?  Not all properties are worthless, but many are on this basis, and many are too expensive to be sold back into the market, since there are no buyers (unless prices go lower).  In order to sell this junk real estate back to the citizens, they want to artificially maintain a higher price on these properties, than they are worth.  In the end they are price fixing real estate at higher than market prices, attempting to maintain and maybe continue the junk mortgages.  Everyone forgets that there is a time cost here.  As the properties remain vacant, who will maintain them so that they can retain value?  The Fed?  No, probably a new Federal Agency. 

If they would just let the properties fall in value, to where speculators can purchase and maintain them at a reasonable price, and put them back on the market, this would all be over much, much quicker.  The population does not need artificially maintained higher bubble prices.  If they pass the bailout, and futures contracts begin to trade again, as they did before, then why would we expect commodity prices to not bubble up again?  That would be crazy, since one definition of crazy is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results.

There is enough money in other parts of the markets, few people have to worry about their accounts, and why should we bail out the bad?  It shouldn’t be done!  Not now, not ever!  So instead lets do something much smarter.  Companies need to use less credit, citizens need to use much less credit.  And big international firms need to stop cramming it down our throats.

But they are likely to pass it, now that they are in such a hurry.  In the end, either way, the markets may still correct, earnings may still come down, and people may still worry.

 

Copyright 2008 Michael P Arnold, MPArnold

 

How much of our Free Capitalist Society is being lost in the current financial crisis?

It is no wonder that we don’t have Socialized Medicine, we already spent the money on Socialized Housing.  The roots of this crisis are in pressure from congressmen to make housing loans available to those who do not qualify for normal loans.  This is the basis for the growth of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Yes, the American dream.  But what is the dream going to cost us now that the financial structure has failed?  So far about $900 Billion, which is the amount the Fed had in the bank (more or less).  It is likely to cost taxpayers about $3 Trillion before it is all said and done.

The whole point is the Government now owns and operates Fannie and Freddie and will soon own and underwrite the entire worthless portfolio of sub-prime mortgages to provide continuing house loans for those who cannot qualify for them.  I am not for putting people out of their homes but I am also not for putting people in homes who should not be there.  There are other alternatives.

What I would like to be able to calculate is the value of the future impact of such a socialist program.  I would contend that allowing the financial firms to collapse in a free market would actually put the assets back to work more quickly and safely than a slow federal process and at much lower cost.  This now limits the ability of those who can invest at reduced price, and would, to do so.

Imagine you have a herd of cattle and the government comes by and says your herd could have a disease and they want to put a fence around them and quarantine the whole herd.  In the meantime they tell everyone that beef is tainted and the price begins to fall.  While you are locked up and cannot sell into the market the demand for beef continues to fall.  Eventually the market bottoms and it is determined that your cattle are not sick, which you knew all along.  Your herd is released back to you and now they cost more to feed than you can ever get back in the market.  Now your only hope is that the Fed will purchase your herd or compensate you for the downturn.  This will be at a discount and a loss to you.  It could now take several business cycles for prices to return to a profitable level.

Should the Government be doing this with housing?  I guess they have.  In this case the rancher loses the beef and those who do not work for it will be eating well.

 

After 9/11 George Bush determined to take care of business.  Without getting into too much detail you should recall that France, Germany and a few other countries were not supportive in Iraq and thus irked enough people in the U.S. to cause them to boycott imports from those countries.  In response to poor support from our good allies who we usually stand up for very well, financially and in defense, George Bush chose not to prevent the dollar from falling in value on the foreign markets.  This in turn allowed American goods to become cheaper and goods and services of those allies to become more expensive in the U.S.

Why would George Bush’s administration do that?  It gave us economic strength and strained the other countries.  It was a way of raising tariffs in a sense without creating new tariffs in fact.  There are other advantages such as the weaker international dollar reduced our adjusted cost of paying off international deficits.  It increased our ability to export goods and created a positive environment for U.S. business abroad and definitely gave us a better competitive stance regarding China.

Now, because the dollar was allowed to fall in the international markets, and because we are exporting more, and our services are more in demand, we are in a much better position than we would have been in during this economic debacle which our bankers, hedge funds, brokers, and commodity traders have leveraged us into.

As you read news headlines, and if your only source of information is the news media, then you are not likely to know or understand these things.  You are missing a huge part of the picture and are bound to be trapped by the same frustrations as the rest of the crowd who believe that George Bush has done terrible things to this country.  If you will do your homework by reading, really reading, and then try to understand the meaning of things and why they are done (follow the money trail) you will understand things much more clearly and will be better off in deciding what to do with your own wealth.  If you can’t find the information or don’t understand it, then talk to your Financial Advisor.  If your advisor does not understand either, then find a new one!

© 2012 Ecspex Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha