John Paulson Says Double-Digit Inflation is Coming

 

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.   

As average U.S. gas prices head toward $4.00 a gallon, billionaire hedge fund operator John Paulson recently told a standing room only crowd at New York’s University Club that double-digit inflation is about to rear its ugly head. Paulson assumes that the Fed will continue to engage in its inflation-creating behavior.

John Paulson is famous for making a killing on shorting subprime bonds before their collapse. Most of Wall Street was bullish at the time and Fed Chair Ben Bernanke famously declared that he didn't see subprime mortgages causing any problem. The market completely fell apart weeks after Bernanke spoke.

The Paulson Bernanke dynamic is now back in play with predictions of inflation. Bernanke doesn't see it now and doesn't anticipate it. In an interview with ABC News done around the same time that Paulson gave his talk, Bernanke stated "We haven't quite yet got to the point where we can be completely confident that we're on a track to full recovery," and he continued that the central bank would take no options off the table to further stimulate the economy.  The interviewer didn't ask Bernanke the obvious question of whether or not the need for further Fed stimulus after four years indicates that the previous efforts have been a failure.

Paulson's presumption that the Fed will continue to feed inflation forces is completely supported by Bernanke's actions and statements. The Fed Chair further blamed rising oil and U.S. gasoline prices on geopolitical tensions. Prior to the mid-2000s though, geopolitical tensions only raised the price of oil to $40 a barrel. This time it's well over $100 a barrel. Money printing accounts for the price difference, but you'll never hear that from the Fed's money-printer-in-chief. And this is to expected. No government in inflation's 2000 year history has ever taken full responsibility for causing it.

Governments also have a history of finagling with the inflation numbers as well. This seems to be a universal practice once some form of indexation takes place (adjusting prices for inflation). The U.S. introduced indexation for social security and tax brackets in the 1970s. Starting it the 1980s, a number of statistical "improvements" were introduced in how the inflation rate was calculated. Interestingly, all of these "improvements" lowered the reported rate.

When it comes to inflation predictions, investors have a choice between John Paulson, who has made billions from his knowledge of how markets works, and Ben Bernanke, who has repeatedly shown he is oblivious to their dangers (remember how he let Lehman Brothers go under and this almost led to the complete collapse of the global financial system?). If you are betting on Bernanke, you are betting against history repeating itself. Money-printing has always led to massive inflation in the past. Apparently, John Paulson knows this.


Disclosure: None


Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Stocks Rally on Bernanke's Admission That the Fed Has Been Ineffective

 

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

Stocks rallied Monday based on comments that Fed Chair Ben Bernanke made at the National Association for Business Economics spring conference. Long-term interest rates however went up.

The Dow Industrials rose 100 points not too long after the market's open, apparently on the hopes that more quantitative easing might be coming. Bernanke made no such promise in his talk and it would be a stretch to have made that interpretation, but as usual mainstream media reports put a positive spin on Bernanke's remarks.

The takeaway that got buried was that the Fed Chair admitted that the economy remained weak and there has been no significant recovery yet. In relation to job gains, Bernanke specifically stated, "we have not seen that in a persuasive way yet." He followed up by saying that without much stronger GDP growth, the unemployment rate was unlikely to fall much further.

Essentially, Bernanke's remarks are an admission that the Fed's policy of zero percent interest rates for almost three and a half years now and two rounds of quantitative easing (combined with trillion plus dollar budget deficits for four years in a row) have been a big dud. The average American however wouldn't know this based on what they read in the papers and hear on TV. There have been three years of reports from the mass media informing the public about the "recovery" that is taking place.

Every time Bernanke has made comments, whether specific or indirect, about more stimulus from the Fed, stocks have rallied strongly — one of the few things that easy money has accomplished. The Fed has also been successful in driving interest rates down, although this seems to be changing. Long-term rates rose on Bernanke's remarks even though the Fed's Operation Twist program is still ongoing. Mortgage rates, after being at all-time lows, rose above 4% last week.

Stock traders make their decisions on very short-term time horizons. Liquidity drives stock prices up, regardless of what else is going on in the background. Bernanke has delivered on greater liquidity on a massive scale since the Credit Crisis in 2008. Not surprisingly, the stock market has had a nice rally during that time. Liquidity was also behind the previous real estate market rally in the first years of the 2000s that led to the Credit Crisis and before that the late 1990s tech stock bubble that was followed by an 80% crash in the Nasdaq. There will be serious consequences again this time around, but that type of long-term thinking isn't an important consideration for most traders.

Investors should ask themselves,: If the Fed's ZIRP (zero interest rate policy) and money-printing quantitative easing are such good ideas, why haven't they been done before and why don't we just always do them? While ZIRP is historically unusual, money-printing is nothing new. It's been done hundreds of times (if not thousands) and has always been followed by major inflation and frequently hyperinflation. The risks of these policies are extreme and this is why they have been avoided by responsible governments throughout time.

Ben Bernanke is not worried about inflation though. He claims he hasn't seen it yet (obviously he doesn't go food shopping or buy gas for his car). Of course, U.S. government statistics are manipulated so it is difficult for them to show inflation except when it is really elevated. Inflation is also one of those things that once it shows up, it is difficult to stop — sort of like a tsunami.

Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Volcker Says U.S. Mired in Recession and Inflation is Coming

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.   

In a talk given to a small audience at the American Museum of Finance on Wednesday evening, former Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker stated that there was an ongoing recession in the U.S. and that we will be seeing inflation in the future because of the actions of the Fed and Treasury during the 2008 Credit Crisis.

While most of Volcker's talk centered on the current crisis in Europe, he frequently made connections to what was going on in the EU to what has taken place in the United States. His remarks about the U.S. being mired in an ongoing recession were in response to a question on whether an infrastructure bank would be a good idea. As part of his answer he stated, "We're not going to end the recession in the next month or the next year. It's going to take several years before the recession is over." The U.S. government claims that the last recession ended in June 2009and has repeatedly said that the U.S. has not fallen back into recession even though unemployment and consumer confidence have continually remained at recession levels.

When discussing the bailouts during the Credit Crisis,  Volcker remarked "people said that there will be inflation... that's true over time." Volcker was critical of pro-inflation policies. He said that "the problem with inflation is that it looks so enticing, but the historical record doesn't verify that it is." He continued, "We would be very foolish if we deliberately went out and created inflation." The Federal Reserve under Ben Bernanke has kept Fed Funds rates around zero percent for three years now, which means real interest rates have been negative. Negative interest rates are highly inflationary as is money printing. The Fed has expanded its balance sheet — one of the many ways it prints money — by over $2 trillion dollars since September 2008.

Volcker described the 2008 Credit Crisis as a "regulatory failure", but added "the Fed is only one regulator". He went on to state that "the Federal Reserve took a lot of extraordinary measures" to handle events back then and "the Fed and the Treasury did not necessarily follow the letter of the law" in attempting to control the damage to the financial system. Volcker further laid part of the blame for the Credit Crisis to proprietary trading by banks and said he was "not in favor of banks being speculative entities being supported by the U.S. government".

Paul Volcker was Chairman of the Federal Reserve from August 1979 to August 1987 and is widely credited with bringing down the high inflation of the 1970s by raising interest rates. More recently he headed the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, which he left in February.

Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Author: "Inflation Investing - A Guide for the 2010s"
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21 

This posting is editorial opinion. There is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Ben Bernanke's 'It's Not My Fault' Inflation Speech

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

Americans shouldn’t expect to hear the truth about inflation from Fed Chief Ben Bernanke and he didn't disappoint in a speech he gave to the International Monetary Conference in Atlanta, Georgia on Monday. The money-printer-in-chief of the Federal Reserve denied that the Fed’s easy money policies are responsible for the inflation that is currently showing up in commodity prices. The public shouldn’t have expected anything else from the dissembling Fed Chair, nor should they believe anything he says.

Bernanke claims that rapidly rising commodity prices are the result of rising demand and not enough supply. While in isolation this is always the case in economics, it doesn’t explain why demand is rising in leaps and bounds and why this has occurred at the same time the Fed has been on a money printing binge. Bernanke did not make comparisons in his speech between demand and prices in 2008, when the Fed turned up the printing presses to max and conditions right now. Let’s look at a few of them:  U.S. gasoline prices went from approximately $1.60 a gallon to almost $4.00. Oil prices have tripled from a low around $33 a barrel. Copper prices almost tripled during the same period. Cotton prices have gone through the roof and took out a high established around 150 years ago. Silver prices went from a low of $8.88 to almost $50.  And that’s just the beginning.

Did global demand for oil, copper, and silver increase by three or more times in two and a half years?  It most certainly did not. If anything economic demand has only increased by a few percent at most. There is something that did increase by a lot more however – the Fed’s balance sheet, which grows when it prints money. That has gone through the roof just like commodity prices. Money printing of course increases demand for any number of items because it makes a lot more funds available in the financial system. For some reason, Bernanke didn’t quite connect the dots between the two in his speech.

The recognition that increasing the available money in the economy leads to rising prices has been known for 500 years and was first proposed by well-known astronomer Copernicus. The idea is based on grade-school arithmetic. If you have an economy of a certain size and a given amount of money and you increase that amount of money, then each unit of money is worth less. It’s not rocket science, and yet Fed officials with PhDs from top schools can’t seem to be able to grasp this simple concept. Or perhaps they don’t want to do so.

Bernanke’s speech also didn’t explain why the price of gold has doubled since its Credit Crisis low. While gold does have some industrial uses, its price is a good gage of inflation expectations on the part of the investing public. Bernanke claimed these were under control, so we don’t have to worry about inflation. Gold is telling a very different story – and gold is not known to lie.

Bernanke also fell back on the 'employment is high and there is slack in the economy, so inflation can’t happen' argument. Historical analysis indicates that hyperinflation takes place under just such conditions. The most recent example happened in Zimbabwe in the 2000s (perhaps Ben didn’t read the papers during those years). As the economy collapsed and unemployment headed toward close to 100%, prices skyrocketed. It wasn’t the first time something like this has happened, it’s the same story over and over and over again throughout history – yet Ben keeps telling us it can’t happen. Well, I guess if you don’t let little things like reality intrude in your worldview, it can’t.

As an author of a book which includes a lot of material on inflation history, I found no case in the past where the authorities admitted their guilt in causing inflation. In every instance, the government printed a lot money or cut the coinage (if it was before paper money existed). Without exception in modern times, speculators and foreign influences are blamed for inflation. For some reason the government money-printers behind the inflation that ruins their countries just never seem to admit that they’re at fault. Bernanke’s recent speech is just another example of history repeating itself.   

Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21
Author, "Inflation Investing: A Guide for the 2010s"

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Market Sells Off Even Though Bernanke Is Bullish

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


Fed Chair Ben Bernanke stated last night that he is 'hopeful' the U.S. economy will not fall into a double dip recession. After a tremendous drubbing on Friday, stocks somehow managed to sell down to even lower levels yesterday. They are down again this morning following Bernanke's comments - a fitting response to his forecasting acumen.

Few people in the United States seem to be as oblivious to the condition of the American economy as is the guy who is in charge of the Federal Reserve. Bernanke notoriously stated that subprime borrowing wouldn't cause any problems only weeks before it blew up into the biggest financial crisis the world has ever seen. Following this, the Fed released a number of statements in the spring of 2008 about how it was hopeful that its policies would prevent the U.S. economy from falling into a recession. Unfortunately, the economy had already fallen into recession months before, but the Fed was blissfully unaware of this even though it has more access to economic data than anyone else. The buffoonish Bernanke has been beating the drum of economic recovery for a long time now, even though analysis of U.S. statistics indicates the private sector is still struggling. The only recovery that seems to have taken place is in increased government spending.

At the moment, the markets don't seem to share Bernanke's rosy view of the future. The Dow dropped 115 points (1.2%) yesterday and most of the selling took place around the close, as is typical in bear markets. The Dow's ending price of 9816 was well below the key 10,000 level. The S&P 500 fell 14 points (1.4%) and closed at a new low for 2010, as did the Dow. Selling was even more pronounced in the tech heavy Nasdaq and the small cap Russell 2000. The Nasdaq lost 45 points (2.0%) and the Russell 15 points (2.4%). As of today, the Dow and S&P 500 have spent 13 trading days below their simple 200-day moving averages, a bearish pattern. Selling was also widespread with market breadth close to three to one negative on the NYSE.

The only areas of the market that did well yesterday were utilities, gold/ gold miners, and treasuries - safe havens. Financials were hit hard with Goldman Sachs (GS) falling 2.5% and Bank of America (BAC) losing 3.4%. U.S. bank failures have reached 81 so far this year and look like they are going to handily exceed 2009's very high figure. Credit card debt has fallen for 19 months in a row and May's employment report indicated private sector hiring has disappeared. Once the 1.2 million temporary Census workers are dismissed, the U.S. unemployment rate should go above 10%. These are not signs of economic recovery and yet the Fed chair keeps spouting one cheerleading remark after another about how recovery is taking place. Herbert Hoover did the same thing in the early 1930s as the Great Depression was developing. Consequently, he is now treated as a historical laughingstock. History may take the same view of Ben Bernanke. 

Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

The Twilight of Ben Bernanke

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


Fed Chair Ben Bernanke survived the U.S. Senate vote for his reappointment, but it was touch and go for a while. The vote was 70 to 30 - an unprecedented lack of support for a sitting head of the Federal Open Market Committee. The previous lowest level of support was for Paul Volcker in 1983. His vote was 84 to 16, much better than Bernanke's. Volcker failed to get support for another nomination however. He was out in the next term. Bernanke will be lucky if he lasts even that long.

Opposition to Bernanke first arose in the blogosphere and then spread through the politically activist communities on both the Left and the Right. Even with that, the senate might still have engaged in its usual rubber stamp support for the president's nominee for Fed Chair.  The surprise upset in the Massachusetts special election for Ted Kennedy's seat indicated how angry the public was about the handling of the economy and that no senator could expect automatic voter support this fall. The one-third of senators up for reelection in November seemed particularly reluctant to support Bernanke. The White House had to get involved to salvage Bernanke's nomination. Without pressure from the president and congressional leadership, he might have gone under.

The government PR machine has been trying to turn Bernanke's first term at the head of the Fed from the fiasco it has been into a great triumph. They came up with the tag line that 'he saved the U.S. from another depression'. Obama and a number of Democratic leaders repeated this outrageous claim over and over again. There is only limited proof that this might be the case. The U.S. economy still faces a depression or at the very least an ongoing recessionary period that could last for years. The White House and the Fed may indeed be oblivious to this idea, since they both seem to believe their own press releases rather than the hard evidence that indicates otherwise. In truth, Bernanke is one of the most incompetent leaders the Fed has ever had. He failed to see the Credit Crisis coming, he failed to react quickly when it did, and when he did he took questionable actions that benefited Wall Street at the expense of Main Street. Bernanke's associates, Tim Geithner and Henry Paulson, the current and former Treasury Secretaries, also claim they did a great job handling the Credit Crisis and that they too saved the U.S. from another depression.

Why Obama submitted Bernanke's name for reappointment is indeed a mystery - at least if you believe his rhetoric about 'change you can believe in'. Bernanke was originally appointed by George Bush and is a Republican. Obama constantly complains about the big mess with the economy that George Bush left him to untangle. Yet, Obama renominates, with obsequious praise, the key architect of the Bush economy. Did he even look for someone else to fill the position?  My guess is he didn't. The rap about why senators should support Bernanke has included 'no one else would probably have done a better job handling the Credit Crisis' (an indirect admission that Bernanke didn't perform well) and 'someone else wouldn't be much different as Fed Chair'. While Washington is willing to accept mediocrity and substandard performance in top government positions, the American public seems to finally be getting fed up with Beltway incompetence.

Bernanke's loss of power is not just due to his poor handling of the economy and financial system. He is a complete contrast to the politically savvy Alan Greenspan, who survived for 19 years as Fed Chair, through both Republican and Democratic administrations. Bernanke seems to be politically tone-deaf. The Fed's actions at this month's meeting, which ended on Wednesday, included an announcement that it was closing down a number of its programs that provide liquidity to the system. Stocks gyrated wildly after the announcement and the market could easily have gone into a tailspin. Not exactly a wise move for a Fed Chair ever and particularly not smart the day before a vote for renomination where senators are looking for a reason not to support you.

Bernanke also seems to have confused the idea that the Fed should be independent with the Fed should be above the law. This imperial view does not sit well with the American public. Bernanke's renomination will only further empower the forces that want to audit the Fed and reign it in. From now on, he is Barack Obama's Fed Chair and not George Bush's. Bernanke's reappointment is likely to be one more decision that president Obama will regret having made. And if he doesn't, the voters will probably make sure he does.

Disclosure: None.
NEXT: U.S. 4th Quarter GDP - Slower Decline Leads to Growth


Daryl Montgomery
Organizer,New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

The Case Against Reappointing Ben Bernanke

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


Economics is one of the few professions where incompetence is regularly rewarded. The attempt to keep Ben Bernanke as head of the Federal Reserve for a second term is one of the most glaring examples of this practice - and one that will have serious negative repercussions for the United States going forward.

When president Obama announced that he was reappointing Bernanke last August, the reason he gave was that 'Bernanke prevented another depression'. This sound bite has been mindlessly repeated by politicians - senate leader Harry Reid most recently - and economically challenged media commentators ever since. Until the U.S. economy returns to its pre-Credit Crisis state, we will not know whether or not that we have been saved from another depression. There is more than enough evidence to indicate that we haven't been - double digit unemployment, bank loan portfolios that continue to deteriorate, rising bankruptcies and bank failures, lack of lending by the banks, and a housing market that only functions because of numerous government programs that prop it up are just a few reasons why this claim is wrong. Obama would not be the first U.S. president to prematurely call the end to a depression, Herbert Hoover did so in June 1930 when he told the press that the Great Depression was over - it was almost three years before the bottom and at least another decade before that was indeed the case.

One thing that will be pointed to as evidence of recovery will be good GDP numbers later this week - estimates are as high as 6% annualized growth for the fourth quarter of 2009.  If GDP numbers were calculated in a way that measured actual economic growth this would indeed be encouraging. Unfortunately, they are not. U.S. GDP figures for 2008 were positive even though it is universally recognized that the U.S. was in a severe recession the entire year - this is a theoretical impossibility, yet no one talks about it. The lesson of Japan in the 1990s and 2000s warns against using GDP figures as evidence that an economic crisis is over. Japan had quarters of over 10% annualized GDP growth. They were 'saved' from a depression as many as seven times (depends on how you count) in the last two decades. Their economy has nevertheless continued a long, slow leak since 1990 and bigger problems are likely in the next decade, which will be the third one after their crisis began. In reality, Japan extended its depression over a very long period of time; none of its government's actions prevented it.

The defect in the 'saving from depression' argument is an implicit assumption that the economy has two states like a light switch, on and off, instead of an infinite number of possible outcomes. Many of those outcomes involve inflation and hyperinflation. There is no discussion of the negative consequences of Bernanke's actions among his supporters - and all economic policy actions have side effects, many of which can be extremely undesirable. Bernanke himself wrote his PhD thesis on Fed policy errors during the 1930s and demonstrated that restrictive Fed monetary policy led to the debacle. He also came to the conclusion that doing the opposite would fix the problem. If the economy was as simple as a light switch it would. In a complex system, this is not the case. Doing the opposite may simply lead to a different disastrous outcome.

Bernanke also didn't show understanding of the impending problems within the financial system, nor did he react quickly. As late as June 2007, Bernanke was assuring people that there would be no problem with subprime loans. In July the problem blew up. As late as the spring of 2008, the Fed was releasing statements that they were hopeful they would still be able to prevent a recession. The recession had already begun in December 2007, but the Fed was unaware of it. In September 2008, Lehman was allowed to fail with the subsequent excuse being given that no one was interested in buying it. Only days later AIG was nationalized when no one would buy it. The Lehman failure set off a general global financial collapse. Bernanke is now claiming credit from 'saving' the system from this collapse with his quick action. As one commentator astutely observed, this is like an arsonist wanting credit for putting out a fire that he had started.

Bernanke was originally appointed by George Bush and is one of the key economic actors along with the current Treasury secretary Tim Geithner from the Bush administration. While on one hand president Obama constantly criticizes Bush economic policies and how much damage they have caused, on the other he has gone out of his way to keep the Bush economic team mostly in place. This is reminiscent of Obama's newfound criticism of irresponsible giveaways to the big banks. For those who don't recall, the TARP bill originally failed in its first congressional vote. Presidential candidate Obama was instrumental in rounding up enough Democratic votes to get it passed on a second try. Now, Bush deserves the blame.

Bernanke's appointment runs out on January 31st. The slow-moving senate has yet to get around to voting on it. While Bernanke has had his detractors in congress, they became energized after the surprise upset in the Massachusetts special senate election last week that indicated quite clearly that American voters are angry about how the economy has been handled. Senators up for reelection in November (only one-third of the total) particularly began to have second thoughts, as indeed they should. Support for Bernanke may come back to haunt them in the future even more than support for the ill-fated health care bill. Bernanke is almost guaranteed to win the vote to reappoint him however. The White House is leaning heavily on Democratic senators to support him and hoping that the public isn't paying too much attention. Voters tend to notice though when they don't have a job.

Disclosure: None

NEXT: Consumers Lack Confidence, They Also Lack Credit

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Oil Update - EIA, CFTC, and USD

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. In addition to the term helicopter economics, we have also coined the term, helicopternomics, to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government and to update the old-fashioned term wheelbarrow economics.

Our Video Related to this Blog:

Light sweet crude fell 5.8% yesterday, a crash level one day drop. The EIA weekly storage report set off the selling. Crude closed at $63.35. It was $3.60 below Brent, a lower quality oil. The CFTC has started hearings this week and traders are claiming that they are completely politically motivated. Their evidence? - the CFTC's own reports. Oil was also damaged by a rising dollar. The dollar was rallying on the 'good news' that the U.S. was printing money to buy its own bonds (no that doesn't make any sense). As has been the case since the beginning of June, when the dollar goes up, everything else went down.

The EIA reported that oil storage was up 5.1 million barrels. Distillates were up 2.1 million barrels, but gasoline stocks fell 2.3 million. The mainstream media reported that distillate stocks were at their highest level in 25 years (take that with a grain of salt). Year over year distillate demand is down 10.7% and jet fuel demand dropped 13.3%. Gasoline demand is up by 0.8% however. At his time of year gasoline is the key demand driver for the oil market.

The CFTC has started its hearings this week trying to track down the evil speculators that have been manipulating the oil market. Interestingly, on Monday the Wall Street Journal reported the CFTC "plans to issue a report next month suggesting speculators played a significant role in driving wild swings in oil prices - a reversal of an earlier CFTC position." On Tuesday, the Journal reported that the CFTC is "updating- but not necessarily reversing - a 2008 report that blamed supply and demand, rather than speculators" for last year's spike in oil prices. So let me summarize this news for you. The CFTC already investigated this subject last year and found that the oil market like every other market operates on supply and demand. Not trusting its own work and the basic laws of economics, it has decided to investigate again. To get to the truth, it is holding hearings. However, before the hearings have even begun and data gathered, a decision was already made to blame speculators in the report that will be issued. At this point, you should be smelling a giant rat the size of Washington, D.C.

I actually don't doubt for a moment that there is speculation driving the price of oil to non-market prices. It's not taking place on the trading floors in New York, London or Singapore however, but from government offices on the Potomoc and Thames. To help clarify this picture, it might be a good idea to change Ben Bernanke's title from Fed Chair to Speculator-in-Chief. At least then, the public would know what he is really up to.

NEXT: Economy is Bad, but GDP Report is OK

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer,New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21


This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Today's Economic Lunacy

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. In addition to the term helicopter economics, we have also coined the term, helicopternomics, to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government and to update the old-fashioned term wheelbarrow economics.

Our Video Related to this Blog:

If ever there was ever any doubt that lunatics are running the economic asylum, we received more than enough confirmation of it today. Fed chairman Ben Bernanke expressed confidence that the current recession (actually depression) could end in 2009. It has been revealed that much of the AIG bailout money went to pay other banks and brokers who were also receiving bailout money and for executive bonuses. OPEC caved into pressure from the West not to cut oil production because it would hurt the world economy, as if this could somehow undo all the damage the Central Bankers were doing.

Fed Chair Ben Bernanke made his remarks about the recession on 60 Minutes (they should have resurrected the 1960's classic show, 'The Twilight Zone', for his commentary). While media headlines this morning blared that Bernanke said the recession would be ending in 2009, he actually added the important caveat that this would only happen if the banking system is stabilized. A realistic assessment of the chances of that happening can not be found in most press coverage. Bernanke further stated (try not to laugh) the largest U.S. banks are solvent and "they are not going to fail". The large U.S. banks are of course insolvent, although it is true that they are not going to fail because the government will pump an infinite amount of money into them if necessary to prevent this from happening. U.S. taxpayers should not worry about this however. Bernanke assured us last night that the bailout aid is not coming directly from tax funds and is "more akin to printing money than it is borrowing." Isn't that the approach the Weimar Germany and Zimbabwe took?

Government money printing is bad enough as is, but the news out of AIG over the weekend shows just how much of this is going to waste (hey, don't worry, they can always print more... and they will). Of the $170 billion that AIG received in government bailout funds, $105 billion went to pay other banks, including many foreign banks. Many of the U.S. banks were already receiving other government bailout money as is. As for the foreign banks, why is the U.S. bailing them out? Adding insult to injury, AIG is also using its bailout money to also pay executive bonuses. It claims that it is legally obligated to do so. Personally, I would like to see those contracts that state government money must be used to pay these bonuses. I think this problem could easily be solved if the people running AIG spent some time with Bernie Madoff in his new home.

Since the ordinary rules of basic economics are being ignored everywhere else, why should they apply to oil production. At its meeting on Sunday, OPEC did not cut production quotas again, but instead said it would aim to enforce the already existing cuts. In the last several months OPEC has announced a 4.2 billion reduction in quotas and it is estimated there has been 80% compliance. They are now trying to get the extra 20% or 800,000 barrels a day. Oil production is being cut elsewhere as well, including the U.S., and this is happening because it simply isn't profitable to produce oil under $40 a barrel in many places. And no amount of wishing, hoping and jawboning is going to make this happen. The rules of economics always win in the end. Someone should tell Ben Bernanke.

The New York Investing meetup is having its second class in Technical Analysis on Tuesday. If you are in the New York area, you should be attending (space is limited and by invitation only to members of the group, if you didn't get an invitation email me through the website).

NEXT: When Bad News is Good News and Vice-a-Versa

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer,New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.