A Twisted Tale of Gold Stolen Almost 80 Years Ago

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.

Apparently the government can keep property stolen from you, but you can't keep property stolen from the government. A recent Bloomberg Businessweek article entitled "Gold Coins: The Mystery of the Double Eagle" details how the Secret Service has spent almost 80 years trying to track down 1933 Double Eagle $20 gold coins missing from the Philadelphia Mint.  It is well-known however who stole millions of dollars of gold from the American public in the same year - and since it was the U.S. government, lot's of luck in getting compensation.

The 1933 Double Eagle never went into circulation. All coins were ordered to be melted down because U.S. citizens were banned from owning gold in the same year. Moreover, the Roosevelt Administration confiscated all gold and paid gold holders $20.67 per ounce. Those who failed to turn their gold in were subject to a 10 year jail sentence - more time than some violent criminals got - and a $10,000 fine. Once the government had the citizenry's gold, it raised the price to $35.00 an ounce or 41% higher. The price difference represents the value of personal property stolen by the government.

Sensibly, some people sued the federal government claiming the gold seizure was unconstitutional. After all, the U.S. Constitution clearly protects property rights of Americans - if it is enforced that is. Moreover, the Roosevelt Administration claimed it was given authority to seize everyone's gold through a World War I law that gave the government sweeping powers to seize personal property to protect the Republic during wartime. There was of course, no war in 1933.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court, in one of its most absurd rulings of all time, ruled the gold seizure perfectly legal. Even today, the mainstream press continues to soft peddle this trashing of the U.S. Constitution. The Bloomberg Businessweek article states that Roosevelt's Executive Order 6102,  "prohibited the hoarding of gold", rather than the owning of gold. While the gold was taken long ago, the same propaganda from the 1930s seems to still be with us.  

Apparently also in 1933 at least one employee at the Philadelphia Mint smuggled out some Double Gold Eagles. The government was unaware of this however. Around 1937, a Philadelphia coin dealer offered some Double Gold Eagles for sale. One of them, after being purchased by another coin dealer, was sold to King Farouk of Egypt. Unbeknownst to the Secret Service, the Secretary of the Treasury's office issued an export license for this coin on Feb. 29, 1944.

This was only one of many things that took place at Treasury that the Secret Service knew nothing about. Not stated in the Bloomberg Businessweek article was that the Under-Secretary of the Treasury at the time, Harry Dexter White, was the most highly placed Soviet agent in the U.S. government. This inconvenient, but well-documented truth has been covered up or minimized by left-wing historians and reporters for decades. White began working for the Roosevelt Administration in 1934 and concentrated on the relationship of gold and silver to currency management. The U.S. federal government confiscated American's private silver holdings in 1934.

The Secret Service arranged an elaborate sting operation in 1996 to eventually get the Farouk gold coin back. Thank goodness they didn't waste their time investigating Bernie Madoff while he was in the process of ripping off the public in his record breaking $65 billion Ponzi scheme. Eventually, after being seized from a British subject who had bought it, this coin was sold at auction and the proceeds were split between him and the U.S. government. Recently more coins have surfaced in the United States and the government has simply confiscated them -- something it is very good at doing when it comes to gold.

That the U.S. government claims rights through perpetuity and across national borders for its property, but unconstitutionally denies them to its own citizens is the major issue in the Bloomberg Businessweek article (one they seem to have missed entirely), but not the only one. Other than the dangerous precedent of property rights for the average person being trashed, the article brings up the point that the federal government is unaware that gold is stolen from its storehouses and the government wastes its time on pursuing trivial matters on its behalf while ignoring major economic crimes involving billions or even trillions of dollars. Fort Knox hasn't been audited  since 1954. How much of the gold is still there?  What other major Ponzi schemes and frauds are taking place while government agents spend their time tracking down gold coins from 1933?

Disclosure: Do not own any 1933 gold coins.

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.

Market Sell Off on Goldman News Has Deeper Roots

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.


The SEC's announcement on Friday (April 17th) that it was investigating Goldman Sachs on fraud charges seems to have been the cause of a serious market sell off, but other factors were at work as well. While major financial stocks took a hit, so did gold, gold miners, and oil. The tech heavy Nasdaq also had a sharp decline. The market was overbought and options expiration added an extra impetus to the volatility.  In such circumstances, any bad news can cause contagious selling.

While selling was broad based, large cap financials were indeed the epicenter of the damage. Goldman (GS) itself closed down 13% on the day. JP Morgan (JPM) was down 5% and Morgan Stanley (MS) down 6%. XLF, the financial ETF, was down 4.5%. Inexplicably, the gold mining index HUI was down 4.4% and gold and oil were each down over 2%. Gold should have seen safe haven investing flows, but did not.

As for the major market indices, the financial heavy S&P 500 had the biggest drop, falling 1.6%. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was down only 1.1% and the small cap Russell 2000 ended 1.3% lower. Nasdaq lost 1.4%. On the daily charts, the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 reached overbought territory in the middle of last week. Nasdaq became extremely overbought at the same time. If selling hadn't started on Friday, it would have done so probably at the beginning of this week.

Although the Dow has not gotten to overbought territory, it has other technical issues, namely volume or lack thereof. The Dow finally had a high volume trading day on Friday ... on heavy selling, which added even more weight to the technically negative picture. Overall volume on the Dow has been dropping since the bottom was put in last March, something that should not be taking place during a rally. Even worse, selling has been occurring on above average volume recently. This is known as distribution and indicates big money is getting out of the market. The only above average volume day so far in April was last Friday. The only high volume day in March also saw selling. February was more mixed, but the four highest volume days in January, all well above average, saw selling. 

Where the buying has been taken place in the market is also not encouraging. Only six stocks frequently account for up to 30% of the buying on the NYSE - Citigroup (C), AIG (AIG), Ambac (ABK), Bank of America (BAK), Popular (BPOP) and Fannie Mae (FNM). Considering that AIG and Fannie Mae are nationalized enterprises owned by the U.S. government and Ambac, Citigroup and Popular were penny stocks selling for 1.00 or less during the Credit Crisis, this is not exactly a sterling list of solid growth companies leading the market.

Liquidity is what makes markets go up (good earnings are the result of liquidity, although in the current rally, liberalized accounting standards may be even more important). The fed and other central banks throughout the world have pumped an almost unlimited amount of it into the world financial system since the Credit Crisis began. Too much liquidity over too long a period of time though pumps up stocks to unsustainable levels as happened in 1929, 1987 and 2000. Under such circumstances withdrawing even small amounts of liquidity can have the effect of sticking a pin in a very over inflated balloon.

Disclosure: Long oil.

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.

Big Bust on Wall Street

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.

Our Video Related to this Blog:

It's not everyday that a billionaire hedge fund manager gets busted for insider trading as happened last Friday. This is not because Wall Street isn't permeated with criminal insider trading activity at the very top, but because the SEC has turned a blind eye to it for a long, long time. In a celebrated case from just a few years ago, an SEC employee who tried to investigate a well-known hedge fund manager was promptly fired for his efforts. The SEC has claimed in the past that since hedge funds and big brokers trade continually it isn't possible to prove that they are engaging in insider trading. It was possible this time however because instead of just examining trading records, wiretapping was used.

Wiretapping was first legally permitted in 1928 by a U.S. Supreme Court decision, several years before the SEC was created. Left to its own devices the SEC would probably never have decided to use any law enforcement technology not available to the Amish, but the FBI was involved in this case. The insider trading investigation against Raj Rajaratnam apparently began in 2007. Rajaratnam runs the Galleon Group which has $3 billion under management. He has been charged with conspiracy and securities fraud. Reports indicate that he is at the center of an insider trading ring and more arrests are coming.

Where did Rajaratnam get his inside information? Other than sources that worked directly for the companies involved, Internet sources indicate that Rajaratnam seemed to have at least one informant at the rating agency Moody's, the consulting firm McKinsey & Company, and Intel Capital (the venture capital arm of the technology giant). These are all top firms. You should ask yourself how many other firms have employees involved in providing insider information, how many employees are involved and to how many hedge funds is this information provided? My guess is the answers to these questions is a lot, a lot and a lot. Why aren't there stricter controls within these firms that prevent this from happening? The public has a right to know.

At least some progress is being made in reigning in the Wall Street criminal operations. The biggest Ponzi schemer of all time, Bernie Madoff, is behind bars, not because the SEC caught on to his obvious $50 billion scam after numerous investigations, but because it finally blew up on its own accord. At least the SEC did finally close down the $8 billion 'investment fraud' run by Allen Stanford. The head of a top New York law firm, Marc Drier, has been sentenced to 20 years in jail for fraudulent activity. All of these cases were beyond outrageous and extreme examples of criminality. What about all the other criminal activity on Wall Street that is being done with at least a grain of discretion? Rajaratnam is merely the tip of that very massive iceberg.

NEXT: U.S. Dollar Down, Everything Else Up

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.

SEC Discovers Fraud Exists/Smart Money Buys Gold

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:

Yesterday, SEC officials raided the offices of R. Allen Stanford, a Texas billionaire listed as one of the 400 richest by Forbes magazine, and froze the assets of three companies he controls. The SEC is accusing Stanford of perpetrating an $8 billion investment fraud, something that would have had to have been conducted over many years if not decades because of its size. The fraud was centered around CD's, usually considered the safest of investments, with higher than the going rate of return. Just as with the Madoff investment scam, the too good to be true returns were a fantasy. At the same time that the Standford fraud news appeared, figures for gold consumption in 2008 were released and they indicate that the smart money was loading up on the precious metal last year.

When news of the Madoff scam broke, only the incredibly naive would have thought it was the only one being perpetrated. Madoff's fraud indicated an SEC permeated with corruption. It is not far fetched to say that the SEC itself was in on the Madoff scam. Madoff himself sat on an SEC board. At least one (more likely several) former SEC regulator left the SEC and started a feeder hedge fund that funneled at least $7 billion into Madoff's operations. That fund changed its auditors every year (something which is not done) in an obvious attempt to hide what it was really doing. Even though Madoff's operations would have required that he was conducting more than 100% of the trades in the SP100 futures markets, the SEC didn't see anything suspicious about this. FINRA, the other regulatory agency that investigated Madoff, reported that parts of Madoff's firm had no customers, but was still making money. They didn't find anything impossible about that one either. The head of FINRA at that time is now the current head of the SEC.

The most recent statements from the SEC indicate they believe the Madoff scam began in the 1970s. In over three decades they noticed nothing. How long the $8 billion Standford scam has been going on is not yet known. However, it usually takes a long time to steal $8 billion. Stanford has significant operations in off-shore money haven Antigua, where he has been knighted. It is quite possible Madoff has stashed a lot of money at one or more off-shore locations himself. It takes a lot of money to bribe judges and other U.S. government officials after all.

Lost amidst all the fraud news was that gold demand hit a record in 2008, surpassing the $100 billion mark for the first time ever. Demand for the precious metal in the form of jewelry, for industrial uses, gold bars, coins, and gold exchange-traded funds, hit $102 billion, up 29% from 2007. Many of the buyers of Standford's 'safe' CDs may have shunned gold because it was 'risky' and the wanted 'cash flow'. Many of those people will lose everything. The actual smart money knows that paper assets are now the riskiest of all and has been loading up on gold behind the scenes for awhile now.

NEXT: Gold and Silver Rise, Oil Falls

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.

New York Investing Meetup Versus the SEC

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:

I would like to thank the 145 people who braved a snow storm last night to come to the February general meeting of the New York Investing meetup. In addition to the scheduled talks on the State of the Market (and why gold is looking good and oil could have a pop up in the near future), the Credit Crisis Update and Art Investing, Shelley Gould flew in from San Francisco and gave a couple of minute introduction to her new SmartStops service. While New York Investing meets the needs of the investing public as long as New York City hasn't been shut down, investors unfortunately don't receive such dedication from the watchdog government agencies that are suppose to be protecting their money.

New allegations arose last night against the SEC and FINRA (the the brokerage industry's self-policing organization). Harry Markopolos, the securities industry executive and fraud investigator who brought allegations against Bernard Madoff to the SEC by 2000, if not earlier, is now saying he feared for his personal and family's safety because of the SEC's inaction (and indeed he should have). Markopolos submitted detailed evidence to the SEC in Boston, New York, and Washington about Madoff's scam and as we all know too well, the SEC did nothing. Markopolos will be appearing before a congressional investigatory committee today.

Markopolos was not alone in being suspicious of Madoff. Anyone who examined his trading strategy knew immediately it was a fraud. How? His trading would have been bigger than the entire volume of the markets he claimed to be trading in. While even a casual observer would realize something crooked was going on, the public watchdog SEC couldn't figure it out. While you may think nothing like this could have happened before, you would be mistaken. The 1962 Salad Oil Scandal (a $175 million fraud then or about $1 billion in today's money) required the same suspension of common sense from the 51 Wall Street banks that lent money to the perpetrator, Tino De Angelis. De Angelis borrowed money from these banks based on his inventory of salad oil, stored in huge tanks in New Jersey which actually contained water with a thin layer of salad oil floating on the top (so field inspectors did indeed see oil when they looked into the top of the tanks). However, publicly available information published by the U.S. government indicated there was less salad oil in the entire United States than De Angelis claimed he had in his New Jersey storage facilities. Apparently this wasn't enough to make Wall Street banks avoid lending to him, just as their contemporaries would make loans to people without any income or assets. Consider this the next time you are tempted to follow Wall Street's investing advice.

In case you may also be thinking things are now going to get a lot better, I would advise you not to get too hopeful just yet. The new head of the SEC is Mary Schapiro (replacing See-No-Evil Christopher Cox). Ms. Schapiro was previously the head of FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority). FINRA at least investigated Madoff several times. They found nothing out of the ordinary and claim they couldn't have because they were only empowered to examine his brokerage business (an almost guaranteed destination of some of the missing $50 billion) and the fraud was perpetrated through his investment business. Congress claims that it was not particularly impressed with It's-Not-My-Job Mary Schapiro's performance in this circumstance. Nevertheless she is now in charge of protecting the public's investments.

NEXT: Only TARP Recipients Should Worry About Deflation

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.

Indecent Exposure: Madoff Caught Swimming Naked

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:

Warren Buffett's famous remark that you only know who's swimming naked when the tide goes out is particularly relevant at the moment with the ultimate Wall Street insider Bernard Madoff accused of operating a $50 billion Ponzi scheme (with an additional $17 billion just 'missing'). The hear no evil, see no evil SEC gets no credit for unmasking this multi-decade fraud, with Madoff confessing to his sons as his scheme fell apart and they in turn notifying the FBI. There are even reports of in-the-know Wall Streeters having invested with Madoff knowing his operation was fraudulent, but they had assumed that it was based on an insider trading scam - it being common knowledge on the Street that the SEC rarely investigates citizens above suspicion (one SEC employee was recently fired for trying to open just such a case) for this behavior.

Madoff is the former chairman of the Nasdaq and the founder of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, a closely-held market-making firm that has operated since 1960. He also ran a hedge fund, which is the source of the supposed $50 billion in fraudulent losses (sustained during the time that former Fed chair Alan Greenspan repeatedly said there was no need to regulate hedge funds). Madoff's hedge fund business didn't register with the SEC until September 2006. What took it so long to do so is a good question. An even better question is, did they investigate the hedge fund since that date and if so why couldn't they uncover the largest fraud in American financial history? Madoff's Investment Securities is also market maker on Nasdaq and huge amounts of funds pass through that operation. Are those funds safe or have some of them been pilfered too?

Investors in Madoff's hedge fund are a who's who of big money people, banks and other hedge funds who should have known better. These include banks Santander, Royal Bank of Scotland, BNP Paribas, HSBC, Nomura and hedge funds Man Group, Tremont Capital Management and Fairfield Greenwich Group. Some big names that have surfaced so far as Madoff investors are Philadelphia Eagles owner Norman Braman, New York Mets owner Fred Wilpon and J. Ezra Merkin, the chairman of GMAC Financial Services (49% owned by looking for a government bailout GM). A number of charities also entrusted their money to Madoff, Senator Frank Lautenberg's family charitable trust among them, and at least one has already closed down as a result.

The revelations of the Madoff fraud are somewhat reminiscent of Richard Whitney scandal during the Great Depression. Whitney was the president of the New York stock exchange from 1930 to 1935 and was also a citizen above suspicion just like Madoff. He was assumed to be a brilliant financier, but this image was also false. He turned to embezzlement to cover up his mounting business losses and to maintain his extravagant lifestyle. The authorities eventually caught up with him, although it didn't take nearly as long as it has with Madoff, and he wound up in Sing Sing. Revelations of financial misdeeds indeed became commonplace in the 1930s as the economy fell apart and you should assume that this will be the happening once again.

NEXT: Excess Liquidity to Solve Excess Liquidity Problem

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.

Subprime Housing Leads to Subprime Financial Institutions

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.

The housing reports released in October 2007 which indicated the state of the market in September were even more dismal than those of the prior month. Nationally, foreclosures had doubled year over year and they had gone up as much as 500% to a 1000% in the worst hit bubble areas of the housing market. Existing Home Sales were down 23% nationally. Although also down substantially, New Home Sales were nevertheless reported as increasing (huh?).

The September 2007 New Home Sales report was a classic example of how the financial media frequently reports bad news as good and hopes people only read the headlines and not the fine print. The New Home Sales report originally indicated that there had been 795,000 houses sold in August. The report then indicated 770,000 houses sold in September. This drop of 25,000 was heralded by the media as a increase of 4.8%. This happened because the sales figures for August were revised downward to 735,000 (by almost 8%, an incredible error for a statistical report) and the September figure was above this number, so this indicated that sales were going up! The first thought of any rational person should of course have been, 'if the numbers for August were actually much lower, why shouldn't the ones for September be much lower as well?' Even a casual look inside the September report lent substantial support that this was indeed the case. Sales in the West, probably the worst hit housing area in the U.S., were supposedly up 38% - a completely absurd number and an indication that the September numbers were being overstated just as the August numbers had been.

Despite the complete devastation in housing sales., median house prices were reported up 2.5%. The statistical tricks that led to this impossible outcome were discussed previously in this blog in the posting, "Housing Market Collapses, but the Statistics Hold Up".

House sales were falling off a cliff because mortgage money was disappearing. By October 2007, 183 mortgage lenders had already closed their doors since the previous December. One that didn't was Countrywide, the largest mortgage lender in the United States and therefore presumably too big to fail. What kept Countrywide afloat was a $2 billion capital infusion in August from Bank of America. Barron's reported that there were rumors that this bailout had been secretly arranged by the U.S. federal government. If so, it would only be the first of many bailouts that the Feds would have to arrange to prop up failing American financial institutions. Shortly thereafter, one of the major British mortgage lenders, Northern Rock, experienced a run on the bank - the first in England since the 19th century. Northern Rock had been known for it 125% mortgages and when word got out that it needed an emergency loan from the Bank of England, depositors queued up for blocks desperate to get their money out. While the Bank of England directly provided capital to keep Northern Rock going, this approach would prove to be no more successful than the more circumspect American one. Both Countrywide and Northern Rock would barely survive into 2008.

Next: What Banks and Enron Had Common

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup

For more about us, please go to: http://investing.meetup.com/21

Housing Market Collapses, but the Statistics Hold Up

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.

The August housing sales figures released in September 2007 indicated that housing sales had fallen off a cliff in most of the areas of the U.S. that had been at the center of irresponsible mortgage lending. Los Angeles county California lead the way with a 50% decline in houses sales from the previous year. Orlando, Florida and Phoenix, Arizona were not far behind with a 40% drop. House sales in Las Vegas, Nevada were 37% lower than a year before. The collapse in the U.S. housing market would be led by these four housing bubble states: Arizona, California, Florida and Nevada plus two others: Michigan and Ohio, which were suffering economic hardship from declines in U.S. manufacturing.

One of the most fundamental tenants of economics is that price is determined by supply and demand. When demand drops or supply rises, prices should fall. When demand drops a lot, prices usually fall a lot. While there were anecdotal reports of housing prices falling 50% or more at bank auctions in various parts of the country, the overall statistics indicated only modest drops in housing prices in most communities, and even small increases in others. How was this possible, assuming there was no fraudulent manipulation of the numbers (something that should always be considered when two and two doesn't add up to four)? As with many of the U.S. government reports, statistical sleight of hand by the number crunchers was at work .

When housing prices were being compared year over year, there were in reality two different markets being measured. In other words, the comparison was being made between apples and oranges and was therefore effectively meaningless. When housing sales fall dramatically, they don't fall evenly across the economic spectrum. People who buy more expensive homes are more likely to be able to get a mortgage and the high-end of the housing market holds up. People at the lower end get shut out and sales for cheaper homes fall much more than those of expensive homes. The most recent housing market statistics will have a lot more high-priced homes in them proportionately than the previous years statistics and this skews the average and median prices up. It is in fact easy to come up with examples where every house price in a market falls by a significant amount and yet the average and median house price goes up! This was exactly what was happening in the summer and fall of 2007. While the plummeting housing sales numbers were accurate, the officially reported prices in no way reflected actual pricing trends in the market.

Next: Bubble, Bubble, Toil and Trouble

Daryl Montgomery,
Organizer, New York Investing meetup

For more about us, please go to our web site: http://investing.meetup.com/21