Sunday Musings: On Debt And Deficit Spending

Ulli Uncategorized Contact

John Hussman wrote a nice piece in “Extraordinarily Large Band-Aids” after last Friday’s disappointing jobs report. Here are some highlights:

I’ll reiterate that from our perspective, the essential difficulty of the market here is not Greece, it is not the Euro, it is not Hungary, and it is really not even the slow pace of job growth in the latest report. The fundamental problem is that we have not, as a global economy, accepted the word “restructuring” into our dialogue.

Instead, we have allowed our policy makers to borrow and print extraordinarily large band-aids to temporarily cover an open wound that will not heal until we close the gap. That gap is the difference between the face value of debt securities and the actual cash flows available to service them. The way to close the gap is to restructure the debt. This will require those who made the bad loans to accept the associated losses. By failing to do that, we have failed to address the essential problem faced by the world, which is that we have created more debt than we are able to service.

A few observations. First, I remain convinced that the other shoe to drop is not Greece or Spain or Hungary, but rather a second wave of major credit strains here in the U.S. related to fresh delinquencies from exotic adjustable rate mortgages.

Second, it is a delusion to interpret economic statistics suggesting an economic turnaround over the past year without factoring out the extent to which that has been driven by unsustainable levels of deficit spending.

If you do that, you’ll find that the economy has recovered to the point where the the year-over-year growth rate since early 2009 now matches the worst performance of any of 50 years preceding the recent downturn.

Third, when our policy makers insist on defending reckless lenders with public resources, we have to recognize that this is not free money. When the government issues a paper liability for real value, that real value gets directed to the recipient at the expense of countless other activities. Even seemingly costless interventions can be redistributions of wealth. For example, the strategy of dropping short-term interest rates to nearly zero as a way of increasing the interest spread earned by banks has the direct effect of impoverishing savers, very often elderly people who rely on lower risk investments for capital preservation.

With regard to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, either the Treasury securities issued in order to cover their losses will crowd out other private investment, or the eventual inflationary effects of printing money to do so will act as an implicit tax on people with fixed incomes. As a side note, we don’t hold any Fannie or Freddie liabilities in the Strategic Total Return Fund. I am still unconvinced that the Treasury’s unlimited 3-year backstop was authorized or even contemplated by the 2008 HERA legislation, which is what the Treasury used as justification.

A dollar spent by the government is always a dollar taken from somebody and diverted from some other activity. The only question is whether the dollar spent is more productive, or satisfies a more desperate human need, than the alternative activity would. If not, the spending is hostile to economic growth and public welfare. There is no free lunch. At best, what people call “stimulus” can only occur if the dollars spent by government are more productive than they would have been if they were allocated privately. I cannot imagine how allocating public funds to the same reckless stewards of capital that made the bad loans in the first place can possibly be a productive use of capital.

All of this would be fairly moot if it we were simply talking about 2008 and 2009. However, my impression is that as the effects of last year’s surge of deficit spending taper off, we will begin to observe a more accurate and generally flat reflection of underlying economic activity.

[My Emphasis]

I have been commenting on the same topic for the last year from time to time, although in a less eloquent way than John Hussman did. What has been called an economic recovery has been based entirely on stimulus, which makes it impossible to determine or measure if there had been any real recovery without it.

Time will tell, as current rebates and tax credits come to an end, if there are some real green shoots in this recovery or not. Of course, to not face reality and kick the can down the road even further, government in its infinite wisdom could always introduce a new and improved Stimulus 2.0 version.

Let’s hope not, because this would accomplish nothing but plunge us deeper into the debt spiral leaving us all to chant “Hello Greece, here we come…”

A Physical Gold ETF

Ulli Uncategorized Contact

With gold having successfully bucked the equity downward spiral, as well as having been in its own bull market, MarketWatch reports that “Buyers take a shine to new gold ETF:

Strong demand for a closed-end fund that holds gold bullion suggests that some affluent investors are willing to pay an expensive insurance premium for the ability to take possession of the precious metal.

Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS) has already made waves in the gold market. It has more than $700 million in assets after a recent secondary offering following the initial public offering in February.

Sprott Physical Gold Trust is listed on both the NYSE Arca and the Toronto Stock Exchange. Aside from its closed-end format, it has key differences from gold ETFs such as the $50 billion SPDR Gold Shares (GLD).

Most notably, the Sprott offering has a unique feature that allows investors to redeem shares for gold bullion on a monthly basis, provided the amount is enough to cover at least one so-called London Good Delivery Bar, which generally weighs around 400 troy ounces.

Each share represents 1/100th of a troy ounce. Expenses are capped at 0.65% of the trust’s assets.

Since the number of shares can only be increased with secondary offerings, this “call option” on physical delivery of gold drives the price of the trust’s shares above spot gold prices, said Nicholas Colas, ConvergEx Group chief market strategist, in a research note.

He estimated that since inception, the fund’s median premium to net asset value has been between 7% and 8%. The escalating debt crisis in Europe pushed the premium over 20% in May. Late last week, the premium was just above 10% following the secondary offering.

Most ETFs are structured as open-end funds and have an arbitrage feature that generally keeps the price of a share in line with net asset value. Premiums and discounts are normally much smaller.

The hefty premium in Sprott Physical Gold Trust shares has drawn attention.

“The premium shows enough people are interested in the call option on gold to pay up for it,” Colas said in an interview. “The market appears to be telling us something about how investors view gold as an investment. It is trading at a premium even when there are other established ETFs for gold.”

The trust is managed by Sprott Asset Management LP of Toronto. Its gold bullion is stored at the Royal Canadian Mint.

Eric Sprott, chief executive of Sprott Asset Management, said in an interview that part of the trust’s appeal is that investors don’t deal with a counterparty that may be a leveraged financial institution. He said physical gold is priced higher than commodity exchange quotes, which he derided as a “paper market” because there is little physical settlement of gold.

He also pointed to potential tax advantages for some U.S. investors relative to other gold ETFs. For investors who hold Sprott Physical Gold Trust shares for more than one year, gains are taxable as long-term capital gains at a maximum rate of 15%, according to the prospectus.

Meanwhile, long-term gains in SPDR Gold Shares are taxed at a higher 28% rate for “collectibles.”

What if you decide to take possession of the gold? Wealthy investors or institutional buyers with a large enough position to redeem shares for gold must inform the trust by the 15th of the month, according to the prospectus. Shareholders can have the bullion delivered via armored vehicle, although they have to shoulder the costs. The prospectus estimates it costs $5 per troy ounce for delivery to the continental U.S. and Canada, plus $5 per bar for in-and-out fees charged by the Royal Canadian Mint, and an administrative fee of $50.

If you are planning on taking physical delivery of gold, don’t mind the premium and are looking for better taxation, then PHYS might make sense. Otherwise, if you’re just an investor trying to ride the trend of gold, you’re probably better served investing in the GLD ETF.

Disclosure: We have holdings in GLD but not PHYS

No Load Fund/ETF Tracker updated through 6/10/2010

Ulli Uncategorized Contact

My latest No Load Fund/ETF Tracker has been posted at:

http://www.successful-investment.com/newsletter-archive.php

In a reversal from the prior week, the major indexes gained for a change.

Our Trend Tracking Index (TTI) for domestic funds/ETFs remains above its trend line (red) by +1.38% (last week +0.52%) keeping the current buy signal intact. The effective date was June 3, 2009.



The international index has now broken below its long-term trend line by -2.83% (last week -5.12%). A Sell Signal was triggered effective May 7, 2010. We are no longer holding any positions in that arena.




[Click on charts to enlarge]

For more details, and the latest market commentary, as well as the updated No load Fund/ETF StatSheet, please see the above link.

Rebound Failure

Ulli Uncategorized Contact



[chart courtesy of marketwatch.com]

Yesterday, we saw a repeat of sizzle and fizzle in the market as a solid rebound rally had the Dow up by some 125 points and back over the 10,000 level.

As has been the case more often than not lately, the activity during last trading hour took the starch right out of the momentum and down we went with the major indexes closing in negative territory. This was certainly a disappointing outcome for those hoping that we may have turned the bearish corner two days ago.

Even the cautious but upbeat comments by Fed chairman Bernanke could not support the waning momentum. External news from the European Union and general uneasiness about the global economy seemed to be simply too strong to overcome the meager internal reports from the beige book and consumer and business spending.

Our domestic Trend Tracking Index (TTI) reversed course from the prior day and moved closer to its long term trend line. As of yesterday, it still hovers +0.21% “above” it keeping us in bullish territory.

Barring a sudden grand solution to all what ails the global economies, it’s just a matter of time before the domestic TTI breaks below its line.

Once it does, we will become outright bearish. Since we are so close to that point, I will keep you posted on a daily basis, as I have been, via this blog as many readers have indicated that this break will be their ultimate indicator to get out of all domestic equity positions.

Buying Time

Ulli Uncategorized Contact



It was nip and tuck for a while as the major indexes plunged right after yesterday’s opening. The subsequent rebound attempt held for a change and buying during the last 30 minute lifted the averages (except the Nasdaq) out of the doldrums.

As discussed on Monday, the S&P; 500 bounced off its 1,040 support level twice; an encouraging sign for many traders. The euro gained helping metals and energy prices to move up as well.

After all the recent selling some kind of rebound was overdue, but it certainly does not guarantee a new bottom is in. To me, it merely means that we have bought some time as the 1,040 level is certain to be tested again.

For right now, however, a domestic sell signal did not materialize as the domestic TTI moved slightly higher and is still positioned above its long term trend line— although by only a very meager +0.46%.

Honing In On Bear Market Territory

Ulli Uncategorized Contact



When the intra-day mini crash of 1,000 points in the Dow occurred on May 6, most investors thought of it as an aberration and did not consider the possibility that we might actually revisit that price level.

Here we are 30 days later, and we have broken through it decisively. Yesterday’s rally attempt was wiped out during the last 30 minutes of trading, and the major indexes closed at their lows for the day.

Our international Trend Tracking Index (TTI) has been stuck in bear market territory since 5/7/10 (currently at -5.94%), while the domestic TTI has been hanging on by staying above the trend line. At times it has come within striking distance of succumbing to bearish forces before the bulls managed to save the day.

Yesterday’s sell off pulled the domestic TTI again to within +0.12% of moving into bearish territory; close, but no cigar. Another down day similar to yesterday, and we will surely be heading below the line.

If you followed and executed my recommended sell stop discipline, you should have sold your domestic equity holdings some time ago, so, when the actual sell signal occurs, it is merely a formality confirming the already established downward trend.

If you have a small equity position left you wish to hold for whatever reason, you may want to consider hedging it once we have actually broken below the trend line for the domestic TTI.

In our managed accounts, we actually have such a (conservative) mutual fund that covers some equities, bonds, gold, silver and currencies. Due to the size of the holding, and the fact that we are still partially within the 90-day redemption period, I may hedge it for the time being to guard against sudden further down moves.

Market technicians are trying to figure out whether we are near a bottom or not. The 1,040 level of the S&P; 500 offers the nearest support by being part of a long-term trend line since last July.

However, with the European debt crisis only being in the first inning or so, nothing would surprise me on the downside. We could take out that 1,040 level before breakfast today and be back in no man’s land.

Right now, we are still in that range where establishing new long positions doesn’t make any sense while it’s too early (and risky) to get involved in outright short ones. Be patient and wait for the market to give a better indication as to where we’re headed next.