menu-type-splitmenu menu-type-splitmenu">

Category: Economics

Last week, we discussed the ongoing fall of dividend, and especially earnings, yields. This Report is not a stock letter, and we make no stock market predictions. We talk about this phenomenon to make a different point. The discount rate has fallen to a very low level indeed.

Discount in stocks is how you assess the present-day value of earnings to occur in the future. For example, if the discount rate is 10%, then a dollar of earnings per share at Acme Piping next year is worth $0.90 today. At a 1% discount, it’s worth $0.99. As you look forward many years, the difference between these rates is very large.

A buck of earnings at 10% discount = $1.00 + $0.90 + $0.81 + $0.73 … = $10.

At 1% discount = $1.00 + $0.99 + $0.98 + $0.97 … = $100.

A rising stock price is equivalent to a falling discount rate, assuming earnings are not growing commensurately. Our graph last week shows that they aren’t.

The idea of commensurate is important in economics. Any economist can paint a rosy picture by, for example, showing rising GDP. If you object that debt is rising with GDP, the economist switches to a chart of debt/GDP. He will tell you that the solution is to grow GDP with the right fiscal and regulatory policies.

However, we can look at how much additional GDP is added for each newly-borrowed dollar. This is called marginal productivity of debt. This shows a clear picture, a secular decline over many decades. To produce this graph, take change in GDP divided by change in debt.


Source: St Louis Fed

Several salient features stand out. One is the volatility in the early years of the series. Without digging deeper into this, we suspect this is at least partly due to errors in how the data is gathered.

Two, the oscillations are the Federal Reserve’s business cycle! There is a peak every few years. If you picture a bureaucrat moving levers to control the economy, trying to boost at times, but not overcompensate, that’s not far off the mark.

Three, this is a long-term falling trend. Everyone has seen graphs showing GDP growing. In fact, GDP is now 50 times greater than it was 65 years ago, at the start of the graph in 1947. However, debt has also been growing. GDP is not growing commensurately with debt. It is underperforming. Just a little bit each year, but over time it is profound.

Up until around 1981 (an important date, as this is when the rising interest rate turned to falling—more on that below), the peaks were well over 70 cents of growth for every dollar borrowed. This is not good, by the way—it should be over a dollar. But it’s a damned sight better than what happened after that.

From 1981 through just prior to the global financial crisis, marginal productivity of debt fell from over 70 cents to under a dime. A freshly borrowed dollar added less than 10 cents to the economy (by the way, we think GDP is a flawed measure of the economy, in the same way that the amount someone eats is a flawed measure of his wealth). Less than 10 cents on the dollar of borrowed money went into all the things included in GDP. That means that more than 90 cents went into something else.

Four, post-crisis, the number had some wild oscillations, before coming back to Earth in 2012. GDP fell from an annualized $14.8 trillion in Q3 2008 to $14.3 trillion in Q2 2009. After that, GDP began rising. However, the debt lagged. Debt hit a high of $54.6 trillion in Q1 2009, then fell to a low of $53.8 in Q2 2010, before resuming its rise. A total of $800 billion went out of existence.

Five, marginal productivity of debt appears to be at a higher level than it was pre-crisis. Part of the explanation may be changes in how the Bureau of Economic Analysis measures GDP. For example, in 2013 BEA announced that it would begin including film royalties and research and development. However, we suspect the majority of the change can be attributed to one factor: the consumption of capital.

GDP is worse than useless as a measure, because it makes no distinction between spending your income, and spending your liquidated savings. Or spending someone else’s borrowed cash. This matters when the Fed incentivizes a great conversion of one party’s wealth into another’s income (see Keith’s Yield Purchasing Power discussion for more about this idea).

In 1981, a period of 34 years of rising interest rates came to an end. Interest began to fall. Each time the rate drops, it offers a greater incentive to borrow, and hence add to GDP. However, it also does something else. It increases the burden of those who borrowed previously. This is because the net present value of all future payments must be discounted by the current market interest rate. The rate at which the debtor borrowed is not a factor. Thus, the lower the rate, the higher the net present value.

Falling interest rates have little impact on short-term bills. The real magic occurs on the long bond. A 10-year bond goes up a lot more than a 1-year (a 30-year bond would go up even more, but we will look at the 10, being more common).

The gain of the holder of an asset (including a bond or loan) is matched by the loss of the issuer. A change in interest rates is a zero-sum transfer of wealth. It is not entrepreneurial creation of wealth. However, as they say, every dollar spends the same. No one makes a distinction between dollars made from labor, rent, profit—or speculation.

The drop in interest rates has two effects. The debtors become less inclined (and less able) to spend. And the asset owners, particularly those who finance their assets with short-term debt, are happy to spend more.

So which of these opposing trends prevails? Let’s look at a long-term chart of marginal productivity of debt overlaid with interest on the 10-year Treasury bond.

There appears to be no correlation during the period of rising interest rates. But starting in 1981, the change from rising to falling interest ushered in a new regime. After that point, not only do the two lines correlate, but even the zigs and zags match. It’s uncanny.

Let’s introduce one more new idea, and we will tie it all together. Marginal productivity of debt is called marginal, because it looks at what is happening with the borrowed dollar right on the line between viable and nonviable. Marginal is one of the key concepts of the Austrian School discovered by Carl Menger (and also by Stanley Jevons and Leon Walras, unknown to each other at the time).

Change occurs at the margin. For example, when the sales tax is hiked by 1%, there are TV interviews of people shopping in a mall. It’s pure propaganda. They show an affluent family buying an X-Box for their teenage son, saying the tax won’t change their buying behavior at all. Of course not! That wealthy video-game-buying family is not the marginal consumer! They should go to Walmart and ask the single mother of 3 kids, buying mittens for the youngest, if the tax means a more meager Christmas!

It is the same with interest rates. The interest rate had been rising when Steve Jobs secured a loan of $250,000 in 1977, to get Apple Computer off the ground. Apple was not the marginal business, and this was not the marginal loan. It would not have mattered much if the Treasury rate was 7.4% or 10% (Apple paid more than the Treasury rate, of course). However, the borrower at the margin is the one who finds himself unable to borrow at the higher rate.

The 1960’s and 1970’s was a period of destruction of heavy industry. Low-margin manufacturers could not justify borrowing to refresh their plant. So when it went end-of-life, they had to shut down (or move elsewhere where rates were lower or subsidized).

The same analysis works when interest is falling. It is not who will stop borrowing as the rate goes up, but who will start borrowing or borrow more as it falls? What is the use of credit at the margin at 6% and what new uses will be found for credit at 3%?

It should be obvious that the lower the rate, the less productive the credit. Back at the time Apple was founded, you had to have a highly productive business to justify borrowing. Today, interest on the 10-year Treasury is about 70% lower than it was in 1977. For business borrowers, the change as a percentage is larger.

This brings us back to the question of why does the marginal productivity of debt show a big increase after the crisis? As we said above, it may be partially due to changes in how GDP is measured (and if GDP can be over-reported, debt could be under-reported too). Another factor may be consumption of capital by speculators who own rising assets, and those whose incomes are tied to asset prices (e.g. CEOs, bankers, brokers, etc.) A third factor may be the extraordinary deficits of the government. These are all unsustainable trends. We believe there is something else.

We will leave the question of what causes the higher level after 2010 open for now, and encourage readers to contact us with their thoughts on this. One thing is for sure, the relationship between falling interest and falling marginal productivity of debt did not come to an end in 2010. We are therefore not inclined to trust the graph after that date.


The prices of the metals shot up, by $28 and $0.57.

Last week, we said:

One way to think of these moves is as the addition of energy into the market. Like tossing a pebble into a still pond (not quantity of water, but energy that perturbs it). Once the speculators get the idea that gold and especially silver should go up, well it becomes self-fulfilling. Statements by the Fed, the ECB, or even the fatboy who rules North Korea can all have an effect.

That described this week perfectly, especially Friday morning. The Consumer Price Index came in below the Fed’s target. It was up 1.7%, below the 1.8% expected and 2% Fed policy. This news ignited a 20-cent increase in the price of silver within minutes.

We have to take a moment to savor the irony. Suppose the economy is underperforming Fed targets. And therefore the Fed will do more of what it had been doing, during which time the prices of gold and silver had been falling. But this time—so the theory goes—the increase in the quantity of dollars will cause the prices of the metals to go up.

In our view, the trend will continue: falling interest, rising debt, falling marginal productivity of debt… and the prices of the metals will one day skyrocket for some reason. But today is not that day, and Fed policy to increase quantity of dollars is not that reason.

In our view, these data releases are not important, just noise.

We will look at an updated picture of the fundamentals of supply and demand of both metals. But first, here are the charts of the prices of gold and silver, and the gold-silver ratio.

Next, this is a graph of the gold price measured in silver, otherwise known as the gold to silver ratio. The ratio fell.

In this graph, we show both bid and offer prices for the gold-silver ratio. If you were to sell gold on the bid and buy silver at the ask, that is the lower bid price. Conversely, if you sold silver on the bid and bought gold at the offer, that is the higher offer price.

For each metal, we will look at a graph of the basis and cobasis overlaid with the price of the dollar in terms of the respective metal. It will make it easier to provide brief commentary. The dollar will be represented in green, the basis in blue and cobasis in red.

Here is the graph showing the gold basis and cobasis overlaid with the price of the dollar (inverse to the price of gold, measured in dollars).

The basis (i.e. abundance) is up and cobasis (i.e. scarcity) is down a bit. Which is what you’d expect if speculators pushed up the price of futures with leveraged bets. The price of spot is pulled up by the arbitragers, but trails the price of futures.

Our calculated Monetary Metals gold fundamental price is up, but not so much as the market price. Six bucks.

Now let’s look at silver.

The same pattern occurs in silver. The metal is more abundant at the higher price.

Our calculated Monetary Metals silver fundamental price is also up, 32 cents.

 

© 2017 Monetary Metals

Demand has exploded for a cheap options bet which stands to benefit should the market-implied odds of a Federal Reserve rate hike in December tumble.

As Bloomberg reports, the eurodollar call option involved expires Friday, so the biggest chance the wager has to profit lies with a weaker-than-forecast print on the September consumer price index, set for release at 8:30 a.m. New York time.

The options position emerged Wednesday, and was added to dramatically on Thursday, CME open interest data show.

Expectations are for a 0.6% rise in CPI MoM (Core CPI +0.2% exp) and the whisper number is for a 0.5% rise.

The current odds for a Dec rate hike are 80.2%...

The minutes of the Fed’s September meeting showed some officials are concerned that low inflation is more than temporary.

Rajan Dhall MSTA from fxdaily.co.uk provides a quick preview of what to expect:

Looking ahead to the US data releases this afternoon, there are some common themes to pick on, with the CPI rate set to rise on the boost in gasoline prices. Shortages and disruption in agricultural products will also lead to upward pressure in price, but will be 'factored out' to a certain degree.

 

For retail sales, the pick up in auto sales post hurricane season is expected show up strongly in these figures, giving GDP Q3 some much needed support given the detrimental weather impact on activity earlier in the quarter.

All this points to a good afternoon for the USD on the face of it, but therein lies the drag factor, so any miss on the data points could have a more volatile effect to the downside. That said, with so many of the Fed members focused heavily on inflation, a move through 2.0% in the headline rate will be an interesting dynamic given the rhetoric from the likes of Kashkari and Bullard, and to a lesser degree Kaplan. A December rate hike is largely priced in at present, and if normalisation is as strongly intended as Fed chair Yellen makes out, then this is the time to underline it - but a softer USD helps their cause and the market could be playing right into their hands - the conspiracy mongers and cynics will point to downbeat comments of late pushing for this in any case.

The president, true to form, has been teasing the public about the identity of the next Fed chair, and Wall Street is watching with interest – and some anxiety

The Federal Reserve chair, Janet Yellen, will end her term in February, and Donald Trump has yet to say if he will follow tradition and renominate the Obama-appointed incumbent to a second term – or nominate someone of his own choosing.

Related: The great unwinding: Fed begins slow demise of its post-crash stimulus

Continue reading...

Analysis supports tax strategy of Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour in UK – and undermines that of Donald Trump in US

Higher income tax rates for the rich would help reduce inequality without having an adverse impact on growth, the International Monetary Fund has said.

The Washington-based IMF used its influential half-yearly fiscal monitor to demolish the argument that economic growth would suffer if governments in advanced Western countries forced the top 1% of earners to pay more tax.

Continue reading...

Fund cuts UK and US growth forecasts, and also tells governments not to get complacent in its latest World Economic Outlook

The International Monetary Fund has said the global economy’s recent recovery may not last, despite a pickup in activity in all western countries except the UK.

Marking the 10th anniversary of the onset of the financial crisis, the IMF said in its World Economic Outlook (WEO) there was a risk that governments could be lulled into a false sense of security by booming markets and policymakers needed to guard against complacency.

Continue reading...

America’s 2 million truckers have long been mythologised in popular culture. But self-driving trucks are set to lay waste to one of the country’s most beloved jobs – and the fallout could be huge

Jeff Baxter’s sunflower-yellow Kenworth truck shines as bright and almost as big as the sun. Four men clean the glistening cab in the hangar-like truck wash at Iowa 80, the world’s largest truck stop.

Baxter has made a pitstop at Iowa 80 before picking up a 116ft-long wind turbine blade that he’s driving down to Texas, 900 miles away.

Continue reading...

The IMF is seen as a hand-wringing liberal institution making nuanced and technical suggestions in an age of broad-brush solutions

Christine Lagarde, boss of the International Monetary Fund, is expected to deliver a hard-hitting speech at the organisation’s annual meeting this week, urging world leaders to push ahead with reforms to turn the current global economic recovery into something more sustainable.

Lagarde, who is now in her second four-year term as managing director of the Washington-based lender of last resort, will talk about a lack of education, training and productivity. She will, no doubt, develop the argument she put forward in London a fortnight ago that regulators need to be wary of lenders outside the mainstream repeating the same errors as the banks a decade ago.

Continue reading...

SEC files seen by the Guardian show that in 2017, money manager State Street rejected shareholder proposals to tackle gender inequality at least 12 times

In March, State Street Global Advisors unveiled Fearless Girl, a statue of a young girl confronting the charging Wall Street bull. It became an instant cultural touchstone.

Related: Fearless Girl company discriminated against women by underpaying them

Continue reading...

Exclusive: Bjarni Benediktsson, current Iceland leader, sold millions of króna of Glitnir assets before state took control in 2008

The current prime minister of Iceland sold almost all his remaining assets in a major Icelandic bank’s investment fund on the day the government seized control of the country’s collapsing financial sector at the peak of the 2008 crash.

According to leaked documents, Bjarni Benediktsson, then an MP on the parliament’s economy and tax committee, sold several million króna of assets in the Glitnir bank’s fund in the final days and hours before an emergency law placed Iceland’s failed financial institutions under state control.

Continue reading...

Since Janet Yellen last spoke (shifting hawkish), the dollar and bond yields have surged (as have the odds of a Dec rate-hike).

Since Yellen last spoke...

It is unclear whether today's opening remarks at the fifth annual Community Banking in the 21st Century conference at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, will offer any new insights on monetary policy direction but given President Trump's 'shortlist', it may well be among her last public appearances as Fed Chair.

Notably, James Bullard, head of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis is also speaking at this event, so there is always room for some uber-dovishness if Yellen tilts further hawkish.

Live Feed (Unfortunately no embed is available so click the image below for a link to Bloomberg's live feed):

International organisation joins Bank of England in voicing concern over high levels of household borrowing

The International Monetary Fund has issued a warning to governments that rely on debt-fuelled consumer spending to boost economic growth, telling them they run the risk of another major financial collapse.

In a report before the IMF’s annual meeting in Washington next week, it said analysis of consumer spending and levels of household debt showed that economies benefited in the first two to three years when households raised their levels of borrowing, but then risks began to mount.

Continue reading...

Rising cost of imports such as food and fuel since Brexit vote is pushing prices to rise at faster rate than anywhere in G7

The UK has the highest inflation rate among the world’s top economies, in the latest sign the Brexit vote is contributing to a squeeze on living standards.

The increased cost of importing food and fuel is pushing prices to rise at a faster rate than anywhere in the G7 group of leading global economies, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. The UK is only behind Turkey, Mexico and the eastern European states of Latvia and Estonia in the club of 35 developed nations.

Continue reading...
May
Even as the United Kingdom scours the planet for friends and trading partners ahead of the country departing the European Union power bloc, British Prime Minister Theresa May is threatening key ally the United States with a "trade war".

World faces disaster if those who contributed ‘lion’s share’ to global warming don’t aid low-income countries, IMF says

The International Monetary Fund has told rich countries they must do more to help poor nations cope with climate change or suffer from the weaker global growth and higher migration flows that will inevitably result.

In a chapter released ahead of the publication of next month’s World Economic Outlook, the Washington-based IMF said low-income countries had contributed little to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and could not afford to tackle the problem from their own meagre resources.

Continue reading...

The campaign of Roy Moore was overwhelmed by a flood of GOP Establishment political cash, but it was not defeated. Millions were squandered in an effort to beat back Moore, but in the end it was the GOP Establishment that was vanquished.

Newsletter Signup Form



Contact Info

Zion Clinic Pharmacy
205 E. Hallandale Beach Blvd
Hallandale Beach, Fl 33009

Phone 954-367-5365
Fax 954-839-9039
Email: info@zionpharmacy.com

Archives

Zion Health Store

Login