Showing posts with label Bailouts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bailouts. Show all posts

Friday, May 1, 2009

Why There's So Little Outrage

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the federal government is projected to spend $1.8 trillion more than it takes in this year. Next year, expenses are projected to exceed revenue by another $1.4 trillion. $1.8 trillion is equal to the entire amount of revenue generated by the federal government as recently as 1999. 10 years later, it's equal to the amount we're spending in excess of revenue.

This $1.8 and $1.4 trillion is just the beginning. The CBO estimates that our cumulative deficits will run to over $9 trillion over the next decade. The figures are simply astounding. Where will all of this money come from? It will be borrowed. That borrowed money eventually needs to be repaid.

Let's be clear about this deficit, our debt, and the steady stream of bailouts. These are inter-generational transfers of wealth. We are "saving" and "rescuing" those who have failed in some capacity, and we are expecting our children to pay the cost. For a moment, let's forget about whether these deficits will "work" to strengthen the economy (they won't), and let's forget about the future economic consequences of this massive borrowing binge. Where is the discussion of fairness? Where is our sense of decency? Where is the outrage?!

I suppose it's hard to feel outraged if you can't even quantify the magnitude of the problem.

How Many Millions are in a Trillion? from Econ4U on Vimeo.



The Market Rubbernecker is affiliated with Aspera Financial, LLC, a registered investment advisor. Please read the disclaimer on the home page of the Market Rubbernecker site.

Saturday, February 14, 2009

So, Where Are We Now?

I appreciate all of the inquiries as to my disappearance lately. I'd love to report that I've been relaxing on a beach on a remote telecommunications-free island in the Caribbean, but client business, trading, earnings season, and a beautiful, laughing, 4-month old daughter have kept me very busy these past few weeks. As earnings season slows I hope to have a little more time for the Rubbernecker, sleep, and personal grooming.

I certainly haven't avoided writing due to a lack of material! Let me try and catch up with the past few weeks and recap where we stand.

  • As we know, the Fed has driven interest rates to ridiculous below-market rates.
  • These low rates are devastating for the savings of retirees who have no business moving out on the risk curve in search of higher yield.
  • These low rates are also supposed to encourage more borrowing despite the fact that our economy is currently suffering from too much debt.
  • Congress is angry that the banks aren't lending their bailout funds to people who already have too much debt in the middle of some type of economic "ession."
  • Congress is criticizing bankers for paying themselves too much, over-levering their balance sheets, and maintaining huge off-balance sheet liabilities while Congressfolk continue to pay themselves too much, over-leverage our nation's balance sheet, and maintain huge off-balance sheet liabilities.
  • The collective earnings of the S&P 500 companies will register its first decline ever in the fourth quarter of 2008. Ever.
  • Congress just passed a $787 billion stimulus plan that will further increase our national debt and displace private investment. The notion that this and future stimulus is only temporary and will be withdrawn once the economy recovers is laughable.
  • Over $8 trillion in spending/promises have been incurred in the past year.
  • We have a Treasury Secretary in charge of both the financial industry bailout and the IRS who either isn't smart enough or honest enough to do his own taxes properly.
  • This same Treasury Secretary just announced an eagerly-awaited financial bailout plan that included no details and no plan aside from somehow spending a lot more money.
  • The Obama administration is now working on some scheme to "save" the housing market. Whatever the details of the plan, we can be sure it will entail using the tax dollars of those who were prudent to "rescue" those who made bad choices. It will also impede the housing market finding a bottom.
  • This year's Federal budget deficit is creeping towards $1.5 trillion, and is sure to rise further as tax receipts continue to fall.
Debt, Debt, and More Debt
Simply put, this massive increase in debt is an inter-generational transfer of wealth. In other words, we're doing this for our own current "benefit" and will be passing the bill to our children. Where's the discussion of fairness? With every bailout of the past year, our leaders have told us that we must act immediately or the global economy will collapse. That hasn't left much time for educated discussion, nor has it prevented the global collapse that their swift undebated action was supposed to prevent. Last week, I explained to my 4-month old daughter that her share of the national debt is well over $200,000. You should have seen the diaper I had to change after that.

It amazes me how accepted it has become that the the cure for any slowdown of any magnitude is always to throw money at it. This is the policy that we've pursued consistently since the Great Depression, and look where it's gotten us. There's a popular quote that seems rather appropriate. "If you keep doing what you've been doing you'll keep getting what you've been getting."

For far too long, our policy makers have increased and encouraged borrowing at every whiff of a slowdown rather than let the market correct the excesses that have built up. Each time, they managed to forestall what would have been a healthy correction at the expense of preordaining a more severe future correction. Ironically, now that it's time to pay the piper, our authorities are laying the blame on the failings of the free market instead of their constant meddling. Unfortunately, their actions will only prolong the length of this downturn.

As I've stated before, the good news is that the market is still doing its job, and many of the excesses (excluding government credit and money supply expansion) are gradually being cleared away. The housing bubble is unwinding, consumers are beginning to save again, global equity markets are back to far more reasonable levels, excess production capacity is starting to dry up, etc. This process will take time, especially with the massive level of government meddling, but it is occurring, and it will eventually take us to a healthier level of economic activity -- one not dependent largely on household credit expansion.

Stock Market Rally?
As ugly as the situation is, there is a strong likelihood that the fiscal and monetary stimulus being dumped on the economy will appear to have a positive impact. As counterproductive and inefficient as most of this spending will eventually prove, the stimulus will at least help slow the rate of decline, probably beginning in the second half of the year. In anticipation of this or at the earliest sign of this, we may experience a fairly strong rally in the equity market as investors come to believe that the worst is behind us. The expected "Obama rally" earlier this year was doomed from the start as too many people were expecting it and were looking to sell into it. With pessimism growing again and less talk of an impending rally, the odds of a rally have actually increased.

To the extent that the credit bubble has not been allowed to correct sufficiently, it's hard to imagine that any such rally will be the real deal. As discussed in prior posts, bear rallies can be powerful. The Great Depression saw a 50% rally over a 6 month period right in the middle of the first leg down. Barring a dramatic change in policy, any rally unaccompanied by a significant correction in the credit bubble is likely to prove a dead cat bounce.

The ballooning national debt and Fed balance sheet also need to be watched. I just can't see all of this stimulus being removed without collapsing any recovery we do eventually get. Government doesn't have a terrific track record of enacting temporary stimulus. Not surprisingly, it typically manages to morph into permanent funding. New constituents will be created who will create lobbying groups, and they won't take kindly to any future talk of decreased funding. The Fed will also find it difficult to withdraw the massive monetary stimulus it has injected. Once the printing presses are humming, it's very difficult to turn them off. Although much of the talk these days is of deflation, I see significant inflation as a much more serious threat down the road.

Strategy Update
As a result, current long-term Treasury yields strike me as unsustainably low. I had shorted the long end of the curve in mid-December and sold that position near the end of January. I didn't anticipate this being a short-term position, but we were fortunate to buy the position close to its low, and it experienced a 25% gain in just over one month. Hopefully, I'll get another crack at it. The Fed has discussed buying long-dated Treasuries. Should they follow through, I would expect another decline in long yields at which time I'll take a hard look at loading up again. Longer-term, this is a position I want to own.

Gold has typically been viewed as an inflation hedge, but it's been one of the best performers in this current deflationary phase (as it was during the Great Depression) as investors flock to its safety and low interest rates minimize the opportunity cost of owning gold. We've been overweight precious metals throughout the gold bull market and have continued to add on pullbacks. In early January, I bought a few junior mining names that had been driven to ridiculously attractive prices. More recently, I eased back on our GLD/DGP position in those accounts where the position grew just a little too large following this recent rally. We still own a healthy precious metals position and would be quick to add on any significant pullback.

Most of the balance of our aggressive portfolios hasn't changed significantly. Our bias at these levels is towards select emerging markets and commodities. I take a long-term approach with these positions and am quick to point out that I have no expectation for these positions in the short-term (less than one year). The countries I'm focusing on have already declined significantly, have experienced an outflow of hot money, are marked by high savings rates, have at least reasonably solid reserves, and are trading at attractive valuation levels. Five years from now, I expect to be pleased with their performance.

We still hold a decent cash position, and we continue to have just a few short positions as the recent leg down in the market has made it more difficult to find many compelling short opportunities. As usual, at the margin I would anticipate selling some long positions and increasing short exposure if we get a strong rally without signs of a significant positive change in the underlying fundamentals.

I think that catches me up from my relative absence the past few weeks. I now have to go explain to my daughter why she'll be learning Chinese and why her savings account is short the dollar. I'll be putting a second "backup" diaper on first.


The Market Rubbernecker is affiliated with Aspera Financial, LLC, a registered investment advisor. Please read the disclaimer on the home page of the Market Rubbernecker site.

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Housing And The Candidates

"Homeowners are the innocent bystanders in a drive-by shooting by Wall Street and Washington." John McCain

"What we need is a floor in the housing market, a, a stop to the decline in housing values."
Barack Obama

One of these two men will be our next President. Neither of these two men have shown any understanding of basic economic principles or economic reality. There seems to be a collective re-writing of history underway that passes nearly all of the blame for the mortgage debacle on to Wall Street and Washington and absolves the home buyer from any guilt. That may make it easier for Congress to pass its ill-conceived bailouts, but it doesn't square with the facts.


Let's start with McCain's quote. Homeowners are the innocent bystanders? I can only hope that this comment is driven more by political expediency and pandering than actual belief. This type of comment makes me wish he'd focus less on the economy and more on Palin's wardrobe and make-up.


The fact, however, is that many homeowners over the last few years knowingly took a gamble on housing. Some gambled that interest rates would always remain low. Some gambled that they'd always be able to refinance their mortgage at a low teaser rate. Some gambled that they would be able to sell their home to a greater fool at the time of their choosing. Some gambled that their eccentric rich old Aunt Eunice would kick off and leave them a mint. Some gambled that they would get a raise that would offset any mortgage payment increase. Some gambled that they would be able to flip their negative cash flow investment properties for a nice profit to another investor who was even less concerned with cash flow.


Yes, there was some fraud that occurred. Those folks/firms should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, when financial institutions agree to lend money to a homeowner with some combination of low credit score, low earnings, low down payment, and little savings, that's not fraud. It's just bad business. The bank was foolish for making such a loan, but that doesn't mean that the homeowner who willingly accepted that loan should bear no responsibility. Do you think these same homeowners would be complaining about their mortgages today if the real estate market and economy hadn't soured? Of course not. It seems to only be a problem for them because their gamble didn't pay off.


If you sign a document, you're acknowledging that you understand and agree to its terms. If you don't understand the terms, you have no business signing the document. Any homeowner could have hired their own lawyer for a few hundred dollars to explain the terms. Anyone could have Googled "mortgage" to help get up to speed. Instead, people were willing to spend more time researching the purchase of a new plasma TV than the details of their mortgage terms.


What about Obama's quote about needing a floor in the housing market? This ridiculous statement shows Obama's complete lack of awareness of the disastrous history of price fixing. This reminds me of
Pakistan's stock exchange. The Pakistanis grew tired of falling stock prices in their country this summer so they instituted a floor under stocks on August 28th. Until further notice, stock prices would be allowed to fluctuate within a 5% range, but they wouldn't be allowed to fall any further.

What has happened since? Volume has dried up and the market has barely budged. Who in their right mind would want to step in and buy with such a lack of transparency in this environment? If price fixing and floors really worked why don't we put a floor under incomes at $1 million? We could all be rich! In addition, let's pass some legislation mandating that everyone is entitled to a minimum level of attractiveness. We'll just have the "government" pay for all of the "necessary" implants, botox, and liposuctions.


Trying to put a floor under housing will lead to buyers stepping away from the market, which is the last thing we need. There is only one real ultimate solution to the housing crisis and that's for new supply to fall and for home prices to decrease to levels at which buyers (new homeowners and investors) will be able and willing to absorb the existing excess inventory. Artificially inflating prices by putting a floor under them would have the adverse effect of decreasing price transparency and discouraging buyers from making offers.


There is also the issue of fairness. Most U.S. taxpayers either rent a home or can still comfortably handle their mortgage. Why should this majority of Americans bear the cost of bailing out those who gambled and lost? It's truly absurd from the perspective of renters (future homeowners) as any government intervention that serves to artificially support home prices doubly bites this group. They incur their share of the cost of the bailout while artificially inflated home prices keep them from fully benefiting from the housing price correction.


Talk is now building for another round of bailouts, this time focused on directly helping homeowners who are under water. McCain has proposed buying mortgages from banks at face value and then replacing it with a new 30-year fixed government mortgage at an interest rate of just over 5%. He basically wants to reward the financial institutions who made these ridiculous mortgages by paying them full value. Then he'll give the homeowner a new smaller mortgage that's in-line with the current value of the house. What happens to the difference between the size of the old and new mortgage? Well, that loss will be borne by you and I, the U.S. taxpayer. You have to love the absurdity of the plan. Reward the banks for making bad loans and then turn around and reward the homeowner (who likely gambled) with a lower mortgage at an interest rate better than a new borrower with an 800 FICO score and 40% down would receive!

We don't need the government to get involved with loan negotiations. Banks will negotiate with homeowners when it makes economic sense to them. If the present value of a new mortgage at new terms exceeds the amount the bank projects that it would receive from foreclosing, a bank is going to take a hard look at negotiating with the homeowner. Otherwise, the property should be foreclosed upon. The homeowner will get out from under the mortgage and become a renter again with a rental expense that is likely much below their previous house payment. The homeowner may have to endure the stigma of foreclosure for some time, but with so many people facing foreclosure, I'm not sure much of a stigma will be attached. The bank will take the hit it deserves for making a loan it should have rejected. The property will be put back on the market and will eventually be sold to a new homeowner who will be able to meet the more stringent mortgage qualification requirements demanded by banks. No government (taxpayer) money needs to be wasted in this process.


Neither Obama nor McCain nor Congress will or can solve the mortgage "problem." The problem was the bubble. The correction is the solution, not the problem. I recently read that 6% of the U.S. workforce are lawyers but 45% of the members of Congress are lawyers (another 45% couldn't get into law school). The real problem is that it's impossible for a room full of lawyers not to meddle.

Congress, along with either Obama or McCain, will continue to pass ever-larger bailouts and stimulus packages in an effort to encourage increased lending in an economy that is imploding because of too much debt. Somehow, they (and many economists) don't see the irony of trying to fix the problem of too much debt by encouraging increased lending.

Disclosure: The Rubbernecker is short bailouts, pandering, and botox, and he's longing for the end to this election season.


The Market Rubbernecker is affiliated with Aspera Financial, LLC, a registered investment advisor. Please read the disclaimer on the home page of the Market Rubbernecker site.